Follow-Up Note, September 2004

After more conversations with Waking-Down folks, and reading more of Saniel Bonder's writings, I am close to give up my connection to this approach. I know the substance is very valuable, and most likely quite different from other traditions. But the packaging it too often difficult for me to deal with.

There is too much of a charge around how it is presented. Saniel seems stuck in his own wounds (as we all are), but also inable to let go of it when he presents his realizations. It is too much a reaction against something, rather than a more impartial offering of an alternative.

And there are too many assumptions about where people are coming from. For me, with a Buddhist background, these assumptions are too frequent, stick out like a sore thumb, and bizarre.

Assumptions of people coming from a background that...

* Is escapist (I am used to approaches that seek full embodiment and full experience of all aspects of the human condition)
* Where people think enlightened people are somehow "perfect" (I am used to approaches where they know very well that enlightenment is the first step of the process and that people are as screwed up before as after)
* Where there are strict "rules" (I am used to gentle guidelines at the most, and a realization that life is far too complex for rules)

In short, it seems like a practice that is a little too immature - not seasoned enough.

Open Letter - Sept. 18 2004

Hi [one of the Waking Down teachers],

After much soul-searching, I have come to the decision that I would like to ask for the $50 back from you that I have not used for a session.

I would like to talk with you about this and give you some feedback about how I have experienced our conversations and the Waking Down work in general, but not if I'll have to pay for it...

For now, I can maybe mention a few things (I always prefer to talk about these things in person, but again - I am not willing to pay for the privilege).

* I see the Waking Down process as immensely valuable and indeed as offering something quite different from other traditions. During and after the weekend with Saniel this summer, I had enough personal experiences to verify that (I experienced how it is a process that comes through every cell in the body, profoundly changes my experience of the world, and seems to rework my body/mind in a very detailed and physical way).

* I have a great deal of respect and admiration for the Waking Down folks I have met. I see a great deal of integrity, openness and explorative attitude.

Still,...

* I experience a lot of difficulties when trying to read Saniel's writings. There seems to be too much of a charge around certain issues, which seem to relate to his own personal wounds. Of course, we all have hang-ups, but he seems unable to let go of it when presenting his realizations. There seems too much of a reaction against something, which takes away from the gold he is offering. I am not sure if I am willing to put up with that wrapping for the indefinite future, no matter how valuable the content is.

* I, ironically, experience a lack of mutuality compared with other traditions I have been involved with. I am used to people checking in with each other about where they are coming from, of checking in to see if assumptions are correct etc. With Saniel, you and Carol, who are the three I have had most experience with, I repeatedly experience that you make strong assumptions and talk/act from those assumptions w/o first checking in to see if they are correct (and leaving little space for me to clear it up at the moment). I could mention many examples, but it may be better in person if we have a chance to talk.

* I have some trouble with what I perceive as bizarre and frequent assumption that Waking Down folks make about other's backgrounds (again mostly from my experiences with Saniel, you and [another teacher]).

I am used to traditions that...
- Seek full embodiment and full experience of every aspect of the human conditions. They may not achieve it in the Waking Down way, but it is at least their intention (Saniel seems to attempt to make it look as if they are not even trying).
- Where enlightenment is seen as the first step, the easiest part of the work. And full embodiment is an continuous/endless process and the real work.
- That are transdual, and all polarities (mind/matter etc) are seen as equal expressions (and equally important and valuable) of that beyond all dualities.
- Where all aspects of our experience are expressions of that beyond dualities and contain/is gold (and to ease fully into all experiences help us gain from that gold).
- Where there are no rules (for behavior or anything else), only gentle guidelines at the most. And where there is the realization that life is far too complex for rules.
- Where there is full accountability between teacher and students, and the teacher is transparent about their own struggles, obscurations and hang-ups in all parts of life.
- Where nothing of what a teacher says is taken for "truth". At the very best it is one person's experience, and everyone has to try it out for themselves and will inevitably experience it in a different way.

Again, it may be that none of these are achieved in the Waking Down way. But the way Saniel often present it, he seems to attempt to make it appear as if they are not even trying (and he takes the most bizarre examples and talks about it as if it represents all traditions). It seems possible to say "I know that these intentions are found in many other traditions, but the Waking Down experience and expression of it is different. I am not going to try to verbally convince you, but please try it for yourself".

I must admit that if this more respectful and accurate approach (when comparing Waking Down with other traditions) was more prevalent, I would not hesitate with throwing myself into the Waking Down work. For now, that is the main issue that is holding me back. A lack of respect for other traditions seems to reflect a lack of comfort with one's own realizations...
That's it for now. Hope this has been useful feedback and that it can be used to improve the "marketing" aspect of Waking Down in the future.

Take care,
Per

-------------------------------------

Extra - September 2004

I still have no doubt that the substance of Waking Down is very valuable, and would be so for me too, but there are so many surface obstacles for me that I wonder if I will ever get to it. There seems to be so much "extra" in how it is presented. Either a charge around it, imbalance, or overdramatization.

One example is what they call the core wound. As far as I understand, it is one aspect of the dance between the absolute and relative: We are finite animals, and also beyond dualities.

For me, this is the basic human condition. It is what I experience over and over, in always deepening and new ways, through sitting meditation, Breema and everyday life. It is what Buddhism, and Koans in particular, are all about. The dance between the relative and absolute. We, and the rest of Existence, express both. It can be no other way.

It does create a tension, and it is terrible and wonderful at the same time. It stimulates awareness and aliveness. It gives richness and juice to life.

To call it a "wound" seems to imply that we somehow are "wounded". Is seems to compare our condition to some abstract/dualistic/onesided state. It overdramatizes the basic human condition and the basic characteristics of Existence: beyond and embracing all dualities. It is "extra".

Hypermasculinity is another term that seems to carry additional baggage beyond what it is meant to refer to. It has a derogatory connotation, not supporting relationships to people from other traditions. Also, it seems to imply that masculinity in itself is suspicious, while I assume it is questioning (a) a lack of balance between masculine and feminine qualities, and/or (b) unhealthy expressions of masculinity.

-------------------------------------

Strategy

No matter how valuable the content in Waking Down is, I again and again find myself put off by their teaching strategies. One of which seems to be to put others down to elevate themselves. It seems a profoundly flawed strategy as it...
(a) Puts people off.
(b) Is absolutely unnecessary and "extra". It is possible to explain what you are about, and even differentiate, w/out putting others down.
(c) Is easily perceived as an expression of insecurity. Of not being comfortable with ones own realizations.
(d) Is "tribal" in that it sets up an us vs. them dynamic, both in perception and thus in real-life relationships with people from other traditions. It is difficult to see how this supports either the relationships or the maturation process of any individual.


-------------------------------------

Differentiation

It is not difficult to differentiate w/o alienate. One of the basic principles of good communication is to describe someone else's experiences and approach in a way that they themselves would agree with or at least feel comfortable with.

In Waking Down, the "putting down" component seems strong enough to prevent a high quality dialogue with people using different approaches. It seems "blind" in that area...

And, as mentioned above, it seems to reflect either blind spots and/or lack of comfort with own path/realizations... (which are basically one and the same).

-------------------------------------

Other Aspects

In reflecting more on this, and talking to more people, there is still much ambivalence here for me. More concerns...

• Everyone has hangups. With Saniel, there seems to be a hardness and blindness around it (from the little I saw of him at the weekend in Portland). With Zen teachers I know, there are still hangups, but more of a softness, willingness to fully acknowledge it, and a transparency around it.
  
• Again, with Zen teachers, there seems to be a stronger and more sincere encouragement to not believe what they say, but try it for oneself. I know this is emphasized in Waking Down as well, but there seemed to be a charge around it (at least when Saniel talked about it).
  
• There is so much talk about how Waking Down is different from all other traditions. I fully acknowledge that the experience may be quite different, but there is often not even an acknowledgement that the intention/direction/wording may be similar. For instance: I often hear that the "core wound" is unique to Waking Down. But - from what I have read about it and hear from WD people - it seems to be what is the (often conscious and expressed) essence of anyone's motivation for any spiritual practice, and it certainly is a strong experience for me in everyday life, and even more so in my sitting practice. Also, even in my Process Work class, there was a strong emphasis on what WD calls the core wound (to the point of using the same terminology). It is just a part of the human condition, expressed and acknowledged in many traditions...
  
• The terminology seems to be far more charged (overdramatizes, either in "positive" direction or "negative" direction) than in more seasoned traditions such as Buddhism. This seems like "extra" and a distraction.
  
• If I go into this process, do I really have to interact with these people? I feel very comfortable with Zen and Breema students, but less so with WD people (mostly because of the charge and their need to emphasize how different it is from other approaches)... It just seems more immature.
  
• Since it is from a more Indian tradition, is it fully trans-dual to the extent that Buddhism is? Do they truly experience everything, including the mind/body, as beyond all dualities (including existence/no-existence).