|
|
|
Rawat knows how flawed his teaching has always been, but there appears to be enough mugs around at any one time who never notice. And so he goes on, and on, and on, and on....  Mila... once a broken mug, now repaired.
Modified by Milarepa at Fri, May 25, 2007, 17:10:31
|
|
|
|
...or you're part of the solution, brother. As any good New Ager will look you in the eye and tell you: " Inner peace is a direction;its a movement toward ." and of course "The journey is the destination" (as your local zen master will admonish you.) Its your step brother 
Ah me, are there no mighty knock-down, super all-under-cutting arguments any more? Doe all views have to share equal status under the umbrella of "narrative"?
Of course I totally agree with you Rawat's is a hugely flawed philosophy-I know from experience, as they say. But as for telling anyone out loud exactly why-I don't think its possible. The spin spins on every point uttered, and the ground disappears beneath the critic's feet as fast as s/he tries to build up the argument.
Bollocks to 'em I say.
Ta for the point though. More.
Love
Bryn
|
|
|
|
"The spin spins on every point uttered, and the ground disappears
beneath the critic's feet as fast as s/he tries to build up the argument."
... that particular itch feels a lot better, now that you've found words that scratch it.
Thanks
Modified by Lp at Fri, May 25, 2007, 15:26:24
|
|
|
|
I agree, Bryn, that it is indeed impossible to burst somebody else's bubble, be it New Age or otherwise. No, the bubble-bursting must come from within! But what I like is that myths are always in danger of being debunked, and the truth simply is. Myths masquarade as truth, and fool the fools. Sometimes, the fools are ready to wake up. Your example, "the journey is the destination" is not a truth, it is a silly aphorism that sounds like a truth. It is actually a myth perpetrated by people who either can't face up to the truth or who wish to make an undue profit. The truth is that the destination is never achieved simply by journeying indefinitely, and no one embarks on a journey simply for the sake of going, since they wouldn't know which way to go. That's why people who believe such nonsense can be seen going around in circles uselessly. On the other hand, some Zen is truthful. Such as "The Way that can be wayfared is not the Way." This is a universal truth and can be acknowledged and appreciated. It is talking about something very, very specific, namely how that which is in time can become timeless. What it means is simply that there is no way to do it and if somebody tells you there is, they are wrong. As long as we live in time and space, we must live as we are, enjoy it as we are able, and be thankful that our present configuration is a finite one. This is the only Way to live, in acceptance. Rawat recently made another of these proclamations that create a myth masquarading as a truth. He had the utter gall to say that: "without the Master, confusion never ends." The actual truth, in this instance, is this: "as long as there is Master and student, confusion never ends." Ha! Rawat is full of such examples, and he intersperses them freely with obvious little truths, (such as "everybody wants to be happy" . His charade is a ridiculous one. He is a cartoon hero and is only taken seriously by people who are living in an idealistic dream world.
Modified by Will at Fri, May 25, 2007, 16:34:19
|
|
|
|
"without the Master, confusion never ends." Maybe he is just describing his own experience and attributing his endless confusion to his lack of a master? If it wasn't his own experience then how would he know it ? I mean he wouldn't just make something up or parrot some silly self-serving religious concept that he didn't really know to be true from hos own experience would he? Surely not. No..if he said it and he is a 'master' then it must be true. But Prem Rawat has no master and therefore he must be endlessly confused. No ..but hold on ..if he is endlessly confused then why does anyone believe him? confused Tim
|
|
|
|
A tiny pin will burst a big bubble.
