On the nature of arahatship: further questions

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby Modus.Ponens » Sun Aug 25, 2013 1:11 pm

Hello

A few months ago we were discussing about the nature of arahatship. I think it came up as an analysis of the description of arahats by Daniel Ingraim. Through a series of questions it was concluded, at least by me, that arahats feel unpleasant sensations from all the senses, including the mind. I have two further questions:

1- Do arahats have preferences? I think (I'm not sure) I read in the suttas something like this: someone asked the Buddha if he still practiced mindfulness after awakening. He said yes. Then he was asked why. And he said that it was conductive to happiness. This would be indicative that an arahat has preferences for some things over others. However, it was said to me in that thread, quoting Bhikkhu Bodhi, iirc, that arahats are free from liking and disliking. If both these statements are correct, what distinguishes liking from prefering?

2- It seems to me that a lot of the stories of Mara would have to be interpreted as literal (ie, with Mara being a real person). Now, Dipa Ma, when she gave the interview I mentioned in that thread said that to her, anger was like a fire that didn't burn. She said this following the statement that she did feel negative feelings, just that these didn't affect her (I hope I'm transmiting the correct idea). She also said that she had attained the 3rd path. After 3rd path there is no anger, so acording to our usual interpretation of arahatship this shouldn't be happening. So is there evidence in the suttas that arahats "feel" anger but it doesn't bother them? The closest thing I remember is exactly the Buddha's encounters with Mara. If we accept that arahats can "feel" anger, but it doesn't affect them at all, (some of) the encounters with Mara could be interpreted as negative "feelings" _ and associated ideas _ arising and being dealt with, by the Buddha, with perfect wisdom.

Metta
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
 
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Funchal, Portugal

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby santa100 » Sun Aug 25, 2013 6:59 pm

Modus.Ponens wrote:..1- If both these statements are correct, what distinguishes liking from prefering?


The clinging to the object. For example, say there're 2 persons traveling on a scorchingly hot desert without water for quite some time and are about to die of de-hydration, one is enlightened and the other is not. They then reach a place that has just barely enough water for 1 single peson. While both would "prefer" to drink that tiny little glass of water over the painful feeling of severe dehydration, the enlightend one would have no problem sacrificing his own life and let the other one drinks to stay alive. The un-enlightened person would probably do everything(possibly killing the other) just to get that glass of water..

..2- So is there evidence in the suttas that arahats "feel" anger but it doesn't bother them?

anger is a volitional formation/sankhara instead of a feeling/vedana. The Buddhist definition of feeling is just of 3 types: pleasant, painful, and neutral, which an arahant can still fully cognize. Although s/he's still cognizant of painful feelings, it's impossible for any anger volition to arise within them..
santa100
 
Posts: 1522
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby chownah » Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:28 am

It would be great if someone could provide a link to where the Buddha says that his mindfulness is conducive to happiness....or any other reference to the Buddha saying why he practiced mindfulness....and why.
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2655
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby Modus.Ponens » Mon Aug 26, 2013 2:44 am

chownah wrote:It would be great if someone could provide a link to where the Buddha says that his mindfulness is conducive to happiness....or any other reference to the Buddha saying why he practiced mindfulness....and why.
chownah


Indeed. I wish I knew it myself, but I tend to not remember the suttas' names, just the content.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
 
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Funchal, Portugal

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby Aloof » Mon Aug 26, 2013 3:00 am

Modus.Ponens wrote:Hello
A few months ago we were discussing about the nature of arahatship. I think it came up as an analysis of the description of arahats by Daniel Ingraim. Through a series of questions it was concluded, at least by me, that arahats feel unpleasant sensations from all the senses, including the mind. I have two further questions:



Arahats do not feel unpleasant sensations neither from senses nor from the mind

1- Do arahats have preferences? I think (I'm not sure) I read in the suttas something like this: someone asked the Buddha if he still practiced mindfulness after awakening. He said yes. Then he was asked why. And he said that it was conductive to happiness. This would be indicative that an arahat has preferences for some things over others. However, it was said to me in that thread, quoting Bhikkhu Bodhi, iirc, that arahats are free from liking and disliking. If both these statements are correct, what distinguishes liking from prefering?


Arahats have no preferences.
Buddha had surrendeered his Arahatship for the benefit of others and he was following Mahayana path. Every moment he was absorbing surrounding unpleasantness due to compassion and he needed mindfulness. For this you can refer to lotus sutra.

