Denigration of the Future

General discussion about the Elder Race, Life, the Universe and Everything.
Ilkka
Praefectus
Praefectus
Posts: 822
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:17 am

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by Ilkka » Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:01 pm

Gopi wrote:That will have to be taken forward into a real "time research". Is anyone up for that?
Where do I begin? :D

I have always been keeping time as very important. Timing is everything. There is a time for every event and so on. I have had dreams about time where I was late from things where I needed to be on time, like first day in the school (every year when I had school), or first day on a new job and even in everytime I have an appointment to some place, a night before I have this dream that I am late from it. However, never have I actually been late for any such event, only in a dream I have been late.

I need some "pick up" on that research though. If someone has some papers I'd be glad to take a look at them, and try to make a sense of them and be helpful.
Enjoy the Silence

MrTwig
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 7:10 pm
Location: Syracuse, NY

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by MrTwig » Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:48 am

daniel wrote:I was just wondering if anyone here, outside of LoneBear, actually had a positive vision of the future... one that does not require a "savior" or natural disaster to turn things around (Project Blue Beam stuff)? Or has man made the choice to have no future???
I have a neutral view where nothing ever changes too much. Depending on the time or the place things may look bad or look good but in the end it is all what you make of it.

I thought there were whistle blowers out there that said there are two civilizations going on together, if not more. One has all the technology and controls everything and the other basically supplies the other, whether they know it or not. Time lines are a new concept to me, along with the multiverse where dimensions are considered as important as breathing. If someone has created machines or some way of viewing the future or past in real time then we have to accept that messing with reality is going to happen. Whether we have more to us, than our brain, is debatable because if there is a higher reason for our existence, not everyone can grasp it. For me I always look for a better way of doing something and enjoy checking out the latest gadget. Science is a way of describing nature in a logical way but I think it has be hijack and we have lost control of our own education. Most people today are just going with the flow. But there are some people that are bucking the system and trying to learn more than we are taught. I want to be included in that group. Even if I can not physically be there. Someday I hope we will all understand what the H is going on.

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3905
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by LoneBear » Sun Feb 09, 2014 1:56 pm

Gopi wrote:I did notice that Hanuman has disappeared from the Antiquatis logo... the end of an era I guess. Since hope and fear were constituents of Pandora's box, do we have to project that onto everything outside the box? That is not out-of-the-box thinking.
Actually, that is a consequence of the phone/table-compatible theme I recently upgraded to; it only has a single, clickable region for the home page. The other theme I created myself, so I had three header regions, Hanuman for the the forum home, the Antiquatis logo for the main site, and the site header. I can't really do much with customizing this theme, because I don't have a phone/table device to test with, so I wouldn't know if I broke it.

I'll mess around with the image, to see if I can come up with something better. I just did this "quick and dirty" to see if the theme would work for the people surfing with these other devices, which it apparently does.

The other theme is still there; you can switch back to it in your Profile by selecting the "Ancient" style, and resurrect Hanuman.
Keeper of the Troth of Ásgarðr, Moriar prius quam dedecorer.

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 521
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by Arcelius » Tue Feb 11, 2014 5:31 pm

Gopi wrote:Let me clarify once more how it appears with this "dump all the gods" theory. I have attempted to do that here and here but curiously there was no response. Let us say you slip and fall, realize that the forces of electricity, magnetism, and gravity combined are responsible for creating the bang, the bleeding knee, and the lingering pain. So now that you realize what forces were involved in the whole situation, you can say "Gravity is pulling me, electricity and magnetism are pulling and pushing me around, I do not want anything to influence me any more, so I will cut the chains to Gravity and Magnetism and dump them down the drain, and become free!" What sense does that make, from any angle?
It can make sense for someone who lacks understanding of those forces. Perhaps it can be difficult to tell the difference between certain things such as:
  1. Natural forces at work
  2. Powerful beings utilizing natural forces for specific purposes
  3. People pretending access to or direct control over the first 2 in order to gain power over others
  4. People projecting their own power or thoughts externally
With respect to the third one, it may be that is what is being rejected with the "dump all the gods" theory. However, what is being rejected is the other 3 (or more) as well. Like with many "spiritual" or "religious" things, there is a wide variety of understanding of what some things mean or can mean. It can take some experience with both sides of a coin between the understanding of a coin is gained.

