Beyond by Santosh Jha (electronic reader .TXT) 📖

are. Just say and keep saying. As you have always said and I have lived it up; individually, you and I are probabilities and together; assimilated, we engender dimensions of probabilities. This shall remain forever. Neither you, nor I are apprehensive of any probability. We have both always welcomed and relished novelty of probabilities. We have grown like that in our mutuality. Just fly…’

Nakedness has precarious worthiness. Nakedness is music of utmost superiority. Nakedness is singular artistry of body and mind, which is always susceptible to the culpability of presenting its full face in the inappropriateness of Time and Space. Musicality too has the same susceptibility. True and right notes, played at inappropriateness of Time and Space in progression and emergent probabilities of music; is suicide of aesthetics. Nakedness; like music, is innate expression of consciousness. Bodies too need be naked, when appropriate. Mind opting out for absolute nakedness is innocence of honesty. Body and mind have the best appropriateness of time and space, when a man and woman, hand in hand, together, journey their consciousnesses in singular linearity into the formless landscapes of probabilities, without fear and without purposefulness of arriving. The journeying begins…

‘I am essentially seeking to actualize this probability of journeying beyond, whatever have been realities for me so far. The stumbling block however is the fact that it was I, who felt suffocation and wished emancipation from current realities and; when there is this feeling of journeying beyond, it is the same I, which visualizes it. The dualism is inherent in continuity of I, as it seems, there must be a novel and alternative I, which should ideally journey beyond. The same I probably is not even eligible for beyond as it is probably too deeply mired in antecedents of the past realities. It would be of great help if you could tell me, what you felt were things, you did not find true and right in me, which you would like me to drop and acquire novelties, when I journey beyond. This would help me in unraveling the dualism between two different I.’

‘It is not easy for me to tell. I have never thought in such terms. When we are together, it is always a happy situation and as there has always been so little time we have had together, I always focused on imbibing the blissfulness of togetherness. However, if you ask me, I can tell you about what I feel about myself, when I am conflicted between my own being at different times and situations. I have always felt; there has to be huge amount of preparedness to get the optimal utility and worth out of any probability. This I have witnessed with you too, when I watch some of your performances. With me; it is almost a routine. There is preparedness inside and there has to be a matching readiness outside when you present yourself. I have seen, in some places, where the stage or milieu was not right and the audiences were not receptive, you played but it missed the magic. Same happens with me. I am always ready with best of my personal resourcefulness but still, as external preparedness does not match my inner readiness, I fail miserably. I cannot be my optimal best. This has always happened, when I am with you. When I am back home, after spending time with you, I always feel, I could do better but could not. It is not because you were nor ready. It is primarily because we usually met in situations, which were never ideally suited to optimize our personal potentials. That is why together we were in many occasions but the magic could not happen; as it is here, now and muffling us. I feel, it is all about a mutuality and symbiosis of personal preparedness and brilliance of ambience, which defines the potential of I.’

‘You mean to say, the suffocation of I is about the mediocrity of milieus and people in them and that is why emancipation is self’s freedom from this mediocrity, which smothers artfulness of consciousness?’

‘It is not always like that. But, sadly; it happens. You talked about the dualism of I. You banged your violin. You however are a musician not because of your violin. Even when the violin is gone; the emancipation has happened; you are still a musician. You may bang a part of you; something you may call untrue and unreal in you. But; you still remain the I. You are so brilliant and marvelous to me but it is not because of me. Your I is always there, as it is. I and my presence is just like the violin. People are just like the instrumentalities for a reality. I is always the constant reality. You, without your violin and me shall remain what you are. However, what I am suggesting is that the finality of expression of your brilliance and marvel is affected by the instrument you choose to have. If your violin is not well tuned, if I am not prepared and ready; the milieu where you and your violin happen together is not conducive; your magic may not attain optimality.’

‘This means; if my consciousness is a media; its expressions have to be dependent on the suitability and genius of instruments of external realities. This way; emancipation has to be from the inappropriateness of external media and its instrumentalities?’

‘It is somehow not the right thing to say but the reality remains that for vast majority of people, the mediocrity and depravity of society and cultures is the safe haven to live blissfully with their own mediocrity and depravity. Only mediocrity can be the best suited milieu and ambience for unprepared and unready people. You need a market, which successfully sells the produce you cultivate. Mediocrity sells mediocrity beautifully and gives best profitability of self-validation. Society and cultures are, very often, mediocre instrumentalities but then; they are in best suitability for majority of mediocre consciousnesses. The trouble is with a handful of people like you, who must feel suffocation in the market of mediocrity. Cultures, mass majority of mediocre people shall always supply restrictive and suffocating standards of utilities and worth. Brilliance and superior readiness of consciousness seeking sublime expressions of self and I shall always feel an alienation from self. I in perpetual subjugation of I and its mediocrity shall always be conflicted. Suffocation may be I-centric reality but the emancipation cannot be from I. It has to be from mediocrity. If I is also mediocre, then emancipation must also involve I. The freedom is from mediocrity, unreadiness and superfluously benchmarked utility and worthiness of all media. It is somehow a very tough thing to say but it is equally true that when you are blessed enough to rise above something, you must not seek validation from realities beneath you.’

‘I definitely can feel what you intend to arrive at. Being a musician, good or bad; I can assure you, this happens, very often. We can even say; this is primary and dominant dimension of suffocation and need for emancipation. However, as you say you find yourself in right ambience now; I wish we could delve deep into this suffocation of I itself. I mean to say; no amount of excellence can keep you afloat forever. This excellence in time progression may itself become a mediocrity. How can then I be in readiness to journey beyond successive mediocrities and suffocations? What readies the I to accept its own mediocrity and then to look and journey beyond?’

‘It is a tough question. I haven’t even approached things from this perspective. What I can tell you; from my own experience of life-living is that the consciousness itself senses out its own needs, if there is this awareness and conscientious acceptance about the need to evolve perpetually. The body and mind has its own languages. The consciousness can probably read them all but one must be in perfect symmetry of rhythm and melodic reverberance to actualize it. I personally feel, pain is the language of suffocation and emancipation from all sorts of mediocrity. Anger, I presume is the expression of your unpreparedness for a reality. The causality can be deciphered from the expression. The cause can be unraveled from the effect it engenders. You may not know it but I was the sole witness, when you banged your violin. I felt, you probably were not ready for your journey beyond. Probably, you could have gifted your violin to any child on the street, if you were ready. Painfulness is also hugely beautiful language of reality, which the body-mind speaks and consciousness understands; even enjoys, if there is readiness. I always feel the pain when I am with you as I know; there is always this missing readiness, which is required. The mediocrity of mine and its suffocation expresses itself in the painfulness. I know I am still good lot mediocre in intimacy. I need to go beyond’.

‘It is so brilliant that you and I are almost at the same idea. I was also thinking in terms of what you call the readiness. I also felt, what essentially matters is not consciousness and its conflicts. Even the animals have consciousness. I am beginning to realize that consciousness must have the artistry to journey multiverse of novel and alternative dimensions in all probabilities and their causalities. Also and more importantly, the consciousness must have this adroitness and craft to break free of populist-cultural utilities-worth and chisel out novelty of purposes as well as worthiness. If you could tell me, when you speak of readiness, how you make it happen for you? How do you juxtapose readiness? Is it situation-specific or generic for all times? What artistry or science you assign to your readiness to optimize it?’

‘What can I say…! You are asking me but I have never structured my thoughtfulness over these issues in a way, which I could express in words. For me, my readiness is not what you may call a universal or generic one. I cannot say my readiness is for all times and situations. As we have been talking about readiness as an artistry of consciousness for all situations; I would rather admit that my readiness so far has been very specific and subjective to me. It is difficult to describe it, but if I may put it through a metaphor, I would say my readiness has been my entrenched desire to remain perpetually in the innate state of nakedness. My readiness is not about wearing appropriate and occasion-specific dress. It is about I being in continuity with my nakedness and if I ever wear a dress; I do it not for occasion or situation, but for the extension of my nakedness, so that I remain at my innate best; never lending my consciousness to cosmetic or synthetic requirements of culturally defined appropriateness. However, as we have talked about the idea of beyond; I admit that this readiness is also not true and optimal.’

‘I can understand what you say about your own readiness. I know, being a woman, cultural appropriates of dressing up and wearing your wares are heaped on you and you naturally align yourself with nakedness to remain tuned with your own consciousness and its innate musicality. But I feel, you are right when you say, nakedness may also be restrictive, like your own self and consciousness, when it comes to being in perfect readiness for all probabilities and causalities in all time and space. How should we approach this readiness in its universality, holism and entirety?’

‘May be, you can handle this issue better than me. It is like you play your music and you also do it with perfect readiness. This readiness, you can say is restrictive. It sure is. I believe, when you play, you cannot probably emancipate yourself from the situation of audience and the unconscious insinuation of what the critics might make of it. May be, we can say, your readiness can enter a novel dimension if