This episode of Buddhist Geeks features a candid and heartfelt conversation between Vince Fakhoury Horn and Tasshin Fogleman about Palestine, the TPOT subculture, and what it means to embody true Bodhisattvahood. They explore the limitations of online discourse, especially around contentious issues, and reflect on the importance of good-faith dialogue, friendship, and spiritual integrity in times of crisis.

Join Vince Fakhoury Horn and Brian Newman outside of Lisbon, Portugal at the beginning of 2026 for a 10-day intensive jhāna retreat. There, we’ll be exploring The Flavors of Jhāna.

Episode Transcript

Vince:

Hey Tasshin.

Tasshin:

Hi Vince.

We just talked before I hit record. We just talked still. It's like formally. Hi. Hi.

Tasshin:

We're here.

Vince:

Yeah, exactly. That's good to see you.

Tasshin:

Yeah, good to see you too, brother. Yeah.

Vince:

Yeah, man, I appreciate you being willing to I invited you to have this conversation on X or my favorite platform to hate,

Tasshin:

My

favorite platform to love.

Vince:

Great. I was there with you for a while, but yeah, it's getting a little weird. It's it's getting a little Faschy,

X but we'll probably talk about that. So I propose that we talk about, this was the theme I proposed to you, which is Palestine, TPOT, and True Bodhisattvahood..

And it's, I guess in response to a lot of frustrated, angry, maybe righteous and not in a necessarily, in all bad sense. But yeah, in some posts that I've been sharing on X since I don't know it's been ongoing since the October 7th in my case. So I guess I wanted to explore that with you because I consider you to be one of my friends in the TPOT subculture, which we can get into and talk about what that actually is, Uhhuh because it's pretty, and it's it's vagueish, but, or decentralized at least.

But it seems like you're well respected in this decentralized subculture and I think I'm part of that as well, but I seem to be taking a very different role from you and how I relate to it, which is a little bit more critical and

Challenging and, I haven't found that's really endeared me to many people in the community.

But some people like yourself have engaged with my critiques in what feels like a good faith way, and I've really appreciated that. So I thought, it'd be cool to have a, an even more personal conversation where people could see potentially if we decide to release any of this.

And I don't know, just the human side of this, which doesn't come across often in 280 characters.

Tasshin:

Yeah. I appreciate all that context. I think that's really helpful and I think it's good to have a conversation about this. I think that I've been really struck by your perspectives on this and in general, I really value your perspectives and your opinions about the path and about practice and, we've had a number of disagreements over the years, but I've always walked away, like really learning a lot. And yeah, I do try to engage in good faith and I think especially one of the practices I have just for any kind of conflict in general is if I feel like text-based mediums especially can only hold so much.

I don't even like to discourse or disagree on Twitter. I use it for other things and it's hey, if I'm, I've said this to you before, if we have a disagreement, let's get on a call and actually talk about it. And because it's just, you can actually hear the other person's perspective and where they're coming from in a way that text just really doesn't afford.

So I'm glad we're talking about this. Yeah, I think it's great. Yeah.

Vince:

And the downside of doing that without recording it and sharing it back, because of course then it's just like a private thing that happens Right, and doesn't necessarily filter out in the same way to the collective.

Tasshin:

Totally. Totally.

So

Vince:

This is cool. Yeah. Thank you.

Tasshin:

Do you have any suggestions for where you'd like to start or what feels like a good starting place?

Vince:

I would be curious to see your take on what TPOT is or how you'd describe that phenomena. I did spend a little bit of time reflecting on it, and I came up with a little, like micro definition, but I don't think it's exhaustive this a starting point.

But I'm curious even before sharing that, if there's anything, thoughts on TPOT and what it is, if you've thought, have you meditated on that? How do you can,

Tasshin:

yeah. I love that and I'm so curious what your definition will be. I suspect it'll be spicier than mine, but I liked what you said earlier about it being a decentralized community.

because I, I felt a little bit of trepidation before this conversation for really all three of the things you want to talk about. I feel like, so woefully inexpert in and I really don't know as much as I ought to about the war, and I don't know as much. I, I don't know. I'm not, I'm in TPOT certainly, but I'm not, there's no elected four figure leader or something.

It's decentralized, as you said. And then also at the Bodhisattva path, I'm like still figuring it out very right. As we all are so right. But yeah, TPOT, I think for me it's very much about specific people, like their specific friends that I've cultivated very deep friendships with, that I've met through Twitter, and developed those relationships through Twitter and their, I think some of my closest friends at this point are people I've met through Twitter and they're friendships that I treasure and I think it is decentralized.

I think it's. Spread throughout the world at this point. Like I can go to any major city and meet people who are connected to this network. And I, like my friend Andrew Rose has been talking about it recently as the network where it's yeah, it's not really about Twitter anymore. And it's not really, it's a larger cloud of people that are connected and I think it's not necessarily ideologically on the same page, like people having the same perspectives or even shared practices.

There might be shared interests and common overlaps, but I think people have very different perspectives on the world. And it's more, if anything, I'd say it's like a developmental similarity where, for me at least, it really helped me to, I started to enter TPOT. I could go into detail, but as I was individuating from being at the monastery for many years and it's I mean it from a developmental perspective, it helped me jump from three to four in the Keegan stages where it's like I was in a tribal state of mind identified with the maple ideology and worldview and practices, which was great for me at the time. It really was. And then it's, it stopped being great for me and I had to find a new way and being with so many weirdos from around the world who saw things so differently really helped me to find my own way and find my own life. So I feel a sense of connection and intimacy with it, and like indebtedness to it, where it's these are my people and a help that helped me to find myself in the world.

Yeah, that's what TPOT is to me at least.

Vince:

I like what you're saying about the developmental part. I guess I see the phenomena similarly like this is something that. There's a lot of people coming together, not, like you said, around a particular ideology or like framework.

Which is very common. Like a bunch of people come together on a specific book or teacher or teaching or whatever. This is different because there are teachers and teachings that are, you see commonly in that community. But it's pretty broad. Yeah.

Tasshin:

And you don't have to buy into any of them.

I think there are major, if anything there's like themes, like non coercion is a big one or Right. And people bring their own interests and you don't have to be interested in the same things other people are interested in.

Vince:

But there's something, if you put all those themes together, you'd start to see like broader theme of Absolutely.

Yeah. The connection there. Yeah. Which I think you're totally right. It's, there's something maybe developmental underneath that. I was thinking about the book, The Postmodern Condition. Which David Chapman originally recommended to me. He's one of the, he's a TPOT Philosopher.

Maybe he wouldn't he probably reject that phrase term, but he is a philosopher and well respected in that space.

Tasshin: Sure. Vince:And I remember the the author Jean-François Lyotard, he said, simplifying to the extreme, “I define postmodern as incredulity toward meta narratives.”

And I find there's something very postmodern about this community where there's a kind of general skepticism toward meta-narratives, of thinking that like one way of describing reality could be totally comprehensive and true for everyone, everywhere, all the time.

And I see that as one of the things I really appreciate about TPOT. In terms of it representing a move out of like the modern condition, which was much more like about trying to find the right ideology and all these clashing Isms, Communism versus Capitalism versus all these kind of clashing religions.

Who's got the best, which framework is going to come out on top, and everyone's going to eventually believe it's like some, I see that as the more of the modern condition. And so in that sense it feels like a real relief, to see communities, that are forming around.

Around this. And it, I guess that's the reason for me, I always connect my experience of coming up in the integral community, Ken Wilber's community with TPOT because it felt like a very similar kind of vibe there. Where so many people I met were just doing radically different kinds of things.

And, there'd be someone who's super into, like spiritual surrender, the lineage of Adi da, who is also like a concert pianist that I'm literally describing an actual person I worked with. And then someone else would be like, super into video production and have no interest in spiritual practice or meditation, but they have a lot of interest in like psychological work.

And yeah, I guess that's something I've seen is consistent with the TPOT world. Is this sort of like postmodern incredulity towards meta narratives?

Tasshin:

How would that fit with it being I've never really understood this, but would you describe TPOT as meta-modern, or not meta-modern.

Vince:

I guess for me, I would say the center of gravity of TPOT seems to be in the transition between modern to postmodern.

Like that I would call that post rational.

Because the main mode of modernity is rational individualism. It's this is Ken Wilber's and Jean Gebser's take, but I find that to be true.

So people like are questioning the limits of rationality and model making are post rational. I see, and I think as a result they're postmodern. But there's a transition, it's like there's a awkward developmental phase where you're letting go of, the absoluteness of models and you can ken Wilber called it the “performance contradiction.” He said, you can you can absolutize that too, or you can say everything is relative. That statement isn't a relative statement, it's an absolute statement.

All perspectives are valid. Okay. That perspective you're saying is more valid than any other perspective, which says that certain perspectives are more valid than others.

And so like the whole idea of postmodernity rests on a performance contradiction. That's, or at least the early stages of it where you're deconstructing that mo deconstructive, postmodernism Robert Kegan, would call it.

He also has a reconstructive postmodern phase. I don't think TPOT is in the reconstructive postmodern phase, but I think some people in it are. It's like there's a spectrum, within, there's a center of gravity, but there's a spectrum. As well or more, it's like a scatter graph, Uhhuh, where like most of the dots are in the center around this sort of modern to postmodern transition, but then there's like trailing off in both directions.

You'll see some people that are more traditional that are there just treating it like a group. I'm sure you saw that probably at Vibe Camp. Probably some people there that are just like. Just drinking the Kool-Aid and don't really, aren't really, maybe vibing in the same way as everyone else.

Tasshin:

Uhhuh.

Vince:

And then you find some weird people too that are like aliens even within the space.

Who seem to be like a David Chapman I mentioned. He seems like a, an alien to me.

Tasshin:

An example,

Vince:

I think he's talking, I think he's a meta-modern

Tasshin:

thinker.

Vince:

I don't know.

