Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Be still, and know that I am God

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Nisargadatta, iinself wrote:

> Hi All,

> how does this relate to the problem of over-intellectualization

faced

> by many of us beginners. The advice " Be still, and know that I

am

> God " , sounds very apt for seekers, even Guru Ramana has

quoted this

> phrase.

>

> Cheers :-)

> Arvind

 

--------------------

 

Hello Arvind,

 

What over-intellect...

 

Don't you mean a shortage of intellect...?

 

Intellect at it's apex self-destructs.

 

You see any apex here?

 

 

Cheers,

El

 

 

..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, then.

 

Be ...

still ...

know that ...

 

.... " I am God " ...

 

What problem of overintellectualization?

What seekers?

What beginners?

 

-- Dan

 

 

 

--- iinself wrote:

> Hi All,

> how does this relate to the problem of

> over-intellectualization faced

> by many of us beginners. The advice " Be still, and

> know that I am

> God " , sounds very apt for seekers, even Guru Ramana

> has quoted this

> phrase.

>

> Cheers :-)

> Arvind

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

Listen to your Mail messages from any phone.

http://phone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi El and All,

 

so you ask what is my problem with over-intellecualization :-) ...

 

I hope we all agree that ego (or I or mind or thought OR INTELLECT)

is the thing that needs to eliminated. WHY? Because ego is a faulty

mechanism at present (unless evolution speeds up ;-)). WHY FAULTY?

Because it does not have the ability to view the Universe

impartially, it HAS to distort it to fit its contorted view of the

Universe. WHY? Because the ego has been created by primordial

ignorance of borrowing partially the properties of the body and

Brahman (or Universal Consiousness).

 

Now one of the primary sustainer of this process is the INTELLECT !!

 

Even posting to this group is an act of ego-fulfillment UNLESS there

is a genuine desire to learn or if you think you are a GURU, a

genuine desire to teach ;-)

 

 

NOW by continously stressing ones intellect one only creates what one

desires to eliminate.

 

Thanks for your patience.

 

Once we realize that the ego is also just another thought or if you

prefer intellectual mechanism aimed at maitaining its distorted view

of the universe....

 

Cheers :-)

Arvind

 

 

Nisargadatta, elizabeth_wells2001 wrote:

 

> Hello Arvind,

>

> What over-intellect...

>

> Don't you mean a shortage of intellect...?

>

> Intellect at it's apex self-destructs.

>

> You see any apex here?

>

>

> Cheers,

> El

>

>

> .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hiya Arvind,

 

 

 

-

iinself

Nisargadatta

Tuesday, October 02, 2001 10:07 PM

Re: "Be still, and know that I am God"

 

Hi El and All,so you ask what is my problem with over-intellecualization :-) ...I hope we all agree that ego (or I or mind or thought OR INTELLECT) is the thing that needs to eliminated. WHY? Because ego is a faulty mechanism at present (unless evolution speeds up ;-)). WHY FAULTY? Because it does not have the ability to view the Universe impartially, it HAS to distort it to fit its contorted view of the Universe. WHY? Because the ego has been created by primordial ignorance of borrowing partially the properties of the body and Brahman (or Universal Consiousness).

 

 

San:

 

Can you please advise what does the term "ego", mean for you?

 

And who is to eliminate it?

 

Now one of the primary sustainer of this process is the INTELLECT !!Even posting to this group is an act of ego-fulfillment UNLESS there is a genuine desire to learn

 

 

San:

 

This genuine desire to learn, who is having it?

 

 

or if you think you are a GURU, a genuine desire to teach ;-)

San:

 

This genuine desire to teach, who is having it?

 

NOW by continously stressing ones intellect one only creates what one desires to eliminate.

 

 

San:

 

I am a newbie in all these spiritual stuff, and specially to this thread of discussion.

 

So would like to know, how does one not create what one desires to eliminate?

 

 

Thanks for your patience.Once we realize that the ego is also just another thought or if you prefer intellectual mechanism aimed at maitaining its distorted view of the universe....

