Who/what are you? 61-4

bruce_g · Jul 30, 2007

Thought this might make for interesting discussion.

Is there a certain magical part of your day, when your mind isn’t filled with what the world calls you to do, when there is only you and the great space? Very early morning is that time for me.

This morning I asked (Yi), who or what are you? I was actually more interested in the who rather than the what, but also knew that the answer would probably be closer to what.

61. 1,5 – 4

How do you read?

lightofreason · Jul 30, 2007

bruce_g said:
...
This morning I asked (Yi), who or what are you? I was actually more interested in the who rather than the what, but also knew that the answer would probably be closer to what.

61. 1,5 – 4

How do you read?

A piecemeal question - eliciting a part to try and serve as the whole. This is called metonymy.

Treating the I Ching as a monad, there are 4096 aspects, facial expressions, that go to describing the whole. As such there are 4096 expressions to choose from to serve as classifers of some context where the instance of that context is a customisation of one of the 4096. The remainder then queue up behind that one to form a spectrum of meaning from best fit to worst fit given the context.

As a UNIVERSAL the IC is a set of classifiers of generic meanings all derived from self-referencing yin/yang.

SO... lets see if we can figure out what prompted the question since it was more than just the morning....

who are you or what are you are questions of yang, differentiating, and so all hexagrams with yang as base. You wanted an answer NOW and so a focus on what IS/WAS/WILL-BE more than what could-have-been/is-not/could-be

So we have:

11 - the digram that is completed into two trigrams, either heaven (111) or lake (110). These trigrams cover assertions of identity by replacing currrent context with something more precise, better, than the existing.

This is enough to indicate that you were working from a position of sensation-seeking ;-)

Thus the true answer to your question is in one of the 16 hexagrams with the two bottom lines of yang - this reflects your focus on engaging and re-engaging something/someone where the sensation seeking acts to refine your overall competitive skills.

To ground this further - the next line is about you instigating the situation or responding to it. I would say you responded to the 'push' of the sensation of the morning and so the focus on lake more than heaven - as such you seek a relationship that will allow you refine your skills, replicate yourself, have a cooperative relationship but with a replacment focus - to 'better' your current context.

There is more of course - to narrow down the eight possible to one and then to extract finer details through XORing. The result is a hexagram that describes, classifies the current situation that is pushing your buttons to ask the question you did in the first place.

Lake:
19,41,60,61,54,38,58,10

you approachd the high seeking deference and so integration(19)?
you focus on the derivation of something 'pure' (41)?

you focus on standards/limitations (60)?
you focus on the yielding, something to protect you (61)?

you focus on the aspects if the immature (54)?
you focus on dealing with oppositions/mirroring (38)?

you focus on self-reflection and intensity in that reflection (replication) (58)?
you focus on trying to tread a path whilst under intense scrutiny (10)?

A simple question comes with a lot of depth if you go beyond coin tossing.

Chris.

Tohpol · Jul 30, 2007

lightofreason said:
A simple question comes with a lot of depth if you go beyond coin tossing.
Chris.

Yes, but maybe too much!

I always find your work fascinating Chris, but I can't help thinking that the simplicity is often lost in a barrage of complexity. I understand, generally, the overall substance of what you are referring to and it's a very interesting dimension to the understanding of the IC phenomena. But the answers seem to become virtual books in themselves and surely there is a place for stripping down the meaning instead of incorporating so much. In the end, there seems to be so much technical daring-do and fascinating intricate extrapolations but lacking some simplicity. Simple "coin tossing" has been incredibly accurate for me so far.

But then, you've heard all this before. I have to admire your knowledge and absolute faith in your convictions. Anyhow, that's just my opinion as it stands right now. Always open to change.

As to the question, in my humble-coin-tossing-peasant-in-the-field method

I think it's a perfect answer.

Inner Truth is the way by which IC can connect. It best describes the IC to me. Therefore, it's intimately connected to the deep unchanging self or higher self, that tries to teach us with sparks of truth, filtering through the heavy frequencies we are immersed in. Line 5 from one interpretation seems to summarise that quite nicely:

"The vision in a position of power may succeed in linking others together in a non-superficial manner through the fundamental quality of the multi-faceted influences engendered by its action."

http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs/ching/ching61v.php

Line 1 might be interpreted as showing that inner truth is of paramount importance rather than undue influence on external values and their ties. Yet this inner truth means going beyond ourselves. It's showing us the connections of the inner world which can manifest, via self-knowledge to the outer world by the process of knowledge which is shared and dispersed. Inner truth is alchemical. The changing hex of 4 perhaps indicates the human process: learning from our mistakes - all is lessons.

