VZ editorial frame
Read this piece through one operating lens: AI does not automate first, it amplifies first. If the underlying decision architecture is clear, AI scales clarity. If it is noisy, AI scales noise and cost.
VZ Lens
From a VZ lens, this piece is not for passive trend tracking - it is a strategic decision input. Roles consume presence—a vow is not a burden, but a direction. A compass unfolding from a winter evening in Budapest, where a single breath fits between the trigger and the reaction. Its advantage appears only when converted into concrete operating choices.
TL;DR
TL;DR: VOW is an internal compass that creates a brief pause between the trigger and the reaction. When roles consume our presence, the vow is not a burden, but the only point where choice still exists—before the action. Within the framework of Neural Awareness, VOW is not a spiritual ornament but a regulatory axis: a shift in objective function from proof to connection.
1) The cold night when the chest stops
“The first awakening is often a gift and free. But after that, the game changes. What you received for free, you must now live for at any cost.” — note in the margin; VZ
It was night when I first realized I had no direction. It was a winter evening in Budapest. That kind of dry cold when nothing is falling, the sidewalk is clear, but the air bites, and every exhaled breath forms a column of steam in the lamplight. The walls of the houses reflected the light; only occasionally did a car roll down the empty streets. The asphalt clattered hard beneath my footsteps, my hands in my pockets, my scarf over my mouth, and with every exhalation I saw my breath glow for a moment in the cold, then dissipate.
I walked, just like that, aimlessly. It wasn’t a grand decision, just that late-night “I need to clear my head” impulse. I thought this would just be another aimless loop around the block. Then a sentence burst in, with full force, so much so that I actually stumbled on the frozen asphalt.
And the strange thing was that my mind only understood it later. My body stopped first. As if my chest read reality sooner than my mind.
2) The role is loud, the presence is silent
“My roles devour my presence.”
I stood there in the cold, in a cloud of my own breath, and suddenly I saw myself from the outside. Not in a mirror, but in a story. I saw how much I work to piece the narrative together—what I’ve achieved, how the company is growing, what projects are underway, where I stand in my “development.” And in the meantime, how many lived moments slip through my fingers.
Not big, dramatic things. Little ones. A sentence I swallowed because it was faster that way. A glance I let go of because I was already looking at the next task. An evening in which I was there the whole time, yet I never truly arrived.
Winter is cruel at this time of year. No green, no scenery, just bare forms. That’s exactly how the image revealed itself to me, too—bare. On the outside, order, form, a well-played role. On the inside, a life lived that grows ever hungrier, never satisfied. In that frosty clarity, it suddenly became clear how easy it is to confuse the two.
A role can be very convincing. Presence is not. Presence cannot sell itself. Presence simply is. Or it isn’t.
The next sentence was no longer dramatic. It was quiet, and harsh.
If you don’t do something, it will stay this way. The masks I’ve put on are living out what I could actually be living.
The role is like an overfitted model—it optimizes for yesterday’s rewards and, in the process, loses touch with reality.
3) What happens if you don’t feed the hungry dogs?
This is where it all starts. Not from a theoretical definition, but from that very concrete, cold Budapest evening when you realize that what you’re doing isn’t the same as what you want to live. Because if you don’t set a course, the roles will do their job. Not maliciously. Politely. Successfully. Maybe even to applause. And in the process, they swallow up your presence. They devour reality.
That’s why we need VOW.
Our souls are full of hungry dogs. Not the kind you see on postcards, but those inner animals that have needs, that feel a void, and that suddenly demand to be fed. They crave attention, connection, rest, security, and justice. They crave a single spoken sentence that we’ve been swallowing for far too long. They crave a boundary that we haven’t drawn for far too long.
The question is rarely whether we have such dogs inside us. The question is whether there is an order in which they do not have to break free for us to notice them.
