This is an archive of past discussions about Subud. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

A Lot of Material Removed

An anonymous editor removed what appears to be a lot of text from this article. (I think it was R.) While I see a lot of good changes, there are some I don't agree with. If I had time to carefully compare the previous version with the current one, I suppose I'd want to add a lot more back in, but I don't have time. (BTW, I do like the "Pitfalls" rather than "downside" terminology.) Unless I hear a good argument about why to leave out the bit on Crisis, in about a week or so I'll add it back into the article. I think it's essential. It's essential because this aspect of Subud is central to understanding what the latihan is. Purification is very real in Subud, and even though it may be a disincentive and turn people off, we're not here in Wikipedia to present only the good things about Subud. We have to present the whole picture.

(I won't argue it here, but, we shouldn't be afraid of including these so-called "pitfalls" because they may easily be re-cast as benefits of the latihan! This may be fleshed out more in additions to the article. A section could be added which argues how, ultimately, there are no substantial pitfalls. But that is further down the road, and, again, would have to be argued carefully so as to remain objective.)

Note that I don't disagree with removal of the text about Crisis. Certainly, if anyone wants to make suggestions about how to change this text, that's great. It's hard to respond to the removal of all the text because the editor didn't give any rationale for removing it, he/she just went in and made changes. (By "didn't give any rationale for removing it" I mean they didn't discuss it on this Talk page first.) As I said, I'll try to check back here within the next week and see if there's any rationale for not putting the text back into the article. The text in question is below.

"While very rare, it must be mentioned that spiritual purification and improvement sometimes has a price in temporary lowering of psychological functioning. This rare state is most often termed “spiritual crisis” by Subud members, and can last from a few hours to a few weeks. The person may have challenges carrying out the normal activities of their life. The Helpers are charged with the responsibility of aiding a person in this state, and other Subud members support them as well. Normally, this situation is remedied very quickly. Again, the person affected is always in control of his or her actions, and thus there is no physical danger. This kind of situation is not unique to Subud, as spiritual crisis has parallels in our culture: The mystical literature speaks of the “Dark night of the soul”; in 1978, Stanislav Grof started the Spiritual Emergence Network (SEN) to deal with spiritual crisis; people who have Near death experience sometimes need special help or counseling; practitioners of Yoga and other systems often experience states of ecstasy or increased energy (kundalini) such that interventions are required to help them gain balance, etc."

Aloah, Aliman 03:34, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New Suggestion for Crisis

There's a new suggestion to simplify the bit on crisis:

"It is suggested that the beginner in Subud only practice the latihan in two one-half hour sessions per week. Doing more than this, especially when one is a beginner in Subud, can create an imbalance in an individual's life that the founder of Subud termed a 'crisis'. Such spiritual crises are not uncommon in spiritual practices that expose the practioner to previously untapped resources for purification and growth."

This will go to the article in a week or so contingent upon any comments.

Aloha, Aliman 05:15, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Question about addition

I deleted the new edit: "or though oher spirtual experiances" under the heading "Becoming a Member." Not only was there three spelling errors, but I'm not sure about the rationale behind the addition. First, it would help to have a "person" to discuss this with rather than just a "number," so I wonder if the editor can log onto Wikipedia with a username before they make edits? Second, I can understand if someone wants to claim that a person may receive the latihan in a way other than a traditional opening (thus the comment about being opened through "other spiritual experiences"), but this idea is too complex to treat with with just part of a sentence, especially given the introductory nature of the article. I suggest that the editor write another section where this idea is fully explained. Aloha, Aliman 17:25, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No Comments--I'll make changes

There have been no comments from the the person who remomved the material on "crisis" so I'll add a revised version back:

It is suggested that the beginner in Subud only practice the latihan in two one-half hour sessions per week. Doing more than this, especially when one is a beginner in Subud, can create an imbalance in an individual's life that the founder of Subud termed a 'crisis'. Such spiritual crises are not uncommon in spiritual practices that expose the practioner to previously untapped resources for purification and growth (e.g., the mystical literature speaks of the “Dark night of the soul”; in 1978, Stanislav Grof started the Spiritual Emergence Network (SEN) to deal with spiritual crisis; practitioners of Yoga and other systems often experience states of increased energy (kundalini) such that interventions are required to help them gain balance, etc.). Aliman 19:48, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Removed Somewhat Misleading Link

I removed the "Latihan/Holy Spirit" link because it is somewhat misleading (although in innocent ways) and is riddled with factual errors.

First, the latihan is not an exercise embedded in a series of other exercises as the context and structure of the website implies. In fact, it's best if the latihan is not mixed with meditation and exercises. (The popular translation of "latihan" into English as "exercise" itself is misleading--the latihan isn't an exercise like pushups or like meditation. Latihan either "happens" spontaneously without effort, will, and concentration of the mind, or it doesn't happen. With meditation, one willfully and purposefully sits down and concentrates with the mind and meditates. Latihan and meditation are two very different things.)

Second, latihan was not introduced in the beginning of the 20th century. Muhammed Subuh was born in the beginning of the 20th century. He passed the latihan contact on to friends and relatives in the 1930's, and it became a registered organization in Indonesia in the 1940's, and was registered in the USA in the 1960's (it could have been registered in the 1950's, but I think it was the 1960's).

Third, Muhammed Subuh was not a Sufi and never claimed to be (nor was he identified by others as one).

