Subud Vision - Discussion

Hadrian Micciche - Both Simple and Complex

Discussion continued from this page

From Philip Quackenbush, October 1, 2008. Time 20:51

Hi, Luthfi,

You said,

"Most of my replies are delivered instantly, off the cuff, in a typically Sublam fashion. I agree completely about the Sublam baggage, Stefan - and I am also convinced you will never get rid of it. It amused me that, in the local latihan a few nights ago, every man present (except one, who never sings or says anything, and never has done, but then there's always one - and a very nice chap he is too, I might add) was singing, muttering, groaning etc :Muslim words and/or phrases. Yet none of us is a Muslim per se, and indeed one or two of us might be regarded as somewhat anti-Muslim in many respects. Now if that is not evidence of the Islamocentric nature of the inner Subud reality, I dunno what is. I already anticipate Halim's reply, and let me say immediately that I dismiss it without reservation, lol. No, Halim, it is NOT because they have read too many Bapak talks and are regurgitaing it in the latihan. They are saying these Muslim words and phrases because they are prompted to do so from their inner selves by the power of God. What? God? Oh dear no!! Good Gawd, you can't say 'God' here in Subud Vision!! What will the neighbours think?"

Well, if you take that scenario in "Subud" terms, all that "Muslim" stuff could merely be "purification". I once "received" that my "mantra" was "Allah, Allah, Allah." So, if your tongue is flapping like that, it's nothing special. The founder of the cult in one of his lectures said that it wasn't Islamic, that it was the closest that the human tongue could come to expressing the "power of God."

If you take it from a scientific viewpoint, first of all, it can be, and often is, merely imitation, not only psychologically but from the standpoint of physics, since the "latihan" "opening" and all subsequent group "latihans" involve induction by those practicing in the group, like the flow of air currents or water in a river, but in this case, it's the vibrational resonance of proximal bodies.

Also, in another lecture the founder stated that everything comes from "God."
IMO, everything is "God," so there is no separation between anything (the basic illusory nature of perception in "this world" that the Hindus speak of being that "separation"). I just bought a toy that illustrates that fact, one of those "spiky" rubber balls, "God" being the main part of the ball, and the spikes the various manifestations that emanate from it, which are still part of the ball).

But all of this, including the founder's statements, are just speculations based upon personal experience and encountered data, so it's not necessary to take it too Siriusly, since everyone has their own perspective at a given point in space-time (or time-space, which is sometimes experienced in "latihan" and elsewhere/when). What is important, IMO, is to realize the differences and not only allow them, but celebrate their contribution to the Whole. That, IMO, is where the SUBorg most needs to change, in eliminating its hierarchical nature, and realize the basic equality of all persons and phenomena in the ultimate Unity that can be expressed in the org., but can't be under the current structure.

Peace, Philip

From Luthfi Dixon, October 1, 2008. Time 22:16

Yees, yees, sort of..umm... I dunno. When I did 'Dispatch' the issues I was concerned with were almost all to do with enterprises, since we had several 'major' ones on the go at the time. The last one expired recently, of course, R.I.P. Anyways, point I am trying to make here is that any 'controversy' I may have provoked was mostly in that area...ummm..have just remembered 'White Ladies, Villa Rahayu - White Elephant?', the headline for my article about the hugely expensive and little-used (by Bapak)house on the exclusive Wentworth Estate which had been bought for Bapak by British Subudians. White Ladies was the house's original name, Villa Rahayu the new name post-donation.

Anyways, again, and here I am probably trying vainly to cover my spiritual ass (not from you lot, lol, from 'them above' - and stop mentally calling for the men in white coats!! It's most distracting!!), I mostly didn't have any views on the structure.

The other night, after group latihan, with a peaceful and somewhat blank mind, resonating with pleasant latihan, I stood outside smoking me pipe (quel relief), and into my mind came a little voice saying quietly 'what are they complaining about?' It was referring to Subud Vision. Well, I tried to answer, but I could think of absolutely nuffink. Zilch.

Members of Subud Vision might try that little test. After your group latihan, when you are quiet, ask yourself what everyone on S.V.is complaining about. The answer/s, or lack of them, and the way you feel about the whole matter just after the latihan, might be illuminating.