I guess, at it's deepest expression (for Chris) self-referencing, self-organisation and or autopeosis etc. we become bifurcation points where ultimately it is about becoming something closer to the REAL I. Knowledge is brought forth and known. We come to know ourselves. That to me is the process deep inside 61 and so it's a perfect answer. IC is inner truth.

Thanks for a great question Bruce.

Topal

bruce_g · Jul 30, 2007

Chris,
Thanks for your analysis of why I asked the question. Unfortunately your hypothesis is incorrect, and so your conclusion is thusly flawed. My reason for asking wasn’t sensation seeking, it was opportunism. Being of especially clear mind earlier this morning, I felt I could take advantage of such to ask such a question and receive an especially clear answer to an especially difficult question. But you’re right about it being metonymical. It still amazes me, though, that in spite of all your smarts you still can not see the answer as best fit.

Topal,
Thanks for giving thought to this answer. Makes sense to me, and is along the lines of my own thoughts on it.

bruce_g · Jul 30, 2007

I'm genuinely curious how others might interpret this reading. Have my own thoughts on it, which I'll kick in later.

maremaria · Jul 30, 2007

bruce_g said:
I'm genuinely curious how others might interpret this reading. Have my own thoughts on it, which I'll kick in later.

I want ! I want !
But I have to traslate my thougths to English. Otherwise it will be "Greek" to you

getojack · Jul 30, 2007

"Who/what are you?"
61 > 4

You is very complicated...
From a trigram perspective, the inner you's joy is visibly sinking down, while the inner you's movement is stealthily coming forth.
The outer you's penetration of insight is visibly ceasing, while the outer you is receiving the hidden aid of stillness.

Yi's answer seems to be telling you that you is sort-of a feedback loop, imo.

bruce_g · Jul 30, 2007

Ok, here’s how I see it:

Chris and others were right about the answer being self referencing, or a loop, as Jack said. 4 was me, asking a question, which I thought I could “trick” Yi into answering, because I was feeling clear minded and frisky. Ha! Yi throws it back to me (what I like to call the “playing catch with the porcupine effect”), saying in line 1: “You are unsettled and you want to know something to solve your curiosity. Ok, look at line 5: Truth links together. I am not something other than you, except for your curiosity. I am that I am.”

From this I gather: If there were no questions there would be no answers. The master doesn’t seek me, I seek the master.

rosada · Jul 31, 2007

61.1
Being prepared brings good fortune.
(If the seeker has considered his question fully before asking, and if he is willing to hear The Truth, the answer will be particularly clear.)

If there are secret designs, it is disquieting.
(If the seeker is not sincere, or is hoping for a particular responce, or is in any state other than receptivity, the answer may be disturbing. If one is not open to it, the Truth may hurt.)

61.5
He possesses truth, which links together.
(The I Ching speaks Truth, which connects it with the seekers own sence of Truth.)
No blame.
(The IC is blameless so if you don't want to know the truth, don't ask the IChing.)

4. Youthful Folly
A sincere person in a new situation.

Summation: The I Ching is a means of connecting us to our own Inner Truth. We can call upon it whenever we don't feel we can sence our truth spontaneously. If we are sincerely needing some guidance, if we feel we're like fools in a foreign country and we're never going to be able to solve the puzzle on our own, then the I Ching will tell you the answer but only if you ask, and you will know it is the answer because you will recognize it as the answer you already knew in your heart all along.

lightofreason · Jul 31, 2007

bruce_g said:
Chris,
Thanks for your analysis of why I asked the question. Unfortunately your hypothesis is incorrect, and so your conclusion is thusly flawed. My reason for asking wasn’t sensation seeking, it was opportunism.

...and so my conclusion was spot on. The realm of sensation seeking covers the replacement focus of something by something else - a 'better' sensation - and opportunism is a property of that focus on replacement; a chance to 'replace' current perspectives/sensations with a better one - and so you take the moment to do so, to refine the 'buzz'.

