"why ours won’t" -- you don't know this Vincent, and the statement is actually not in the spirit of this post. Sometimes we just do our best, and it still doesn't work out. What y'all have accomplished is certainly impressive, and you are still a long way from the end-game. If y'all do succeed, it will be because of the quality of presence which I have seen you and Karen embody. It's why I continue to track your experiment. Also what is failure anyway? I would be more enrolled if you said that there is no such thing in an experiment of this scope.
You are right. This was unfortunately worded. What I meant to say is: This is why communities fail and Neos at the core is about addressing that very thing. So I have rephrased it to: Why communities fail — and the lesson shaping ours. Thank you for pointing this out.
thanks for receiving my critique seriously. I am very supportive of your project and I believe that our paths will continue to cross. The need for deep-relational containers inside the regenerative culture movement is strong and I think that you and Karen have the right idea there.
Loved this article as a declaration of what Neos stands for and how it stands out - feels like a clear signal for even greater alignment, resonance and coherence with fellow co-creators and villages.
I feel so glad seeing what you all are creating and the level of integrity you’re holding in this project. I especially appreciate your willingness to receive and respond to Marc’s comment, as that line gave me pause when I read this piece the first time. It also set off my AI radar (as do other parts of this article, which I’d be happy to give you feedback on separately).
In the meantime you might enjoy checking out our Substack:
Thank you for your feedback. I have started using the support of AI to help bring across the message more succinctly and clearly. I write the article and then ask AI to make it shorter, clearer and generally clean it up and therefore a better experience for the reader. The subtitle that raised eye brows was a result of that process - and tellingly - made me stop as well but I failed to give it the weight to correct it - it was 1am. There’s a lesson here. The other side of it is that we are holding so many hats and tasks at once and of course we are making mistakes. It’s an unavoidable part of the process. What we are committed to is the purity of what we are building and to continuously grow and learn from what we are doing. I believe this is the most important driver of whether Neos will be ‘successful’ and empower the change and transformation we are working towards.
Thank you for openly speaking to this, Vincent. I agree with every word… the path to true soul liberation is paved not through comfort, but through the willingness to keep confronting the parts of us that are yet to see the light of awareness and be loved into wholeness. 🙏🏼 thank you for the book recommendation as well. ♥️
Thank you, Vincent, for this post and all of your dedication to this wonderful project. I would like to share a few thoughts on the floated idea of making a book mandatory.
This direction may benefit from careful thought and consideration. A recommendation, or even a strong recommendation could be a constructive approach—especially if it allows for shared reviews and discussion around the books you find valuable.
Moving into the territory of “mandatory,” however, gives me pause. Everyone’s path is different. A book that is transformative and inspiring for one person at one point in their life may not be so for another, or even for that same person at a different time. There is a natural individuality in how people engage with ideas and material.
Introducing the idea of mandated reading also raises questions around how such expectations would be enforced in practice, and what it might imply more broadly over time (eg. more mandates in different areas of life?). It may be worth considering how to support shared understanding while preserving that individual freedom of engagement.
Those are my reflections. Maybe a reading list on a platform such as Goodreads, linked on the Neos website would be useful, like you have done with the excellent YouTube/Film inspiration list.
I’m on Goodreads personally https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/49848654-niamh —if you or anyone reading this would like to connect there. I’d be interested to see what else you’re reading and your reflections on it :)
Thank you for your reflection. To create successful community, we will need a common language and hence certain courses and trainings will be mandatory which is in the interest of everyone. Whether this book is part of it or not is a different question. Bear in mind that I am writing these articles at night in between building a whole village so not every single word should be over analysed. The message I aimed at conveying with the article is that Neos is for people who are committed to work on themselves rather than staying a victim of what is happening to them - and why this is important.
My concern is that the mandating of specific books reflects a deeper structural issue rather than a simple onboarding preference. It suggests an attempt to stabilize the culture by defining acceptable thought through prescribed material. In effect, this risks crystallizing a kind of mentalized collective identity around externalized forms and ideologies.
I understand the intention behind this. But my concern is that what can emerge is not necessarily genuine resonance, but behavioural agreement—people conforming to expectations rather than arriving at shared understanding through experience - compliance in place of authenticity.
For me, there is a clear distinction between functional and ideological domains. Functional requirements—processes, participation, responsibilities and obligations—are entirely appropriate. But when it comes to worldview, philosophy, or consciousness development, the appropriate mechanisms are invitation, exposure, and embodied culture, not obligation. The moment this line is crossed, it introduces subtle pressure: belonging becomes linked, however indirectly, to intellectual conformity.
