I am currently considering the possibility that the charismatic effect the latihan is supposed to produce only makes sense in terms of a more or less Christian concept of ‘the Holy Spirit,’ which cannot be glossed away by relating it to the usual reading of the Qur’anic ‘Ruh Qudus’ as referring to Jibril.

Many of the prophets and great spiritual figures had healing powers and used them out of compassion. In their own cultures there were dukun-like characters. As far as I understand matters, the prophets attributed their healing powers to God and not to occult powers. There is nothing wrong with healing powers as such. They are often based on herbs and other medicinal substances. Practices similar to the rajah are common in North Africa and perhaps other Islamic cultures. I think many of these things have become debased but there may be a truth in them. Revealing these truths may be one of the latihan’s fruits.

You give the impression that Bapak and many Subud members are against the application of science and technology. But you know that is not the case. Bapak has encouraged us to use our minds (S&T) to advance our material and physical well-being and our social life. I have a religious worldview yet I drive a car, take it to be maintained, fill it with petrol, change the tyres etc and before driving off I say “Bismillah”. I listen to music on an Apple mac, but not during Ramadhan. I do use it to listen to Bapak’s talks during Ramadhan. I love some science and technology. I use modern medicine but realize in some instances I know myself better than a doctor and that many modern medicines have bad side effects. I have also learned that through the latihan I can sometimes find the cause and a solution to a health problem and thus don’t always need to run to the doctor. I’d say this is normal in Subud. For Bapak the development of science and technology can be inspired by God. But he didn’t give it more importance than the spiritual. See next point.

You seem to want science to be the arbiter of what is true in religion. You will no doubt feel more at ease with the Dalai Lama’s interpretation of Buddhism in that case as you point out he has said something similar. But then again he neither believes in God or the soul. If your religion is based only on the mind and your own efforts that kind of materialist conclusion seems unremarkable to me. And until science disproves it, he is happy to approve that a certain child is a reincarnation of a deceased lama because the child chose the possessions of the deceased lama when presented with a diverse group of items. I don’t think this kind of practice is something that is of much interest to scientists. So I don’t think that particular aspect of Tibetan Buddhism will be challenged by science as such.

Bapak as you know has spoken of the relation between science and spirit in terms of an ontological hierarchy, which is the position in Islamic metaphysics and in Christian (Eastern Orthodox) metaphysics. Bapak’s explanations I think are fairly nuanced, something you fail to acknowledge. Scientific reasoning cannot enter into the spiritual dimension and so cannot pass judgement on what pertains to that dimension. Of course this sort of “debate” has a long history and there are philosophers more knowledgeable than you or me who have rejected your inverted hierarchy of values. Mystics too, for want of a better word, have rejected your upturned hierarchy. According to Rumi (13th century):

“The man more perfect in erudition is behind in meaning and ahead in form….
A knowledge is needed whose root is upon the other side, since every branch leads to its root.
Every wing cannot fly across the breadth of the ocean: Only a knowledge that comes directly from Him can take one to Him”.

And, like Bapak, Rumi didn’t reject science and technology, he pointed out:

“Those people who have studied or are now
studying imagine that if they attend faithfully here [the spiritual exercise, sama] they will
forget and abandon all their knowledge. On the contrary, when
they come here all their sciences will acquire a spirit. The science are all paintings. When they gain spirits, it is as if a lifeless
body receives a spirit. The root of all these sciences is from
Yonder, but they have been transported from the world
without sounds and letters into the world of sounds and
letters.”

W. Chittick, 1983.The Sufi Path of Love, p. 25-26.

You frequently paint a picture of Bapak which elevates in importance and significance remarks about dukuns, healing etc and relegate (virtually jettison) his remarks about what is of supreme importance for Subud members: Surrendering to the Will of God. Bapak I’d say consistently confirms the Quranic characterization of the Creator and our position vis a vis the Creator. I understand that you are not comfortable with this kind of language and I believe it is leading you to paint a highly misleading and biased picture of Bapak and the contents of his talks. You emphasise the peripheral and de-emphasise the core in Bapak’s life and talks as the core is decidedly spiritual.