 

Who realizes this?

 

 

Cheers

 

Sandeep

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Sandeep,

thanks for your thoughts both in this posting and the mail u sent me.

 

 

> San:

> Can you please advise what does the term " ego " , mean for you?

Ego = I = mind = thought

 

> And who is to eliminate it?

YOU (not your ego) (Neti, Neti..)

 

> This genuine desire to learn, who is having it?

The one who is reading or posting

 

> This genuine desire to teach, who is having it?

The one who is reading or posting

 

> Who realizes this?

Not the ego (Neti, Neti...)

 

Sandeep, the terseness of the reply might make you wonder, but I

believe in " more words the further you are " . We are dabbling near an

area that is beyound words (or intellect)... " Be still and know that

I am God " .

 

Cheers :-)

Arvind

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>iinself

>Nisargadatta

>Nisargadatta

> Re: " Be still, and know that I am God "

>Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:33:20 -0000

>

>We are dabbling near an

>area that is beyound words (or intellect)... Cheers :-)

>Arvind

 

Hi Arvid,

 

Interesting discussion going on...

In the mean time before your

respondent replies, my question

to you is :

 

Is it possible for 'you' to

experience something beyond words

and if so, who exactly is this

'you' that is experiencing all this ?

Or more directly can 'you' experience the ego ?

If so what is experiencing the ego ?

 

Isn't it more likely that since all experiences

are dual (in terms of subject and object)

then probably the background 'YOU'

that is witnesing the ego maybe the same ego

playing mind games with itself, spliting

itself into an observer and observed, seer

and seen?

 

What I'm trying to say is maybe this 'you'

is merely another word or thought,

an invented entity much like a second-hand

person moulded or acquired from

the ideas, knowledge, and experiences

of others.

 

When this is recognised and 'you' dissolves

is there any experience at all or someone

remaining to experience some beyond ?

 

Then perhaps this 'beyond words' may be an

objective invention of the ego to perpetuate,

protect and maintain itself as an eternal subject.

 

:)

~dave

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dave,

agree this is interesting. I am just a seeker (seeking something I

only know I am missing but cannot say exactly what it is). I believe

all of us who are reading posting to such groups are also in search

of that missing " thing " .

 

In some forms of Hinduism this state which is beyond the three states

of waking, dreaming and sleeping is called " Turiya " or 4th state. It

can be sought in many ways - including just being aware of moments

between two thoughts. This state is self-aware (Sat Chit Ananda), it

does not need a you to experience itself ie it does not rely on the

subject-object dichotomy. It DOES NOT RELY ON INTELLECT.

 

Maybe I have answered you question paritally?

 

Anyways, Cheers :-)

Arvind

 

 

Nisargadatta, " Dave Sirjue " <davesirjue@h...> wrote:

>

>

>

> >iinself

> >Nisargadatta

> >Nisargadatta

> > Re: " Be still, and know that I am God "

> >Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:33:20 -0000

> >

> >We are dabbling near an

> >area that is beyound words (or intellect)... Cheers :-)

> >Arvind

>

> Hi Arvid,

>

> Interesting discussion going on...

> In the mean time before your

> respondent replies, my question

> to you is :

>

> Is it possible for 'you' to

> experience something beyond words

> and if so, who exactly is this

> 'you' that is experiencing all this ?

> Or more directly can 'you' experience the ego ?

> If so what is experiencing the ego ?

>

> Isn't it more likely that since all experiences

> are dual (in terms of subject and object)

> then probably the background 'YOU'

> that is witnesing the ego maybe the same ego

> playing mind games with itself, spliting

> itself into an observer and observed, seer

> and seen?

>

> What I'm trying to say is maybe this 'you'

> is merely another word or thought,

> an invented entity much like a second-hand

> person moulded or acquired from

> the ideas, knowledge, and experiences

> of others.

>

> When this is recognised and 'you' dissolves

> is there any experience at all or someone

> remaining to experience some beyond ?

