Subud Vision - Discussion
Stefan Freedman - Subud at Middle East Spirituality and Peace Festival
Discussion continued from this page
From David Week, April 30, 2008. Time 15:51
Hi Bronte
Not perforce. By choice.
Best
David
From Philip Quackenbush, April 30, 2008. Time 16:55
Hi, Merin,
>PQ: ............. I think that the basic criterion for when a person is at least beginning to be "enlightened" is when that person realizes that this location and this moment is all there is and acts accordingly.
MN: But providing that allows pursuing long term goals.
PQ: Well, yes. You can't just sit in (or move in) an alpha or theta trance and expect to get much done in the beta-oriented whirl. However, I've noted that one's motivation is key. One can exist in a state of "surrender to 'God'" (as it's generally called in Subud [I prefer the idea of opening myself "wider" to what the Source, or universe "wants", "needs", or "requires", because IMO we're all part of that Source, which is All There Is, and suffering results from pursuing our personal, or egoic desires {goals} to the exclusion of whatever promptings or "indications" one gets from that "collective unconscious", in Jungian terms {why not simply call it the collective consciousness?; just because humans are generally not fully, or even partially cognizant of it doesn't mean such a universal consciousness isn't there and producing what we regard as our own motivations anyway: examined carefully, then, it seems that free will is an illusion, and only the will of the Whole exists ((from both a philosophical and experiential viewpoint)), so why not "give in" to that apparent fact and live one's life accordingly? - I've found recently that life for me is a lot more enjoyable when I do}]).
Of course, from an Islamic viewpoint (and, one presumes, from the viewpoint of any theology that presumes a "creator"), what I've just said parenthetically is "unlawful", since "Allah" is supposedly separate from "his" creation. IMO, anything which seems to produce separation of or from the Whole is illusory (but from a practical standpoint, one must see a chair, for example, as a series of components in order to build one). It is only recently, in quantum physics, chaos theory, and microbiology, that scientific thinking seems to be supporting the non-separation view of the universe, but most scientists are still thinking in terms of Newtonian "absolutes" (85%, according to a survey done not long ago; hard to get out of "bad habits").
MN: I notice the Jesuits are at it again. Philip Kapleau tells this story in "The Three Pillars of Zen":
PQ: That's the story that de Mello recounts, which I didn't quote very accurately. Since he lived in India for much of his life, he picked up rots and rots of such tales. A lot of their origins are lost in the fog of pre-history. (the tale about the man, his son, the horse and the conscripting army generally thought to be Chinese I heard as a tale from a Native American that got it from his grandmother). However, for having the effrontery to introduce them in his books, I heard that de Mello had the distinction of being excommunicated posthumously (shouldn't mess with the powerful, successful cults [in such a messe, as the French say], particularly when the head of the modernized virgin of the Inquisition was the current Pope).
Peace, Philip
From Philip Quackenbush, April 30, 2008. Time 17:23
Bronte: We, supposedly "have" the latihan.
In the other world out there, where devoted believers do what Bapak advised, religiously, and unquestioningly, there is something I believe is called "The World Latihan"
I NEVER do it.
I just don't believe in it.
But should I?
I don't believe in or practice fasting, or ramadan, or any of that stuff that derives from non-Christian religions, mainly, and never managed to do much of what I learnt in the Christian faith either, but that is another matter.
But, when I manage to, I do the latihan, alone per-force.
Now, if we all share that principle, why do we no just agree to do a latihan, for a specific purpose, at a set time, and find out, by experiment, if there is a difference between, say, typing away here to express our views while we maintain a remenbrance of and, hopefully, a connection to, latihan, and doing it all without the latihan.
PQ: Well, that's one approach, but not a very controlled experiment, unfortunately. I remember a time when we all got together as "helpers" in the hospital chapel to do "latihan" for a kid undergoing brain surgery. The consensus in our post-trance (or residual trance, perhaps) after hearing that the operation was successful seemed to be that our "latihan" somehow influenced the surgical team and the patient for the better. Rotsa ruck measuring that (visions of "helpers" doing "latihan" with EEG wires dangling from their heads while videotaping the operation with time cues for correspondences, if any)!
The "latihan" seems to be, and may always remain, a subjective phenomenon, that is, it may continue to be whatever the individual thinks it is (beliefs being simply habitual memeplexes, usually unexamined). It may be possible (and probably is) to devise controlled experiments that can show what effect a given person's (or group's) "latihan" has on a specific situation, but given the general intransigence of most members I've encountered to such an idea, I don't expect it any time soon. However, I'm quite sure it has some effect: a butterfly flapping its wings in Brazil or China may have been the tipping factor in the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. The whole of chaos theory developed from the desire of a meteorologist to be able to predict weather patterns, and his computer showed him that the universe is very complex, though patterned, and there are too many factors involved in the weather to give a prediction with much accuracy: with current technology, it would take a computer the size of the entire Earth to predict it with accuracy even a day in advance.