The realm of sensation seeking covers the lake and heaven trigram realms and in it we find opportunism and the engagement/re-engagement with context in that opportunists will engage/re-engage the context to exploit it to get the 'buzz'. It amazes me how narrow your thinking can be - it really limits you. I get the impression that you needed to 'defeat' me in the classification - the fact is your attempt validated my classification! LOL!

bruce_g said:
Being of especially clear mind earlier this morning, I felt I could take advantage of such to ask such a question and receive an especially clear answer to an especially difficult question. But you’re right about it being metonymical. It still amazes me, though, that in spite of all your smarts you still can not see the answer as best fit.

I see more than you, in your present state, can possibly imagine. You need to move out of your 10th century BC thinking and understand the full spectrum of sensation seeking, identity seeking, security seeking, and problem solving. ALL of that covers the basics of who/what the I Ching is. Your refusal or difficulty in doing that just brings out your self-impose limitations - your need for things to be 'simple' when the fact is the universe is complex - perhaps that is all too much for you? Living a 10th century BC mind it probably is.

EVERY person on this list can toss coins and get EACH hexagram/dodecagram of the IC as an answer - and so totally defeat your expressed intent! Your 10th century BC thinking will NOT aid you in understanding the IC since you refuse to consider 3000+ years of neuroscience, anthropology, sociology, psychology, theology etc etc etc research that aids in fleshing out who/what the IC is - a metaphor derived by humans to describe 'all there is'. THEN comes the exploitation of such to try and predict states but it is clear that such methods are limiting, not consistant and so in need of upgrade - being brought into the 21st century AD.

Go deeper - get wiser. Learn the material until it becomes habit and then appears simple - it allows for smooth functioning in any context, complex or simple. Lift dude.

To understand the answer to your question just read the I Ching as the I Ching, no need for coin tossing or any other magical/random method. Simple. Coin tossing etc just shows you are being lazy.

Chris.

lightofreason · Jul 31, 2007

topal said:
Yes, but maybe too much!

I always find your work fascinating Chris, but I can't help thinking that the simplicity is often lost in a barrage of complexity. I understand, generally, the overall substance of what you are referring to and it's a very interesting dimension to the understanding of the IC phenomena. But the answers seem to become virtual books in themselves and surely there is a place for stripping down the meaning instead of incorporating so much.

The dynamics of reality are in the conversion of difference to sameness, the asymmetric to the symmetric - this allows for ease in communcation but also simplifies the difference to be over simplistic. By going for the depth just a couple of times it makes comprehension easier in the long run - the recognition of depth is then through quality associations, simple associations, that bring out the depth.

There are in fact issues with logic in the realm of the symmetric, all due to the LACK in precision, the lazyness involved. See such texts as Matte-Blanco's "The Unconscious as Infinite Sets" or such pages on his work as:

http://www.scispirit.com/matteblanco5web.htm

topal said:
In the end, there seems to be so much technical daring-do and fascinating intricate extrapolations but lacking some simplicity. Simple "coin tossing" has been incredibly accurate for me so far.

- so you believe but I would say that careful analysis of your methods/results would show inconsistancy (or more so consciousness filling in the dots. The issues with coin toss etc is that you can get the best fit or the second best, third best, 20th best etc etc and since ALL of them can elicit some form of meaning as if the 'best fit') Do you keep a diary of your consultations covering the type of questions and their answer and outcome?)

topal said:
Inner Truth is the way by which IC can connect. It best describes the IC to me.

IMHO this is simplistic point of view. There are 4096 aspects to the question - go through them all; or simplify by just considering the question with the 64 hexagrams or 8 trigrams - and THEN consider the aspects through XORing. Once you go with the depth, after a while it becomes unconscious and known as part of associative memory development - THEN it is 'simple' ;-) --- thats why the focus in some texts on not comming to the IC until after 50 years of experience! - BUT with XOR we can fill in a lot of details earlier since it is part of the material as potentials.

To appreciate the full spectrum of the IC means work. It means moving on from 10th century BC thinking and into the 21st century AD. As with all study, it can be a pain in the arse to start with but as knowledge is taken in so it links up to form a rich associative memory that allows for things to be, to appear, simple.

Chris.

bruce_g · Jul 31, 2007

Chris, I love you, man. I don't care if you see better, or are smarter, or better looking, or have a bigger penis than me.