Modified by Lp at Sat, May 26, 2007, 03:26:31
|
|
|
|
Hi LP (btw enjoying your posts) Yes, the many problems and inconsistencies of Rawatism now seem so obvious that you just feel that there ought to be some simple 'knock down' main point that could finally cut the Gordian knot and help out even the most willfully blind. I think we do try on this forum (although obviously there are fewer and fewer original points left to make). But, as Bryn points out 'The spin spins on every point uttered' ..so while spoilt for choice there is still no 'knock down' point to be had. To me, the most bizzare thing about Rawatism and the closest thing to a knock down point is the whole crooked self-serving concept of a 'master’, the question of authority and where it derives from. Originally the story was sort of clear even if bogus…. Long line of ‘satgurus’ stretching back beyond and including Jesus ..each uniquely and divinely ordained to ‘reveal God’ … finally leads to 8 yr old Prem Rawat carrying on his Father’s work and messianically vowing to bring ‘ A peace that will never die’ to all of humanity. A thoroughly modern ‘master’ with an ancient provenance harnessing modern technology to achieve this noble goal. Now he disavows this (in any case discredited) past and presents himself as an inspirational speaker, no labels ‘just me’, ‘proud to be a human being' with a message that ‘contentment is possible’ and offering ‘help’ for people to connect with peace and contentment within them. So while his only tenuous source of ‘authority’ is discredited and disconnected he, nevertheless, assumes ever more personal authority by unambiguously installing himself as the sole personality from whom springs all wisdom, propagation, anecdote and authoritive comment on ‘that place etc. etc’. ...effcetively the authority on ‘peace and contentment’ that other people may or may not feel within themselves. A personality cult built upon faith in the strength of Prem Rawat’s personal revelation and philosophizing in relation to ‘peace and contentment within’ and ability therefore to supply authorative ‘inspiration’. Of course, in a sense, his statement that ‘without a master there is endless confusion’ is true as well as self-serving and manipulative. Implicit belief and acceptance of any absolute authority does make life simple. A premie friend of mine joined the army in his quest for ‘simplicity’. But of all the unlikely ‘authorities’ that one could unquestioningly accept (and what a silly thing to do anyway) Rawat must be one of the least credible. EPO deals his personal credibility (a faith built on distance for most premies) a fatal blow. No wonder he has to argue that Knowledge has no visible external effects! I think that Cynthia (below) is quite right to suggest that many of his words unconsciously reveal his own inner dialogue ... perhaps he does mean that 'without his master he is feeling endlessly confused'. …. Where does he see the future of his cult ? Does he think about his legacy ? Will he ever do anything genuine or come to deserve and gain any real respect from anyone in the real world ? Who knows? All the Best Tim m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" o:preferrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600">
|
|
|
|
is not the concept of 'Masters' but the idea that Rawat can provide ‘help’ for people to connect with peace and contentment within them by teaching them how to meditate by: "Place your finger and thumb on your eyes and index finger between your eyebrows and concentrate for 15 minutes, stick your thumbs in you ears and fingers atop your head and concentrate for 15 minutes, concentrate on your breath for 15 minutes maybe imagining me going to and fro on a swing and stick your tongue backwards on your palate and concentrate for 15 minutes".
I'd love to ask him just how, even if that worked, what possible connection could it have to him?
|
|
|
|
Apparently, Rawat spoke in Malibu yesterday. Apparently, premies are now like Neanderthals. But, can anyone make any sense out of this? An Incredible Tool  There are a few things I would like to say, and really it’s very simple. And even though it is so simple, it’s hard to say it without giving an analogy.
You, in 2007, got the opportunity to travel back in time. Somebody came up with an invention, and you got to travel back in time, really far back. You brought some things with you that you thought would be necessary, and accidentally you hit the date keyboard wrong, and you ended up back in the Neanderthal age. And there, you see this Neanderthal, and he is trying to grind on this stone. He is sitting there, and he is frustrated, and he is grinding, grinding. And you realize, that in your space ship you’ve got this blender, and not wanting to offend this guy, you place the blender next to a tree, hoping he will find it. And what do you think will happen if he finds the blender? In his wildest imagination, he couldn’t imagine that you plug this thing in somewhere, and you put stuff in it and it blends it. You – you would not give it a second thought, you know exactly what it is, but to him, he doesn’t know. And the chances are, if he sees the weight of it, he might use it - the base part of it - to try and smash something. This is all he knows. What are the possibilities? This is all he knows. You could let it be, or you could try and teach him something, of what it is he is trying to grind. Because really, we are the Neanderthals. And we have an objective. The objective is – maybe something from within ourselves, aspiring – that joy is a possibility, that happiness is a possibility that we can be fulfilled – that is a possibility. And so, we want to invent a tool that could better this. Without realizing that an incredible tool has been given to us to make this possibility real. Incredible tool. And this tool that has been given to us is called life. That’s the tool. Now, I know that you have heard of this life’s as a journey, life as a river, life as a this, life as a that, but consider this. Consider that this life is a tool. To accomplish something.  Not just your two hands. But this life you have been given. This existence you have been given - it can make something real. Can make it a possibility. And do you want to realize that – to accept that possibility? This is a very loaded question. And it is a question that definitely needs to be asked. Not, “Wouldn’t you like to be happy?” Any idiot would say, “Sure." But do you want to accept that this life is a tool? And through this tool you can accomplish the greatest of all joy. The greatest of all happiness. Of everything that you do, you do to be content. Maharaji - Malibu, CA
26 May, 2007
Modified by Cynthia at Sun, May 27, 2007, 10:51:17
|
|
|
|
The Geico cavemen may resent this analogy. Kabir
|
|
|
|
I think Mr. Rawat ought to lay off the booze before he attends these programs and opens his mouth. I am quite sure that the GEICO cavemen are much smarter than Rawat and therapists.