From Merin Nielsen, October 2, 2008. Time 11:40

>>… those that have full inner consciousness in Subud (and they, like it or not, form an unseen but definite kind of 'Illuminati') are totally, utterly, completely normative Islam. If you ever have inner experiences where you clearly meet such people, whether it is Bapak or someone else, the way that Subud is inwardly closely tied to an Islamic reality becomes utterly clear. … I have sometimes argued about it (using my mind), with such people. But it's quite clear that I am using my mind and emotions, whereas they ain't.

So, you’ve spoken with people who have full inner consciousness in Subud.
Does that imply you yourself are spiritually developed, or just lucky?

>> Very few people understand the process of getting properly conscious from your inner self

But you do, apparently.

>> And when you do start to get somewhere inwardly, you'll notice Islamic 'references' everywhere.

Having had none, I’m mortified.

>> It amused me that, in the local latihan a few nights ago, every man present (except one…) was singing, muttering, groaning etc :Muslim words and/or phrases. … Now if that is not evidence of the Islamocentric nature of the inner Subud reality, I dunno what is.

I’m surprised that you value evidence of this kind, which involves interpreting outer phenomena.
If all the men were chanting Buddhist prayers one night, would you take it as meaning that God had
converted to Buddhism? (By the way, my latihans are amusing too -- full of Hindu mutterings.)

>> and isn't a lot of what we see here in SubVision simply a reflection of people's inability to fully surrender inwardly… ?

You seem to think so.

>> After your group latihan, when you are quiet, ask yourself what everyone on S.V.is complaining about.

Partly the Islamocentrism. Partly the brainwashing.

From Luthfi Dixon, October 2, 2008. Time 13:11

Ha, amusant comeback, Merin. Glad to see a bit of irony and humour on S.V, it seems to be getting increasingly po-faced.

Perhaps the main problem with talking about one's inner experiences is that people immediately say you are somehow claiming to be 'superior' in some way. So, really, perhaps it is an utter waste of time talking about inner experiences - which only goes to show that a forum like this is utterly irrelevant to inner needs, and addressing inner needs is surely the core of Subud. I would like to make it clear that I do not in any way regard myself as inwardly 'superior'. However, those that know, know. Those that don't, don't. It's nothing to do with being superior - it is all to do with the fact that there is only one true inner reality, not umpteen versions of it, just as there's only one God. But,yes, reluctantly, I have to say also, from my experience, that those who do not yet understand the reality of the inner Islamocentric business just haven't got anywhere yet. And, just as I don't speak for you, you don't speak for me. It's not a matter of argument - we just have our own different views, and arguing won't change the inner reality, whatever that may be. I'd like also to add that I was brought up as a rationalist/humanist, and my weltanschauung is still very much skewed that way - that, and a taste for satire, which is why I appreciated your comeback.

I'm actually not at all happy with the inner Islamocentric business, though it is a very different kind of Islamocentrism that you get, say, in the Muslim world generally, certainly different from any kind of extremism. But I find, for example, that it is incredibly effective to say, inwardly, the three Islamic prayers that I know. The inner protection and sorting-out you can get from just reciting those prayers is extraordinary. There isn't any kind of inner compulsion, re Islamocentrism, but, for example, you will never really get anywhere inwardly if you don't do fasting to some degree. It's like trying to climb a mountain without doing some fitness training first.

In the end, the fact is this: we find ourselves in a world where we are, knowingly or unknowingly, under attack the whole time from forces which most people are utterly unaware of - chiefly the material force. The latihan gives us at least a core protection from that, to a greater or lesser extent. Moving on from there, to get conscious inwardlyu, indeed tro achieve one's salvation, is usually a very difficult business. And those that truly have some clue about it do, and those that do not do not. The only way you can really know when someone is relating the truth, with regard to inner matters, is by recognising the ring of truth in what they say. But one cannot make the blind see, or the deaf hear.

From Merin Nielsen, October 2, 2008. Time 13:46

>> ... perhaps it is an utter waste of time talking about inner experiences - which only goes to show that a forum like this is utterly irrelevant to inner needs, and addressing inner needs is surely the core of Subud.

Addressing inner needs is surely the core of practising latihan. Subud is an organisation for addressing outer needs connected with that practice, and this forum is mainly for talking about Subud.

