The Case Against Buddhism: A Conversation between Glenn Wallis and Charles Hallisey

[@garyarthurs]

Glenn (if you read this) I wish you the best, but I confess this was difficult to follow. I’m reminded of the saying, if you can’t explain it you probably don’t understand it yourself, or something to that effect. I believe everyone has something to offer. I would encourage to have your complex thoughts, but keep learning until you can communicate them in simple terms.

[@didjesbydan]

Funny, I haven't even watched this videi yet but have to agree fervently with your statement as I just finished reading Glenn's nearly incomprehensible book. I think his ideas could be expressed in a way that is much less clunky and full of cocky display of obtuse concepts which unneccessarily complicate message and meaning.

[@ericoliverpaquette1885]

That's just not true in a wide sense. Nobody can explain quantum mechanics in simple terms to a layman. Same things with algebraic topology. Lacanian psychoanalysis and whatnot.

[@sky.the.infinite]

@@ericoliverpaquette1885 idk about the other subject matters you mention (which you seem to raise somewhat ironically) but there are plenty of people even here on KZbin explaining Quantum Mechanics in layman’s terms.

[@ericoliverpaquette1885]

@@sky.the.infinite well, you may explain a tiny part of it maybe but the correct interpretation of quantum mechanics is still a matter of debate.

[@sky.the.infinite]

@@ericoliverpaquette1885 okay… I think you’re still missing the point. This thread is implicating that the best way to iterate one’s knowledge is to use the Feynman technique, which requires one to explain what they’re trying to say as if they are teaching a 10 year old child. This is a technique for learning, as well as teaching, because it makes sure that your brain actually fully grasps the concepts of a theory (or whatever) enough to understand it at its fundamental core and that your own mind, at its most basic state of consciousness, can share it with others so well that a child can ‘get it’. Quantum mechanics, at its core, is fundamentally transient and psychedelic. It is intrinsically about observation and its effects, which are both simple and complex. At the very nature of complexity _is_ simplicity, though. If you have a huge twisted mass of knots, and your job is to understand it, do you spend your lifetime standing back with your and on your chin contemplating its complexities? I mean, _some_ people do… and others get work at following each individual strand, as best they can, until they’ve unlaced it from the pile, and so on… in doing so, they form a greater, deeper understanding of the nature of the strands _and_ the knots _and_ the mass. Get it?

[@ydbn272_92]

Why isn’t this titled “the case against ‘western’ buddhism”? Regards, A misled Asian Buddhist

[@aaronball4829]

Agreed. I watched the whole thing and found whatever they thought they were saying quite confused. Much of it really doesn't relate to Buddhism as a whole in terms of ideology, behavior, religion, philosophy. Just a small contemporary western piece which does not have a formal coherence the way organized Buddhist sects do. Even if the title were more accurate I still think the conversation was lacking. Anyways, I was looking for counterpoint to Buddhism so I guess I'm glad they had the discussion, albeit rather narrow and full of unnecessary jargon.

[@OgdenM]

@@aaronball4829, "full of unnecessary jargon" is putting it lightly. I felt the whole thing was incomprehensible because of it. The fact that Glenn doesn't understand his own book drove that home. I also was looking for counterpoint to Buddhism and was very disappointed in this. If anything, I feel it made me feel Buddhism is the right thing more then before.

[@ruh8659]

​@@aaronball4829They're oppositionists

[@navayanabuddhistsanghanbs6756]

"What is it you seek?" asked the Buddhist Master of a western scholar who came to her for guidance. "Life." was the reply Said the Buddhist Master, "If you are to live, words must die."

[@TheFrenchClooney]

I think Glenn presented his position quite well, given the difficult nature of it. Another factor in making Glenn's position difficult to elucidate is that there are not many people making serious critiques of Buddhism. Glenn is in somewhat uncharted territory here, and so of course, the first attempt at making a map may lack precision. I really enjoyed this conversation, and would love to hear Charles' response to Glenn's arguments.

[@JustAskTheAxis]

So enjoying the playful interaction between Glenn and Charlie - priceless! Charlie is brilliant at getting Glenn to spit out the goods.

[@lostcallow]

I find lack of data collection from this Professor Hallisey. The professor started from Sri Lanka and vanished in India. He even dunno where Buddha was Born. It's a good business on the name of buddhism from Harvard... 👏👏👏👏

[@01assassinscreed63]

Yes many tell Buddhism is true but they don't realise it's the same dogma as other religions like the concepts samsara, nirvana, Four Noble truths and end of rebirth

[@DipayanPyne94]

@@01assassinscreed63 No. That's a False Characterization of Buddhism. Buddhism is Fundamentally Non Dogmatic. That doesn't mean that Buddha was right about everything. He wasn't. However, his Central Teachings are Spot On !

[@ChrisBarkerFlotsam]

1.02.25: "Is it a concept, or is it real?" "It's not real!" This is a worthy project, and Glenn's project is like someone who wants to make sure that you don't want to over-pack when you go on a long trip. He wants to make sure that when you encounter Buddhism, that you encounter it alone, unencumbered by the questionable digestions of others. This thievery is great, and he sits in a great long tradition of robbers. He is trying to “capture something about human existence that is true and real but tries to avoid the ideological layering that occurs around systems of thought about that real.” But - notice the incredible reliance on a notion of a "foreclosed" real. He thinks that there is really something in an empty fist. Think Honey Bunny in Pulp fiction, during the robbery at the diner: “What’s is it?...what’s in it?” The foreclosed real is exactly the same as the foreclosed apple, or the foreclosed sky, or the foreclosed chocolate bar. Although he insists that he is using the notion axiomatically, ultimately, doesn't he join all the other conga-line of soothsayers about the real? I don’t see a lot of talk about the price of eggs in China, or Barcelona F.C. The real is a productive absence that can be used in the generation of ideological fictions. We’ve been here before - think of some of his comments in the light of Nargarjuna’s 4 propositions: “The real is something that has produced all of this." Being "It's not real!” - Not Being “The real must be something that is posited axiomatically." Being and not Being. “It's an axiom that allows us to observe the kind of production that occurs if we practice from the real, or alongside of the real, rather than into the real, or towards the real.” Neither Being nor not Being. The last inclusion is generous, but practicing alongside the real is pretty good. Practicing as the real? Messi’s had a good season.

[@barnabyrt1012]

20:29 what the hell is he talking about! He hasn't said anything yet.

[@titussamuel2440]

Greek stoicism was never big in much of early West, never attracted the attention of the many royal courts. Christianity did guide a few royal courts. In time, church became a force enough to dictate royal courts much later on. Both Christianity and Budhism were both civilizational influences, Middle East Christianity never wanted freedom for individual, Western Christianity evolved to infuse non hierarchy structure to free human from compulsions and punitive penance. Religion needs to be a human order, the more it turns into an militant and hysterical order it has become anti-life, life has lost value, it is a dangerously captive world. Much of organized religion is inflexible, religion has to be opted for by an informed person/refined mind, people need freedom to chose or reject religion. The sense of belonging has to come through choice not by being choiceless.

[@mujaku]

I have read most all the Dhammapada translations. For those who have been on the path for a long time, every Pali word has it own little rabbit hole. There is much, in other words, for the profound mind and little for the shallow minded.

[@animist_avery]

I know this is really negative, but Glenn Wallis reminds me of every weaselly overeducated academic who is incapable of explaining himself in concrete terms. His ideas have no weight to them, no force of spirit. He is only comfortable being critical because to display a positive spirit would open him up for the criticism of others and would risk him losing his position as the detached cool-headed rational person, a position we have been trained to admire above all others.

[@nik8099]

Most 'academics' are arrogant and really aren't as well rounded as they seem. However, I find those in STEM to be a bit worse. Evangelism and toxicity everywhere.

[@animist_avery]

@@nik8099 Yeah, I agree, though I imagine there's a sickness to just about every group of humans on Earth today. Not that I don't believe in the incredible potential of humanity. My biggest problem with scientists today (speaking as one) is the way we carry on as if the replication crisis were not there. The replication crisis is the fact that most science cannot be replicated and confirmed.

[@nik8099]

@@animist_avery What's interesting is that even the so-called rigorous sciences lose it on closer examination. Look into the Peter & Pete KZbin channel. Even Chemistry is not safe. Evangelical scientists want to cling onto a mechanistic view of everything.

[@animist_avery]

Interesting, they appear to advocate flat earth and have thus gone way too far in distrusting science.

