Them

[AnatoliyS]

Them

Be wary – they've arrived!
We have strived to stop them,
Yet still, tenaciously,
They have arrived to kill.

No one escapes, they're here –
In fear, we cannot hide,
They reach inside and tear
The flesh off bones – alas! –

Too late – they have arrived!
In nightmares we have seen
Them coming from within,
Our sin – to let them through.

We cannot fend them off,
Nor mend the ills they've caused
We never paused to think
What our own thoughts could bring.

[Tanner]

You had me with the Title! which made me think of the very camp 1954 sci-fi movie about irradiated ants; it was I think the first "Bug" movie of its genre.
A dark poem that engenders much pause for thought.

[rhymetime]

"THEM" I think they are not external. perhaps they are the negative thoughts and emotions, fear, hate that we welcome into our souls. Though they are distructive we seem to love them. We savor and encourage them. Yes they will consume us.

[AnatoliyS]

Precisely, rhymetime! Thank you for your comment.

[AlexandratheLate]

I took it the same way as unwelcomed yet sometimes unwittingly or wittingly thoughts, emotions, fears and hate and how they affect us. Nicely done AnatoliyS.

[grant hayes]

One can read it as the mindset of those who fear immigrants.

[AnatoliyS]

Indeed, Grant, some might see the poem this way. Never occurred to me personally, though. The last line, I thought, clearly says who are "them".

[grant hayes]

Perhaps it's their regret that their 'thoughts' were too easy-going, and that they've been Trojan-horsed thereby.

'Our sin - to let them through' is strongly externalising - the Other as realized nightmare.

[AnatoliyS]

grant hayes ,

'Our sin – to let them through' is strongly externalising

Do you mean that it strongly implies someone outside of "us"?

It has a different meaning for me. What is "sin"? In my understanding, there "is" only one sin – a thought "what if I go and play on my own?" that Son of God had thought. From that one thought the whole universe had come to be. This is the story of Adam and Eve in the Bible. Before this event had presumably occurred, there was only Oneness. Son of God (us) was not in any way separate from God. The world of duality (whole universe) "was" created by this thought. Before this thought there were no other thoughts, nor there was any consciousness because in oneness there are nothing to be conscious of (no separate subject and object). And this imaginary "sin" had created all the other thoughts that we seem to be thinking daily. Some thoughts we judge as good, some seen as bad. Yet they are neither – all thought is non-existent, other than in a dream.

So to me, that phrase implies the Original Sin, eating of the apple. We let the thoughts of "good and bad" through and separated from our Source. In essence, the whole poem is the story of (mis)creation, as propagated by our ego.

[grant hayes]

"In essence, the whole poem is the story of (mis)creation, as propagated by our ego."

It may be to you, but its reads like an epitome of xenophobia, with a vague, guilty nod toward phronemophobia at the end.

The term 'sin' carries a lot of freight, which is brought to bear whenever it is used. People approach the word with their understanding of it - the common connotation - not your own very individualised meaning. This poem is too generalised in its scope to elucidate the latter.

You use words to mediate your message that 'all thought is non-existent', itself a concept, i.e. a thought. So you are at crossed purposes. Problematising thought itself as you do - to the extent of equating it with 'sin' - renders your poetry an act of absurdity at best, hypocrisy at worst.

[AnatoliyS]

Such is the essence of language, grant hayes. No word has the same meaning to two separated beings. We could take the argument to great lengths, but that requires both open-mindedness and time. We might have one, but lack the other.

[grant hayes]

If the illusion of thought must be overcome, Anatoliy, why perpetuate it by writing, which makes one think? Are you not aiding and abetting the very 'sin' you eschew? To use the phrase 'in my understanding', as you do here, even the pronoun 'my', becomes a supreme irony.

Your absolutes - like 'all thought is non-existent', differentiation is 'sin' - are untenable. You refute them with every word you write

[AnatoliyS]

"Untenable" – what a wonderful word, truly! Love is untenable, and so am I!

Thank you, grant hayes , even though we may misunderstand each other in some ways (after all, we speak different languages), I learn a lot from you. We all teach each other, yet most are unaware of the ways in which they teach. Your comments have just inspired 3 new poems.

[grant hayes]

God needs its Satan, like One needs its Nought.

One is Nought cut, stretched out, raised; Nought is One bent on Itself, ends rejoined, the ouroboros eating its tail.

O, Q, C, ___ , I , ( , C , O

O and I : the binary from which all proceeds, and to which all returns. Rinse. Repeat.