Subud Vision - Feedback
A great number of possible "models" of the "latihan".. From Philip Quackenbush, November 28, 2011. Time 4:59
This article articulates a lot of what has needed to be said about the nature of the "latihan," offering rather fully your particular viewpoint. As you say, other viewpoints or "models" are possible, and, in my opinion, should be widely offered to the membership when as well articulated as yours. I personally don't agree with much of what you said (although I do agree with more of it than I don't, probably), but it has long needed to be said. I found it interesting that the "physicality" model, according to you, automatically generates a mystical attitude. If one goes in to more modern physics (i.e. , beyond the Newtonian or Einsteinian world view), it becomes clear that the "spiritual" and "physical" are a continuum, and, in my view, "we" are small "bundles" of energy that can "grow", transform (in the body and out of it), "expand" or "evolve" (non-"physically", of course, in this case) from "lifetime" to "lifetime", eventually perhaps reaching the "level" of intelligence of a planet, star, or even a galaxy, and there's plenty of "scientific" evidence to back up that assertion contained in a recent publication called "The Source Field Investigations", by David Wilcock, who is sometimes (often, actually) thought to be the "re-incarnation" of Edgar Cayce. If one takes the attitude of Pascal's "gambit", it doesn't really matter if there's an "afterlife" or not, but it behooves us to act as if there is, in case the consequences from less-desirable actions could be less desirable in an "afterlife". By the way, I've been recently (over the past few years) attending a group discussion of non-duality in lieu of Thursday night "latihans", and I find your observations quite informative on that score, as well. Well done. Enjoy.
As you say, exploring diverse models of spirituality and/or the latihan's nature is perfectly reasonable. It's useful to recognise that practising the latihan and explaining it are separate things. In particular, Subud members should understand that paying any attention to Bapak's talks is a completely optional, personal 'extra'.
Did I mention that the founder also said that Subud should progress with the times, and that as people "progress" in the "latihan", they should no longer have to rely on his "advice" (stating in a very early "talk" or private conversation that became the "rumor de jour" for a while that the best thing that he could do would be to give no "talks", but then failing to follow his own "advice"). Those who continue to depend on his "advices" are apparently not capable of "receiving" very well, despite his continued admonitions to "stand on your own two feet" (he once said that testing was for people who didn't "receive" well; I've personally noted that "receiving" improves with "practice" and the assumption that the instantaneous answer from the "collective unconscious" or "divine mind" as the "channel" becomes "broader" is "correct", which, again, is what he said in so many words.). Granted that I'm guilty of selective memory, since that seems to be the case with most, if not all, people's neurology, if people are going to rely on the founder's advice, then they should take a close look at his often contradictory "advices", which often were predicated on a specific time or situation, and could more fruitfully be ignored now. Maybe that would give them the impetus to think and act for themselves more, rather than relying on "leaders" to think and act for them. Enjoy.
Add Feedback to this page / Communicate with us
Use the form below to
- Send your own response to the opinions expressed above
- Request password reminder
- Request addition to or removal from the list of contributors who get instant email notification of changes to this page
- Complain about a guidelines breach.
Problems filling in the form? To get help, please email firstname.lastname@example.org