RECENT DISCUSSION POSTS

The most recent postings are reprinted below, with links to the pages they come from.

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From bronte, August 26, 2008. Time 1:4

"All helpers should be aware of this and other possible problems with mental stability that might arise in the course of practicing latihan. At the very least, there should be a central source trained in mental health issues for helpers to turn to when a member shows signs of mental instability."

Surely the job of helpers can not include this task.
Otherwise they/we would need seminaries, theological colleges, university degrees, and all those worldly things that now hang well on the hook called "religion"

People in Subud certainly need to be caring, understanding, helpful and so on.
But Subud is not a human-devised therapy, suited only to the age-of-enlightenment, when many practitioners are highly educated, as presumably is Hassanah.
Subud latihan's ability to produce response in the uneducated and naive as well as the rest is it's essence.

We all need to be caring, loving, kind.
Some manage that, at least a little.
But a little love can go a long way.
And I too have found it necessary to look outside of Subud to find it, which I have.

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From Sahlan Diver, August 24, 2008. Time 9:9

Hassanah,

Thanks for the comments. However I didn't see myself in the role of moderating this particular discussion, rather just taking part in it, although in my editorial capacity I am hoping at some point that we will get an article from Zebedee, or from others who are unhappy about various statements that are made on the web site, that will provide a detailed counter-argument. So far, we have only been able to find two authors willing to provide us with such articles.

I agree with what you say about the original Subud Vision mission. At the same time, if we are to promote open debate we have to allow the discussion to go where the wind blows, and this will presunably result in a variety of discussion themes,

Regards,

Sahlan

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From Michael Irwin, August 19, 2008. Time 17:6

Katie. Thank you for this clear, thorough and moving post. You give clear examples of so many processes that apply to so many of us.

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From bronte, August 19, 2008. Time 1:25

I can't watch that video.
But please don't ask me to expect reason and logic to take the place of the latihan and testing.
It can't. It won't.
The Christian idea is that
"quietening the mind and heart" lets the devil in.
(See the New Zealand cult site, or rather anti-cult site.)
We, Subud, get listed as "Dangerous" there. Well, I say so is the literal application of Christian dogma, and probably any other dogma.
Subud leads us to a different awareness. If you can't test to your satisfaction, then don't tell everyone to give up testing. Keep on applying the "testing process", and let it get more real, and relevant, as it will for some.
It was given to Subud people as part of the Subud training. Don't try to chuck it out. I think it is a vital part of our Subud life, and always will be.

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From Merlin P, August 18, 2008. Time 22:42

Thank you so much the penny has dropped several times over the last ten minutes reading these articles. The desire to gods will, Thank you so much for articulating that it really hits the spot for me. Once again just so glad to hear that those little thoughts about repression etc I suspected but ..no they have been in subud too long... I was right! Would be great to chat further if possible, if not thanks for that fantastic insight.

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From Hassanah Briedis, August 3, 2008. Time 23:6

Thank you Sahlan for moderating, or facilitating, this discussion which evolved into a discussion about the SubudVision site itself and its agenda of free and open discussion about Subud. I have witnessed discussion strings about a range of philosophical issues around matters that relate less and less to Subud itself, but this one that's just taken place is, I believe, of far more relevance to the SubudVision mission (as I understood it).

Hassanah (Briedis)

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From sjahari, August 3, 2008. Time 16:0

Hi Leonard,
Thanks for your clarification. On further review I see you are correct. Still, I continue to have problems with the second paragraph of the article. I guess I would just like to see the article focussed more directly as an interpretation of what you feel is the best approach to the issue of belief. I feel that it would draw more people in that way and perhaps be of broader use.

Regarding Faith:
I have had major personal struggles with faith. I know that many people following a spiritual path share that struggle with me. A few years ago, at a time when I really needed it, I came across a statement by Thomas Merton explaining what faith is. This idea has made a major impact on me and it is what I rely on now. I forget where the quote is from Merton, but could find it if you want.

Basically, Merton told me that faith is the one thing I can do myself. It is in fact the only thing. Absolutely everything else is beyond my control. But I do have the ability to be in a state of faith.

To me now, faith is a very active thing. It is a verb rather than a noun.

Faith is arriving. Faith is standing up at the beginning of the latihan. Faith is the action of presenting myself. Faith is that inner turning towards G_d.

Now in my own mind faith is intimately tied with belief but is not the same thing. If I did not have some kind of belief (based on all the aspects of belief you have mentioned including - teachings, experience, what other people said) then -- Why would I bother to stand? Why would I arrive?

So for me it takes a certain action within myself of turning towards this ultimate process in the belief that it is what I believe it is. And it is this action which is Faith. And somehow the core of that action goes to something much deeper than the mindset of beliefs.

The nature of the belief that supports my faith is not important. It could be theist or agnostic, Christian, or Buddhist or nothing.

I think that what Bapak referred to as Submission, Surrender, Patience, is almost the same thing. These are actions. You dont take an action unless you have a belief in the result. But The action is the faith.

The kind of experience you describe as being at the core of your faith is for me my evidence. I dont always remember. I dont always feel that solid place. The solid place is a memory It is evidence. And the next time it is latihan night what is it that takes me there to arrive? What is the action of arriving? Well I remember the evidence, but that is just a memory. What takes me there is something deeper -- it is the action which is my Faith.

The core experience, and the belief are the foundation and the anchoring point -- but in the end it is only Me and G_d. And it is within this moment that I have faith.

Anyway. That is my attempt to explain it.

BELIEF
Right now I am reading A SECULAR AGE by Charles Taylor.The first section is on belief. I am not used to reading philosophy. It is difficult reading and it has taken me a long time just to get to page 73. Fascinating stuff though. He reviews the process whereby in 1500 it was virtually impossible not to believe in God. While in 2000 it was easy. In fact very common. How did that happen? It is a very intricate story.
In some ways it seems to me that our process in Subud over the past 50 years has in many ways paralleled this secularization of civilization in the past 500 years. In 1960 the ideas being expressed on subudvision would have been virtually impossible -- even though there were plenty of subud radicals around at the time)
While today they are common and widespread.

And the aspects of belief which Taylor discusses are all there in our process too
1. The order of the natural world ( the order outlined in Bapak’s book and talks )

2. The organization of society (our subud organizational structure)

3. The “Enchanted” world. ( in Subud - the reference to “God’s Will”)

Interestingly much of the reactivity we see today in Subud can be iinterpreted as a tearing down of all these foundations blocks of the subud belief structure, Which Taylor refers to as “The Bulwarks of Belief”

The question is -- once it is all dismantled --- what are we left with?

I will let you know --- still have 700 pages to go.

All the best
Sjahari

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From Leonard Priestley, August 2, 2008. Time 21:48

Hi Sjahari,

Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad you generally liked the article.

Actually, the only "widespread beliefs" referred to in the article are the belief "that it is not necessary to believe anything to be in Subud", and the belief "that belief is a Good Thing". The belief in a vengeful God is one that I introduce not as a belief widespread in Subud, but as the kind of belief that can turn people against theism of any kind. I think it's likely that some Subud members accept the doctrine of eternal damnation, but I think many do not. Since at present there's no way of knowing how many members hold any of the various kinds of belief and disbelief that I discuss, I thought it best in each case simply to say "some". But I did go so far as to suggest that members' conception of God is "often" quite vague. And as I hope is clear by the end of the article, I think there's wisdom in not having any very definite conception of God.

Like you, I distinguish between belief and faith. I recognize that people can mean many different things when they talk about faith, and my own use of the term may be idiosyncratic. I'm inclined to use it for something very deep within me which comes into my consciousness through the latihan (and maybe not only in that way), and in which I find complete affirmation of every part of my life, and a quiet confidence, as unshakeable as bedrock, in the face of death. A very difficult and important subject; maybe some day....

I should think you're right about the intention of the God talk in the opening statement. But it does assume a basically theistic view: "You know that the One Almighty God is the Creator of the whole universe...." I can imagine a non-theist having some trouble with it. And the declaration that the applicant is to make before the opening statement is read is explicitly about belief: "I believe in the One Almighty God and I wish to worship only God." One can hardly avoid getting the impression that belief is important in Subud. Bapak was quite clear that the wording of these statements can be modified, and that the declaration can even be omitted entirely, and that is certainly evidence of the flexibility and tolerance at the heart of Subud. But the fact remains that these theistic statements are the norm, and anything else will naturally be perceived as an exceptional accommodation to the requirements (or limitations) of a particular person.

