Fact Checking Daniel M. Jones and The Church of Jediism

JLSpinner wrote: Kyrin, I think you confuse seeking distance and unattachment. There is nothing wrong about some of our numbers not clinging to the star wars fiction. Our version of Jedi is very much different from the fiction. I hold tightly to the fiction as it was spiritual to me before I found this temple. Nobody will meet your or my standards exactly. Everyone is different. Grand sweeping statements will never work 100%.
As for the leadership. I've seen instances like you state, true. But these cases are far and few as a whole. To classify all of our leaders as you did does no good and will discourage their efforts. Be mindful of the specifics. Generalizing isn't the route to change. I encourage you to stay the path you have stated. But don't numb the system with statements that won't help your cause. Be precise and keen. May the Force be with you.

Yes I understand what you are saying but once again, I am not saying the fiction is what is followed but the philosophy behind the fiction. To that point though, the name Jedi itself is fictional as well as the name "The Force" and that cant be denied. So no matter how hard you try to unattach yourself, those elements still permeate the spirituality. You yourself have a light saber in your avatar as well, another element based in fiction.

I have no problem with any of those things, but I'm also not sure how you can say that "our" version of Jediism is very much different. How can you speak for any one other than yourself in this regard? My version (if you can call it that) is worlds different than yours and Jones is different than any ones here I would think. This is my point, Take away the name Jedi and the philosophy as a movement falls apart. The term Jedi, a fictional term, is the only glue holding this movement together because there is no unifying material beyond that term. No creation story, no agreed upon text, no singly shared universal belief held among all practitioners and no originator of the movement. you cant strip the fiction from the Jedi spirituality without destroying the cohesion of the spirituality.

As for my comments on the leadership of this place, respectfully I would disagree with your statement. These instances are not far and wide, but run rampant. My latest example is the misunderstanding you and I just had. No communication caused distress in a thread. I have been blocked by clergy members and ignored by council members because they have grown tired of my questions. I find that unacceptable. Just a few examples but there are many more. Many council members left recently as well as a major chunk of the core membership over the same sort of communication failures. Doesnt seem like isolated incidents to me.

Perhaps you should reread my post. I stated that I personally hold the fiction dear to heart as part of my spirituality. That is not in debate. Others do not. How do we differ from the fiction? None of us are sanctioned by the government to hold the peace as Jedi. A small percentage practice any martial arts. We don't take children from their homes to indoctrinate them. Yes we share philosophies. We teach those philosophies from the source of inspiration and not from the fiction. I know your point. Yes no matter how much people wish to be unattached they can never achieve it truly because of our connection to the fiction. That being said nobody has to be your definition of Jedi. Nobody must do works for the name.
This interaction doesn't equate to abuse from leadership. This equates to a debate or discussion where individuals disagree with you. If that is abusive to you, i apologize. That was not my intent. I only seek to translate my view in a way you can understand.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: Tellahane, do you call yourself a Jedi? Do you call yourself a Knight of Jediism? Do you belong to a Jedi temple? Then assumption confirmed.

I don’t believe I said anything about evangelism. I didn’t even say you had to open your mouth. I just said you do things in the name of Jediism – even if you only keep that as a thought in your mind.

Obviously the name speaks to you in some way as singularly significant. It signifies something to you. You can tell me all day long that you would be just as happy following “Mcdonaldism” and carrying the title of "hamburgular" but it would be a lie.

It's not a lie...but at this point I think you will refuse to even attempt to understand my perspective at this point because you are on a mission to try and convince me otherwise by continuing to tell me what my own perspective of my belief is from your two eyes. I don't know how else to try and explain it at this point, I don't think you care.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: You see, a spirituality can be made out of anything and labeled any way we want, (I have created my own name for example). However what speaks to you are the concepts in Star Wars and the philosophies behind the name Jedi and The Force. I’m not sure why it is you’re so vehement to distance yourself from that here?

Again, injecting words you are telling me what speaks to me and what doesn't and you aren't me?

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: As for my “vendetta” well, strong word. I don’t recall ever saying anywhere that my mission is to call everyone out on their BS. This place thrives on too little information. Those with the power keep it to themselves to remain in power while they treat the membership like children. My only “mission” is to see that change.

Then to change the status quo you have to be willing to LISTEN and seek out others perspectives and have the respect to acknowledge them even if you don't understand them. I feel like this is deja vu in me having to explain this.

"The Tao that can be described, is not the Tao" This is a quote I very firmly believe in. My spiritual connection with the "force" for example, the force is the word of the day/month/year/picktimeperiod here that I'm using to describe it for now, but what word I use to describe it, is not it and of itself, it is far beyond those words, it existed long before star wars and movies and everything else, and while the fictional connection might be the closest idea of what it is, it still isn't it, so yeah I'll use the name for now but that doesn't mean I think the fictional idea of the "force" is real, I think there is something out there that is real that for me in the best way we can describe it today has the closest match the fictional idea of the "force" and thats why we use that term so there is something we can use on common ground to try and describe it. But IT is still more important then the word we use to hold it in its proverbial container we try and use to describe it.

I'm not sure how I can explain that better, maybe with more attempts and practice, but this might be a situation where you an I can just agree that we disagree on that philosophical view and move on.

Everyone makes a valid point of view... As much as I have to say a Quote from the Star Wars movies, hits the Nail on the head....


