ATTN: COUNCIL; Updated Doctrine Proposal

I dont think it reads a bit simple..
I happen to think it is clearer in the new proposed form.
But then I have always liked things more straightforward in its wording.
The mystery and wonder comes in applying what we take from and use in life.

It's difficult to explain. It seems to lose some of the essence.

I'd like to draw your attention to the second part of my statement. The mystery can be rediscovered with reverance

OB1Shinobi wrote: I dont know if this is answering your question in the way that you meant it when you asked but my understanding from what ive seen so far is that 1) this isnt an effort to change the doctrine, only to streamline it. And 2) the benefits are an increase in clarity and a reduction of redundancy.

——- —-

If im wrong, could someone please explain how/why i’m wrong and If im correct, could someone please explain how/why im correct?

It appears to me that based on the first paragraph this is neither an effort to merely streamline nor to reduce redudancy. It starts off by redefining jediism (which members have long maintained is a religion) as a school of thought (bit of a mouthful when compared to 'religion'), presumably with the end goal of reclassifying it as a subset of jedi realism. It also adds a divine attribute to the Force which is not the totjo way and a major shift in policy.

Changing the definition back to the original "Jediism is a religion based on the observance of the Force" from "religious school of thought" would definitely make it less of a mouthful. I don't see a problem with changing that, or even just keeping the original write up. As you'll recall, I was not the one to propose an edit on that, I only proposed a renaming of the Creed to "Jedi Affirmations", an introduction to the Jedi Code, and streamlining the two documents into one so we could compare the three and choose one.

As for the edit suggested by Zealot to axe metaphysical and replace it with "Divine". I actually think that pulls it more outside the realm of Jedi Realism and across the line into Jediism. It also goes to the heart of the discussion that was had in the "Is Reiki a Force Power?" thread a couple of weeks ago.

When that discussion occurred, we saw a lot of people get upset that anyone would equate alternative healing methods like that to using the Force (I also note that some in the "against" camp noted they could see it being used for calming someone down, but not for legit healing). It would seem that the ToTJO environment is more against Metaphysical studies (of which Reiki, Telepathy, and the like fall into) than they would the idea that something is divine.

Divine also has a lot more connotations than simply a "deity". In many new-age cultures, Humans have their own internal divinity.

So... um, jediism or jedi realism or force jediism... what do all these mean? And will the doctrine say that reike cant be force healing here? I'm very confused??? This is a star wars jedi religion place that some actually believe in the "miracles" of the jedi or , well not sure. It doesnt have to be supernatural right? Just like science we dont get yet?

The distinctions are as follows:

Force Realist- an overall term that describes anyone who follows a religion, philosophy or way of life inspired primarily by Star Wars (Sithism, Sith Realism, Jedi Realism, Jediism, Baran Do, Dark Jedi, Jensaari, Mando, and many more historical/current systems that have been explored in the real life community)

Pragmatic Jedi- which at best I can only describe as Atheist-leaning Jedi. They don't really acknowledge the supernatural nature of the Force, but instead look at it as more of a metaphor.

Jedi Realism- Treats the Jedi Path as a way of life, and believe the Force is something tangible. In truth, there are many who would define Jedi Realism as "Dual-Faith", and Jediism as being it's own religion. Anyone that identifies as a Christian Jedi, Wiccan Jedi, Norse Jedi, etc would be considered Jedi Realists.

Jediism- TotJO, however, doesn't have a distinction between Jedi Realism and Jediism, as we consider those with dual-faith to be followers of Jediism. But those which do draw hard lines between the two may best describe Jediism as more an Agnostic faith. Meaning that the Force is some form of higher power alone- but what it is, is part of the mystery Jedi explore- never hammering down a concrete "it is God", "it is Ashe", "it is Magick", "it is Chi", "it's like the Gaia Hypothesis", etc. They may use these terms or analogies, but it is more to help describe what they understand of the Force, rather than saying it "IS" this.

I should point out that TotJO is pretty explicitly not force realist.

In my opinion, force realism is just larping and not even religion anyways, so it's pointless to discuss it. Our understanding of the force is informed by our prejudices, so the idea that someone isn't a real Jedi if they follow a different religion is reductionist.

Also the Gaia hypothesis is pseudoscience and not a religion because it does not make the claims that religions do.

I use often “a modern day Jeddist” for a reason, mainly it’s not about the labels . Most any one can reasonably apply any chosen label in place of “modern day Jeddist” for whichever flavor of Jeddist they choose and receive the same value of the idea.
But that’s me.
Where did these definitions come from if I may ask? Where do they come from?

So... in force realism is jediism? and jediism is what is done here? so larping is done here? Were there old time jediists?

@Rex Well fortunately for the rest of us, you never published the definition of "Force Realism"- I DID. I even had several platforms named "Force Realist" over the last decade: Force Realists Magazine, Force Realists Radio, Force Realists TV. All of which focused on the real life philosophy of those which followed them. I even have run an annual event called "Force Realists Meditation Relay" on New Years Day. The term came about when I tried to find a way to create a magazine that allowed all three Aspects at Force Academy to contribute without misrepresenting them as "Jedi".

Ren may have historically used the term to talk down to people, but I was unaware of his use of the term until long after I began FRM. Throughout the community, it's my definition which won out. So let's not talk down about the various other groups which exist and follow the various philosophies that fit into the category. Philosophies which you clearly know nothing about if you're calling them Larpers. Thank you.

@Carlos- as for the other definitions. Pragmatic Jedi was created by Opie, the "description" I provided was loose and just a way to give a very brief understanding of how Opie applied it. It's not a term he uses anymore and settles with "Jedi" as he doesn't believe there should be any distinctions between the different Jedi "archetypes". The other two are based upon how they are used outside of TotJO. As I explained in my post- there is no distinction here at TotJO between a Jedi Realist and a follower of Jediism. Here we just call it all Jediism.


@Fyxe let me put it another way:

All Jedi are Force Realists, not all Force Realists are Jedi
JUST AS
All Roses are Flowers, not all Flowers are Roses.

Going BACK to Rex- there's one more thing:

The Gaia Hypothesis may not be a religion, but it is none-the-less a way that I've encountered a few Jediists try to describe their understanding of the Force to explain how the Force has a "Will", but we still maintain our own free will within it. Just because it's not YOUR way of describing (it's not mine either) it doesn't mean they cannot use it for themselves as they explore the Force.