The fact that you don’t believe in the spiritual benefits of names or visitations of the dead simply means that you haven’t experienced these things and aren’t prepared to accept the opinions of others. And another logical fallacy: The fact that Indonesians change names frequently including for non-spiritual purposes doesn’t invalidate the idea that names can confer spiritual benefit. But of course one shouldn’t overstate the case. I think Bapak and Ibu have faithfully avoided this. As someone who has changed his name, I have had experience of its spiritual benefit. The name Bapak gave me is the name associated with my soul and I have from time to time found that very helpful on my spiritual journey, no more than that. If you don’t believe in the soul then of course you can’t appreciate that. Renaming is common in most spiritual traditions. Is it simply a case of taking a name with a good meaning? Perhaps there was a deeper dimension now lost and refound in Subud? It’s possible. In latihan I have had an experience involving someone who had died years previously. I think many Subud members have had such experiences. It is very different I believe from spiritism where you intend to contact the spirit of someone who has died. You don’t have to believe in these experiences to practice the latihan. For those who have such experiences they don’t take up a central position in one’s life or spiritual practice. Muslims you tell us don’t have such experiences. But you will find in Islamic culture in general lots of experiences with the Jinn! Perhaps one has to be receptive in the first place.

You say you write not to change Subud but as a resource for Subud members who might be similarly uncomfortable with the kind of ideas you have written about. I hope I have shown above that you are doing more than that. You have devoted considerable time and energy and intellectual resources not simply to say that we don’t have to believe these things to benefit from the latihan. Instead you have misrepresented Bapak. You have elevated in significance the peripheral and ignored the core contents of Bapak’s talks and advice to Subud members. In fact you are totally silent on Bapak’s core message. Curious I’d say.

It would be interesting if you were to write about your experience of the latihan, talk about the meaning of the latihan for someone whose belief system is not theistic. It would be of interest to those of us who share a common practice with people with a very different worldview. It may be useful for those less experienced Subud members who find it difficult to adopt a spiritual worldview but wish for something positive while they develop in the latihan.

I gather from what you’ve said that (a) you believe in the effectiveness of dukuns–depending on where they get their power; (b) you believe in the power of “the right names” to confirm “spiritual benefits”, (c) you believe in visitations by dead people.

I don’t believe in dukun powers. I remember being told about the great encounter between the Dutch cannons and the Javanese magical weapons. The cannons one side; the magical krises on the other: bye-bye, Javan empire. I also know from my work in Indonesia that if poor people have no money, they go to a dukun; if they can afford it, they go to a doctor. I don’t think they’re being stupid. They know from that harshest and most direct experience what works, and what doesn’t. Middle class white folk, on the other hand, always backstopped by the public health and medical system, aren’t forced into that choice.

I also don’t believe that “spiritual benefit” can be had by getting the “right name”. The traditional Javanese change their names constantly, maintain different names for different purposes, get name-changes to change their fortune, and support all this by the Hindu musical metaphor for the universe. There is no injunction or advice in Islam that supports such a practice. Islamic parents are enjoined to give their children names with good meanings: that’s it. In the West, this belief is the province of numerology, like the site advertising this service: “The power of your knowing your name’s meaning is in it’s ability to reveal the spiritual and emotional urgings of your soul that are meant to be expressed through the talents and physical capabilities of your personality. Together these radiate as your unique quality of consciousness and all that you intrinsically are – your character and the ways that you express it. Name Consciousness is great for understanding your names meaning, finding the perfect baby names or predicting the effects of name changes!” Perhaps Subud can open up such shopfront, too: imagine the endless benefits to humanity.

