Transcription of a Deconstructing Yourself podcast episode, you possibly can hearken to here.
Michael Taft: Welcome to , the podcast for meta-modern mutants concerned about meditation, neuroscience, hardcore Dharma, shards of Earth, predictive processing, tantra, nonduality, awakening, and way more. My name is Michael Taft, your host on the podcast, and on this episode, I’m speaking, once more, with Ken McLeod. Ken McLeod began his study and practice of Buddhism in 1970 under the eminent Tibetan master Kalu Rinpoche. After completing two three-year retreats, he was appointed as resident teacher for Kalu Rinpoche Center in Los Angeles, where he developed modern approaches to teaching and translation. After his teacher’s death in 1989, Ken established Unfettered Mind, a spot for those whose path lies outside established institutions. His many published works include , , and his brand latest book entitled . And now without further ado, I offer you part two of the episode called “The Magic of Vajrayana with Ken McLeod.”
Michael Taft: So, as promised, Ken, welcome back for part two of our speak about your book,
Ken McLeod: Thanks. What are we going to explore today?
MT: I feel it’s to be discovered, we’ll discover what we’re going to explore. But as I discussed, I felt like at the top of the last interview, which we did about 10 days ago, or something, I just felt like we hadn’t really gotten as far together with all the pieces I desired to talk in regards to the book as we can have liked. So I feel like today, we are able to go a bit of further in that direction.
KM: Sounds good.
MT: I feel that within the meantime, a few questions have arisen for me, which I feel chances are you’ll be well-positioned to reply. So I’d prefer to just ask you some questions off the highest of my head, apropos our last discussion. One is that within the book, you provide, like very complete practice texts, or what we’d call the rubric for doing the yoga of White Tara, which is incredibly beautiful, by the best way, practice, and in addition for Mahakala. And I’m just curious, in fact, as you realize, in lots, perhaps virtually all Vajrayana tradition, one does not only publish these things in full detail and tell anyone, anywhere they will do it. Typically, there’s often some form of restriction, saying that it is advisable have an initiation from someone who’s in a lineage and might trace the initiation back all of the solution to Samantabhadra or something. I’m curious, what’s your eager about just publishing this openly on this book?
KM: Well, mixed, if I’m going to place it in a single word. I’m well aware of the standard way these texts were presented. And that was the best way they were presented to me. And yet, we live in a really different world now from the world of Indian Buddhism and from the world of Tibetan Buddhism. And so individuals who’ve looked into this more deeply than I even have come to the conclusion that the entire matter of secrecy or restriction may not function well in the present circumstances because it did in previous times. One Tibetan teacher, a really well-regarded Tibetan teacher who’s taught extensively within the West way back to the 2000s, said that there’s no point to the secrecy anymore because you’ll find all the pieces on the internet, somewhere or other. I definitely found that to be true. There are loads more secret teachings than these all around the web.
I feel it’s not terribly helpful to place the emphasis on secrecy because empowerment could be very essential. And I feel I make that fairly clear within the book. And indirectly, someway a seed of experience must be planted in case your practice goes to be fruitful. So I don’t see any great harm in putting these practices, you realize, the main points of those practices, out because individuals are just going to read it. And so they may attempt to practice it; perhaps that’ll be helpful to them. I feel more likely it is going to probably encourage them to seek out a teacher and form a relationship with the teacher in order that they will go deeper than the book does.
In lots of respects, I also tried to jot down the book in such a way that it might elicit some form of experience within the reader. That’s for you and others, such as you, Michael, to find out whether that’s the case or not since it’s all about experience and the way we experience the world. And as I said, one can find all of those teachings on the internet someplace or other. And I believed it was higher to set them within the context—the emotional context by way of faith and devotion—and the practice context by which they are supposed to be practiced, relatively than simply coming across them on some website somewhere. That’s not a really coherent answer, but I hope you get the drift.
MT: I do. But I would like to ask a couple of more questions on it. One is, are you saying that indirectly, even when it’s a non-traditional way, you are feeling the book itself provides an empowerment or an empowerment-like experience? You said it’s up for readers to make a decision. But I mean by way of your intention.
KM: In all of the books I’ve written to date anyway, I’ve tried to emphasise the experiential aspect versus the theoretical or the tutorial, or what have you ever. Because I feel that’s a greater guide for people, and the best way to practice specifically, how does it feel within the body? And I feel you realize this from your personal teaching experience.
MT: Yes, very much so.
KM: Yeah. So in each of the sections—the guru section, and the deity section, within the protector section—I wanted people to feel something of their body as they read it. And which will act as a seed, which allows something to grow in them. And if that happens, I feel that I used to be successful in my efforts to jot down this book.
MT: Do you think that the implied magic magical component of initiation will be achieved this manner? My guess is, why not? After all, it may. We’ve all read books which have initiatory power, sometimes startlingly intense initiatory power. That’s why they turn into spiritual classics. So my guess at the reply is, in fact. Now, I’m not asking you to say that yours does that. But no less than how you consider this level? Do you imagine that texts can contain regardless of the secret seed of initiatory power is, no less than sometimes or for some readers?
KM: Let’s go a bit of broader first. I do know of two eminent Tibetan teachers who now give empowerments in videos. That’s while you feel able to take the empowerment, you watch the video. And a few of these are very complex empowerments, like and so there’ll be several hours. Well, that’s not something I might have tried. And so that you’re watching the Lama perform the ceremony, often in Tibetan with some translation. And that’s being considered receiving the empowerment.
I feel, specializing in the; Is that this an empowerment? Or is it not? I don’t think that’s the very best solution to have a look at this. I mean, within the Tibetan tradition–I’m considering of Langri Tangpa, who was visiting–he’s a Kadampa teacher back within the twelfth, thirteenth century, somewhere around there, perhaps a bit of later. And he was visiting a friend and there was a book open at his friend’s house. And he happened to glance and see two lines, And he had never, ever seen or heard of a teaching like that. And so he asked his host; Where does that come from? And he said, Well, that’s from Langri Tangpa’s , which I translated within the Unfettered Minds website. And so this person sought out that teacher. So obviously, just that one phrase planted a seed. Was that an empowerment? I wouldn’t even get into that game. It’s sufficient to say that it planted the seed, struck something in him that moved him in a direction, and have become very essential for him.
And so I feel these items may occur. It’d be nice if it happened with this book. Definitely, other people have felt that and for that matter, opened up ways to practice or approaches to practice that they hadn’t considered. And I feel that what’s essential is–whether it’s a book or video or whatever–it has that form of effect. It moves something within the person. It puts them in contact with a calling that they could not have known was there, clarifies something in order that latest possibilities open up. And I’m not going to get stuck a lot on whether that constitutes an empowerment or not in the standard sense, because you then get into an entire bunch of things. Does it move this person forward on his or her path? And if it does? Well, perhaps that’s ok. Perhaps now a dissatisfactory reply, Michael, that’s probably the very best I can do.
MT: The most important reason I ask is because I’ll assert that there probably already are online forums where these things is being debated to the nth degree, and so simply to have your tackle it, I feel could be very helpful.
KM: Well, that is something that I’m very grateful to my teacher, Kalu Rinpoche because he didn’t get stuck on a whole lot of these things. He wanted people to practice, and he gave them the tools and what they needed to practice. I’m talking in regards to the 4 levels of tantra, and you realize, the 4 this’s, the five that’s, and things like that. He wanted people to know the spirit and the intention and what’s its place in practice, not all of the technical details and precise definitions and things like that. You may say the spirit of practice. You realize the importance of feeling the spirit of practice.
Chances are you’ll recall within the deity section, I talk in regards to the spirit of the deity. Well, that’s not a Tibetan formulation. And I’m not even quite sure how one would translate that into Tibetan. Nevertheless it evokes something in English; you would say it’s the mind of the deity, however the mind doesn’t carry the identical connotations and the identical power because the spirit. And you are feeling the spirit of Avalokitesvara, or Chenrezig is radiant compassion or similar to White Tara. And if you will have some feeling for that spirit of the deity and also you make that the cornerstone of the premise of your practice, your practice might be going to be more fruitful than for those who expend an ideal deal of energy trying to visualise every detail but don’t have that spirit in it.
MT: Yeah, that tracks for thus much of spiritual experience. The spirit is the essential part or no less than a very powerful part. Your comment in regards to the word spirit in English jogs my memory of the roots of psychology within the West, where Freud never wrote in regards to the ; he was writing in regards to the Geist, which, in fact, means the spirit. And his work reads a lot in a different way for those who replace the word psyche in every single place, which, in fact, means something similar originally, but the best way it was utilized in the West was as a pseudo-scientific term since it’s using an ancient language and so forth. It reads really in a different way for those who replace it with the word spirit, and even–gasp–soul. The work becomes so way more approachable and relatable, and in a way, organic.