[@nik8099]

@@animist_avery Well I've seen both sides. The main difference is that they are both perceiving the Earth differently. Despite science claiming to be more objective, there are still differences as to how many individuals perceive things. A lot of these 'problems' are the result of linguistic and semantic issues. For instance, some conceive of 'mind' and 'world' to be separate and some see no separation between mind and world.

[@fredherzogfan]

hmmm, while Glenn is offering some points I have come to as well, Charles - in his Harvard course lectures - has mentioned Sokku Gokki way too many times for my comfort. Deviant sect for someone who claims to have a profound understanding of Buddhism

[@TheLochs]

And why is that wrong?

[@fredherzogfan]

TheLochs well, to be concise, Sokku is not Buddhism. For anyone to consider it Buddhism is not following the path. The Buddha was very clear in his teachings. To muddy these teachings is egregious and only leads one to delusion. Practice Sokku if you want but you are not Buddhist.

[@TheLochs]

@@fredherzogfan Thanks for the reply, I'm not familiar with Sokku Gokki, can you point me to some info on it?

[@lenorefoxmoor9985]

FYI. 3 journal articles, read in succession, serve to unmask the ("westernization")of the matter (and the "anti-matter). 1) Paul Carus: A Case-study of Philosophy on the Frontier. by William H Hay. 2) Paul Carusand the Open Court: the History of a Journal. by Constance Myers. 3) The Zen of Japanese Natiinalism. by Robert H Sharf.

[@lenorefoxmoor9985]

FYI. 3 Journal articles serve, read in succession ( apropos of the matter--and anti-matter). 1) Paul Carus:a Case-Study of Philosophy on the Frontier, by William H Hay, 1956. 2) Paul Carus and the Open Court: The History of a Journal, by Constance Myers, 1964. 3) The Zen of Japanese Nationalism, by Robert H Sharf, 1993. Also KZbin "Slavoj Zizek and Buddhism", spoken about the matter and anti-matter.

[@RommelTellez]

I was researching about this just yesterday! How lucky I am. Thanks you all for keeping this channel updated. Greetings from Costa Rica.

[@gohdux]

This is a false religion.

[@kraz007]

Just based on the intro, I'd agree Buddhist anarchism sounds great 👍

[@OgdenM]

I'm sorry but, if a book is hard for the author to read , then the book needs a Version 2 that is easier to read. The chapter Glenn read made 0 sense and you could tell he didn't understand what he was saying. I feel he utterly got lost in the philosophy of Buddhism and hasn't really practiced it....and if he has, his teachers were horrible. Or that he didn't know/ forgot that the whole point is to LET GO of the world. I'll sum up the issues with Western Buddhism (And sadly, seemingly even Buddhism in the East these days.. at least in SOME ways(more on that later) as I see it for everyone. 1) By and large, In the West, the monastic aspect of Buddhism has been stripped away. Lay people are being called monks and this 100% goes against the spirit of Buddhism. Monks can not be lay people. They can't touch money and are supposed to be dependent on the generosity of lay people. 2) Capitalism has done all sorts of weird stuff to it. One thing is charging for retreats, talks etc etc etc. Buddhism is supposed to be about giving for the sake of merit. I get that building centers, maintaining buildings, food for retreats etc etc costs money. However, the model of Buddhism for centuries is that monks live in shacks until communities willingly give them money and/or help them build better monasteries. There are a few MAJOR reasons for this: A) Buddhism isn't suppose to "recruit' people etc. Monks and teachers are supposed to lead by example. B) One of the CORE concepts of Buddhism is that the whole point is to never be reborn and to do so, one must stop being attached, craving worldly things. Eventually, even really stop finding joy in anything worldly beyond joy from doing the daily things that one must do to live. 3) Back to 2b: This is really the BIG one. Western Buddhism(And yes, sadly it seems MOST Buddhist people) have stripped out the "only get joy from doing the daily things that one must do to live" part. Most people now look at it as a way to make their life BETTER while they continue to vacation, buy things they don't need, party etc etc. This 100% goes against the Buddha's deeper teachings. The whole point is to realize that NOTHING physical will ever be satisfactory for many many reasons. That One can get an equal amount if not MORE happiness and joy from must paying attention to the breath. That the joy you get from the breath is NOT dependent on any external circumstances or things and therefor is the only thing that really matters because we do it anyway. I could go on and on on #3 but, I think you get the point. 4) So many people lump all the different schools of Buddhism in to one big thing and they are SO vastly different in many ways that you just CAN'T do that. (To be fair, I used to do this until I started to study/research it.) On top of that, there are different linage of teachers in Buddhism that can be in the same school but vastly different. 5) People either don't know or forget that Buddha taught people in different ways. He met them where they were in life and taught from there. So, now we have a WHOLE host of different teachings that people try to apply to EVERYTHING and EVERYONE and it gets utterly confusing and ends up misapplied to people and things. On top of that, some of them compete against each other and find ways to bring in more people and think up new crazy ideas that just complicate things more and more when they don't need to be. 6) As for Buddhism pointing back to it self to prove itself? Oh come on! That is what Science does ALL THE TIME. Science builds upon itself in experiments etc etc. Buddhism does that same thing, most teachers will say that it is an "experiential" religion / spirituality. This means both that one must experiment and experience what comes out of that experiment. Like, uh SCIENCE DOES!!! Back to 3) Buddhism isn't about a way to live and be part of the world: It's about a way live life as simple as you can and enjoy that simplicity until you die so you are NEVER reborn. Or, if you don't believe in rebirth fine, drop the rebirth part and it still applies. The joy you can get from meditation is friggen AMAZING. I suggest looking up the Jhanas, but even if you don't get there, you can get so much peace, joy and happiness from just sitting, letting go of all of your desires and paying attention to the breath. Btw, meditation is NOT really about "concentration" it's about relaxation. You relax the body and the mind, let everything go and all you have left is the breath so you pay attention to it naturally. The letting go of everything leads to joy that all you're doing is sitting around breathing. Try it: Think of something you've ALWAYS wanted to do but haven't been able to. Figure out why you haven't done it; I bet you ANYTHING it's because you don't want to do the things required to GET you to be able to do it. Ergo, go on a 4 week vacation to Europe was my thing. I realized I don't want to work enough to afford it and accepted that fact. Then I accepted that I'll probably never go on said vacation and let go of the desire. The amount of peace and joy that came out of that was INSANE.

[@sunstarrfox]

Yess, thank you for posting this run down!

[@sunstarrfox]

Only one critique to yours... The 'goal' is not to cease rebirth because we will return to samsara until all beings are freed from it. To personally not be reborn again would be selfish.

[@OgdenM]

@@sunstarrfox that depends on what school of Buddhism you follow. The one I follow is like, "look like if all beings were going to be freed it would have happened all ready. It's best to free yourself and while you are doing so help others as much as you can. But in the end, it is their responsibility to free themselves."

[@ZPG61]

Wonderfully written. Just as a side note, I was going to ordain as a Monk in Thailand that was until they informed me that for the ordination process a requirement is to remain in a kneeling position for the total of 45-60min; this is not possible for me due to sporting injuries in my younger years, so I now cannot ordain. I’m sure that Siddhartha Gautama in his time would have accepted anyone despite any physical or mental issues. Did he not accept and train the serial killer Angulimala? Maybe I’ll just have to ‘train’ myself. I guess even Buddhism is affected/infected by dogma…sigh

[@OgdenM]

@@ZPG61, I'm sure there monasteries that would allow you to sit in a different position.

[@theequitableprose]

"Under that Korean gong, or whatever it is, I'm not entirely sure " yes, I've had extraordinary amounts of confidence inspired in the upcoming theological discussion.

[@lesscott4301]

Which one of these two was that original knowledgeable man who went to see the Zen master who overflowed the cup?

[@LONDONFIELDS2001]

buddhists assume that the The Real is benevolent or at worst neutral? What if the The Real is destructive, evil? meditate on that!

[@dzhaughnne]

Your fear and anger are palpable.

[@signe8321]

Its only Tibetan buddhisme that is distructive. Maybe some other buddhist groupings have cultic aspects to, but not mystical magic used to abuse people.

[@_VISION.]

@@signe8321 Why only Tibetan?

[@signe8321]

@@_VISION. "because I am an evil, awfull racist", no! because it is tantra.

[@_VISION.]

@@signe8321 ... And?

[@conradomscv2250]

Talking about Buddhism without ever mentioning the states of absorption, the jhanas, and the final state, nibanna, is misleading. You're missing a big chunk of the puzzle. When referring to Buddhism you must acknowledge its threefold training: virtue, CONCENTRATION, wisdom.