Fourth, his name is misspelled (it's "Muhammed Subuh" not "Mohammed Subukh").

Fifth, it says that Bapak "...taught this method to Catholic monks and healed with it many diseased people...". There are three errors here. One is that there is no "method" to teach. Bapak didn't teach anyone a method. As I said above, this is totally spontaneous and no learning or other preparation is required. In fact, the strength of Subud is that there no teaching or method or dogmatic beliefs required. Regarding the monks, it's certainly possible that one or two "Catholic monks" were opened into Subud, but it would have been only because they came along with the hundreds of people to Comb Springs and other places that Bapak visited in the 1950's and 1960's to be opened. If any monks were opened, it had little to do with them being monks per se. I suspect the Catholic Church would either not condone this, or would be very skeptical of permitting priests/nuns, etc. being opened in Subud. Regarding healing, Bapak healed very few people (Eva Bartok being one) because the latihan is more of a way of living rather than a tool to be used to discern the future or to heal. In a few extraordinary circumstances Bapak healed people, but his main concern was that people simply do the latihan for themselves thus enabling them to receive directly whatever they needed, physical healing being only one of many benefits.

Sixth, the webpage says: "This technique [latihan] consists in addressing the Holy Spirit for help and asking Him to concentrate above one’s head (one needs to become aware of Him there) and then to “shower” Himself down through one’s body as through an empty shell or transparent bottle without a bottom." This is very much in error, and is utterly antithetical to latihan. It's entirely misleading. The latihan isn't necessarily about the Holy Spirit (or even about God), and the latihan certainly does not entail asking anything or anyone above your head to shower down through you! In addition, the footnote to this paraphrase is to a non-Subud source. Such a technique is no doubt what the author of the webpage thinks the latihan is about. The latihan is a subjective experience, and so maybe the author of the webpage is a Subud member and maybe this is how they experience the latihan (although it is doubtful because usually the latihan is different for different people, and more than that it's different each time for each person). So, such a description of the latihan is entirely misleading.

Seventh, the paragraph that begins, "Having surrendered to the Stream coming through it, the body starts dancing and performing other smooth and harmonious movements…" is again misleading. There isn't necessarily anything "smooth and harmonious" about it. Sometimes there is, but a better description is much wider because basically anything can happen in the latihan--sometimes one has a terribly discordant and difficult experience. The description on the webpage sounds like a "New ager" concentrating on some idealized version of the latihan. (BTW, Subud also doesn't necessarily have anything to do with New Age. In fact, most people in Subud are very far from the New Age mentality.)

Eighth, the webpage says "we may try to imagine ourselves… in paradise, under a heavenly waterfall, immersed in the tender sunlight..." whereas in latihan one must put aside the mind totally and does not TRY to do anything. One should not imagine anything (ironically, one should not try to do anything--not even try to not do anything!)

Ninth, the webpage says "In order for the laya dance (the dance of “dissolution”) to start, being guided by the Holy Spirit, we should stand on the tip-toes and raise our hands..." Again, there is no "dance of dissolution" or any other such thing associated with the latihan. In latihan there are no techniques--no standing on toes or sitting cross-legged or any specified actions or comportments. However, it is recommended that when a person is doing latihan for the first time that they begin it while standing up because sometimes it's easier to "follow" when the body is free because the movements in the beginning may be more difficult for some to feel. (However again, some people newly opened in Subud feel the latihan much more strongly than those who have been doing it for 20 years or more--again, it's different for different people.)

Tenth, (and finally, whew!) the official recommendation of Subud as an organization is that one should NOT do what the webpage is suggesting, which is to attempt to do latihan on your own. The explanation for this is more complex, and I won't argue it here.

All-in-all the authors of the webpage don’t seem to know much about Subud or the latihan, thus it seems like this is not a good link for the objectivity that is required in Wikipedia. Aliman 22:45, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

DISCUSS FIRST, FOLKS

"Ozielke" made a change to the article. I agree with the change. Although, it would be nice to discuss changes here (on this Discussion page) first. E.g., it's not absolutely the case that men and women do latihan seperately all the time, even when they "practice in groups." Prio opened a bunch of women, husbands and wives do latihan together (although only with the two partners alone), etc. Aloha, Aliman 23:51, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Alternative to Religion?----Too much God language?

Under the section "Doctrines and Rules of Subud" it says: "Bapak acknowledged the divine source of the major religions, and never claimed that Subud is more effective than the alternatives - he is on record as saying that Subud does not have a monopoly on God, and that to believe otherwise is simple arrogance. He did indicate, however, that the latihan may be more expedient in the context of the modern world than, for example, vanishing to an ashram or monastery for months at a time in the quest for inner peace."

I'm a little concerned about Subud being described as an alternative to religion. A person may be involved in the latihan and practice a religion at the same time.

Re. the first part of the first sentence, I suggest something like this: "Bapak acknowledged the divine source of the major religions, and never claimed that Subud has a special religious or spiritual standing - he is on record..." Unless someone makes a compelling counterargument, I'll make that change in a few days.

There's also been many major changes to the article since I saw it last. These changes weren't discussed. That's fine--there's no requirement to do so, but it may mean many changes and then counter-changes if people don't agree. For example, the word "God" is used a lot, and because Subud doesn't necessarily hinge on the idea of God, this word has to be used with caution. E.g., Subud is certainly open to practicing Jains, but they are not theists (there's no concept of a creator God).