KM: That’s very interesting that you must mention that because the best way Freud was translated into English modified how he got here across in other ways. In German, he used , and , which were the common words for or , and . But when it was translated into English, it became , and . Latin terms were used.
MT: Again, making them sound like they’re science terms and form of removing the immediacy of the living language.
KM: Exactly. So that is why translation and the way we express things are so essential. And certainly one of the things I strive to do each in translation and writing is to have what I write–whether it’s a translation or a book that I’m writing–have that sense of spirit aliveness in it. And sometimes I read a passage I’ve written and say, that’s just dead. And I am going back and rework it until it’s got some life in it.
MT: Yeah, I feel that’s reflected in how people reply to your books as living texts and for some people, even a form of scripture. I’m also curious why White Tara, the sadhana, I feel you mentioned is especially short, which is good and in fact, incredibly beautiful. And are there other considerations for using White Tara?
KM: Yes, I could have used Avalokiteshvara, Chenrezig, the one which Rinpoche gave to almost everybody. It got here from a visionary experience of Thang Tong Gyalpo, a fifteenth or Sixteenth-century teacher–I can’t remember exactly when–with which I used to be very familiar. And listeners can find that in a really solid commentary by Rinpoche’s spiritual heir Bokar Rinpoche, within the book, . But I selected White Tara for 2 reasons. One a peaceful deity, like Avalokitesvara, the embodiment of compassion, more here, however the association of long life and activity of compassion, but additionally since the structure of the text was more the standard structure of a practice text, a sadhana than the Chenrezig, or the Avalokitesvara text. And so I felt that more people would have the option to relate to their practice text, whatever it was because it might have the same structure to the White Tara one. And that was essential that these different elements in it and the sequences, it’s clearer within the White Tara than it’s within the Avalokiteshvara text that I used to be conversant in.
MT: I See. And what about Mahakala? Why select that exact protector?
KM: Oh, because I prefer it.
MT: Yeah.
KM: I mean, I’ve had a really long relationship with Mahakala, there are lots of types of Mahakala. That is just certainly one of them. And there are lots of practice texts of each form which have this particular form. But that is one which I used to be very conversant in. Again, it embodies the core practice elements of protector practice: the torma offering, the invoking obligation, etc. With protector practices, there’s all types of little ritual elements. And again, the aim of the book is for individuals who’ve been doing a little of these items, perhaps not with Mahakala, perhaps with Ekajati or Palden Lhamo or any variety of other protectors, they’re going to seek out that the practice elements are very similar. And this gave me the chance to elucidate and hopefully convey with some energy, the spirit of those practices, what you’re actually doing in them.
I discovered myself relatively bemused, I suppose is the precise word there’s an amazing amount of written on deity practice, or yidam practice that sense of deity. There’s relatively little written on protector practice. And I believed this was very curious. And so I desired to put something out so that folks had a way of referring to protector practices, there wasn’t just this mysterious thing that everyone did. But no one was quite sure why or what it was about or what the meaning of the text was, and even in the event that they understood the meaning of the text, what the meaning of the practice was, and so forth. So many alternative layers. Because I feel it’s really essential while you’re practicing, you really know what you’re doing.
MT: Yeah, do you will have any understanding or conjecture about why so little is written about it?
KM: I thought of that for some time. Why is there so little written about it? I mean, there are texts which explain the best way to do the practices, and lots of practices related to the six-arm Mahakala, which actually makes it into yidam practice kind of in its own right. But, again, as I feel I noted, in our last conversation, in Japanese Vajrayana, there isn’t a distinction between deity and protector, your deity is your protector. And so there could also be something there. And in addition, the magical element is more explicit, despite the fact that it’s very much a part of deity practice, the incontrovertible fact that you’re invoking magic is a bit of more explicit, or quite a bit more explicit within the protector. That will have been a reason why less was written about it. And it was something that was communicated orally to those that actually had the flexibility to practice and work magic at that level. I don’t know. That is all conjecture on my part.