>

> Then perhaps this 'beyond words' may be an

> objective invention of the ego to perpetuate,

> protect and maintain itself as an eternal subject.

>

> :)

> ~dave

_______________

> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at

http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Arvind -

 

*It* has nothing to do with

any mental or emotional contents.

Not what the ego is or what intellect

does, nor what universal consciousness

supposedly is ...

 

Be ...

 

Still ...

 

Know ...

 

" That I am God " is

content-less ...

 

You see? Where are the mental

contents now?

 

:-)

 

Namaste,

Dan

 

--- iinself wrote:

> Hi El and All,

>

> so you ask what is my problem with

> over-intellecualization :-) ...

>

> I hope we all agree that ego (or I or mind or

> thought OR INTELLECT)

> is the thing that needs to eliminated. WHY? Because

> ego is a faulty

> mechanism at present (unless evolution speeds up

> ;-)). WHY FAULTY?

> Because it does not have the ability to view the

> Universe

> impartially, it HAS to distort it to fit its

> contorted view of the

> Universe. WHY? Because the ego has been created by

> primordial

> ignorance of borrowing partially the properties of

> the body and

> Brahman (or Universal Consiousness).

>

> Now one of the primary sustainer of this process is

> the INTELLECT !!

>

> Even posting to this group is an act of

> ego-fulfillment UNLESS there

> is a genuine desire to learn or if you think you are

> a GURU, a

> genuine desire to teach ;-)

>

>

> NOW by continously stressing ones intellect one only

> creates what one

> desires to eliminate.

>

> Thanks for your patience.

>

> Once we realize that the ego is also just another

> thought or if you

> prefer intellectual mechanism aimed at maitaining

> its distorted view

> of the universe....

>

> Cheers :-)

> Arvind

>

>

> Nisargadatta, elizabeth_wells2001

> wrote:

>

> > Hello Arvind,

> >

> > What over-intellect...

> >

> > Don't you mean a shortage of intellect...?

> >

> > Intellect at it's apex self-destructs.

> >

> > You see any apex here?

> >

> >

> > Cheers,

> > El

> >

> >

> > .

>

>

 

 

 

 

Listen to your Mail messages from any phone.

http://phone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> > San:

> > Can you please advise what does the term " ego " ,

> mean for you?

> Ego = I = mind = thought

>

> > And who is to eliminate it?

> YOU (not your ego) (Neti, Neti..)

>

> > This genuine desire to learn, who is having it?

> The one who is reading or posting

>

> > This genuine desire to teach, who is having it?

> The one who is reading or posting

>

> > Who realizes this?

> Not the ego (Neti, Neti...)

>

> Sandeep, the terseness of the reply might make you

> wonder, but I

> believe in " more words the further you are " . We are

> dabbling near an

> area that is beyound words (or intellect)... " Be

> still and know that

> I am God " .

>

> Cheers :-)

> Arvind

 

Arvind,

 

Beliefs = dabbling.

It's not an area near which

one can dabble.

 

:-)

 

Stillness,

Dan

 

 

 

 

 

Listen to your Mail messages from any phone.

http://phone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hiya Arvind,

 

Thank you for your thoughts.

 

Some two cents.....

 

 

-

iinself

Nisargadatta

Tuesday, October 02, 2001 11:03 PM

Re: "Be still, and know that I am God"

 

Hi Sandeep,thanks for your thoughts both in this posting and the mail u sent me.> San:> Can you please advise what does the term "ego", mean for you?

A:

Ego = I = mind = thought

 

San:

And since this is what, you want to eliminate(through whichever manner you expect to achieve this) and let's label that entity as a "sage", are you saying a sage is a lobotomized, thoughtless entity?

That body-mind organism would not survive a moment.

 

A suggestion for your consideration...

 

Ego is the sense of indentification with a body-mind complex and the name that Society has bestowed on that form.

And this remains, so long the body-mind organism is "alive", whether we are talking of a sage or a clown.

