Post by Alena on Dec 26, 2006 23:23:49 GMT -5
This is my thoughts and expansion of a topic, taken from a Jedi chat group.
I keep hearing the ideal of "Serving the Force" how does one serve a neutral energy field? Looking close at the workings of the universe and nature(which is a reflection of the laws of the universe.)
We can see the Force strives for constant upward evolution of all things, while de-evolution can also happen, it is usually stamped out sooner or later, the Force does not tolerate going backwards and stagnation, if a thing is not evolving it is dieing. The Force is not benevolent, all-loving warm fuzzy, sentimental being. It is a neutral energy power. It seems the current Jedi way of thinking is based on rotten systems of the same old egalitarian, love everyone there all some how so valuable/humanitarian ideals that came from rotten brains of fallible mortals. And not some energy field. So they make a mistake overlapping crusty ideals of degenerates onto the Force and then claim to speak for the Force. And given at this time these ideals which characterize the dark age are the popular ones, so more people go with what is "in" at the moment.
I see the Force beyond sentiment, I see it as characterized in the Hindu trinity of Shiva,Krishna and Brahman.
"The well-known Hindu Trinity -- Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, so masterfully evoked in Indian art -- is anything but the blending of three inseparable gods into one; anything but the triple aspect of one transcendent and personal god. It symbolizes something by far more fundamental, namely, existence in its entirety: manifested and unmanifested; conceivable, visible and tangible, and beyond conception. For existence -- being -- is the one thing divine. And there is no divinity outside it; and nothing outside divinity. [Image: Bust of Trimurti ("having three forms") in the caves at Elephanta.]
Now Brahma is existence in und fuer sich -- in and for itself; being unmanifested, and thereby outside and above time; being, beyond the conception of the time-bound mind, and thereby unknowable. It is significant that Brahma has no temples in India -- or elsewhere. One cannot render a cult to that which no time-bound consciousness can conceive. One can, at the most, through the right attitude (and also through the right ascetic practices) merge one's self into it; transcend individual consciousness; live above time -- in the absolute present which admits no "before" and no "after," and which is eternity.
Vishnu -- the world sustainer -- is the tendency of every being to remain the same and to create (and procreate) in its own likeness; the universal life force as opposed to change and thereby to disaggregation and death; the power that binds this time-bound universe to its timeless essence -- every manifested being to the idea of that being, in the sense Plato was one day to give the word idea.
All men against time (all centers of action against time, in the cosmic sense of the word) are embodiments of Vishnu. They are all -- more or less -- saviors of the world: forces of life, directed against the downward current of irresistible change that is the very current of time; forces of life tending to bring the world back to original, timeless perfection.
Shiva -- the destroyer -- is the tendency of every being to change, to die to its present and to all its past aspects. He is Mahakala -- time itself; time that drags the universe to its unavoidable doom and -- beyond that -- to no less irresistible regeneration; to the spring of a new Golden Age and again, slowly and steadily, to degeneracy and death, in an endless succession.
The truly great men in time -- men such as Genghis Khan -- reflect something of his terrible majesty. The greatest men against time also -- inasmuch as they all must possess (more or less) the qualities of character that are specially those of the men in time; the qualities in which is rooted the efficiency of organized violence. For Shiva is not only the destroyer; he is the creator -- the good one; the positive one -- also to the extent all further creation is conditioned by change and ultimately by the destruction of that which was there before. He is -- as essence of destructive change, as time -- turned toward the future. And, on the other hand, Lord Shiva himself -- time personified -- is also (strange as this may seem to the purely analytical mind) above time. He is the great Yogi, whose face remains as serene as the blue sky while his feet beat the furious rhythm of the Tandava dance, amid the flames and smoke of a crumbling world.
In other words, Vishnu and Shiva, the world sustainer and the world destroyer, the force against time and time itself -- Mahakala -- are one and the same. And they are Brahma, timeless existence, the essence of all that is. They are Brahma manifested in time (and automatically also against time) and yet timeless. Hindu art has symbolized this metaphysical truth in the figure of Hari-Hara (Vishnu and Shiva in one body) and in the famous Trimurti: three-faced Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva.
In the manifested universe as we experience it at our scale, no living being embodies that triple and complete idea of existence -- the everlasting, universal law of constant change away from, and of untiring aspiration toward and ceaseless effort back to, original perfection and the ineffable inner peace of timelessness, inseparable from it -- better than the everlasting and ever-returning man against time; He Who Comes Back, age after age "to destroy evildoers and to establish upon earth the reign of righteousness."
The man in time has hardly any of the Vishnu or, as I have called them, sun qualities.
The man above time has hardly any of the lightning qualities of Shiva, the destroyer.
The man against time -- who lives in eternity while acting in time, according to the Aryan doctrine of detached violence -- has Vishnu's faithfulness to the original pattern of creation, Shiva's holy fury of destruction (in view of further creation), and Brahma's fathomless serenity which is, I repeat, the serenity of all three: timeless peace beyond the roar of all wars in time."