Peace, Philip
From Merin Nielsen, May 1, 2008. Time 3:26
Hi, David,
Afterthoughts... there's the venerable distinction between knowing 'that' and knowing 'how'. Perhaps tool acquisition matches the former, somehow, while performing with flow matches the latter. Accordingly, maybe reflective thinking is correctly associated with learning.
Earlier, I asked whether one could flow with respect to socially shared practices. Given any SSP, then okay, one may learn it -- acquiring the tools to perform it -- and subsequently perhaps perform it with flow. What I really meant to ask about was more like how one navigates among SSPs in the first place. Can this navigation incorporate flow?
Regards,
Merin
From Merin Nielsen, May 1, 2008. Time 3:43
Hi, Philip,
>>......... [I prefer the idea of opening myself "wider" to what the Source, or universe "wants", "needs", or "requires", because IMO we're all part of that Source, which is All There Is, and suffering results from pursuing our personal, or egoic desires {goals} to the exclusion of whatever promptings or "indications" one gets from that "collective unconscious", in Jungian terms {why not simply call it the collective consciousness?; just because humans are generally not fully, or even partially cognizant of it doesn't mean such a universal consciousness isn't there and producing what we regard as our own motivations anyway: examined carefully, then, it seems that free will is an illusion........
I don't feel any need of envisaging anything TO WHICH to 'open myself wider'. I find that recognising the illusoriness of free will is effective enough.
Regards,
Merin
From David Week, May 1, 2008. Time 4:37
Hi Philip
If The Source is All There Is, then there is no way to be closed or disconnected from it. And your ego is part of It too.
Hi Merin
The Buddhists would say that every thing and thought is illusory, but that illusions are to be neither shied away from nor clung to.
Best
David
From Philip Quackenbush, May 1, 2008. Time 4:47
MN: I don't feel any need of envisaging anything TO WHICH to 'open myself wider'. I find that recognising the illusoriness of free will is effective enough.
PQ: Agreed. But how did you recognise the illusion? And was it an intellectual or experiental (besides being intellectual) recognition? Guys like Chuang-tse and Huang Po may have left descriptions of their process, but it might be helpful to others if you could put your recognition in a personal, contemporary context. And it might also be helpful to give some idea about how that change of perception effects your actions in the whirl.
For me, the ego is still actively trying to keep away from being in the moment with various distractions, but one technique I've found to be useful is the subvocal (yet to be done vocally in case the ego gets too uppity) command "Be STILL (to the body/mind) and know that I AM your Source" (kinda puts the "fear of 'God'" into the ego, cuz it knows that its temporary existence is dependent on the Source allowing it to manifest, and so it shuts up [for a while, anyway]).
Peace, Philip
From Philip Quackenbush, May 1, 2008. Time 4:53
Hi Philip
If The Source is All There Is, then there is no way to be closed or disconnected from it. And your ego is part of It too.
Q:Perzackly.
Hi Merin
The Buddhists would say that every thing and thought is illusory, but that illusions are to be neither shied away from nor clung to.
Q: That, too. Living that way is where the "practice" comes in, innit.
Best
David
Peace, Philip
From Philip Quackenbush, May 1, 2008. Time 5:0
DW: If The Source is All There Is, then there is no way to be closed or disconnected from it. And your ego is part of It too.
Cue: The ol' "closer than your jug (you, Lars [yes, you])", innit?
Piece (of my mind, which I'm out of at the moment; back in five minutes), Philip
From Michael Irwin, May 1, 2008. Time 21:22
David: “Hi Michael You can find 'flow' described here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)”
I know what the definition of ‘flow’ is. I have seldom experienced it in connection with the latihan. It seems to me that it is an entirely outer-world state.
I was playing with the word ‘flow’ as with my reference to going back to the Bible and the unethical flow of some people who have a religion. Actually I thought you had made a mistake there and that what you wrote was not actually what you meant. The whole post was mild irony as was Bronte’s reference to his urologist. I found its being taken seriously mildly unsettling.
You referred to the Buddhist (I think) fear of groundlessness and getting used to it. That is the perception I am becoming acclimatized to. Well put.
Considering the amount of ink your reference to ‘flow’ produced I think that my quip about flow was justified.
Philip: “One can watch one's breath in "latihan" without interfering with the process” That discovery for me applies to the whole body. Just watching it does not seem to interfere with the presence of the void.
Bronte: "”The World Latihan" I NEVER do it. I just don't believe in it. But should I?” I have never done it.” I think it is just magical thinking. I have said so often. I definitely don’t think that the various levels of the org should support it by publishing the times.
From stefan, May 1, 2008. Time 22:32
Recapping and then moving onward (I hope)...
I tried introducing Subud at a workshop in an experiential way, offering people a taste of moving with eyes closed while "following" and then of spontaneous singing arising effortlessly from silence. I explained that although this was not the same as doing latihan it could provide some hint of what it is like.
Sjahari commented that the explanations I offered didn't answer some of the questions that Bapak addressed (such as where the latihan is from), while David pointed out that even though my explanations were free from the word "God" they still contained claims that he felt couldn't be substantiated, and references to "inner self" that were not of interest to the public.
