It could be that I am Perfection's Love <br />and all that you need. <br /> <br />It could be that you will brim with satiation <br />of all my needs; <br /> <br />I could be in error tho, <br />and therefore cannot be Me <br />if all of above were true. <br /> <br />But Being Me should not lie down at <br />Needs Door <br />and be external to the me <br />I was born with and the Me I am. <br /> <br />So perhaps I should be the Am which I already Am <br />and need not Be for you <br />the All you need, <br /> <br />understanding however that tack <br />is mere self-contained self-sufficiency <br />which in the end is isolating and lonely. <br /> <br />Surely self-containment is not the perfection we all should seek. <br />It must thus <br />that the individualistic suppositions we all assume <br />are clearly not true <br />because I am not truly the individual Am <br />and never was. <br />If, therefore, I am indeed a collective Me, <br />then how can I be the perfect match- <br />singularly- for thee? <br /> <br />The only way I think this could be <br />is that I and you <br />become Multiplicities able to abide, <br />meet and supply <br />our mutual multiple needs. <br />But is this Schizophrenia <br />both individually and culturally? <br />There is that word Individual again.<br /><br />Lonnie Hicks<br /><br />http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/individual-thus/