MT: You realize, the opposite day, I used to be listening to a podcast that contained principally what I might classify as ecstatic poetry, or perhaps poetry prose, however it was definitely like an ecstatic invocation of the Goddess. It was very moving, I discovered it very moving and powerful. And it just occurred to me afterwards, how little of this is accessible anymore in any form of living text in English, where that is something anyone just wrote recently. It just struck me how rare that is now for anyone to place something on the market in that mood. And to me how deeply essential that exact mood of like invocation of beauty and expression of each awe and wonder and devotion and perhaps even, especially by way of the goddess terror, and all-encompassing-ness in a mysterious way, it invokes a mystery. There’s just so little of that anymore. And I feel like even within the last, let’s say, ten or perhaps twenty years, but more just like the last 10 years our society which has been armored against that for lots of of years has turn into almost completely proof against stuff like that. I feel like people don’t even know the best way to approach material like that, let alone be moved by it. It’s similar to, what is that this? It doesn’t feel linear and rational enough, which in fact, it’s not linear and rational in any respect. That’s why it doesn’t feel that way.
But as I used to be just sitting with my feelings after listening to that I used to be eager about your book. Yes, it’s talking about the best way to do these practices and your experience, you realize, the experiential component you’re describing. But additionally, it’s an entire book of what I might consider to be ecstatic poetry to deities that you just’ve translated from Tibetan. And for me, certainly one of the things I really like about it, it’s similar to sitting and reading these evocations, they’re so beautiful. And the pictures that they create up are so potent, and I would like to only avoid even using the word because that just puts them in some form of box that’s so mental. And it’s like, no, that is of the center and it’s dynamite. It’s explosive, for those who really let yourself feel it. I don’t think that is resulting in a matter. I’m just talking. So I’ll just be quiet for a moment and see if that brings up anything for you?
KM: Well, it does. Considered one of the thoughts that got here to mind is that there’s a choral group here in Santa Rosa called Sonoma Bach. It’s greater than a choral group, there’s about three or 4 different choral groups of various sizes, all the pieces from 4 or six voices as much as thirty, or forty voices. And the music is either late Renaissance, or all within the Baroque period, or simply very near the Baroque period. And I really like the music, particularly when it’s just the choral music since it is so incredibly pure in tone and tune that I feel, quite literally washed inside and outside from listening to it. And at the identical time, it brings me an amazing amount of sadness. Because for those who take Bach, as an example, every bit of music that he wrote, he signed . And that is what inspired him to jot down this music. And certainly one of the things that I find very sad is that almost all people hear this extraordinary music that developed within the Christian tradition around that time period, but now it’s a type of entertainment, not a type of devotion.
So I feel that folks are exposed to these things but in a really, very different way. And we’ve got the identical thing with Tibetans, you realize that these touring firms of the multi-tonal singing, the Gyuto Choir, after which the mandala ceremonies and so forth, and even lama dances. For these were all liturgical elements which have now turn into a type of entertainment, which suggests that you just get to hearken to them, but the best way that you just’re listening to them form of immunizes against–except in rare cases–them really touching anything deep and moving you in a special direction. And in order that’s something that our culture has created. I mean, one could put the blame where one wants, but our relationship with the spiritual has turn into so weak that for a lot of, the one solution to relate to the spiritual is a type of entertainment. That’s one thing that your comments elicited in me.
And I feel that it’s very essential if one goes to practice, on this tradition, or in some other, I’ll say a mystical or spiritual tradition, it may’t be since it makes you are feeling higher. You used the word awe. I remember giving a chat on the Buddhist Geeks conference a few years ago, by which I amended Joseph Campbell’s follow your bliss, and said, Because while you deliberately put yourself into the sensation of awe and I defined awe as a sense of being intimately connected, with something that’s infinitely greater than you. When that emotion arises in you, and also you don’t push it away, but you let it penetrate you, then the world and life tackle a special form of meaning and it’s not a meaning you possibly can express in words. And it’s not a meaning, out of which any malevolence, or greed, or any of these items can manifest. There’s a humility in it. And I might even go to date as to say a reverence for all times which easily translates into a reasonably widespread compassion. Originally, that is what Christian architecture and Islamic architecture was just–particularly Islamic–just incredible at evoking–that sense of awe–but you get the identical thing in most of the Gothic churches in Europe. But that’s the premise of spiritual practice, I feel it’s for me.