As time permits, I may be suggesting and making some changes. I'll try to post here first for discussion, however.

Aloha, Aliman 03:20, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Anti-Subud??

Let's also look at the appropriateness of this link. Is it written by a harmless disgruntled member, or is it disinformation? I'm leaning somewhat toward the latter. Aliman 03:28, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Discuss changes?

We can either discuss changes or not--normally I do, but when I log on and see a change made, without discussion, that I disagree with, then I'm likely to just go ahead and change it back. Aliman 16:31, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Having just gotten through some editing, let me say that what you propose is not always very practical. The number of changes that seemed to me necessary or desirable were simply to large to submit to a line-by-line vote. These ranged from minor rephrasings, to reordering of some sections (lots of repeated information and jumbled information), to the elimination of lines that seemed transparently apologetic. (I did leave the last section intact, out of despair of figuring out what else to do wit it, and because it does reveal something about the Subud enterprise.)

Of course you can change anything you want; that's what wikipedia is all about. I do hope you like the results, though. 218.168.241.1 11:23, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Good morning from Hamburg, Germany This is Osanna Vaughn writing having just been directed to this presentation of Subud on Wikipedia. As I read, I saw a few minor errors (for example, the Subud symbol is rarely reproduced in red, it is usually presented in either blue or gold/yellow), and I was surprised that I could simply edit it, just like that. Anyway, I did. I also corrected International Subud Association. That does not exist. We have the World Subud Association (WSA) and we have the International Subud Committee (ISC). Finally, the comment about Ibu Rahayu having the exclusive right to bestowe Subud names is inaccurate. It is true that Subud members usually write to Ibu for a new name, but this is not exclusively the case. There are increasing numbers of Subud members who spontaneously or through testing 'receive' their Subud name. Of course, the expression Subud name is, in itself, misleading because it has no official or legal status as far as I understand it, within or without of Subud. Since the Subud World Congress in Innsbruck this past summer, I have taken on the task of WSA chairlady. I am happy to answer any questions anyone has to the best of my ability. osanna@subudworldnews.com

Hello! This is Dawud from Taiwan. (A non-Subudist, though I've met some.) Welcome, and thank you for your corrections. My color vision is not very good, and now my memory appears to be going as well! So, what do the spokes mean? Same as the circles?

Could you perhaps have a look at the Bapak and Ibu entries as well, and add the sort of material biographies should have? Also, how about a "theology" section giving the seven levels, all that stuff about ancestors, that sort of thing? Schisms too if you know any offhand. (Otherwise I'll go hunt up the ones I remember.)

In general, what do you think of the content so far? 210.60.55.8 08:35, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

PS. Would it be possible to post some photos/ images of (a) a latihan (or some more public activity if photography isn't allowed--maybe something from the last Congress?); (b) the symbol, (c) Bapak and Ibu on their entries, (d) anything else you got that looks cool?

Greetings. Osanna again. Thanks for responding Dawud. My understanding of the spokes on the Subud symbol is that they represent the possibility, through the latihan, to connect with and experience the seven levels respresented by the circles. However, I would need to check with some others to find out how accurate that is or if it's only part of the meaning, so please don't add my comment. There are various aspects to the symbol that seem to have a fluidness about them that make it hard to nail down with words! I'll look into the biographies for Bapak and Ibu and see if we can add some more detailed information. I may have to find someone who has the time for this - especially if we were to go in depth into the seven levels. Bapak wrote a book called Susila Budhi Dharma where it is explained in full detail; however, if read just from the head, without the experience of the latihan, it might be hard for readers to make sense of. We Subud members still haven't necessarily grasped the full significance! As for schisms, it's hard to say. I believe there were some off-shoots created in Indonesia in the early days, but I don't have details. Also, I would need to know what exactly is meant by a schism. Do you mean a separate organisation set up by members who have broken away from Subud for whatever reason. If so, I am unaware of any outside of Indonesia in the early days as I mentioned; certainly nothing current. There are, however, members who leave the organisation because they don't agree with certain aspects or have had a bad experience, yet they continue to do latihan. In general, I think the content is good, though I should probably read through it more slowly. I didn't notice any major misinterpretations and I have no problem, personally, with the criticisms or concerns expressed. As mentioned elsewhere in this discussion, people come to Subud for many reasons, often looking for something specific which they don't find. For myself, the beauty of the latihan is being open to the unknown and the unexpected, while having total trust that the experience arises in accordance with my own true inner nature. I guess it's similar to the kind of trust that a young child has when one of their parents takes them by the hand. Regarding photos of the latihan, sorry there are none. Even if done in a group, it is a personal, private experience and it isn't appropriate to photograph someone while following it. I suppose someone could chose to be photographed but, what for? A picture is static and the latihan is full of life. As for photographs of the last congress, you can check out www.subudworldnews.com On another note, maybe you can tell me a bit more about yourself and your connection with Wikipedia. When I clicked on your user link, I was told it doesn't exist... When I clicked on Aliman's I got a bit of a bio. Sorry, I'm not very good at using this, so my might be missing some of the obvious. Have a good day!

