Open Source Explained: Why the Future of Mindfulness may Depend on It

By Mo Edjlali, Founder and CEO, Mindful Leader; Author, Open MBSR: Reimagining the Future of Mindfulness

A New Trend Emerges

Something new is stirring in mindfulness: the language of open source. What began as a whisper is now entering real conversations. Ideas like community-centric and open-source alongside MBSR are no longer unthinkable, still not mainstream, but no longer off-limits. In August, Wiley published my book Open MBSR, a framework built on transparency, collaboration, and shared stewardship. The book gave shape to a vision I’ve carried for years, and it’s gratifying to see the first signs of those seeds taking root.

The premise is simple yet radical: just as open source transformed technology, it can transform mindfulness. A movement sustained by the very community it serves. The idea is gaining momentum. The question now is whether we’ll build the real thing...or settle for open-source theater.

The Crisis Eating Mindfulness

Beneath the surface, the mindfulness movement faces a crisis. Countless folks still benefit from programs like MBSR, but the very structures meant to sustain and grow the field are corroding their core.

• Buddhist entanglement clouds the line between secular practice and religious inheritance.
  
• Oligarchic control concentrates authority in ways that contradict mindfulness’s own insights about interdependence.
  
• One-dimensional thinking flattens practices, stripping them of depth and transformative power, and creates echo chambers.
  

The solution isn’t the next generation of gurus. It’s community ownership.  When practice belongs to the people who use it, when governance flows from collective wisdom rather than institutional decree, when innovation rises from grassroots adaptation rather than top-down control — only then can mindfulness realize its revolutionary potential.

What Open Source Means in Mindfulness

In the tech world, “open source” means software whose code is shared publicly so anyone can study it, improve it, and build on it. What makes it work is not chaos but clear principles, transparent governance, and shared responsibility. In technology, open source isn’t just about access to code. It’s about a system where communities can:

• Contribute — everyone has a pathway to add and improve.
  
• Govern transparently — decisions aren’t hidden in back rooms.
  
• Share power — no single group hoards control.
  
• Adapt freely — if leadership fails, the community can fork and continue.
  

For mindfulness, open source can mean something similar. It’s not enough to share materials freely. True openness requires:

• Clear licenses and permissions — so the community knows what it can use, adapt, and share.
  
• Transparent decision-making — no hidden committees deciding the future.
  
• Shared frameworks of purpose and values — so collaboration has direction and integrity.
  
• Active engagement with critical perspectives — dissent and outside voices welcomed as fuel for growth, not threats to be managed.
  
• Respect for contributors and the community — credit where it’s due, and pathways for participation.
  
• The right to fork — if leadership goes astray, the community can take the work and carry it forward.
  
• Dialectical governance — the ability to hold contradictory truths (like standards and innovation) without forcing false resolution.
  

Every community-centric movement needs a manifesto: clarity of ends (where we are going) and clarity of means (how we will get there). Without this, “open” is only a label, not a reality. Nothing holds the community together, and the result is drift, division, and the rise of personality cults.

When Openness Is Just a Performance

Open source can go wrong — and it often does. Institutions adopt the language without the substance:

• Open Access Disguised as Openness — publishing documents while hoarding control.
  
• Branding Without Structure — declaring “community ownership” while decisions remain top-down.
  
• Performance Over Practice — signaling openness without ever sharing power.
  
• Echo-Chamber Collaboration — welcoming only voices that agree.
  
• False Consensus — mistaking agreement for wisdom and silencing productive tension.

Each is the same story: practices created for collective liberation captured by institutional control. Openness reduced to theater. Critical voices were managed instead of engaged. The result? Stagnation in new packaging.

The Real Revolution: Practicing Openness

Done well, openness is not cosmetic. It is catalytic.

• Living curricula that evolve through genuine community input.
  
• Communities of practice where contribution matters more than credentials — and critical thinking stands alongside compassion.
  
• Radical accessibility that lowers barriers and actively seeks dissenting voices.
  
• Transparency that restores trust through governance able to hold paradox without collapsing into false simplicity.
  
• Dialectical wisdom — maintaining standards while enabling innovation, welcoming criticism while preserving coherence.
  
• Agile governance — shared outcomes paired with principled, flexible processes.
  

This isn’t about sharing free access to PDFs. It’s about reimagining how transformation spreads.

Communities that foster independence. Not dependency.
Pathways that welcome diverse voices. Not just the credentialed few.

Imagine communities that govern themselves. Innovation flowing from the edges. Quality emerging from collective wisdom.

This vision isn’t utopian. It’s practical. The tools exist. The frameworks are proven. What’s missing is the courage to actually share power instead of just talking about it.

Announcement: The Test Ahead

A major University recently announced that its new MBSR Curriculum & Teaching Guide will be “open-source” and “community-owned.” For an institution long seen as part of the old guard, that’s a promising shift. The ideas of Open MBSR are beginning to take root. But language alone isn’t enough. Their move could mark a watershed moment—if it’s backed by substance. Open MBSR provides a concrete starting point, yet any institution invoking openness and community stewardship must offer real clarity. That clarity rests on two essentials that hold a community together: Where are we going? And how will we get there? In other words, shared outcomes and shared principles. Without them, “open” remains a label, not a reality. Below are the outcomes and principles from Open MBSR—free for anyone to adapt and use with attribution.

The Five Outcomes (Where We’re Going)

1. Cultivating Attitudinal Foundations 
   
2. Practicing Mindfulness Skills 
   
3. Understanding Stress and Resilience 
   
4. Applying Mindfulness to Daily Life 
   
5. Fostering Intentional Community 
   

The Seven Principles (How We Get There)

• Act with Integrity and Transparency 
  
• Ground in Scientific Evidence and Reason 
  
• Engage Critically and Think Dialectically 
  
• Embrace Diversity and Ensure Accessibility
  
• Empower Individuals and Respect Autonomy
  
• Learn from Direct Experience and Collective Wisdom
  
• Adapt Continuously and Cultivate Growth
  

If any institution is serious about openness, it must publish its outcomes and principles, explain the reasoning behind them, invite genuine community input, and hold itself accountable to those commitments. Without this, “open”  can drop into performance, with no shared framework for evaluating ideas or contributions.

The Future of Openness in Mindfulness

Open source is no longer just an abstract idea. It is beginning to find its way into the conversation on mindfulness. The question now is whether it will grow into a lived principle — or fade into a reactionary hollow patch and label.

I’ve been making this case for years. With Open MBSR released this August, the framework is here, the principles are clear, and early signals of change are appearing. Institutions are starting to stir — cautiously, sometimes quietly.

But the real test of openness isn’t what we call it. It’s whether we practice it.