How To Use Tibetan Buddhism To AWAKEN In Everyday Moments
Episode 26 of Redesigning The Dharma by Sahaja Soma features a conversation with Scott Tusa, a Buddhist meditation teacher and former monk with 23 years of experience. They discuss Scott's journey from encountering Buddhism at age 19, to living as a Buddhist monk ordained by the 14th Dalai Lama, and later returning to householder life. Scott shares insights from his experiences, including the importance of integrating personal practice with teaching, and practical advice on navigating challenges with social media and modern life. They explore different Buddhist traditions and techniques for dealing with like and dislike, craving, and the importance of maintaining equanimity. Scott emphasizes the importance of continual self-honesty, the guidance of experienced teachers, and the role of somatic awareness in deepening one's practice. The episode ends with an overview of Scott’s meditation and buddhism mentoring offerings as well as a sneak peek at some of his courses on lojong (mind training) and mindful parenting.
Episode Highlights:
00:00 Introduction to Scott Tusa
01:57 Early Encounters with Buddhism & Journey to Monastic Life
09:05 Challenges and Reflections on Monasticism
19:46 Dharma and Awakening for Modern Practitioners
34:12 Exploring Equanimity and Understanding Preferences and Boundaries
46:59 Navigating Social Media and Modern
54:42 Conclusion and Upcoming Offerings
Guest Bio:
Scott Tusa is a Buddhist meditation teacher and practitioner who has spent the last 25 years exploring how to embody and live meaningfully through the Buddhist path.
At age sixteen, his mother's death sparked a deep longing for healing and spiritual wisdom that eventually led him to Tibetan Buddhism. He spent my early twenties seeking out and learning from a variety of Tibetan Buddhist masters, and was ordained by His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama as a Buddhist monk at age twenty-eight.
He spent the next nine years as a monk, deepening his understanding of the Dharma, engaging in solitary meditation retreats, and continuing his studies with teachers in India, Nepal, and the United States, including his main teachers Lama Zopa Rinpoche and Tsoknyi Rinpoche.
Since 2008, he has been teaching Buddhist meditation in group and one-to-one settings in the United States, Europe, Latin America, and online, bringing Buddhist wisdom to modern meditators, helping them to deepen and develop more confidence in their practice.
Full Transcript:
Adrian: Welcome to Redesigning the Dharma. I'm your host Adrian Baker, and today I'm speaking with Scott Tusa.
Scott is a Buddhist meditation teacher and practitioner who has spent the last 25 years exploring how to embody and live meaningfully through the Buddhist path.
At age 16, his mother's death sparked a deep longing for healing and spiritual wisdom that eventually led him to Tibetan Buddhism. He spent his early twenties seeking out and learning from a variety of Tibetan Buddhist masters and was ordained by his holiness the 14th Dalai Lama as a Buddhist monk at age 28.
He spent the next nine years as a monk deepening his understanding of the dharma, engaging in solitary meditation retreats, and continuing his studies with teachers in India, Nepal, and the United States, including his main teachers, Lama Zopa Rinpoche and Tsoknyi Rinpoche.
Since 2008, he has been teaching Buddhist [00:01:00] meditation in group and one-to-one settings in the United States, Europe, Latin America, and online, bringing Buddhist wisdom to modern meditators, helping them to deepen and develop more confidence in their practice.
I hope you enjoy this conversation, and as always, please if you have any questions, comments, feedback, things you'd like to see more of, please follow up and reach out either in the comment section on YouTube or Instagram, as well as just reaching out directly through email sahaja@pm.me.
So first of all, thank you so much for joining us and, welcome to Redesigning the Dharma
Scott: Yeah. Thanks so much, Adrian.
Adrian: yeah, absolutely. Thank you. Just to let the audience know, so I encountered you for the first time on one of Tsoknyi Rinpoche's retreats where you were doing some of the, it's not just a q and a, you sort of explain his teachings and make them accessible for the audience. And that's sort of where we first met or where I first learned about you. And it's great to have you on the podcast. So thank you for, for joining.
Scott: Thanks so much. Yeah,
Adrian: And I'd love to start just [00:02:00] if you can share a little bit what you do, your sort of brief bio and, talking about your Dharma journey a little bit as well, you know, how you encountered the dharma in the first place.
Scott: Yeah, so, so more or less, you know, I've been actively trying to make sense of, and, and put into practice, the Buddhist path and more specifically, like through, the lenses of Himalayan Buddhism, for about 25 years now.
And, I met the Dharma around 19 or 20 years old and, immediately it was just sort of like, I mean I was interested in more like Indic traditions at first, and just sort of the wide lens of what that is and trying to suss out okay, what's speaking to me. And I think at 20 you don't have a lot of information to go off of a, a little bit. So I tried my best and actually I think it was, you know, I just ended up landing more in Himalayan Buddhism 'cause I don't know, the only way I know how to express it is just sort of the, the karmic seeds of something arose and I just felt not only very attracted to some of its past, but really inspired and especially to more, the [00:03:00] monastic path
Adrian: And, sorry, where were you, Scott? Were you traveling around Asia? Was this somewhere in the US?
Scott: Yeah, basically, um, I was in music school, so I was in Boston at Berkeley College of Music and, up to that point, music was kind of my passion and I would call it like my dharma more or less like my path. and I was, one of those passionate people who wanted to make it a career and also, you know, all of that.
So yeah, I went to Berkeley College of Music and just met really cool people and, you know, friends and just have that college experience, but of course people interested in, meditation and spiritual stuff. So, so yeah, it sort of coalesced there in Boston, in the Boston kind of metro area.
And, I had met, a teacher who's teaching me some meditation and sort of from different traditions, some Zen, some Tibetan, some different yogas from, more like, Vedic or Hindu traditions. And it was the, yeah, the Himalayan stuff that spoke to me. And then I, went to seek out, Tibetan teacher and found a monk named Geshe Soga, who was from com Tibet, who had actually escaped Tibet at like 16 or [00:04:00] 15, and escaped to South India and, um, helped to rebuild one of the major monasteries of the Gelug tradition there, Sera Jey Monastery, and, he's just like the sweetest, most amazing guy and, and had been a monk since he was very young. And I ended up studying with him and then eventually became his cook for three years and lived with him.
And, you know, I I, I kind of knew right away, even before I'd met him that I wanted to become a monk, but it sort of like became more real when I was living with him.
Adrian: And were you living with him in the Boston area?
Scott: yeah, in Medford, Massachusetts, there's a center of Lama Zopa Rinpoche, who's one of my root teachers. Yeah. So I'd met Lama Zopa Rinpoche around the same time and, it was one of his centers and the Geshe was like the resident teacher there, Geshe Soga.
and yeah, so that was kind of the start of it, more or less. That's how I met it all. Yeah.
Adrian: Very cool. and then you went through a period where I believe you were a monk for a number of years, right. And then left that. Do you mind giving a little
Scott: Yeah, sure, sure.
Adrian: Because I think that's fascinating for many people who, you [00:05:00] know,
Scott: it is, yeah. Yeah. I get, I get asked a lot, like, how did you become a monk? And then I get asked a lot, like, why did you decide to stop being a monk?
Adrian: Yeah. If you don't mind giving a, a little overview of that,
Scott: Sure.
Adrian: I'm sure the audience would be curious. I am.
Scott: Yeah. Sure. actually like Autobiography of a Yogi, by, by Yoga Nanda was one of the first, books I've encountered, I encountered around the Indic you know, lineages and traditions.
Before that, strangely enough, I'm a percussionist and drummer, so before I'd Read that book. I was really into, African religions as much as I could be, and so I had actually a a little bit, which is that syncretic tradition, mixing Catholic, saints with African saints that came, came through, you know, more or less, African slaves in Cuba.
And then of course you have a correlate in Brazil and you actually have like similar things all over Latin America. But yeah, that was like actually my first chosen path. You know, I grew up in a religion that wasn't my choice, and when I actually had a choice, I was really into, west African music, Afro-Cuban music, Afro-Brazilian [00:06:00] music.
So the religion kind of appealed to me. Just going back a little bit before, uh, that was when I was like 16 or something, 17. And then, yeah, around 18, 19, I encountered Autobiography of Yogi, and as I said, even before I met Buddhism, that path appealed to me.
I think it was the path of like, oh, I want to be a yogi, I want to be able to like do these, you know, wild, you know, things and have city and stuff like that. That was the first thing that sort of appealed to me but it was also the life of a Sannyasen, of a Sadhu, of a monastic, Cause that's what you see in, the book is, you know, Sannyasens and Sadhus and stories of, them.
And then when I encountered it in Buddhism, it became much more practical somehow for me. Like, as you know, Tibetan Buddhism has an extremely rigorous, philosophical tradition, grounded in a lot of study and all of that stuff as well as a yogic tradition So. it was that catalyst when I was 19 that sort of, I didn't know what it was, but I wanted to live a life of, monasticism, even though I didn't really know what that was.
So when I met [00:07:00] Geshe Soga and Lama Zopa Rinpoche and other teachers, I spent the next, eight years more or less kind of like, doing my thing as, as someone in my early twenties, I became a recording engineer and I was recording bands in the Bay Area, I moved back to San Francisco...
But part of that was doing more retreats, doing, you know, studying more, going regularly to classes being around Sangha and getting to know what it would be like to become a monk, as a westerner on the Tibetan tradition. So yeah, so it took me eight years because part of it was I wanted to understand what I was doing, but the other part was like, I just wanted to be someone in my early twenties and date and all that and, you know, really go into it wholeheartedly as much as I could.
And so, when I was 28, I went to India on the advice of Lama Zopa Rinpoche and I took, what's called Rabjung, which is like the entrance into the monastery with him you know, you wear robes and you shave your head and all that, that was in Bodh Gaya where the Buddha obtained enlightenment. And then a month later I went to Dharmsala and took, Getsul or, a novice ordination with his Holiness Dalai Lama. And that was just incredible in and of [00:08:00] itself. But, yeah, so that's kind of how it started.
And then I went into retreat because most monastics, they go into a study program, but Lama Zopa Rinpoche advised me go to retreat, and so yeah, I did, that for the first three years and then met Tsoknyi Rinpoche in 2010, and I moved to Creststone and lived, in his retreat center, basically in his house near the retreat center, and continued retreat, continued studying, I started teaching a little bit more myself at that point.
Adrian: And did you do the three year retreat like that formal training or were you just in sort of your own solo
Scott: I did. No, I didn't do like, so when people refer to three year retreat, they're usually referring to like a system that you go through.
through of
Adrian: a curriculum. Yeah.
Scott: There's a curriculum. I didn't do that. I did probably more than four years of retreat, but not at one time and not in that curriculum. Right. So it was just more curriculum that Lama Zopa gave me.
And then once I was with Tsoknyi Rinpoche and wanted to study a little bit more in the Nyingma tradition, I started taking some other teachings and transmissions and practicing those things, and yeah, basically continued in [00:09:00] Colorado and Creststone, Colorado, was a monk until I returned my vows in 2017, so I was, I was a monk for nine years. Um,
Adrian: Hmm.
Scott: And yeah, the way out is similar to the way in, you know, sort of like usually happens through passion and it ends through passion, right? Like, maybe that's the best way to put it. but, you know, it's a little more complex than that because I, I'm just trying to simplify it.
But, um, in the west, when we don't, go to Asia to Nepal or India and study in a Tibetan monastery and learn Tibetan, the thing that's difficult in the west is it's hard to have sustainable monastic community. And when there's no monastic community, the checks and balances aren't there as much as well as the support of like-minded individuals doing the same thing.
And, just that daily connection to people who are doing the same life more or less. I think it's quite simple. So at a certain point, even though I was doing a lot of retreat alone, in solitary retreat, I started to feel more isolated and wanted a more dynamic life and more, just warmth and connection with others.
at the [00:10:00] same time, there's a lot of ups and downs, you know, I, I sometimes liken it to marriage where in a marriage, you know, sometimes you're in love with your partner and sometimes you're not. It just sort of like goes in waves for most people, from what I've heard. And, you know, you go through challenges with that person and, sometimes it's great.
So it's very similar with monastic vows, even though it's not another person. I was really struggling with it and sometimes I was just like so happy I was there, and that's, you know, over nine years that ebbed and flowed. And then around 2016 I started to crave, you know, a partner again and that kind of thing.
So it's kind of this, this sense of wanting to blend in in the world. Have friends that are doing something similar to me... relate to people without robes and all that stuff. And I wanted a partner, so, I return the vows, which is, we can take them and we can also return them.
In the Tibetan tradition, your intention is to take them for life, but you know how it goes, right?
Adrian: Yeah. So one thing that comes up for me as I'm listening to you is, and this is a question that I come back to a lot and you're a great person to ask it to, is, do you think in [00:11:00] some ways there's a challenge as we're translating dharma as a householder when the code, right, and there are householder traditions, or Ngakpa traditions within Vajrayana, for example, but in general, it's a system that's written for monex going all the way back to the original Buddha, right?
And so that foundation even, it provides a view of what the goal is, what the path is that has a certain premise, that was built for Renunciate. And so as the tradition evolves, it does include householders, but do you feel that there are some issues with translation where we are subtly or unconsciously taking on certain language, certain goals, that had a different view of the path. You know, I laughed, I when you, when you said I was craving a partner, and of course I know what you meant in a healthy way, but the word craving, you know, you know,
Scott: yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah,
Adrian: Just immediately it connects to such a direct translation of that original poison of tanha. And it's the whole question of like desire and how do we [00:12:00] define desire and attachment and all these things. So I I'm curious how you've wrestled with that as you were someone who entered monasticism and now left it. How do you think of the goal of the path and in what ways is that different than maybe a traditional view or how you viewed it before?
Scott: Again, like the way I understand Buddha Dharma and the way I practice it is heavily influenced by a three yana system, that we practice, and I'll define that in a second, you know, just for the listeners, but it's heavily influenced by that in Himalayan Buddhism. Cause most forms of Himalayan Buddhism, if not all, they practice a version of the three yana system, which is, the Śrāvakayāna, the Mahayana and the Vajrayana.