Hello again Osanna! Well, my "connection" with Wikipedia is more or less similar to other people's. I discovered it through word-of-mouth (or postings somewhere else), found articles on subjects of interest to me (various religions, mainly), and having discovered that I could edit them (or create new ones), began doing so as a form of relaxation. I've worked (sometimes alongside many other people) on the Baha'i, Sky Kingdom, Edgar Cayce, Burkhanism, CIIS, New Age, Esoteric, Yoga, Tantra, FPMT and related pages, and some other weird ones.

I hope you do understand that you are as much an "editor" as I am, or anybody else is. That's the beauty / insanity of the Wikipedia. It's a fascinating exercise in groupthink / group wisdom. For all its faults, it seems to be rapidly becoming the first place many people look for information on various subjects. 218.167.171.198 23:57, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Dawud. Aliman says he only ever edited the material on Subud, so I'm understanding that you put in the original information. I'm curious how you went about it. As for myself, till now I've never done anything other than use Wikipedia when looking for information. So, I'd like to understand the process better. When one puts in an article, does one get questioned as to veracity, etc.? I mean, I've just scanned through the Policy points, but, while it's talking about the policies to be followed, I'm wondering if anyone actually checks that they are being followed. There are, after all, hundreds of thousands of articles in Wikipedia. Now, my intention is not to be critical, but, as I said, to understand the process. For example, you had mentioned the Subud symbol being red. While there is no rule saying that a specific colour HAS to be used, red is certainly the one LEAST used. The colours most often used are yellow/gold, blue, white (on blue) or black on white and there are guidelines of to the use of the symbol (including colours, etc.) to be found at www.iscmedia.com . So, until I stumbled across it, the accuracy about the red had not been questioned. In the end, I am asking this also because I do use Wikipedia to find out all kinds of things. To what degree can I trust the information? Hope my questions don't annoy you. It's not my intention. All the best, Osanna

Dawud again. No, there is no automatic checking for veracity. Anybody can add anything they want, but then anybody else can take it away. The most reliable entries have enough knowledgable people on them, that mistakes or bad edits are likely to get caught, but one never knows. Caveat lector.

Another problem (that you have perhaps seen here over the last few days) is that some subjects are of mainly of interest to certain subcultures, whose more outspoken representatives aren't always interested in a balanced presentation.

Thanks again for responding and answering my questions. I hope I can organise for someone or a team to keep tabs and ensure that our information is up-dated, complete and balanced. I'll also check into the discussion page every now and then. Otherwise I can be contacted at osanna@subudworldnews.com Keep well!

MAJOR CHANGE TO THE PRESENTATION ON SUBUD This is Osanna again, wondering who made such an enormous change to the page on Subud and why. I can't recognise who was responsible and would like to discuss it. Thanks

I've taken the liberty of reverting twice now. Somebody out there apparently wants to turn this entry into a piece of Subud propaganda.

A word to the wise: propaganda that looks like propaganda, is BAD propaganda. I submit that your cause would be better served by just honestly admitting to whatever disagreements and controversies there be, and attempting to discuss them in a balanced way, rather than just sweep everything under the carpet.--Dawud

>>>

From the instigator of the enormous change referred to above

Hi Osanna,

Changes were made - as is my right - because as it stands the existing text is full of inaccuracies and typos (missing "k" at the end of Bapak's name for example).

The original Wiki entry from 2 or 3 years back was NOT propaganda - it just gave an accurate description of what Subud is - as against what society's perceptions are from the outside.

The whole point of Subud is that it offers access to an experience that is unique to the person receiving it, and that no teaching other than the received teaching of the Latihan is primary. That is something which all members seemed to understand in the seventies. I would submit that by accommodating the cynics/outsiders with careful and "politically correct" language we are adding to the confusion. The fact that some members behave in certain ways or are disappointed by their experiences (or lack of them) has nothing to do with what Subud is supposed to be.

Perhaps it would be better to split the entry into 2 parts, labelling one as the public perception of Subud. Subud seems to be trying to create an identity for itself. It's this very quest for identity which has people so confused. It's a collective of people only who have the experience of receiving the Latihan as a common thread; friendships in Subud, in my experience, are based on simply getting along with those that one does, not on a common choice of spirituality.

I also object to the term Subudist - there is no Subudism, so there are no Subudists. That's how it is - it's not a religion, and that has been a fundamental since it began. Bapak was clear that if you wanted a religion you should join one in addition to doing Latihan - how much more specific do we need to be? The fact that, according to the entry here, some Subud members don't know if it's a religion or not is a question of semantics, and is irrelevant to the discussion. I have previously made subtle and reasonable changes, and in each case someone simply replaced them wholesale with what was there before. That's why I finally reposted the original entry, which I still view as one of the better descriptions I have seen.

It is not propagandist, any more than it is propagandist to describe a meerkat as a social animal with a penchant for eating scorpions. Schisms etc are not anything to do with Subud - I'm not aware of any in any case, but if they do exist, by definition they are no longer part of Subud. So what do we want - a clean and accurate description of what Subud is, or a piece of gutter journalism complete with inaccuracies and exaggerations? I particularly loved the bit in there a few weeks back about "Subudists" penchant for free love. Huh!!!??? I’ve obviously been going to the wrong meetings ;-) I haven't checked the entry for Christianity, but it could - by the logic of half of what's posted about Subud - state that Christians have a tendency to persecute people for witchcraft and burn them at the stake.