 

 

> And who is to eliminate it?

YOU (not your ego) (Neti, Neti..)

 

 

OK.

So are you saying that all appearance of seeking, is the apparent seeking of That-Which-IS and there is no individual seeker involved in the body-mind complex, where apparently seeking has occurred, started?

 

> This genuine desire to learn, who is having it?

The one who is reading or posting

 

Who is that?

 

> This genuine desire to teach, who is having it?

The one who is reading or posting

 

Who is that?

 

> Who realizes this?

 

Not the ego (Neti, Neti...)

 

<s>

Sandeep, the terseness of the reply might make you wonder, but I believe in "more words the further you are".

 

San:

 

Indeed.

However terseness need not automatically mean clarity.<s>

 

 

 

 

We are dabbling near an area that is beyound words (or intellect)... "Be still and know that I am God".

 

San:

 

I know that particular bromide has been much bandied about.

Sheer baloney.

 

In stillness,

who is I

And who is God,

And to whom can this affirmation be made

Thus in whom could the need of making this affirmation (or any affirmation) arise?

 

Cheers

 

Sandeep

 

 

Ps: Greetings to all old friends and foes.

Hi Dave, greetings El, hi Dan, hi Wim

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dave,

 

Greetings old friend.

 

Dobeee Dobeeee Doooooo.

 

 

Cheers

 

Sandeep

 

 

 

-

Dave Sirjue

Nisargadatta

Wednesday, October 03, 2001 12:49 AM

Re: Re: "Be still, and know that I am God"

>iinselfNisargadatta >Nisargadatta > Re: "Be still, and know that I am God">Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:33:20 -0000>>We are dabbling near an>area that is beyound words (or intellect)... Cheers :-)>ArvindHi Arvid,Interesting discussion going on...In the mean time before yourrespondent replies, my questionto you is :Is it possible for 'you' toexperience something beyond wordsand if so, who exactly is this'you' that is experiencing all this ?Or more directly can 'you' experience the ego ?If so what is experiencing the ego ?Isn't it more likely that since all experiencesare dual (in terms of subject and object)then probably the background 'YOU'that is witnesing the ego maybe the same egoplaying mind games with itself, splitingitself into an observer and observed, seerand seen?What I'm trying to say is maybe this 'you'is merely another word or thought,an invented entity much like a second-handperson moulded or acquired fromthe ideas, knowledge, and experiencesof others.When this is recognised and 'you' dissolvesis there any experience at all or someoneremaining to experience some beyond ?Then perhaps this 'beyond words' may be anobjective invention of the ego to perpetuate,protect and maintain itself as an eternal subject.:)~dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> " Sandeep Chatterjee " <sandeepc

>Nisargadatta

><Nisargadatta >

>Re: Re: " Be still, and know that I am God "

>Wed, 3 Oct 2001 08:41:38 +0530

>

>Hi Dave,

>

>Greetings old friend.

 

>Cheers

>

>Sandeep

 

 

Hey Sandeep,

 

Glad to meet again, my friend.

...and welcome once more to this waterhole.

 

Last I heard you were grossly involved

in business development of artificial

intelligence software...How is it going ?.

 

I'm still over here in Trinidad

working my ass out in these remote

oilfields but I always look forward

to spending a weekend at the beaches

not to mention the Caribbean rum & coconut

and beautiful brauds.

 

At least it's much safer down here than

the big apple!

 

Cheers (Vodka & lemon juice)

~dave

 

 

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dave,

 

 

<SNIP>Hey Sandeep,Glad to meet again, my friend...and welcome once more to this waterhole.Last I heard you were grossly involvedin business development of artificialintelligence software...How is it going ?.

 

 

San:

 

It was going great guns till a certain bearded gentleman decided to blow things apart.

I think I will sell him the software.

There is an inbuilt "hang" system, at Level 1 usage and a full "crash" system at level 2 usage if the focus is on blowing up stuff.