Best,

Leonard

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From bronte, July 31, 2008. Time 22:53

I wish I could see as many contributors here now as formed the first contributions to this site.
I am convinced that there is a great need for clear self-examination of Subud, as it functions in the world now.
If it is a valid, viable training for the human being, let alone the human soul, then it needs some clearer, modern, inviting explanations and dialogue. If not then God know what it needs.

I might also wish to see the younger generation, so keen to have nothing to do with it, make some comments here.
Come on parents, please get you teenagers and pre-thirty year olds to tell the rest of us what they are thinking and doing about "our cult".
Zebedee, are you concerned about the age-divide too?
Us over 60's just might listen and learn, and be useful to the younger ones yet. After all, they get everything for themselves sooner than we think.

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From Sahlan Diver, July 31, 2008. Time 19:45

Zebedee,

I see you made a reply to my previous comments while I was at the same time replying to your comment to Bronte.

It seems to me you are distorting what David was saying in his "tragedy of the commons" paragraph - he was not implying that Subud members act like sheep all mindlessly following each other, on the contrary he was pointing out that an action that might make perfect sense and seem perfectly reasonable for an individual, when repeated across a large number of individuals actually can have quite a different effect than the expected or intended effect.

In respect of your other comments:
His entire article is .... built on exaggeration, using a wishy washy definition of a cult, taking a handful of Bapak's talk quotations out of context, all to reach a contrived conclusion.....Absolutely no meaningful comparisons with other associations....no clairvoyance of what "normal" looks like ...

as I said before an article which argued the case for your conclusions would be one in which we could be interested,

Sahlan

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From Sahlan Diver, July 31, 2008. Time 18:58

Zebedee,

Let's get the facts straight here. In this discussion there are approximately 10 posts from you. All are published exactly as you submitted them, apart from one, which was edited by removing a sentence or two, not because of what you said but because of the way it was phrased, and had we been able to contact you privately we would have given you the opportunity to rephrase those sentences rather than have them cut. That hardly counts as censorship does it? We very rarely ask contributors to change what they have said and FYI we have made as many cuts or requests for changes in contributions from our own editors and authors as we have made from anyone else, so we are not at all one-sided.

If you would like to write an article, either under a pseudonym or your real name, disputing in detail what David and others say about Subud in relation to the topic of cults, we would be pleased to consider it.

However so that there is no misuderstanding I feel I need to spell out what falls under our guidelines

a) David Week's claim that Subud is in danger of looking like a cult to outsiders is invalid for these reasons ...

OK

b) David Week and the other Subud Vision editors and anyone else who says anything critical about Subud is only doing so because they wish to damage and discredit Subud ...

NOT OK, for the obvious reason that nobody can't possibly know what the motivation of all those people is. Also it would kind of work against any argument that Subud is not a cult, because take any cult and study what happens to members who criticise it. Usually the tactic is that such members are marginalised and demonised as flawed characters whose only motivation is a low one. Typical cult thinking is that everything that comes from the cult is 100% perfect and that any criticism is therefore unworthy and must be taken as a sign that the criticiser is mentally ill, or venting supposed feelings of frustration and unhappiness on the cult, etc etc

Sahlan Diver
Managing Editor
Subud Vision

Click here to go to page for the following item:

From Zebedee, July 31, 2008. Time 18:37

Sahlan, you are asking the wrong question. The question you should be asking is how is saying "we are in danger of looking like cultists because of certain of our behaviours" calling Subud a cult. And it is because his "tragedy of the commons" analogy is a scaremongering, extremist way of demonising Subud members. His entire article is hype. Hype built on exaggeration, using a wishy washy definition of a cult, taking a handful of Bapak's talk quotations out of context, all to reach a contrived conclusion.

Absolutely no meaningful comparisons with other associations. Just convoluted, condescending babble with no clairvoyance of what "normal" looks like. The maturity of a five year old "Who wants to join a cult? Anyone? Raise your hands please!"

To summerize the gist of it "You're a cultist you are! Not only a cultist but a sheep who's over grazing the commons, you all act the same way! Not only a sheep but a Javanese Hindu Animist sheep!" Such taste and sophistication. Worthy of an ill behaved kindergarten bully.

Click here to go to page for the following item: