a redwood forest, possibly the very embodiment of the opposite of “noise”

I just did an extensive Q&A series on Instagram stories.

On all the topics.

(It is saved as a “stories highlight” on my profile if you want to look. It will be on there for a while, though it might be gone if you’re reading this post far enough in the future.)

Responding to something I said there, a friend asked, “how do I know if my program isn’t just adding to the noise, putting more of ‘what everyone else is doing’ out there?”

I was, and am, so grateful for this question.

It is a courageous question, coming from someone whose spirit is healthy enough to be willing to risk discomfort.

That’s more than I could ask for from… so many.

I thought deeply about how to answer this, and want to talk about it here.


But first, non-duality.

Nothing is inherently noise, or non-noise.

The music you love so much might just be noise to someone else.

The literature you find so meaningful might just be unremarkable strings of words to someone else.

The teaching that saved your life might just sound like fluffy nonsense to someone else.

Noise isn’t an inherent property of anything, but a perception, a judgment.


That said, judgments are sometimes useful.

Judgment is discernment.

And sometimes, the lack of discernment hurts us.

Here’s what I’m willing to define as noise, right now: that which lacks substance and root.

When something is lacking in substance and root and still manages to persist in the world, it is usually because it makes up for what it lacks in other attributes.

Like: the soft manipulation of shiny packaging and sleek slogans, and the ability to appeal to the lowest common denominator through the triggering of our basest instincts.

Add on top of that the irresistible pull of the “cheap, fast, easy, and convenient”, then we have a recipe for something full of static… but no signal.


One of the reasons I’m pulling my old, enormously popular podcast off the air is my profound regret that, in hundreds of episodes teaching people how to get the word out about their thing, I’ve rarely stopped to ask them: “is your thing worth getting the word out about?”

If I were to do a do-over — which I am, now — here’s what I would ask again, and again.

Does your thing have substance?

Meaning, did you come by what you claim honestly?

Is it embodied and battle-tested?

When you take away the packaging, the buzzwords, the constructs and methodologies skimmed off 2-month-long course without the much slower, non-linear, winding and vexatious work of personal cultivation, is there a there there?

And can you answer this infuriating — and yet, ultimately the most important — question of:

“Why does your thing matter in a world where wars and genocides are still raging, a quarter of the global population is living under the poverty line, and where we are all equally facing a mass extinction event, probably less than a century away?”

Does your thing have roots?

Meaning, how deep does it go?

Are the roots deep enough to sustain you through floods, draughts and storms?

What kind of worldsense is it grounded in — if not the default of appropriative, disembodied, post-colonial capitalist emptiness?

Can it stand the test of time?

Where can you track the lineage of your thing?

Is that something you can make moral sense of — if not be proud of?


These are thorny, inconvenient, terribly difficult questions.

If you have an easy and quick time answering them, you’re probably already on the wrong track.

And it’s worth repeating: my biggest regret is that I haven’t posed these questions to the world sooner, more frequently and insistently.

It’s not that I believe everyone should sit on their hands and wait to take action on their passions until they have all the answers perfectly figured out.

I actually think that’s impossible.

But I think the questions beg to be honestly, humbly and vigorously wrestled with.

I think doing so is the work.

It is how you become a person of substance, and how you grow roots.

I don’t think anyone who is unwilling to do so can claim to be a serious person in the public arena.

I think anyone who is unwilling to do so is most likely, by default, just contributing noise.