Even Auroville does not and has never mandated the works of Sri Aurobindo. They may strongly encourage it, reference it, or build culture around it—but they stop short of requiring ingestion. That distinction matters. Encouragement allows for agency; mandates introduce compliance structures, and with them, the possibility of enforcement, exclusion, or quiet self-censorship.
More fundamentally, I question whether this approach achieves its intended aim. Mandating books may create surface-level alignment, but it does not produce authentic coherence. If anything, it can inhibit it, by reinforcing mental agreement rather than allowing deeper, more individual processes of integration to unfold. In that sense, it risks strengthening the very ego structures it may be trying to transcend.
For me, this is a point of principle rather than preference. It speaks to how the community understands growth, autonomy, and governance. If alignment must be ensured through obligation at the level of thought, then it perhaps suggests a lack of trust in the organic development of the individuals within it.
Because of that, this is where I would need to draw a boundary in terms of my interest, support, and potential participation. I am fully open to engagement, learning, and exposure—but not to mandated ideological intake as a condition of belonging.
Regarding the “over analysis of every single word” element of your response, I understand that it may seem that way, but, If I may, I will offer a reframe from my perspective… As someone who was seriously considering putting money down and becoming a Neos villager, this level of scrutiny is actually necessary due diligence. Others with no ‘skin in the game’ might read your output in a less exacting way, but if one’s future is potentially heavily invested in this project, suddenly a throwaway comment mentioning “mandated books” becomes a potential area that needs serious consideration.
No need to respond to this comment Vincent, I appreciate that you have a gargantuan task underway and that your time is indeed precious. Also my long list of questions that I submitted via WhatsApp can be discarded. I genuinely wish you all every success in the future of the creation of the village. Xx Niamh
Thank you for your reflection. Yes, raising consciousness is ultimately about moving out of the ego - and that requires us taken care of our wounds which keep us in the ego/a low frequency/a survival state.
"why ours won’t" -- you don't know this Vincent, and the statement is actually not in the spirit of this post. Sometimes we just do our best, and it still doesn't work out. What y'all have accomplished is certainly impressive, and you are still a long way from the end-game. If y'all do succeed, it will be because of the quality of presence which I have seen you and Karen embody. It's why I continue to track your experiment. Also what is failure anyway? I would be more enrolled if you said that there is no such thing in an experiment of this scope.
You are right. This was unfortunately worded. What I meant to say is: This is why communities fail and Neos at the core is about addressing that very thing. So I have rephrased it to: Why communities fail — and the lesson shaping ours. Thank you for pointing this out.
thanks for receiving my critique seriously. I am very supportive of your project and I believe that our paths will continue to cross. The need for deep-relational containers inside the regenerative culture movement is strong and I think that you and Karen have the right idea there.
Loved this article as a declaration of what Neos stands for and how it stands out - feels like a clear signal for even greater alignment, resonance and coherence with fellow co-creators and villages.
Dear Vincent,
I feel so glad seeing what you all are creating and the level of integrity you’re holding in this project. I especially appreciate your willingness to receive and respond to Marc’s comment, as that line gave me pause when I read this piece the first time. It also set off my AI radar (as do other parts of this article, which I’d be happy to give you feedback on separately).
In the meantime you might enjoy checking out our Substack:
https://regeneralife.substack.com/
We’re planning on hosting another residency in October in Portugal—would love to explore possibilities to mutually support one another.
With Love,
Hannah
Thank you for your feedback. I have started using the support of AI to help bring across the message more succinctly and clearly. I write the article and then ask AI to make it shorter, clearer and generally clean it up and therefore a better experience for the reader. The subtitle that raised eye brows was a result of that process - and tellingly - made me stop as well but I failed to give it the weight to correct it - it was 1am. There’s a lesson here. The other side of it is that we are holding so many hats and tasks at once and of course we are making mistakes. It’s an unavoidable part of the process. What we are committed to is the purity of what we are building and to continuously grow and learn from what we are doing. I believe this is the most important driver of whether Neos will be ‘successful’ and empower the change and transformation we are working towards.