So I, I see a mix, but I mostly see people in the Yeah. Like early postmodern stage,

Tasshin:

I recently saw a really nice tweet from Mechanical Monk where, which I can link you to later, but he drew this diagram or made like a video of what TPOT is, and he was arguing that like TPOT is a moving target where like i'm thinking of these people. And then you're thinking of these people and there's some overlap, like you and I are both friends with, like Daniel Thorson for example, or. Some other people that we'd have in common, or I know who David Chapman is or whatever. And so there, there's enough overlap that we could be like, oh, we're both pointing at TPOT, but then you don't know some people that I'm pointing to and I don't know some people you're pointing to.

And then eventually this is happening more and more. Or people use the acronym TPOT and you're like, I've never seen you. I don't know who you're talking about, and I don't know what you're describing. I think you and I have enough of a shared sense of the thing, but yeah, I thought that was a really good point, that it's not like a homogenous group.

Like it has a no, no one likes, this is a very probably like post rat thing to do. Nobody likes labeling it. So it's everyone's unhappy with the term TPOT. Nobody wants to identify as TPOT or as a post rat or whatever. Even the term,

Vince:

I mean in the phrase the acronym TPOT itself is

Tasshin:

relative and it's like relational.

Vince:

This part of Twitter. Yeah, no, you're saying it's like a network and I see that. There was a site for a while, I don't know if you saw it, where you could like, you could see the sort of it was like a ranking or listing of the most sort of central, I do remember that inside of a network, it was like the tea, you could pull up TPOT and see a list.

I was like, I'm on that list. Which I would, which I would take myself, I would opt out of that list if I could choose to. But it's not a choice as you're part of this network.

Tasshin:

Yeah. If you know the acronym ar arguably you are in it. It's just once and.

Vince:

Yeah. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. So what I hear you saying from like the network perspective is like you, you see it from your point of view of the network. And the network is evolving, it's not static. It continues to grow and change and shift. That's right. So your view of it is changing and shifting with the network.

That's right. So you both, you have both a limited view and it of something that's changing.

That seems true to me. Which doesn't mean we can't talk about it. Or try to, come up with something useful to say about it. I would describe it this way. I'll tell you how I would describe it.

Yeah. Yeah. Let's hear it. Oh boy. I'm not so sure about the last part. No, it's not that bad. So I describe TPOT as a weird, and here I'm using the weird acronym, Western educated, industrialized rich and democratic post rational subculture that's connected by shared interest in self-agency and awareness.

Tasshin:

That seems good. Something that's popping out to me is just also how much of this is specifically enabled by the internet and Twitter in particular, or I think there's something starting to happen that you could call like a Twitter like Blue Sky is a Twitter or Mastodon is a Twitter. I hope we have other Twitter likes in the future.

because as you said, X is becoming fahy. Or to me, the thing that a Twitter is very much like a public library, and then Twitter happens to be a company and it's that has skewed incentives and stuff like that. But any case I'm like, yeah that all, everything you said tracks and then it's I think it is meaningfully enabled by technology, right?

And whatever a Twitter like is in particular.

Vince:

Okay. Yeah. That's good. So that's missing in my description here. I agree. It's enabled by that and there's something too like it. The tech, the technology itself is very postmodern.

These platforms and microblogging platforms, like you're getting these really tiny little snippets that are largely decontextualized.

And you're just seeing a bunch of decontextualized atomized information flowing constantly through your stream without, you have to put the context together. That's right. The platform itself does not do that. In fact, it, if you're not, if you don't have the capability to do that, it might actually be really problematic because That's

Tasshin:

true.

Vince:

Yeah. You don't know. So I'd say it's almost perfectly compliments the subculture, the design of it.

Tasshin:

That's true. And it makes sense of like why you would feel a resonance with, I wasn't in this myself, but from what I imagine the integral community and then also why that would be different of I imagine Twitter wasn't a huge part of that back then because it, I don't even know what the were, but wasn it wasn't even, it

Vince:

wasn't, no, Twitter launched the year after I left the Integral Institute. So yeah. It wasn't part of that blogging and podcast or very early, like web two was part of it for sure.

But it was primarily an in-person community. It was centered. It was like centered in person and then had a sort of one to many kind of broadcast media kind of web 2.0 media thing to it. So it did look a lot different than that. It occurs

Tasshin:

to me that, at least in my experience, the technology feels really central to the thing.

And the properties you named are almost like emergent or like the kinds of people that would resonate with it or something, or be able to make full use of it or Right. What have you. But it doesn't seem intrinsically necessary, but it does seem to me almost, like that if you have a Twitter, like something like this subculture would arise and I could see different, similar subcultures that had different properties or even an ideology or like different developmental stages or something.

But I think that a Twitter is really good at clustering people who can vibe together or relate to each other and in a way that's more emergent. I think a lot about individualism and collectivism and I think that this kind of technology affords the possibility of yeah, basically a Hegelian synthesis of individualism and collectivism where each person can be their own individual, but also be in community with a larger network that respects their individuality, but can coordinate as a whole and.

I think Twitter likes uniquely make that possible. And I could see ones that were like clusters that were meaningfully different. You'll see sometimes people talk about this, they're like, maybe there's a whole other cluster that's not connected to us at all that we have no idea about. Almost the I forget what the alien version of that is, but like the likelihood that there's an alien is civilization in any given solar system.

It's maybe they're out there. Who knows.

Vince:

Something like, like the Drake equation would describe the Drake equation, how likely that would be. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's interesting. You're using the term Twitter. I don't know if we've talked about this, but I will explicitly not use that term anymore to refer to X, mainly because I think people are confusing the term Twitter with the term microblogging. Huh? Since it was the original Microblogging platform, I think a lot of times we conflate Twitter with Microblogging. And so when you say Twitter, like I, that's another way to me of saying Microblogging.

What's

Tasshin:

important to you there?

Vince:

It's important to me to stop being so sentimental about Twitter because Twitter's dead and whatever that it was, is gone. But Microblogging is alive and well and it's probably doing better now than when Twitter was alive. So I think it's somehow by being sent sentimental Twitter, we mask our ability to perceive what's happening in broader terms with microblogging. And we potentially overlook a lot of nasty shit happening on X.com as well by doing that.

Tasshin:

I see. Yeah I tend to use the word Twitter for different, maybe sentimental reasons as you're saying, but it's an intentional use on my term. On my part. And maybe I'll just use the word Twitter and you can use the word X and we can

Vince:

Yeah, no, it's fine.

Proceed accordingly. It's No, it's fine. I just wanted to point that out. Very good. That's a difference in frames. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. This has been very conceptual so far, but I'm curious to bring it a little downward too, because I remember maybe it was like a week after October 7th Hamas attacked civilians in Israel and.

I knew from my own experience having grown up in a, as a Palestinian and American household and having watched this to some degree play out over 40 plus years, 40 years at the time that I was like the blow back from this is gonna be 10 x at least. Because that's consistent. Throughout time it's always Israel will respond with 10 times the amount of violent force at least. And so I was like, if you take the numbers, I was like, that's. That's catastrophic. That's gonna be terrible. And so I knew within the first week, and I shared this on X, that this is going to be a genocide.

And so for me, this is the perspective I'm coming from is like I've known that a genocide has been going on for, from the beginning. Have known that the intention or that the likely the likely response was gonna be genocidal.

And I think there's a lot of debate about whether or not this is I think that debate is now totally foolish from my point of view.

You frame this for instance, as a war, I would call it a genocide. I would say the genocide rather than the war. Or the occupation, which more, more accurate description. because a war assumes that there's two countries, two sides that are equivalent and they're at war.

But this is rather like a group of people who've been dispossessed and occupied for decades. Who wrongly lashed out and hurt civilians. But who did so from the point of view of being in a one up, one down power position?

So like the group of people or Palestinian people, had been occupied, their movements are controlled.

Things coming in and out of Gaza were controlled in terms of water, food, et cetera. Many people described it as an open air prison. Including a colleague of mine who lives in Tel Aviv. He described it that way to me one time. And so from my point of view, it's a lot of times people don't understand when they enter into this, the history of this, that just the basic history of occupation.

And so to frame it as a conflict between two equals is a, in a way obscures the power. Dynamics at play where, one group has so much more power over the other and has so much more are literally like nuclear power that's backed by the most powerful military in the world.

Who has a lock on the un

Tasshin:

In

Vince:

terms of our ability to veto the Americans. So it's David and Goliath rather than, two superpowers going to war.

So that's one thing I'll just share is just the frame for me of Palestine. And so I'm, I've been seeing it that from the very beginning.

And what I've found with, on, on platforms like X and with the community of TPOT is. Just this sort of maddening silence. Or this sort of schizo, in my experience is like a schizophrenic feed, where on the one hand I'm seeing Palestinian activists and intellectuals and people who are I think doing good work at bringing awareness to an ongoing livestream, genocide.

And then an another group of folks more in the TPOT space who are kind of sharing their psychotic explorations and talking about their cool practices and giving, challenging takes and all of which has this other very different vibe which is much more self-focused. And and the two of them in contrast really, that's, for me, that's my, that, that's the tension I'm existing in.

And I can totally relate to the self. Absorbed interest in my own transformation and wanting to play around. And it, I totally get that because that's where I've been. Like that's my background as well. But it's, yeah, it's maddening to see these two side by side. And I feel like there's so much missed opportunity with TPOT given that it's so influential right now in culture, in our mainstream culture.

And so I guess I, I'm saddened by the fact that I don't see that community having really come around to care much about what's happening in these kind of global situations. Like you, you talked about individualism and collectivism. I feel like it's way more skewed toward individualism in the TPOT world than it is collectivism.

So I, that's actually a criticism I'd have. I don't feel like they're both ending it at all. But. Anyway. Yeah, that's just a little bit where I'm coming from,

Tasshin:

I hear you. Just first off, really mourning and grieving the plate of the Palestinian people that's happening and feeling personally connected to that because of your family and watching the news very closely and really actively grieving that, of just the evil that's happening and caring about that and wanting to see that change and end, and seeing that as a genocide, not as a war.

And really appreciating people who are speaking up and being vocal about it and trying to work for change to resolve that crisis and. It feeling used the word like schizophrenic to see TPOT, which seems like self-absorbed and individualistic, where it's like people are talking about whatever they're on about, and it's I got this metaphor hearing you talk about it, of someone who's starving, who's like incredibly hungry, and then they're like next to some rich people who are like having like coffee and talking about, some obstru philosophy and you're like, I'm starving.