Let's take an event such as a rain shower that a shaman has "prayed for" under the above list:
  • Perhaps the shaman is able to become as one with those forces and rain was result
  • Perhaps the shaman communicated to another entity the desire for rain and that entity decided to cause such a rain shower
  • By chance, rain occurs after the shaman has prayed and the shaman goes on to form a new religious movement based on the claim that s/he made it rain and must therefore be special unlike everyone else
  • Perhaps the shaman prays and after the rain, s/he thanks god for the rain not realizing that subconsciously, it was more like #1
The world is generally viewed through the lens of a person rather than very objectively. Perhaps this is part of growing up and maturing spiritually and different people are at different places.
Gopi wrote:Besides, you guys do realize that you are coming to this conclusion two millennia after it was first taught? It was during the time of the Roman Caesars that humans began worshiping incarnate beings as gods, the Caesars.
Actually, I believe that during the 18th Dynasty of Egypt this started. Before that, Pharaoh was only god after s/he was dead. Quite a bit before the Caesars and Christianity though Christianity is clearly the continuation of the Egyptian religion.
Gopi wrote:Precisely, I am fully in agreement with that... it's what this whole thread is all about. Larson took the first steps, in my opinion, in bringing the importance of time on par with the importance of space, while previously it was simply 3D space. That will have to be taken forward into a real "time research". Is anyone up for that?
Sure, I think I am in a place now where I am up for that. I may not have the best scientific mind though.

I think one of the large illusions is time as a linear sequence of events which is perpetuated in all time travel shows I am aware including one that has Time Lords in it. In the original series though, they did end up in negative space which was like positive space but a bit smaller.
Gopi wrote:Funnily enough, neither is it an easy task to break the pattern of seeing things "from a mechanical viewpoint" or in terms of software and hardware! That chain to the rock is as real as can be...
Indeed Gopi! Such is how we are so easily ruled.

From The Ra Material, Ra talks about mind/body and mind/body/spirit complexes.
Ra Session 30 Question 5 wrote:We call it mind/body complex recognizing always that in the simplest iota of this complex exists in its entirety the One Infinite Creator; this mind/body complex then in second density discovering the growing and turning towards the light, thus awakening what you may call the spirit complex, that which intensifies the upward spiraling towards the love and light of the Infinite Creator.

The addition of this spirit complex, though apparent rather than real, it having existed potentially from the beginning of space/time, perfects itself by graduation into third density. When the mind/body/spirit complex becomes aware of the possibility of service to self or other-self, then the mind/body/spirit complex is activated.
The first step appears to become aware and I agree. The more aware one is, the more understanding about things will flow.

Ilkka
Praefectus
Praefectus
Posts: 822
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:17 am

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by Ilkka » Tue Feb 11, 2014 6:50 pm

Arcelius wrote:From The Ra Material, Ra talks about mind/body and mind/body/spirit complexes.
Ra Session 30 Question 5 wrote:We call it mind/body complex recognizing always that in the simplest iota of this complex exists in its entirety the One Infinite Creator; this mind/body complex then in second density discovering the growing and turning towards the light, thus awakening what you may call the spirit complex, that which intensifies the upward spiraling towards the love and light of the Infinite Creator.