[@mujaku]

The Buddha after his enlightenment met an Ajivaka on the road by the name of Upaka who questioned the Buddha on his attainment which he didn't buy (he shook his head and said, "It maybe so friend."). Later Upaka went to the Buddha who was staying at Savatthi. He was later admitted to the monastic order. When he died he was reborn in the Aviha heaven.

[@canesvenatici4259]

*Ajivika!

[@lambchoppers9420]

What sad rubbish.

[@TheLochs]

Charles was one of my professors, he was a great guy.

[@saraswati999]

I understand this as Buddhism is a transplant that is not completely the body of work that is fully adopted by its new body now/ likewise in medical terms long term medication needs to be taken by West in order for it to be sustained

[@mks8172]

The most powerful reason for are the reasons against.

[@OgdenM]

I see what you did there! :-) And yes, very true.

[@Justbrowsing4lunch]

The audio is shit!

[@theequitableprose]

I'm certain that this will be a delight.

[@chadkline4268]

It's very simple: self is 1) awareness which reads consciousness, 2) conscience which filters intent, 3) a power of intent which writes to consciousness to initiate a movement in mind, body, dream or attention. Where consciousness is a bidirectional field of the nervous system wherein sensory input is radiated. That comprises the spirit. It is zero dimensional and outside of spacetime. The goal of Buddhism is to see this, realize this as direct experience+knowledge, and then to shift the center of being from consciousness to spirit. Ugh. It's simple. Chemistry, material, cannot create awareness, or intent, or conscience. Chemistry is mechanical. Dimensional. The spirit is neither.

[@backwardthoughts1022]

no mere samadhi is not buddhism. watch Alan Wallace shamatha wisdom lecture.

[@chadkline4268]

@@backwardthoughts1022 concentration+virtue. I have read the Suttas. And know from experience.

[@backwardthoughts1022]

@@chadkline4268 ite very unlikely you have accomplished the 9 stages of shamatha...furthermore mere concentration without vipashyana is mere recycling of samsara

[@chadkline4268]

@@backwardthoughts1022 you're making wrong assumptions.

[@StopFear]

Ugh. Man. This guy is just stroking already big egos of western Buddhists. I know that western, mostly white, Buddhists do not like admitting that they have big egos. But they do. I don’t mean they necessarily love themselves. But more like they pick western style of Buddhism that is liberal, open minded, and which is absolutely unrestricting because they want something that only confirms to their social and political views. That is a problem even if it does not seem to be at first since it means that if Buddhism , for example, contained any ideas they discover later which does not match with their views they would, and sometimes do, just abandon it and go to another thing. My opinion, which I admit can be wrong, is that some , or many, of “western” Buddhists just pick it because they know it only gives a superficial veil of religiosity as they continue living the same materialistic, socially accepted, lifestyle and later simply feel better about themselves. It is just like when young, and almost exclusively rich, kids go “volunteering” to poor countries. You can watch a Vice documentary about this. They go to the poor countries where they are essentially partying and taking selfies with the poor people and not contributing anything of substance at all. They come there for a few months. Maybe a semester. Do a bunch of useless bullshit feeling good about themselves as they take and then post selfies with the destitute people, then leave and never see them again. Western Buddhism is often, with exceptions, like that. It is spiritual tourism.

[@SuperSmithdan]

i really did not understand the guy who looks like Cosmo from Seinfeld yes too big of words for me i guess. KISS

[@taidelek9994]

If your religion ask for conversion then it's not a religion but an industry.

[@_VISION.]

Interesting point

[@Liana-vf3bd]

"There is nothing colder than a Christian who does not seek to save others" - John Chrysostom

[@mooners544]

@@Liana-vf3bd We are not interested in being saved. Thank you.

[@Sahih_al-Bukhari_2658]

If you have the truth, and don’t want to share it, that’s selfish. People share their favorite movies & food. But won’t share the ultimate good leading to the infinite God? Christianity is morally superior in this regard. Especially since non Christians can’t be saved without Jesus.

[@GaganSagar-jd9qi]

​@@Sahih_al-Bukhari_2658 lol😂

[@gohdux]

R Sanchez. I think you misunderstood me. I’ve been born again since 1983.

[@nataliebetito5818]

That was a very interesting way to think about the reality of things and how as human beings we are so afraid of looking at things as they are - not a projection of our desires or our fears, but an empty vessel that contains/attracts/reflects everything.

[@ShamanBuddhaDread]

It was Mark Fisher.

[@akshaypanatawane7375]

IIndian budhism in problem

[@lusulaly3194]

to the point, Buddha has never 'guess' the answers. All he has said was, accurate form of answers and told them to examine themselves. He has never told, ''may be so'' and all. Stop those delusions professor.

[@01assassinscreed63]

Seriously pls none has achieved anything from nirvana and Buddha never told this idiot! Blindly follower of Buddha

[@01assassinscreed63]

He used topics like rebirth to tell the truth rebirth isn't a fact

[@aloka62]

@@01assassinscreed63 Isn’t it.?

[@_VISION.]

The Buddhism in the West is called Pyrrhonism. What 'western' Buddhism is being talked about?

[@LONDONFIELDS2001]

fantastic discussion. brilliant.

[@danielmoore411]

Dr. Wallis! My old professor.

[@freetibet1000]

The Buddha dharma never claims itself to be science. The sole reason for the Buddha to teach was that he had discovered a way of attaining liberation from birth, old age, sickness and death. A conundrum that have always haunted mankind. He had managed to find a way out of the cyclic system of rebirth and subsequent sufferings. The Buddha discovered that the key factor to this path towards liberation lies dormant within our own mind, or consciousness, and that there are sufficient resources within us to actualize a liberation if we make effort and use the right methods. He was very clear on that the attitude of not taking his words for granted but to engage in our own investigation in order to find our own liberation is the correct attitude. In fact, liberation can only happen from within ourselves as a consequence of exhaustive studies, reflections and meditation (absorption) is a very obvious conclusion for anybody engaging in Buddhist studies and practice. Buddhism is not meant to be a system designed to explain the phenomenal world and its inhabitants as a scientific study. Instead it is meant to be a set of effective instructions on how we can actualize our own liberation. Liberation doesn’t happen on the level of thought and speculation, which is the level of operation for anyone engaged in science studies and experimentations. Buddhist teachings does not shy away from describing the nature of enlightenment and our enlightened nature but it also do not encourage the practitioner to skip ahead and forsake all progressive stages towards the actual liberation either. The reason for this is the simple but powerful reason we haven’t already reached our own liberation long ago, our own ignorance or blindness. Generally, it takes someone else to point out our own predicament and what to do about it for us to wake up from our ignorant slumber. Not only is it necessary for an outside force to intervene at an initial stage but in order to not go astray on a journey never traveled before we must rely on teachings and teachers along the way as well. The Buddha dharma is presented in such a way that external teachings and instructions have the capacity to open up the storehouse of insights and wisdom from within the mind of the practitioner. This is based on the understanding that knowledge and insight does not come from an outside source, if it did it would lack the power to be the source for liberation. In short, although we are all equipped with the seed for enlightenment, nevertheless we all need to go through the hoopla of a path of practice in order to reach the liberation that was always with us. Such is the nature of ignorance. It is a temporary thing but it has a stubborn way of believing in its own creations. For that reason the path towards enlightenment has been described as the path of deconstruction by more than one practitioner of the past.

[@afreespiritpoetandking261]

Disliked because of the cell phone joke.

[@That_Freedom_Guy]

I don't care about the encrustation of the superstitions from other cultures. Just the raw 8 fold path, sans BS. No robes, no Sanskrit no rituals just the bits that matter. PS. He's stuck in words like an SUV is stuck in mud.

[@OgdenM]

Sadly, at a certain point along the 8 Fold Path, one must leave Lay life totally to progress. The point is to leave the world unattached and not craving anything as well as very minimal demands. Lay life has all sorts of attachments, cravings and demands that you can't get away from. At least, not until you're almost dead, or lucky enough to retire and never have to work again. (Which most people can't these days.) It's why monasteries were made, they WERE supposed to be a protected space for people to leave the world. I totally agree with the rituals, having to learn Sanskit or Pali etc etc being BS though. From my understanding, 99.99% of that stuff was added way after Buddha died. I'm sure he'd be appalled about what Buddhism has become if he was still around. I suggest looking up Ajahns(Teachers) Brahm and Sona.. and anyone else that was a student of Ajan Chah. They are all very down to earth and practical. (With some ritual but they keep it pretty minimal.) And yes, Glenn is like an SUV stuck in the mud. If only he'd sit down, relax and pay attention to his breath. Or, get out of the SUV, pull out the floor mats and shove them under the tires to gain traction.