Can you please give me some of your food? There I'm having a real problem here and you're talking about this stuff that really doesn't matter. And yeah, that being really painful and then also a care about you're like, yeah, TPOTs incredibly powerful and culturally powerful and why aren't you talking about this?

You should be talking about this so that we can use your power for good and change the world in that way.

Vince:

Yeah. Yeah. And I think that's a naive of me to expect that in some way. So this is where I get a little, this is where I feel the bind. It's on the one hand I intellectually get if this really is developmental as we're describing if this cultural phenomena has a developmental dimension to it, then why would I expect the bulk majority of people who are, coming out of individual rationalism to be focused on anything other than that kind of things are related to that.

Who would be well

Tasshin:

positioned to make a change that had positive effect in the world from a developmental perspective?

Vince:

That's a good question. I guess anyone could. So maybe the issue isn't the underlying development, but it's the culture, the cultural expression of that. In this case, it's, WEIRD is, I think a good way of putting it, white sorry, Western, but those two are connected, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic.

It feels like a lot of what you're saying is true because we're, we are in this WEIRD culture in the US largely, especially the educated TPOT, whole US is not WEIRD. A lot of, there's a lot of uneducated people and people without access to resources, but but we're having this weird conversation.

And meanwhile in the global Commons, we're like you said, right next to people that are posting videos constantly of people being, shot and killed and assassinated executed, like right there, children starving, et cetera. And it's it, this is the critique that Postmodernism has had for a long time of modernity.

It's like the colonialist thing. It's like how is it that we have so much privilege to be able to have these conversations in the first place, because we ourselves are living on dispossessed land. Like we ourselves dispossessed the Native Americans to be able to be here, we ourselves brought African slaves from Africa to be able to take care of our cotton mills and our run our agricultural industry.

And so we ourselves built a country on those very foundations and we ourselves as Western people escaped persecution in Europe.

Our whole history of escaping persecution and then bringing it with us is what's happening with Israel and Palestine, from my point of view, it's the same basic pattern.

I think it's hard to see that when you're focused on you

Tasshin:

On

Vince:

your individual journey of transformation and without being able to zoom out into these broader collective patterns that are shaping you as much as you are shaping yourself.

And I wonder if sometimes, like we overestimate our agency, or we over-index on our agency in this community. That'd be my, I guess my question or challenge to folks.

Tasshin:

Can you say more about that? The over-indexing on agency? What you mean by that?

Vince:

Yeah, so like for me the synthesis of the agency, of agency and communion is what I'm most, most interested in right now.

Because that schizophrenic split feels like it's a split of these two, where it's like you have people that are high agency and have lots of opportunity and privilege, and then you have people that have extremely low ability to opt to effectively exercise their agency. They barely can get food. So it's like such a huge contrast there. And what's the difference between these two groups of people? Like historically it's the only reason I'm on this side of the street is because my grandfather was able to get into this country in 1950.

And he was lucky, essentially. So like the only difference is basically luck of birth.

Like where are you born? And we, I think we take so much credit for the stuff that is, has nothing to do whatsoever with us. It's like when Obama, said you didn't build that and everyone fucking flipped out.

You don't know if you remember that he was talking about, I don't know, he was talking about infrastructure and there was a huge backlash from the Right. Like we built that, in hyper American individualism. And it's I think, you know what the genocide and Gaza's taught me is I'm just lucky.

I'm just lucky because I have cousins who are in the West Bank right now and they're living in concentration camp type environments. Like they, they're scared to leave their home because people around them are getting shot by settlers and, five Palestinian Americans have died in the West Bank this past year.

People who are just going over there to visit family. So it's extremely bad right now, even in the West Bank, which is considered to be the more stable of the two Palestinian regions.

In Gaza, I have two family members here in North Carolina and Asheville that are mar married into my family. So they're not direct family members, but their spouses, and they both have lost over 200 family members in Gaza. Which is hard for people even in the West to understand, because they don't, we don't come from big families like that where you could even imagine having 200 family members.

But yeah, like whole family trees are essentially being wiped out. Yes. Are cut down. So it's, to me it's very, because I'm in both worlds. I'm teaching meditation and I'm hearing about, what's going on for my cousin in the West Bank, and I'm hearing about what's happening for other Palestinians that I know.

I'm like, this is, it's a very hard tension to hold. So for me, the synthesis of agency and communion is I can recognize, like I have a certain amount of agency in part because of the communal situation. Like we have a community that optimizes for agency.

And it optimizes for agency at the at the negative at the expense of many other communities, agency and has historically and even presently, like a lot of.

The opportunities we have are because of they've been taken rather than, it's like not an omni win situation. So I feel like there's a lack of kind of acknowledgement of that, that often in part because you start to feel really bad. And if there's anything I've noticed about TPOT is like, people don't want to feel bad.

Like people wanna empower each other and raise each other up. And I think there's something beautiful about that. But to me it's come, it comes at the expense of valid criticism, of being open to hearing valid criticism. And that's the kind of, that's, that adds how I felt. I've been res largely, my, my criticisms have been responded to.

It's oh yeah, this is, you're just like it's I'm a downer. I'm like, yeah, sorry. It's fucking, it is a downer. It really is.

How do you, I know that's general and broad, but how do you respond to something like that?

Tasshin:

Can you ask a, I there's a lot of thoughts running through my mind. Can you ask a specific question?

Vince:

I'm just curious what your general Yeah. Sense of that is.

Tasshin:

First off, my heart hurts. It hurts to know that violence is happening at scale and it hurts to hear that. And I'm okay hurting.

I know, I've done a lot of, I, I can feel that, but it hurts and I feel sad and I feel grief knowing about this travesty that's happening. And

I feel that about a lot of things that I know about in the world now, including this. And that's always,

yeah. Hard to be with. And I try to learn how to be with that and, i'm grateful for the opportunity to be reminded of what's happening and to be connected to it. I feel a desire to have change occur that feels like it matters. I would like war, genocide, evil violence to end. I'm a pacifist.

My, one of the worst days of my life every year is when I pay taxes. I hate paying my taxes, partly because it's annoying bureaucratically, but even more so because I feel like I'm compromising my own ethics by supporting the US military. And that I every year I decide I'm gonna pay my taxes so that I can contribute, continue to be part of this society in a legal and upright way.

I'm not morally opposed to taxes as such, but I am morally opposed to what my government does with those taxes, including I don't know the full extent of this. I'm sure you know much more, but certainly being complicit in this war, genocide, violence, murder. Bombing evil. Yeah. And other evils known and unknown.

I know that and I've been around a little bit. So that hurts. That's the first and foremost thing. And I feel for you, having family i's just I went through just a couple years ago my mom dying of cancer, and we knew about it four years before she died, three, four years before she died.

And she lived a blessed life, and I felt perfectly ready to let her go. And it was still really hard. And it's imagine my family members being murdered at scale and being starving and being oppressed and in all kinds of ways that I can only imagine. It's that my heart would just be breaking on a daily basis.

And I feel for you, my friend, going through that and, for the Palestinian people more broadly, such that I'm connected to them and for all who are subject to war. It's just it's just evil. It's just e that, like you, you wanna call it genocide? I'll just call it evil, like it's, I think violence is evil and war is evil and genocide is evil and bombs are evil and guns are evil.

And murder is evil and killing children is evil. And it's just, my heart breaks at that. As far as the other specific things you were saying, I'm reminded of a an argument that I've had or witnessed many times where there's kind of two recurring schools of thought in our culture where how do I summarize this? Because I've seen this in a lot of specific instances, and I don't wanna get into the specific instances, but let's take a simple example like say your relative was a Trump supporter, and you personally didn't vote for Trump and don't want Trump to be president. There are people in our culture at this time who would say the thing to do is to be disconnected from that Trump supporter and to never talk to them and to shame them for who they are and or give them radio silence and cut ties.

And that's a whole school of thought that applies to many issues. And then there's a school of thought that says how are you gonna change their mind if you don't stay connected to them, if you don't really understand where they're coming from and listen to them and talk to them and share your own perspective.

And I tend to be more in the latter school of thought of connection is the basis of change. Actually hearing other people's perspectives, sharing my own, to the extent that it's possible. And you're not. Beating each other up or whatever shooting at each other. But I think being connected to people is the basis of change.

And I'm getting here somewhere here with this, which is to me, I hear you saying, I'm not part of TPOT. These are the people that are in TPOT. They're silent, they have these, I don't know, I hear you talking about like collective blind spots, which I think are very valid. I'm glad you're mentioning them, but it's like those people have the blind spot.

And this is their problem. And to me I could be wrong, but think,

Vince:

It's really the Palestinians problem. They're the ones that are suffering for the collective blind spot.

They're suffering a lot more.

Tasshin:

Yes.

I think that. You could usefully see yourself as part of TPOT, and that by staying connected to people in TPOT and speaking to them, you can change their minds. I think you've changed my mind about things about this and had an impact on me and had a causal influence on me. And I see you having that impact on a other people.

And I think that if you took that perspective, there's more or less efficacious ways of doing that. Ways that, that, that's a question that's come up for me about this is actually about like theories of change. And just one more thing is I was recently in Santa Fe, my dad moved to Santa Fe and when I was there, there's a lot, my dad is like very near the Santa Fe is the capitol, and he is very near the capitol where the government is.

And so there's just always protests there like at least once a week. And I get, I personally, me, Tasshin, get so angry at these protestors because I, in my current worldview, think that their theory of change is just shit. They're like, by going to this place and having a sign, I'm gonna change the world. It, to me, I see that is like by and large, incredibly efficacious and not gonna produce the change that they want.

And do I know what the theory, what a theory of change is that would produce it? No, but I am spending all of my time and energy on things that I think will have a positive change in the world. Even if they're not enough, even if they're not direct enough, even if they're not gonna end or resolve all the issues I care about, which are many.

I am putting all of my time and energy into things that I believe are efficacious. And presumably they think it's efficacious too. They think this is worth doing because they're doing it. And in a way I'm wrong about it because demonstrably people think that holding a sign in front of a capitol is gonna change the world.

But,

Vince:

It does boost their agency when people protest that's, it's an exercise in agency.

