direct path to enligthement

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Hendrik, I believe, from the text, the “demon mind” is the mind of attachment to concepts!

The verse just prior to the portion of the one cited introduces the concept of “demon mind”.

‘Another question: ’What is the path?’ Answer: ’When you desire to produce the thought of moving toward the path, crafty ingenuity will arise, and you will fall into having mind. If you desire to give rise to the path, ingenious artifice will arise. If you have devices in your mind, crafty artifice will always arise.’ Another question: ’What is crafty artifice?’ Answer: ’If you use intellectual understanding to seek a name, a hundred ingenious schemes arise. If you desire to cut off crafty artifice, don’t produce the thought of enlightenment and don’t use knowledge of the sutras and treatises. If you can accomplish this, then for the first time you will have bodily energy. If you have spirit, do not esteem understanding, do not seek Dharma, and do not love knowledge, then you will find a little quietude.’ Further: ’If you do not seek wonderful understanding, do not serve as a teacher for people, and also do not take Dharma as your teacher, you will walk alone spontaneously.’ Further: If you do not give rise to a demon mind, I can lead you.”

The complete verse of the line I originally cited is below,

“Question: ‘What is the demon mind?’ Answer: 'Closing the eyes [in cross-legged sitting posture] and entering Samadhi.'" “Question: ‘[What if] I gather mind into dhyana [meditation] so that it does not move?’ Answer; ‘This is bondage Samadhi. It is useless. This holds even for the four dyhanas, each of which is merely one stage of quiescence from which you will return to disturbance again. They are not to be valued. These are created dharmas, dharmas that will be destroyed again, not the Ultimate Dharma. If you can understand that intrinsically there is neither quiescence nor disturbance, then you will be able to exist of yourself. The one who is not drawn into quiescence and disturbance is the man of spirit.’ Further: ‘If one is capable of not seizing on interpretations, not creating the mind of delusion, and not esteeming profound knowledge, then he will be a peaceful person. If there is one dharma to be esteemed or valued, this dharma will be the one most capable of binding and killing you, and you will fall into having mind. This is an unreliable state of affairs. There are innumerable common men throughout the world who are bound by terminology and the written word.’

[uki]

’What is the path?’

mind is the path.

[Scott R. Brown]

mind is the path.

Record II of the Tun-huang text:

#67 “A certain person asked Dhyana Master Hsuan: ‘What is the substance of the path?’ Answer: ’Mind is the substance of the path. This is the substantive substanceless. It is the inconceivable Dharma, neither existent nor nonexistent, Why? Mind is natureless, and so it does not exist. It arises from conditions, and so it does not inexist. Mind does not have the characteristic of form, and so it is nonexistent. It functions ceaselessly, and so it is not inexistent.’

#70 Dhyana Master Lien says: “The Dharma Nature is insubstantive. Directly function and do not doubt. The sutra says: ‘All dharmas from the outset are nonexistent.’ The sutra says: ‘Because from the outset there is no mind, there is the mind of Thusness; because of the mind of Thusness, from the outset there is no [mind].’

#90 Dhyana Master Yuan says: “ ‘All the sutras and treatises are dharmas that produce mind. If you produce a mental focus on the path, then ingenius artifice will give rise to knowledge and a complement of events. If mind is not produced, what need is there for cross-legged sitting dyana? If ingenious artifice does not arise, why toil over right mindfulness? If you do not raise the thought of enlightenment and do not seek insight and understanding, then you will exhaust both phenomena and principle.’

[Hendrik]

Hi Hendrik, I believe, from the text, the “demon mind” is the mind of attachment to concepts!.....

Thanks for the sharing.

[Hendrik]

If mind is not produced, what need is there for cross-legged sitting dyana? ’[/b]

even if mind is produce what need is there for cross-legged sitting dyana?

[Scott R. Brown]

even if mind is produce what need is there for cross-legged sitting dyana?

I agree!

And a few from Master Huang Po:

“The Master said: ‘Only when your minds cease dwelling upon anything whatsoever will you come to an understanding of the true way of Zen. I may express it thus—the way of the Buddhas flourishes in a mind utterly freed from conceptual thought processes, while discrimination between this and that give birth to a legion of demons! Finally, remember that from the first to last not even the smallest grain of anything perceptible has ever existed or ever will exist.’”