 

---------

I'm still over here in Trinidadworking my ass out in these remoteoilfields but I always look forwardto spending a weekend at the beachesnot to mention the Caribbean rum & coconutand beautiful brauds.

 

 

San:

 

You have it good maaaan.

 

 

At least it's much safer down here thanthe big apple!Cheers (Vodka & lemon juice)~daveCheers with some Remy Martin.

 

 

Sandeep

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta, iinself wrote:

> Hi All,

> how does this relate to the problem of over-intellectualization

faced

> by many of us beginners. The advice " Be still, and know that I am

> God " , sounds very apt for seekers, even Guru Ramana has quoted this

> phrase.

>

> Cheers :-)

> Arvind

 

Namaste All,

 

This is also a stage, for the 'I AM', is really the Mahat the

universal mind projected by the Saguna Brahman, which is all

ultimately unreal. Only Nirguna is real, but it is a useful concept

for it can be imagined in some way.........ONS....Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> " Sandeep Chatterjee " <sandeepc

>Nisargadatta

><Nisargadatta >

>Re: Re: " Be still, and know that I am God "

>Wed, 3 Oct 2001 22:04:35 +0530

>

 

>

> San:

>

> It was going great guns till a certain bearded gentleman decided to blow

>things apart.

 

Yeah, that's what I'm hearing too 'bout this bearded fellow from

what's beaming via CNN et al; but Tony O'clery and his conspiracy buddies

seem to think otherwise.. convinced that this old chap lacks the ability and

expertise to pull such a precise hit job,they're saying it's an inside job,

well ochestrated by a 'cartel' who used these suicide commandos to do the

dirty work and are now benefiting financially and otherwise from this

ordeal.

...So is there's more behind the scenes or what?

 

Cheers (hic..)

~dave

 

 

 

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> San:

>

> (snip) I know that particular bromide has been

much

> bandied about.

> Sheer baloney.

>

> In stillness,

> who is I

> And who is God,

> And to whom can this affirmation be made

> Thus in whom could the need of making this

> affirmation (or any affirmation) arise?

> Cheers

>

> Sandeep

>

>

> Ps: Greetings to all old friends and foes.

> Hi Dave, greetings El, hi Dan, hi Wim

 

Hi Sandeep!

Enjoying your clarity and humor.

 

There being no space between God

and God, in which to form or utter

a true statement, no communication

from God about God has ever truly

occurred.

 

No statement about God being possible,

the word " God " is a misnomer.

 

" Be still and know that I am God "

is, as you say, utterly unreal

as a statement of reality (as is

any statement about reality).

 

It has some use as a placebo, good for

what ails you as long as there persists

a belief that there is someone outside

of God, to whom God could communicate

something about God.

 

Namaste,

Dan

 

 

 

 

NEW from GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.

http://geocities./ps/info1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta, " Dave Sirjue " <davesirjue@h...> wrote:

 

> >

> > It was going great guns till a certain bearded gentleman decided

to blow

> >things apart.

>

> Yeah, that's what I'm hearing too 'bout this bearded fellow from

> what's beaming via CNN et al; but Tony O'clery and his conspiracy

buddies

> seem to think otherwise.. convinced that this old chap lacks the

ability and

> expertise to pull such a precise hit job,they're saying it's an

inside job,

> well ochestrated by a 'cartel' who used these suicide commandos to

do the

> dirty work and are now benefiting financially and otherwise from

this

> ordeal.

> ..So is there's more behind the scenes or what?

>

> Cheers (hic..)

> ~dave

 

Namaste Dave,

 

Where did I say all the above? He may very well have done it. However

some eggshells were found at the site and now it is believed

humpty-dumpty was involved. They have all the evidence, but like the

kid in the school yard, 'I'm not telling you'. So we'll never really

know whether this was an egg job or not, for all eggs are now to be

destroyed by special forces.

 

I wouldn't use the word cartel, Nostradamus's 'cabal', is much more

appropos. Whether they had anything to do with WTC, I have no idea,

perhaps you have some incontrovertable evidence that you are hiding?