Tasshin:

I do think there's a critical threshold where if enough people protest something, I can't have a change. Obviously that's happened

Vince:

Arab Spring.

Tasshin:

Exactly. So it's not, it's definitely not useless. But my point to you as an individual that I care about as my friend, is I think you're actually incredibly well positioned to have a cultural impact on this group that you already are connected to, and that there are more or less efficacious ways of doing that.

Like this conversation is efficacious, right? We're having a real conversation between two people who respect each other. We're recording that so that other people can listen. I think that's actually likely to produce the change that you're desiring to some extent. Is it gonna it's hard to say.

Vince:

It's hard to say. I hear what you're saying. Yeah, I think you and I have talked about this in the past too. I have, some of the biggest changes I've been through have come through people challenging me even violently.

And my whole upbringing, as you can hear, it's rooted in violence. Yes. So it's like the story of my family.

Is one of resilience in the face of violence,

Tasshin:

Uhhuh. So this is the recurring thing we always argue about. Yeah. Or one of the several things.

Vince:

Yeah. It's an, it's like in a place where we rub, I think, but Yeah. But it's understandable. So I'm a little more Okay. Ruffling feathers and even having active conflict with people because I know that sometimes that's actually good.

Sometimes if you're too nice, people won't hear you.

If you have something powerfully challenging to say, it will just be like, oh yeah, that's nice. And I can just incorporate that into my worldview and feel good about knowing about it, but actually not really be doing anything significantly differently.

So it's like a, I don't know, this is in the abstract, but.

Tasshin:

There's two things there. What there's one is, which is like, how nice are you? And I actually do honestly believe that you would be more efficacious at seeing the changes you want to see, at least in the local community if you were nicer.

In addition to being kind. I do think you're kind, that's not an issue. But separately from that, like you, one of the things we talked about recently on the timeline was you're like, I've just been considering blocking people left and right. And I think that Oh, I have been blocking them lost.

Exactly.

Vince:

I've lost half of my friend network in the last year. Tasshin and so that's where I am. So here let me push back a little bit. I lo yeah. I lo I love what you're saying, but I don't think it's my job to do that. I think it's your job to do that, to, to be the one that can be nice and change people's minds on this topic.

Tasshin:

Oh, that's true. It is my job. You're right. I

Vince:

agree with you. Yeah, because because I'm too close to it.

It's too painful for me.

Like people start saying stuff to me. It is like I'm hearing them deny the entire, like truth of my whole identity, my family identity. It's no, like this is true.

I'm not, I'm gonna have argue with you like you are dehumanizing me and everyone that's Palestinian right now. Even by having an argument, having even framing this as a debate, is there a war going on? Who's responsible? Et cetera. So it's like what I find is I want to keep talking because I want, it's like the Buddha, he's, and I'm comparing myself to the Buddha here.

I know he is gonna fly really well, there, there's an analogy here where he's I'm awake. Okay. Who can I, teach this to, very few are gonna understand it. Because it's subtle and hard to get grasp. My companions, the ones I was practicing with they seem like they'll get it.

They have very little dust in their eyes. So I guess I see my role as really more like the people that have very little dust in their eyes. Maybe I can reach them. What's the difference

Tasshin:

in this case between someone who has dust in their eyes and someone who doesn't, from your perspective?

Vince:

Are they, yeah. Are they awake to their complicity in a gen, in an active livestream? Genocide? Are they aware? I pay

Tasshin:

my taxes and,

Vince:

That's part of it. That's part of it. Yeah. It's like paying taxes. You, like you said, you can't really stop paying your taxes.

My uncle did that. Went to prison. I actively

Tasshin:

choose

Vince:

to pay

Tasshin:

my taxes. I think I could stop paying my taxes. Could, I'm saying every year I considered you can do that.

Vince:

I seriously

Tasshin:

consider it. Every you'll to prison. Every year.

Vince:

You'll, you will go to prison.

Tasshin:

Yeah, exactly. And I believe I can have more impact, positive impact on the world by paying my taxes and not, and I, every, it's a trade off.

Literally every year I make this decision again.

Vince:

Yeah. So it's, to your point, it's not it's not like a black and white thing where it's like. I'm complicit in this very obvious way that I'm just choosing not to. It's, it, the complicity is deep and it's multidimensional, subtle and

Tasshin:

systemic and multi-generational.

And even,

Vince:

and yeah, and for me it's I was hanging out with a couple of my cousins recently who are from Palestine. They immigrated here in the early nineties when Palestinians were kicked out of Kuwait.

And so they were here, they had to rebuild their life. They lost everything. And I grew up with them.

And they're doing advocacy work now in the us And when I hear them, talk about their experience, it's like they're being, they're dealing with shit that I'm not having to deal with. Like one of my cousins recently lost her job. She was a high level exec at a tech company in San Francisco.

And she thinks it's likely that she lost it because of her advocacy work within the company. So when I guess when I see. I've lost the thread a bit here in terms of connecting back to what we were talking about. But where was I going with that?

Tasshin:

You were saying something as my job as being TPOT versus your job.

Vince:

So like when I talk to, say I'll talk to my great uncle my grandfather's brother who grew up in Palestine, and I'll hear the kinds of things that he'll share. And like I, I don't have those kind of views. Like he's extreme compared to me in terms of like how he's viewing things.

This is my interpretation. There's a definitely antisemitic tendencies in, in the family system that I've seen explicit and I understand why. Like I have a lot of compassion. I don't actually let it stand. I challenge it when it arises. Even now. This is this uncle I'm talking about.

It's his family and his daughter that's in the West Bank right now. He's considering going to visit her in a couple months. He might get shot and killed while he is there. It's quite possible. For me it's like I, I see I can listen to him and I can hear him talk about stuff and I can sort through the pain and the antisemitism to hear, some of the, what's genuine and sincere and I can be there for him.

And then I feel like I can reach out and connect with some people and share my pain and what I'm going through and, offer challenges or whatever to some folks. Recently right after September October 7th someone from he lives in Israel. He is American. We have the same background lineage of a pasta tradition.

He invited me on to, to have a dialogue about this about what was happening.

And and then after our we split, and we're not able to have any conversations anymore. Because some of the things I saw him writing on X and so the perspectives that he seemed to be taking, and we got to a point where we pulled in a mutual mentor someone someone who's like a master mediator.

And their basic feedback was like, sometimes you can't have a conversation. Sometimes it's just not possible. And I feel like that's where I'm getting largely, it's it's just not possible for me to have a conversation with a lot of people right now. Because of how 10 how sensitive this is. And so you say, when you say to or I hear if you were kind or if you were nicer, you'd be more efficacious, if I were able to be, I would. But I'm not.

Tasshin:

And the second part of what I was saying there is that when you block people, you are closing yourself off from the possibility of changing them.

And from what I've just heard from, and I'm okay with that. Yeah, exactly. That makes a bit more sense to me now from what you've said. But

Vince:

I'm not gonna change a Zionist's mind, I don't think, someone who's like a, Christian or Jewish Zionist, I don't think I'm gonna change their mind by sharing something on like a micro blog.

Tasshin:

That, one of the really urgent questions for me here is what is a theory of change that produces genuine end to war violence, genocide? What actually resolves that? Actually because if I let me figure out how to put this. I am currently putting my time and energy.

Into the things that I think I can do that will have the highest benefit from my current understanding and vantage point. I literally spend every day of my life waking to sleeping, doing the thing that I think is best based on my, admittedly flawed, limited perspective, my own weaknesses and blind spots.

But I do that every day. Every day. And if I thought that I could lead to the end of war, genocide, violence, evil in a scaled way I would work much harder to bring that about. I'd have to think about how it fits into all the things I'm doing and balance. But I really wanna know how someone like, I, I would hope for example, that the service guild at some point will have a peace department.

Currently, we, as we have a love department, a curiosity department, an empowerment department. I would love for us to have a peace department. I want other departments, us to be able to have infrastructure for other focused crews. At some point it's the Peace Department should be bringing about peace.

And I don't know how to do that. Even peace Pilgrim my hero, she spent 30 years working in the way that she knew how for peace. And I don't think she wasted her time far from it. But there is still not peace on earth after her doing that.

Vince:

Sure. Some of this reminds me, has echoes of the effect of al altruism movement.

Yeah.

Tasshin:

I think they I feel how to put this, I have different aesthetic and ideological views with them on specific points, but I feel very sympathetic to their larger efforts and yeah, what do we actually do to actually have a real impact? I feel very I feel kinship with that, even if there's specific things I disagree with or don't vibe with.

So yeah, that's noted.

Vince:

Yeah, I think if we were to zoom, like not to take the two global perspective of like, how do we stop all genocide, war, et cetera. And that's a good question, but to me it's like, how do we stop this specific one that's happening right now,

Tasshin:

Uhhuh.

Like how,

Vince:

Because that's sure. So how do we stop it? Obviously you

Tasshin:

don't have to know, but what a different way of putting the question that's maybe a bit more reasonable. I think it, it's very

Vince:

noble. Like you, you stop Israel from killing Palestinians. That's how it, okay. And what leads

Tasshin:

to that causally?

Vince:

Probably having a Palestinian state would be a necessary part of that. And what leads to that? The US has to stop vetoing it in the us. And what leads

Tasshin:

to that?

Vince:

They change in US leadership and change. And what leads to that? People putting pressure and voting and grassroots organ organizing.

Ah, that's

Tasshin:

where you lose me.

Vince:

Yeah. Look at look at Zohran Mamdani. He's a good example of how that's actually happening right now in the, he's the only candidate, like major candidate that I've seen recent in recent times. Progressive candidate who's actually vocal about this, who isn't on the, both parties, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump both supported the ongoing genocide.

They're equally complicit.

Tasshin:

So basically we should or not leaders that are clear this in your perspective. What I'm hearing is Yeah. Yeah. The salient thing is elect leaders who are clear that this is a genocide who will end us complicitness and help and who are focused on economic populism.

Vince:

because our country really need, we need that right now.

Tasshin:

You lost me there. How does, what does that have to do with ending this genocide?

Vince:

You could it's both and so it's if you look at, this is a good example, I think part of, I grew up in the as probably you did too, in the.