Having read the discussion that follows we're still no nearer to finding a generally acceptable contemporary description of the Subud latihan, so why not approach it the other way round, and say something like:
In the view of some participants, the latihan meets their desire for a direct experience of "God" or "inner guidance".
For others it provides an experience of integration, giving a sense of being restored. The experience varies widely from person to person, and for each individual over time. (and some find very little in it) Reports include experiencing challenge, purification, personal growth, moments of insight, spontaneity or deep stillness.
By saying "in the view of some participants" there is no attempt to provide evidence, simply a report about what users tend to say about it. This contrasts with the current explanations by providing a diversity of views, rather than one.
It could easily be broadened further - this is not an end product but a quick sketch of an approach to describing the latihan. Don't try to describe "it". We still all disagree about "it", but we can describe what a spectrum of latihaners say.
Stefan
From sjahari, May 1, 2008. Time 22:38
Reality Check:
It is difficult for me to keep up to all the complexities that have emerged under this discussion.
I would like to make a reality check at this point. I am wondering how many people have come into Subud through listening to the various theories proposed here. How many people have the writers brought into subud?
In my experience the people who tend to bring others into subud are generally not deep philosophical thinkers.
They usually bring two aspects:
1. A deep personal connection.
2. An explanation of the latihan that more or less conforms to the one that Bapak presented to us. ( This is not emphasized or presented as a religious “ truth” but simply as a background.
3. sharing of who Bapak was. (as a person and not as a guru or god)
I think the recent article in the Subud Voice about Hussein Chung was very instructive in this regard. He brings people to Subud through demonstrative and shared action. By experiencing his work people actually begin to get an experience of the latihan itself. ANd this is what brings them in.
David has asked me how I can justify using Bapak’s explanations, so I will give a partial answer.
Subud is not a religion. It is not a belief system. Subud is simply the group of people who do the latihan. How people choose to understand and relate to the latihan is completely up to them. As we have seen in this forum people have a multitude of different beliefs and language systems which they like to use in order to understand the experience they are having in the latihan.
As the originator of Subud, Bapak, also offered a language and model with which people could understand their experience.
My position is as follows.
1. Anyone is free to use whatever language or belief system or model they want to use in order to understand for themselves their experience in the latihan.
2. Any subud member is free to talk to new members as much as he likes, or to anyone at all in subud to present and discuss his personal belief system.
3. We need to have in subud a group of people (currently called helpers) to whom we as an organization entrust the responsibility of formally explaining subud to new people, and introducing them to the practice.
4. I firmly believe that the FORMAL l explanation of the latihan and the practice of subud given by helpers should be more or less consistent across the subud world.
5 I DO NOT AGREE that this group (currently called helpers ) can have carte blance to present to new members any kind of explanation that they personally believe in as being the core and basis and aim of subud.
6. I DO NOT AGREE that a new member coming to meet with the helpers could be told in one subud group that Subud is a channeling from a spiritual entity from another galaxy, and be told in another group that the latihan is actually a specialized secret training in an ancient Javanese martial art. etc. etc.
7. Bapak’s explanations are NOt intended to be a dogmatic depiction of reality and should not be presented as such and either supported or opposed on that basis. They are a TOOL and a SUPPORT which may be helpful to individuals in order to give a language to and an understanding of certain experiences they are going through as a result of doing the latihan. They have no other purpose or intention.
8. You have asked me how I can support the use of the model of the four elements. My answer: It is not at all appropriate to try and convince people of the dogma that all of matter is made of the four elements. However, it MIGHT be very helpful for a helper to use such an analogy in offering assistance to a member who is attempting to understand a spiritual experience received in the latihan state.
Such an explanation might begin with something to the effect that “when he explained the latihan to us, Bapak indicated that it can be helpful to think of the universe as consisting of the four basic elements. These can be present in us in different proportions and lead to different feeling states. . . etc. etc. “ No helper should be prohibited from offering this kind of assistance to a member simply because the idea of the four elements is an ancient one.
The same general answer could be modified for all the rest of the questions you have asked.
best wishes
Sjahari
From sjahari, May 1, 2008. Time 23:10
It looks like Stefan and I posted at almost exactly the same time.
Stefan suggests that we tell new people about the broad ranges of experiences and beliefs that people have. I agree. ( In fact I think this is more or less what is happening now in most helpers groups. )
And at the same time I also feel it is absolutely essential that new people interested in Subud deserve to be told how the latihan arose. They deserve to know who the founder of Subud was. And they also deserve to know the explanation that the founder gave about what the latihan is and what its purpose is.
They deserve to be introduced to the huge treasure available in Bapak’s talks which can really help people to understand and process the experiences they are having in latihan.
Finally, I think it is a great idea to use an experiential method such as Stefan used in his workshop to give interested people a sense of what the latihan is all about. I would like to see this idea developed more. Maybe Stefan could offer some workshops on this technique in subud settings.
Sjahari
Discussion continued on this page