And so while you really allow yourself to feel the spirit of the Deity, like Avalokitesvara, as we were talking, or White Tara, Mahakala, or any of the others, they speak to you thru that awe. And that lets you start letting go of the sense of self that we ordinarily hold on to so tenaciously. The sense of self subsides in that have of awe. If just for a moment, and that’s why it becomes something very intimate. And I feel that’s what a whole lot of individuals are searching for, even in the event that they don’t understand it. Does this make any sense to you, Michael?
MT: Yeah, I noticed that, especially within the very modern, up-to-the-minute West, there’s a whole lot of speak about invoking a few of these deity energies to love improve my marketing, or to assist me you realize, work out higher. There’s a form of like, yeah, the deity is there to assist me clean my bathroom or something. It jogs my memory of the old business, the oven cleanser is doing the cleansing for you whilst you’re playing cards, or whatever, I’m cleansing my oven. And it’s form of like, yeah, the deity is cleansing my oven. There’s just this sense of absolute opposite of awe and wonder at something greater than yourself. It’s more like, oh, a cute little self-help meme or something. And clearly, it got its own problem. Nevertheless it’s reflective, to me anyway, of the incontrovertible fact that our society seems proof against this type of mystical experience. And yet, we’re still human beings. And human beings require mystical experience to be human beings. And so, this is just not a latest concept, after we’re not allowed healthy, robust, clear lines of mystical experience or mystical transmission of experience. We’ve got a whole lot of sick, diseased, unhealthy versions arrive like crazy conspiracy theories and vast conspiracies which can be much greater than me. And so they have these twisted elements of mysticism in them because human beings are mystical creatures.
Again, I’m undecided there’s a matter there. You were asking me the opposite day what I thought of mysticism in our society. And that’s what’s coming up for me is just that, because we’ve so comprehensively banned it from all public discourse, it’s now leaking from the basement up in the shape of similar to raw, mystical sewage. I see a book like this and sure you realize, it’s like, that’s a pleasant little text for understanding the best way to do these things. But there’s a lot in there that might potentially be a healthy type of connecting with this deep, deep need in human beings.
KM: Well, a technique I’ve heard expressed is: when mystic or a spiritual craving knocks on the front door, for those who don’t let it in, it is available in the back door, often in some distorted form, as you will have already expressed, and it doesn’t go away. It just is available in, in a special form. And the query that I pose to you, because a whole lot of people have asked me, “What do you see as the long run of Vajrayana within the West?” or on this country, or whatever. And I used to be eager about this in reference to something else I used to be reading, does our culture have a necessity for it? And at this point; it doesn’t. It’s been doing extremely well with materialism, and particularly over the past 30 years or so. But that period appears to be passing now. And it’s very possible things are gonna get quite a bit rougher, not really easy as they’ve been by way of globalization and so forth. And with the ability to get whatever you wish, wherever you wish, and so forth. And in the identical way that COVID threw people, no less than temporarily, off the track of a very powerful thing to do in your life is figure. And other people discovered No, there’s other features to life which can be really like spending time with my children or simply going for walks quietly by myself and all of the things that folks did to adapt to the COVID restrictions. For many individuals, they found that there have been dimensions to life, which they form of knew but had forgotten. And I feel something like which will must occur. From my very own part, I’m by no means concerned with changing the character of the society. I’m way more concerned with providing the individuals who feel this type of calling with the tools and the resources, I suppose broadly speaking, that might help them of their spiritual practice and sustain them of their spiritual practice. And that’s principally why right, and that’s the intention behind all the pieces that I write, it’s to be utilized by people who find themselves in search of a solution to approach spiritual practice. Because there’s an awful lot of confusion about that in our society. Not only confusion but distortions of the sort you’ve described. And I feel some good will include that. I hope so.
MT: Have you ever been receiving any feedback in regards to the book?
KM: Yes, I’ve had a couple of letters, a couple of emails, and most of the people are expressing very positive feelings about it. A pair of individuals, they get the book and the very first thing they do is to establish a retreat for themselves as quickly as possible in order that they will read it in a setting where they’re going to be quiet for an extended time period, I feel that’s relatively good.
MT: I actually resonate with this emphasis that you just’re describing, of not attempting to storm the partitions of society’s castle and kill the king and create a latest society or something like that. But simply, hey, for those who’re concerned about these things, here’s some things chances are you’ll find helpful, you may not, but listed here are some things chances are you’ll find helpful. I feel that’s an appropriate expression of the mood you’re describing. It has a specific amount of intimacy and humility in it, and never a grand plan. And in order that just seems judicious to me.
