Corrected Version
My soul I cannot find; my truth you may not seek,
as this message is perceived only for what it is.
However, you may find that reality hits hard:
it is a mirror of obsolescence
in a world of dimensions we cannot conclude.
What is, is not.
What is not seen has always been what we feel and touch;
what we see and look upon
is our perception of an untold lie.
Who may be pulling the strings?
It is an unanswerable question of survival,
but only the I can answer—
not the me, but the I—
because we exist deep within our ego,
and only the I has the power
to distinguish truth from falsehood
and reality from a physical stage.
With that I am; with that I exist:
one more soul in this universe
seeking enlightenment.
Irodk7
Read the original, uncorrected text
Original Version
My soul i cannot find, my truth you may not seek, as
This message its only percieved what what it is
However you may find, reality fits hard, its a mirror of absolcense ina wolrd of dimensions we may not conclude
What it is, it is not, whats not seen has always been what we feel and touch what we see and look is our perception of an untold lie.. Who may be pulling the strings? Its an answereless questionb of survival, but only The I can answer, not the me, but the I, because we exist deep within our ego and reality only I has the powe to distinguish the truth from the false and reality from a physic stage.
With that I am, with that I exist one more soul in this universe in the seeking for enlightment.
Irodk7
Literary Perspective
“Abstract Reality” investigates the distance between perception and truth. The speaker cannot find his own soul and warns that truth cannot simply be sought as an external object. Reality “hits hard” because what appears solid may be a mirror, a stage, or an obsolete image produced by the mind.
The question “Who may be pulling the strings?” introduces the metaphor of existence as theater or puppetry. The speaker suspects that visible reality is arranged, but refuses to give the final authority to an outside controller. Only “the I” can answer—not the everyday “me,” but a deeper witnessing consciousness capable of observing the ego itself.
That distinction between “me” and “I” is the philosophical heart of the piece. The “me” is the personality living inside conditions, habits, and stories; the “I” is presented as the faculty that can recognize those stories and distinguish appearance from truth. Yet the poem does not claim complete escape. The speaker remains “one more soul” seeking enlightenment, which keeps the ending humble.
The contradictions—“What is, is not” and the unseen as what we feel and touch—give the writing a mystical quality. At times, the abstraction becomes dense enough to obscure its own insight. The edited version introduces line breaks and clearer syntax so the reader can follow the movement from doubt, to the stage metaphor, to the deeper I. A future revision could anchor the philosophy in one concrete moment when perception proved unreliable.
This editorial reading is an interpretation, not a definitive statement of the author’s intent.
Featured image / Imagen destacada: den-belitsky via Envato Elements — licensed via Envato Elements for A Poet’s Diary.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.