4) Leash, feeding schedule, return
If there is no order, sooner or later they will break their chains. Out of instinct. And when the chain breaks, they don’t bite where they “should,” but where they can. Those close to us. The one who happens to be there, who happens to be paying attention, who happens to be loving, who happens to be trying to connect. And of course, us too. Our bodies. Our sleep. Our decisions. Our voices, which suddenly become too sharp. Our sentences, which suddenly become too harsh. Our reactions, which become disproportionate, and afterward we just look to see who was speaking through us.
This is when narratives are born. The mind fabricates a story because that’s its job. It explains why it was justified, why it was necessary, why “this time it really was,” why “it couldn’t have been any other way.” The narrative often serves as a substitute for a leash—a retroactive explanation that makes us believe we were in control, when in reality the pack ran right over us.
VOW is not a force, but a built-in limit—a subtle rate limiter that prevents the system from overshooting.
And here, precision is key. Role and narrative are related, yet not the same. Role is what you project outward: behavior, responsibility, expectations, status, rhythm, reward. Narrative is what you use internally to justify, interpret, and sustain yourself. And the dogs are those needs that can remain hungry beneath both. Often, it is the role that suppresses or reframes the hunger, and the narrative explains the bite afterward.
That is why a leash is needed. That is why a feeding schedule is needed. Not out of punishment or self-control, but out of care. We need a system that provides nourishment before the dogs tear apart the space around us. And this can rarely be done alone, in your head, with a single grand resolution, because when the dogs are hungry, thinking is already too late. Then the body and the nervous system take the lead, and the mind follows behind.
Who should you work with to establish this order? People who don’t feed off your stories, but your presence. People who don’t polish your narrative, but help you notice when you slip into autopilot and how to come back before the chain breaks.
A good therapist works with deeper hungers. Shame, anger, attachment, old absences—things that don’t stem from a bad week, but from an entire life story. They can handle the silence with you and don’t let you immediately escape into a story, but help you stay where the dogs actually are.
The body-based companion understands that these animals don’t live in your head, but in your chest, your stomach, your jaw, your shoulders, your sleep, your breath. They help you reconnect with your body, because the leash is often not a command, but an exhalation. Not a thought, but a slowing down. Not an explanation, but a return.
A mentor or coach helps you get your daily rhythm in order. The pack responds to rhythm. Chaos starves you. Rhythm nourishes you. When you sleep, when you rest, when you work, when you’re with people, when you’re in silence, when there’s space, when there’s play. These aren’t lifestyle tips. These are links in a chain.
What ties all this together is VOW. It’s about coming back to the present first, and only then speaking. Body first, then story. Connection first, then justification. Because dogs aren’t tamed by you explaining things to them, but by feeding them on time. VOW is the name of this feeding schedule. A silent contract that means they don’t have to act out to finally get attention.
5) VOW — the direction before the movement
VOW is an internal compass. It shows you how to stay present even when no one is watching—without it slipping into a method, a goal, or yet another self-project. It’s more of a baseline. A spoken or unspoken vow that holds even when there’s no reward, no feedback, no applause—just your body, your nervous system, and the moment.
A VOW is not a situational decision. It’s easier on good days, harder on tired days, yet it always pulls you back to the same place. A deeply rooted direction to which you return again and again. If you had to put it in one sentence, it would be:
“This is how I will be present, no matter what happens.”
A VOW doesn’t tell you what you want to achieve, but how you’re willing to operate along the way. The goal may or may not be reached—but a VOW can be practiced. Even when you fail at it. Even when you realize you’ve strayed from it. That’s precisely what brings it to life, because it doesn’t sustain you in success, but in returning to it.
On a psychological level, the VOW is the counterpoint to fragmented identity (a self-identity that has fallen into pieces). When attention shatters into fragments amid roles, expectations, and stimuli, the VOW realigns it onto a single axis. It does not solve—it sustains. It does not provide answers—it provides grounding.
In spiritual terms, it is close to the Bodhisattva Vow. The main focus here is not on comfortable liberation, but on the quality of presence even in the midst of suffering. Not withdrawal. Engagement.
To put it another way: a VOW is the inner statement that speaks within you even when no one is asking. In micro-moments, in tone, in setting boundaries, in silence, or in speech. If it is well-formulated, it does not constrict. It is quiet and stable.
6) A breath’s worth of space
You can see the VOW in the fact that there is room for a breath between the trigger and the reaction.
It’s not a large space. It’s not a ceremony. Rather, it’s a hair’s-breadth gap before the movement, when the body is already ready to go, the mind is already running through the usual narrative, and yet there is a moment when you can pull back. The soles of your feet on the ground. Your shoulders a millimeter lower. Your throat relaxes. Your chest doesn’t immediately close in on the sentence. This gap is the practice.
Attention is a computational budget, and VOW is that moment when you don’t give it all to the next stimulus.
The world of deep learning knows this momentum with uncanny precision. A model always wants to predict the next step—the next token, the next move—and if there is no intervening brake, it continues running along its own internal probabilities. In this language, VOW is a tiny bit of regularization. It doesn’t stop life; it just gives the system back a momentary right to decide.
Think of it this way: overfitting in a neural network means that the model learns the past data too closely and loses its ability to respond flexibly to new situations. That is exactly its role: an automatism trained on patterns of yesterday’s rewards. Regularization—a penalty term in deep learning that prevents the model from following old data too closely—is the VOW here. It doesn’t prohibit anything. It just ensures a tiny gap where the next move is not yet determined.
7) What takes center stage if not the self?
Without VOW, no matter how much you work on yourself, your life can still fall apart. VOW is not another goal, nor is it a spiritual prop; rather, it is the declaration that “from here on out, this is the fundamental direction of my life”. Everything else either builds upon this or falls away from it.
The VOW shifts the center of your consciousness. Until it exists, the “I” is at the center. Needs, fears, vanity, wounds, compensations. Often, this “I” isn’t even a living entity, but rather a constructed mechanism made up of feedback and conformity. It looks good, lasts a long time, and demands constant energy along the way. Fuel, proof, validation. And it often takes this from where it is most precious: from presence.
The objective function of my old center was proof.
“My roles devour my presence”—that’s what it’s about. As long as the self is at the center, work, “progress,” and relationships can all become props for validation. Your own story becomes louder than your life. There is a narrative, yet little lived present.
With VOW, the center is no longer the self. Something bigger than me takes its place—a direction that remains valid even when I’m not doing well with it. This shifts the balance of my decisions. The first question isn’t “what’s in it for me,” but “does this align with what I’ve dedicated my life to?”
The objective function of VOW is the relationship.
And you can feel it. It’s ten o’clock at night, the phone rings, another message. The old mindset would already be moving the thumb, shrugging the shoulders, tightening the chest, attention racing ahead. With VOW, another question comes up first—not in the head, but more in the gut: “Does this bring me closer to who I want to become? Or are my roles asking for another bite, and am I paying for it with my presence?”
And sometimes that’s all that happens. The hand pauses for a moment. Gently. Before the movement, there’s a breath’s pause.
8) A vow is not a burden
“VOW” is an everyday word. A vow, an oath, a commitment. Here, a “vow” often comes down to a moral project. “I’ll be good.” “Never again.” Then comes the shame when it fails. A VOW is of a different quality. It is not a burden carried by the ego, but a direction you set out on, and one that slowly begins to hold you.
There is an old Zen story. The monk lists his vows: “I will not get angry,” “a hundred prayers every day,” “I will help everyone,” “I will be perfect.” The master listens, then asks: “And who is going to keep all of these?” — “Well, me.” The master smiles: “Then I already know that these will break you.”
The problem isn’t the intention, but entrusting the vow to the ego. A VOW begins to work when the direction holds—and not just when you force the direction.
Uchiyama Roshi said: “The vow is not something you hold onto—the vow is what holds you.” You truly understand this when fatigue, failure, and shame arise, and yet a quiet, simple “still” speaks within you, keeping you on course.
9) What hidden vows are guiding us from behind the scenes?