Two final points - I am a member of Subud (28 years and counting). The irony is that I avoid Subud events and people in general because I simply don't get on with that many Subud members. Also, I don't like the way it is run or the way it portrays itself - I find it redolent of the European Union these days - bureaucracy ad nauseam. However, I have plenty of good friends in Subud and I honestly believe that I am a good representative: I am in it purely for the Latihan, which I live as a daily reality, and I attend group Latihans when work permits (I travel extensively). So I know enough about Subud to comment.

Second point - I do believe, Dawud, that as someone who has not experienced the Latihan, you are not well qualified to comment. Call me a fascist if you like, but for me you could no more give an accurate view of Subud, than you could give a true description of Afghanistan if you had not visited it. Why not give it a shot? Subud, not Afghanistan ;-)

I will be away from my PC for about three weeks, so will not be able to engage in further discussion until I return. Osanna, I hope this answers your question and opens up the discussion in a constructive way. I certainly have not intended to offend.

Forgive me if I remain anonymous - my life is complicated enough as it is without raising the ire of anyone who may be able to look me up in a Subud directory and start hurling invective at my email inbox. Ciao!

Dawud again. Yes, you have the right to make whatever changes you want--just as I and everyone else have the right to do the same (for instance, by reverting). If this is uncomfortable for you, then perhaps you should make your own Subud webpage, which other people can't edit.

I'm afraid there is no escaping "cynics" and 'outsiders." Your description may or may not be an accurate description of spiritual reality, at least for you, but most people who come here will expect practical information, not tedentious revelatory claims.

Of course the entry ought to reflect Subud's self-understanding, at least in part, but from what I have read, there seems to be some diversity of views within Subud. We can't just arbitrarily declare your experience to be authoritative or normative.

Imagine if the UFO entry began "UFO's are piloted by little green men with antennae." and then further down, "OUTSIDER'S VIEWS: Some close-minded fools don't even believe in UFO's!"

Then imagine somebody editing this. And the original writer says "what do you know? You've probably never even seen a UFO!"

But a spelling mistake? Now that's another matter! Let me go check which name you meant...

On the word "Subudists," I have run across it on subudlife.com, but understand if it rubs some people the wrong way. (Baha'is don't like "Bahaism," God knows why but okay.) I usually write "Subud practitioner." Is there a more standard term floating around?

On free love--yes, mea culpa. I wrote about a "reputation" (not "penchant") for free love based on the recent remarks of Ibu. I should perhaps have added a parenthetical note like "Think East/West culture clash, not orgies". You rightly edited this out, and I have respected that.

Are invectives often hurled within Subud? Just asking...

Hi Dawud and Anonymous!!! I am certainly looking for an open discussion about this entry in Wikipedia and I would hope that we could find some concensus. I personally like Dawud's format, though there are, in my mind, comments that are inaccurate or misleading, or too brief to give a real picture. My intention, however, rather than just going in and making a bunch of changes, was to get some wider in-put from other members and then propose some changes here or, at least, explain them once we've made them. Anon's personal experience and explanation of the latihan is perfectly valid, but I'm sure there are plenty of members who would question and even disagree with some of the wording. Maybe the best thing would be to have a link called 'Members' personal experiences' for example. From my point of view, to exclusively have a text like that about Subud in an encyclopedia is inadequate. Anyway, using this site at the weekend is testing my patience: it's so slow. I have a busy week ahead, but I will be meeting up with some other council and ISC members and will talk about this with them. Then I'll get back here. In the meantime, keep well.

>>>

Anon here again – thanks for your replies; this is looking like a constructive dialogue, and I’m glad of that. I’d like to offer a couple of replies – sorry for the length of my post, but I want to convey these points as clearly as possible.

Dawud wrote: > If this is uncomfortable for you, then perhaps you should make your own Subud webpage, which other people can’t edit.

I’m not sufficiently passionate, and in any event, I doubt that a webpage created by little old me would attract the level of hits that Wikipedia does.

> Imagine if the UFO entry began “UFO’s are piloted by little green men with antennae.” and then further down, “OUTSIDER’S VIEWS: Some close-minded fools don’t even believe in UFO’s!”

Sorry – I think that’s a specious argument. Unlike UFOs, Subud can be proved to exist. It can be demonstrated that people attend group meetings. A majority of those people report that they receive something unexpected and new to them.

Yes, it’s a subjective experience, but one could better compare it to someone who fasts, prays or meditates. There is empirical evidence that ascetic practices, as well as meditation and prayer, can produce variations in body chemistry that result in a change in consciousness. It’s not unreasonable to assume that the Latihan might have a similar effect. What we ultimately ascribe those effects to will always be a matter for debate between mystics and rationalists.

> But a spelling mistake? Now that’s another matter! Let me go check which name you meant...

3rd para of History of Subud: “…Bapa’s reputation…” BTW, Latihan with a capital “L” sits better for me.

> On the word “Subudists,” I have run across it on subudlife.com, but understand if it rubs some people the wrong way. (Baha’is don’t like “Bahaism,” God knows why but okay.) I usually write “Subud practitioner.” Is there a more standard term floating around?

