Living Together

Quin,

Such an outcry in times of the greatest global meltdown of this century, makes me wonder! I wanted to ask you if Muhammad's loneliness or Buddha silence could cure tribal fights in their respective societies over who gets what. And how much?

Where is your sense of Sociology, my friend?
Metaphysics has been robbed of four words: M, E, T, A. Now it's purely Physics.
No matter what you do, He never responds, since the Dead never speak up.

Get real, yaar!

P.S: All I hear from you is "you, you, you". It's time to say "I, I, I" - the greatest, the powerful, the God.
-E

… mojo, no disrespect meant, but I think, for this you may want to tune at a slightly different frequency at altered amplitude, though I don’t know exactly at what Hertz it will work for you.

My answer to your question is with more questions: What can cure tribal fights or any fights for that matter? And who you consider is responsible for that?

And then: What ‘artist’ can create something of world changing possibilities if they do not plumb into the depth of silence of their soul? And did anyone stopped at silence. They came back to change the world. (And change they did – though that is not the whole point here)

Now dear friend, are you trying to dictate that poetry should be a ‘private dancer’ to ‘sociological needs’?

And by the way, I am so happy for global meltdown – hoping that it will be an impetus to a new stage of evolution for man. I hope that it is a turning point for humanity to declutch themselves from the claws of slavery of depraved materialism. If, instead, we destroy ourselves, then probably that is what we deserve. No one else is to blame but us. No one else is to be looked up for deliverance but ourselves.

And from where you got this notion that I am asking ‘HIM’ (God knows who is this HE) to respond? Can you educate me?

PS: You may say I, I and I and be a God, yet all you can be a god of many needs - you may want to see my earlier poem of the same title. So what is the point?

Dear Mutaal, I always enjoy reading your work, very profound, sometimes a bit too deep for a Joeshmo like myself, but I enjoy it nonetheless and the parts that don’t make sense to me, I live with the indignity of not knowing. Thanks you for you.

Re: # 3 Much thanks for your interest and for your kind feedback. No doubt poetry is such an unruly beast. As it rises from the depths of unconscious, not even a poet knows what it is up to. Ultimately an incomprehensible specter of self - that is where all the fun as well as the pain is. We all are in it together.

quin ... leave you a couple of quotes here (by the same person) ... probably do explain your point of view (in different words, of course):

[[Your Spirit mixed with my Spirit little by little, by turns, through reunions and abandons.
And now I am Yourself, Your existence is my own, and it is also my will.

I have seen my Lord with the eye of my heart, and I said: "Who art thou?" He said:"thou."]]

now what my friend Enam (BSM) is saying here is the 'apparent' opposite (but equally valid no doubt) ... he is simply saying "thou art I"!! rather than "I art thou"

and THAT is what I've been saying all this time as well

take care

These words constitute a spectrum that seem to radiate and diversify splitting themselves into multiple shades and hues giving varying colours and meanings to underlying thought.

I dare not say, I could grasp much of the meanings for these lines are pretty deep and profound. Only cursory comprehension if anything at all.

Good to see you back on FP in a long while. Keep sharing more please.

Re: # 6
" dare not say, I could grasp much..."

Be open please, say it as openly as I do Del.

The next poem will be titled: Living Together In Sin With Jane.

Re: # 5 nice take akcheema ... enjoyed

Re: # 6 thanks Delirium, as I said earlier, it is the nature of this unruly beast: poetry; a spectre of self, raising thousand questions and giving no definite answers.
It is more like a dream awakened with a heightened sense of awareness and as we know, no one always totally understands the dreams - not even the dreamer. One can only try in words to convey some sense of ambience of that state of mind, and that is why we have art and thanks God that we have it. Otherwise our hearts may turn into bricks and stones.
(And are not all of us dreamers in one way or other - to make this world better?)

Re: # 7 you got that right, but what is wrong in living together with Jane. She is most wonderful lady and I am looking forward to it. Don't waste your wa'az on me and Jane.

Someone posted this 'shaer' on Chowk iLog that I liked very much:

"Zahid, nigah e kam say kisi rind ko na daikha kar
kia janay Uss Kareem ko tu hai kay woh pasand "

And I had posted the following earlier:

"Ignorance’ black tongue,
By intolerance stung,
By conceit swollen,
Scornfully flung,
Leaps
At the sight of every novelty."

My post # 10 responds only to the last line addressed to me in post #7.

#2
Quin,

That frequency is not so difficult to catch on. I think you poets can do that as well. Just get off your poetic fence of dictation, forget the poetic liscence.

And I am NOT suggesting anything here. :)

Your science of poetry is surely a damned 'private dancer' to Sociology. I am still waiting to see one word of poetry falling out of this supposed sociological realm.

Oh the silence of the soul. God! When will this silence be broken? And what is it that's gonna break it apart, if not today's world situation?

"I hope that it is a turning point for humanity to declutch themselves from the claws of slavery of depraved materialism"

Hope you probably mean "materialism" as literal, not philosophical. Btw, what kind of an ancient statement is that? What's it that you are looking for, quin, if not an advanced and humane form of Materialism in your proposed evolution of Man from here on, I wonder?

P.S: By the way, I have an old case against poetry, love, and God. All things "existentialist" need to be rejected at any cost, I believe. So, no hard feelings!
-E

Re: # 5

Cheema sahib,

Don't get me wrong this time. I only meant to say: "it's over, darling!" :)

Clarification: And this time I meant, the I-God sessions in purely existentialist way.

Have a silk evening! :)
-E

Enam ... all I can say for myself is that either 'I' (i.e., the 'creation') exist or 'God - the creator' ... both cannot co-exist

and THAT is the foundation of my 'belief'.

Re: # 15

... and the probability of that is even less with theory of 'all-in-one and one-in-all' ... and all this exuberant 'love' thing quin sahib speaks of

though he is very much entitled to his point of view and I respect that right very much