deepundergroundpoetry.com
Will One Be Happy In A Ghostly Realm?
What will keep the spark of love
one knew on earth
alive
when one is bodiless
and “lives” without an end to time
within a realm of ghosts?
Is it not sure
that boredom with one’s mate
whom one, deprived of eyes
and hands and the facilities
of flesh,
has no ability to see
or touch or kiss
will then eventually
set in
and ennui too
will fill up full
the fabric of one’s never-ending “days”?
one knew on earth
alive
when one is bodiless
and “lives” without an end to time
within a realm of ghosts?
Is it not sure
that boredom with one’s mate
whom one, deprived of eyes
and hands and the facilities
of flesh,
has no ability to see
or touch or kiss
will then eventually
set in
and ennui too
will fill up full
the fabric of one’s never-ending “days”?
Published 12th Feb 2023
All writing remains the property of the author. Don't use it for any purpose without their permission.
likes 0
reading list entries 0
comments 6
reads 129
Commenting Preference:
The author encourages honest critique.
12th Feb 2023 9:12pm
Dear Baldwin,
1- For me, the soul can feel, see, and have all the senses of the flesh. It can love more than the flesh. If the soul has no senses, what is the use of rewarding it in heaven or punishing it in hell, l mean through remorse?
2- Sorry, Baldwin, but I consider your writing is prose, and not poetry. Why didn't you write your what is supposed to be a poem in prose and continued
lines instead of writing it very few words in a line? Again, lam so sorry, Baldwin, but this is what l really believe.
1- For me, the soul can feel, see, and have all the senses of the flesh. It can love more than the flesh. If the soul has no senses, what is the use of rewarding it in heaven or punishing it in hell, l mean through remorse?
2- Sorry, Baldwin, but I consider your writing is prose, and not poetry. Why didn't you write your what is supposed to be a poem in prose and continued
lines instead of writing it very few words in a line? Again, lam so sorry, Baldwin, but this is what l really believe.
"1- For me, the soul can feel, see, and have all the senses of the flesh. It can love more than the flesh [sic]"
So if the soul can see, shouldn't a man who has lost his eyes still be able to see? After all, according to you, what a person is is a temporarily enfleshed ghostly entity that is the seat of sensory perception.,
And how can something that has no nervous system and sense organs -- which are things that only animate objects made of material substance have -- experience physical sensations, let alone those that are greater than those a bodied person experiences?
"If the soul has no senses, what is the use of rewarding it in heaven or punishing it in hell .[sic ?]".
I
The NT does not say that sous go to heaven,. Not does it affirm that a disembodied entity is a human being. pers, let alone that human beings' final and ultimate abode is some ghostly realm in the sky. It says that it is on the restored earth.
if you read Matthew 25, you'll see that the NT says that those who are rewarded with a heavenly state, as well as those who are consigned to hell have bodies. For the judgment occurs after the general resurrection.
"2- Sorry, Baldwin, but I consider your writing is [SIC to be prose] , [SIC no comma needed] and not poetry. "
Really? It has all of the things you have stated elsewhere that a writing has to have to be poetry: i.e., sound meter, rhyme, and a good subject.
"Why didn't you write your what is supposed to be a poem in prose and continued lines instead of writing it [sic with] very few words in a line?"
Leaving aside the fact that the lines in my stanzas are continuous, please show me where it is stated in any authoritative manual on how to write poetry that the lines in a composition MUST be of equal length.
" this is what l really believe."
Yes, but the question is why anyone should or would think that your belief about what my submission is has any validity.
So if the soul can see, shouldn't a man who has lost his eyes still be able to see? After all, according to you, what a person is is a temporarily enfleshed ghostly entity that is the seat of sensory perception.,
And how can something that has no nervous system and sense organs -- which are things that only animate objects made of material substance have -- experience physical sensations, let alone those that are greater than those a bodied person experiences?
"If the soul has no senses, what is the use of rewarding it in heaven or punishing it in hell .[sic ?]".
I
The NT does not say that sous go to heaven,. Not does it affirm that a disembodied entity is a human being. pers, let alone that human beings' final and ultimate abode is some ghostly realm in the sky. It says that it is on the restored earth.
if you read Matthew 25, you'll see that the NT says that those who are rewarded with a heavenly state, as well as those who are consigned to hell have bodies. For the judgment occurs after the general resurrection.