My objection is to do with inaccuracy; if there are members who refer to themselves as “Subudists”, then they have misunderstood what “isms” are or they are trying to make of Subud something which it is not. I think the simple “Subud member” is OK, or the clumsier “Latihan practitioner”, because – if we accept that there is no Subudism, then one can’t really practise Subud. But the problem with humans is that they will go to war over semantics…

Diversionary note – why I find it reasonable to assert that Subud is not a religion: Subud does not qualify as a religion, sect, cult etc. because there is no ritual to follow, no charismatic leader (alive or dead) to revere, no teaching to learn or adhere to. Human nature being what it is, some members inevitably do revere some key figures, notably Bapak and Ibu, despite Bapak’s insistence that he was just an ordinary man. I heard him say it countless times, yet in a eulogy shortly after his death he was referred to by the speaker as “an extraordinary ordinary man”. None of this alters the fundamental principles on which the brotherhood was established.

I was disappointed when I recently read a statement by a Subud member to the effect that it was good to let people know “what our beliefs are”. There should be none, officially. Some Subud members try to promote their own brand of dogma, and it’s true that a sort of unwritten mythology has emerged based on (IMHO) a western perspective of an eastern perspective of an unknowable reality – it’s noteworthy that a prominent member once referred to this as “poison gas Subud”.

Bapak’s talks were for information and guidance and not intended as a doctrine, and we either accept at face value his assertion that we should not take anything he said as gospel unless we had experienced it for ourselves – or we choose to believe that he was not sincere when he said that – and by extension, not sincere when he apologised at the end of each talk in case what he’d said had offended anyone.

> On free love--yes, mea culpa. I wrote about a “reputation” (not “penchant”) for free love based on the recent remarks of Ibu. I should perhaps have added a parenthetical note like “Think East/West culture clash, not orgies”. You rightly edited this out, and I have respected that.

Thanks – and sorry to have misquoted you (I was working from memory). I haven’t heard these remarks, although I read an interesting talk she gave, aimed at young people and warning of the dangers of promiscuity. Ibu tends to recommend common sense, and I would have thought that the physical dangers of promiscuity (potential for illness), the social dangers (unwanted pregnancies) and the emotional dangers (you don’t need spiritual insight to recognise that excessive casual sex diminishes the value of intimacy in the long-term) should be enough, at least, to give pause. Or not – maybe I’ve just forgotten how it felt to be 20 and awash with hormones.

> Are invectives often hurled within Subud? Just asking...

Invectives… hmmm. This is my exact reason for wanting more clarity in the entry. It’s not unknown, but Subud is full of people, some great, some not so great, most pretty average. So just like real people, there are those who take things very personally and get (IMHO) overly upset. I wouldn’t necessarily expect invective from other members, but naming myself could open me to professional difficulties, as well as nasty emails from anyone I might offend, in or out of Subud. However, in Subud we don’t, to my certain knowledge, get psychopaths, professional criminals or hit-men – and other than that it’s a true cross section, which is the beauty of it.

I believe that the value of the Subud brotherhood is that it puts in place a structure by which people can hear about the Latihan, receive the contact if they so choose and meet with others who have this single, unusual thing in common. As far as I’m concerned all other bets are off – that (and this is the message Bapak gave) it’s all about the Latihan.

Which leads me neatly to the problem with the way the page is currently presented. It could easily suggest to the outsider that Subud is a collective of people:

who are subject to enormous in-house bickering
who claim to be free-thinkers but are too spineless to make a major decision without referring to an old lady in Indonesia
who start businesses which drag their hapless co-members into penury
who, based on their humanitarian and artistic initiatives, couldn’t (forgive my language) organise a piss-up in a brewery. SDI, for example, has actually done some fantastic humanitarian work.

Subud is full of humans and humans are flawed, but those flaws are not the product of Subud. To clarify to the point of possible tedium, suppose a computer programmer joins Subud. Let’s imagine that he’s irascible around his family, maybe drinks a little too much, but is a genuine seeker. And let’s suppose his behaviour improves greatly over a few years. Then one day he gets embroiled in an argument over policy at a committee meeting, storms out, goes to the pub, downs a couple of double vodkas and goes home to rant at his wife. It’s not a function of Subud that the meeting was left in disarray and people were rattled – it’s simply that one individual held passionately to a view that others didn’t subscribe to. We could imagine that it’s his first serious drink in three years, in the morning he feels stupid, but is perhaps unable to admit this to his peers. In such a case it’s no more reasonable to assert that Subud members are unable to live in harmony (as if that were a result of being in Subud) than it is to claim that all computer programmers are inveterate drinkers who bully their kids. The distinction is that Subud is about doing the Latihan, behavioural issues are about being human. (BTW, please don’t assume that this is based on any given example, it’s a “for instance” off the top of my head).

> Anon’s personal experience and explanation of the latihan is perfectly valid, but I’m sure there are plenty of members who would question and even disagree with some of the wording.

Actually, it’s not my wording – it is the original Wikipedia entry I found some years back. As for my experience being valid – well, yes it is valid to me, but that’s the nub of the issue: each person’s experience is unique and not easily conveyed. The other stuff just seems irrelevant.

> Maybe the best thing would be to have a link called ‘Members’ personal experiences’ for example.

I honestly don’t know about that, but if the Latihan is to be shared, I guess one has to try to give some idea of what it is.