Modified by Cynthia at Sun, May 27, 2007, 12:59:15
|
|
|
|
Was this talk translated into any languages? Coherent English,
perhaps? I can make no sense of it. Am I missing something? Shall I
try again?
I think my first problem was trying to figure out why, if I went back
in time, I would take a blender with me. Electricity is, relatively
speaking, quite new and even now is not universally available. Why a
blender? Do I assume I will be able to blend my cocktails anywhere in
time? Does he assume everyone else would have to take their blender
since that is possibly his favorite appliance? Cocktails and
milkshakes?
|
|
|
|
Frankly, it all sounded like gibberish to me. I'm thinking maybe he hit the cognac bottle prior to opening his mouth to speak, but he does sound all dried up to me, so maybe I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
Besides: even Homer knows; if you go back in time, you don't need your blender, you need your toaster.
|
|
|
|
Which totally contradicts his father's teachings which were that he had the "Infallible technique of improving human behaviour".
http://www.prem-rawat-bio.org/satsang/hans/infallibletechnique.html
Do you have a copy of Rawat making that claim? Well it's hardly a claim, more of an excuse really.
My wife showed it to me once on a video to explain why just because Rawat's minions were liars it didn't mean that "Knowledge" was false. It was just that premies had been mistaken believing practising Rawat's techniques of meditation would make you a better person. Now that the Master had explained that and cleared it up, surely I would be able to see that the mistake was mine and that I was misjudging premies because I had a false concept that premies shoud become better people and that they should become happier too. They really, really were, it's just that it's an inner peace and happiness that cannot be seen externally.
I wasn't my usual happy self that afternoon, I can tell you and my happiness is the visible kind.
|
|
|
|
Ocker, Well of course one can never really define anything merely by negative recitation ...but in the anxiety to avoid labels I think that M and K have mainly only been described in terms of what they are not. All in all I think 'no visible effects' is a fair summation of all the caveats that have been mentioned at various times (not a philosophy, not a religion, not a meditation, not a relaxation method, not a way to succeed at work, not a way to solve problems ..or more recently ..not suitable for those with unresolved mental or emotional health problems) I think this view substantiated by the following from 'Conversations' ------------------------- If a person succeeds in the process you are talking about, what would he or she have to show for it in the end?
They may not have anything to show on the outside, but they certainly are going to know about it themselves. Knowing that you are satisfied is something that you will know yourself. Maybe our attention really needs to turn from seeking approval of the world to seeking approval of ourselves as well. This is where peace becomes very, very important. To seek approval of ourselves, the request that comes from the heart has to be fulfilled, and that request is to be content, to be in peace, to be in joy. If that can happen, maybe you won't get a certificate, but you will get something much more valuable. What you will get is that inner smile, that inner joy, that inner twinkle that a person can have in their life.
| m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" o:preferrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600"> |
--------------------------------------------------
(btw The phrase ‘inner twinkle’ is such manipulative bollocks isn’t it?. Code for some sad introverted smug sense of privilege via ‘inner connection’ with the Master? By contrast, real joy is infectious, overflowing ..uncontainable, children’s eyes, good conversation (Brian Johnstone’s laugh in Test Match Special), bright intelligence, new insights, creativity… hey even a good internet conversation. ‘Inner twinkle’ is manipulative concept for keeping people that are actually not happy in thrall to the idea that they may be. It is so apparent that premies have no infectious and therefore no real joy to propagate. That is why it doesn’t work. Ironically they propagate the ‘concept’ that ‘joy is not a concept’ and that ‘peace is a feeling to be found within ’ but grounded on such flimsy personal revelation that can only be reliably expressed via a DVD of someone else’s words. Real passion replaced by listening to some stranger talking about 'real passion'. Says it all really doesn’t it? )
and of course Rawat is so slippery ....He will claim that K may have no visible effects (as above) ...and, in the next breath he will be claiming that his revelations are somehow linked to human kindness and that this will start to resolve problems..(as below)..
