Return

Subud Vision - Discussion

Stefan Freedman - Subud at Middle East Spirituality and Peace Festival

Discussion continued from this page

From David Week, May 2, 2008. Time 0:23

Hi Sjahari

You again reiterate your own position, which appears to me to be no more than the conventional position.

Subuh said that if Subud failed to grow, it would be the fault of the helpers. Subud has failed to grow. Therefore we should not model future behaviour on what the helpers are doing.

Subuh also said that Subud would not grow unless people spoke from their own experience. That's what people are seeking to do here, an activity which you constantly struggle against in favour of The Imitation of Bapak.

You suggest that people should not be told that the latihan is the channeling of a spiritual entity from another galaxy. Neither should they be told that it is a receiving of the Great Life Force, whatever that's supposed to be.

You talk about what -- "in your experience" -- brings people to Subud. What we know as a matter of fact is that most people that come to Subud leave again in about two years. We know that after the population explosion of the 50s and 60s, few people come, leaving us with an aging, stagnant population. And we know that trick is not in the coming, but in having something worthwhile to stay for. That something appears to be lacking.

You say that people have been inspired by Subuh's talks. That's no longer the case. At the Ascot gathering, a Bob Dylan cover band drew 10 times as many people as a playing of a Bapak DVD. In New York, the Bapak literaure is unread. And Subud young people have spoken on lists, about what is wrong with it.

You say that people should communicate "Bapak the man". To do that, they'd have to know Bapak the man. You don't. Few people do. And as Subud was originally formulated (by "Bapak the man") it's not supposed to be about "Bapak the man". The personality cult is a later, and most unfortunate, addition.

I've kept 10 people in Subud over the last two years, who said otherwise they would have left. What's your count?

Reality check: let's see some evidence. (I recall you saying that no-one in your Vancouver group was under 70?)

Best

David


From Philip Quackenbush, May 2, 2008. Time 6:25

Hi, Michael,

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.

Right. But if there's too much void present, it's better to use the loo.

Peace, Philip


From Philip Quackenbush, May 2, 2008. Time 7:11

Sjahari wrote:

"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."

I haven't read the article, but from what you say, I'm wondering if he hasn't already brought more people to the "latihan" than any other member (possibly even including the founder). I remember when I was in the San Francisco group and had to go to Palo Alto for group "latihan" or not get any for a while, that it seemed like almost every member there had come to the group through him. I also remember a member who for a long time was my best friend in the org. (I believe he's dead now, or at least left the org. several years ago) who was "opened" by him before he became a Subud member at a formal "opening" by simply hanging around him.

I also remember the story about the founder's jealousy becoming manifest (as it did with Richard Engels) when Chung went to Cilandak and he seemed to be getting too popular with the crowd there, so, as related by Mansur Medeiros on Subudtalk, as I remember it, they were all sitting around buddy-buddy in the big "latihan" hall talking about "soul" levels and Subuh said that Chung didn't have one. A put-down comparable to the time a regional "helper" tried to get me kicked out of "helperdom" by suggesting that they test (without ever asking me) whether I should continue, since he'd heard something I said that he didn't agree with, and then writing to me to say that it was "received" that I resign. What he didn't say that it was only his "receiving", not that of the other regional "helpers." I had to mention it at a national congress to get it resolved, at which point the national "helpers" considered kicking him out!

It's scenarios like this that make it a very reasonable thing, IMO, to eliminate "helpers" entirely from the organization, as I think Rosalind has suggested in another article. Simply having members (more than one, of course) that one feels comfortable with explaining what the latihan is from their perspective and how the organization works should be sufficient for an applicant to decide whether the cult is what they want to join or not, keeping in mind that the founder said that three months was the maximum time an applicant should have to wait before being "opened", their waiting that long already a test of their sincerity, which is all that is required. IMO, the standard opening could also easily be ditched and replaced by an abbreviated one that simply says something like "Close your eyes and pay no attention to what's happening around you. If spontaneous movement arises, do not resist or force it, but simply follow whatever occurs. We will begin now."

Peace, Philip


From Merin Nielsen, May 3, 2008. Time 8:24

Hi, Philip,

You wrote:
>> ... But how did you recognise the illusion [of free will]? ..... And it might also be helpful to give some idea about how that change of perception effects your actions in the whirl.

Every motivation is either caused or uncaused, and neither case matches what free will is supposed to be, so it's impossible. How my actions have been affected, I can't say for sure, because analysing them from this side is too difficult.

