Is the light and dark?

Manu wrote: Ok. So you have your definition of darkness.

How does one "turn to the darkside"? Does it entail craving the end of life? Have you met such a person, or are we discussing hypotheticals?

Simply put giving into our selfish tendencies. If we accept that the darkness is a natural form of the force, thus a natural form of the life experience, then it serves to reason that the light is the self control to avoid acting as one wishes. The sanctity of life, being of the light, can only be outweighed by someone's own ambition to subjugate others, and the only reason that one would have to subjugate another is for their own selfish gains.

As I understand, Jedi humble themselves before others, so they act in accordance, NATURALLY, in the light. They have no ambitions for self recognition, indulgences, or control. Therefor they should have no need to seek the dark, except to master it within them self, such as dealing with attachments, emotions, and natural desires.

I can accept the the natural state of the force is the darkness, but I also concede that the light is an obligation to the life that has been created around us. Se we would in fact need to live in both the light and the dark in order to more compassionately understand the gift we have been given to live this life. And by understanding that we are all beings of the light, this to say we all have life, we should be taking part to understand and protect all life as we now know it.

It could be that I am way off track with this thought, but as I sit here contemplating and meditating about this discussion, the more I am assured that how I feel is how I should feel on this. So thanks to everyone who has participated in this discussion. For me , I have found the answers I have sought here.

lol, i feel like one of the last few posts was copied bad, putting James' quotes under my own name.

ནའдհдཀ༑ནკ wrote: ...as I sit here contemplating and meditating about this discussion, the more I am assured that how I feel is how I should feel on this. So thanks to everyone who has participated in this discussion. For me , I have found the answers I have sought here.

You certainly found what you were looking for.

Manu wrote: I suppose you aren't really trying to make a case for rape, as much as you are trying to make a case against philosophical/moral absolutism. This distinction is important to put into perspective the reason why you keep insisting on discussing this subject that might be of a sensitive nature to others.

Yes that is the case. I don't think that anything we experience in life can be considered as an absolute - meaning that nothing is absolutely right (good) or wrong (evil). Sex and violence have always been closely related. Over half the population admit to entertaining rape fantasies. In addition many cultures use the practices of ceremonial or ritual rape and prostitution in long standing time honored traditions. I could site some examples but in the interest of not going into details let me use an example of something less polarizing.

There is a tribe in Africa called the Hamar that engage in ceremonial beating of young women. Now on the surface this sounds horrible but from their point of view it is a very honorable tradition. Young men of the tribe go through a right of passage ceremony that involves the leaping over of cows. However part of the ceremony also involves the beating of their female relatives. On the afternoon of the leap, the man’s female relatives demand to be whipped as part of the ceremony.

The girls go out to meet the ones who will whip them, gathering around them and begging to be whipped on their backs. They don’t show the pain they feel and they actually carry the scars with pride. They look down on a women who refuses to join in. One of the reasons for this ritual whipping is to create a strong bond between the young man and his sisters. If they face hard times in the future, he’ll remember them because of the pain they went through at his initiation. Her scars are a mark of how she suffered for her brother.

This is an ancient and honorable spiritual and religious tradition for these people. Even though most in the western world would find it repulsive these people do not view it the same way. My point is that the Jedi religion claims itself to be inclusive of all spiritual paths so wouldn't that include paths and ritual and traditions that some might find not to their liking?

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: This is an ancient and honorable spiritual and religious tradition for these people. Even though most in the western world would find it repulsive these people do not view it the same way. My point is that the Jedi religion claims itself to be inclusive of all spiritual paths so wouldn't that include paths and ritual and traditions that some might find not to their liking?

I think the case can also be made that there is a form of cruelty involved in forcibly stopping communities from expressing their cultural practices as well. This really is one of the biggest difficulties I have - balancing the rights of individuals and the rights of communities. It can be really tough at the brass tacks to know what's "light" and "dark".

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: My point is that the Jedi religion claims itself to be inclusive of all spiritual paths so wouldn't that include paths and ritual and traditions that some might find not to their liking?

Beats me. :silly:

Pun aside, I'd like to make a few observations:

1. "Jedi religion" serves individuals. Individuals do not serve "Jedi religion". Thus, generalized observations do not apply to all members evenly.
2. There is a difference between being open to studying all spiritual paths and accepting all spiritual practices as valid. I'm not going to accept every practice out there in the name of "tolerance".
3. I can go ahead and make up my mind about whether or not I consider the practices you described hurtful or not. What I cannot do is try to impose those views on others, especially if I am not a part of their community/society.
4. Profit? (I sort of lost focus here).

I think your absolutely right Manu, The Jedi religion serves the individual. That is one of the reasons that no one has ever been able to put a clear definition to exactly what a Jedi is because each individual has their own definition and also by definition Jediism is Syncretic, meaning all inclusive. So your right, you don't have to accept the practices of any other Jedi just as you have no right to impose yours on others. However, as a Jedi you must be tolerant of them.

So if a member of the Hamar tribe came here to study as a Jedi but kept his ancestral practices would he be accepted as a Jedi? What about one that practices ceremonial rape as part of an ancestral religious or spiritual custom? Their interpretation of the current doctrine would make their practice just as valid as yours. This is really where religion starts to get in trouble because without a detailed dogma almost anything can be interpreted in a subjective manner and in that case one cannot say that something like rape or beating your sister would never be condoned.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: So if a member of the Hamar tribe came here to study as a Jedi but kept his ancestral practices would he be accepted as a Jedi? What about one that practices ceremonial rape as part of an ancestral religious or spiritual custom? Their interpretation of the current doctrine would make their practice just as valid as yours. This is really where religion starts to get in trouble because without a detailed dogma almost anything can be interpreted in a subjective manner and in that case one cannot say that something like rape or beating your sister would never be condoned.

Your attention to detailed wording makes me conclude you must enroll in Law school. :laugh:

To be honest, anyone can call themselves Jedi and there is nothing we can do about it. As long as you got some sort of inspiration from the fictional Jedi and you try to apply it to real life, you are Jedi. Which is why it is impossible to define.

That said, communities do exist, and communities set standards. So communities (and the high-rankers and members therein) have to right to acknowledge your claim to Jedi-hood as valid... or not.

But some do not mind not being recognized formally.

Personally, I do not like calling "Jedi" a religion.

However, as a Jedi you must be tolerant of them.
Jedi believe in the inherit worth of all . No where does it say Jedi must do anything . This one simple beliefs rids a Jedi of a need for tolorance orvthe use of the word. If done one is as valid as you .. if you Kyrin are as valid as I - I do not tolerate you I believe in you and I accept you. That doesn't mean we will not agree. See eye to eye. But if I truly live like there is no compotition between us - then syncritsm and our belief allows both to be... both to seek and both ( all truly) , to grow. No tolerating here.

I see the doctrine as giving a silhouette, symbolic, and people walk into this path as shadows of something they seek within. The silhouette therefore serves as the symbolic language, and so the refined product will be different, but translations to its form will be related in some manner and so representative and connected. The 'religion', the effort of that, is syncretic, but the doctrine is not syncretic (short of where it indicates the effort)... so its not inclusive of all things in that regard. IMO.