Some of you used to think it was Khizr? That sounds to me like empty speculation. And, again, it requires belief in mythological figures, or rather a LITERAL belief in mythology. I love the Mahabharata. It informs my life. But if I were to start taking it literally, or worse–to start seeing Arjuna in the back garden–not only would that be weird, but it would miss the whole point of the Mahabharata.

What I see going on in Subud is a conflation of animistic beliefs with religion, and spiritism with spirituality. Neither religion nor spirituality require one to reject a scientific understanding of the world.

Consider the words of one Lisa E. Park, a professor of paleontology at the University of Akron, on visiting the Creation Museum: “I think they should rename the museum — not the Creation Museum, but the Confusion Museum. Unfortunately, they do it knowingly. I was dismayed. As a Christian, I was dismayed.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/science/30muse.html

Most of the people fighting the Creationists are Christians, who don’t want Christianity conflated with ignorance, or the adoption of Medieval or superseded beliefs. Or look at Islam in its Golden Age, when it was centred in Baghdad. Or Buddhism today, in which the Dalai Lama can say: “If science finds anything that contradicts Buddhism, then Buddhism must change.”

On Subuh’s childhood: How would Pak Subuh discern as a child that this was Sunan Kalijaga? After all, Mr Kalijaga was long dead by then. You’re not now saying that Pak Subuh consorted with dead spirits? Even more evidence that he was steeped in animism, not Islam. In Islam, when you’re dead, your dead, which is why you won’t find in Islam thousands of stories about apparitions of famous dead people, as you will in animist societies, or European spiritualism (or in Subud, for that matter.) People see visions of dead people in those societies in which people believe that kind of thing. On the whole, Muslims don’t.

Furthermore, here is what Subuh said about his own birth: “The baby was named Sukarno. However, because he was sickly, his name was changed to Muhammad Subuh by a mysterious old man that nobody knew. Grandfather accepted the change of name with a feeling of satisfaction as its meaning fitted exactly the time of the baby’s birth: dawn. Thereafter, the baby was both happy and healthy. This is what my mother told me about my birth.”

Nothing else. It should be clear from this passage that Pak Subuh did not remember this incident first hand, but heard it from his mother. If he didn’t recall the incident, how could he remember the “mysterious old man”? And if elsewhere and later he decided it was Sunan Kalijaga (whom he also claimed as ancestor), this more likely falls into the category of “authorization stories”, other examples of which would be his statements that “the jinn say I’m the World Teacher” and “the Queen of the South Seas wants to marry me.”

Do you believe that there is a green queen, covered in seaweed, living under the water off the West Coast of Java. For an alternative view, see this:
http://www.radix.net/~bardsley/censor.html

I agree that different worldviews can, and do, co-exist. That doesn’t mean that we have to subscribe to them all, or that they’re of equal value to human beings, or to our lives. Racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, “Intelligent Design” and social darwinism are all beliefs that co-exist with us today… That doesn’t mean that they’re good ones to hold. I’m sure that Thailand is today full of beliefs in spirits. So too in Indonesia. Why did my car break down? Hantu, hantu, hantu. Needless to say, when people believe that spirits cause their cars to break down, it becomes more difficult to instill a culture of periodic maintenance.

The postmodern worldview accepts that many worldviews are viable. Thus, a world filled with spirits, life forces, levels, name-change, mysterious strangers, ancestral baggage, etc can be a viable world in which people are born, live, love, die, and raise the next generation. It was a viable world for centuries, for feudal Javanese. That doesn’t mean we should seek to adopt it.

It also accepts that all are human constructs. All of them. So that the “reality” that Subud community has constructed for itself, around the texts of the talks, is no more nor less real than any other social construction.

Again, this is not a matter of secularism versus religion. It’s a distinction between religion that’s practiced in a way that is tune with the wonders and successes of modern knowledge and technology, and religion that desires to hang onto medieval beliefs and magical thinking.

You finish with: “You make too much out of these things for some reason.”