Ciao – see you in a week or two, anon.

why I find it reasonable to assert that Subud is not a religion: Subud does not qualify as a religion, sect, cult etc. because

It is "reasonable" to say this, but it is also "reasonable" to say that Subud DOES have a ritual and charismatic founder, or that a "religion" might exist without these things. Subudists seem to insist on one particular conclusion (that Subud is not a religion) regardless of the premises that lead to it.

who are subject to enormous in-house bickering

How true or false is this? I suppose it must vary from person to person, and from group to group...

who claim to be free-thinkers but are too spineless to make a major decision without referring to an old lady in Indonesia

Surely we could think of some neutral way of acknowledging Ibu's influence. Whether her influence is a good thing or a bad thing is not really the point of an encyclopedia entry--we might as well be critiquing the popes according to how "Catholic" we think they were.

who start businesses which drag their hapless co-members into penury

Apparently there have been disputes of this nature. I would welcome more thorough information about "enterprises," if this is available, but I thought my wording considerably understated the true situation.

who, based on their humanitarian and artistic initiatives, couldn’t (forgive my language) organise a piss-up in a brewery. SDI, for example, has actually done some fantastic humanitarian work.

Well, the budget for all four "wings" was less than USD 20,000 four years ago. (Going by my memory of reading the presidential address for the last congress.) I don't say that they are incompetent, but it seems to me that these have not historically been a priority. If I were working for them, I would want to see individual entries for each "wing" describing whatever projects it has undertaken.

I think a lot of our difficulty lies with the inherent messiness of generalizing across people who disagree with each other and are different from one another. Yes, by all means put in individual experiences and perspectives (properly labeled as such). --Dawud

Greetings again. Osanna here 1) Unfortunately, it will be hard to come to an agreement on the question of religion, cult, sect, etc., because these words have different connotations for everyone, regardless of dictionary definitions. Years ago someone mentioned to me that the word religion comes from 'religare' - to reconnect. In this sense, the original meaning of the word religion no longer necessarily applies to how it is understood today. The word in the Oxford dictionary is first defined as: particular system of faith and worship. In the sense of 'religare' Subud does re-establish or re-awaken a connection with God - or maybe it simply makes us aware again of a connection that is always there. Well, then again... there's the definition of God... It would be accurate to say that the World Subud Association does not have any form of religious doctrine and does not consider Subud a religion (regardless of the fact that some individual members do use Bapak's words as doctrine. This is a reality as well). From many people's point of view (specifically, obviously, non members) Subud is a cult or a sect. So, I think to have the sub-link about this is probably okay, though some points need to be corrected. For example, to say that tax authorities usually treat it as a religion is also misleading. Some countries treat it as a charity (the definition of charity being very wide), while others (Germany for example) treat it as a 'Gemeinnützigeverein', meaning an association of general usefulness because it promotes exchange and interaction between different cultures, nationalities, religions, etc.

2) Enormous amounts of in-house bickering is, I'm happy to say, a major exaggeration. Of course, there are situations when disagreements arise and I won't say that tempers don't ever get lost, but bickering sounds like petty arguments over the colour of a carpet. I can certainly confirm that over the years out capacity to deal with disagreements has improved and considering the extreme variety of opinions based on the aforementioned variety of cultures, etc., I think we do remarkably well.

3) I agree that Ibu should be mentioned with all the respect she deserves; however, from my personal experience with her over the years, she rarely gives answers to people's queries along the lines of do this or do that. She is truly like an older sister who is supportive but always encouraging members to stand on their own feet and make their own choices.

4) Regarding large enterprises that have caused members distress, a lot has been learned from the past and gradually being applied to the present; however, this really only applies to the very large enterprises which, being efforts to work together on a large scale and considering all those multi-cultural aspects, would have been extremely difficult to pull off at a first go. Plus, the question of penury only applies, as far as I know, to a couple. Others, while currently being in difficulties (largely due to economical factors outside the influence of the entrepreneurs themselves), have earned many investors very good returns. As for smaller enterprises there have been countless success stories. In fact possibly above average numbers of successes. Here in Germany again, the members apparently sat down and brain-stormed coming up with 10 or so enterprise ideas. Apparently about 60% of them were carried forward and became successful: Rofin Sinar, the Cadera Bakery, Erler & Pless, the Parkhotel in Wolfsbug, just to mention a few. So, typically, as with the press, the negative stories are the popular ones.

5) The Wings. Susila Dharma International Association, the social welfare wing of Subud is an independant association with its own budget which is not small. Even so, it is a networking association and the projects it networks for also receive funds directly from contributors; so it is difficult to give a total figure, but the amount is not insignificant. The portion of the WSA budget given to SDIA supports the SDIA chairperson's attendance to the world council meetings and helps promote SDIA within Subud. So, to be accurate, historically, SDIA has had enormous support and been a priority for many Subud members. It supports about 70 projects worldwide. Information of these can be found at www.susiladharma.org. SICA (the cultural association) is also an independant association. It is also a networking association and the budget given to it by WSA in no way reflects the enormous amount of cultural activities within Subud which, as often as not, aim to be self-funding anyway. Example: The Love Exhibition - an art exhibition that toured many Subud centres and was open to the general public. The reality is that while historically culture has always been an enormous factor within Subud, it is not clear to the membership at large what structure, if any, to give it. Coming from a family of artists, I know anyway how difficult it is to structurise these kinds of things!!! The Enterprise Wing. This wing (which is not an independant association) has also gone through a lot of evolution and lack of clarity as to its real aim; even so, there are plenty of entrepreneurs in Subud. Here also arises the question of what form do we give to enterprise within the overall structure of Subud. Till now, most efforts in this area have been financed by entrepreneurs themselves, rather than the WSA. Finally to youth. Again this wing is not an independant association, but the international budget in no way reflects the activities of the youth worldwide. Another point to be remembered is that the youth are, first and foremost, Subud members themselves and can partake in all Subud activities. The fact that they also organise activities and events aimed specifically at younger members is natural, but would not necessarily be reflected in any budget as they tend to be self-funded.

