Here’s a little description of the areas we explored, with a download link of the recording below for your listening pleasure.

Eastern technologies for awakening met Western psychology and the scientific method a long time ago, and generations of practitioners have been kindling the creative synergies between them ever since. What are the specific insights we’re learning about the technical processes of meditation and awakening? How can meditation be deepened by adding new forms of practice to the old? Can we be deepened by relational (rather than solo) meditation, for example? Or from the techniques developed in fields such as lean processing and agile software development? And how can our clearer consciousness enact itself in service more effectively?

Download Audio Recording

I gave a talk on Friday evening at the Pacific Asia Art Museum on “Buddhist Geeks: Uniting Technology and Wisdom.” The talk was a broad look at the way that the development of global Buddhism and the exponential growth of information technology (particularly through the development of the personal computer and internet) are converging, and what they have to offer one another.

The talk was part of the museum’s Active Cultures series, where they mash-up two speakers, first having each of them present—the person I co-presented with spoke about the development of modern music in Indonesia—and then after having the presenters in dialogue with the audience. The audience asked some very geeky questions, and they were really interested in seeing the relationship between our seemingly disparate topics.

It was a really fun event, and my talk went well, especially after realizing that the original talk I prepared was two times too long! I was able to whittle it down to 30 minutes, and was grateful for having practiced beforehand.

Having a chance to check out their asian gallery was also pretty cool. We saw some kick ass pieces there, including this gorgeous yab-yum statue and a funky Vietnamese Buddha (who is holding a mudra that is similar to one I’ve seen in a Shingon practice I did for a short time). If you’re ever in Pasadena I’d highly recommend checking it out.

I’m going to be giving the talk again after Thanksgiving at InsightLA and am planning on recording that one, so that I can perhaps sync the recorded talk with the slide presentation and put that out on video.

UPDATE: I was able to create a synced video recording of the talk given at InsightLA, which is embedded above.

For millennia, eastern philosophers have talked about the “interconnectedness of all things;” the idea of an invisible web that links together beings and objects, organic and inorganic. For the first time in human history, this idea is becoming physically manifest as we begin to network more and more objects—and even our own bodies—with the help of WiFi, sensors, and RFID. These technologies are turning up in everything from grocery packaging to household devices to self-monitoring tools like the FitBit and JawBone Up, and pointing to a future in which the minute details of our lives will be coordinated online. But could all this connectedness make us better people? In this fascinating session, we’ll bring together a researcher examining the trends of quantified self and “the Internet of things” (Sara Öhrvall from Bonnier R&D), a top connected-product designer (Matt Rolandson of Ammunition Group), and tech-savvy Buddhism teacher Vincent Horn, who will shed light on what the networked future might mean for human spirituality.

If you have a moment, I’d really appreciate if you could vote for the panel.

Mitchell Landsberg, the author of the piece, joined us at the Buddhist Geeks Conference and afterwards we did an interview at the 18th St. Coffeeshop in Santa Monica. This coffeeshop is rumored to be owned by Bob Dylan, but from the extensive online research I’ve conducted that rumor appears to be false (geek, what?). Still, it was a great place to chat with Mitchell, and he asked some really penetrating questions about my personal story, about how Buddhist Geeks arose, how it has changed over the years. The dude definitely knows how to ask good questions, and I found myself feeling quite comfortable speaking with him, like we were long-time friends. No doubt the post-conference high was also a factor.

In any case, I was thrilled that the LA Times decided to feature us. It’s amazing to me how far Buddhist Geeks has come, and by extension how far I’ve come, in the last few years. I’m so grateful to all the people who have been instrumental in making this project happen. Although I’m sort of the voice behind Buddhist Geeks (right now), I’m definitely not alone in making it happen, and as things unfold I suspect that will be more and more true. My sincere hope is that we’re able to skillfully use this media attention to continue our mission of helping serve the convergence of Buddhism with modern technology and culture.

Peter: So another question I have relates to what you call an ‘Open Source’ approach to meditation, where there is a freedom to draw from all kinds of practices. Could you say a little about that?