And those are not three separate systems. They're often integrated within one practitioner. And within that view, there's also a historical perspective. Maybe I'll define this quick, you know, Śrāvakayāna is more what you're referring to. That we be the path of individual liberation, which has a heavy monastic influence.
Right. and you know.
Adrian: Can we also, we can also say this is Theravada, [00:13:00] which a lot of people associate with Vipassana. Is that a fair.
Scott: Well, Śrāvaka.... So the, the way the Tibetan system, the way that I see it and how I've learned it, the three yana system, especially like the Śrāvakayāna, the closest thing you could correlate it to as another lineage is the existing Theravada tradition. But they're not exactly the same thing.
It's more a way
Adrian: Because there were more than Theravada originally. Is that why?
Scott: no, it's more like a view and a way that that Himalayan Buddhist philosophy has codified and systematized the teachings of the Buddha that are coming from the poly tradition and the sutras that discuss individual liberation. So it's more how they're organizing it, which looks close, like some of the information and the philosophy and the purpose looks very similar to Theravada But the way the practice goes, you know, the way they orient themselves around the practices and the philosophies aren't always the same.
So I just separate them to not create confusion. 'cause some people use the term [00:14:00] Hinayana instead of Śrāvakayāna and then people take offense, but Hinay ana actually, it's, not talking about someone else's lineage, it's talking about the scheme of how we think of it in Himalayan Buddhism.
Cause Hinayana can mean foundational vehicle. Some people interpret it as like lower vehicle, but we just sort of use it to represent something foundational for Mahayana and Vajrayana. For Theravada, it's not foundational, it's the whole entire path, you know? And so I don't correlate them to be exactly the same for that reason.
Adrian: Fair enough.
Scott: I also use Śrāvakayāna 'cause it's a more respectful term. which just means basically like disciple or follower, literally. But it means like a follower of the path of individual liberation, meaning seeking one's own liberation and, you know, Bodhicitta's talked about in the poly cannon, but there's no practice for actually doing it. There's no way to engage Bodhicitta, at least in popular Teta.
So we have these three yanas, Śrāvakayāna, the individual liberation vehicle, the Mahayana, the greater vehicle, which, goes more into emptiness and Bodhicitta, which we can talk about later if you want, and then the Vajrayana and these three vehicles, you can look at them in a linear way, but you can also look at them in a circular [00:15:00] way or, a spiral where we kind of come back through them because well, the Vajrayana is impossible to practice without the Mahayana. And the Mahayana is impossible to practice without the Śrāvakayāna.
And then even if you've done some Śrāvakayāna view and Mahayana view and worked with those different practices in meditation, and you're practicing Vajrayana, you still need the renunciation mind teachings that are taught in the Śrāvakayāna. Like they're still beneficial to us, whether we're a monastic or not, cause we all need to understand the cause of suffering and to have some kind of weariness with samsara.
Adrian: mm-hmm.
Scott: I would say, for instance, Dzogchen yogis, however they get to that weariness, just to give an example, like the highest peak of they have the most weariness out of anyone, towards Samsara, but it's like a weariness where they also don't make a distinction.
So that's like another topic, but
Adrian: But say more about that, and why do they have the most weariness in a way? Because they're letting go of everything, even the practice. Like even the forms?
Scott: Well, it's sort of like... the way I look at, it's like there's a way up and there's a way looking down, So if, you're [00:16:00] looking up, you just simply need to be weary with a certain lifestyle and way of relating to your mind and emotions to create the space and time for practices like Dzogchen to work, we can't get around that, most of us, we need to put time into these things and, you know, formal and informal practice.
So a lot of the renunciation mind teachings in the Śrāvakayāna, they really center around that at least, they center around a lot of things but, if we're looking at how do we use them in the Vajrayana traditions, we use them to have a weariness towards the status quo of how we relate to mind and the world, right? And so when you're looking up towards Dzogchen, if there's not a weariness, we literally don't have the space in our life to practice it.
And what's unique is to be successful as ocean practice, you do need formal and informal practice, but you don't have to look like a practitioner. You know what I mean? it, it really depends on how you're using your mind. But what I've noticed is it's really tough to develop the energy, the effort to practice it fully, if we don't let go of our way of working with Samara, which for most of us is a work in progress, it's not like, you [00:17:00] know, exceptional practitioners, they're able to just let go and go, for it. Most of us are working on these three Yanas simultaneously,
Adrian: And the weariness is, increasing over time. And it goes through phases. I mean, I find that for myself with certain things, it takes a while. Okay. Had to work through that pattern. Finally got sick of that. Like can see that's not gonna make me happy
Scott: Yeah. Exactly. We have to see what works and doesn't work. Right. and I think of course we can study that and conceptualize it, but as you said, if we don't see it personally, we have no buy-in. And then we don't feel that experientially, we won't really let go.
it's like we have to see, how rotten the fruit is to stop taking a bite basically, and like you said, for most of us that comes in waves, it takes time. And so, you know, I just treat that as a lifelong part of the path. And then, you know, back to your original question, there is a difference of the lifestyle of how we do that as a monastic versus a householder.
And, just to go back a bit before I describe that, the reason I brought up these three Yanas is from the Himalayan Buddhist point of view, those existed at the time of the [00:18:00] Buddha. All three of those Yanas. Not organized in that way, but he was teaching all three.
The Vajrayana being the most hidden, meaning that wasn't taught to a lot of people, most likely. The Shravakayana being that was taught to the most people, and Mahayana a little bit less. But the Himalayan Buddhist historical view is that what developed simultaneously was what's called the Saffron Sangha and the white Sangha. White just meaning the color of robes they wear.
So the monastics will wear saffron or red robes and the householder Sangha will wear white robes. And so we don't exactly know. I mean, it probably has, some historians could come here and say they, think they know or they can, just found these things get incredibly, especially, you know, any study into Indic things, they're highly fluid, let me put it that way.
So, course we can have some ideas of what happened, but we don't exactly know. but within the Himalayan Buddhist lineages, generally there's this view that there was a, a white robe Sangha and a saffron robe saga, and those developed together.
But if a culture is predominantly viewing Buddhism through the monastic Sangha, [00:19:00] then of course it's gonna have this more emphasis of Śrāvakayāna, right? Like, like Thailand and Burma. that's not bad or wrong. That's great. I mean, the Buddha even said when the monastic song is not established in a country, the dharma's not established actually.
So it's really important we establish both. and then of course, kind of maybe what you're alluding to, I'm not sure, is that, political systems, systems of power within countries and Buddhist cultures over, thousands of years do ebb and flow and, in history of Tibetan Buddhism, you can see like in the beginning, it, wasn't a, a monastic thing that was very small.
And it was, more the VA came in, and then monasticism started to develop. And then later in Tibet's history it was like the monastic systems held the power the country, So of course that would flavor, some of the ways people engage with the dharma, et cetera.
Adrian: Yeah. Well, let me ask you in folks, I'll give them the link to your website and they can look at, when you think about translating the dharma to meet people where they are now, meditation, the teachings, what sort of jumps out in [00:20:00] your mind in terms of what you're emphasizing in sort of yeah, how are you trying to approach it in a slightly different way or also what's the same?
Scott: Yeah. And this is something I give a lot of attention to personally and, one of my main root teachers, you know, Tsoknyi Rinpoche, who you already mentioned, where he feels that, of course, you know, we need to learn the dharma and be able to understand past masters and be able to teach from their wisdom.
But if we're only teaching from their wisdom and it's not coming through our own practice and the development of our practice, it's a little bit dry and cold. So it needs to have both elements.
And so that's like the first thing really being beholden to if, I'm going to even share meditation with someone, let alone teach a class on dharma or give advice, I need to be seriously putting energy into my formal and informal practice.
So like, that's the first thing. That's kind of the first rule for me. the sharing part of it comes second actually. not because I need to center myself more, just I have nothing to offer if I'm not, deepening my practice, right? It's just gonna be either cold, dry words or [00:21:00] I might mislead people, which be dangerous.
I also kind of firmly try to apply like radical self-honesty to like where I'm at, and then I limit my sharing to that, if you know what I mean.
Right. So,
Adrian: And that resonates. Yeah.
Scott: yeah. and I think that's kind of important to do. Just to also help people and, and not lead them in a wrong direction with something I actually don't have personal experience over, right?
Adrian: It reminds me of, Adyashanti once, said in a Dharma talk that his teacher said to him when he started teaching. Like, you know, when he's like, how do I do this? She just said, very simply, always speak from your own experience and never speak from anything more than that.
Scott: Yeah. I think that's a, really valuable thing. And so that's kinda like the elements and then of course having living teachers to check in with and that they are, much more. knowledgeable than me? And they can see my blind spots and they are invited into pointing them out and reshifting me.
Right. So I think that's really helpful. if we're gonna be teaching anything, we need someone, with more experience than us to be sort of, [00:22:00] it's not quite policing us, it's more just, you know, helping us to see our own blindspots.
Adrian: Feedback. Would that be a way to think about it?
Scott: I think it's feedback, but often with Vajrayana teachers, especially when they're realized, the feedback comes in strange ways. It's not always
Adrian: Say more about that.
Scott: Uh, I don't know. I mean, everyone has their different style of how they work with people. Some teachers, the most realized ones, they don't really need to do much. They don't really need to say much. It just sort of happens in their presence. I know that sounds a little wishy-washy or vague.
And sometimes they'll say little things here and there. Like for instance, One time, I don't know, this might have been like eight years ago or something, Tsoknyi Rinpoche told me, drop the caring and let the true caring come. Like we were just talking and he just said that based on something I was sharing with him .
That was something he shares publicly, but at the time I didn't really understand fully what he meant. I like sort of did, but I didn't understand on an experiential level. And then I sat with that as kind of a koan over the years. Okay. Drop the caring, let the true caring come. So I was like, which caring do I need to drop? And I know he meant neurotic, caring, Sort of like dysfunctional, [00:23:00] distorted, neurotic, caring about myself and others. But I didn't know how to do that. So then his prompts led me in a whole sort of multi-year process of trying to. drop the carrying and let the true carrying come, you know? And I'm still on that process, but it's become more clear. So something like that would be like a direct verbal thing.
But other than a verbal thing, sometimes you just get cooked in their presence. ' cause they're powerful, And, um, they don't have to say anything. Those are some of the things I reflect on in relation to me, because I think we have to think about our role in this and be very honest, like as honest as possible, which is not easy. I think we self deceive until we're awake basically, to a certain degree. But, you know, we can work on that.
So , that's kind of my side, and working with my mind, working with my emotions, of course, that implies that through practice. But as far as the dharma in how I, share it with others and sort of my process, I was really thinking about this a few years ago, It's not really a critique, it's more just like a way I want to do things. And, so I'm not critiquing anyone else. It was just sort of like, okay, how do I do [00:24:00] this? Like you said, like translating things for people who need another westerner to translate it for them, but without watering it down. that was like the big question for me. And what does it mean to water it down and what does it mean to make it accessible?
Adrian: Right.
Scott: I don't have an answer on that. I'm still playing with that, but what I will say, I did come up with sort of a format for how I like to share things, which is like, my goal is to help people to reach up to the dharma, you know, not saying they can't now. It just depends on the person or what kind of dharma or what kind of practice or whatever. But I kind of think of it as that it's sort of like my role is more as like a cheerleader, a translator to a certain degree, like a cultural translator and then helping people to reach and meet it, not bring the dharma down, you know? And so, that's sort of been one of my like, guiding lights or sort of, signpost or lighthouse to follow.
Whether I'm working with someone one-to-one or in a group or in a retreat with, hundred plus people or whatever, it's to like help them meet this thing. Usually it's multiple things, 'cause the dharma's not [00:25:00] one thing. Right? It's very vast and beautiful, wonderful path.
So within that, I think to get specific, you were kind of alluding to this earlier when we were just chatting. I do think Tsoknyi Rinpoche's lens of understanding obstacles in the body for us as westerners... it's not really somatically understanding the dharma, but it's understanding ourselves somatically a little bit more. That kind of stuff makes its way heavily into my work with people just because again, going back to me and sort of sharing from where I'm at, in 2010 when I met him, he helped me to understand. There was a huge block happening in my practice where the dharma couldn't go down from the understanding into the experience or feeling of it.
It could sometimes, but I was having a lot of trouble with that. but you know, it was hard to see like, what's wrong? I understand this, I'm practicing it, what's going on? Right? You know, understand to a certain degree. And so his practices of working and opening up, blockages in the body, opening up to something he calls essence love, working with reducing speediness or [00:26:00] speedy rlung wind energy in the body.
These all helped me to understand the practice is also happening in the body. And, you know, this is not novel anymore. Most meditation teachers are talking about this, but in 2010, there wasn't like a ton talking about it. especially in the Tibetan tradition. Still, I wouldn't say a lot.
Talk about it. and that's a cultural translation, right? Because, in, let's just call it the old world, pre-industrial revolution, maybe they didn't need that so much. It was just sort of like they could reflect on renunciation and it would become a felt experience and embodied for them and for us, it just gets stuck all up here.
Adrian: Yeah. I think that's where Rinpoche's point when I've heard him talk about it is, people were just more naturally connected and they still have that in certain parts of the world, Nepal. But when we're in a knowledge economy and we're so trained up here, we've developed this disconnect.
And there might be other cultural reasons we can go into certain things from Western culture that exacerbated that, but it's definitely beyond culture 'cause I'm sure people in Singapore and South Korea and Japan,
Scott: Yeah, now if you just meet a Tibetan who lives in New York and [00:27:00] works a job in the New York area, they have the same issues
Adrian: Oh yeah. I would imagine.
Scott: It's a modern person's problem, not a west, east thing.
Adrian: Yes. Well, I was gonna say, that unlocked a lot for me, when I encountered those teachings from Tsoknyi Rinpoche. And it actually made a lot of sense to me as well when I was working with Ayahuasca, how that medicine works.
In a lot of ways it's just releasing karmic knots from the subtle body and, you know, there's a lot of talk, sometimes people think it's about a particular insight. And in my experience that's a lot of what's coming up is just our karmic visions being released. But really what it's doing is just connecting, as Rinpoche would say, the thinking mind and the feeling mind. And so it was facilitating that integration between body, heart, mind altogether.
And once I encountered Rinpoche's teachings, it just, really just all started making sense, including the fact that a lot of times he talks about, I remember with confusion for example, there's two kinds of confusion and sometimes with the cognitive, we might need to go into it, into the story, you know? And that's why therapy's important.
But a lot of times, actually, we don't need to go into the [00:28:00] story. We need to be with the feeling and what's happening in the body and in the nervous system when that knot gets triggered or activated. And actually, I realized when I was working with that, that actually going into the story is a way to bypass and not be with the feeling a lot of times.
Scott: Totally. And, a lot of us don't know another way. So that's part of the issue.
Adrian: Yeah. Well, it's such a habit, right? To go into it. And that's how we feel safe. I'm making sense of it. I'm gonna develop a plan for how to deal with it and Yeah.
Scott: Yeah. So, I heavily rely on those and then of course, you know, there's a way for those to support the path of liberation or like the traditional Buddhist path of awakening , and there's a way to integrate them actually. and to not replace the path of liberation with that, which is an important thing.
We can have wellness and all that and that's good, but that's not the same as sort of ego dissolution, but a lot of people like, myself are just, wanna go hardcore into ego dissolution and you hit a wall 'cause there's this whole other missing piece. I think it's a lot of, it's connected to the compassion element of the path.
Adrian: Hmm.
Scott: And, the wisdom element becomes dry. It becomes [00:29:00] kind of cold and dry without that compassion element emphasized through embodied work.
Adrian: Yeah, and I think actually what comes up, and it goes back to the question more towards the beginning of the conversation. It makes sense in a monastic context. We're trying to extinguish the poisons whether you're a householder or monastic.
That's the, the common thread. But I think what's different is, if you're a household or living a life, your individuality, the personality is just gonna take expression more than whether you're in a monastic community. And that can be cultural as well. There's certain cultures where individual expression is valued more, whereas, you tamp that down more versus in another culture like Japanese culture or something like that.
And so I also view that a little bit as maybe not such an absolute thing, but that can take different forms. And that's one thing I've sort of worked with is, there's certain parts of my personality that doesn't just fit into my idea of what I see from the Buddha, and I'm never gonna be this image of the Buddha, and, and that's okay.
Like we do have certain karmic [00:30:00] dispositions, you know, this personality, this nervous system. And I don't think the goal is to totally extinguish it so that we all look the same.
Greed. Yes. You know, self-centeredness, excessive pride, but, it's gonna look different in each of us, I think, in terms of how we show up for life in terms of the gifts we have, in terms of the quality of beans that we have.
Scott: Oh yeah.
Adrian: All of that.
Scott: Yeah. And I think that's totally welcome. Whether someone's a monastic or a household or practitioner, it's just as you said, because monasticism is emphasizing certain things, mostly you're working heavily with craving and desire and, your vows prevent you from literally going out and fulfilling some of those things, so I consider these things containers.
So this is kind of how I view it now you have like the monastic container and then you have the non monastic container. And the non monastic container includes lots of different lifestyles too. Like there's some non monastic yogis who basically live like monks. You know, you wouldn't know the difference. They just don't hold celibacy vows, or some of them do hold celibacy, so it, there's a lot of variation. So I just look at it as like containers for how [00:31:00] we want to train our mind. You know, I just simplify it into that.
And as you said, different containers are going to be applicable to different people. And then of course, we find our own way within each of those containers anyways, once the dharma gets internalized and we're working with it, honestly. So what's key here is we have to understand what are we using the container for.
Then I think the path becomes clear. Whatever we choose.
Adrian: Yeah. And what's your, what's your pith answer to that? Where you are now in life? What are you using the container for?
Scott: I mean, again, it's sort of like the pith answer is to wake up. But as you know, that's like a big ... what do we mean by waking up? You know, actually the word awakening, just like the word meditation, what I'm seeing in the west is it's losing its meaning. Meditation pretty much can mean anything these days,
Adrian: Sure.
Scott: And awakening can also mean a lot of different things. In Buddhism, we're very specific with what that means, right? so yeah, the pith answer is, awakening. But I don't know. I use, of course, my life, my householder life, but I also use the dharma as my container for understanding mind and where I get stuck.
And so for me it's all about [00:32:00] getting unstuck, but getting unstuck in a real way where I'm not trying to land in, you know, usually we get stuck and then we land in another stuck,
Adrian: Yes.
Scott: I think of awakening as like, you get stuck and then you don't land in another stuck ' cause You can't get stuck in space. You know, there's no way to get stuck in space.
And then of course, I use the container of lots of different practices and, processes to hopefully move you know, the sticky paper gets a little less sticky over time, you know, and, and here's just space, right?
So yeah, that's kind of how I think of it. And of course, you know, with Bodhicitta trying to make that in service of others, that's the motivation, for doing it. So it's not just a self-involved, my awakening kind of thing. And in that way, everything in life becomes, a tool. Everything becomes a way essentially .
But it's also fake. I mean, we have to acknowledge that at some point, if we can't acknowledge that, then the containers don't work. ' Cause then we actually reify the container itself.
So, what I mean by everything is fake, is sort of, everything is interpreted by mind. And mind has no idea of what's really going on 'cause it's stuck, right?
And so until it's unstuck. And mind is knowing its [00:33:00] own spaciousness or spacious nature, 24/7 , we're just sort of working in stories and memories and perceptions, which aren't ultimately true, but they're relatively true and it's, what I have to work with.
So the containers, the way I, I see the world, what I'm working with each moment. It's all I've got. But I also know there's a deception happening, like somewhere in my, mind. I mean, I'm not saying I literally know that all the time, but I can remember, oh, I think there's some kind of deception going on, meaning me to me, and in that way, we can take a way, a path as a container and a process, but also knowing like the container itself is also a story. Like you said, there's individual processes within these things, within these dharma paths and containers, there's ways within them, and they become personal at a certain point because they have to be applicable to us.
But I don't think we have to replicate that for other, like I don't have to translate that for other people. We can meet the dharma and then if we practice, that'll just start to happen. We don't make up some other path, we just engage with the path.
I think the path as it was taught in Tibet is applicable to us [00:34:00] nowadays. I don't feel there needs to be a lot of innovation. I just think we need to practice it, you know what I mean? And then of course, know that the container is also fluid in the way that that is also another story. It's another illusion, but it's a positive illusion. It's something that can help us.
Adrian: Well, let's, use an example, shall we, to talk about getting unstuck, and I mentioned that, I wanted to chat with you about this in preparing for our conversation. And I listened to your one, it was a two part episode on how we try to control our experience and that really resonated, with me.
And it got to, a lot of the questions that I wrestle with in terms of what these goals are, how to define some of these terms, and you gave the example, which it's the perfect one for me ' cause I live in Thailand too, it's wanting to control the temperature in the room.
Scott: Yeah.
Adrian: You know, I live somewhere that's super hot and I'm extremely sensitive to temperatures. I know a lot of other people like this who are just sensitive, whether 'cause they're neurodivergent or for other reasons, but like being very sensitive to stimuli. And the reason I [00:35:00] noticed for me, around temperature, there's something about it, it really, it's not just discomfort, it actually really gets right to the core of my stability of mindfulness.
Scott: Yeah.
Adrian: So that was a great example and I've really reflected on that and I've, talked a lot about that. And so it made me reflect on equanimity, and what is this term, equanimity. I, when I started practicing, I started Vipassanna, Joran Shaw tradition, right? Jack Kornfield...
And then I came across, the writings of Dogan when I got into Zen years later. And it really struck me as, that Dogan gives the instructions, the room should be not too hot nor too cold. And I thought that was really interesting because you will not hear that instruction in Theravada. In fact, it's very much about being with the heat in the room, like no matter what.
And the way I sort of interpret that, living in Asia, trying to different cultures, , it makes sense knowing Japanese culture because there's something about where we decide to draw the boundary, right? My teacher, Douglas Brooks, Shakta Tantra teacher would call that a shiva strategy . And so, Shiva strategy is like where we draw the boundary, and the [00:36:00] shakta strategy is more we just choose to take things then, and then we alchemize it.
And the way I read Japanese culture, it's like they're big on that shiva strategy of like drawing the boundary. And so the way I've tried to make sense of equanimity, I think at first it was like, I have to get to this imperturbable place of being, kind of a Buddha and it's just so not me.
Scott: Yeah.
Adrian: Um, so the, way I've come to define it is, I'm okay about, there are times where I draw the boundary and there are times where I let it in and I think the viveca or discernment is around, where to do that. So I try to think around equanimity as being not reactive.
And then also not harming, right? I don't want to do it in a way where it's harming other people or I'm not taking into consideration their needs. But, equanimity for example, is a term that I've struggled with and kind of had to make sense of, and it's been helpful to see how even other dharma traditions and practices kind of make sense of it, maybe in a slightly different way.
So I'm curious, how you wrestle, with a [00:37:00] similar,
Scott: With equ.
Adrian: Yeah. And, within the context of trying to control things and how you think about it, like what's skillful in discernment within a certain degree and what's excessive or unskillful?
Scott: We're similar in that I, apply a boundary when necessary and then I try to leave heavy curiosity towards that boundary.
Adrian: Hmm.
Scott: Meaning like, some boundaries we just place for five minutes and some we have for five years, right? So if it's gonna be a boundary I'm placing for a longer period of time around something I like or don't like, if I'm gonna place it, I'll be conscious about it as sort of a skillful means of like, okay, this is where I'm at. Like, for you it's the temperature if it gets too hot, I'm hearing, you know, it's hard for you to function in certain ways.
So you, have to have some way of working with that. And I think this is just, being skillful of when is something going to be so overwhelming it's not gonna be helpful for us.
And if we can do something about it, if I can do something about it, do something. And so I think in that way, the way I'll practice equanimity is sort of challenging that like and dislike or that boundary over time. And just checking in, do I still need that? And [00:38:00] seeing is that something that's still necessary or not?
The other way is , it's similar to like, and dislike it, but it's like another way to think about it, which is bias. Which is being biased to one way or another. And I usually just challenge it in small ways.
When I was a monk and kind of early on, I really idealized these great yogis and, people who lived in like very austere circumstances and stuff, and similar to you, I just was like, can't do that. You know what I mean? It's not my jam.
And it's been much healthier for me to recognize where my boundaries are, but also challenge them.
Adrian: Hmm.
Scott: So when it comes to that with equanimity, that's how I work with it. And challenging bias, challenging, like, and dislike. and then, sometimes I'm forced into situations by karma or whatever you want to think of it.
I have to deal with things that are totally overwhelming and I don't feel equipped to deal with it, and yet it's there. And so that's where I find practices of compassion and sometimes embodied compassion, really helpful. Really like leaning into the pain, but like leaning in, in a way, that's being curious towards it.
So the way I kind of interrupt control is to be [00:39:00] curious and it's not really like curiosity with lots of cognitive questions. It's more like, what is this? can I be with this? You know, like opening up my idea both thinking wise, but more felt of like, what is this really? And not trying to get hung up around one way of it being, so that's kind of how I use equanimity.
In the Tibetan system, we use it more in our work with others like likable, dislikable and indifferent figures. But if you really look at it, that's also a teaching. It can be about people or things. But it's really a teaching on like and dislike,
you know, when we get
Adrian: That's interesting. So in the Tibetan system, does it get emphasized a lot with people? Because I associate it so much from vipassana. In vipassana, it's really about sensory experience a lot that that's actually my first association with it. Yes. People too. But it's really noticing when we're doing that vipassana on the cushion, like sounds, smells, temperature, all of that. What's pushing and pulling our attention.
Scott: Yeah, I think that's a really cool part of Thai Forest Vipasana, right? Yeah. similar to[00:40:00]
Adrian: And Mahasi Sayadaw does that too.
Scott: Oh, he does. Okay.
Adrian: that. Yeah.
Scott: Okay, cool. Yeah. I find that super helpful in the Theravada traditions. And then, you know, in Mahamudra we have some similar things. 'Cause again, when you're working with a experiential meditative path where you're using awareness and mindfulness to sort look at things and work with things, that's when I think it gets into that territory you're describing. Usually we run into the word equanimity first through, more compassion, loving kindness, and Bodhicitta meditations.
That's why you tend to see that emphasis with sort of,
Adrian: Oh, like not getting swept away by the suffering of the world or something like that?
Scott: A little bit. It's more like, you know, one of the key practices we work with when we're developing compassion, love, and then Bodhicitta or the Mind of Awakening is, through the four boundless states. And so you can look at the four boundless states, with loving kindness first, compassion second, and empathetic joy third, and then equanimity fourth.
But when they actually practice it, they usually move equanimity first because there's this sort of idea, if we don't develop an unbiased attitude towards the [00:41:00] different relationships we have in our life, our love and compassion is gonna be biased. Right? I'm not saying that's the norm, that's just where I heard of it first.
And so it was more applied to sort of. Relationships, but exploring that over many years, I've really seen that doesn't just apply to people relationships. That really applies to like anything, relationship. And the truth is, I'm in relationship with lots of things all the time. Even if nobody's in the room, I'm in relationship with internal things, thoughts, emotions, et cetera, sensations, and I'm in relationship with external things, temperature, pictures in the room, computers, whatever.
So I think, it does come down to that like dislike, dynamic and equalizing that. Recognizing like and dislike is a form of suffering.
And you know, it sounds like that in the vipassana practice too. So we can think of equanimity as a state, but we can also just think of it as more like a release. It's like a release of like, and dislike or let's say a lessening is more reachable for most of us.
Adrian: Yeah. I mean, what I was thinking about as we were describing it, I was like, we can classify it almost into animate and inanimate objects. But the big thing is when we think about [00:42:00] looking on our phone, which people are doing so much of the time, it's tricky because it's like, well, it's inanimate in that it's a projection, it's a reflection of someone. It's a video you're watching. Yet it's all about like and dislike and what's driving engagement and just noticing all the time, the way that's sort of strengthening preferences.
Scott: Totally. And you're reminding me just to build on what we're talking about, because some people might have the question, well, if I'm letting go of, or lessening like and dislike, how do I function in the world? and that's where prajna takes over and discernment and wisdom can take over.