Beautifully said, Vincent! It’s indeed not for everyone yet! Hopefully we’ll build it to last and eventually it will become the new normal! 🫶🫶
Thank you for openly speaking to this, Vincent. I agree with every word… the path to true soul liberation is paved not through comfort, but through the willingness to keep confronting the parts of us that are yet to see the light of awareness and be loved into wholeness. 🙏🏼 thank you for the book recommendation as well. ♥️
🎯
So inspiring to read this 🫶 Thank you
Thank you, Vincent, for this post and all of your dedication to this wonderful project. I would like to share a few thoughts on the floated idea of making a book mandatory.
This direction may benefit from careful thought and consideration. A recommendation, or even a strong recommendation could be a constructive approach—especially if it allows for shared reviews and discussion around the books you find valuable.
Moving into the territory of “mandatory,” however, gives me pause. Everyone’s path is different. A book that is transformative and inspiring for one person at one point in their life may not be so for another, or even for that same person at a different time. There is a natural individuality in how people engage with ideas and material.
Introducing the idea of mandated reading also raises questions around how such expectations would be enforced in practice, and what it might imply more broadly over time (eg. more mandates in different areas of life?). It may be worth considering how to support shared understanding while preserving that individual freedom of engagement.
Those are my reflections. Maybe a reading list on a platform such as Goodreads, linked on the Neos website would be useful, like you have done with the excellent YouTube/Film inspiration list.
I’m on Goodreads personally https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/49848654-niamh —if you or anyone reading this would like to connect there. I’d be interested to see what else you’re reading and your reflections on it :)
Thank you for your reflection. To create successful community, we will need a common language and hence certain courses and trainings will be mandatory which is in the interest of everyone. Whether this book is part of it or not is a different question. Bear in mind that I am writing these articles at night in between building a whole village so not every single word should be over analysed. The message I aimed at conveying with the article is that Neos is for people who are committed to work on themselves rather than staying a victim of what is happening to them - and why this is important.
My concern is that the mandating of specific books reflects a deeper structural issue rather than a simple onboarding preference. It suggests an attempt to stabilize the culture by defining acceptable thought through prescribed material. In effect, this risks crystallizing a kind of mentalized collective identity around externalized forms and ideologies.
I understand the intention behind this. But my concern is that what can emerge is not necessarily genuine resonance, but behavioural agreement—people conforming to expectations rather than arriving at shared understanding through experience - compliance in place of authenticity.
For me, there is a clear distinction between functional and ideological domains. Functional requirements—processes, participation, responsibilities and obligations—are entirely appropriate. But when it comes to worldview, philosophy, or consciousness development, the appropriate mechanisms are invitation, exposure, and embodied culture, not obligation. The moment this line is crossed, it introduces subtle pressure: belonging becomes linked, however indirectly, to intellectual conformity.
Even Auroville does not and has never mandated the works of Sri Aurobindo. They may strongly encourage it, reference it, or build culture around it—but they stop short of requiring ingestion. That distinction matters. Encouragement allows for agency; mandates introduce compliance structures, and with them, the possibility of enforcement, exclusion, or quiet self-censorship.
More fundamentally, I question whether this approach achieves its intended aim. Mandating books may create surface-level alignment, but it does not produce authentic coherence. If anything, it can inhibit it, by reinforcing mental agreement rather than allowing deeper, more individual processes of integration to unfold. In that sense, it risks strengthening the very ego structures it may be trying to transcend.
For me, this is a point of principle rather than preference. It speaks to how the community understands growth, autonomy, and governance. If alignment must be ensured through obligation at the level of thought, then it perhaps suggests a lack of trust in the organic development of the individuals within it.
Because of that, this is where I would need to draw a boundary in terms of my interest, support, and potential participation. I am fully open to engagement, learning, and exposure—but not to mandated ideological intake as a condition of belonging.
Regarding the “over analysis of every single word” element of your response, I understand that it may seem that way, but, If I may, I will offer a reframe from my perspective… As someone who was seriously considering putting money down and becoming a Neos villager, this level of scrutiny is actually necessary due diligence. Others with no ‘skin in the game’ might read your output in a less exacting way, but if one’s future is potentially heavily invested in this project, suddenly a throwaway comment mentioning “mandated books” becomes a potential area that needs serious consideration.
No need to respond to this comment Vincent, I appreciate that you have a gargantuan task underway and that your time is indeed precious. Also my long list of questions that I submitted via WhatsApp can be discarded. I genuinely wish you all every success in the future of the creation of the village. Xx Niamh
Thank you for your reflection. Yes, raising consciousness is ultimately about moving out of the ego - and that requires us taken care of our wounds which keep us in the ego/a low frequency/a survival state.