The VOW is the fundamental guiding system of life. It is not a goal, not a task, not a to-do list, but a fundamental quality. In light of this, everything else either falls into place or is exposed. Goals are important—and without the VOW, they can even work against one another. Career versus health. Self-actualization against presence in relationships. Spiritual “growth” against unbearable guilt.
Tiny, often unspoken narratives run through every person. “I have to prove myself.” “I can’t be weak again.” “If I slow down, I’ll disappear.” “If I don’t hold it together, everything will fall apart.” These are actually small, hidden vows. As long as they aren’t brought to the surface, they’re in control. And you think you’re the one making the decisions.
I learned from the data of my past, and I thought that was reality.
In the language of machine learning, we would say: these are hidden objective functions. If your internal objective function is to “prove yourself,” then your system will optimize everything toward that—even rest, even relationships—just with a different label, just a smarter story. In this case, VOW isn’t about motivation. It’s a change of direction. A change of objective function. You’ll have a chance to build a different kind of life by setting your sights on something else.
Now I’m learning a new pattern—from real-life situations, not from memories.
We often experience this inner workings as if we were constantly standing in line. Not a real line. An inner line. Always waiting for the next moment. The next message. The next task. The next proof that I’m okay. Meanwhile, the body stays out in the cold.
10) How does VOW overwrite shame-based vows?
I remember when I first saw my own hidden vows. I almost choked on the shame. Not because I saw myself as a “bad person,” but because it suddenly became clear that beneath my grand narrative of freedom ran very tight vows woven from fear. “I will always be strong.” “I won’t ask for help.” “I carry others; no one carries me.”* That’s how I slowly became the kind of person who felt free on the outside but utterly exhausted on the inside.
This is where VOW comes in. Not by slapping a pretty phrase over your old narratives, but by stating the direction against which they can no longer steer the ship. For example:
“The direction of my life is that my relationships should not be fed from the leftover time of my performance.”
Or like this:
“The direction of my life is that my performance should arise from my connections and my presence, not in place of them.”
When you say this—and feel it in your chest, in your gut—that’s when the VOW begins to overwrite the small, shame-based vows. Not like lightning. More like slow snow.
11) VOW in the Kitchen and at the Front Door
In Zen, there is a simple insight that Master Dae Kwang conveys with an image. The strongest practice is not the greenhouse, but everyday life. A tree grown in a greenhouse grows beautifully, but when the protection is removed, it easily falls over. A tree grown outdoors grows stronger in the wind. Practice is decided where the wind blows.
The notification comes like an interrupt, and I reflexively let it take over the CPU.
The modern attention economy, meanwhile, is like an aggressively fine-tuned recommendation system. It’s constantly learning what pulls you out of the present moment and what pulls you back into the flow. VOW doesn’t fight by making you stronger, but by helping you reconnect before acting, so you don’t hand over complete control to the next stimulus.
The practical language of Neural Awareness breaks this down into micro-doses. Practice doesn’t just happen in long sessions, but in brief returns, in tiny transitions. VOW fits into this by arriving not after the story, but before the movement.
VOW is when I reclaim the ongoing process.
Before you write a letter, before you eat, before you wash the dishes, before you step out onto the street for a walk—there is a hair’s-breadth gap. Your body is already moving, your mind is already running the usual story, and yet there is a moment when you can come back.
You’re writing a letter. You sit down at the computer and feel your shoulders already hunching up, your chest tightening, your throat hardening, as if you had to defend the sentence. You pause for the length of an exhalation. Feet on the ground. Shoulders a millimeter lower. Then comes the sentence, and only then comes the letter.
You’re about to eat. Your hand is already reaching for the fork, your attention races ahead, as if you had to master your body. You feel the tension in your jaw, the stomach’s urgent demand, the rushing. Two slower exhalations. Then comes the sentence, and only after that comes the eating.
You’re about to do the dishes. Your head would dismiss it, would flee from it, while your shoulders and neck are already bearing the weight of the day. You grab the sponge, feel the warm water, and before you start—a moment. Sole. Breath. Shoulder. Then comes the sentence, and only after that comes the movement.
You step out for a walk. The doorknob in your hand, the cold outside already around your nose, and your attention is already drifting toward the to-do lists. You pause on the threshold for the duration of an exhalation. You feel your feet in your shoes. Then comes the sentence, and the first ten steps are not thought, but sensation. Cold air. The rhythm of your steps. Lights. Faces. Your body, as it comes back.
12) Four lines borrowed from the VOW, until your own arrives
If you don’t have your own VOW sentence yet, use one of the lines from the Bodhisattva Vows and alternate them. Once outward. Once inward. Once help. Once letting go. A single sentence is enough, clearly, inwardly, softly—so that your body can hear it too.
When you’re writing a letter and you feel that behind the sentences lies a desire to please, to assert yourself, or to figure out “how do I get out of this”—stop yourself before you act, and say to yourself:
“Sentient beings are countless—I vow to be of help to them all.”
The letter may be firm, precise, or businesslike—and yet the focus shifts. It is not the role that seeks to win. It is the relationship that seeks to remain pure.
At other times, with the very same letter, you feel something boiling inside: anger, hurt, a need to prove yourself—and your hand is already tightening the tone. In such moments, say the other line:
“Disturbing emotions are many—I accept that I will tame them all.”
This is not avoidance, nor is it compromise. It means that the disturbing emotion does not drive the sentence. You return first. Then you write.
But you can also use the other two lines, adapted slightly to today’s world:
“The teachings are manifold—I vow to understand them all.”
This is the line of curiosity. You say it when your mind closes off, and you’re tempted to just label the other person, when all it would take is a single clear question.
“The path of my life is unfathomable—I accept that I will walk it to the end.”
This is a line of perseverance. You say it when you’re about to take the easier detour, when you’re already bargaining with yourself, and you need an inner “yes” to take this step right now—in small ways, simply, moving forward. And this is also a line of expansion, which you say when control would pull you back, and you instead allow yourself to connect with whatever comes—before you give it a name, before you push it away, before you turn it into a story.
Before eating, when the rush of the day would make even the fork hurry, you feel the fluttering in your stomach, the tension in your throat—and you speak the line of letting go. Before washing dishes, when your mind wants to escape and your body is already carrying the burden—you speak the line of help. Before the doorknob, when you shrink into your own head—the line of help expands. When you’re spinning out of control and your inner commentary is racing—the line of letting go clears the way.
The essence of this alternation is that VOW should not be a rigid formula, but a living direction.
13) Postscript — Neural Awareness as an Operational Language
The Neural Awareness combination I developed and structured is not “unique” in the sense that all its components already exist and are supported by very strong traditions individually. What is rarer is the balance, the sequence, and the language through which it comes together. This is not “spirituality plus psychology,” nor is it “technology plus mindfulness,” but rather a triangle where narrative, neurological state, and mindfulness are different cross-sections of the same phenomenon—and from this emerges a teachable, everyday practice.
Neural Awareness is not a worldview, but rather observability, feedback, and the fine-tuning of a human system in real time.
The vow as a form of commitment is natural within the Buddhist and existential traditions. Reading the state of the nervous system, returning to the body, and regulation have long been central to modern trauma and somatic schools. The narrative self—the “story about myself,” its defense mechanisms, and self-deceptions—is also present in narrative psychology, cognitive approaches, and phenomenology. The components may be familiar.
Neural Awareness stands out in that it presents all this not as a theoretical map, but as an operational language. It does not say, “This is how the nervous system works,” but rather: “This is how I realize I’ve been carried away by the role, and this is how I come back.” It does not say, “narrative identity,” but rather: “When I start defending my story, the contact is lost.” The vow is the system’s stabilizer because it connects the momentary micro-decision with long-term self-identity. This is what makes “the vow as a regulatory axis” an unusual framework, and this is what gives it its own voice.