The addition of this spirit complex, though apparent rather than real, it having existed potentially from the beginning of space/time, perfects itself by graduation into third density. When the mind/body/spirit complex becomes aware of the possibility of service to self or other-self, then the mind/body/spirit complex is activated.
The first step appears to become aware and I agree. The more aware one is, the more understanding about things will flow.
Now, that I read this Ra material quote again I understand more of it than I did a year ago. Awareness is truely very important in every day life.
Enjoy the Silence

User avatar
Gopi
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Salt Lake City
Contact:

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by Gopi » Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:53 am

LoneBear wrote:Actually, that is a consequence of the phone/table-compatible theme I recently upgraded to; it only has a single, clickable region for the home page.
No worries, it is just something I mentioned in passing as I had noticed the coincidence to the post, and is definitely not taken to imply anything. A mere sideline to the rest of the post... to which I'll be interested to see what you have to say.
It is time.

User avatar
infinity
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 7:35 am

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by infinity » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:23 am

I tip my hat to everyone that has posted here so far. Very interesting and stimulating conversation!

Wonderful food for thought. I'd like to add to the mix :)
Gopi wrote:As to the present day, I am actually glad that hope is being killed... be it in the Tomorrow People, or Star Trek, or with Disney... because hope has been the opium of the masses for too long. Thanks to hope, few have taken up the initiative to learn about the world, as humans, and do anything, and instead simply watch and wait for something else.
As Bashar once quoted a bumper sticker that said "One day I gave up all hope, and felt MUCH better since." Very appropriate in the context you mention Gopi.
LoneBear wrote:I'm all for a better, more conscious world--but in baby steps, not all-inclusive "world orders" that are being dumped on us. Tier 2 thinking and concepts like rapport are still new to us. We need to learn how to walk, before we start running.
Probably the way it will be evolving anyway. Just like strong family units are the foundation of any community, and a collection of strong communities the foundation for any strong regional governance, so I can imagine it being the best way to implement a new way of thinking in scalable communities - starting small, and as things WORK, the communities grow and thrive.
Juanter wrote:
Anyways, I will be on here often. I probably wont post much since I feel most of you don't really need my input.
LoneBear wrote:Something I have found in my life is that you learn the most, and the fastest, when you try to explain something to others. There is no "right" or "wrong," only different levels of understanding. And keep in mind that old saying, "as above, so below." When you try to help others, or just contribute what you know, you're also helping yourself. So feel free to post; you never know what you might contribute to help others along their path.
Many times, by expressing your own experience and perspective, you enable others to see through your eyes - and by doing that, you inspire and trigger new ways of thinking and understanding in others. Please feel free to share and ask and give input.
daniel wrote:For me, hope is defined more along the lines that you define the concept of "infinity," that of potential and the possibility for situations that arise to promote the evolution of consciousness--the great and limitless unknown.
I believe the way we define concepts (i.e. our definitions of them) are just as important as exploring concepts themselves. The way you define hope is a much more practical way. One that is based on enthusiasm, curiosity, creativity. Perhaps I dare to say, the divine nature in us with the power to create. Hope with power behind it - not passivity.
dave432 wrote:
I feel we as a species are our own saviors. Humans have outgrown worshiping incarnate beings. We do not need the gods anymore. To all the ones who really helped us, a sincere thank you, but if worship is demanded as payment then no thank you. If humans were able to research and develop unhindered, we would be ready for an amazing future right now, without any help from "out there." The ET/ED thing is a bunch of hype anyway, at least the way it is being presented to us. We are the explorers of tomorrow. We'll build our own ships and make any outer space contacts ourselves.
daniel wrote:Well said, Dave! We need to not only stop looking back at the mineral and vegetable kingdoms, but those "kingdoms of gods" as well, and take back the transference of the ascendent function (normally passed off to J.H. Christ) and make it part of our own, human expression.
I agree with Dave, but I think the roman version of JC as a response is being confused with the one that said the following:

John 15 "15 Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you."
Doesn't look like we're supposed to be slaves, neither forced, nor voluntary. Neither were any ascendent function nor responsibility for it "given away" as described in another verse where we're all responsible for the "working out of our own salvation" - and that word salvation does not mean someone else doing it for us, either.

John 14 "12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father."
Oh, look at that. Its not going to be done for us, he's leaving, and he's saying we got it in ourselves to the stuff he did, and more. So why does it say "because I go unto my Father" ?

John 14 "6 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you."
Cool, so he had a show and tell, and basically said, now its time to take responsibility - and we don't need other people teaching us what to do. We will know it by the spirit.

Just a confirmation that we don't need religious people dictating stuff to us:
1 John 2:27 " But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you and you do not need that anyone teach you;"

It goes further. The point of it all is actually union with the Creator. Now what does that imply? It implies equality with the Creator:
Ephesians 5:31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”[e] 32 This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church."

Plenty of backup material for this, but that summarizes things as follows:
1. JC was talking pretty much most of the time about thinking differently, about a non-materialistic and a non-religious way of doing things. Best symbolism to use was the word "kingdom" because that's what people understood. He was against religion too, and he was not self-promoting nor did he start a religion. He only wanted people to get to know this different way of thinking and doing things, showing us how, and that we have a responsibility not to keep it to ourselves. People twisted that into organized religion about making proselytes driven by fear of punishment. JC never promoted even the sentiment of it.

2. A lot of misunderstanding of things JC said can point to it seeming as if he is promoting himself as a savior, but in fact what he was doing was pointing the way to liberty from materialistic and other forms of limitation by showing it through the way he lived. He taught about taking responsibility - certainly neither passivity in hope, nor domination through force. When Peter cut off the ear of some dude that was trying to arrest JC, he was reprimanded for it. When JC sent people to witness, he told them to dust off their feet if they were rejected - not force or persuade people. Which, by the way, is a very symbolic thing - dust falling from a person deemed anointed was seen as a transference medium of spiritual power. So the idea is to actually unconditionally bless a place, despite rejection.

3. The end-game goal is for everyone to walk in liberty from every single form of bondage - including the need to have to reincarnate the whole time (eternal or perpetual death, i.e. having to keep dying the whole time in every lifetime). For everyone to be "co-heirs" of everything JC was talking about (and that's a quote, yes).

So in conclusion, the whole picture of some tyrannical politically-motivated power being behind every single act and word connected with a dude with the name Jesus Christ, is just ridiculous. The very same material being criticized contradicts the criticism.
"The death of dogma is the birth of morality" - Kant

User avatar
infinity
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 7:35 am

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by infinity » Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:14 am

Gopi wrote:Besides, you guys do realize that you are coming to this conclusion two millennia after it was first taught? It was during the time of the Roman Caesars that humans began worshiping incarnate beings as gods, the Caesars. Since we are on the topic, that was when the corrective teaching came forward that there was no more necessity to do that:
The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God." Jesus answered them, "Has it not been written in your Law, 'I SAID, YOU ARE GODS '?"
The coverup of such a dangerous idea was immediately in effect (LoneBear: "or that Jesus was a creation of the Flavian Caesars to trick the violent and about-to-rebel Hebrews into believing that General Titus Flavius was the Messiah?") but I see that here the coverup is being treated as the main line, and the main line being treated as a cover up! Which fact would likely encounter resistance, the blasphemous one that human beings are gods themselves, or that they have to worship another Caesar at a time when everyone was worshiping them anyway? It takes a while for things to be understood, but really, two millennia?
I think the anti-religious response can be understood as a way of rejecting what they define this as. I think we are all on the same page about rejecting religion, and rejecting deception. But the definition is flawed if it refers to the story of Jesus. Just because some people tell the story differently, doesn't mean it is fact. However, because of the BELIEF in a different definition that offers the LUXURY of simply rejecting it all (instead of studying it for its merits), that the approach of the "anti-concept" is chosen. It's more convenient.

In the end, the result is simply that that concept (the stuff Jesus did and taught) is not considered an option in learning more about consciousness. If I were to choose to do the same with RS2, would I not be put at the exact same disadvantage? Instead, I would rather benefit from both, and integrate understanding from not only these two, but other approaches to understanding reality as well.

Does the evolution of consciousness depend on the rejection of concepts, or the investigation, understanding, assimilation and integration of concepts? Are we enriched and growing through being against this concept and against that concept? Or do we stretch our mental capacities instead by crossing the borders between two concepts and transcending them both? Not as obsolete, nor invalid, nor inferior - but as pieces, all of them, to the bigger puzzle, the bigger picture of evolving consciousness, awareness, understanding.

Let's explore another aspect of this:
Let's assume that the definitions two people give about the same thing create a paradox. How do we deal with paradoxes? Who is to say that paradoxes aren't a part of growing in consciousness? Why can't BOTH be valid? Shall we now reject the part we don't prefer in favor of the parts that we do? Do we not rob ourselves then of the opportunity to grow in consciousness? We just robbed ourselves of infinity and limited ourselves to only the finite. Easier to control, feel more comfortable in this safer way of thinking and understanding things.

Easy to call light and dark or hope and fear the enemy and then settle in intellectual comfort as if it is our friend.

How long will it take us to call that our enemy as well?

The value in exploring all definitions, all concepts - even those contradicting each other - is obvious. But how can we STUDY one concept or another without excluding others to some degree? I'm not sure its possible. One concept cannot be distinguished from another then. Limitation is a tool in study, just as conceptualization is - each with its place and use. But one should never exclude this one or that one and say this or that is an inferior way of looking at things.

I think this is where it starts coming together. And it ties in with fear, hope, light, dark. All of it. Its all there, its all real, its all valid.

Now what? That is what we're learning. The answer to that question. We are yearning to stretch beyond the limits of duality. This AND that. Neither this, NOR that. What then?

Redefinition.

Of what we want.

Like rapport.
"The death of dogma is the birth of morality" - Kant

User avatar
dave432
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 133
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:59 am

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by dave432 » Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:37 pm

daniel wrote: What is really needed is a not just a re-evaluation of Larson's Reciprocal System, but knowledge, itself. Most of the concepts we deal with were first introduced centuries, if not millennia, ago. Few people ever question them, not matter how bizarre they seem in light of modern thinking. Conventional science, religion and spiritualists will not do that, because they are too vested in the current system.
I watched the remake of Cosmos last night and "I had one of those flashes" (any Grateful Dead fans out there?) that I am not the same person I was only a year ago, at least as far as science is concerned due to reading and studying your papers, the CH forum and this forum. I was asked some questions during the program such as did I believe in a big bang beginning to the universe, and I automatically replied that I did not. I said mainstream science ignores the other non-material "half" of the physical universe and energy and matter keep alternating between space and this other half, so the universe may always have been. Other parts of the program went similarly, such as, no, I don't think the radio dating process is really as accurate as we are told it is so those dates don't seem correct; celestial objects are probably much younger than we are told they are, and no, I don't think we came from the sea.

I have always liked Neil deGrasse Tyson and his teaching ability, but I really wanted to be hearing a different lecture. So I suppose in about a year's time, I have questioned quite a bit of the conventional right out of my world view.
daniel wrote: There was an interesting solution proposed in an old, black & white film from 1951, called The Day the Earth Stood Still. If you've never seen it, watch it, if you get the opportunity. It's a classic (ignore the 2008 remake--junk), to see how just one alien managed to change the way the world thought, in just an hour.
Yes, I have the VHS!
dave432 wrote:Helmsman, take us out....
daniel wrote:Warp Factor 9!
If we encounter a species that looks friendly, let's slow down to impulse power and say hello!

(I hit submit when I wanted preview so I went back to edit.)
"just down the road a little way, turn left, cross the drawbridge, and you will be my guest tonight."
-- directions to the grail castle. We'll have some toast.

User avatar
dave432
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 133
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:59 am

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by dave432 » Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:23 pm

Gopi wrote:
Let me clarify once more how it appears with this "dump all the gods" theory. I have attempted to do that here and here but curiously there was no response. Let us say you slip and fall, realize that the forces of electricity, magnetism, and gravity combined are responsible for creating the bang, the bleeding knee, and the lingering pain. So now that you realize what forces were involved in the whole situation, you can say "Gravity is pulling me, electricity and magnetism are pulling and pushing me around, I do not want anything to influence me any more, so I will cut the chains to Gravity and Magnetism and dump them down the drain, and become free!" What sense does that make, from any angle?
I may be having difficulty understanding what you mean. I wasn't implying that the gods shouldn't exit, only that their authority over us is no longer needed. Gravity, electricity and magnetism are part of nature but slavery is invented and can be rejected as unnatural.
Gopi wrote: I find it surprising that there is enormous enthusiasm to conquer space, build ships, etc, but very little interest in understanding time, how one time affects the other, how one era changes into the other, and why things have a time for everything. With that missing, folks will be perfectly positioned to accept any old thing as a "novelty". That is one thing that is bothering me a bit... that the concepts are there (Time Lord, for example) but not really applied, more like empty shells. And of course, with time taken out of the picture, delusion sets in that all progress would be instantaneous, like this:
dave432 wrote: Medicine would be transformed in the blink of an eye....If this stopped today, people would wake up practically overnight...
The perfect setup for today's impatient generation... instant pills.
I did not mean that at all. I said people could "begin producing planet-safe solutions." I take too much medication as it is and am all to familiar with the side effects from this stuff, so I am no advocate for anybody needing to take pills. Medical advances need to be allowed to develop in their own time, as does space travel.
"just down the road a little way, turn left, cross the drawbridge, and you will be my guest tonight."
-- directions to the grail castle. We'll have some toast.

User avatar
Gopi
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 622
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Salt Lake City
Contact:

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by Gopi » Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:33 am

dave432 wrote:I may be having difficulty understanding what you mean. I wasn't implying that the gods shouldn't exit, only that their authority over us is no longer needed. Gravity, electricity and magnetism are part of nature but slavery is invented and can be rejected as unnatural.
The key point is that, just as gravity and electricity influence but do not enslave you, the presence and influence of the gods does not enslave either. What we are struggling with is our own inherent love of comfort and following someone i.e. slavery, and the struggle is in our own souls... throwing off natural laws or supernatural laws has nothing to do with it.
dave432 wrote: I did not mean that at all. I said people could "begin producing planet-safe solutions." I take too much medication as it is and am all to familiar with the side effects from this stuff, so I am no advocate for anybody needing to take pills. Medical advances need to be allowed to develop in their own time, as does space travel.
Sorry about that... I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. It was a side point triggered by your phrase.
It is time.

User avatar
dave432
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 133
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:59 am

Re: Denigration of the Future

Post by dave432 » Mon Mar 24, 2014 11:30 am

Gopi wrote: The key point is that, just as gravity and electricity influence but do not enslave you, the presence and influence of the gods does not enslave either. What we are struggling with is our own inherent love of comfort and following someone i.e. slavery, and the struggle is in our own souls... throwing off natural laws or supernatural laws has nothing to do with it.
OK. I see now. Right, on the surface we are being tricked to one degree or another with so many false messages but we often hide from the thing we don't really want to face, that slavery can be easier than taking responsibility, and sweeping the deeper issue under the rug means we get to retain that sense of comfort.
Gopi wrote: I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. It was a side point triggered by your phrase.
Thanks. Like you mentioned on CH, without hearing someone's tone, it's hard sometimes to grasp the meaning of a written message. If I heard you speak your comment, I would probably have picked up on your meaning right away. Sorry I got defensive.
"just down the road a little way, turn left, cross the drawbridge, and you will be my guest tonight."
-- directions to the grail castle. We'll have some toast.

Post Reply