What is the point of this? To show how the Force and those who follow the Force in a more pure form should understand, the concept of destruction of what has become stagnate and down ward, to further the Life Force. Like weeding a garden. If the Force was really being followed we would have evolved to Godhood by now.
So a interesting thing is the Sith seems to understand higher evolution and violence as a neutral thing like the Force, in further pursuing of a goal. The Jedi seems to always talk about the Life Force and humanitarian claptrap, in the idea of serving others and the common good. The falling of the Sith is a lot claim there is no real law system beyond what they think up for themselves, a falling of the Jedi is a lot claim to serve degenerate creeds that help make things worse and push the dark age further. Both need to direct there understanding to the Greater reality of the Law of the Force and then live and act in accordance with it.
But both are right in the need for constant personal evolution. Perhaps it could be said there is more Lightning then Sun in the Sith, and more Sun then Lighting in the Jedi. Both are unbalanced. I would like to see the day the balance is corrected, and out of this to be honest the core of a high humanity could come. And a neo-Warrior Caste on par with the ancient Kons.
And yes I sense the ironic part that I go under the banner of Sith, but it allows me the personal freedom to say what needs to be said, and act in whats needs to be acted on.
"I'd like to give my opinion on the Sith vs Jedi debate in order to
get feedback upon which to meditate.
I don't believe the issue is as simple as 'good vs evil'.
Rather, I believe that the issue is power/force and two ways to deal
with it. On the one hand we have the community level that thinks in
terms of being accepted by the populations, safety in numbers,
acceptability, standardized training, community benefit, etc. On the
other hand we have the individual who is looking to their own ethical
standards and abilities.
The thing to keep in mind is that a person who lives by his own
standards may be a healer or champion because those might be his
standards. A person in it for his community might be evil (Hitler was
for his own people).
We think in terms of only good or evil, but in truth there are various
ethical standards in play in the individual at one time. The
requirements of my religion, my community and myself are three common
ones that may clash on occasion.
I'd suggest looking into it deeper rather than writing off all Sith as
evil.
The problem with the Satanic myth (as an example) was that they were
supposed to be 100% evil drug abusing child murdering alcoholics...
but so well organized as to run perfectly unfindable organizations of
doctors, cops and teachers.
Anyone see the problem?
Stereotypes... not always conducive to righteous growth.
SJ"
by Luciferian
I keep hearing the ideal of "Serving the Force" how does one serve a neutral energy field? Looking close at the workings of the universe and nature(which is a reflection of the laws of the universe.)
We can see the Force strives for constant upward evolution of all things, while de-evolution can also happen, it is usually stamped out sooner or later, the Force does not tolerate going backwards and stagnation, if a thing is not evolving it is dieing. The Force is not benevolent, all-loving warm fuzzy, sentimental being. It is a neutral energy power. It seems the current Jedi way of thinking is based on rotten systems of the same old egalitarian, love everyone there all some how so valuable/humanitarian ideals that came from rotten brains of fallible mortals. And not some energy field. So they make a mistake overlapping crusty ideals of degenerates onto the Force and then claim to speak for the Force. And given at this time these ideals which characterize the dark age are the popular ones, so more people go with what is "in" at the moment.
I see the Force beyond sentiment, I see it as characterized in the Hindu trinity of Shiva,Krishna and Brahman.
"The well-known Hindu Trinity -- Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, so masterfully evoked in Indian art -- is anything but the blending of three inseparable gods into one; anything but the triple aspect of one transcendent and personal god. It symbolizes something by far more fundamental, namely, existence in its entirety: manifested and unmanifested; conceivable, visible and tangible, and beyond conception. For existence -- being -- is the one thing divine. And there is no divinity outside it; and nothing outside divinity. [Image: Bust of Trimurti ("having three forms") in the caves at Elephanta.]
Now Brahma is existence in und fuer sich -- in and for itself; being unmanifested, and thereby outside and above time; being, beyond the conception of the time-bound mind, and thereby unknowable. It is significant that Brahma has no temples in India -- or elsewhere. One cannot render a cult to that which no time-bound consciousness can conceive. One can, at the most, through the right attitude (and also through the right ascetic practices) merge one's self into it; transcend individual consciousness; live above time -- in the absolute present which admits no "before" and no "after," and which is eternity.
Vishnu -- the world sustainer -- is the tendency of every being to remain the same and to create (and procreate) in its own likeness; the universal life force as opposed to change and thereby to disaggregation and death; the power that binds this time-bound universe to its timeless essence -- every manifested being to the idea of that being, in the sense Plato was one day to give the word idea.