Obi-Wan: "So what I told you was true, from a certain point of view." Luke: "A certain point of view?" Obi-Wan: "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

No two people ever agree exactly!!!!!

And If I had to say what I feel or who is What I think truly developed and Founded the Concept of Jediism... The Man who started it all... George Lucas... IF it wasn't for him, it wouldn't be here.....

Neaj Pa Bol wrote: Everyone makes a valid point of view... As much as I have to say a Quote from the Star Wars movies, hits the Nail on the head....


Obi-Wan: "So what I told you was true, from a certain point of view." Luke: "A certain point of view?" Obi-Wan: "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

No two people ever agree exactly!!!!!

And If I had to say what I feel or who is What I think truly developed and Founded the Concept of Jediism... The Man who started it all... George Lucas... IF it wasn't for him, it wouldn't be here.....

True, but one might predict that in the absence of such a thing, we individually would have found something else that also best fits our needs, and without any prior knowledge of star wars would also probably be reasonably satisfied in whatever we found or chose to follow.

We would be trekkies lol

Very True...

JLSpinner wrote: Perhaps you should reread my post. I stated that I personally hold the fiction dear to heart as part of my spirituality. That is not in debate. Others do not.

I never said it was. The statement you made I was referring to was this:

spinner wrote: Our version of Jedi is very much different from the fiction.

JLSpinner wrote: How do we differ from the fiction? None of us are sanctioned by the government to hold the peace as Jedi. A small percentage practice any martial arts. We don't take children from their homes to indoctrinate them. Yes we share philosophies. We teach those philosophies from the source of inspiration and not from the fiction. I know your point. Yes no matter how much people wish to be unattached they can never achieve it truly because of our connection to the fiction. That being said nobody has to be your definition of Jedi. Nobody must do works for the name.

I never said anyone MUST do works in the name of Jedi and I never said anyone has to be my definition of Jedi. Your putting words in my mouth. In fact my point was that there is NO definition of Jedi without the title "Jedi". Take away the title and the philosophy is reduced to one of disorder whose tenets are defined in any of a multitude of other spiritualities. Your examples of differences show that. I don't mean to belabor the point because you have already admitted an irrevocable connection to the fiction but you cant define the differences without using the fiction itself. All this means is there is no coherent definition of what Jediism is without the fiction as a reference. I dont mean to imply its a bad thing, just the way it is.

JLSpinner wrote: This interaction doesn't equate to abuse from leadership. This equates to a debate or discussion where individuals disagree with you. If that is abusive to you, i apologize. That was not my intent. I only seek to translate my view in a way you can understand.

Once again, you put words in my mouth. I never said anything about abuse from leadership? I dont even know where the hell you got that!? Beyond that, yes I do agree this is simply a debate so how did you get the idea I considered this abuse? All I ever said was there was a lack of communication and I gave one example, as asked for by you, when we were speaking in the thread a few weeks ago about Streen. Still not abuse though, just lack of comms.

Tellahane, you yourself are the one who used the hamburger analogy.

Are you saying that the philosophies behind Star Wars, Jedi and The Force do not speak to you? If so then why in the very next paragraph do you quote the Tao, tell me you firmly believe in its quote and then say your chosen word for it is The Force. If I’m not mistaken the Tao is one of the philosophies that inspired the fictional term “The Force”, is it not?

If I’m not interpreting your perspective correctly then why not just call it by its more commonly known more widely accepted name of “The Tao”?

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: Tellahane, you yourself are the one who used the hamburger analogy.

Are you saying that the philosophies behind Star Wars, Jedi and The Force do not speak to you? If so then why in the very next paragraph do you quote the Tao, tell me you firmly believe in its quote and then say your chosen word for it is The Force. If I’m not mistaken the Tao is one of the philosophies that inspired the fictional term “The Force”, is it not?

If I’m not interpreting your perspective correctly then why not just call it by its more commonly known more widely accepted name of “The Tao”?

I'm saying that it is the best collection of philosophies and idea's that best speaks with me, but the labels of themselves are not what speaks its what's behind them that does, it's the picture not the description. That make any sense?

Tellahane wrote: I'm saying that it is the best collection of philosophies and idea's that best speaks with me, but the labels of themselves are not what speaks its what's behind them that does, it's the picture not the description. That make any sense?

Yes it makes sense. I understand what you are saying. Unfortunately though, we are forced to label those pictures and the labels that have been chosen here are ones of fictional origin.

The Tao attempts to describe ones perception that some esoteric essence exists and binds the universe. The Tao is a placeholder for that essence. It does not adequately describe that essence because descriptions can never adequately convey ones innate perception of what that essence truly encompasses. But its the best we have.

However what happens when we take up new terminology that describes that essence from a fictional source, we put yet another layer between ourselves and that essence - a fictional layer that cant be removed. Spinner and I have been discussing that. People see that and recognize that layer and it degrades the experience for many of them. I think that is one of the reason that Jediism is looked on by many as less than a serious pursuit.

My question is, how does one get beyond that? My pondering of all this, is simply an exercise in wondering what would need to be done to bring Jediism to the mainstream and allow it to stand on its own without the need for the fiction? I think people like Daniel Jones, as misguided as he may be, may be onto something.

I wonder how you tell people your philosophic worldview without using any reference to the fiction whatsoever and can that description ever be generic enough to be agreed upon by any Jedi practicing today? I think if Jediism cant achieve that in some way, it will never be truly accepted as a legitimate philosophy and instead be relegated to the fringes forever.