Vincent: Yeah, the Open Source thing is interesting because I’m really into technology – it’s something I’ve been interested in for a long time – and one thing I know about the open source movement is that it can be done really really well, if you get the right people, or it can be a complete disaster and you end up with the worst software ever! (laughs)

But if you do get the right people involved, there’s something about the spirit of open source, a kind of attitude of experimentation, of trying new things, of seeing what works, of not getting caught in a closed, proprietary system. So, for example if you’re working at Microsoft there’s certain parameters that you have to work within, that you don’t have to use when you’re working with open source.

And sometimes the tradition of Buddhism can get like that, in an analogous way, in that it can keep those inside it from seeing beyond what’s already been done, what the parameters are. The open source model is not saying ‘let’s get rid of the core aims of practice’, but rather let’s see if we can have the software run in a more elegant or maybe more efficient way. But the aim is still awakening. What the program is for, to continue to stretch this metaphor to it’s complete limit (laughs), is awakening, and a mastering of the ability to move in and out of states of consciousness, and to not grasp them at the same time. So it’s about having that full range of experience accessible but not holding on to any one state. To me that’s the core of the trainings that the Buddha was offering, you know, a freedom to move through and access, and then let go of all these different states of consciousness.

Peter: So would that apply to forms and structures as well – seeing their transparency, but also being able to find the usefulness in them?

Vincent: Yeah, I think so. For example I have recently been using a technique, ‘noting-out-loud’, which I learned from one of my main teachers, Kenneth Folk. Although I’d been using it in the teacher-student setting, when he told me that his students were having really good results doing it out loud on their own, I felt this internal polarity inside me between the traditional Buddhist, who was like, ‘You can’t do it out loud, meditation is supposed to be silent’, and the other part of me who doesn’t really care! And I realized that I have to work with both of these dimensions.

There has to be some deep wisdom in this long standing tradition of silent meditation. There’s something to it that I don’t want to discard, but then in the same token I have to acknowledge that if something else works better for some people, then, you know ‘Why not?’!

And so I’m having to acknowledge that sometimes I have to let go of the forms, or how it’s supposed to look, in certain cases, as long as it’s not abandoning the core wisdom that we’re trying to have manifest and come alive. The main aim of what we call Pragmatic Dharma is supporting others in really seeing what’s happening in their experience moment to moment, really seeing how things are changing, and of course into all the traditional three characteristics of experience – and as a result moving toward liberating insight into the nature of identity.

And whatever techniques support that, whatever actually works is what I’m interested in using – which is kind of of the central philosophy of pragmatism – to use whatever practices work. And also to use whatever theoretical constructs support that. So its’ unsentimental in a certain way, but it’s also got that Buddhist spirit of doing whatever works to wake up!

”By whatever means necessary” (laughs)…

“I say vulnerable is woundable.” – The Guru Pitka

So much of what I’ve been learning about lately is around vulnerability. Vulnerability in a psychological sense, of seeing my own limitations and being willing to acknowledge them. And also in a more cognitive and spiritual sense. The cognitive vulnerability has to do with dropping common ways of knowing and doing things, and stepping into new and uncomfortable territory, kind of like an infant when it takes a few shaky steps. In particular I’ve been stepping more and more away rational and analytical ways of knowing to more intuitive and feeling based ways, and it has been both incredibly rewarding and intensely new. And the spiritual vulnerability—perhaps the most complete kind of vulnerability—has to do with surrendering into the mystery, the unknown, into what in the Zen tradition is called, “Don’t know mind.” Spiritual vulnerability is about letting go of who we think we are, without any real guarantee that we’re going to receive some answer that we like.

In every case, vulnerability shares a common movement, one that is away from the solidly familiar and into the tenuous unknown. The unknown is unknown because it hasn’t been explored (by us) before. And for that reason it’s also quite scary. Vulnerability implies with it that we are opening ourselves to possible danger. Or certainly it feels that way. One of the lessons of tapping into vulnerability, and letting ourselves be vulnerable in the right circumstances, is that we see that we often overestimate certain types of danger. We often confuse discomfort and the unknown for sure and certain death! Something as simple as changing something in our routine can feel like an attack on our very sanity.