>> ... I do not in any way regard myself as inwardly 'superior'. However, those that know, know. Those that don't, don't. It's nothing to do with being superior...

An intriguing distinction.

>> But,yes, reluctantly, I have to say also, from my experience, that those who do not yet understand the reality of the inner Islamocentric business just haven't got anywhere yet. And, just as I don't speak for you, you don't speak for me.

You’re just speaking about me, and thousands of others.

>> I find, for example, that it is incredibly effective to say, inwardly, the three Islamic prayers that I know. The inner protection and sorting-out you can get from just reciting those prayers is extraordinary.

Meanwhile, the Christians, the Hindus, the Buddhists, and so on -– if only they all knew!

>> The only way you can really know when someone is relating the truth, with regard to inner matters, is by recognising the ring of truth in what they say.

In other words, you can only know the truth (with regard to inner matters) by recognising it as the truth. I agree. And you can only know falsehood the same way.

From Luthfi Dixon, October 2, 2008. Time 14:34

Hmm, okay Merin, have a go, lol. I agree with your last statement, anyway. Perhaps we can leave it at that.

I was just reflecting, earlier, that my rattling on about the inner was somewhat stimulated by a strong feeling of cheerfulness that I've had since the end of Ramadan. But, basically, and unfortunately, it's usually a mistake to talk about the inner. One means well, but people always take it the wrong way, and in any case perhaps I have been careless and not written in the right way.

Carry on latihanning - those on S.V. that still do, anyway. Pip pip!!

From Hassanah Briedis, October 5, 2008. Time 11:37

Hi Luthfi,

thanks for your cheerful 'rattling on' as you call it! I appreciate your forthrightness. I guess alot of readers just read, but don't reply. Replies are usually generated by a particular response to a particular statement. My response is to your sentence:

"The other night, after group latihan, with a peaceful and somewhat blank mind, resonating with pleasant latihan, I stood outside smoking me pipe (quel relief), and into my mind came a little voice saying quietly 'what are they complaining about?' It was referring to Subud Vision. Well, I tried to answer, but I could think of absolutely nuffink. Zilch."

The key words in your description that triggered my response were 'blank mind' and 'pleasant latihan', followed by an inability to think logically or remember relevent issues. It reminded me of my article on dissociation and its link to the latihan experience, (in Subud Vision) and the experience you describe is a good one for demonstrating that link.

Dissociation, which is a universal experience in humans, but under certain conditions becomes more extreme, is defined as the uncoupling of the processes of memory, identity, thought and consciousness in the brain. The normal links between those functions are broken or uncoupled, temporarily. If the latihan is seen as a form of dissociation, it makes sense that in that immediate post-latihan state, you couldn't assemble either your memories about the issues or your ability to think clearly about them, and you couldn't access your sense of there being anything important to think about.

There's nothing wrong with this of course, in fact it's very relaxing and eases the tensions in our lives. But the fact that you felt like that does not mean that there aren't some legitimate concerns about the way Subud is evolving. It just means that in that state none of it felt important to you. The risk, in my opinion, is in interpreting the effect of that dissociated (latihan) state as a message of truth. It may simply be that at that moment those particular brain functions (described above)were not working in an integrated way.

Anyway, I wanted to point out the excellent example of the dissociative effect of latihan. Please excuse me for using you as a guinea pig! With respect, and best wishes,

Hassanah Briedis

From Philip Quackenbush, October 5, 2008. Time 22:8

Hi, Hassanah,

You wrote:

"Dissociation, which is a universal experience in humans, but under certain conditions becomes more extreme, is defined as the uncoupling of the processes of memory, identity, thought and consciousness in the brain. The normal links between those functions are broken or uncoupled, temporarily. If the latihan is seen as a form of dissociation, it makes sense that in that immediate post-latihan state, you couldn't assemble either your memories about the issues or your ability to think clearly about them, and you couldn't access your sense of there being anything important to think about.

"There's nothing wrong with this of course, in fact it's very relaxing and eases the tensions in our lives. But the fact that you felt like that does not mean that there aren't some legitimate concerns about the way Subud is evolving. It just means that in that state none of it felt important to you. The risk, in my opinion, is in interpreting the effect of that dissociated (latihan) state as a message of truth. It may simply be that at that moment those particular brain functions (described above)were not working in an integrated way."