The separation of the role-playing self and the lived presence in this method is not moralizing, nor is it “authenticity PR.” It can be measured in terms of neurological and attentional consequences. The question is not “am I real,” but whether there is contact, whether there is a body, whether there is responsiveness—or whether there is only a role and a reflex.
14) Compasses and Kindred Voices
VOW does not grow out of a single tradition; rather, it is a point where multiple languages point to the same thing.
The existentialist approach. Kierkegaard and Frankl provide the backbone—and alongside them stands Heidegger with his sober view of thrownness (Geworfenheit—the consciousness that we did not choose, but were thrown into existence), Camus’s pure rebellion, Hannah Arendt and her sense of responsibility in the weight of everyday life, while Levinas broadens the picture with the ethical imperative arising from the face. Simone Weil attention here is not a decoration, but an action—like when you do not allow your presence to be taken away by your story.
The Zen side. The vow is not an ideal, but washing dishes and fatigue. Robert Aitken, Thich Nhat Hanh, Suzuki and Dogen all point to the same everyday truth—and Uchiyama’s statement that “you do not hold the vow; the vow holds you” hits the mark because it offers not comfort, but a structure that your body can understand.
The line between disintegration and integration. Pema Chödrön’s steadfastness, Jack Kornfield’s sobriety, Tara Brach’s gentle precision, Adyashanti’s breaking-through—all teach the same thing: realization is not a peak experience, but behavior, tone, and contact.
The psychological space. Winnicott on the “true self / false self,” Kohut on narcissistic vulnerability, Bowlby attachment theory, Rogers unconditional positive regard, Perls figure-ground clarity — all of these reveal the tension between role and lived experience, just in different words.
The body and nervous system perspective. Peter Levine titration (an approach to trauma processing involving slow, small steps), Bessel van der Kolk and his concept of the body’s memory (The Body Keeps the Score), Stephen Porges polyvagal theory (a three-tiered safety model of the nervous system) and Deb Dana subtle maps all point to the same thing: “dogs” are not poetry, but a state, and care here is rhythm, not explanation.
The narrative and cognitive space. Jerome Bruner and Dan McAdams show how we construct ourselves through stories. Daniel Kahneman, meanwhile, shows how easily we confuse quick reactions with reality—the difference between System 1 (fast, automatic thinking) and System 2 (slow, deliberate thinking) is precisely that an automatic response is not the same as the correct answer.
The Mind and the Model. Thomas Metzinger’s phenomenological transparency (when we confuse the internal model with reality), Antonio Damasio’s somatic marker hypothesis, and Karl Friston predictive logic (predictive processing—the brain as a constantly forecasting system) are related because they all ask: when do you take your own model too seriously, and when do you have a chance to come back? George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s metaphor engines are not literature here, but steering wheels—and when you realize this, the VOW’s flashlight illuminates a wider space. Not because it illuminates everything, but because it shines precisely where there is still a choice before the move.
The poetic compasses. Rilke’s patience with questions — “Live the questions now” — and Alan Watts’s humor, which breaks down the spiritual ego so that VOW isn’t just another “pretty role,” but a simple return.
VOW is the human version of alignment—not so that I can be flawless, but so that there is direction before the movement.
These voices point to the same thing in different languages. Without VOW, mindfulness training easily becomes a performance. Without mindfulness training, VOW easily becomes a pretty phrase. And without narrative, it’s harder to notice when we slip into a role.
15) Closing — Back into the Cold
So, on that evening in Budapest, I didn’t find a solution. I only found a direction. VOW didn’t make me wise, and it didn’t suddenly turn me into a better person. It just brought me back. For a breath.
I was out in the cold, my breath steaming in the lamplight, then dissipating, and somewhere in that steam I understood for the first time that the role is loud, the presence is silent. And that sometimes that is the difference between the role and life. Before the movement, there is the pause. That is where the breath fits in. That is where the direction begins.
Key Thoughts
- Roles consume one’s presence — not maliciously, but in a refined, successful way, even to the point of receiving applause; VOW is the realization that what you do is not the same as how you want to live
- The metaphor of hungry dogs as a working principle — unmet inner needs do not disappear, but run wild; VOW is the feeding routine that provides sustenance before the space is torn apart
- The breath-long gap between trigger and reaction — the human version of deep learning regularization; it doesn’t stop life, it just gives back a momentary right to decide
- The vow is not a burden, but a direction — in the words of Uchiyama Roshi: you don’t hold the vow, the vow holds you; the VOW works when the ego can no longer cope, yet the direction remains
- Hidden vows are hidden steering wheels — as long as shame-based internal narratives are in control, conscious decision-making is an illusion; the VOW is a change in objective function, not motivation
Key Takeaways
- VOW is an internal rate limiter that inserts a brief pause between the trigger and the reaction, preventing the automatic mode of roles from swallowing up presence. As the article points out, this is not a force, but a built-in regulatory axis.
- Presence cannot sell itself; it simply exists or does not exist, unlike persuasive roles, which—like an overfitted model—are optimized for past rewards.
- Internal needs are like “hungry dogs” that require a feeding system (a leash); otherwise, they “bite” those around us and our own bodies, after which the narrative provides only a retrospective explanation (a leash substitute).
- Awakening often begins with a specific, physical experience (such as a cold Budapest evening), when the chest “reads” reality sooner than the mind, and we see from the outside that our roles are consuming the moments we are meant to live.
- The objective function must be shifted from proof to connection, and this system is best developed with people who nurture presence rather than embellish the story.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between a VOW and a typical New Year’s resolution?
A New Year’s resolution leaves it up to the ego to keep it—“I’ll be good,” “never again”—and when it fails, shame follows. A VOW is of a different nature: it is a direction, not a destination. It doesn’t tell you what to achieve, but how you are willing to be present on the journey. The Zen story is exactly about this: you don’t keep the vow; the vow keeps you. A New Year’s resolution measures itself by success—a VOW by return. It lives precisely because it is not the absence of failure that makes it valid, but the fact that even after failure, there is somewhere to return to.
How can I start practicing VOW if I don’t have my own vow?
The four lines of bodhisattva vows are exactly for this: a borrowed VOW until your own arrives. The four lines represent four directions—help, taming, curiosity, perseverance—and the practice is to pause for the duration of an exhalation before acting, and silently recite the line appropriate to the situation to yourself. It is not the words that matter, but the space they create between the trigger and the reaction. In the kitchen, at the front door, before checking email—VOW is woven into the fabric of everyday life, not into moments of retreat.
Why does the article use machine learning and deep learning analogies for VOW?
Because the operating principle is the same—not metaphorically, but structurally. An overfitted model optimizes for yesterday’s data and loses its flexibility—that is precisely its role: an automatism trained on patterns of past rewards. Regularization (a penalty term in deep learning) prevents the model from following the past too closely—this is exactly what VOW is: a hair’s-breadth gap where the next move is not yet determined. The hidden objective function is the unspoken optimization criterion that controls the entire system from the background—internal narratives of the “prove yourself” or “don’t be weak” type work exactly this way. VOW is an objective function swap: connection instead of proof.
Related Thoughts
- On Presence, Simply — Zen monasteries, narratives, and the architecture of silence
- The Anatomy of Presence — embodied consciousness in the digital age
- Contemplative RAG: Meditation + Knowledge System — when attention management and the structure of the knowledge system are one and the same
Zoltán Varga - LinkedIn
Neural • Knowledge Systems Architect | Enterprise RAG architect
PKM • AI Ecosystems | Neural Awareness • Consciousness & Leadership
Where the signal ends, the system begins.
Strategic Synthesis
- Map the key risk assumptions before scaling further.
- Measure both speed and reliability so optimization does not degrade quality.
- Close the loop with one retrospective and one execution adjustment.
Next step
If you want your brand to be represented with context quality and citation strength in AI systems, start with a practical baseline and a priority sequence.