This isn’t to say that there aren’t certain situations where being vulnerable isn’t the most wise course of action. We have the ability to protect ourselves, or to hold back at times, precisely because we often need to. The world is a very difficult and unforgiving place at times, and thankfully we have the ability to shield ourselves from much of it. Those who lose their shields often lose their minds. But still, we aren’t always the best at estimating the difference between grave threats and those threats which seem real, but really aren’t. Knowing how to see the difference is a function of wisdom, and so wisdom becomes the means by which we exercise vulnerability.

Wisdom helps us see when we need to relax and open, and when we need to be firm and maintain boundaries. For instance, if you have a meditation practice, you’ll be familiar with some of these questions around formal practice: Do you set a timer and practice through whatever happens, no matter what? Do you practice for as long as it intuitively feels right and then move on? Do you have an intention to practice for a certain amount of time but give yourself permission to end or change form if something intense comes up? How much do you trust yourself, and how much do you put your trust in the practice? These are all questions that we have to actively explore as we discern, with wisdom, how to relate to our own practice, and thus our own minds.

In this way, a formal practice like meditation also serves as a meta-development of qualities like wisdom and compassion–two of the most crucial enlightened qualities highlighted in the Buddhist tradition. And these qualities are ones that unfold over years and decades of active engagement with these questions. This is the deep change that Buddhism, and all contemplative traditions, offer. But in order to really reap their benefits we have to continually be willing to step into the unknown and let go of who we think we are. It can certainly feel like dying, but sometimes we need to be reminded that the universe lives and breaths because of death, not despite it.

Mike: What would be the difference between Choiceless Awareness and someone just sitting down, not thinking or doing anything at all? When I was doing this practice, I got the sense that it’s just noticing that you’re noticing. For all of us, probably, the presence or awareness, it comes and goes.

Vincent: Yeah. Basically, someone who hasn’t trained their mind at all, they may be able to naturally sit and notice that they’re aware, and notice what you’re describing, of presence and awareness coming and then going. But it’s harder because people usually don’t have a firm grounding in presence and the perspective of presence to begin with. And so just sitting means daydreaming or being completely lost in conceptions. At least that’s the experience that most people have when they start to meditate.

But I think what you’re pointing to about presence and awareness coming and going is really profound. Because there’s usually the sense or feeling of there being a gap between being present and not being present, and what we try to do is close the gap by maintaining presence. And with choiceless awareness we’re not forcing ourselves to do that. We’re actually letting ourselves be whatever we are. I think there’s something profound in that because it’s pointing to not needing to find a solid, stable ground either in presence or in non-presence. That somehow there’s something profound or very important about the expansion and contraction of attention itself.

There’s something that happens with people when we let that process of expansion and contraction happen on it’s own without trying to manipulate it at all. We don’t feel bad that we’re not present and we don’t get excited and pat ourselves on the back when we are present. Instead we just let it happen. And in letting it happen the ground for deep awakening really gets cultivated because then we’re not clinging to either side.

Does that description resonate with you?

Mike: Yeah. Just sort of your natural process takes over and you’re not getting in the way of that I guess.

Vincent: Yeah. And there’s something about choiceless awareness where it undercuts this very subtle identification we often have as “the meditator.” Thinking that I’m the one meditating. I’m the doer. I’m the meditator. That can become a subtle clinging or identification that we don’t see, especially if we’ve been doing a lot to practices that have to do with actively doing something or trying to cultivate a particular state. This can hide a very subtle sense that I’m the meditator. I’m the doing this thing.

Mike: And maybe due to someone’s past practice you kind of develop an ability to really recognize what’s happening more. And so if you have that background then maybe coming to this type of practice, of choiceless awareness, you’re not getting lost so much. You can track things better.

Vincent: Yeah, I think that’s why it’s typically taught as a more advanced practice, for instance with Mahamudra and Dzogchen. Although it’s not always the case, because in the Soto Zen tradition the practice of shikantaza, or “just sitting,” is the initial practice often times. Sometimes they do breath meditation, but a lot of teachers teach the beginner to “just sit.” They don’t give you any instructions, besides perhaps to focus on your posture, make sure you’re upright, and that’s it.