Regards,
Merin


From Philip Quackenbush, May 3, 2008. Time 10:24

>> PQ... But how did you recognise the illusion [of free will]? ..... And it might also be helpful to give some idea about how that change of perception effects your actions in the whirl.

MN: Every motivation is either caused or uncaused, and neither case matches what free will is supposed to be, so it's impossible. How my actions have been affected, I can't say for sure, because analysing them from this side is too difficult.

Well, I don't see anything that's uncaused, though the causative factors may be extremely complex (what in Buddhism is called dependent origination - everything that happens is dependent upon everything else that happens, not just one "cause"). It may, then, be an unfair question to ask how your actions have been affected, since recognizing the illusion of free will is only one item in the vast mix of "causes". In my case, though, it has left me free to be a slave to whatever happens and be happy with it, because that recognition means that what I do is ultimately not my responsibility (though I still act as if it is; otherwise of what use is my existence other than an entertainment for the Source, which may be all that it is?

If I tell "God" why I'm doing what I'm doing, s/he/it can have big laugh at my ignorance, so I'd rather not spoil my own fun by assuming or even worse, believing, s/he/it exists and would have me do otherwise, although s/he/it seems to exist, since accepting his/her/its (perhaps the universal consciousness', as I expressed earlier) motivation and "universal knowledge" seems to result in a freer and happier lifestyle.

Peace, Philip


From Stefan, May 5, 2008. Time 10:51

Sjahari:
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. )

Stefan:
This is a KEY factor in demonstrating that Subud isn't a cult or a religion. But I don't share your confidence that this is happening now in most helpers groups. A friend of mine who became an applicant was put off by a dogmatic helper. Another got opened but only just about survived the applicant meetings because of my reassurances that she didn't have to agree with everything the helpers wanted her to believe.

Shahari
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.

Stefan
It would be odd not to mention the founder and a brief précis of his explanations. But suppose you're hearing about an organisation such as Oxfam or the United Nations. How much would you want to hear at the outset about the founder. Isn't it more interesting to hear about current plans, projects and what's happening now?

Sjahari:
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.

Stefan:
Depending on the individual the Bapak talks they meet might either clarify the latihan process or create dissonance and confusion. You'd probably advise the reader or listener to listen receptively without thinking about the ideas, but in view of public knowledge about the way messages can easily be absorbed by the unconscious this advice would put many people on their guard.

Secondly, there's such an overwhelmingly "huge treasure" of talks. I've only read 10%. Are we prompting an applicant to wade through them all?

Thirdly, how can we square this approach with "Subud is simple, open-to-all, experience-based and has no dogma?"

Sjahari
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.

Stefan
Thank you

David (responding to Sjahari)
You again reiterate your own position, which appears to me to be no more than the conventional position.

Stefan
The conventional "Bapakist" approach doesn't give airtime to diverse individual accounts of the latihan or to developing experiencial ways of introducing Subud in public. I find Sjahari's views far more nuanced and adventurous than that.

David:
Subuh also said that Subud would not grow unless people spoke from their own experience. That's what people are seeking to do here, an activity which you constantly struggle against in favour of The Imitation of Bapak.

Stefan:
It seems to me that Sjahari is not asking people to imitate Bapak but rather to give full value to Bapak's explanations in addition to speaking from personal experience

David:
You talk about what -- "in your experience" -- brings people to Subud. What we know as a matter of fact is that most people that come to Subud leave again in about two years. We know that after the population explosion of the 50s and 60s, few people come, leaving us with an aging, stagnant population. And we know that trick is not in the coming, but in having something worthwhile to stay for. That something appears to be lacking.

Stefan:
There's a tension among people who treasure the latihan. Some also treasure Bapak's words, while others find them either offensive, outdated or distracting. If we want people coming into Subud to find open-mindedness, it won't come about by bashing Bapak.

Those who currently promote and quote Bapak will need to go lightly, and acknowledge that not everyone who is drawn to latihan shares their enthusiasm for Bapak's talks. Far from it, some may find them to be a major obstacle.

Those who want to challenge Subud's cult-like tendency to deify the founder and his words will need to either form a new organisation, or to develop compassion for people who hold very different views to their own. Where the power is in the hands of "Bapakists" I'm all for challenging this imbalance, so that Subud can become a more democratic organisation. At the same time, it's not about one view replacing another, but about enabling peoples different choices and voices to coexist.

