Forsaken by Mankind

For you I weep,
O Hermit man,
And speak for you
Best as I can.

To me I move,
Against the wind,
from day to night,
from grass to sand.

The goals of barren children
Needs be renewed.
Life is not bereft of ease,
to the worthy of the few.

These hearts rend tears
From depths repressed,
For bruises just now,
But blood is next.

Lying awake in the sleeper,
which is the world,
Forsaken and sleepless,
Misshapen, broken, and curled.

And now, comes caravans of such,
To say into my ears,
'invoke always the sorrow,
of so many tears'.

Very nice. You've a gift for prose...

I must admit the thread title caught me off-guard.
My eyes are going bad and, for a moment, I thought this was
a Jewish thread.

reply to post by rival



May I ask why you have mistaken such for a 'jewish' sort?

Very nice!!!

reply to post by backcase

May I ask why you have mistaken such for a 'jewish' sort?

The possessive form indicated by the apostrophe s, makes you think it is something men own.
So your mind reads the word by sight rather than working through the phonetics, coming up with the word, foreskin.

I realize after looking at it three times that it is really a contraction of "mankind is", and not the possessive.
You should have just written it out, without the contraction.

reply to post by jmdewey60


sorry, not understanding you

Edit:
Ah, I see. I may change the title

ReEdit: I like how it works on both levels. I will keep it as such

reply to post by jmdewey60


well I meant it to be possessive actually

reply to post by backcase

I may change the title

Just take the apostrophe s off and type out the word, "is".

well I meant it to be possessive actually.

OK, adding the last word on works.

jmdewey60
reply to post by backcase

 

I may change the title

Just take the apostrophe s off and type out the word, "is".

I fixed it, I wanted it to be possessive to highlight those forsaken by the world

reply to post by backcase


It is quite beautiful.

My question is, is it the world that has forsaken you? or you that has forsaken the world?

reply to post by Aphorism


It is the world which refuses to nurse its child and leaves it alone to fend for itself.

reply to post by backcase

It is the world which refuses to nurse its child and leaves it alone to fend for itself. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

As a thing of the world, the child acts within, through, and according to the world. Only the child can refuse, nurse, and leave things alone as you describe.

It is up to the child, as a part of the world, to vindicate the world, rather than forsake all and everything within it, including himself. It seems contradictory to condemn God's creation because it does not bend to serve us.

reply to post by Aphorism


It is not so much that the world does not serve us, but it mocks us. Imagine being a child who is constantly mocked by its mother when it seeks warmth. So is the world to the little ones.

"Before the world hated you, it hated me"

So it is not that the forsaken wish to break off from the world, but it is that they cann ot find love in the world's cruelty, and where they find love it exists apart from the world as it also does. For Christ is the cornerstone which has been rejected by the builders.

Certainly some food for contemplative thought, thank you for provoking such.

reply to post by backcase

It is not so much that the world does not serve us, but it mocks us. Imagine being a child who is constantly mocked by its mother when it seeks warmth. So is the world to the little ones.

"Before the world hated you, it hated me"

So it is not that the forsaken wish to break off from the world, but it is that they cann ot find love in the world's cruelty, and where they find love it exists apart from the world as it also does. For Christ is the cornerstone which has been rejected by the builders.

Certainly some food for contemplative thought, thank you for provoking such. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Interesting outlook. You might find solace in the work of Søren Kierkegaard, who I think dealt with these types of questions, but it only served to bolster his Christianity, making it stronger.

I certainly see the view that the world hates us, or that we should not love the world, as nihilism. It seems to me to take the meaning out of the world, and as such, ourselves.

reply to post by backcase

Haven't been here for a very long time but just wanted to tell you I Really like your poem

reply to post by Aphorism


It is not that I hate the world, in fact I love the world and the people in it. When I say the world I mean the mode of common society and daily life. Consider the goals of the average man accepted by society. Those goals are bleak and the make life lifeless. Yet when that man looks at someone who lives life and is happy in spirit, he considers him strange.

I love the beauty of this world, but I have a good idea of where the beauty is and where it isn't.

reply to post by theson


thanks, but all praise is due to God.

Let your praise rise from your heart to God, a man can glory only in what is dead he he does not glory in God.

reply to post by backcase

It is not that I hate the world, in fact I love the world and the people in it. When I say the world I mean the mode of common society and daily life. Consider the goals of the average man accepted by society. Those goals are bleak and the make life lifeless. Yet when that man looks at someone who lives life and is happy in spirit, he considers him strange.

I love the beauty of this world, but I have a good idea of where the beauty is and where it isn't. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

But life is never lifeless. It might be perhaps that you've been led to believe that life is something more than it is, and upon utilizing this lens to view the world with, what actually is the case, whatever that may be, simply doesn't live up to expectation and promise. Such a lens makes things bleak and lifeless, because that is what it teaches about things that aren't in accordance with its rules. How else can someone look at another person and condemn him without knowing him? The opposite is the case, and it is the lens that is bleak and lifeless.

I agree with you about modern society and culture. It is decadent. However, these are artifacts of man, and as such, can be manipulated and changed by man. Most advancements in certain directions were brought about by single individuals.

Thanks for the talk. Discussing the world with scientists is tiring. I much prefer the poet.

Cheers.

The hermit swallows the pain and spits out forgiveness for us.

reply to post by Aphorism


you remind me of Machiavellian views