IMO, this could be one of the most important statements, if not THE most important statement, to ever appear on this website. It encapsulates in very few words precisely what's "wrong" with Subud as well as what's "right".

I agree with the idea that the "latihan" is a form of dissociation, and would further suggest that it may not be anything beyond that other than an opportunity for new and "better" neural connections to take place for the body to achieve a more functional state without the interference of the "ego", and in the case of "testing", or "receiving" to get messages from the body's subconscious data bank that may be useful, depending on one's degree of "purification", i.e. non-blockage of the messages by one's thoughts or desires. Insofar as people are telepathic or "psychic", messages from sources "outside" the body may be accessed as well, but there is so little discipline involved in most of the "receiving" that I've come across, both in Subud and elsewhere, that it's usually highly unreliable. In that respect, it's probably best to emphasize to people "testing" that there's no guarantee that any answers may be "right," because of the lack of procedural discipline and checking the results against other known data. If such methodology is instituted within the cult, it could become truly useful to society as a source of information and "problem" solving. Meanwhile, it's "best," IMO, to not believe anything until it's shown to be "true," including what I say, as Gotama said (a nod to you here, Hadrian).

It could be that my reply would be better written to your article than Hadrian's, but so be it. One thing that occurred to me after I read it was how important it is to keep kids away from the "latihan" until their brains have developed to the point where they can handle it, because a large enough dose of the process that engenders dissociation could possible actually prevent (for a while, at least), the actual development of the neural pathways
that provide the links that make associations possible.

Recent research that I've come across on neuroscience (I wish that I had kept the references, but I didn't) shows the plasticity of the neural pathways, such that the brain continues to evolve (for example, creating more links between the pre-frontal cortex and the limbic system, resulting in more compassion as one ages) until death (and perhaps beyond, like hair growing on a corpse). So, overindulgence in the "latihan" process may (and probably does) produce too much dissociation in one's life, which makes it difficult to function "normally", in my experience and observation of others.

Granted that the founder of the cult has pointed out some or much of this in various lectures, when one is in a state of dissociation after "latihan", nobody is paying much attention to what is being said, instead likely "swimming" in the "feel good" feelings, something that both the founder and his daughter have encouraged by, for example, encouraging that one be in a "latihan state" while listening to or reading their lectures. Consequently, the "message", if rational (which it may be, but often isn't, when an attempt is made to discern carefully what is falsifiable), doesn't usually get through, and if a problem is being addressed, can't be seen or solved rationally, because the rational functioning is in abeyance.

Peace, Philip

From Luthfi Dixon, October 6, 2008. Time 5:48

Hi Hassanah,

I was aware of all this mental dissociation thingy, because it had been extensively punted on Subud Talk by someone who, basically, didn't think that the latihan was anything other than a type of neural disturbance, as Philip also likes to see it - and the former person, and possibly Philip also, don't believe that there is any such thing as the 'spiritual', in the normative Subud sense.

Well, that's all fine and dandy, but of course it completely invalidates the latihan as a genuine spiritual experience which can, apart from anything else, provide you with genuine insights - something that is above and beyond the mind, and which can provide insights for the mind.

If you believe that, okay - but one has to wonder why you are still in Subud. This is the point where the arguments of the neural dissociation rationalists become somewhat specious, in my view.

From Hassanah Briedis, October 6, 2008. Time 7:36

Hi Luthfi, thanks for your reply. No, I don't mean that the latihan has no spiritual component. If you read my article (pronounced reed, not red), I try to be clear that my thesis has to do with HOW the latihan phenomenon is processed through the brain. IN other words, wherever it comes from and whatever it is (spiritually) it still requires the brain and its neurons in order for us to register that we are experiencing something. My suggestion is that the mechanism being used is similar to the mechanism that institutes dissociation, which is just a fancy name for 'a change of state of consciousness'. I don't think anyone would argue that the latihan is an altered state of consciousness from the norm.

And the reason I've gone to the trouble of writing the article and arguing my ideas, is because I really believe that this link between altered (spiritual) states of consciousness and dissociation needs to be better understood, in order that people who have dissociative illnesses can make more informed choices about how they live their spiritual lives. I speak from personal experience.