“Above all, have no longing to become a future Buddha; your sole concern should be, as thought succeeds thought, to avoid clinging to any of them”

“Mind is not Mind, for whatever that term connotes is far from the reality is symbolizes.”

“…every sort of dharma is but a creation of Mind.”

“Enlightenment springs from Mind, regardless of your practice of the six paramitas and the rest. All such practices are merely expedients for handling ‘concrete’ matters when dealing with the problems of daily life.”

“Mind is the Buddha, while cessation of conceptual thought is the Way. Once you stop arousing concepts and thinking in terms of existence and non-existence….[dualistic opposites]…you will find that your Mind is intrinsically the Buddha, that the Buddha is intrinsically the Mind and that Mind resembles a void.”

“You do not see that THE FUNDAMENTAL DOCTRINE OF THE DHARMA IS THAT THERE ARE NO DHARMAS, YET THAT THIS DOCTRINE OF NO-DHARMA IS IN ITSELF A DHARMA; AND NOW THAT THE NO-DHARMA DOCTRINE HAS BEEN TRANSMITTED, HOW CAN THE DOCTIRINE OF THE DHARMA BE A DHARMA?”

“…when you reach the point of clinging to nothing whatever, you will be acting as the Buddhas act.”

“ ‘Studying the Way’ is just a figure of speech. It is a method of arousing people’s interest in the early stages of their development. In fact, the Way is not something which can be studied. Study leads to the retention of concepts and so the Way is entirely misunderstood.”

[Hendrik]

I agree!

So there is no demon mind?
if so,
why then you this Buddha to be keep qouting and hold on to those old texts ?




AS the song of Enligtenment said,

In my youth, I gathered much knowledge, searching the Sutras, Sastras, and Commentaries;
I endlessly analyzed names and forms, a task as vain as counting sands on the Ocean Floor.
I was severely admonished by the Buddha, who asked, " What is the profit in counting other persons' treasures?"
Then, I fully realized the futility of my greatest efforts and the aimless travelling about that I had done.


Why not Travel the path of

I have crossed many rivers and mountains
Searching for Masters to instruct in the secrets of Ch'an,
But then I came to know the Path of Ts'ao Ch'i Hui-Neng,
And, I are no longer concerned with birth and death.

and go search for those who still carry the mind seal of Hui-Neng?

[Scott R. Brown]

So there is no demon mind?

Of course there is…just because all things are empty does not mean they do not exist. It only means they are all creations of our own mind delusion. They both exist and do not exist according to a context!

All delusions are real according to their context. Change the context and, while they do not exist under that new context, they still exist under the former context and they are real to those bound by that context. Their essential condition is “empty” because they are not Absolute/Unchanging conditions! They are based upon context!

As Huang Po says:

“Mind is not Mind, for whatever that term connotes is far from the reality it symbolizes.”

That is why Mind is not existent, but also not “non-existent”. THUSNESS cannot be defined by these terms. It must be directly experienced, except that even that is not correct because an experience takes place in a duality, an experience and an experiencer, THUSSNESS as stated by Nagarjuna is, “not this, not that, not both and not neither”. It is indescribable!

Definitions do not accurately signify what they are meant to represent because they are symbols of the REAL thing. Only the REAL thing is the REAL thing, NOT the description. People confuse the description with the REAL thing and think they know the REAL thing when all they really know is the description.

We use texts of the old Masters, not because they say anything special, but because foolish people do not understand on their own, so they are provided with an authority in hopes they will understand based upon the authorities reputation. But an authority is not necessary! It is important to distinguish between “not necessary” and “not beneficial”.

A “thing” may be beneficial, but not necessary! So a teacher, meditation, texts, treatises, sutras may all be beneficial, but none of them are necessary. They are only tools that indicate the “essence of mind” through representations. The caution the teachers make is to “not confuse ‘representations’ for the REAL thing”!

The only true “mind seal” is direct experience, NOT the confirmation of a teacher. If anyone requires for themselves a teacher to lead them to “essence of mind” or to confirm for them they have found “essence of mind” they have created for themselves chains that bind them to their own delusion!

And any REAL teacher would say exactly that!

why then you this Buddha to be keep qouting and hold on to those old texts?

I hold to no texts. It is all a game. I play the game because I enjoy it and it is edifying.

Texts are just fingers pointing to the moon, they are not the moon. They are guides, but not direct experience or direct knowledge. One of the reasons I quote them is because, from your own statements, you appear to be bound to the delusion of a need for a teacher. Since you appear to be bound by the that delusion, I have provided statements made by noted teachers confirming the truth that no teachers are necessary. My hope is that, since you will not believe me, you will believe noted Masters of the past!

While a teacher may be helpful a teacher is NOT a necessity. As long as you believe you NEED a teacher you are chained to your delusion and a slave to it. An insistence on the NEED for a teacher is a form of attachment. There is NO freedom when there exists attachments of any kind, including an attachment to the idea of a teacher, Buddha Mind, a mind seal, the need for confirmation, the need for meditation, attainment of any kind, etc.

…and go search for those who still carry the mind seal of Hui-Neng?

Because the mind seal is for children who are bound by attachment. They will not receive a mind seal just because they found a teacher. If your mind is not ready no teacher can help you. If it were that easy then all those who followed Hui-Neng, Huang Po, Master Yuan, Ma-tsu etc. would have become enlightened. Not everyone receives mind seal confirmation because their minds are not ready and no teacher can guarantee it for you!

As stated by Hui-Neng:Those who realize on their own do not need to seek outside. If you insist absolutely that a teacher is necessary in order to attain liberation, that is not right.

Anyone with the mind seal of Hui-Neng's tradition would teach the same thing or they have NOT received the mind seal of Hui-Neng's tradition!

[uki]

But an authority is not necessary!

only mature souls will understand this.

While a teacher may be helpful a teacher is NOT a necessity. As long as you believe you NEED a teacher you are chained to your delusion and a slave to it. An insistence on the NEED for a teacher is a form of attachment. There is NO freedom when there exists attachments of any kind, including an attachment to the idea of a teacher, Buddha Mind, a mind seal, the need for confirmation, the need for meditation, attainment of any kind, etc.

very nice. well done indeed... you are a TRUE teacher(unlike some of these fools on the board who claim to be)

[mantis108]

Sorry to interject...

Hi Scott,

The only true “mind seal” is direct experience, NOT the confirmation of a teacher. If anyone requires for themselves a teacher to lead them to “essence of mind” or to confirm for them they have found “essence of mind” they have created for themselves chains that bind them to their own delusion!

If in fact the "only true mind seal" is direct experience, then the historic Buddha has done nothing but a astronomical disservice for the "world" by becoming an icon/idol in the collective consciousness of the world through books, texts and any other multimedia format. Of course we can easily argue that he has become the Dharma and He is the Dharma, so on so fore but this is irrelevant in direct experience.

We have to bear in mind that "the confirmation of a teacher " IS in fact paradoxically a direct experience (one that is not from or of other form than human contact) against your argument. It is in fact direct experience in a pure form - two minds being one through yet transcendent physical contact. We must also realize that the Dharma, the Buddha, and the Sangha are one and the same as direct experience, which is practical reason rather than theoretical reason (not a construct) in nature. Buddhism is not a separation of society, religion and philosophy. On the contrary, it allows individual to participate and "realize" freely in the world (not a construct) in a non fragmented manner.

I would argue that Thusness is in fact paraouisa and it's practical reason where happiness and Highest Good that are important to human nature is found. In other words, when Thusness is reached, we can develop either a fundamental ontology or a moral metaphysics, one that is not without human interaction (human as not of a personal God/Authority) thus realize the necessity of the three treasures, which essentially a Buddhist community/nation even Buddha-verse.

And any REAL teacher would say exactly that!

Yes, but in that case the teacher has to be human, thus using a recognizable language (discursive) . According to Buddhism which all things being empty in nature, I don't think a book (even a good Koan) or a cat can say exactly that to you. BTW, you can choose to live with books and/or cats but what does that have to do with Buddhism as Buddha envisioned? You are still the one "telling" yourself that you are one with Thusness hence able to live amongst object and/or animals happily (somewhat Daoist in that case). Being your own teacher is fine but that only makes this enlightenment subjective. That kind of "enlightenment" is incomplete. Perhaps we could say it's more of a way (not all of them) of the Arhat but not even a Bodhisattva let alone being a Buddha.

So my friend please be mindful of the Three Treasures and the meaning of "Mind Seal" when it comes to Buddhism.