2
- It seems to me that a lot of the stories of Mara would have to be interpreted as literal (ie, with Mara being a real person). Now, Dipa Ma, when she gave the interview I mentioned in that thread said that to her, anger was like a fire that didn't burn. She said this following the statement that she did feel negative feelings, just that these didn't affect her (I hope I'm transmiting the correct idea). She also said that she had attained the 3rd path. After 3rd path there is no anger, so acording to our usual interpretation of arahatship this shouldn't be happening. So is there evidence in the suttas that arahats "feel" anger but it doesn't bother them? The closest thing I remember is exactly the Buddha's encounters with Mara. If we accept that arahats can "feel" anger, but it doesn't affect them at all, (some of) the encounters with Mara could be interpreted as negative "feelings" _ and associated ideas _ arising and being dealt with, by the Buddha, with perfect wisdom.


Arahats do not feel anger neither it affects them. Buddhahood starts after arahatship is surrendered as I mentioned earlier.
Aloof
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 3:57 am

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby retrofuturist » Mon Aug 26, 2013 3:20 am

Greetings Aloof,

Aloof wrote:Buddha had surrendeered his Arahatship for the benefit of others and he was following Mahayana path. Every moment he was absorbing surrounding unpleasantness due to compassion and he needed mindfulness. For this you can refer to lotus sutra.

:rules:

For this you can refer to the Terms Of Service and bear in mind that the Lotus Sutra has no relevance whatsoever to a General Theravada discussion on the nature of arahantship. Thanks.

:reading:

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14651
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby pegembara » Mon Aug 26, 2013 3:49 am

Modus.Ponens wrote:
chownah wrote:It would be great if someone could provide a link to where the Buddha says that his mindfulness is conducive to happiness....or any other reference to the Buddha saying why he practiced mindfulness....and why.
chownah


Indeed. I wish I knew it myself, but I tend to not remember the suttas' names, just the content.


Heedfulness is the Deathless path,
heedlessness, the path to death.
Those who are heedful do not die,
heedless are like the dead.

Explanation: The path to the Deathless is the perpetual awareness of experience. The deathless does not imply a physical state where the body does not die. When an individual becomes totally aware of the process of experiencing, he is freed from the continuity of existence. Those who do not have that awareness are like the dead, even if they are physically alive.

http://www.buddhanet.net/dhammapada/d_heed.htm
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
pegembara
 
Posts: 630
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby Aloof » Mon Aug 26, 2013 6:47 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Aloof,

Aloof wrote:Buddha had surrendeered his Arahatship for the benefit of others and he was following Mahayana path. Every moment he was absorbing surrounding unpleasantness due to compassion and he needed mindfulness. For this you can refer to lotus sutra.

:rules:

For this you can refer to the Terms Of Service and bear in mind that the Lotus Sutra has no relevance whatsoever to a General Theravada discussion on the nature of arahantship. Thanks.

:reading:

Metta,
Retro. :)


Lotus sutra came out of the mouth of Guatam Buddha. The explanation was in the sphere of Lotus sutra. No other answer will be correct. How can one keep such a sharp division pertaining to Guatam Buddha who is a teacher of Theravada and Mahayana as well.
Aloof
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 3:57 am

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby cooran » Mon Aug 26, 2013 8:30 am

Hello aloof, all,

I would encourage you to read this article by Venerable Sujato:

Is the Lotus Sutra authentic?
http://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/10/18/ ... authentic/

With metta,
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
cooran
 
Posts: 7509
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby retrofuturist » Mon Aug 26, 2013 8:51 am

Greetings Aloof,

Aloof wrote:Lotus sutra came out of the mouth of Guatam Buddha.

If it were in the Pali Canon and not completely at odds with what is in the Pali Canon, then maybe... but since it doesn't meet those standards, according to the Theravada tradition, it is not the words of the Buddha.

Aloof wrote:The explanation was in the sphere of Lotus sutra.

Which in the context of the General Theravada section of this site is completely irrelevant.

If you're going to continue posting on this forum, you need to develop some respect for other members of the forum.The people who are conversing in the General Theravada forum are here to talk about Theravada Buddhism.... not views derived from the Lotus Sutra.

Aloof wrote:How can one keep such a sharp division pertaining to Guatam Buddha who is a teacher of Theravada and Mahayana as well.

If that is how you feel, you may feel more at home at http://www.dharmawheel.net/

However, if you stay and continue to disrespect forum members by derailing Theravada discussion topics with Mahayana irrelevancies, then you will be disciplined in line with the Terms of Service.

:focus:

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14651
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby daverupa » Mon Aug 26, 2013 11:19 am

chownah wrote:It would be great if someone could provide a link to where the Buddha says that his mindfulness is conducive to happiness....or any other reference to the Buddha saying why he practiced mindfulness....and why.
chownah


SN 54.11 wrote:On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Icchānaṅgala in the Icchānaṅgala Wood. There the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus thus:

“Bhikkhus, I wish to go into seclusion for three months. I should not be approached by anyone except the one who brings me almsfood.”

“Yes, venerable sir,” those bhikkhus replied, and no one approached the Blessed One except the one who brought him almsfood.