All men against time (all centers of action against time, in the cosmic sense of the word) are embodiments of Vishnu. They are all -- more or less -- saviors of the world: forces of life, directed against the downward current of irresistible change that is the very current of time; forces of life tending to bring the world back to original, timeless perfection.
Shiva -- the destroyer -- is the tendency of every being to change, to die to its present and to all its past aspects. He is Mahakala -- time itself; time that drags the universe to its unavoidable doom and -- beyond that -- to no less irresistible regeneration; to the spring of a new Golden Age and again, slowly and steadily, to degeneracy and death, in an endless succession.
The truly great men in time -- men such as Genghis Khan -- reflect something of his terrible majesty. The greatest men against time also -- inasmuch as they all must possess (more or less) the qualities of character that are specially those of the men in time; the qualities in which is rooted the efficiency of organized violence. For Shiva is not only the destroyer; he is the creator -- the good one; the positive one -- also to the extent all further creation is conditioned by change and ultimately by the destruction of that which was there before. He is -- as essence of destructive change, as time -- turned toward the future. And, on the other hand, Lord Shiva himself -- time personified -- is also (strange as this may seem to the purely analytical mind) above time. He is the great Yogi, whose face remains as serene as the blue sky while his feet beat the furious rhythm of the Tandava dance, amid the flames and smoke of a crumbling world.
In other words, Vishnu and Shiva, the world sustainer and the world destroyer, the force against time and time itself -- Mahakala -- are one and the same. And they are Brahma, timeless existence, the essence of all that is. They are Brahma manifested in time (and automatically also against time) and yet timeless. Hindu art has symbolized this metaphysical truth in the figure of Hari-Hara (Vishnu and Shiva in one body) and in the famous Trimurti: three-faced Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva.
In the manifested universe as we experience it at our scale, no living being embodies that triple and complete idea of existence -- the everlasting, universal law of constant change away from, and of untiring aspiration toward and ceaseless effort back to, original perfection and the ineffable inner peace of timelessness, inseparable from it -- better than the everlasting and ever-returning man against time; He Who Comes Back, age after age "to destroy evildoers and to establish upon earth the reign of righteousness."
The man in time has hardly any of the Vishnu or, as I have called them, sun qualities.
The man above time has hardly any of the lightning qualities of Shiva, the destroyer.
The man against time -- who lives in eternity while acting in time, according to the Aryan doctrine of detached violence -- has Vishnu's faithfulness to the original pattern of creation, Shiva's holy fury of destruction (in view of further creation), and Brahma's fathomless serenity which is, I repeat, the serenity of all three: timeless peace beyond the roar of all wars in time."
What is the point of this? To show how the Force and those who follow the Force in a more pure form should understand, the concept of destruction of what has become stagnate and down ward, to further the Life Force. Like weeding a garden. If the Force was really being followed we would have evolved to Godhood by now.
So a interesting thing is the Sith seems to understand higher evolution and violence as a neutral thing like the Force, in further pursuing of a goal. The Jedi seems to always talk about the Life Force and humanitarian claptrap, in the idea of serving others and the common good. The falling of the Sith is a lot claim there is no real law system beyond what they think up for themselves, a falling of the Jedi is a lot claim to serve degenerate creeds that help make things worse and push the dark age further. Both need to direct there understanding to the Greater reality of the Law of the Force and then live and act in accordance with it.
But both are right in the need for constant personal evolution. Perhaps it could be said there is more Lightning then Sun in the Sith, and more Sun then Lighting in the Jedi. Both are unbalanced. I would like to see the day the balance is corrected, and out of this to be honest the core of a high humanity could come. And a neo-Warrior Caste on par with the ancient Kons.
And yes I sense the ironic part that I go under the banner of Sith, but it allows me the personal freedom to say what needs to be said, and act in whats needs to be acted on.
"I'd like to give my opinion on the Sith vs Jedi debate in order to
get feedback upon which to meditate.
I don't believe the issue is as simple as 'good vs evil'.
Rather, I believe that the issue is power/force and two ways to deal
with it. On the one hand we have the community level that thinks in
terms of being accepted by the populations, safety in numbers,
acceptability, standardized training, community benefit, etc. On the
other hand we have the individual who is looking to their own ethical
standards and abilities.
The thing to keep in mind is that a person who lives by his own
standards may be a healer or champion because those might be his
standards. A person in it for his community might be evil (Hitler was
for his own people).
We think in terms of only good or evil, but in truth there are various
ethical standards in play in the individual at one time. The
requirements of my religion, my community and myself are three common
ones that may clash on occasion.
I'd suggest looking into it deeper rather than writing off all Sith as
evil.
The problem with the Satanic myth (as an example) was that they were
supposed to be 100% evil drug abusing child murdering alcoholics...
but so well organized as to run perfectly unfindable organizations of
doctors, cops and teachers.
Anyone see the problem?
Stereotypes... not always conducive to righteous growth.
SJ"
by Luciferian