------------------------------
Tell us more about peace.
When a human being truly realizes that there is an absence of truth and happiness in his life, an absence of peace, then a fire comes from within. A real fire to find peace burns for that person from the heart, not from the head. That person starts to search. Look for the thirst. It is the thirst within that propels us in the right direction. That is what we need—the rediscovery of the passion for joy. Let that be the driving force. When this life feels full, when this breath is not being thrown away, kindness begins to manifest. Kindness is the outpouring of a heart filled with joy. That is when peace comes into our lives. That is when we begin to find the resolution to our problems. It is not that our problems are resolved, but that we find within a simplicity that is magnificent.
| |
Anyway....
best Tim
(btw 'pedantry' is a good quality ..essential for accuracy)
|
|
|
|
Modified by Lp at Sat, May 26, 2007, 02:35:32
|
|
|
|
No matter how you want to look at this and slice it all up... It is still just a huge load of cult crap.
Modified by hilltop at Sun, May 27, 2007, 03:04:18
|
|
|
|
http://www.prem-rawat-bio.org/satsang/hans/howtosavemankind.html
Now it seems that Premboy is just as big a megalomaniac as his father when he's in some backwoods Indian province giving satsang but as far as we know Hansdad, the second most powerful incarnation of God ever on this planet, never held back anywhere, anytime.
Here he speaks of how to save mankind from extinction. I'm really, really sorry I didn't read this satsang and take it to heart before I "received Knowledge" because there is no doubt that Prem Rawat did not "reveal Divine Light instantaneously or not" to me or to pretty well anybody for that matter. I did think that if all these other people were raving about it and "Mahatma Padarthanand" did seem genuinely puzzled that I didn't get totally blissed out in the Knowledge Session I'd better go home and give this meditation a serious try. And of course I'd have to keep going to the "satsang" meetings every night as well.
And as Hansdad said "Only the Satguru of the time can reveal what this Holy Name is." I never did really find out whether the Holy Name was Soham or Hamso.
|
|
|
|
It was sohung in the UK, but maybe it has something to do with accents. Maybe sohung with a British accent is equivalent to soham in Aus. Regional Holy Name like. You'd have to ask the Perfect Master.
|
|
|
|
I've seen it written as Soham in Indian religious texts so I figured that was the correct spelling.
But as this website shows there is plenty of confusion about the "Natural Mantra" but then confusion is natural in human beings.
http://www.meditationiseasy.com/mCorner/techniques/soham.htm
So when were you told not to use 'Sohung' in your meditation?
Modified by ocker at Sun, May 27, 2007, 17:04:07
|
|
|
|
So when were you told not to use 'Sohung' in your meditation?
This is an interesting point which illustrates the ramshackle nature of the whole thing right from the start.
I was told that sohung was only an approximation, a kind of aide memoire to be discarded when practice tuned one into the real unspeakable name, after which, diligent application for about 2 yrs would result in realisation..........I'm still waiting.
As it seems that others were given slightly different instructions, the only conclusion must be that the mahatmas weren't sufficiently co-ordinated, just as the Perfect One says, lol.
|
|
|
|
'So when were you told not to use 'Sohung' in your meditation?'
Actually, the first I heard of sohung was in a K review. Cos I remember thinking, that can't be right, that's just a mantra, and we don't do mantras. So I never did sohung. I did the real thing ( aghhh!)
When it was in and when it was out? - I don't know. I was constantly remembering Holy Name, so I don't know anything.
|
|
|
|
When it was in and when it was out? - I don't know. I was constantly remembering Holy Name, so I don't know anything.
|
|
|
|
http://www.prem-rawat-bio.org/satsang/hans/shininglikepearls.html
"In reality the glories of Guru Maharaj Ji cannot be described. By simply
remembering Guru Maharaj Ji, all difficulties go away and for this reason all
saints and mahatmas salute Guru Maharaj Ji first."
"Blessings are given to good persons, not to bad ones. Hence the orders of Guru
Maharaj should be obeyed. What he asks should be done, what he does not ask
should not be done. Only in this is there the good of yours and mine and all."
Now if Shri Hans, the father of Prem Rawat and the source of his power, says that then he must be correct as he was the Satguru. But as premies have been remembering "Guru Maharaj Ji" or Prem Rawat as he is now known for decades and all difficulties haven't gone away and they've been obeying him and the good hasn't manifested for them all then this is the "smoking gun", the proof that Prem Rawat is not the Satguru but a phony foisted on the world by his venal family - after all he's said they were only in it for the money.
http://www.ex-premie.org/video/passages.html#familybusiness
|
|
|
|
Only in this is there the good of yours and mine and all."
It would appear that it was a family conviction to consider their own good as equivalent to the good of all, with an almost hereditary blindness to actual people and their needs and experiences.
When they split apart they each criticized the other as they really were, while remaining delusional or living a deliberate lie as regards projections of their own image as divine.
When: splitting; each half of a tree reveals the rot in the other, it is obvious that the whole tree was rotten from the inside before, and that that was the reason for the fracture.
There is nothing to save.
Modified by Lp at Mon, May 28, 2007, 08:03:26
|
|
|
|
Permit me the luxury of suggesting that there are a few points in your Bubble Bursting post above that imo could be legitimately challenged by some mythical coherent New Ager not on acid- but lets not quibble or we'll end up in a Wiki type swamp.I do see what you are saying.
But the point as I grasp it, and the fact that even you and I have already shifted toward disparity here, is to do with language and how people feel free to use it.
The helpfullest insight I've gleaned on this issue has come from some confident cognitive-linguistic research which validates metaphor as fundamental to reasoning. Reasoning, this research claims to show, is as much achieved in the neurology of body movement as in more "rationalistic" cognitive brain circuitry. Metaphor and the imagination preserve the inferences that make body/situated thinking able do reasoning.
All I mean is that language as truthful labeller may never have been an accurate tool for discussion ever anyway, and the idea of accurate labelling was only a Myth itself-to be replaced by some post Cartesian "new thing". The new imaginative/metaphorical discussion!!
I think there is some truth in the above garbled possibillity. Trouble is it leaves the door open for shysters, megalomaniacs and fast talkers of all waters, as you say.
Ta for reply Will,
Love
Bryn
|
|
|
|
Well in the 1990's one of Rawatism's videos was even called "The Journey Is The Destination"
http://www.ex-premie.org/video/thebridge.html
When I saw it I was horrified / happified by the sight of Rawat's dissolution. In retrospect I have to think that the captures I took of that face and those jowls and chins were possibly exaggerated by the changes in format and the program I was using but not by much.
However it certainly shows Rawat's ignorance about "spirituality' and religion and the premies' low grade consciousness. Were you there at that "satsang"?
|
|
|
|
What difference doesn't make if he notices or not? Does he care at all? NO! We know by the 2,000 pages in EPO and all the others flowing around the Internet telling the TRUTH about his immoral ass that all that $$$matters$$$ to him, he got it! So, is like this.
This really happened. This guy told his wife that he was going to a bussiness trip to the city where he usually traveled to. His wife asked him if he was going to stay in the same hotel he usually stayed. He said yes, I'll be there. She decided to go visit a friend, in a cottage, no phone. Because she wasn't going to be home, she told him not to call her. But she cancelled her trip and called him taht night to give him some news. He was not registered in the hotel where he said he was going to be.
When he came back, she had suspected he was seen someone else, she asked him how the trip was, and if the hotel stay was pleasant, he naswered yes. Then, she told him, you are a liar. His response? This is my story and I will not change it.
Rawat for many reasons cannot change his story. Did he noticed his numerous mistakes? Common, of course he did, but why recognize it publickly? He doesn't have to, so far, and he sticks to his story. Recognizing, coming clean will leave the can of worms open and he cannot afford to do that.
He is a horrible, "man". Little, so little, so miserable, so stupid, so wrong. "Man", because a REAL man is capable to recognize his mistake and the blub cannoot do that. He was NEVER a man and it seems, who knows what will take for him to CONFESS his crimes. Yes, I call what he does a crime. Too many suffered and ARE suffering because if him. God have mercy on his soul. He will rip alright and no, I don't want to be there to witness what will be. I can see it will not be good.