Then, when those three months had passed, the Blessed One emerged from seclusion and addressed the bhikkhus thus:

“Bhikkhus, if wanderers of other sects ask you: ‘In what dwelling, friends, did the Blessed One generally dwell during the rains residence?’—being asked thus, you should answer those wanderers thus: ‘During the rains residence, friends, the Blessed One generally dwelt in the concentration by mindfulness of breathing.’

...

"Bhikkhus, those bhikkhus who are trainees, who have not attained their mind’s ideal, who dwell aspiring for the unsurpassed security from bondage: for them concentration by mindfulness of breathing, when developed and cultivated, leads to the destruction of the taints. Those bhikkhus who are arahants, whose taints are destroyed, who have lived the holy life, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, reached their own goal, utterly destroyed the fetters of existence, those completely liberated through final knowledge: for them concentration by mindfulness of breathing, when developed and cultivated, leads to a pleasant dwelling in this very life and to mindfulness and clear comprehension.


---

The Buddha seems to have wished to go into retreat, which can be seen as a preference. When the Buddha was on the road and there was no one else around, there he 'had his ease', as another sutta reports. This all goes to 1, to a certain extent. Surely the Buddha prefers that his words be understood, and at the same time he abides equanimously even when students misunderstand or otherwise don't get it.

I think dhamma-rupas can contact mano in the same sorts of ways that eye-/sound-/etc-rupas can contact their respective 'organs', so there is a certain level of ...spontaneity (?) there for an arahant in terms of the world, but anger isn't a simple dhamma in this sense, to my way of thinking, which goes to 2. The abstract "mano-dhamma-vinnana --> unpleasant vedana" is difficult to quantize phenomenologically, isn't it, without making it into a fully-fledged citta event...
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 4119
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby barcsimalsi » Mon Aug 26, 2013 12:37 pm

Actions conducive to happiness still implies decision making which involves desire to be happy. Besides, arahants are said to be perfectly mindful every moment which means their actions cannot derive from spontaneous tendency.

Despite of many good replies above, i still failed to understand how to distinguish preference from craving. Can anyone please explain more? please.......
barcsimalsi
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:33 am

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby Modus.Ponens » Mon Aug 26, 2013 7:57 pm

daverupa wrote:
chownah wrote:It would be great if someone could provide a link to where the Buddha says that his mindfulness is conducive to happiness....or any other reference to the Buddha saying why he practiced mindfulness....and why.
chownah


SN 54.11 wrote:On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Icchānaṅgala in the Icchānaṅgala Wood. There the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus thus:

“Bhikkhus, I wish to go into seclusion for three months. I should not be approached by anyone except the one who brings me almsfood.”

“Yes, venerable sir,” those bhikkhus replied, and no one approached the Blessed One except the one who brought him almsfood.

Then, when those three months had passed, the Blessed One emerged from seclusion and addressed the bhikkhus thus:

“Bhikkhus, if wanderers of other sects ask you: ‘In what dwelling, friends, did the Blessed One generally dwell during the rains residence?’—being asked thus, you should answer those wanderers thus: ‘During the rains residence, friends, the Blessed One generally dwelt in the concentration by mindfulness of breathing.’

...

"Bhikkhus, those bhikkhus who are trainees, who have not attained their mind’s ideal, who dwell aspiring for the unsurpassed security from bondage: for them concentration by mindfulness of breathing, when developed and cultivated, leads to the destruction of the taints. Those bhikkhus who are arahants, whose taints are destroyed, who have lived the holy life, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, reached their own goal, utterly destroyed the fetters of existence, those completely liberated through final knowledge: for them concentration by mindfulness of breathing, when developed and cultivated, leads to a pleasant dwelling in this very life and to mindfulness and clear comprehension.


---

The Buddha seems to have wished to go into retreat, which can be seen as a preference. When the Buddha was on the road and there was no one else around, there he 'had his ease', as another sutta reports. This all goes to 1, to a certain extent. Surely the Buddha prefers that his words be understood, and at the same time he abides equanimously even when students misunderstand or otherwise don't get it.

I think dhamma-rupas can contact mano in the same sorts of ways that eye-/sound-/etc-rupas can contact their respective 'organs', so there is a certain level of ...spontaneity (?) there for an arahant in terms of the world, but anger isn't a simple dhamma in this sense, to my way of thinking, which goes to 2. The abstract "mano-dhamma-vinnana --> unpleasant vedana" is difficult to quantize phenomenologically, isn't it, without making it into a fully-fledged citta event...


Thank you Dave.

So arahats have preferences. Maybe the second part of the first question is not so relevant, since it probably has more to do with semantics than with content.

Regarding the second question, I was unable to understand what your point is, exactly. Can you elaborate, please?
Reflecting a bit more, arahats remember what anger feels like. And when you remember a feeling, you feel it to some degree. So (at least) in this sense, an arahat can possibly feel anger, although he will relate to it in a different manner than a non noble one.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
 
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Funchal, Portugal

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby Modus.Ponens » Mon Aug 26, 2013 8:08 pm

barcsimalsi wrote:Actions conducive to happiness still implies decision making which involves desire to be happy. Besides, arahants are said to be perfectly mindful every moment which means their actions cannot derive from spontaneous tendency.

Despite of many good replies above, i still failed to understand how to distinguish preference from craving. Can anyone please explain more? please.......


Although not quite the same as one of my questions, it's interesting in itself and I would like to know what others have to say. Probably they enjoy pleasant sensations without craving. When Dipa Ma was asked something of the sort, she answered that now she enjoyed life even more.

Another interesting question is "would an arahat want to avoid unpleasant sensations?" One possibility is that they would prefer pleasant sensations, but wouldn't prefer not to have unpleasant ones. The other is that they would prefer pleasant sensations and would prefer not to have unpleasant sensations.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
 
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Funchal, Portugal

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby daverupa » Mon Aug 26, 2013 9:22 pm

Modus.Ponens wrote:So is there evidence in the suttas that arahats "feel" anger but it doesn't bother them? The closest thing I remember is exactly the Buddha's encounters with Mara.


daverupa wrote:The abstract "mano-dhamma-vinnana --> unpleasant vedana" is difficult to quantize phenomenologically, isn't it, without making it into a fully-fledged citta event...


So, anger: is it a dhamma which fits into <dhamma-mano-vinnana> or is anger, instead, some sort of sankhara or citta happening, not a dhamma?

---

For example, sitting under a tree before getting up to walk for alms, an arahant and a puthujjana see a field, hear a dog bark, and "mano-s" a dhamma. All this occurs for the arahant and puthujjana, it's just that for an arahant in the seen is just the seen, in the heard is just the heard, in the mano-d is just the mano-d.

The puthujjana will be the one making all manner of constructions on those bases, and it is this making which is required for there to be e.g. anger.
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 4119
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby Aloof » Tue Aug 27, 2013 1:20 am

Modus.Ponens wrote:Another interesting question is "would an arahat want to avoid unpleasant sensations?" One possibility is that they would prefer pleasant sensations, but wouldn't prefer not to have unpleasant ones. The other is that they would prefer pleasant sensations and would prefer not to have unpleasant sensations.



Arahat has to be beyond sensations. He does not go thro unpleasant or pleasant sensations. Question of preference also does not arise with an arahat.
Aloof
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 3:57 am

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby Modus.Ponens » Tue Aug 27, 2013 2:38 am

daverupa wrote:
Modus.Ponens wrote:So is there evidence in the suttas that arahats "feel" anger but it doesn't bother them? The closest thing I remember is exactly the Buddha's encounters with Mara.


daverupa wrote:The abstract "mano-dhamma-vinnana --> unpleasant vedana" is difficult to quantize phenomenologically, isn't it, without making it into a fully-fledged citta event...


So, anger: is it a dhamma which fits into <dhamma-mano-vinnana> or is anger, instead, some sort of sankhara or citta happening, not a dhamma?

---

For example, sitting under a tree before getting up to walk for alms, an arahant and a puthujjana see a field, hear a dog bark, and "mano-s" a dhamma. All this occurs for the arahant and puthujjana, it's just that for an arahant in the seen is just the seen, in the heard is just the heard, in the mano-d is just the mano-d.

The puthujjana will be the one making all manner of constructions on those bases, and it is this making which is required for there to be e.g. anger.


Oh, I see. So do you think it's possible for there to be an "anger impulse", which would disapear as soon as it arised? I think it's the general agreement that there are no constructions, no feeding of this hypothetical anger impulse.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
 
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Funchal, Portugal

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby chownah » Tue Aug 27, 2013 4:17 am

Isn't an arahant that is still alive said to have attained nibanna with remainder and isn't it the remainder part of this that we are discussing?
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2655
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby daverupa » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:21 am

Modus.Ponens wrote:So do you think it's possible for there to be an "anger impulse", which would disapear as soon as it arised? I think it's the general agreement that there are no constructions, no feeding of this hypothetical anger impulse.


That sounds like the anusaya of ill-will, which is fully eradicated for an arahant, no longer subject to arising.
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 4119
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: On the nature of arahatship: further questions

Postby Modus.Ponens » Tue Aug 27, 2013 12:26 pm

Then how would you reconcile what Dipa Ma says of her experience and the teachings of the Buddha? It's hard to believe that she was deluded and yet so respected by highly respected members of the sangha.

Thank you.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
 
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Funchal, Portugal

Next

Return to General Theravāda discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests