Sith

ZealotX, I'm not going to spoon feed you. You seem intelligent enough to find information, but I could be wrong, so I won't write conjecture to say that you are, or not. Do you see what I mean? I'm not telling you not to post your opinions. Conjecture is positing a conclusion or opinion based on incomplete information. It's not that you're entirely wrong, but, when you spend most of your time making claims about a group of people with which you have no experience or knowledge, it tells me that you aren't here to learn. You seem to hold onto one idea and then tell others that they are wrong for not agreeing with you. That's my perception of what you're doing, but you could be trying to do something entirely different from what I perceive. I'm not one to jump to conclusions so hastily.

Who are we to limit what is valid? If I find the means to help myself or others from words of fiction, should I choose to ignore it? What classifies as fiction? I can find fictional rewrites in my history books. Life isn't so black and white. Do what you can with what you get, whether it's Obi-wan Kenobi or Odin.

It's not a matter of what inspires us, or what's valid for us, but pigeon-holing people based on our perceptions with a foundation in fiction, rather than fact.

Luthien wrote: It's not a matter of what inspires us, or what's valid for us, but pigeon-holing people based on our perceptions with a foundation in fiction, rather than fact.

I can see where you are coming from. I just think we are getting tied up in labels. Like another thread, the name does not define the item. We choose the name and give the meaning based off of our memories. No one else will have the exact same meaning. It's the intention and the result that brings importance.

JamesSand wrote:

But with all due respect... you're basically creating a difference between real life Sith ideology vs SW mythology and you want me to treat the "real life" sith as real sith which would make the sith in the SW... "wrong"? You're using THEIR Sith Code but saying their interpretation isn't correct. That's like me quoting the founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses and claiming to have created a JW church but then any part of it I don't like (like no blood transfusions) I just leave out and I can just decide to change their doctrines into Catholicism but since I'm calling it Jehovah's Witness people have to respect it as such.

I see the point you're trying to make, however there is one slight difference in your example - being that various "Figures" in the JW world could very come around and argue the point about your new splinter group.

In the unlikely event that Darth Maul rocks up and starts slapping people upside the head, then the "real life" sith might have something to worry about - until then, adapting the word to suit their mythology (or methodology) and devising their own path is more or less up to them.

Would it make you happier if they call themselves Z-Warriors instead of Sith?

I don't call myself Sith...and the reason for that is mostly because of the word's connotations for other people. Outside of the Sith/Jedi folk, no one gives a rats arse about the difference between Sith and Jedi., if indeed there is much difference.

When I discuss my "way" I want to conjure up images of Sir Alec Guiness in a homespun robe, not a glossy black cyborg, so the language I use reflects that.

The debate between Sith and Jedi doesn't interest me half so much as the one between Jedi (and Sith and all related offshoots) and Christian or Agnostic.

When one day all of my friends and family are "some sort of" variation of the Jedi group, then I'll worry about the various subdivisions.

To be fair I felt the close to the same way about Christianity so I can't say enough that this is MY opinion. It bugged me that this JEWISH man didn't create a new religion. Who created Christianity was really the gentile (non-Hebrew) followers (mainly of Paul). Yeshua/Jesus was a reformer. He wanted to reform Judaism. And while I can't prove it I believe that enough people (zealots) wanted to use him because they wanted to fight Rome for independence, that they were willing to hype him up and build up his reputation from rabbi to messiah. In their culture messiah was the title given to the king because the kings of Israel were "anointed" by God to lead. And they would need that kind of leadership to unite the scattered tribes in order to fight.

There are many brands of Christianity and truth is that many of them feel like "hey we're all Christians" while many others feel like you aren't really a Christian if you don't believe certain doctrines. The Catholic church was so adamant on this point that they murdered people as "heretics". Ironically, their belief in the Trinity made THEM heretics but they thought they were entitled to control the religion and all doctrines because they got the bishops together (gentiles) to agree. But even though they call themselves Christians that's more of their religion than it is Jesus's because, again, he didn't start it. It was simply done in his name. And imo the gentiles were like grave robbers because it wasn't until after all the 12 disciples had died that they took their names and their authority to build themselves as the base and foundation of this church-which capitalized on the name and popularity of the man behind all the rumors.

A lot of Christians are deeply confused because "Christ" wasn't the author and creator of their religion. So its mixed with paganism. Christmas is a pagan holy day. If the God of the Israelites was real he would be furious.

If Darth Maul were real he would be furious. Actually, I don't know if Maul would care. Darth Bane, however; he would definitely be furious and might look to destroy these people. There's nothing wrong with creating your own path. But then don't use my name, lol. Use your own. So yeah, I would totally happy if they called themselves Z-warriors or even Slith or Silth or Siith. Seriously. At least change the name a little if you're going to make major changes. People shouldn't not do something out of fear that someone is going to confront them, Don't do it because it's not the same thing as what the name suggests. If I was going to create a Christian denomination about worshiping Barney (yes the purple dinosaur) Christians would be upset. I could name it the Church of Barney... which would be accurate, but no. I'm going to call it Christian. And if I was such a fan of what it meant to be Christian and I wanted to live by what Christians believe, I would call myself a Christian and actually be that, not worship Barney.