What I do know is, I'm extremely satisfied with the answer I received.

lightofreason · Jul 31, 2007

bruce_g said:
...What I do know is, I'm extremely satisfied with the answer I received.

Maybe so but to appreciate what you are dealing with, since the IC is self-referencing so asking a question of it can be applied to asking the same question of each part of it - I.e. all of the hexagrams. SO ... from 1 to 64, ask each hexagram the same question and see/experience the scope of meaning being delt with.

(if you want to cover real depth then go through the hexagram's spectrum and ask each example of IT the same question - 64 per hex, 64 hexes = 4096 aspects of the whole)

Chris.

bruce_g · Jul 31, 2007

rosada said:
The I Ching is a means of connecting us to our own Inner Truth.

Is my inner truth different from yours? Or is there just inner truth?

maremaria · Jul 31, 2007

Hi bruce,

I have also make that question in my mind when I was surprised from the reading I got. I can recall myself saying “what is going on here ?” “who are you ?” “how you do that?”
For me too IC is inner truth. The invisible wind that stirs the water of my lake-my life The wind that penetrates the surface and travels in the center in her soul where little forgotten creatures live. And their voices that previously couldn’t penetrate the surface of the lake and be heard, now they use the way the wind opens for them , they ride on the wind and go out. And the lake sees and hears that creatures but she can’t recognize all of them. She wants to keep her creatures and get rid the others but she is not sure. The creatures felt that and each of them tries to persuade the lake that she should keep it.
The lake is so confused. She asks help from the trees, the grass , the animals but nobody can solve her problem. And then a wise man comes to the lake and tells her stories from his travels round the world. But the lake doesn’t want to hear stories. She wants a solution now. She tells that to the man –Yi is his name- but the man does not reply. He just continues telling her stories. The lake after a while forgets her problem and find herself hearing the story of a horse, a moon, a tiger, a mountain, a cloud, a fire, a king . a prince and she is discussing with the man. Some stories are familiar to her. She tell her stories to him, the wise man ask questions, the lake gives answer, they have a interesting conversation.
Suddenly the man says. “I have to go now”
-“Wait”, the lake says. “Before you go, can you tell me what to do with my problem?”
-“You already know what to do” he replies
-“But I not know nothing”
-“Then you can learn everything you want. Listen !” the wise man replies and disappears in the forest.
And the lake …………….

Hmmm, what was the question Bruce?

P.S. Agree with Topal. Great question and great answer (61.1.5>4)

Tohpol · Jul 31, 2007

lightofreason said:
The dynamics of reality are in the conversion of difference to sameness, the asymmetric to the symmetric - this allows for ease in communcation but also simplifies the difference to be over simplistic. By going for the depth just a couple of times it makes comprehension easier in the long run - the recognition of depth is then through quality associations, simple associations, that bring out the depth.

There are in fact issues with logic in the realm of the symmetric, all due to the LACK in precision, the lazyness involved. See such texts as Matte-Blanco's "The Unconscious as Infinite Sets" or such pages on his work as:

http://www.scispirit.com/matteblanco5web.htm

- so you believe but I would say that careful analysis of your methods/results would show inconsistancy (or more so consciousness filling in the dots. The issues with coin toss etc is that you can get the best fit or the second best, third best, 20th best etc etc and since ALL of them can elicit some form of meaning as if the 'best fit') Do you keep a diary of your consultations covering the type of questions and their answer and outcome?)

IMHO this is simplistic point of view. There are 4096 aspects to the question - go through them all; or simplify by just considering the question with the 64 hexagrams or 8 trigrams - and THEN consider the aspects through XORing. Once you go with the depth, after a while it becomes unconscious and known as part of associative memory development - THEN it is 'simple' ;-) --- thats why the focus in some texts on not comming to the IC until after 50 years of experience! - BUT with XOR we can fill in a lot of details earlier since it is part of the material as potentials.

To appreciate the full spectrum of the IC means work. It means moving on from 10th century BC thinking and into the 21st century AD. As with all study, it can be a pain in the arse to start with but as knowledge is taken in so it links up to form a rich associative memory that allows for things to be, to appear, simple.

Chris.

I certainly agree with your last statement - knowledge does require work - that's for sure. Yes, I do keep an extensive diary since the beginning of this year and there is a remarkably consistent thematic pattern on most topics, sometimes with clear repeats of hex's where the question was largely the same but worded slightly differently.