KM: Well, I’ve thought loads about systems. And in a society akin to ours, we absolutely need systems with a view to function since the number of individuals is just so large. But certainly one of the things that happens with systems is that, you realize, everyone knows what it’s like coping with a cable company, as an example, or some other system, it’s a dehumanizing experience.
MT: Cross yourself and throw some salt over your shoulder, while you say their names.
KM: Well, I could say some other thing like customs officials, I just had a round with that, any large organization, they must, however it’s dehumanizing to interact with them. Nevertheless it’s also dehumanizing for the people within the organization because they must cope with people as averages. And from time to time you discover someone in certainly one of those organizations to treat you as a human being. And it’s like a breath of fresh air.
MT: It’s shocking and wonderful.
KM: Wonderful. And the business gets taken care of in a short time. But they will’t do that every one the time. And so because I find–needed as they’re, and I’ve great admiration for individuals who can actually arrange effective systems and get them to run least with a dab of humanity. But I noticed that that wasn’t something that I used to be arrange for, or had much inclination towards. And I encourage people who find themselves feeling any form of spiritual longing to maintain it small by way of numbers, and have real personal connections, real-time connections with individuals with teachers, or with co-travelers, or so forth. Because in those interactions, you’re going to get so way more than you ever can from an establishment or from a system. And I just think that’s very, very essential.
If people find something on this book that I’ve written that speaks to them, then find someone you possibly can talk over with about that. I remember, a few years ago that a girl had come to some of my retreats, asked if she could study with me. And she or he lived in Recent York. I said, you realize, it’s probably not very practical. But she said, I even have my teacher who’s within the Theravada tradition, but he never talks in regards to the stuff you speak about. And so they said, well, then here’s what I suggest you do: go to him and say, “These are the things that I discovered really meaningful. And I would really like to speak with you about these items or their equivalents within the Theravada tradition.” And she or he actually took my advice, and went and had a chat together with her teacher, and said that it was probably the most amazing conversation she’d ever had with them.
In order that’s what I feel’s essential is that if an individual is well trained and knowledgeable a couple of spiritual tradition, and something really speaks to you. And also you’re in a position to put that in words, even when there are halting, not very eloquent words. Then something real begins to occur. And chances are you’ll discover that there’s untold depths that you just weren’t even aware of because each of you might be indirectly constrained by the system. In order that’s what I would really like people to explore.
MT: Ken, are you able to give an example of your personal interaction with Kalu Rinpoche, and just that quality, that it’s personal, that it’s one on one and you actually learn something that you just couldn’t learn at a distance reading about it or whatever, however it’s really that more like direct transmission form of thing.
KM: So Rinpoche, generally speaking was a person of very, only a few words. He had a unprecedented ability to provide the essence of a principal or a teaching in only a sentence or two, quite literally. And there have been many occasions where he would say a sentence and I noticed that it was all there. And as an example, I feel every teacher has their favorite phrase, which embodies the teachings for them, or embodies practice. And one candidate anyway, for Rinpoche, was the Tibetan phrase, which suggests, . And it took me a bit of while to know what he was pointing to. But as you rest in formal meditation, for those who notice that you just’re respiratory, okay, and you then just rest there. And for those who notice the thoughts arisen, you only rest there. And for those who notice that you just’re drained, you only rest there. So that you’re at all times resting in only recognizing. And I got here to understand that so many other instructionsactually what they were pointing to. Though repeatedly people have made them into quite different meditations and distorted them and distorted the sense and taking them away from the immediacy of just recognizing and resting right there. Suitable candidate?
MT: Yes, Ken, again, time has flown.
KM: It does between us, you realize, I feel we must always do something about that. Perhaps decelerate the clocks after we talk.
MT: I’m absolutely willing to try this. I’m so glad we got this chance to dig into this, delve into this topic, no less than a bit of further. As usual, it seems like there’s so way more but hopefully, we’ve no less than intrigued listeners enough to examine it out and maybe if moved to go a bit of deeper on this direction. So thanks a lot again.
KM: It’s at all times a pleasure talking with you, Michael. I do appreciate it. And thanks for the chance again.
You possibly can support the creation of future episodes of this podcast by contributing through Patreon.
