Being and Doing
Click this link to read the PDF VERSION of
this article
Click this link to SEND FEEDBACK on the article
Click this link to VIEW FEEDBACK on the author's articles
(Originally for Subud Journal)
A lifetime
ago, when I was desperately searching for a way to release my ‘true self’ from
both inherited and adopted psychological ‘hang ups’, while at the same time
yearning to become at one with nature and at peace within (ideas gleaned from a
piecemeal study of mysticism, ‘pop’ Zen and the psychology of Jung), I was very
impressed by something I read in Colin Wilson’s The
Outsider.
After taking an hallucinogenic drug, he’d had a
mystical experience; ‘but,’ he wrote, ‘it was like driving at night and
switching off your headlights. You could see for miles around, but you had to
crawl along at a snail’s pace.’
What was required, he reasoned, was a spotlight on the
roof as well. Thus one could drive at speed, headlights on, (analogous to
living a normal life) yet still see for miles around (or explore and commune
with the world of the inner self). He went on to claim he had found his
‘spotlight’ through the Gurdjieff movement — and following up on that link
eventually led me to Subud.
And today, forty years later, it becomes clearer and
clearer to me that ‘gift’ of the latihan is exactly that — a ‘spotlight on the
roof’ — and it’s a very powerful one.
What the spotlight does (for me) is to enable an
integration of ‘doing’ and ‘being’, where ‘doing’ equals working in the world,
making a buck, and paying the rent, while ‘being’ equates with keeping in touch
with the moment, my environment, my body, my relationships and my inner self. I
can’t say I manage it all the time, but doing latihan somehow always gets me
back on track when I lose the plot.
In other words, because I have no religion (and am
embarrassed by Subud’s patina of religious language) I do see the latihan
process as a powerful ‘personal development course’, and its source as my
personal ‘life-style trainer’.
And I’m not alone in thinking this, as the following
quote from Bapak reveals:
That is how it is and that is why this
‘spiritual training’ is training to be alive. In fact, the term ‘spiritual’ is
not the right term to use. However, there was no other way to describe this
training; there was not another term that fitted the nature of the latihan.
When Bapak called it ‘training to live’, [people asked] ‘What does “training to
live” mean? Why do we have to train to live? We are already alive aren’t we, so
what do we need training for?’ So Bapak had to change the name to ‘spiritual
training’. The correct term is ‘training for human life’…. (67 NYC 3)
So, there you have it — training for human life. And
probably all the great spiritual movements originally bore the same simple
message, that a complete human life is about getting the balance right between
engaging with this world (doing) — hopefully contributing something positive to civilisation — while at
the same time being
—keeping in touch with nature, our inner selves and the source of compassion
and love.
But we humans do like to move up in the ranks, so we
create religions and ‘isms’ and corporations. We also like to dress stuff up
(the ‘mystification of experience’ syndrome, as beloved by mullahs and priests,
experts and pundits) and thus we complicate and obfuscate the simple, but
eternal, message and spend far too much time doing and not enough being.
Let’s not, therefore, turn Subud into a ‘spiritual
way’ — a small step from a religion — or into a full-blown corporation, both
with implicit hierarchies and ‘one coat fits all’ branding plus the consequent
stifling of the individual. Let’s not aggrandise ourselves with an intolerant
‘we, the chosen few, have the only way’ attitude, either. Because, while we are
busy doing the ‘we’re right’, defensive stuff, we can’t be compassionate and
loving, as is proven by religious fundamentalism.
Instead, let’s re-instate Bapak’s ‘training for human
life’ concept, while at the same time employing the KISS formula (keep it simple, stupid), thus avoiding the
mistakes all the great religions have made — and are continuing to make today.
Humour (especially laughing at oneself) is a good way
of keeping it simple. So here’s a contribution — my favourite graffito from Nigel Rees’ ‘Graffiti 4’:
To be is to do. — Sartre
To do is to be. — Socrates
Do-be-do-be-do. — Sinatra