 

You are very good at writing up 'evidence', though, perhaps a job at

the CIA for you?.........ONS....Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta, " Dave Sirjue " <davesirjue@h...> wrote:

>

>

>

> > " Sandeep Chatterjee " <sandeepc@b...>

> >Nisargadatta

> ><Nisargadatta>

> >Re: Re: " Be still, and know that I am God "

> >Wed, 3 Oct 2001 22:04:35 +0530

> >

>

> >

> > San:

> >

> > It was going great guns till a certain bearded gentleman decided

to blow

> >things apart.

>

> Yeah, that's what I'm hearing too 'bout this bearded fellow from

> what's beaming via CNN et al; but Tony O'clery and his conspiracy

buddies

> seem to think otherwise.. convinced that this old chap lacks the

ability and

> expertise to pull such a precise hit job,they're saying it's an

inside job,

> well ochestrated by a 'cartel' who used these suicide commandos to

do the

> dirty work and are now benefiting financially and otherwise from

this

> ordeal.

> ..So is there's more behind the scenes or what?

>

> Cheers (hic..)

> ~dave

 

Dear David,

 

I see you are drunk still. What has all this bollocks thread to do

with Maharaj?......Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hiya Dan,

 

-

d b

Nisargadatta

Thursday, October 04, 2001 02:30 AM

Re: "Be still, and know that I am God"

 

> San:> > (snip) I know that particular bromide has beenmuch> bandied about.> Sheer baloney.> > In stillness, > who is I > And who is God,> And to whom can this affirmation be made > Thus in whom could the need of making this> affirmation (or any affirmation) arise? > Cheers> > Sandeep> > > Ps: Greetings to all old friends and foes.> Hi Dave, greetings El, hi Dan, hi WimHi Sandeep!Enjoying your clarity and humor.There being no space between God and God, in which to form or utter a true statement, no communication from God about God has ever truly occurred.No statement about God being possible,the word "God" is a misnomer."Be still and know that I am God" is, as you say, utterly unreal as a statement of reality (as is any statement about reality).It has some use as a placebo, good for what ails you as long as there persists a belief that there is someone outside of God, to whom God could communicate something about God.

 

----------

 

Dobeee Dobeeee Doooo.

 

Wonder, then why does conceptualization occur?

Why did it occur the first time and why does it continue to occur?

Apparently.

 

Cheers

Sandeep (TIC)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> Dobeee Dobeeee Doooo.

>

> Wonder, then why does conceptualization occur?

> Why did it occur the first time and why does it

> continue to occur?

> Apparently.

>

> Cheers

>

> Sandeep (TIC)

 

 

Hi Sandeep!

 

There is no first concept, because

any concept infers a previous

concept, just as any

experiencing infers a previous

experience by which it is known

(through contrast).

 

" Why " itself involves the assumption

of a previous experience, which is

how " why " can be discussed.

 

Although it doesn't happen, here it is,

happening! Go figure! :-)

 

What can't be said is that there actually

is a " why " , only it's not a (conceptual)

" why " . It doesn't involve a plan, thought,

or a creator.

 

There absolutely must be relativity,

time is the inevitable expression

of timelessness.

 

Love,

Dan

 

 

 

 

 

NEW from GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.

http://geocities./ps/info1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<SNIP>

 

There absolutely must be relativity, time is the inevitable expression of timelessness.

 

Conceptualization is the inevitable expression of that which is not a concept?

 

Cheers

 

Sandeep

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> <SNIP>

>

>

> There absolutely must be relativity,

> time is the inevitable expression

> of timelessness.

>

>

> Conceptualization is the inevitable expression of

> that which is not a concept?

>

> Cheers

>

> Sandeep

 

Indeed!

 

Apperceived with no reference

to anything, this inevitability

is self-evident.

 

-- Dan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NEW from GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.

http://geocities./ps/info1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...