The strength of the question asked i.e. the focus and the intensity of the moment appears to make a difference. It goes straight to the "best fit" whereas some questions with less depth or ones which are lazy do produce a "third or fourth fit." But if I just open the IC at a random page with a question in mind as oppose to throwing the coins, there is a difference - there is no connection - no sense. I've tried this a few times. If I'm getting a best fit consistently then it's a fit that seems to serve me well.

However, that said, I have used your emotional IC many times and find it very accurate indeed, without exception. by accurate I mean extremely clear and pointed.

Overall though, I can't disagree with what you say and I have a lot of respect for this particular manifestation of IC "mechanics." Like everything it depends what avenue of Knowledge we wish to give our fullest attention to. I have several areas at the moment. You can't do it all. But perhaps I'll get round to gaining a deeper understanding of the IC using your methodology when time allows. It does merit a deeper look for sure.

Topal

bruce_g · Jul 31, 2007

Hi Maria,

I can not begin to recall how many times I’ve asked this question. I think it’s an important question to ask, no matter how many times you’ve asked it before. If there’s something to be gained from using the Yi, outside of just having our usually mundane questions answered, it’s that all things and beings are connected, and it’s from this source of unity and inner truth that answers flow like water. It seems only right to acknowledge and honor the source this way… who and what are you? And I love your question: How do you do that!!!

We lose something essential when we lose our sense of awe and mystery (4). It’s what opens us up to hear an answer. I mean a real answer: "A crane calling on the shady Northern slope. Its young joins in singing. I have a good wine-cup, I will empty it together with you."

maremaria · Jul 31, 2007

Hi Bruce,
I said

Hmmm, what was the question Bruce?

Of cource I knew what you asked

61. 1,5 – 4
How do you read?

But when I started to write my thougths , this story came to my mind and I couldn't resist to "live" it.
I don't know if this story is a 61.1.5>4 story but I am not worrying about that. (ok ,maybe a little). what is more important here is that I feel that I put some puzzle peaces to each place, or at the place I believe they should go for the time being.

Thanks Bruce. Without your question I wouldn't have this story.

Maria

bruce_g · Jul 31, 2007

Maria,

I think it was a beautiful story. Rather than analyze it, I just went for the the ride with it. That's how good stories are, I think. People don't always know what to say or how to respond to stories. Maybe they're too busy living in it, or maybe they don't understand it, or where it comes from. That's ok. You have a mind which takes to the mythical imagery side of things; it seems to be your language. I can relate to that.

Sparhawk · Jul 31, 2007

bruce_g said:
Chris, I love you, man. I don't care if you see better, or are smarter, or better looking, or have a bigger penis than me.

Whatever you two do to settle that, please, spare us the pictures... :rolling:

maremaria · Jul 31, 2007

bruce_g · Jul 31, 2007

sparhawk said:
Whatever you two do to settle that, please, spare us the pictures...

Ok. I wouldn't want Chris to be humiliated anyway. :rolling:

lightofreason · Aug 1, 2007

bruce_g said:
We lose something essential when we lose our sense of awe and mystery (4).

yeh - its all part of growing up. As a child we are all awe but as we mature so we learn and make the implicit explicit, the unkown known. Science does that. If we lived a life of total awe and mystery we would still have a life span of half that we have now. The focus of awe/mystery is to motivate seeking of identification of such rather than avoiding it (living in fear). Moving from 10th century BC thinking to 21st century AD where there is still awe and mystery but also toolkits to deal with it, reveal it, and so build a toolset that allows us to extend ourselves beyond our planet as well as within our heads.

Chris.

RindaR · Aug 1, 2007

bruce_g said:
Thought this might make for interesting discussion.

Is there a certain magical part of your day, when your mind isn’t filled with what the world calls you to do, when there is only you and the great space? Very early morning is that time for me.

This morning I asked (Yi), who or what are you? I was actually more interested in the who rather than the what, but also knew that the answer would probably be closer to what.

61. 1,5 – 4

How do you read?

4 might be seen as the state of unknowing from which you asked....(or perhaps the undifferentiated state of Yi before a question is asked?)

61 might be saying that whatever/whoever people think Yi is, you will know who it is/what it is by the results you get.

