Why Did It Go Wrong?
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
The greatest trauma in the history of Subud was
occasioned by the economic disasters following Bapak’s efforts to found big
Subud enterprises. We have had, in succession, Bank Susila Bakti, PT S Widjojo
and Anugraha. Later, without Bapak's involvement, we had Premier Hotels. The
search for gold and other minerals in Kalimantan has not yet borne fruit. But
such traumas should not stay unresolved. They haunt us, even if we do not think
about it. They contribute to the widespread cynicism, disillusionment and lack
of self-respect in Subud today.
We have been inclined to put the blame on the whole
membership, and especially on those who should have made Bapak’s visions
reality. It is not difficult to rattle off the errors they made. The question
is: Did they not, after all, do the best they were able to, given their
personal limitations? If we are going to learn from our mistakes, we have to
first make an assessment of what happened on all the various steps in the
process. So it is appropriate to take it from the beginning and spotlight the
ideas and ambitions that were the starting point.
When I left Cilandak after the World Congress 1971, I
had a certain feeling of sadness, which I did not understand. Looking back, I
feel that maybe it was because the decision to start a Subud bank set us on a
wrong track.
It is questionable whether the aims of the enterprises
(I will not recount these aims here, as they have been explained at length in
Bapak’s talks, especially in 1972) would have been met, even if the enterprises
had been successful. But in any case the problem is that we were not able to
run such enterprises.
Those who have tried to embark on a new enterprise
know how difficult it is to establish a stable and lasting co-operation even
between just two or three people. In general it is not advisable to start
something that presupposes an immediate, well-functioning co-operation between
a lot of people who do not know each other or have not worked together before.
It is especially difficult in Subud where the lines of command tend to be
indistinct, where everybody feels that they are on an equal footing, and where
spiritual deliberations are often given the same weight or more than the
strictly economic ones. It is established wisdom in business life that a
company does not start big, but small, and has to grow like an organism.
Well-known examples are the American IT companies that started in a garage. If
you look at the history of successful companies, it is difficult to find
examples to the contrary. Even if we find such examples, we will find that they
did not start from scratch, but were backed by another business organization.
To start so ambitiously was scarcely professional, and in every case it doomed
us to failure. Thus, there is no need to look for the specific mistakes made in
each instance. The idea was faulty in itself and could not end in anything but fiasco.
And that is also the answer to the question in the title.
Connected with this is the disease, common among
religious people and especially prevalent in Subud, of mixing spiritual and
worldly affairs. We appeal to God all the time, through the procedure we call
testing, for help in business and economic affairs.
This is to debase the latihan, but it also puts us on
a straight (sometimes crooked) path to disaster, because here the mind is the
relevant instrument. It is true that Bapak asked us to reserve testing for
spiritual matters only. Enterprises, however, could and should be run with
indications received from within. But when
there is a pressing problem and no receiving, it is tempting to resort to
testing. The distinction between receiving and testing can be blurred. In the
end, there is no doubt that numerous members got the impression that Subud
enterprises could and even should rely on testing.
Why did we discard common business principles and
embark upon something so precarious? Some of us were not really professional,
but others were and should have known better. The reason is that we thought we
had the backing of God himself, so that we could not fail. Such an idea is
preposterous, even dangerous. And Bapak’s own receiving could not be doubted.
Also a blameworthy attitude.
I do not claim to understand everything that happened.
What I can perhaps understand, to some degree, is my own attitude, which was
shared by some of my co-members. I remember well how I made an extraordinary
effort to make money for investing in the bank. At that time I really felt an
obligation to invest, because I believed that the bank was necessary in order
that Subud should grow and more people have the possibility of receiving the
latihan. I was not the only one. And these same attitudes are found in Subud
right to this day – among some, while others are in the grip of
disillusionment.
Why we were led onto a path that could not succeed, we
may never understand. If we believe that these initiatives were willed by God,
we also have to believe that we were willed to fail. Someone I knew, when
pondering over this problem, received the words ‘sacrificial play’. So it might
have been just a way for us to learn something, maybe the difference between
what is our responsibility and what is not. If so, we should really take the
lesson to heart, and also to the mind, because we paid a lot of money for it.
Big enterprises with aims that verge upon the
spiritual presuppose that there are a lot of people with essential spiritual
qualities such as the ability to set self-interest aside and to distinguish
between the spiritual and the material. This is utopia. Large-scale Subud
enterprises are therefore also utopia. The time has never been right for great
Subud enterprises and probably never will be. As we cannot have an obligation
to do what is beyond our capabilities, we have no obligation in that direction
and we never had, so in a deeper sense it may well be correct that we
failed. Maybe fiasco was not just the
only possible outcome, but also the best possible. The time has come to put all
the big Subud enterprise stuff aside, as something belonging to the past.
This does not mean that there was anything wrong with
the recommendation to do enterprises. Encouraging us to combine spiritual
activity with work in the world is clearly relevant, especially for those who
have a strong spiritual inclination. Even so, doing enterprises may not be the
right thing for everybody. Maybe it’s best to go back to what we were told in
the beginning: always try to be aware that we, in our daily activities, do not
stray too far from our direct inner guidance. Some of us may feel this as a
liberation.