Stefan


From Philip Quackenbush, May 6, 2008. Time 6:26

Hi, Stefan,

You said,

"It seems to me that Sjahari is not asking people to imitate Bapak but rather to give full value to Bapak's explanations in addition to speaking from personal experience"

That would be a valid argument if we could know what he actually said, but most of the translations are so bad, even ludicrous, most of them being translated by people who are not native English speakers (the first rule of professional translating, the non-English translations usually based upon the English ones), and with little or no knowledge of the Javanese culture on which they are mainly based, and the non sequiturs are so numerous that it sometimes seems as if the speaker was purposely avoiding making sense (maybe he was, if the frequent adjurations by our "betters" to not think about them means anything). The habit that some members have of listening to or reading them in trance can further obscure any attempt at presenting them to an applicant with any clarity.

Peace, Philip


From Merin Nielsen, May 18, 2008. Time 12:22

Sjahari wrote:
>> 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.

(At latihan premises somewhere, after an explanation of the latihan has been given...)

Scenario 1
APPLICANT: Well, that all sounds great, thanks.
HELPER: You know, there are other quite different latihan explanations available.
APPLICANT: Oh, no thanks, your explanation was totally fine for me. I’m in.

Scenario 2
APPLICANT: Hmm, all of that doesn’t really convince me that I should join up.
HELPER: You know, there are other quite different latihan explanations available.
APPLICANT: Oh, okay, I might be interested in checking them out, just in case.
HELPER: Sure, well, there’s the explanation of Subud’s founder, and then there’s the explanation of Charlie sitting over there, or there’s one by a Subud member named David, which is available on the internet.
APPLICANT: Any recommendations?
HELPER: Personally, I reckon Charlie’s explanation is very cool and interesting. David’s is a bit dry and uninspiring, and I have to admit that the founder’s explanation is basically rubbish, as far as I’m concerned.
APPLICANT: Fine then, I’ll talk with Charlie, shall I?
HELPER: Yeah, he’ll be happy to help you.

Scenario 3
APPLICANT: Hmm, all of that doesn’t really convince me that I should join up.
HELPER: You know, there are other quite different latihan explanations available.
APPLICANT: Oh, okay, I might be interested in checking them out, just in case.
HELPER: Actually, you deserve to hear about the founder’s explanation.
APPLICANT: It’s good, huh?
HELPER: Um, speaking from personal experience, I don’t think much of it, but you deserve to hear about it.
APPLICANT: Why is that, if you don’t think much of it? You already told me about Subud’s founder. But now, are you really saying that the founder’s explanation deserves to be heard about?
HELPER: Well, yes, I suppose so.
APPLICANT: So the founder is treated as a teacher, huh? I thought you said this wasn’t a religion. Thanks for your time, but I’m outta here.

So is there anything else that this helper ought to have said?


From bronte, May 18, 2008. Time 14:50

One thing that I think should be said Merin, is that the experience is going to be their own, not someone else's.

In religion, people are told that they have their own personal realationship to God, sometimes, if not usually.
But they are also, usually, told that they have to do, say, and believe what the others in that religion do.
In Subud, I would claim that the individual must always wait for the experience that is real to them before attaching, or re-attaching, the words which were used to describe what they/we might expect of Subud.
Hence, for me, it is possible for an atheist to experience latihan. In our case, in this town, the atheist I am thinking of, named John (no surnames!) left as soon as he was told, or perhaps reminded, that Subud people usually (always?) believe in God. But he admitted, and we mostly knew, that his latihan was strong and free, and he was a very active member for years.
As to what I tell people, that is another thing. I am ashamed of the Subud I know, and won't give it's name to people who know I am "into something ", yet I claim it is real, effective for me (but not too effective), and independent of the others in it, even if I want to be inter-dependent with them. As to the explanations of why people who are skeptical of Subud, like so many writing here, they still beleive in or practice "the latihan" to some degree, and that is the only thing they, or we, can tell anybody. Just get a few of the other contributors to explain why they are still in Subud.
I got one to tell me, and what he wrote was very inspiring.
If you believe in yourself, others will believe in you.
Why else do some of my friends ask me to open them?
Go see the film "Camp"!
Then tell me it is a problem to offer Subud to new people. Do you believe in yourself at all?
I do. Just no where near enough.
And I don't believe in all the people I know in Subud.
I find I can't give or recieve the trust I look for, or expect, because "we" cannot be judged by onlookers for a reputation of loving each other, as Jesus supposedly said was the distinguidhing mark of his disciples.
So what is our distinguishing mark?
Next question please.


Add Feedback to this page / Communicate with us

Use the form below to


Very sorry but feedback forms now permanently closed on the Subud Vision site

Return