It has no personal stake in the game, it is powerful and does not act selfishly, there is no way to control or punish it, in its power it shows itself and maintains its own ethic. When you meet someone who is the same regardless of the circumstances, without a need to prove themself or escape restriction you know you can trust them. It is honest and tells good news with the same freedom as bad news.

.1 may be underlining the idea that it has no aims of it's own.

.5 as you've mentioned this part is recursive, you will recognize the truth in Yi because you have it within yourself, and the more you "see" the truth in/about yourself, the better you can see it within Yi (and vice versa?).

Following the progressive changes, 61.1> 59 - dispersion, dissolving old rigidities/misconceptions, which seems to indicate that Yi is what it does, and can clear away the cobwebs from our thinking... (I am that/who I am as noted earlier in the thread...)

59.5 - might refer to the work we do of holding on to our center as outer things change, and to the idea of the consistency of the Yi's essence throughout the cycle of changes, and that there are consistent patterns within the processes of change that Yi describes....

bruce_g · Aug 1, 2007

Chris, I was born a child, have lived as a child, and God willing, I shall die a child. That has nothing to do with 10 Century BC or with science.

Rinda, beautifully met.

unsubscribed_cm · Aug 1, 2007

I would interpret this 61 - 4 as

"I am your teacher of inner truth."

lightofreason · Aug 1, 2007

bruce_g said:
Chris, I was born a child, have lived as a child, and God willing, I shall die a child.

So your saying you refuse to take on the responsibilities that go with being an adult? :mischief:

You reject the maturity and so quality/wisdom that comes with developing into the way of the superior and so being able to guide others through their fears? I prefer refined wines to rough reds

Repetition elicits instincts/habits and their refinement. That allows one to operate smoothly in any context in that the context pushes buttons but your training is such that there are many buttons, context sensitive and so no need to fight the context, just move with it.

All of these are about algorithms/formulas and so the science side of things. 10th century BC thinking is 'child-like'..... so you want to hang in there to enter the 'kingdom of god'? JC would have made a good used car salesman.

Chris.

bruce_g · Aug 1, 2007

the way of the superior.. hmm

lightofreason · Aug 1, 2007

bruce_g said:
the way of the superior.. hmm

Chung-ni said, “The superior man embodies the course of the Mean; the mean man acts contrary to the course of the Mean.

“The superior man’s embodying the course of the Mean is because he is a superior man, and so always maintains the Mean. The mean man’s acting contrary to the course of the Mean is because he is a mean man, and has no caution.”

The Master said, “Perfect is the virtue which is according to the Mean! Rare have they long been among the people, who could practice it!

The Master said, “I know how it is that the path of the Mean is not walked in:-The knowing go beyond it, and the stupid do not come up to it. I know how it is that the path of the Mean is not understood:-The men of talents and virtue go beyond it, and the worthless do not come up to it.

“There is no body but eats and drinks. But they are few who can distinguish flavors.”

http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/c/confucius/c748d/

http://www.hm.tyg.jp/~acmuller/contao/docofmean.htm

Chris.

maremaria · Aug 1, 2007

lightofreason said:
yeh - its all part of growing up. As a child we are all awe but as we mature so we learn and make the implicit explicit, the unkown known. Science does that.
Chris.

Yes , but we -or some of us- need that magic, the unkown, the milacle, the hope. My english are poor and i don''t know if is that you are telling, but ,imo, this "child" sometimes help us to grow up.

I translate my readings in a childish way might one say. But the past two months rational knowledge turned to "understanding" and I am happy about that. I asked "how do you do that" but I have not the urge to make the implicit exclicit. I am just happy about that.
How wrong can be that?
maria

Who/what are you? 61-4

bruce_g

Guest

lightofreason

Guest

Tohpol

Supporter

bruce_g

Guest

bruce_g

Guest

maremaria

Guest

getojack

visitor

bruce_g

Guest

rosada

Supporter

lightofreason

Guest

lightofreason

Guest

bruce_g

Guest

lightofreason

Guest

bruce_g

Guest

maremaria

Guest

Tohpol

Supporter

bruce_g

Guest

maremaria

Guest

bruce_g

Guest

Sparhawk

One of those men your mother warned you about...

maremaria

Guest

bruce_g

Guest

lightofreason

Guest

RindaR

Supporter

bruce_g

Guest

unsubscribed_cm

Guest

lightofreason

Guest

bruce_g

Guest

lightofreason

Guest

maremaria

Guest