"2- Sorry, Baldwin, but I consider your writing is [SIC to be prose] , [SIC no comma needed] and not poetry. "
Really? It has all of the things you have stated elsewhere that a writing has to have to be poetry: i.e., sound meter, rhyme, and a good subject.
"Why didn't you write your what is supposed to be a poem in prose and continued lines instead of writing it [sic with] very few words in a line?"
Leaving aside the fact that the lines in my stanzas are continuous, please show me where it is stated in any authoritative manual on how to write poetry that the lines in a composition MUST be of equal length.
" this is what l really believe."
Yes, but the question is why anyone should or would think that your belief about what my submission is has any validity.
13th Feb 2023 12:54pm
"Dear Baldwin,
1- For me, the soul can [sic] feel, see, and have all the senses of the flesh."
The issue is not whether a soul "can" do these things, but whether the soul (an entity that is without sense organs: actually DOES these things. Please provide me with texts from the New Testament that attest to this.
[cue the avoidance of your meeting my request]
And can the soul make love to, and enjoy pleasure with, another soul?
"It can [sic] love more than the flesh".
Did you mean to say that the soul can [does?] experience love and engages in loving things to a greater degree than a flesh-encased soul ever could [or does]?
How do you know that this is so?
[cue the red herrings]
In any case, to say that "[a soul] can love more than the flesh" is to say, given the syntax of that assertion, that there are other things besides the flesh that "he" soul is capable of loving. In saying this, you raise the question "What are the things that a soul is capable of loving more than "the flesh"?".
So once again, you show yourself incapable of writing prose in which you actually say what you presumably meant to say.
[cue the red herrings and/or the ad hominems]
1- For me, the soul can [sic] feel, see, and have all the senses of the flesh."
The issue is not whether a soul "can" do these things, but whether the soul (an entity that is without sense organs: actually DOES these things. Please provide me with texts from the New Testament that attest to this.
[cue the avoidance of your meeting my request]
And can the soul make love to, and enjoy pleasure with, another soul?
"It can [sic] love more than the flesh".
Did you mean to say that the soul can [does?] experience love and engages in loving things to a greater degree than a flesh-encased soul ever could [or does]?
How do you know that this is so?
[cue the red herrings]
In any case, to say that "[a soul] can love more than the flesh" is to say, given the syntax of that assertion, that there are other things besides the flesh that "he" soul is capable of loving. In saying this, you raise the question "What are the things that a soul is capable of loving more than "the flesh"?".
So once again, you show yourself incapable of writing prose in which you actually say what you presumably meant to say.
[cue the red herrings and/or the ad hominems]
13th Feb 2023 9:33am
"I take the last paragraph [of what you just now posted] and apply it on your comments, "
Did you mean "apply it TO my comments"? The "last paragraph" is not wax or polish or cream or varnish. So once more you show that your grasp of English idiom is tenuous not to mention that you do not (can't?) even write prose with any degree of felicity.
In any case, the reason why readers might think that my "belief" that my submission is poetry, not prose, is valid is that I offer evidence -- based, notably, upon YOUR statements about what it is a writing has to have to be poetry -- that substantiates my "belief" whereas you just assert that my belief is wrong
Did you mean "apply it TO my comments"? The "last paragraph" is not wax or polish or cream or varnish. So once more you show that your grasp of English idiom is tenuous not to mention that you do not (can't?) even write prose with any degree of felicity.
In any case, the reason why readers might think that my "belief" that my submission is poetry, not prose, is valid is that I offer evidence -- based, notably, upon YOUR statements about what it is a writing has to have to be poetry -- that substantiates my "belief" whereas you just assert that my belief is wrong
15th Feb 2023 1:28pm
"2- Sorry, Baldwin, but I consider your writing is prose,..."
Would you please be kind enough to give me your definition of "prose" and to state explicitly how and why you think my submissions fit that definition?
With thanks in advance for fulfilling this request..
Would you please be kind enough to give me your definition of "prose" and to state explicitly how and why you think my submissions fit that definition?
With thanks in advance for fulfilling this request..