In the fading years of the political consensus between the neo-conservative and neoliberal parties,

Tasshin:

Uhhuh,

Vince:

who largely agreed on most everything,

Tasshin:

Uhhuh.

Vince:

They were both totally fine with military expansion. They were both fine with free trade agreements that hollowed out rural America and towns like in North Carolina, textile towns.

Yeah. To save 5 cents, on a shirt made in Vietnam, we're totally fine letting an entire communities die,

In towns we haul it out. So it's that kind of mentality, it's like what I grew up in and, it's like the arguments were mostly like stylistic. It's which style of the same ideology do you prefer?

Tasshin:

Coke versus Pepsi

Vince:

Ex. Exactly right. Coke and Pepsi. And Obama. He was, you fit right into this. He was not a departure, he was a rhetorician.

Tasshin:

Yeah,

Vince:

he sounded like a departure, but wasn't so true. Bestie. Yep. I think when I look at it in those terms, I say, okay what is so interesting about Donald Trump and the MAGA movement?

It is actually presenting an alternative to the previous consensus. And I, the way I see American politics right now, and I could be wrong, is there's an emerging, there's a new emerging polarity. That alt left and right, quote unquote yeah, gosh, ne neo fascism and neo progressivism.

And there's, and are you saying

Tasshin:

neo progressivism is the answer here?

Vince:

I'm, no, I'm not actually Uhhuh. Okay. Although, because some neo fascists don't want us to be sending money to Israel,

Tasshin:

Uhhuh,

Vince:

Marjorie Taylor Greene there, there's been a number that recently people who are like, why are we sending billions of dollars to Israel every year when we can't even take care of our own people?

Yeah. And so I agree with that Uhhuh, what I actually think is emerging and has to emerge as an alt middle. It's a new. Consensus. And that alt middle will almost certainly not wanna continue propping up an American em military empire. Both alt-right and alt left. That's something they agree on.

They don't want to be constantly waging endless wars. They don't wanna be always sending all of our money into our military budget. And is

Tasshin:

that connected to the populism you're talking about?

Vince:

Yeah, it is. Okay. It's a it's a strand of populism that's interested in retracting the American Empire and not continuing to create so many problems abroad.

And who recognizes that doing so hurts us at home, Uhhuh, and because these things are interconnected. I see.

Tasshin:

Okay. Thank you for explaining that. Can I recount what I heard just now? Your, I, our, a shared goal that we have is we would like this war, genocide, violence, evil to end. We'd like it to end.

And the way that comes about is Israel stops doing what it's doing. And the way that comes about is Palestine is a state and the US stops vetoing certain things at the un. And the way that happens is there's political pressure on the US to show up in a different way. And you're saying that the way that happens is we elect politicians who are want that course of action and also care about this populism and the relationship of how we're spending our money at home.

Yeah. And the way that we do that is get involved in local political movements that support candidates that have that perspective.

Vince:

I think that's one of the most direct ways that uhhuh, that we can as Americans affected this. I'll tell

Tasshin:

you right now, I, I need to do due diligence on learning more about this, but I will very seriously both take that into consideration for my own voting and then also in how I speak about voting to my friends and people I'm connected to.

That's not much. But this is more. That's what I really care about. I wanna make sure that whatever actions I take, I am that I can see. It matters to me that I can see how there could be a causal chain where this actually results in the things that we want, if that makes sense.

I don't know why that matters to me so much, but it does.

Vince:

Yeah. Okay. We haven't talked about Bodhi Safa hood yet. Yes. So maybe I could bring that in. Yeah.

Tasshin:

Thank God, please. Someone helped me. Yeah.

Vince:

I don't know if you, it's a

Tasshin:

struggle out here.

Vince:

I don't know if you've heard this quote from Ujima Roshi Japanese Zen teacher.

He said a Bodhi Safa is an ordinary person who acts like a true adult.

Tasshin:

I had never heard that before, but I love it. And what does true adult mean to you?

Vince:

I think a true adult is someone who sees a problem and they respond to it.

And. A true adult recognizes the complexity of the situation and acts anyway with that with incomplete information with whatever resources and ability that they have while acknowledging that they're limited.

So that's a start. True adult cares about themselves and others. I could even, I could actually inhabit as a true adult. I both take care of my life at home and I care about the impacts that that the country and systems I'm embedded in are having in the world. That I'm causal in, that I have some causal influence over, even if it's minimal.

Tasshin:

You know what I'm reminded of Vince is video game levels and I feel like. It seems it seems cr crass to pick levels, but I feel like, I don't know, let's say a level eight Bodhi Safa I'm not level one anymore. I'm not even level five anymore, but I feel acutely, like I'm really only level eight and I think it's gonna there are 10

Vince:

levels aren't there In this game?

I, oh no. Bodhi the boomie, the boom. No.

Tasshin:

I know what you're talking about. But also that's not the measurement system I'm using. Okay. You're not,

Vince:

it's not a traditional boomy model. No.

Tasshin:

I'm thinking like, I never played it, but like World of Warcraft, I'm pretty sure 80 is like a threshold in World of Warcraft.

It's I'm pretty sure you need like a level 60 or 70 Bodhi Safa to have global systemic change at the level that's needed for the thing we're talking about. And I'm like I know if I have a friend that has a mental health crisis, like I'm struggling to barely be able to support them in a meaningful way.

Like I'm embarrassed by how. Incompetent. I am at even that helping one person that's having a mental health crisis. Like I can help a little bit, but like I know someone who's an extended network right now is having their partner's having a major schizophrenic episode and I'm like, here, I can send you a link that might help you.

That's that's so pathetic. That is so disgustingly pathetic for actually having an impact in the world. It's humiliating to admit, but here we are because there's real suffering and you have to do whatever we can to help. And so I would like to it would be great if I ended this year as a level nine Bodhi, that would be awesome.

And do I want to have global systemic positive change on a historic scale? Absolutely. I hope that every passing year I'm more and more capable of. Large scale, positive impact, and I'm just so acutely aware of how incompetent I am and how limited I'm really doing everything I can to have a positive impact at the scale that I can right now.

And it's it's pathetic and humiliating in the context of this larger suffering. I'm fine with that. I'm not embarrassed to say that, but it is humbling, it's it's not nearly good enough. And I think the more acquainted you are with how much suffering there is in the universe, the more humbled you are by that, by one's own incompetence to, and then you do, that's the Bodhi SA of vows, anyway, is just to be like greed, hatred, and end without end like vow to end it. Like you just, you get up and do something anyway.

Vince:

Yeah. I've. There's a distinction that's commonly made in like a, I would call it like in the woke pluralistic cultural scene of like intention versus impact.

And that's an important distinction when you're starting to get into questions of race and racialization, because people will say things with a good intentions that hurt other people because they're ignorant of the impact that has for someone else. And here I think it's I think of that too with what you're saying, where it's okay yeah, like I want to become a, be a more impactful Bodhi Safa.

I want to have a more net positive impact in the world. And on the one hand yeah, I could say, like you're saying it, I feel humbled and maybe embarrassed by how ineffectual I am. And. I also feel humble about the fact that I don't know the impact that I'm having. I don't understand it. And I feel like this is really, you probably have had a similar experience putting media out into the worlds, like with Buddhist geeks when we launched that, the hundreds and hundreds of people that I heard from over the years who are like, that had such a powerful impact on my life.

And I'm like wow, okay. I, that was definitely not what I was aiming for. I was just doing something I thought was cool at the time. Honestly. And so that wasn't even necessarily my intention, but that was the impact. And so I'm amazed, I am amazed at how effective people can be without even knowing it. It's like hard sometimes. Hard to know. It's hard to measure. And that's where I would say it's the challenge here with what you're saying is I want to see if I'm effect. You have to be able to measure the effectiveness to be able to know, and we can't fully measure, we can get better at measuring, like we can maybe get more sophisticated in seeing and understanding our impact both negative and positive.

But it's really difficult without going into you really have to have an understanding of the whole to be able to see your individual impacts on the whole. And I don't know, where am I going with this? Just to say there's some kind of feedback loop here that I think is like what the Bodhi Safa is driven by.

It's like constantly coming back to. A wise or compassionate intention.

And then do trying your best to live from that place, even if you're, not effectual. And then doing your best to understand the impacts of your actions

So that, you can, that can inform how you act the next time that you're trying to be, coming from this place of genuine wisdom and compassion. And there's some kind of sharpening of like skillful means that happens in this feedback loop.

Tasshin:

Yeah.

Vince:

And to me, it's like the Bodhi Safa is one who's engaged in the pro in that process rather than Yes. Then there are different levels then are depths or degrees of skillfulness.

And probably in different domains too.

Tasshin:

Yeah, of course. Multiple axes.

Vince:

So I hear what you're saying and I think that's valid. Like it isn't up to any, I don't think it's up to individuals to solve the global challenges.

Tasshin:

No, but I'm also like, I'm aware that I think I am I was just humble, so now I can be a little arrogant.

I think I'm uniquely well-suited to create systems that actually do have causal impact on the historic scale over time. It just takes a long time and it takes very careful thought and a lot of care and consideration and love and effort. And so I would like to build systems that have a net positive historic impact on the scale of humanization.

And as far as I can tell I'm playing my cards that way, where like I would really hope that if we fast forwarded 30 or 40 years, we would be like, Hey. The Service Guild did really good stuff that was net positive on human society and our civilization and the planet. And of course there'll be fuckups along the way where we mess up and I make just dumb mistakes and whatever.

But I would hope that it's net positive and that it has a genuinely historic obvious impact on the world that was positive. So that's part of why my care, that's why I would wanna have this conversation at all, is like, how can I build systems that actually do have that kind of impact on ending, yeah.

Including ending violence of all kinds and this conflict, this genocide, this war, this evil in particular.

Vince:

Yeah. I think that's a great intention. I, there's like a, there's a quote in the Bava Gita that's coming to mind. I can't remember the exact quote, but it's some, something about acting without any thought of results or it's happens in that famous dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna. Yeah, there's

Tasshin:

a difference in da I, I've been influenced a lot by DAAs strategy, and they talk a lot about the difference between means ends and conditions, consequences.

And we're really trying to create the conditions for good consequences. So can I guarantee that we would have a particular result? Absolutely not, but absolutely not. But I think we can create the conditions for historic benevolent beneficent impact.

Vince:

It's interesting you're talking about a guild. Because to me it's I think of the Bodhi Safa as a more of like a. A relational phenomena.

Tasshin:

It's

Vince:

Team Bodhi Safa. Rather than a Bodhi Safa.

And so it seems like a lot of the challenge here is around coordinating and connecting and aligning, collective alignment.

And these are the things I think are very hard for people who've been trained to individuate and who are focused on their own agency. John Vey, the philosopher, he points out like when you take role, you are rolling yourself into that. You're losing a certain kind of agency by inhabiting a role, say role of father, role of teacher role of whatever you're limiting yourself in that role.

And, but, and yet you have to play roles in cult in community

Tasshin:

to do anything.

Yep.

Vince:

So I guess, yeah I don't know where to go from there. From here.

Tasshin:

I would summarize our conversation so far as follows. TPOT such as it is an emergent developmental phenomenon that's highly networked, that has some strengths and some weaknesses that we've talked about. There is a great evil being perpetuated that we both would like to see end. That hurts both our hearts.

And we would like to do something about, you had some valuable thoughts about what that might look like, how to end that, especially American politics. I think that's the, I

Vince:

think that's the highest leverage point. Uhhuh, I think there's lots of leverage points and people get more into this.

They start seeing the levers that they can, where their age, where their agency has some causal influence. Like it's also matters what kind of products you're buying and, are you giving money to companies that are profit, profiting off of a an economy of genocide, or not.

Like I, I was drinking Coca-Cola while talking to one of my pa, my Palestinian cousins who runs a nonprofit in Washington state, and she was pointing out like, Coke is one of these companies. And I, I hadn't, because I've been so focused on the political side of things, I haven't really looked deeply at the, the corporate side.

It's but. And that's, for me, I care a lot and I'm still not doing that. Now I've given up Topo Chico, which is a huge, that to me is like the biggest sacrifice I can imagine. What's Topo Chico? Topo Chico is a sparkling water brand. I see. Coca-Cola. Thank you

Tasshin:

for your sacrifice.

Know you're a true Bodhi

Vince:

SA event. Good job. Exactly. Dude, you have no idea. Go drink a Topo Chico and you'll understand this section.

Tasshin:

I'm not supposed to though, so you're That's right. You're morally

Vince:

you can have one just to see, just so you can see how what of a Bodhi Safa I am. I see.

Tasshin:

I'll believe you.

Vince:

I believe you, Vince. I already thought

Tasshin:

you were Bodhisattva, so I'll stick to Polar. Thanks.

Vince:

Yeah. Yeah. Anyway, I'm just trying to mo point out that the, it's, there are other leverage points there, there are other leverage points that we didn't talk about, and I think that's important because it gets more into a practical conversation of what I can actually practically do.

I think the other thing that I suggest to my friends is learn just the basic hist modern history of the situation so that when you open your mouth Uhhuh you don't regret the words that come out. Because right now most of the conversation is if ignorant people talking to ignorant people about things they don't know about.

And it's, I, if anything

Tasshin:

that's how do I say this? I am acutely aware of my ignorance and that's certainly part of what, and that's why

Vince:

people don't say anything sometimes. Yeah. And that's fair.

Tasshin:

Yeah.

Vince:

Like that to me, I would prefer people who are ignorant, not saying anything to saying something.

because it's just like they're polluting space. And I'm really grateful to have

Tasshin:

learned more about it from hearing you speak about it in our conversations both today and previously. It feels important to, one of the skills I really value that I'm trying to get better at, that I also feel incompetent about is like just having a global sense of what's happening on the planet.

And like in really lots of dimensions. Not just politically, not just economically, not just socially, not just culturally, not just technologically, but like all of that, right? And like knowing the gestalt of the larger planet and I don't know. It's important to me to at least know what's happening.

So I'm grateful to have a slightly better model of what's happening. And I guess what I want to say, yeah, what I feel like summarizing my own perspective here is how do I say this? I aspire to do everything in my power to have positive causal impacts on Yeah, global problems where possible. And I'm still learning how to do that and what the actual leverage points are. But the phrase that's coming up in my head, which I don't fully endorse it, but like I know it feels a little bit sticky, is, but is you better believe I'm gonna do something if and when I know I can.

And like I'm clear about what to do and of course I would want this to end. And of course I would. Yeah, my heart fucking breaks, dude. Like looking at this, looking at other things. It's and if I can do something when I'm clear of what I can and do that makes sense with a bunch of variables that we haven't talked about.

But like I, of course I will do something and want something. And I think that, yeah, I'll speak for myself there, but. I think it's really good to be in connection too and to just compare notes as Bodhi Safa yeah what are what do you even do? There's all this suffering. What do you what do?

So I'm grateful to have companionship in that and to speak about these issues in particular.

Vince:

Yeah. Yeah. And this has always been a tension in the communities of people who value contemplative wisdom. Contemplation and action. How do you, yeah. How do you hold these two things together?

Tasshin:

And I'm literally doing everything I know how to do, and I will fully admit it's not nearly good enough, but I hope to get better as the years progress and to have Yeah. And more positive impacts.

Vince:

And for me, this conversation, again, is not so much about and as it is about TPOT in general.

TPOT Yeah. And also the

Tasshin:

subset of like western Buddhists within TPOT and what they can do. Yeah.

Vince:

Buddhist modernists and, yeah. Of which I used to be one, and when I was a Buddhist modernist, I wa I wasn't a Palestinian.

I, at least I hadn't owned that part of my identity yet. Because I think to live in the modern world, you have to disown many aspects of yourself if you want to be able to function well. Like for instance on LinkedIn, you don't want to be talking about genocide. I should start, you know what, which I do, Vince, you

Tasshin:

know what, I should really start. It hurts your prospects speaking out about genocide on LinkedIn. I've made like shit posts on LinkedIn before and that was really fun and I would like to stir the pot a little bit more.

So I'll work on that. Thanks for that moral feedback. I really appreciate it. Yeah. Yeah. What a better use of. I, yeah. because I'm privileged enough to not have to worry about getting fired or not having to please anybody in particular. I can piss people off and that's fine.

Vince:

I saw you were you're practicing pissing people off a little more, or you're inhabiting that, that part of you

Tasshin:

working on, there's some, there's lots of psychological change going on, which actually I do wanna just put a bookmark here.

I, we will probably have to have a whole other conversation about this at some point, but we talked earlier about the whole like niceness versus kindness recurring thing that's in our friendship. And I think there's a whole separate thing that we keep bumping up against that I have not fully understood from you that I should probably just go read some books about, and I haven't yet, but about perspective taking and I don't even know, but you're you've perpetually flagged that.

You're like, oh, you're doing the thing again where you assume that all perspectives are equal and you should just listen to the other person's perspective. And I would still like to learn that from you in time and see that. Yeah, we can

Vince:

talk about it. I guess I just mentioned I mentioned John Vicki earlier.

I think for post rats, he's probably a good philosopher to tune into. I think he he for instance, points to four different ways of knowing. There's a propositional knowing knowing basically facts and knowledge like chat, GPT kind of knowing

Procedural knowing where you're actually know something through doing it.

Prac like practice perspectival knowing which is a kind of knowing in terms of perspective taking and then participatory. Participatory knowing where it's like a knowing through participating in something. Thinking here, like my, like a Harry Mack, the legendary freestyler, if you watch someone free, do freestyle rap.

It's like a very participatory,

Tasshin:

how is that different than the procedural one?

Vince:

So like Harry Mack will practice freestyling of course, but then when he goes in, he's actually freestyling for people. Oh, I see.

Tasshin:

There's like interaction with other people in a larger group or something like that.

Yeah.

Vince:

And there's ways of embodying, like in the zen tradition, so similar, there's ways of embody like inhabiting what you're talking about. That where you're getting inside of the participation of the moment. I see. Yeah. And I don't fully under, I don't fully understand all these distinctions myself, so I, but I would, so I'd point people to, to John Vei.

I see. because I think there's some distinctions here that are really Yeah. It's like really helpful. Like you said, to expand the sort of, the view, philosophically what's happening. And perspective taking is one of those things where, yeah. Where it's. So much of this is about perspective taking from my point of view.

It's like I'm, because I'm taking the perspective of someone who has share, shares an identity with these people. So it's and then history. And so I can take that perspective, but I can't actually take the perspective of someone in Gaza right now. Like I I'm unable to do that and but it seems like a worthwhile thing to try, okay. Can I take a perspective of Benjamin Netanyahu?

Tasshin:

That also seems worthwhile.

Vince:

Yeah. Yeah. Anyway. Dude I appreciate, I know we, we we've been going for a while here.

Tasshin:

Yeah. Great conversation Vincent. Thanks

Vince:

for your time. Yeah.

What is Access Concentration?

This is the question I want to bring forward in this talk.

I recorded something on this topic many years ago—too many, honestly, to comfortably admit. At the time, I was working on a project that was essentially a secular meditation app. That’s basically been the through-line of my career: building and teaching through these kinds of projects. The app was called Meditate.io, and we had a course titled Concentration Meditation. In it, we aimed to explain the basics of how concentration really works. That course now lives on in The Jhāna Community under the name Concentration 101. It shares some really good foundational ideas, one of which is the concept of Access Concentration. I found this idea so useful in my own Buddhist meditative practice that I really wanted to bring it into a more secular context. There’s a YouTube clip that gives my best simple explanation of what Access Concentration is, and I won’t go too deep here since that recording already exists. That’s the beauty of recording something—you don’t have to keep repeating yourself.

But here’s the short version of how I understand it:

Access Concentration is when the object of your focus—whether it’s the breath, the body, a sound, a visual orb, a mantra, or anything else—moves into the center of your attention. It shifts into the foreground, and everything else fades into the background. That background doesn’t disappear entirely; distractions and thoughts may still be there, but now they’re peripheral. The object of your focus becomes primary.

This shift is important. It’s a turning point in practice when your attention starts to settle and stabilize. Of course, we can fall out of access. Some people think they’re only in access concentration if they maintain it the entire time they’re sitting—but that’s a much deeper, more stable version that usually takes time to develop. Unless you’re a natural at this—and few are—it takes consistent effort.

In any given moment, if your meditation object is the main thing in your attention, you’re in access. And sure, distractions will pull at you—that’s normal. You fall out of access, and then you come back. Return to the breath. Be with it.

At first, the breath might not hold your full attention. Maybe it gets 50%, then 30%, then 20%, then something else pulls at you. It’s a dynamic process. In my experience, concentration becomes more fluid and interactive the deeper you go. But at some point, your focus stabilizes: more than 50% of your attention is on the breath. It begins to draw you in—it has gravity. You want to give it more attention. There’s interest. There’s intimacy.

In the traditional Buddhist framework, this state is called Access Concentration because it’s the doorway into the jhānas. You can’t access the jhānas without first stabilizing in access—at least, according to later Buddhist sources. And here’s a side note for the Buddhist nerds out there: the term Access Concentration doesn’t show up in the earliest teachings. It came later—about a thousand years after the Buddha’s time.

Imagine a thousand years of mostly-male monastics meditating, likely trying to outdo each other, and eventually producing this giant meditation manual called the Visuddhimagga, or The Path of Purification. That’s where we find the term Access Concentration, described in the section on concentration—one of three main sections in the book.

According to that model, you reach Access Concentration just before entering jhāna. The Visuddhimagga describes 40 different objects that can lead to access, though I doubt that list is exhaustive. (Hopefully someone caught that Pokémon reference. I know Buddy did.)

So, what is Access Concentration again?

Another way to understand it is this: it’s one of the five jhāna masteries. To master meditation, you have to be able to access the states you want to enter. In other words, Access Concentration is the ability to get to the object—mentally and emotionally—so you can begin to absorb into it.

If we want to use a numerical analogy: Access is when more than 50% of your attention is with something. You’ve entered into relationship with it. And from there, you can deepen that relationship, becoming more absorbed.

In the KASINA meditation app I’ve been developing, there's a visual orb that users can move toward them on the screen. As it moves closer, it fills the screen—you merge with it. That’s what happens with the breath, or love, or the body, or even not-knowing. You become one with the object. That’s the beginning of jhāna.

And the sequence of jhānas, from one to eight, describes how that relationship deepens and evolves. First, the merger is blissful—like falling in love. It’s magical. But over time, that intensity cools, and you settle into a more steady connection—like the second jhāna and beyond.

So, to even enter into that evolving intimacy, we need access. The Visuddhimagga says there are 40 objects that work for this, which implies there are many things that don’t. But I actually disagree with that. I think you could potentially access and merge with anything. But the real question is: why would you want to merge with, say, terror?

Could you handle becoming one with being terrified? Some people love horror movies. I’ve never understood that—it feels like life is terrifying enough. But for those people, maybe horror is a doorway. Maybe terror is their access point.

Okay, so here’s a simple practice to support this:

May concentration arise.

That’s the practice. Just wish for concentration to arise.

Who are you wishing it for?

Start with yourself. That’s why you’re here. Get in touch with the sincerity of that wish—why it’s important to you. Maybe you want to be able to focus better on your relationships, your work, the way you show up in the world. Maybe you want to be healthy, to remember what matters. Concentration helps with that.

So: May concentration arise—for me.

And then extend it out: May concentration arise for the people I care about.

Because when the people around you are focused and well, it affects you too. It creates a feedback loop of clarity and joy.

Then go wider: May concentration arise for everyone.

Even knowing some will use it for harmful ends, trust the whole. Most won’t.

And then: May concentration arise for all beings on Earth.

For all beings to be focused on what’s most important to them.

Even broader: May concentration arise for all beings, everywhere, throughout all time and space.

May all of reality concentrate on what matters most to itself.

Wishing concentration for everyone.

The Jhāna Community

The Jhāna Community is a community of practice dedicated to the art of deep meditation. Check out our 6 new weekly jhāna groups beginning in June:

By Vince Fakhoury Horn

Today, in The Jhāna Community, I want to center our exploration around the completion phase—also known as enlightenment.

What is the relationship between enlightenment and jhāna? That’s what we’ll explore.

The Goal of Vipassana Jhāna

In Vipassana jhāna practice, the goal is insight—clearly seeing the way things are. This clear seeing leads to awakening, within the Buddhist frame.

Trudy Goodman uses a beautiful metaphor for this, comparing the phases of insight to the phases of the moon:

“Can we appreciate all the phases of the moon, all the stages of our life? Can we see past the patterns of perception that too often eclipse the wonder of being alive? Birth, growth, fullness, letting go, vanishing into the mysterious dark—these are the eternal cycles of life.”

The completion phase, in this metaphor, is the full darkness of the moon: the vanishing.

Describing the Unconditioned

Early Buddhist texts describe the apex of this phase—Nirvana—as a kind of vanishing. Bill Hamilton, Kenneth Folk’s teacher, once said:

“Nirvana is an experience of the unconditioned which defies any description. Any description of Nirvana is not a description of Nirvana.”

There are no reference points. Concepts can’t contain it. It’s not a “thing.” It’s a different kind of experience.

Bodhidharma, founder of Zen, said:

“When the mind reaches Nirvana, you don’t see Nirvana because the mind is Nirvana.”

Beyond Meditative States

I remember talking with Kenneth Folk about how many meditation teachers end up teaching a state—a temporary condition—as the goal. But awakening is not about achieving and clinging to a special state.

There are moments of direct contact with the unconditioned. But the next moment might involve answering the phone, cooking dinner, or helping someone. At first, these seem like separate domains. Eventually, they can be integrated.

This practice is about learning to release identification with all states—even the expansive and blissful ones.

Wanting to Be “Permanently Okay”

It’s understandable that we want to find a place where we can be permanently okay. That desire comes from a younger part of us—vulnerable and needing security.

But the adult part of awakening is what frees us to be present for life as it is—even the messy, painful, inconvenient parts.

Paradoxically, it’s not what we thought we signed up for. We imagined transcendence. What we found was this—the real.

The Journey Doesn’t End Here

Here’s the good news: the journey doesn’t end at the completion phase. Awakening is recursive. It loops, like the moon’s phases.

“To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.”

In early Buddhism, the highest achievement was to break out of saṃsāra. But transformation happens not by escaping, but by cycling with change.

Philosopher John Vervaeke says:

“Evolution is revolution with change.”

If your cycles bring new learning, new understanding—that’s evolution.

The Big Picture

That’s the bigger picture I love to teach. Meditation isn’t about escaping life. It’s about working with the natural cycles of our minds and lives—and transforming through them.

And this isn’t in contradiction to Nirvana. When the realization deepens, you see that every experience, every thought, every person is it.

Even the thought, “There’s somewhere else I should be”—that’s it too.

Embodying the Mystery

So what’s the point of all this state-jumping, deconstructing, and releasing?

For me, part of the point is to embody the mystery.

Reggie Ray writes in Touching Enlightenment:

“To be awake, to be enlightened is to be fully and completely embodied… to be entirely present to who we are and to the journey of our own becoming… with no external observer waiting for something better.”

That’s the journey of vipassana jhāna. Nothing left out. Full intimacy with reality.

Awakening Is Collective

Ultimately, awakening isn’t a personal project. Everyone is on this journey—even if they’d never use those words.

Martin Luther King Jr. wrote:

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.”

Awakening leads to the realization that we are in this together.

Eventually, the idea of my awakening dissolves into our awakening.

So Now What?

So the question becomes:How can I show up fully for this moment—this body, this life, this karmic tangle of heartbreak and hope?

That’s the real practice.

Mastering the Art of Jhāna

If you found this article helpful, you may want to check out the community of practice it arose from…

Overview: In this episode, Vince Horn and Daniel Thorson explore the evolving landscape of Western Buddhism, unpacking the tensions between Consensus Buddhism and Pragmatic Dharma, while reflecting on ethics, teacherly authority, and the possibilities for a more integrated future.Vince Horn: I'm here with Daniel Thorson, hanging out in your office-slash-bedroom. You've been in the Asheville area for what—a year now?

Daniel Thorson: Almost two years, actually.

Vince: Whoa, really? That’s wild! And this is our first time recording together since you moved here. Doing it in person feels weird—so hyper-intimate.

Daniel: Yeah. It’s a whole 3D—or maybe even 4D—experience.

Vince: More D than that if you include yourself.Daniel: Totally.Vince: So, I suggested we record because, well, we were going to hang out anyway, and you’ve been writing a really interesting series on your Substack, The Intimate Mirror.

Daniel: Yeah, that’s the one. Initially, I was exploring AI as a kind of mirror—how to use and work with it. But I’ve taken a side journey into critiquing Western Buddhism. I’m planning to do some reconstructive work too, eventually.

Vince: Especially the American convert Buddhist scenes we’ve been part of, right? Like, the Buddhist Geeks orbit, Insight Meditation world, maybe even broader—Consensus Buddhism, as David Chapman calls it.

Daniel: Exactly. My focus is mostly on modern Western Buddhist culture. That includes Insight Meditation, but also Westernized Zen, and even American Vajrayana. It's like a meta-sangha of Buddhist Modernism.

Vince: Right. Like the teachers who went to hang out with the Dalai Lama in the 90s and asked, "How can we make Buddhism more friendly to the West?" And now there’s this whole ecosystem.

Daniel: Definitely. And I want to be clear: I'm not critiquing individual teachers. It's more about the communities and cultures that have grown around them—looking at their gifts and their shadows.

Vince: So you’ve got Consensus Buddhism on one hand and Pragmatic Dharma—what you call the Tech Bro Buddhist scene—on the other. I loved your piece on the "Upper Middle Path and the Tech Bros." You brought in critiques I’ve seen mostly in academic circles—people like David McMahan and Ann Gleig—but you made it much more accessible and relevant.

Daniel: Thanks. That was the goal: take these ideas out of esoteric academic circles and bring them into contemporary discourse. Especially around communities like ours that are immersed in Buddhist Geeks-type spaces.

Vince: It felt like a kind of moral responsibility to name the limitations and mistakes we've seen—or made—over the years. Like, I see a lot of younger folks in the liminal web, teapot Twitter, etc., getting into Buddhist modernism the way we were 15 years ago.

Daniel: Exactly. And I think it's important we help them avoid some of the pitfalls. Not because we’re better or more advanced, but just because we've had more time to metabolize these dynamics.

Vince: Right. I mean, early Buddhist Geeks was full-on modernist—tech, enlightenment, Daniel Ingram’s stage models. But it evolved. Ann Gleig even said she saw postmodern elements starting to emerge in that community. I think she was right.

Daniel: Totally. And part of my own evolution, especially through training at the Monastic Academy, has been this inquiry into ethics—specifically, how ethical responsiveness is missing in a lot of Buddhist spaces. That’s especially problematic in a time of planetary crisis.

Vince: It’s not just about meditating in caves or on retreat anymore. There's a demand for something deeper and more responsive. A lot of Buddhism as it’s been practiced here feels avoidant—especially to folks with avoidant attachment styles. It’s like a refuge from complexity, not a way of meeting it.

Daniel: Exactly. And even in the engaged Buddhist scenes, it can feel like there's a polarity—like the rest of Buddhism is disengaged by default.

Vince: There’s been some shifts, especially post-George Floyd. Consensus Buddhism became more pluralistic, more explicitly social justice-oriented. But even then, it can become polarized—like progressive vs. liberal politics.

Daniel: Right. And on the Pragmatic Dharma side, you see a resistance to that pluralism. It’s still very focused on individual attainment, hyper-rational, and map-model heavy. It’s like a cultural left/right divide.

Vince: I’ve started avoiding the masculine/feminine language because it triggers so many people. I use "self-focused" and "other-focused" instead. Pragmatic Dharma = self-focused; Consensus Buddhism = other-focused. There’s a polarity there.

Daniel: That feels accurate. And yet, both scenes are struggling with ethics. The Tech Bro Dharma scene risks erasing the generative function of suffering. There’s this idea that suffering is just a bug to be fixed.

Vince: Right. And people like Shinzen Young and Daniel Ingram do qualify that—it’s perceptual suffering, not all suffering. But the popularizers, like Nick Cammarata on X.com, often simplify it down to "eliminate suffering, be happy."

Daniel: Which is dangerous. Suffering is supposed to be understood, not eliminated. It teaches us about being in right relationship with reality. Removing it through tech could erase the ethical feedback loops we need.

Vince: And that’s not just theoretical. We've seen examples—teachers like Culadasa, who bypassed relational feedback in ways that created real harm.

Daniel: Or on the other side, in Consensus Buddhism, where the focus becomes eliminating social suffering through systems change—but sometimes it loses the locus of individual responsibility. It becomes ideologically confused.

Vince: Yeah. It’s like both sides are overcorrecting, and what we really need is a new synthesis. Something that honors both individual and collective transformation.

Daniel: The best example I’ve seen of that is John Churchill’s Planetary Dharma. I’m in his Level 1 training, and it weaves individual and relational ethics beautifully.

Vince: I’ve heard good things. Also, Tom Huston’s Kosmic Dharma project seems to be trying something similar, from a more Advaita direction.

Daniel: And Robert Burbea’s Soulmaking Dharma, which really helps people deconstruct secular materialism and reopen to a sacred worldview.

Vince: Yeah, I’ve seen that too. Even in the Pragmatic Dharma scene, many of the original rationalists are now post-rational, magical thinkers. Daniel Ingram literally has wands.

Daniel: That’s the resilience of the Dharma. Practice sincerely, and it eventually breaks out of those constraints.

Vince: That said, I think we’re in a phase of necessary deconstruction before meaningful reconstruction can happen.

Daniel: Totally. And we need to talk about ethics now, not wait for the practice to eventually bring people around.

Vince: Which raises a tricky question: How do you do this work—invite a new synthesis—without just creating a new brand of Buddhism that becomes subject to the same market dynamics?

Daniel: It's hard. But maybe it's less about building one big thing and more about encouraging mutations. Experiments. Some may become new institutions. Others might just be small, temporary communities. I’ve been part of a project called the Church of the Intimate Web that’s experimenting with that.

Vince: I love that. To me, anything that includes the three trainings—ethics, meditation, wisdom—is Buddhist, whether or not it uses the label.

Daniel: Same. And while I’m deeply grateful to the institutions that formed me, I’m not optimistic about their ability to adapt. This series is, in some ways, a goodbye letter to Buddhism for me.

Vince: That might be a key difference between us. I’m still invested in evolving Buddhism from within, even while exploring the edges. Buddhist Geeks is still about that.

Daniel: And thank God for that. Because you’re right: we also need bridges. Between elders and newcomers. Between experimental scenes and rooted lineages. Otherwise, we risk losing our moorings.

Vince: There’s so much anti-authoritarian energy in these new spaces, and yet the real problem isn’t gatekeepers—it’s often a lack of inner trust.

Daniel: Exactly. And until people find legitimate external authority they can trust, it’s hard to develop real inner authority.

Vince: We need both elders and experimentalists. And we need to keep honoring the lineage that made any of this even possible.

Daniel: Amen.

The Jhāna Community

Daniel Thorson will be joining Vince and the Jhāna Community next month for a 4-week teaching series exploring how secure attachment to reality can serve as the basis for jhāna practice. Yes, we plan on recording it!

Live teaching series w/ Daniel Thorson online: Thursday May 8, 15, 22, & 29 @ 4pm Eastern TimeIMPORTANT NOTE: The Jhāna Community will be open for new applicants in the month of May.

Emily Horn is joined by renowned meditation teacher Sharon Salzberg to share reflections on her beloved teacher, Dipa Ma, a Bangladeshi meditation master, who was known for her extraordinary concentration, profound insight, and unwavering kindness. Sharon recounts her personal experiences with Dipa Ma, highlighting her maternal yet fierce presence, her ability to see deep potential in her students, and her unique approach to integrating mindfulness into daily life.

Episode Links:

🔗 Dharmaseed – A library of recorded Dharma talks, including talks from Dipa Ma, Sharon Salzberg, and many other teachers.

🔗 Insight Meditation Society (IMS) – The meditation center co-founded by Sharon Salzberg, Jack Kornfield, and Joseph Goldstein.

🔗 Spirit Rock Meditation Center – A meditation center in California, also associated with Jack Kornfield and the wider Insight tradition.

📖 "Dipa Ma: The Life and Legacy of a Buddhist Master" by Amy Schmidt – A biography of Dipa Ma, mentioned as a key resource for learning about her life and teachings.

👤 Sharon Salzberg – Official website with her books, teachings, and upcoming events.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of Our Beloved Teachers, dharma teacher Leigh Brasington reflects on his transformative experiences studying with Ven. Ayya Khema, one of his most influential teachers. Leigh shares how Ayya Khema's clarity, discipline, and groundbreaking teachings on meditation, including the jhānas, shaped his practice and teaching path. The conversation also delves into Ayya Khema's extraordinary life story and her pivotal contribution toward reviving the Theravāda fully ordained nun’s Sangha.

Episode Links:

👤 Ayya Khema

📖 I Give You My Life by Ayya Khema

👤 Leigh Brasington

📖 Right Concentration by Leigh Brasington

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Vince Fakhoury Horn is joined again by dharma teacher Trudy Goodman, founder of InsightLA, to share reflections on her beloved teacher, Kōbun Chino Otogawa. Kobun (February 1, 1938 – July 26, 2002), also known as Chino Otogawa Roshi, was a Japanese Zen priest who brought his unique and deeply compassionate teachings to America. Renowned for his unconventional approach, he emphasized practicing dharma within daily life, often blending traditional Zen wisdom with a quiet, everyday presence that resonated with many students. In this conversation, Trudy shares stories of Kobun’s compassionate presence, his devotion to helping those suffering, and his profound yet playful approach to teaching.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of Buddhist Geeks, Brian Newman discusses his journey into deep jhāna meditation practice. He explores his training in the rigorous Pa-auk tradition, the challenges and breakthroughs he experienced, and the balance between traditional and more modern approaches to jhāna, ultimately advocating for a playful, less rigid approach to accessing these deep states of concentration.

Episode Links:

👤 Brian Newman

🔗 Appamāda Viharī Meditation Center

👤 Sayalay Susīlā

👤 Pa-auk Sayadaw

👤 Kenneth Folk

📖 Grist for the Mill by Ram Dass & Stephen Levine

📖 Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha by Daniel M. Ingram

🎧 Mastering the Jhānas with Tina Rasmussen & Stephen Snyder

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In the episode on "Technological Metamodernism," Vince Fakhoury Horn and Stephen Reid discuss the intersection of technology, metamodernism, and the potential middle paths that navigate between techno-optimism or e/acc and eco-dystopianism or doomerism. They explore how emerging technologies can be aligned with deeper values, such as sovereignty, relationality, and wholeness, while also addressing the challenges of our current technological trajectory​.

Episode Links:

👤 StephenReid.net

✉️ Stephen Reid in Correspondence - Stephen's substack

🔗 Futurecraft - The site where the Technological Metamodernism course is being hosted​.

🤑 Support the open sourcing of the Technological Metamodernism course (via PayPal or via Crypto)

🔗 Meaning Alignment Institute - Mentioned as part of the discussions, this institute focuses on aligning emerging technologies with human values

🔗 Rebel Wisdom - A platform formerly associated with Alexander Beiner, one of the special guests of the Technological Metamodernism course.

🔗 Life Itself - A project focused on the "Second Renaissance," mentioned in the context of Rufus Pollock's work​, another of the special guests of the Technological Metamodernism course.

🎙️ Future Fossils Podcast - Hosted by Michael Garfield, yet another of the special guests of the Technological Metamodernism course.

📖 Reality Switch Technologies by Andrew Gallimore

🔗 Gitcoin - The platform that supports the quadratic funding method mentioned by which Stephen is raising funds in order open source material from the course. You can contribute to the funding for that project here.

🎙️ Lunarpunk Dreams Podcast by Stephen Reid

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, Vince Fakhoury Horn presents on The Phases of Insight, a contemplative map that charts the process from the moment one begins seeking, up to the moment of initial awakening.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.