So, it’s a little easier to do the choiceless awareness when there’s already some habit of being able to be present. You can see that too if you look at the four stages of insight. The first stage is about being prepared, preparing to practice which means starting to become aware of the distinction between being present and not being present. But then the capacity for presence starts to take on a life of its own and that’s what we call the second state of insight. And then at certain point we start clinging to presence and thinking if we’re going to find awakening on that side of the coin.

What happens then is that we’re presented with not being able to be present so easily anymore. And this is what we called the third stage of insight, or the dark night. We start to see that everything is arising and passing of its own accord including presence, including the ability to be aware of a particular object. That the subject itself is arising and passing.

At that point, there’s an opportunity to let go and surrender. And once that has happened there’s a kind of groundless surrendering, an open surrendering, and a deep equanimity that starts to emerge wherein we’re okay with the fact that both subject and object are arising and passing of their own accord. There’s nothing we can do to try to put ourselves anywhere in particular to try to make experience be a particular way. That’s the fourth stage of insight, which we sometimes call equanimity. From that place is where the unconditioned, the unborn, impersonal dimension can shine forth. Sudden awakening can happen because we’re not trying to manipulate experience, and so it reveals itself by itself. So in some way that’s how I think of it in terms of a progressive model, which can start to integrate the sudden and gradual perspectives.

Mike: Yeah. That is really really good. I really like that description. That kind of feels like it has rounded things out more. When I read the progress of insight it’s just sort of black and white. But that kind of made it come alive for me more. Yeah. Thank you.

Vincent: Yeah. Good. That’s the way I’ve been looking at it more and more. This description feels more organic to me. And it feels like it’s describing this fundamental process that seems to happen as we let go, first getting clear, practicing presence, and then letting go. Truly profound. And then that seems to happen at deeper and deeper levels of our being.

So going through those stages one time we call that stream entry, or initial awakening, but then going through it over and over at deeper and deeper levels is the kind of ongoing, continuing, polishing of the crystal of awakening.

In a certain sense the unconstructed, what we might call nirvana—the moment of seeing nirvana is like seeing the nature of the crystal itself. We’re seeing what the crystal is. It’s nature. It’s crystalness. And then we can see from every facet of the crystal–because the cycles of insight are a turning of the crystal, where each facet actually reveals the crystalness, but it reveals it from a different perspective or angle. It reveals from a perspective of compassion or stillness or suffering or letting go and so on.

It keeps moving and the opportunity of awakening for me has to do with the fullness of it. The bringing together of the sudden and gradual, of the nature of the crystal and the various dimensions or facets of it, is really an opportunity to see that to fully embody awakening from all these different perspective is our practice. Junpo Roshi talks about ceaseless practice. It’s ceaseless because it’s never done. There’s always a deeper level of wisdom or maturity that can be unfolded in that process. But the crystal doesn’t change. The nature of reality is always the same.

Mike: Yeah. That’s a great model. There is never an ending. You just keep learning.

Vincent: Yeah. There’s never an ending with revealing the depth of awakening. But awakening itself is never beginning and never ending. It’s always what it is. So in that sense there is an ending and at the same time there’s no ending.

In this fourth episode I speak with Vince Horn, co-founder of the popular podcast show Buddhist Geeks. He’s also a teacher in the Insight Meditation Tradition, in addition to being an explorer of what he calls Pragmatic Dharma. Besides talking about geeky Buddhist stuff, we delve into the idea of informal learning communities, and how–together with web-based technology–this type of endeavor can facilitate individual and collective learning and development.

Link: http://bit.ly/mnJQFC

My understanding at the time was if I saw these three characteristics of experience deeply enough then I would achieve enlightenment. And so I practiced a technique that would help me do that, so I could move toward my goal. And there’s something quite beautiful about this approach. It has a type of simplicity, straight-forwardness, and pragmatism that is really attractive. If you do this, then you’ll see this, and if you see this, then you’ll get this. If A then B. If B then C, where C is enlightenment. Cool, let’s do it! But what I’ve come to realize in the past couple years is that it isn’t always that simple.