I discovered after several decades that being spaced out all the time had nothing to do with being spiritual. I now live an effective and useful life as a therapist for people who've been abused as children, a job I could not have done until I learnt to control my dissociation, which included latihan. My spiritual life is now expressed in the form of love and compassion for people who suffer, and acts of kindness to other humans. So I do understand that people have differing ideas about what 'spiritual' is, and I do not want to tear down others' beliefs about the latihan, just to ask them to consider how this phenomenon might be 'routed' through the brain and body.

with best wishes, Hassanah

From Philip Quackenbush, October 6, 2008. Time 8:10

Hi, Luthfi,

You wrote:

"I was aware of all this mental dissociation thingy, because it had been extensively punted on Subud Talk by someone who, basically, didn't think that the latihan was anything other than a type of neural disturbance, as Philip also likes to see it - and the former person, and possibly Philip also, don't believe that there is any such thing as the 'spiritual', in the normative Subud sense.

"Well, that's all fine and dandy, but of course it completely invalidates the latihan as a genuine spiritual experience which can, apart from anything else, provide you with genuine insights - something that is above and beyond the mind, and which can provide insights for the mind."

And what is your definition of mind, then? Does it involve the brain, or not, and if so, in what way? Without such a definition, it is likely impossible to be sure we're talking about the same thing. For example, Christian Scientists and Buddhists both use the term "mind" as basic to their cosmologies, but their views of the term may differ radically, and to understand where they're "coming from" is, again, impossible without some understanding of how they define, or at least use, the term. And BTW, what is the "normative" Subud sense of "the spiritual"? Even if Subud is defined as "we, ourselves", as the founder of the cult said on more than one occasion, I suspect that there may be nearly as many understandings of what is "normatively spiritual" as there are members, since there is no official definition of the word within the many publications of the cult, to the best of my knowledge, and yet it is used constantly in conversation and even legal documents.

I should say that, despite my reluctance to use the word "spiritual" to describe phenomena in or from "latihan", since it seems to be such a wastebasket term without definite characteristics that are more easily and/or specifically defined by other terms, I have had "genuine insights" in the "latihan", but have no need to attribute them to anything "spiritual." It should also be said, though, that many of the insights I'v had mature or gain clarity "outside" of the "latihan" through (dare I use the word?) cogitation, reflection, or the (probably badly translated, like many others in common use within the cult) SUBterm, the "thinking mind."

However, it is always difficult to determine what the origins of some "receiving" might be when the brain is befuddled by some mind- (there it is again, dammit) altering substance, such as alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, even caffeine and nicotine, to say nothing of numerous prescription drugs, so I suspect any "receivings" (including my own) that may involve such substances. Have you had your local "helpers" tested for drugs recently (and I don't mean "tested" in the normative Subud sense)? Or observed the "receivings" of heavy smokers and coffee drinkers in relation to those of those who don't use either tobacco or caffeine? Worth a scientific study, I'd say (but where does one find a control group within the membership?), if we're to make any "progress" in our "receiving" (although, IMO, the progress doesn't come in the "receiving" per se, but how well the "receiving" is understood, how accurate it is, and how it's put to use, together with whatever results from its use and if and how that alters one's life, whether for the "better" or the "worse", if at all).

Peace, Philip

From Luthfi Dixon, October 6, 2008. Time 8:31

Hassanah: I buy into Pak Subuh's definition that the brain is a bystander during the latihan, but we are able to stop the latihan at any time if we want to. I don't think one can really define 'how the latihan is processed through the brain', because that is to attempt to analyse the divine, and I am afraid all such attempts are doomed to failure, though people can delude themselves that they are a success.You cannot pin down the workings of the divine. If you were able to, then God would be a phenomenon subject to scientific analysis. You cannot, however, put God under a microscope, a fact the Cern Project scientists totally fail to comprehend.

Philip: yes, I did mean the brain when I referred to the mind.