So... how to put all this kind of stuff into an accurate nutshell???!!!??? Keep well!

Dawud again. I added new entries for SDI (not SIDA anymore--that's Spanish for "AIDS" you know) and SICA (just a stub). Do you know the web addresses for the "wings" other than SDI? Or just dive in and fill in stuff yourself (or get their people to do it).

Osanna here. I've added quite a lot of information about the organisation - spiritual and practical. Will work on it some more. I'm not sure how to programme in links. The Muhammad Subuh Foundation website is www.msubuhfoundation.org Also, for for general information including copies of the constitution and guidelines for the use of the Subud symbol, there exist the www.iscmedia.com site. Thanks for adding the part about SDIA. I'll see what i can go adding as I have time. All the best.

Dawud again. I've added entries for "Latihan", "Helper (Subud)", and "Subud and religion". I don't know how to do this yet, but I would like to make one of those "category" lists for all the Subud-related articles, which would appear on each related page. (See the Baha'i pages for an example of what I mean.) Oh yeah--I also don't know how to do graphics or photographs. Anybody out there smart and enthusiastic enough to do it? These pages sure could use some...

UPDATE: I did manage to create a "Template:Subud, following the Baha'i model. Could somebody stick a Subud symbol on top of it, the way the Baha'is did with their symbol? And other photographs and images in the articles themselves, if you can.

And there's still a lot missing from the various Subud entries. Perhaps Osanna would be willing to fill out the organizational entries? Also, Bapak's biography is very short right now--does anybody have enough historical material to contribute a timeline, bibliography, stuff like that?

Greetings, anon here.

The new layout seems to be an improvement - I haven't had time to study it properly, I just happened to be in range of a hotspot so I had a look. My earlier comments, answered by Dawud, were precisely about how Subud might look based on the content, rather than a statement of how I think it is. I still think some of what's there lacks relevance, but it does appear to be moving in the general direction of objectivity.

In any event, I can't contribute any more at the moment as my work life has just become very much more complicated and I don't see myself being around much until early 2006, but I did want to say thanks for a stimulating forum. Just one last question, to Dawud, if you don't mind my asking: What - as a non-member - is behind your evident fascination with Subud?

Cheers, anon.

Hello anon--thanks for your kind remarks, and good luck with your new direction.

I'm interested in "new religious movements" in general, especially ones that seem "under-studied." --Dawud

A greeting between comings and goings! This is Osanna, just back from Vienna and leaving for Oberwesel tomorrow. I like the look of the new section on the right - with the yellow. Thanks for doing that. I'm going to have to see who can help us adding the missing information. Also maybe I can find someone able to insert the symbol somehow. There are copies that can be taken from the iscmedia.org site, so it shouldn't be too difficult. It's just not my strength. I have a meeting with the executive committee on October 22nd and, at the latest, I want to bring them up to speed with this. Following the recent world congress they have a lot to do, but web presentation of Subud is important as you can imagine. When I get back next week I hope to have time to go through the various entries carefully. Keep well!

Oooops... me again. I just checked out the right hand column, Main practices/Latihan. It begins with the brief description about the latihan, but I can't find an edit function for that first bit. What I wanted to reword was the sentence: In it, participants allow themselves to be possessed or guided by the divine (God, or the "great life force"). The word possessed is inaccurate in so far that it might suggest that people have no control to stop what is happening. Members are always concious during latihan and can stop the process at any time. Needless to say, it also has negative connotations as 'possessed' is usually related to the devil or bad spirits. I would simply change the sentence to: In it, participants allow themselves to be guided by the divine (God, or the "great life force"), which manifests as an inner vibration that will express itself differently for each person. What do you think?

I made the changes, but the "edit this page" function should have been right at the top. Play with it for awhile, you'll get used to it.--Dawud

The article has changed a lot and has some major flaws

I just changed one--it hinted that married couples to latihan together reguarly. This isn't true. Another is regarding testing--it says mainly that it's used to "appoint Staff across the WSA." This is silly. That's like saying a pen is used to write a novel. It's true, but fairly pathetic in terms of communicating, really, what a pen is. At some point I'll be able to turn toward the article and make some changes. Aliman 03:49, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Criticism of Subud Link

Hey Rogerf7777,

I like how you delete the only critical external link. Good show on making Subud appear paranoid about criticism!

Anyway, I put it back, lest this page become some lukewarm attempt at propaganda.

Cheers, dude. See you around.

Ryan

59.120.151.225 07:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I have a criticism of these criticisms of Subud. Out of all the pages for religions, NRMs, spiritual groups and religious practices like yoga and meditation, Subud is unique in having a section dedicated to anonymous grumbles about itself. I think these are inappropriate in a main encyclopidia entry. And as much as i respect Ryans website, he isn't an authority on all things Subud.

---

The controversies/responces headings are not suitable for an encyclopedia. Any relavent parts of it must be moved to relavent sections the main body of the article, and the rest deleted.

Category:Subud

If anyone is still around, I wanted to inform you that I'm going to try to create a category for Subud. There's information about working with categories at Wikipedia:Categorization.--Kineticman 09:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)