when belief and common sense meet

belief was approached by common sense.

common sense says things that question belief.

belief has pat answers in response. 

common sense launches into the basis of beliefs.

belief holds on to silently repeating itself, inwardly.

common sense expecting a response is waiting.

belief could say its beliefs out loud in response,

but realizes that they were already, by presence, stated.

common sense attempts to engage belief into a further dialogue.

but belief only has belief turf as its holding ground.

common sense senses a hidden agenda in belief's presence.

belief is dressed in the words and postures of upholding.

common sense looks at those words as a doctrinaire. 

belief is still assuming an authoritarian silence.

common sense wants to talk about 

the lay of the common sense current land.

belief has a nostalgia in mind, 

as if of sacred rituals of intimate import,

which do not easily translate into the now of discussion.

for they represent and encode an emotional status.

common sense is waiting for sensibility's arrival.

for belief to wide-eye view 

the intimacies of the conversation possible.

but belief has tight lips 

and rushings of emotional memories.

common sense is preparing to speak as both parties,

as a rhetorical, with belief as audience. 

an emotional outbreak is brewing within belief,

as if a crime of verbal abuse is about to take place.

bystanders of mindfulness become attentive 

to the impending circumstance.

potentially a question of both initial parties

may come to be the focus outright.

to say, aren't you both doing a form of belief?

held operationally different,

but essentially for the same cause?

both initially look askance in a ponder.

how can we both be of the same intent?

and the third party response

goes something like this.

each of you are farmers of a sort.

one of you grows for seeds to plant,

while the other grows for fruits to eat.

all you have to do really,

is figure out which one of the two,

are you . . .