I only take it seriously (or more precisely did), because the Subud community takes it seriously. Thus, we have the principal of an enterprise which has spent some $13m looking for gold in Kalimantan reporting: “Baroi is located 5 kilometers east of Lakapoi or Bapak’s Thumb, which is where Bapak placed his thumb on a map in 1985 indicating the place we should live. Bapak explained in some detail at the time, the type of house and size of the rooms we should each have. In hindsight five kilometers is an ideal distance for people to live from a mine site. This may well be another excellent indication that Baroi is the prospect we have been waiting for.” The writer is a delightful human being, but that such ways of thinking (and that’s all it is) are harmful.

I say “or more precisely ‘did’ ” because I’ve come to realise there are thousands, if not tends of thousands of little religious groups in the world, all with their unusual, historically-given beliefs, many of them thinking that they are central to a divine plan, or are the key to the future of humanity. And that says much about human beings.

I’ve also come to realise that those in Subud who choose to live so–like the Creationists–do so wilfully. They want to live in that world they have constructed for themselves. No-one has to join them, and few now do. I choose not to.

What I’d like to establish here is some cultural context and some (dare I say it) objective truth around Subud’s history, including the character and beliefs of Pak Subuh, in place of the blind reverence which seems to be so widespread. That reverence, it seems to me, leads to uncritical consumption of his views and opinions.

I write not because I hope to change Subud, but as a resource for other Subud members who feel discomfort with the spiritism and magical thinking–especially for those in the 2nd and 3rd generations, who never chose these beliefs, but were inducted into them before they had a choice.

David

To cut the next topic short, let me just quote from John Renard’s All the King’s Falcons: Rumi on Prophets and Revelation (1994, p. 30-31): “Jalal ad-DIn’s [Rumi's] language of revelation seems to warrant the following conclusions: …wahy is given mostly to prophets, though it can be related to others on rare occasions. Kafsh is applicable to prophets and nonprophets alike without significant distinction, whereas ilham seems to pertain only to nonprophets. Virtually every seeker of God may attain the Divine tajalli. In terms of content wahy and ilham may impart every sort of beneficial knowledge, whether of the strictly mysterious or not as trades or other practical affairs, secrets of the universe, etc. Kafsh is the uncovering of the mysteriousness of a mystery, that is that which should not, and will never be, the common property of all human beings. Tajalli imparts an overwhelming sense of the brilliance and power of the Deity without necessarily conveying any further information.”
No Rumi was not from Java
The point I think I am making is that these are complex matters and it doesn’t really hold up to paint a picture of the Javanese as somehow uniquely deviant among Muslims and the fact that Subud has not been warmly embraced as meaning anything more than a general modern Muslim (significantly influenced by Wahhabism) suspicion of anything to do with mysticism, esoteric groups and the like. Remember most governments in Islamic countries have fully subscribed to a model of development that is based on science and technology and keeping religion in its place. Saying something like are you driving the car or is the car driving you would be seen as encouraging people not to work hard so they can afford a car!

Many of Subud’s problems might simply be problems of swimming against the increasingly material tide of modern societies, Islamic or otherwise.

Iljas

This is a patently absurd statement as Bapak was born a Muslim. Not a Wahabi for sure, but a Muslim. He didn’t need to convert to islam, wholly or partially.

Then again:

“There is abundant evidence that he was himself not familiar with the Qur’an. He makes errors in his talks that are astonishing. For instance, in “Talk to men and women, Cilandak, Indonesia, February 4, 1979″ he says: “At the end of the Koran one finds the Al-Fatihah.” Al-Fatihah is of course the first Surah of the Qur’an, which is why is it is called Al-Fatihah: “The Opening”. He says this more than once, in several talks.”

Bapak never claimed to be an expert on Islam, I don’t think he attended religious school but his “error” as you put it may have a simple explanation. The Quran is traditionally read from right to left (back of book to front) whereas most modern books are read left to right (front to back). So a traditional book seen from a modern perspective might lead someone to say what Bapak said.
Can’t you cut him some slack? I mean after all he did bring you the latihan.