So if someone is a fan of the Sith... cool. If they want to follow the Sith teachings? Do I agree? No, but I would never tell them they're not Sith. But if they call themselves Sith and they give me Barney philosophy I'm going to call foul just because of what Sith means in MY beliefs. Even if its Barney to them, to me it will always be Darth Bane. And I mean NO DISRESPECT. Honestly. And of course not every Sith is going to be a Darth Bane clone. But Bane understood the Sith more than most of those that called themselves Sith. The Sith that are popular... the Sith that all the fandom centers around... are the ones who exemplified the Sith philosophy and teachings. Those are the Sith I know. Changing what they taught is like changing what they stood for and everything that goes with it. It's like saying you can be rich by investing $5. Everyone should know that's BS but still tons of people be like "where do I send the money to and how does it work"? Sith teachings... work.But how do they work? They work by fully committing to the dark side. So in other words... if you need to scam people that's what you do. If you expected real Sith to follow a bunch of rules meant to create a fair and level playing ground then you don't know the Sith. If you say "no no they' just don't want to get caught so they stay within the law"... again... that's not Sith. That's AVERAGE. That's most people. If you're telling me that people in jail are more badass than Sith because they weren't afraid to get busted then not only does that make me laugh but it steals that badass quality from the Sith. So with all due respect to those people who are afraid of fully committing to the dark side.... they aren't Sith to me. Sorry.

ZealotX wrote: If they want to follow the Sith teachings? Do I agree? No, but I would never tell them they're not Sith. But if they call themselves Sith and they give me Barney philosophy I'm going to call foul just because of what Sith means in MY beliefs.

There's a quote that this thread makes me think of:

Anton LaVey wrote: Counterproductive Pride: That first word is important. Pride is great up to the point you begin to throw out the baby with the bathwater. The rule of Satanism is: if it works for you, great. When it stops working for you, when you've painted yourself into a corner and the only way out is to say, I'm sorry, I made a mistake, I wish would could compromise somehow, then do it."

Although the quote is about Satanism, it works for so many things that members talk about here. It goes both ways... both about believing in things and purposely not believing in things. The truth is, nobody's belief system means to the same even when the names are the same. It happens here, it happens with Sith, it happens with Satanists, Christians, Muslims.

I believe we should be concerned with us and what works for us, we can question why they believe something, but you can't really call 'foul' because their definition is different to yours. Of course, there is always debate

To play off of what Edan said not even the canon sith agreed upon the right path. Darth Bane just murdered those he disagreed with. And really murdering a person for a differing of opinion is a good sign you fear what they have to say.

The reality is that real world Sith created and defined their path. Not you. Just like the founders of this Temple created a path vastly different in many respects than the Jedi of lore. Those that create and codify are the ones that get to set the definition. To close it's most definitely disrespectful to tell someone that they are not a real member of a religious or philosophical path because said path does not meet your standards.

Ain't that what many Christian denominations do? If you don't believe the exact same way that they do, you're not really a Christian? It's sanctimony, at best.

Those that create and codify are the ones that get to set the definition.

But ironically, this is exactly the point I was making. And I will reiterate again, that my views of the Sith are my own opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. This just happens to be mine.

Look, at the end of the day no one is forced to recognize what anyone wants to call themselves. If Rodney wants to call himself "Rodney the Magnificent" Rodney can call himself whatever makes him happy. That doesn't mean that I have to call him that.

The one who created and codified the Jedi and their philosophy was George Lucas. (I know that's the fiction. Hold on.)

Jediism doesn't really change that. It basically honors it and gets as close as possible within a real-world context. There's no real divergence or radical change in the Jedi code, its understanding, or Jedi philosophy. In other words, it doesn't just take the name. Jediism respects the definition of "Jedi" that was created by Lucas. It doesn't borrow the name and do away with the teachings or what it represents in SW. Jedi comes from SW. It is a trademarked property. Because it is non-commercial use Jediism can use it but I wouldn't be here if I felt it didn't give proper respect to the origin of the name and the mythological characters it belonged to. When I read the materials here... what I see is true to what I know about the Jedi. It's not a fan site just for people who want to cosplay or whatever. The focus is on the understanding and enlightenment. The definition of Jedi is already set. If someone suddenly said Jediism is about line dancing and retweeting the Kardashians I'd be out the door. Why? Because my opinion of what Jedi are isn't limited to a movie but rather it is the translation of their ideology into real-life. My opinion of the Sith is based on the same premises.

ZealotX wrote: The definition of Jedi is already set.

Jed·i
/ˈjedˌī/

noun

noun: Jedi; plural noun: Jedi; plural noun: Jedis; noun: Jedi knight; plural noun: Jedi knights; noun: Jedi warrior; plural noun: Jedi warriors

a member of the mystical knightly order in the Star Wars films, trained to guard peace and justice in the universe.

•anyone with special privileges or supernormal powers reminiscent of a Jedi.

@ZealotX

We do try to get as close to this definition as possible, to be what we see when we think Jedi. But, of course, we cannot "use" the Force (We can feel it, hear it if you listen), and we are not guardians of peace and justice in the universe. We cannot travel beyond this planet (save a few, dunno if we have any astronaut Jedi yet), and we do not go and enforce peace and justice. We stand for it, we protect it, but we do not enforce as the movie Jedi do. We have no special privledges, most places don't even recognize the faith. Not all of us have mystical powers (some do, due to their path).

So, by that logic, we are not Jedi, just people claiming the title, just as our modern day Sith. Again, we see the definition change to fit what is possible and acceptable.