Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Trilogy - part I


-->
Animal
I may be a doctor. I may be a poet and philosopher. I may be good in chords and strokes. I am carved like a human. I dress and walk like a human. My head does have conscious and subconscious. I can discover, invent and destroy. I can rule and be a slave if need be. Everybody calls me a human. Everybody wants me to be human. It does hurt me a lot when they want me to be courteous, chivalrous and civilized. It takes a hell lot of effort to be polite and just. I may be smarter than him. I may be more repulsive than him. You may lock inside a room with Beatles Pink Floyd Shakespeare Bhagwadgita Poetry Philosophy 3G I- pads Volkswagen Dollars Euros 3X 7X Continental Chinese Thai Facebook Picasso da Vinci Jack Daniels Marijuana Diamonds and with all the stuff that makes me human. Nobody gave me a choice. That is not what I asked for. I kept wandering and searching to find an answer. I have taken it years to accept. I may take centuries to prove and still get stoned. I may be the master of theories but I have forgotten my basics. I may have taken centuries to evolve but I have been stripped of my instincts in the process. This black veil is jamming my vision. I want to burn it down to ashes. I want to hunt and fuck. Fuck, plain simple fuck. Fuck in the open. Fuck under the big blue sky. Pee on my feet. Shit with everybody watching me. Slumber, where I want to. Meander, when and where I feel to. I want to ramble in herds and flocks. I feel an urge to bark, roar and even mew sometimes. I want to drool and growl. I want to rip apart and lick the flesh. I just love getting naked and soaked in sludge. There may be other truths. But this is also a truth.
Being human is just not me.
I am an animal. Yes an animal.

3 comments:

Sunil Aggarwal said...

Dear Mohit
The assumption of "not being an animal" is the cause of remorse of "being an animal". I would say it reverse morality. I think the question of being a human is a question of permanent vulnerability. It is difficult to face it but this is the way it is. I think we must learn to appear with all lust and ugliness alongwith some sombre promise of beauty and truth. Hating yourself for not being a human enough is not what is called Vairagya and presently, this is not a central question. The only question is- walk while carrying our lust responsibly.

mohit mittal said...

bhaiya you are true that its a case of reverse morality and i also agree that considering yourself human is a question of permanent vulnerability. what troubles me throughout is the problem of carrying a load of labels as a human being. an animal doesn't need to carry those. therefore he is an independent entity living inside a jungle as well as in a cage. he can carry his lust freely and fearlessly in both the situations. he doesn't need to make an effort or pretend. he is a natural being unless and until we try to tame his basic instincts and make him as corrupt as we are. yes carrying our lust responsibly seems to be the only solution. the process of evolution has not only transformed us physically but also spiritually and morally and going back to the basics will require a breakdown of structure of identities.

Sunil Aggarwal said...

Dear Mohit
I think we have developed a judgemental relationship with our ownself. Can we really stop it? I think that is something to be asked again and again? This repeating of one's self is what is missing today. What you call the structure of identities is what can be called the plethora of judgements. Animals are free from it but human beings have a different choice to make all the time. I think that there are too many fractures lying around and inside us. the hidden continuity is not visible but i feel that it is not all that invisible too. That is also the test of our faith. Our karma is a dialogical construct. You lock it; it will lock you back. That is why any kind of essentialism needs to rooted out. e.g. if i say that i like you, can be really very close to saying that i dislike you. The word and the meaning are closeted in the annihilation of separateness. That is the reason why experience can't be theorised. It is only cinematic or sensual in nature.