Iljas

“The People of the Book should know that they have no power over any of God’s grace and that grace is in the hand of God alone: He gives it to whoever He will.”

Most Muslims interpret that very narrowly as a reprimand to the Christians and the Jews for rejecting Muhammad. But is that all it is? I don’t believe so. For Rumi (and the Sufis) you can only really understand the Quran if it is unveiled.

My experience seems to be similar to that of Lusijah. In fact the longer I am in Subud and the more I read the Quran, the latihan and the Quran definitely seem to be from the same source. And Bapak’s talks seem to me to be very Quranic in a way. Bapak emphasised reminding us of certain basics. Just like the Quran. Indeed one of the Quran’s names is the Reminder. And David, however much you harp on about Bapak’s teachings and Indonesian beliefs etc I’d say Lusijah got it exactly right when she described all of this as peripheral. Ultimately Bapak in his talks just kept reminding us of certain basic things necessary for our spiritual progress through the practice of the latihan. All the rest was comparatively unimportant.

There was a very famous meditation master in Thailand known as Acharn Chah. He was a forest monk, considered by many to be enlightened. Once he was giving some talks on Buddhism based on his experience and he asked if there were any questions. A French woman said she had. She went on to say she had studied the Pali canon, the Mahayana scriptures and many others but she still felt she had made no progress in Buddhism. she wanted to know what she should do. Through a translator Acharn Chah said: Madam you are like a chicken farmer who collects the chickenshit but doesn’t bother to collect the eggs.

I guess it’s a universal failing.

I think when Bapak says the latihan is compatible with all religions he is referring to the essence of the major religions. So the reason that the majority of the world’s Muslims might reject islam is no great mystery, it might be that they haven’t experienced the essence of Islam. They only know the shell and that is enough for them. I don’t think we should even be “trying” to bring them into Subud. They have their beliefs and we have ours. It may be that the latihan is not compatible with all belief systems but all believers can practice the latihan. Perhaps all beliefs are not true or equal. That would be my position. I wouldn’t disguise that. I wouldn’t argue about it either. But whatever your beliefs you can try the latihan.

Remember: When a king invites you to his palace you don’t expect him to dress down because you can’t dress like him. Perhaps when you go something will rub off and you will become more king like.

In the dukun article you never refer to the issue of the source of a traditional dukun’s power, which is crucial from a spiritual perspective and definitely something that Bapak spoke about. Naming children may be done by a dukun but its spiritual benefit depends on the source of the name. I believe Bapak on a number of occasions referred to the fact that usually a dukun’s powers did not arise from a pure source and that was problematic. He contrasted this with the kind of spitiual gifts that might arise from the latihan.

And if I remember correctly, it was not a dukun that appeared when Bapak was ill as a child. Some of us used to think it was Khizr but Bapak stated that it was Sunan Kalijaga (alternative spellings apply), whom is considered one of the wali songo or nine saints responsible for spreading Islam throughout Java. He is definitely not to be confused with being a dukun.

You write:
- Are these practices consistent with our own place and time?
- Is it good and appropriate for Subud, which aspires to be international and universal in its practice and appeal, to be the conduit for disseminating practices that are local to mid-20th century Java?

What is so unique about our own place and time? My place is Thailand so these ideas are fairly common. I suspect when referring to time you mean the Age of Science and Reason. Being a postmodern sort of guy can’t you see how different worldviews might co-exist? And is Subud really disseminating these practices? You already mentioned that Bapak warned against doing rajas and you can add to this giving names to others.

You make too much out of these things for some reason.

Okay, let’s keep it simple. You ask “do you really want to replace Bapak’s words?”

No — just want them to be no longer so prominent in an organisation that says it has no teachings and says it is about making the latihan available. Bapak’s talks contain plenty of spiritual teachings. Ask anyone from outside Subud to inspect any sizeable amount of them. He or she will then tell you quite correctly that the talks are often loaded with teachings. To deny this is to abuse the English language. As a result, the overall prominence of the talks in the Subud community, to the point of being strongly promoted, makes them a significant deterrent to newcomers from trying out the latihan — that is, any inquirer who may turn up with his or her own personal perspective on religion or spiritual reality.