And that comes through meditation and practice, where we actually develop skillful discernment to discern what is in line with, the natural state of mind and what's not. And I think that's a beautiful way to think about it. And until we get there, we do need like and dislike, just like we need boundaries, like you were saying,
Adrian: Yeah. And also I'd be curious, like explaining this to someone who's really new, cause they'll say, and it's totally natural, like, part of discernment is like where we channel our attention. It's natural to have preferences. Some person is more into art and [00:43:00] or some person's more into engineering.
Like that's totally normal and healthy, that people are gonna have preferences. So they might ask, Scott, what do you mean by not having preferences? And, what sort of your 1 0 1 explanation to,
Scott: Well, kind of like what I was saying is sort of a work in progress where you're learning to more or less let go of that stickiness. It goes back to that stickiness conversation. When we're questioning preferences, we're not questioning like, should we quit our art career or something like that. You know what I mean? you know, if that's what we do and that's what we love. We're working with like and dislike and preferences within the art career, So we use the vehicles that are in front of us.
We don't have to throw them away. Some people throw them away and go become yogi or a monk. That's fine too. But, cause you were asking more about the householder style, we have things we have to work with within householder life and those things are heavily engaged with the world.
And so the challenge is how do we stay engaged? How do we stay open to others? And we might be decreasing our attachment or clinging or craving stickiness to like and dislike. But what that does is it [00:44:00] opens up the creativity, and the compassion in relationship. ' Cause remember the whole idea is that we're suffering because we're clinging to a self that is an illusion to a certain degree.
Doesn't mean we don't exist, but we're clinging to something that's an illusion. And so working with equanimity and like and dislike is a way to, start to open up that stickiness to how we think of self, how we think of other, that strangely makes us more happy and more joyful .
And as you said, the more we scroll it is just one example, the more we scroll, the more we get hooked into preferences, the more that craving develops, the more that anger and fear develop. And those are all states of suffering.
I know that's not necessarily like a absolute beginner way to put it, but we just have to look at our emotions and our way of relating to life and we see like what's triggering, states of mind that are causing me distress.
Adrian: Hmm.
Scott: Then we have to see, okay, what's the remedy to these things? What's the thing I do to open up a new process? For some people like me, I had to go become a monk. For a lot of people, it's just changing how they're working with something.
So it might be like using someone's creative outlet, you know, their art as an example. Maybe [00:45:00] there's a lot of distress because they're really worried about what people might think of their work, or if they're gonna buy their work or whatever. But if they just stop giving a crap as much and just keep doing their work, things start to flow and open and they enjoy their work more.
Maybe even their work sells more. Who knows? So, you know, just like there's practical things like that too.
Adrian: Yeah, I think that's a good check-in. it's natural to have preferences, but, it's the grasping part. Like what's your mental state like? Are you feeling happier, more calm, free anxiety? Those kind of things,
Scott: Yeah, I don't think there's like a one answer to this. It's a tricky one. ' cause for someone who's really going for it, meaning like really trying to, permanently let go of stickiness and rest in space full time, I don't think they have a preference at that point, but they interact with the karma conditions of their life and the people who they interact with who have the karma with them.
And that's where it gets really trippy and interesting because, I don't know, I don't interact that way. I'm still very much stuck to the, fly paper, you know, so.
I interact mostly based off of self involvement. But, you know, I, I watch some [00:46:00] of my teachers and reflect on the dharma and say, wow, that's so interesting.
So it's almost like a force. And that's just meeting different, interdependent factors in relationships.
And, there's like a doer, but not a doer. That's maybe what preference-less-ness could look like.
But again, there's no one way that could look, that person could be, a yogi and a cave or like a diplomat. There's no rule there.
Adrian: No, I feel like, and it goes back to your discussion earlier about the subtle body, I feel like when those knots, the more and more those are removed from the channels and its energy flowing through us, the more and more those knots aren't there, we don't have that distorted reaction.
And I've seen that with a good friend of mine who facilitates that medicine. I feel he embodies that well, he's human, but he doesn't get, triggered as often through some of those knots.
Scott: Yeah, it's like a, a simple example is like the hook. We don't get as hooked and I don't think it's like a question of are we hooked or not hooked? I think for most of us it's more like, is the hook lessening? Are we getting hooked less?
Adrian: Yeah. Rather than an idealized state.
Scott: We can never get to the hooklessness unless we're working with getting hook [00:47:00] less basically, right?
Adrian: Perhaps sort of on a, closing topic, since we're talking about it, it's such a big thing, social media. I'm wondering what you see your own experience, but also working with clients in terms of, I think it's the classic like, okay, I'm gonna work with this as an object of meditation. I'm gonna try to work with it, versus no, actually I need renunciation because this thing is so hooking me, the more tantric path is actually just sort of like, not skillful.
These algorithms are so powerful. What are you seeing with clients in terms of their ability to find that more middle path and relating to it in a healthy way, or do you think it's just sort of engineered in such a way that, you're kind of, this is how I feel all the times, it's really playing with fire.
Scott: Yeah. And just like a segue, I, think about this a lot 'cause I really like watching cultural dynamics and what's so interesting also from a Buddhist perspective is we already have sort of an abstraction or a distortion to how we're perceiving relative truth,
Adrian: Hmm.
Scott: right? But of course we experienced through a human body, you and I and the others, humans listening to this or watching this. And so we create some kind of a consensus that this is [00:48:00] truth, but it actually is an abstraction.
But when you put on social media and then all of the silos we can end up in through it, you get weird dimensions and worlds. That's the only way I know how to describe it.
Because you're talking about one thing, which is the stimulus from like dopamine hits and, quick hits of pleasure and, and things like that through scrolling, getting a new thing or whatever every moment. But what I'm seeing more and more, a lot of us I think are really lacking belonging.
Of course, a lot of us are struggling with hollowness and not feeling grounded in our bodies and activated nervous systems and all that. But there's also this sense of like, we simultaneously feel alone and also because of that we seek to belong, but everything's in the cloud.
You know, not everything, we have personal friendships in person and families and stuff, but we have these other relationships at further abstraction of relative reality, and then those are not the same thing. And so we're sometimes fighting with each other's worlds. So it's, a really trippy circumstance we find ourself in the modern world.
I'll get to your question in a second, but I actually have like, cause this [00:49:00] can feel very overwhelming and hopeless and you know, we can go to like, everything's on fire mode kind of
Adrian: Oh, give us positive. Definitely. We need some more of that.
Scott: I actually think when we're interested in the dharma or we're interested in waking up, things can be catalysts for us because It can become more plainly obvious, how ridiculous things are to believe in them as true. Meaning, like, we can see, especially with AI now, some things I'm seeing, I can kind of tell they're AI, but I'm not sure. So it's kind of trippy 'cause I don't know if they're real or not. So I'm finding myself questioning that.
And if we're trying to find relative reality to hang onto as true and permanent, that is going to piss us off a lot and distress our nervous systems.
But if we're not actually trying to find some kind of ground to land on that's permanent and independent, it's actually a gift. ' cause we're like, great. I don't know if that's real or not. And then it opens up this whole way to work with non-duality in a positive way. We're not trying to find some non-duality where we're dysfunctional in the world.
We have to function with these things. I think that's where the challenge is. But I think the positive is it can trigger a healthy doubt and [00:50:00] then we start looking inwards to find, genuine truth.
So my hope is that perhaps it may bring more people to these paths of non-duality and working with wisdom traditions.
But how I work with my clients is, you know, going back to the beginning of our conversation is, the three yana approach. You have Śrāvakayāna, don't have a phone, you know, which is not possible for most people.
Adrian: Or you could have a phone, but not social media.
Scott: Yeah. You could have one of those dumb phones
Adrian: Oh, right. The not smartphone.
Scott: I'll give you my opinion in a moment of what I do but I'll say what I share with others depending on where they're at. So someone's really struggling and they don't know how to work with things with more fluidity and space and this kind of illusory like thing I'm talking about in a healthy way.
Then I'll recommend, of course, like, please stop watching the news. turn off the news. You know, the amount of news we need normally to stay in touch with how things are is pretty little.
I mean, depending on the person and what they work in, but we're just inundated with news 24 7 from all over the world, so no human being ever experienced that before. So I just recommend the Śrāvakayānan [00:51:00] approach, which is like, create a strong boundary. Back to what we were saying.
Create a boundary for yourself. Limit what you watch and when you watch. If the person really can't deal with social media, maybe take a break. Those kinds of things.
And that would be
Adrian: As an example, can you share what that looks like for you? Just 'cause this is so relevant right now, especially, I know you and I live abroad, but a lot of US listeners... what's your sort of boundary on how much news do you consume per week, per day, whatever?
Scott: Yeah, I'll get to my situation in a moment, cause I use a combination of these three. 'cause then it'll make sense when I share 'em.
Mahayana is a little different because the Mahayana we're being more curious with our boundaries through the teachings on emptiness, through opening up what is reality, et cetera, kind of what I was saying.
And we're developing more compassion and altruism for others in the world, including ourself. And so we might engage with something, even if it's hurting us, but we might do it for the benefit of others. Meaning like, if I don't engage with social media, how am I gonna understand someone else so that's the We're taking on suffering on purpose so we can help others. So we can be [00:52:00] in touch with them actually.
And then the vajrayana, as you know, is where it gets more spicy, and vajray ana is basically, we use the poison to wake up. And I was kind of alluding to that a little bit and maybe I'm totally, deluding myself, but I tend to take that approach, which is like, just whatever's in front of me and engage with that, noticed the activation inside myself.
Like I just, went on a huge rabbit hole with the Charlie Kirk thing, when he got shot and what that activated in me was wild. And I think for me, I felt like I was sharing that with a lot of other people. Like when I talked to people about it, they'd also describe, when I talked to clients too, they'd also describe how, It was like sort of a moment in time. like a portal we went through some of us, especially those of us who are from the US.
I don't wanna generalize and everyone's going through a different experience with that too, it's not all the same. But my point is I don't mind that. It was an incredibly weird dark rabbit hole to go down watching him get shot and stuff I don't recommend that, I just didn't feel like shying away from it. ' I want to be in touch with this cultural moment.
And so sometimes I do that and [00:53:00] sometimes I just, take the Śrāvakayāna way and, turn my phone off. But mostly just work with same habit patterns everyone else does of like, I just pick up my phone and I'm like, why did I just pick up my phone?
I don't know why, and then I just open Facebook or something, And so I'm addicted just like everyone else, but I kind of don't mind that because then I have something to work with.
Adrian: You're feeling it's more sort of in the middle path. It's not going too much overboard.
Scott: Well, I think when we're taking this more riskier way of we want to be in touch with the world. We don't want to be out of touch with it, but we also don't want to be consumed by it.
Adrian: Right.
Scott: And we're attempting to use the poison as medicine. I'm not saying I can do that. It's more like an attempt. I'm gonna fall on my face most of the time. But I'm gonna learn something about myself. I'm gonna learn something about others, possibly. And then, of course there's the blind spots of maybe where I'm actually addicted and probably need to apply more of the, like, Śrāvakayāna mode, just create a boundary of limits to it.
So with my clients, I recommend some version of that depending on where they're at. Most people need some limits or boundaries. Self-imposed, obviously. yeah, just on a personal [00:54:00] level, back to what you said.
I'm that kind of person, whether it's a, very stupid way of being or smart, I'm not sure. I like have to try things. I have to like stay engaged. Not everything I told people recently on a retreat, I don't need to snort a bunch of cocaine and jump out of a plane. I don't need that level of doing things.
No offense to anyone who likes to do that, but like, just being fluid with my social media interaction if I want to pick up my phone and do it, and like notice how my mind is, I often work with, my own habit patterns of craving through, like watching the craving and I need the craving there in order to understand it. But with social media, I'm not sure if that's lessened it. So I may need another strategy.
Adrian: Well, I thank you. I, really appreciate you sharing your wisdom, especially on these, some of these practical notes that I think people can really relate to. And Scott, thank you for your time. Can you share, you know, any upcoming offerings that you have or where people can find you?
Scott: Sure. Yeah. Thanks so much for having me, Adrian. This was really fun. I just felt like we were talking in your living room, so, that means you're doing a good job.
Adrian: Thank you. I enjoyed it
Scott: Yeah, people can find me on my website, [00:55:00] scotttusa.com. There's three Ts in that and, I got, courses available there. I have lot of blog posts you can check out. And then I have a YouTube channel so people can find content kind of everywhere.
A course is being released that I finished a little while ago for Tricycle Online. It's a lojong course, so people out there want to know more about how to use, the mind training tradition of Tibetan Buddhism to work with daily life. that course is available.
There's also a parenting course that launches tomorrow. The site is Mindful Parenting 2025, and it's, um, a friend Loja Winsler, who's a fellow, American Tibetan Buddhist teacher, Ethan Nicturn Jackie Stewart...
it's actually seven of us. And we're all parents and we're sharing. How to work with, Buddhism, meditation, parenting, et cetera.
Adrian: That's a wonderful offering.
Scott: Yeah, I'm, pretty stoked about it. And so that, launches tomorrow and that, I think that'll just be, evergreen. So that'll, be out there. And same with the tricycle course. Yeah.
Adrian: Wonderful. All right. And we will include the links, to your site and offerings as well in our notes. But Scott, thank you so much for your time. Really enjoyed this conversation.
Scott: Thanks so much, man. Yeah. Take care.
Thank you [00:56:00] for listening to this podcast. If you enjoyed it or found it helpful, please consider subscribing to Sahaja Soma on YouTube, rating the Redesigning the Dharma podcast on Apple or Spotify, or sharing this episode with someone who might benefit from it. Any and every little bit helps.
Also, please bear in mind that the plants and compounds mentioned on this podcast and on the Sahaja Soma platform are illegal in many countries, and even possession can carry severe criminal penalties.
None of this represents medical advice or advocacy and should be construed as a recommendation to use psychedelics.
There are serious legal, psychological, and physical risks. Psychedelics are not for everyone. They can exacerbate certain emotional problems, and there have been, in very rare cases, fatalities.
Thank you very much for listening, and I hope to see you on the next episode, or elsewhere on the SahajaSoma platform.