I eventually quit doing the noting technique exclusively, and begin doing all sorts of other meditative techniques. I practiced metta meditation, zazen, choiceless awareness, self-inquiry, and explored the concentration absorptions. I tried many different kinds of techniques and saw that they were each different. They all had certain strengths and weaknesses and they all opened me up to different facets of experience.

But even more interesting is that I’ve also found that I now care much less about technique, and often just find myself sitting down (or not even sitting per se) and simply trusting myself to know how to meditate. I trust my mind and my heart to open to experience, to be with what is, and to explore the ebb and flow of the inner world. I don’t necessarily even employ a technique while doing this, I just drop the sense of trying to do anything in particular and let things happen. Some might call this choiceless awareness, but even that feels like too much, because it’s always different, always changing, and always fresh. How can I possibly describe something like that in a simple phrase or teach someone how to do that, when it has take me nearly a decade to discover it myself? Perhaps this is something that goes beyond technique.

And now that I’m in this kind of natural meditation more and more, whether I’m sitting or not, it doesn’t feel right to tell people that the way to get here is through techniques alone. Surely, that has been an important part of my journey, and I teach techniques, but letting go of rigid ideas about what meditation “should be” or “is” has been equally important. When what is unnecessarily or unnatural have been dropped, what is natural and fundamental are revealed in their wake. This is maturity. This is trusting deeply that what we do and who we are aren’t separated in the least.

So, let’s take the first perspective, which we could call the non-dual perspective. In any given moment we may really get—or “understand,” or “know,” or “experience”—that this is it. “This is it” simply means that this moment is already as complete, full, & sacred as it will ever be, no matter the content or intensity of the experience. It could be an experiential moment of complete agony or of subtle bliss. We could be experiencing a stream of petty thoughts or a gush of brilliant insights. We could be feeling deep love or intense self-loathing. It could just be the simplicity of sitting and waiting for the bus. No matter what we’re experiencing there’s a possibility that in any moment we give up seeking for something else to be the case. When that happens we are complete and whole just as we are, in that moment. There’s nothing else we need to experience, and the idea that there’s something we need to do, or practice, to make this moment any more of what it already is, is completely absurd.

But the fact is, we don’t always get that. It may always be available as a potential understanding, or as some non-dual teachers propose may always be the case (though I don’t like to speculate on what is ALWAYS the case). But if it isn’t the case in this moment, then the other perspective, that “practice is essential” must be honored. When I say “practice” I don’t really mean a practice of changing your experience. I mean a practice of opening to whatever experience is already there and remembering that there’s nothing more we need to do![1] Interesting this form of practice usually takes effort & courage, and sometimes a great deal of each. And like any practice the more it’s done, the easier it gets. This is the relative or developmental perspective. And it’s also true.

Then there’s a meta-layer to this whole exploration, between what I’m calling the non-dual and developmental perspectives, that is really important to highlight. In some ways we could think of it as the Middle Way between (and beyond) the two. And that is that depending on which perspective we are inhabiting—whether we’re in a non-dual moment where everything is completely ok as it is OR we’re in a moment of appreciating that there’s a process of opening more deeply, fully, and consistently to the moment-as-it-is—we are honest with ourselves about which is happening and we don’t try to solidify either vantage point.

What I mean by that is that we don’t take either the non-dual perspective or the developmental perspective as being “ultimately” real. We don’t even necessarily try to rank their importance—a common ranking in spiritual lives is that the “non-dual” is MORE REAL. The problem with that is that the non-dual perspective reminds us that the idea of something being MORE REAL is itself a dualistic moment. There’s no problem with ranks, or stages, as long as we don’t confuse higher stages for more ultimate realities. What’s ultimate in one moment is shown to be relative in the next and vice versa. And so this middle way is about noticing when we solidify perspectives on experience, and investigate that tendency as well. The moment that we open to what seems like a solid perspective, the apparent solidity starts to melt away immediately. If we can see it, then we aren’t exclusively identified with it. And there’s freedom.

FOOTNOTES
1. What’s really trippy to notice is that by opening to experience it very often changes the experience, and the sense of the “experiencer.” There’s a really amazing and rich paradox here about how when we don’t need to change the content of our experience it often creates the conditions for the content to change even more freely.↑