We can deduct that many aspects of being a human are a mistery, but dip inside we perceipve that "something", or "somebody" (GOD) will not be so impartial when it come to mr rawat.
He doesn't need no one to tell him what he already knows very well. The dilema he lives in a daily basis is reflected in his pathetic face he carries lately. I say it again: Can you believe that the photo "they" chose for his "autobiography" is the best they could do? Something is very wrong with him and it shows. Hi Will.
Silvia
Modified by Axis at Fri, May 25, 2007, 21:56:03
|
|
|
|
Greedy for things which, (in the form in which he describes them: definitely) do not exist.
When he has had a good day more people are left: prepared to give everything for something imaginary: ready to disappear inside themselves:-
Or to take on his arrogance as their own and join the hunt.
Lefty protestor.
Modified by Lp at Sat, May 26, 2007, 03:14:34
|
|
|
|
The more distance I've achieved away from Rawat, the more his words seem to be his own inner dialogue about himself personally. But, they guy is so unaware of himself on any level except what he wants materially that he thinks he's giving out good advice. He's convinced himself he is better than his own guru "highest manifestation ever..." So, any advice he gives out (Rawat's truisms) to the true-believers is well-digested as the absolute Truth. Consider this one, which makes me want to say, how dare you say say such things to people, Prem Rawat, and tell them they are empty without you!!!?? From a recent posting on the Inner Circle Cult blog: "But what it is that you want? Are you in touch with yourself? I know you are in touch with your needs. But, the needs you have been trained for. How about being in touch with your own self? The place that is empty. The attitude today is "that which I don't know will not hurt me." But, unless you know the deficit, how are you going to fill it? If you do not know that there is a place as real as any other place - and this place within inside of you is empty. And unless you fill it, it does not make any difference what else you fill and how much you fill it, unless you fill that one place inside, it's not going to work. It's like taking an automobile and putting water in it. Maharaji What hubris! What mendacity! What Prem Rawat doesn't know doesn't hurt him, like the fact his movement is dead in the west and his inner circle enablers and codependents don't tell him the truth about propagation numbers by fudging statistics, because he's too much of a child to accept the real truth. I can't help but think that when he says these things, as if he's imparting unique wisdom and universal truths, he's actually talking about his own current life experience. He's empty inside. Well! That is what satsang is after all...
Modified by Cynthia at Sat, May 26, 2007, 07:48:50
|
|
|
|
Well spotted Cynthia, "But what it is that you want? Are you in touch with yourself? I know you are in touch with your needs. But, the needs you have been trained for. How about being in touch with your own self? The place that is empty. The attitude today is "that which I don't know will not hurt me." But, unless you know the deficit, how are you going to fill it? If you do not know that there is a place as real as any other place - and this place within inside of you is empty. And unless you fill it, it does not make any difference what else you fill and how much you fill it, unless you fill that one place inside, it's not going to work. It's like taking an automobile and putting water in it. Maharaji Read instead this corrected version and it makes more sense.... "But what it is that I want? Am I in touch with myself? I know I am in touch with my needs. But, the needs I have been trained for. How about being in touch with my own self? The place that is empty. The attitude today is "that which I don't know will not hurt me." But, unless I know the deficit, how am I going to fill it? If I do not know that there is a place as real as any other place - and this place within inside of me is empty. And unless I fill it, it does not make any difference what else I fill and how much I fill it, unless I fill that one place inside, it's not going to work. It's like taking an automobile and putting water in it. Maharaji - running on empty Mila
|
|
|
|
He's been lamenting his father's death since he was eight and he's almost 50. It's time for Rawat to grow up, get a job, and stop pretending that he knows anything about anything.
|
|
|
|
... and he could start right here! It's time for Rawat to grow up, get a job, and stop pretending that he knows anything about anything. Quite. You know, he goes on and on and on about filling the emptiness, but true emptiness can not be filled. Then it ain`t emptiness. Emptiness, as I understand it, is the true nature of everything. Realising and coming to terms with that in an adult way, not trying to fill it with some mumbo jumbo `nollidge`, is all he needs to do. Mila
|
|
|