Just some thoughts

Warmest regards

Mantis108

[Hendrik]

降龍缽，解虎錫，兩鈷金環鳴歷歷。
不是標形虛事持，如來寶杖親蹤跡。

建法幢，立宗旨，明明佛敕曹溪是。
第一迦葉首傳燈，二十八代西天記。
法東流，入此土，菩提達摩為初祖。
六代傳衣天下聞，後人得道何窮數。


三身四智體中圓，八解六通心地印。
上士一決一切了，中下多聞多不信。
但自懷中解垢衣，誰能向外誇精進。



種性邪，錯知解，不達如來圓頓制。
二乘精進沒道心，外道聰明無智慧。
亦愚癡，亦小駭，
空拳指上生實解。執指為月枉施功，根境法中虛捏怪。


日可冷，月可熱，眾魔不能壞真說。
象駕崢嶸慢進途，誰見螳螂能拒轍！
大象不遊於兔徑，大悟不拘於小節。
莫將管見謗蒼蒼，未了吾今為君訣。

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi mantis108,

It has been a long time my friend. It is always a pleasure to have your participation. I appreciate your perspective.

If in fact the "only true mind seal" is direct experience, then the historic Buddha has done nothing but a astronomical disservice for the "world" by becoming an icon/idol in the collective consciousness of the world through books, texts and any other multimedia format. Of course we can easily argue that he has become the Dharma and He is the Dharma, so on so fore but this is irrelevant in direct experience.

Whether it was a service or a disservice is determined by ones perspective. From a certain perspective, The “idea” of Buddha fulfills an emotional need within individuals of a specific level of maturity. Some people need an icon/idol. It is an assumption to presume it is a negative circumstance. It provides a service, so to speak, for people with specific needs. Therefore, it is not really a negative circumstance/disservice.

However, the “idea” of Buddha does become a focus for attachment and that may be considered a negative circumstance from a specific perspective, except, it is within the nature of humans to become attached to phenomena. Therefore, we can presume that humans will become attached to “something” anyway. If from the start it is within our inherent nature to become attached to phenomena, then it behooves humans for the “Ultimate Teacher” to provide something of lesser detriment for us to become attached too. The “idea” of Buddha and his teachings provides that lesser detriment! In the end it is not the “idea” that creates the disservice. It is attachment that causes the difficulty, and we are each responsible for our own attachments, NOT Buddha or the “idea” of Buddha!

The tradition is that it takes eons for most people to realize their Buddha nature. This is because habitual methods of perception hide the truth from us and we become slaves to our own misperceptions.

So, for most of us, we must start in grammar school and move up through the grades as we mature and our mind seal opens. In grammar school, hopefully, we attach ourselves to “ideas” that will serve our overall benefit. The “idea” of Buddha and the precepts, etc. provide that lower level service to the young in insight!

To consider Buddha Dharma or not is, again, only a specific perspective. From one perspective everything is Dharma, so of course that includes the “idea” of Buddha. It is not what “IS” that causes delusion to occur, it is attachments that causes our mind to become confused, which results in a misperception of “IS-NESS”!

I think of it this way. Consider an action based computer game where the players choose a character to be. If the player forgets he is only playing a game and becomes emotionally “attached” to his character, what affects the character, within the game, affects the player in a more direct manner than if the player was more detached from the game.

As personalities, we are immersed within the game of life. Because of our attachment to the game, we forget it is only a game and we become emotionally involved to the point that it becomes uncomfortable to play at times. When we finally remember it is only a game, we realize the illusion/delusion and are able to play the game more effectively from a more detached perspective.

We have to bear in mind that "the confirmation of a teacher " IS in fact paradoxically a direct experience (one that is not from or of other form than human contact) against your argument.

From a specific perspective all phenomena may be directly experienced, however you misunderstand the meaning within the context of your comment.

It is NOT the confirmation of a teacher that is the issue here. It is the “need” or “insistence” that a person has for confirmation. It is the persons “attachment” that causes him to be bound by his own chains.

“Direct experience”, within the context of my comment, means an experience that is not attended by conceptual thinking or discursive mental comment. It is experience in its pure form, so to speak. From this perspective an experience is just an experience with no value attached.

A “mind seal confirmation”, to a person without attachments, has no meaning and therefore it is irrelevant to him whether the experience occurs or not. Under this circumstance, the experience has no inherent benefit or detriment and becomes unnecessary for the person who is able to “directly experience” THUS-NESS! “Mind seal confirmation” only has meaning to one who has attachments to “what it means” to have “mind seal confirmation”. Just the fact it has meaning to a person demonstrates his attachment, and therefore the confirmation is useless because you cannot have a mind seal if you care about whether you have it or not! As long as you actually care about having a mind seal or having it confirmed, you do not and cannot receive it. It is attachment that binds you!