Sure, members aren’t required to believe what’s in the talks, but the talks (along with sundry Javanese cultural spin-offs) nevertheless get very high profile through the helpers, through Subud newsletters and websites, through tape-evenings and even through our post-latihan small talk. The indoctrination process is perhaps mostly non-deliberate, but it’s as plain to see as the ocean — if you’re not a fish.

You say that many reformers in Subud want to replace Bapak’s talks with some universal language that all Subud members must adhere to. Nonsense. It is reasonable, however, to ask for Bapak and his talks to be removed from their pedestal such that they no longer represent ‘the’ set of teachings with which Subud is associated. Since the latihan has nothing to do with teachings, and as Subud is essentially about making the latihan available, there should not be any one belief system or spiritual viewpoint that’s actively sponsored or endorsed by Subud, as is now the case with Bapak’s viewpoint. Your notion that reformers want to impose some ’script’ upon Subud is fanciful scaremongering.

You say that Bapak “most likely was more enlightened on the issue of latihan than any of us”. Well, this is a probability assessment that you have made, and you have the prerogative to believe it. It isn’t a probability assessment that I have made. I’d like for neither perspective (nor any related perspective) to be promoted by Subud.

You say, “If you don’t believe what he said, then you must think he was either lying, or he was just sadly mistaken the thousands of times he says the latihan is from God.” You’re correct about this.

You suggest “taking Bapak’s advice when he said let the latihan spread on its own accord”. There are big differences between promoting something, trying not to promote something, and letting something be more available. Metaphor — supposing you’ve got a truckload of goods (which people may or may not like) that you wish to make available to people, just in case they would like them. Do you keep the goods under wraps in the back of the truck? No, you at least take the cover off so that people can see the goods for themselves. No need to promote anything. If people like, then they’re free to take the goods away. But supposedly by trying not to promote the latihan, Subud is hiding it in the back of the truck.

Why do we do this? I think it’s really because we’re largely bashful about all of the religiosity that we’ve attached to the latihan. By devoutly, obsequiously celebrating Bapak’s talks and culture throughout Subud, the potentially useful goods still in the back of the truck have been gaudily embellished with pseudo-mystical mumbo jumbo. And secretly or subliminally, it’s embarrassing.

Merin

No problem with the long lapse between responses. It’s been a while since I checked back here myself. I’ll try to answer your questions best I can.

I think I can answer your first two questions in one answer.

First do you really want to replace Bapaks words? Why do we need to replace them? His words are not doctrine but only a platform from where we can begin and a touchstone for all subud members to start with. Many reformers and Subud want to REPLACE Bapaks words and create their own doctrine. That is, script a universal language that all Subud members must or should adhere to. Bapak already allowed us to use what ever we feel is necessary according to each case. Like I mentioned before, I have used alternative wording when I have done openings to make it more comfortable for the applicant, but I have never feared mentioning the G word when speaking about Latihan. Why should subud members be coerced into NOT using the word God when Bapak has already made it clear that we don’t have to? It is up to us.

I’m not claiming we should use Bapaks words as doctrine, because he himself said his words were not. Use God or not but no one should be bullied into one over the other.

Further, yes Bapak, Myself and every other human on the planet are fallible. So what makes Subud members think that they can describe Subud better than Bapak? Anyone that has done the Latihan has the proof of it’s reality and Bapak was far further along in his experience and understanding than any of us are. Do you believe that every Subud member is at the same development in their experience of Latihan? You know this isn’t true which means that not only is it possible that Bapak was in a far better position than any of us to describe it but he most likely was more enlightened on the issue of latihan than any of us.

