ATTN: COUNCIL; Updated Doctrine Proposal

This is the updated version with the new language on what Jediism is. I also altered #15 to read:
15) A Jedi is wary of attachments, recognizing that such lead to emotional entrapment.

Originally it defined which attachments, but per contemplation written elsewhere in these forums, those definitions didn't cover all attachments.

I wrote a fairly lengthy document earlier in the month, but didn't post it, as for whatever reasons, I wasn't happy with it.

I still think I do not understand what the "goal" of the "Doctrine" is, and pissfarting around with the wording of this or that concept wasn't getting me any closer.

There are more easier and more with more explanation but here a doctrine can be the thing that we share. I say we here as we all - the temple as a group- we can have these ideas as a beginning point. Our doctrine is only here on site. How we display or apply it - that’s to each of us. A doctrine can be the thing we share when we say we share the force - other places have their own. There is no wrong way to do things of this nature. Every individual has their own right and opportunity to choose their faith or faiths and create their own balance. This is our agreed ideas, do you share em ? So many times things in the real world are lost and separated and serrated - over doctrine or rules or laws and wording and credit of where things “need” to go something similar and we can loose sight of the whole reason why we meet- to share. To learn - to teach not- to force. Like I said there are more organized explanations for many sides. This is simply mine and from some one who apply a many to make a WORKING real everyday practice. I know many do here as well. Some times it’s not the why but the do ya’ that gets me.

There does need to be "something" though, otherwise TotJO is just a funny sounding word.
Have a look at this site - https://www.coca-colacompany.com/

It may very well all be marketing lies, but let us pretend it can be taken at face value, let us pretend it is a religion. (which it would have to be, to have a whole page, delivered sincerely, about their full range of "non alcoholic, calorie free hydration options" AKA - Water. You can only get that sort of madness from faith....)

Back to the point -

They have got their purpose and vision in as simple a form as possible -
"Our Purpose:

Refresh the world. Make a difference.

Our Vision:

Our vision is to craft the brands and choice of drinks that people love, to refresh them in body & spirit. And done in ways that create a more sustainable business and better shared future that makes a difference in people’s lives, communities and our planet."

No one can divide or argue with that, it is the core value. They are here to provide refreshing beverages, and "make a difference"(a delightfully indefinable outcome...). There's no "What if we DID NOT Make beverages? What if we sold sawn timber logs instead?"

It is not a question that can be asked, because the absolute, atomic purpose of the organisation has been stated "refresh the world"


Anyway, Coke is delivering Strawberry + Cucumber profiles meet people’s desire for flavor-forward refreshment. What does TotJO do?

In as few words as possible, what is the baseline purpose and vision of Jediism?

Threw this together on that Idea James, Just a beginning....Have at it to chop it up and reconstruct it...

"Our Purpose:

An Openness to Seek and Follow one’s own Personal Journey, Whether Spiritual or Positive Being…

Our Vision:

Our vision is to provide a place where one can learn, share and find their Path in Life through Philosophies, Teachings and Sharing of Knowledge within Jediism….”

Mission statement is the coordinate space and the 'guiding doctrine' is the reference frame.
An 'authoritative doctrine' is the coordinate space and reference frame, which tends to make them a bit closed and static (because they were dogma to define belief). In contrast a guiding doctrine defines action as simplified examples... to ensure the space needed for embodiment of the values by the individual with a more meaningful personal and pragmatic engagement.
The coord. space needs to be appropriate to the medium, and the ref. frame appropriate to the local space dynamics of activity.
Without any defining characteristics of Temple values it would be anything goes, so both docs could work together to find a balance perhaps.