From Hassanah Briedis, October 6, 2008. Time 11:21

Hi Luthfi, I'll have one more try at explaining what I mean, and after that we'll call it quits! There is a difference between the mind and the brain. I am very specifically talking about the brain, which is a big lump of grey jelly inside your skull. If you were standing in the latihan hall doing latihan, and someone reached into your skull and scooped out your brain, you might continue to 'receive' the latihan, but you wouldn't know about it or be aware of it at all. The brain is the central processing unit of our body, without it the body might, theoretically, keep working, but we wouldn't be aware of anything. In the same way, a person can have eyes that work perfectly and receive light rays, but if the part of their brain that decodes those signals is damaged, they don't know that they are seeing.

My interest in the latihan phenomenon relates to which part of the brain 'tells' us that we are receiving this 'movement of the life force'. MRI scans show us that parts of the brain 'light up' (ie, receive additional flows of oxygen) when that part is being used. I am interested in which part of the brain 'lights up' when a person does latihan, in other words, which part of the brain is active in 'telling us' that we are feeling the feeling of latihan.

This is totally different from trying to understand the latihan itself or analyze it with the mind, which I think is what you are referring to in your last post. I am interested in the latihan as a sensory phenomenon which we are aware of happening in real time. In this sense the Subud exercise is very different from some forms of meditation, it is a much more physicalized experience.

I don't know if this is any clearer. It will probably make it much less interesting to you too!!! But to me, it's very interesting, because if a Subud person would allow themselves to be tested in an MRI machine while doing latihan, we might learn something about which part of the brain lights up during the experience, and that would link in to other spiritual experiences as well as, possibly, phenomena such as dissociation. And that would help us understand the needs of members with mental illness, and so on.

Best for now, Hassanah

From Luthfi Dixon, October 6, 2008. Time 12:20

Call it quits? The mind never lets go, lol. But, as it happens, I have little to add - except that, as regards the post-latihan perception that started this exchange, it was either a valid perception that, perhaps, related to some factors which are underlying the expressed S.V. dissatisfaction with the Org, or it ain't valid. The fact that we are able to rationalise with the mind only when we are not in that 'dissociative' (or whatever you called it) state does not mean that only mental rationalisation is valid, as far as truth perception is concerned. Perhaps we can agree on that.

I was also reflecting, this morning, on my way to the newsagents to get my Daily Express (never could stand the paper, but it has improved of late, and the reason I buy it is because of the exciting 'Gossip From The Gallops' bit in the racing section - 8.20 points up over the last week, since I discovered it), that we are all (including moi) quite keen to talk about the faults of Subud, but rarely, if ever, keen to talk about our own faults, and possible psychological reasons for having a good moan. A little quid pro quo in this area might be a bit more honest, might it not?

So as you see, this one will run and run for a while yet, in all probability - as a betting man, I'd say it is a very long odds-on certainty. 1 to 10 on!! 10/1 the field!!

From Sahlan Diver, October 6, 2008. Time 12:43

We will never be able to run Subud effectively unless we can get out of the habit of wanting to mix up organisational faults and personal character faults in one big muddled basket.

Simple (hypothetical) example: A helper is asked to meet an applicant, spends a great deal of time and care on the applicant, but then gets a little carried away and entuses a little too much about Bapak, not realising that the applicant was attracted to Subud because they wanted a solution free of guru-like teaching - now it's starting to sound like a guru movement and the applicant gets put off and doesn't return.

Was there a character fault involved? Not really - said helper was kind, considerate, caring - he/she just made a mistake in not tuning in enough to that particular applicant's mindset.
Was there an organisational fault involved? If this was an isolated incident, no. But if incidents like this of genuinely interested people being put off by what the helper says, however well meant it was, are common then there clearly is an organisational fault in that we need to train helpers in how better to deal with applicants. This has nothing to do with improving the helper's character, their character and sincerity is not in question. On the contrary we want to capitalise on their good qualities by improving their skill at dealing with people in an applicant/enquirer type situation.

Seems to me this is another example of a Subud-think tenet: "everything has a spiritual cause, therefore if we criticise anything in Subud, it can't possibly be a technical criticism of procedure, it must necessarily be a slur on someone's character, and hadn't we better look at the spec in our own eye first". A great opportunity to pontificate about moral rectitude but as an example of the spiritual, I'd say it's anti-spiritual because it acts as an effective blocker to any chance of improving anything for the benefit of our fellow man.

Discussion continued on this page