Regarding your first comment…I am not worried at all by people who might think I am arrogant by the opinions I express. Religion is not corrupt, it is a ‘thing’ and ideology therefor it is neutral. People are or have the capacity to be corrupt. Anyone who does an investigation into religions and their roots can’t deny that all religions have been tampered with by mans own ego. Why do you think the latihan came in the first place? Do you not recall what Bapak said over and over again about the nature of the latihan? If you dont believe what he said, then you must think he was either lying, or he was just sadly mistaken the thousands of times he says the latihan is from God.

Regarding your second comment…. Saying that the latihan is the root of all religions is in no way the same as saying it is better. This is a logical fallacy and you know it. Yes, one could come to that conclusion if they choose, but I can’t concern myself enough with the thousands of peoples different interpretations and ways of coming to a logical or illogical conclusion to become politically correct when I tell people about what my understanding of the latihan is.

Regarding Buddhism…… Buddhism, like every other religion on earth stems from the teachings of a man, who in turn received it through a divine or extra-sensory experience. The teachings in Buddhism as we understand it today are said to be from Sudartha. But guess what, there exits no surviving text or proof of what he said or taught in written preserved form. So how can you say without a doubt that Buddhism didn’t start with a teaching of one God? You cant. You, like many other followers of religion rely on the hearsay words of hundreds of generations of people passing down their own interpretation of the original teaching. The older a religion is, the further it is from it’s original teachings when we observe it’s present form.

What Subud reform is proposing is that we replace Bapaks words with our own BELIEFS of what the latihan is. This will only create further divide. Do you think your BELIEFS of what the latihan is and where it comes from is superior to Bapaks? Did you not say that all beliefs should be equally valid? Why are today’s subud members beliefs of what the latihan is and where it comes from more valid than Bapaks?

Bapak never told any one what they should believe the latihan is. He spelled it out exactly as he experienced it and left it up to us to take his guidance and do our best. The latihan takes care of the rest. Do you also believe Bapak and now Ibu Rahayu were wrong when they said over and over that it is not the responsibility of Subud members to try and quicken the spread of Subud? And that this is in the figurative hands of God?

If you don’t believe in God then obviously you cant believe that the latihan comes from God, but perhaps its just a matter of semantics. God as described in religion is absolute and perfect in every quality. Absolutism, in it’s truest and purest sense, exists only in the singular, meaning there can logically only be one God if God exists at all. Two absolute Omnipresent Gods cannot share the same space, this is illogical and even laughs in the face of common sense. Knowing this perhaps you might call this absolute force or personality something else. Perhaps, the First Cause, The Uncreated Creator, Allah, Yahweh, The Force…etc. Describe it any way you like, because you cant deny the reality of what one experiences when they receive the latihan. At least we can both agree that the latihan IS real.

Go ahead and tell people your opinions of where you think the latihan comes from, Bapak didn’t forbid this. Tell an applicant that you believe that God doesn’t exist and that this latihan is…well whatever you believe it is. But what happens when that person starts reading Bapaks books and sees God mentioned thousands of times or Allah or whatever language it is translated into, what will you do then? Will you forbid them from reading Bapaks books? Will you say, “He was just a crazy Indonesian Dukun but….uhhh….I still follow this latihan that he received…but don’t mind that.”

Subud members should get off their high horse or depression horse because the world hasn’t changed due to the latihan in their lifetime, and just take Bapaks advice.

Explain the latihan from your own experience because this is the only thing you can be sure of. But you can’t sweep Bapak under the rug man. Tell them what you believe, tell them what your neighbor believes and then tell them what Bapak said. So simple. Let the applicant use his own God given free will to make his own choice. And I suggest taking Bapaks advice when he said let the latihan spread on its own accord. It is NOT our job. To me, trying to take on this task of manipulating Bapaks talks or words with the intention of making up for lost time in Subuds spread is very arrogant. But again, if a person doesn’t believe in God they might not comprehend this.

It’s late and that’s all I have to say for now.

Take care brother, see you on the dark side of the moon.

God bless and Salaam