It is in fact direct experience in a pure form - two minds being one through yet transcendent physical contact. We must also realize that the Dharma, the Buddha, and the Sangha are one and the same as direct experience, which is practical reason rather than theoretical reason (not a construct) in nature. Buddhism is not a separation of society, religion and philosophy. On the contrary, it allows individual to participate and "realize" freely in the world (not a construct) in a non fragmented manner.

I would argue that Thusness is in fact paraouisa and it's practical reason where happiness and Highest Good that are important to human nature is found. In other words, when Thusness is reached, we can develop either a fundamental ontology or a moral metaphysics, one that is not without human interaction (human as not of a personal God/Authority) thus realize the necessity of the three treasures, which essentially a Buddhist community/nation even Buddha-verse.

It is not just Dharma, Buddha and Sangha that are one and the same; all phenomena are one and the same. The only “meaning” individual concepts/phenomena have is the meaning humans give them. Therefore, they are all artificial constructs.

On the narrow, human scale, Buddhism is not separate from society, however from the perspective of “direct experience” of THUS-NESS, all human constructs are artificial and therefore inherently meaningless. The only meaning they have is the meaning humans attach to them. There is no good/bad dualism from the perspective of THUS-NESS.

The three treasures are only treasures from the local, human, context, and the meaning they have is variable according to the artificial construct of any specific social system. Inherently, at the most basic level, they are empty and have no meaning. They are part of the delusion/illusion of life and are nothing more than “useful expedients” used for the benefit of guiding the “young in insight”.

Yes, but in that case the teacher has to be human, thus using a recognizable language (discursive) . According to Buddhism which all things being empty in nature, I don't think a book (even a good Koan) or a cat can say exactly that to you. BTW, you can choose to live with books and/or cats but what does that have to do with Buddhism as Buddha envisioned? You are still the one "telling" yourself that you are one with Thusness hence able to live amongst object and/or animals happily (somewhat Daoist in that case). Being your own teacher is fine but that only makes this enlightenment subjective. That kind of "enlightenment" is incomplete. Perhaps we could say it's more of a way (not all of them) of the Arhat but not even a Bodhisattva let alone being a Buddha.

As long as, “you are ‘telling’ yourself that you are one with Thusness”, you are not! It is not a condition that involves mental discursive comment. It is pure IS-NESS. It is neither existent, nor non-existent, because these are concepts and THUS-NESS/IS-NESS is beyond concepts, even though concepts are contained within it!

Enlightenment is not subjective either, because subjectivity and objectivity form a dualism. It is neither subjective, nor objective! There is no dualism contained within THUS-NESS.

All phenomena are a reflection of mind in action, mind in movement. From that perspective, even a teacher is merely a projection of our own mind. The meaning of what we learn from a teacher is based upon what “we” bring to the relationship. Therefore, it is irrelevant whether one has a teacher or not, if one is not ready, no teacher can help, if one is ready, no teacher is necessary!

As long as “’enlightenment’ is incomplete” it isn’t enlightenment!

It is always a pleasure my friend!

[Scott R. Brown]

降龍缽，解虎錫，兩鈷金環鳴歷歷。
不是標形虛事持，如來寶杖親蹤跡。

建法幢，立宗旨，明明佛敕曹溪是。
第一迦葉首傳燈，二十八代西天記。
法東流，入此土，菩提達摩為初祖。
六代傳衣天下聞，後人得道何窮數。


三身四智體中圓，八解六通心地印。
上士一決一切了，中下多聞多不信。
但自懷中解垢衣，誰能向外誇精進。



種性邪，錯知解，不達如來圓頓制。
二乘精進沒道心，外道聰明無智慧。
亦愚癡，亦小駭，
空拳指上生實解。執指為月枉施功，根境法中虛捏怪。


日可冷，月可熱，眾魔不能壞真說。
象駕崢嶸慢進途，誰見螳螂能拒轍！
大象不遊於兔徑，大悟不拘於小節。
莫將管見謗蒼蒼，未了吾今為君訣。

pokszdp[t bkids m0fg jds0mf9ug0msdfjg0murdyt= m0djv mz drt=0 ue mrkjrtg90uetyjgsd]0tgjqe0gj]0ea9uym0aejdfq34j 9ert 0qe94ujt jg0=9qe34utq 453956

dfojwea09ru [orju3q[j jfej gt0q5jt=0u62u jogm m 9tqtjrgmpea 0945ujt jty09u bj t9jt j teqjgq jmgqejrt qjgmm4qm425pmt] wj jt4tj qjkgtgopjt9qu34t=hy jwr ]q3 t9quj3 tjq3094tju 39qj]ejrg0 9qujtg jk 4yt q49u5ytqwjhrtgm rtg9jq34t jt09qj3 4t]mq]4p09uhvyb=hgnyqmne4tpob 9ojt 09q3j4tv jre

erfqejv th 9-8r4th314t17593utihngr'n pogj0etunvahrgangfNF
EPO43=516TU GJ'ADFNMVKADFNGVOI HE[RH 348RTY RF34QPJ 9H34TI34H034opijfgeqrjhtango[iaher[tv e5tyjeqw bjyi4hwj5iotoirvbt8yhvbt0hqo[i435ntoi[qhe4t8yq8yhsdf tjuq0 43bjt4tj[0954ujt 0j54tj3409tbjh h5406t206jb 45t moi5rtyjh!!!!

[taai gihk yahn]

pokszdp[t bkids m0fg jds0mf9ug0msdfjg0murdyt= m0djv mz drt=0 ue mrkjrtg90uetyjgsd]0tgjqe0gj]0ea9uym0aejdfq34j 9ert 0qe94ujt jg0=9qe34utq 453956

dfojwea09ru [orju3q[j jfej gt0q5jt=0u62u jogm m 9tqtjrgmpea 0945ujt jty09u bj t9jt j teqjgq jmgqejrt qjgmm4qm425pmt] wj jt4tj qjkgtgopjt9qu34t=hy jwr ]q3 t9quj3 tjq3094tju 39qj]ejrg0 9qujtg jk 4yt q49u5ytqwjhrtgm rtg9jq34t jt09qj3 4t]mq]4p09uhvyb=hgnyqmne4tpob 9ojt 09q3j4tv jre

erfqejv th 9-8r4th314t17593utihngr'n pogj0etunvahrgangfNF
EPO43=516TU GJ'ADFNMVKADFNGVOI HE[RH 348RTY RF34QPJ 9H34TI34H034opijfgeqrjhtango[iaher[tv e5tyjeqw bjyi4hwj5iotoirvbt8yhvbt0hqo[i435ntoi[qhe4t8yq8yhsdf tjuq0 43bjt4tj[0954ujt 0j54tj3409tbjh h5406t206jb 45t moi5rtyjh!!!!

no no nooo!

it's:

pokszdp[t bkids m0fg jds0mf9ug0msdfjg0murdyt= m0djv mz drt=0 ue mrkjrtg90uetyjgsd]0tgjqe0gj]0ea9uym0aejdfq34j 9ert 0qe94ujt jg0=9qe34utq 453956

dfojwea09ru [orju3q[j jfej gt0q5jt=0u62u jogm m 9tqtjrgmpea 0945ujt jty09u bj t9jt j teqjgq jmgqejrt qjgmm4qm425pmt] wj jt4tj qjkgtgopjt9qu34t=hy jwr ]q3 t9quj3 tjq3094tju 39qj]ejrg0 9qujtg jk 4yt q49u5Ytqwjhrtgm rtg9jq34t jt09qj3 4t]mq]4p09uhvyb=hgnyqmne4tpob 9ojt 09q3j4tv jre

erfqejv th 9-8r4th314t17593utihngr'n pogj0etunvahrgangfNF
EPO43=516TU GJ'ADFNMVKADFNGVOI HE[RH 348RTY RF34QPJ 9H34TI34H034opijfgeqrjhtango[iaher[tv e5tyjeqw bjyi4hwj5iotoirvbt8yhvbt0hqo[i435ntoi[qhe4t8yq8yhsdf tjuq0 43bjt4tj[0954ujt 0j54tj3409tbjh h5406t206jb 45t moi5rtyjh!!!!


must I fix everything for you?

[Scott R. Brown]

Well I was being verbiotically insucculant!


...but what would I do without you to make my comments "more" incomprehensible!

LOL!!: