Trading off Legibility and Potency in Spiritual Practice

There is often a trade-off between legibility and potency in practices that work with deeper patterning. Such patterning — "communicating well," "feeling your emotions" — may manifest quite differently across people and contexts.

Supporting a deep pattern will vary considerably based on where a person stands and the context of application. By analogy, consider the pattern of "getting to the Eiffel Tower". Are you currently at a hotel within walking distance? Are you currently in a suburb of Paris? In another European country where you can travel by rail? In the United States, where you would need a plane?

There is no singular, universally legible set of instructions for "how to get to the Eiffel Tower", yet someone who knows where you stand can give you concrete, personalized instructions — and you can follow them.

Many of the most potent spiritual practices are like this: such an approach starts with where you are and integrates within your actual context. A classic example is "pointing out instructions", in which a teacher gives instructions only valid for a particular student in a single exact moment.

Legibility is significantly increased by stating a 10-step program! But this entails universalism both in where the person is starting from and the context of integration ― the weaving of practice into the fabric of everyday life. And this lack of fit both to person and context reliably diminishes potency.

My approach to communicating about such matters is to stake my reputation. It's like recommending someone stand before a transcendent artwork: no description substitutes for the encounter. You recommend, they see, they either receive it as you did, or don't, and their trust in your future counsel shifts.