What’s going on?
Within all the
noise that we are a part of, within all the arguments that are voiced between
any two entities (such as our generation and the other generation), can we try
to understand the nature of debate that seem to exist in contemporary times and
the notion of a ‘distant past’? I am attempting to express an overview of
things as I have felt after reading, writing, observing, introspecting the
state of affairs after all these years. The articulation of difference, I
believe, is the starting point to define my way forward for the things to come
in the near Future.
There has been a
‘shift’ in the consciousness – or the nature of thought. In a literary sense,
these shifts are seen due to colonialism (when the world order changed), post
colonial world (World Wars, technological innovations) and recently due to
globalization and the increasing influx of Artificial Intelligence in our
lifestyle. It will be interesting to read, if anybody can explain and map such
shifts in our consciousness in a historical time frame!
I wish to focus
on two world views – which lead to a different experience of the world around
us. There are a few fundamental things that we need to agree first of all - as being an intrinsic nature
of the human mind – we perceive space + time around us and we conceive (or act/
respond) based on our imagination. By knowing this intrinsic nature, we can
then focus on a fundamental question – what
is the way, in which we are perceiving the world and what is the way, in which,
our responses get formed? This will lead us to asking the ‘how’ and the
‘why’ of the nature of perception and conception. Let’s see:
One of the world
views is informed from the perception of geography, leading to the idea of history and philosophy. The fundamental
perception of the world is an intimate expression of dependence on Nature/
environment. One is compelled to respond in basic ways to ensure survival of
the species. Such conditions mean a non critical way of living – a life filled
with bondages or mountains of constraints. Generations of trials and errors to
ensure our survival against the ferocity of Nature has compelled a way of
living – ‘culture’, and further refinement has helped us to understand the
recurring ‘patterns’ of Nature. These patterns have governed our patterns of
agriculture, architecture, art and leisure. This has lead to a comprehensive
view of understanding the world – not in bits and pieces, but a situation,
wherein an idea of ecosystem/ interdependence/ interconnections exists. A
world, wherein a pattern means transformation, change, adaptation,
modification, inheritance, continuity and so on. A world, wherein, flora,
fauna, humans, environment/ climate are interdependent. A world, wherein,
expressions in the form of words, writing, art, architecture are
interdependent. By extension, it means that any form of contemporary expression
(or manifestation or a phenomenon) is a part of a larger pattern of phenomena.
In this way, the Present, Past and Future seem to merge at the same point.
Rather, the Present may be understood as being a variant of the Past! And the
Future may be understood as imagining an appropriate variant of the Present!
Hence, boundaries of events don’t become rigid or distinct, but they influence
one another to form a whole. This world view also makes us aware of our own
thought connections with the ‘outside’ world, since ‘we’ are also patterns! The
self study is an inward looking journey and has the potential to reveal the
interrelationship of space and time and their billion combinations. In
perceiving such billion relationships, the resultant billion expressions of
space-time phenomena are understood NOT as separate events, but all
interconnected or may be seen as multiple sides of the same coin. Hence, the variations
do not disturb us. Variations become only incidental – if such a demand gets
placed on us to respond. Otherwise, what is seen as a cosmic scale of pattern
expressing as a continuous transformation of space into form and vice versa
with multiple space-time expressions embedded simultaneously. This world view
forms our aesthetics of experience and expression. The forms of expression as
music, art or architecture exhibit the mentioned tendency of being
comprehensive, having multiple space-time relationships and being encompassing
to all viewpoints. In other words, the forms of expressions go beyond any
particular space-time relationship and hence, tend to become eternal (or
timeless). One’s gaze of phenomena goes beyond one’s lifetime and includes
generations of shared memories One may ask, what is the fundamental requirement
to generate such a world view? The answer lies in “engaging” oneself in action
of existence. Engaging oneself in imagining, expressing and decoding. Existence
maybe felt as ‘constraints to be responded’. However, it is only by repeatedly
being engaged by responding to constraints, that the experience of something beyond the context is realized. The
nature of human consciousness, as understood by this world view, is such that
constraints are to be seen as a gateway to realizing the dimension of Beyond. Hence, everything around us –
that we perceive as phenomena – has a dimension of eternity. It is expected,
that an ‘idea’ needs to take ground or be embedded in a firm soil and receive
appropriate environment to generate root structure and the tree and fruits.
Eventually, the fruits need to give seeds (expression of ideas/ potential) to
continue the cycle endlessly. The journey from idea (seed) to soil to roots to
tree to fruit and again back to seeds is inevitable or necessary to realize the
nature of eternity. This is what is meant by being engaged with life. By understanding
such a world view, we may realize that there is no need for any debate,
justification, proof, articulation, explanation or finding a razor sharp
purpose – since these tendencies indicate boundaries and we are not dealing
with any boundaries here, but a unified whole! This world view is found in all
past cultures across the globe. It doesn’t depend on literacy or race or
society or country or nation or economy or any other kind of social constructs.
It is a fundamental experience that has been realized by humans. Hence, I
think, this world view binds all human beings (and other life forms) under one
roof. Summarily, “I” as a notion, is relative to the context, and hence can be
regarded as a malleable, fluid entity - a part of the larger cosmic pattern of
events. “I” becomes incidental in the
existential equation and hence, all imaginations and expressions stemming from
this notion may be incidental! Since this world view results in understanding
the idea of Beyond, the applications
of this mindset are far reaching and eternal. Does the world view require any
process of undertaking, does it require any particular methods of practice, and
does technology help us to realize this world view.....yes and no. It is an
individual journey to be initiated, the experience of which goes beyond
articulation.
There is another
world view, which is prevalent nowadays. I am trying to understand (not just
intellectually, but understanding the essence of the idea on our mind) the
structure of post modern thought. Although, much is written about this idea, here
is what I am interpreting – the Reader, as always, is free to disapprove!
My feeling is
that the post modern tendency of thinking has its underpinning in
socio-political realm. Fundamentally, post modern thought is interested to “destabilize”
power structures of any kind. Since the fundamental unit of power structure is
manifested in the thought itself – and its consequent pattern followed by a
manifested form, the post modern critics seem to destabilize/ refute/ debate/
topple/ defragment/ deconstruct all thought equations. Indeed, it will do
anything to see that no thought gets condensed to create any sort of a pattern!
And it does so by keeping a constant voice of the inner critic/ doubt/ attack
to the maximum. It is interested to celebrate the multiple interpretations of
the same phenomenon - the higher the interpretations, the better it is! As the
interpretations offered reach a billion mark, one concludes by this exercise,
that any given situation just can’t be evaluated or judged or concluded in
order to respond concretely! A situation can only be interpreted and debated or
critically seen – thus emphasizing deconstructing an experience to the point of
complete fluidity of thought. What is captured here, is the celebration of the
Individual’s perspective or interpretation. Here, the “I” becomes all important
and with the “I”, the idea of context takes shape. The context can be seen as a
fragment of the pattern and depending on one’s microscopic view of the pattern,
different pieces are seen. In other words,
the world view seems to concentrate and reveal only fragments. I may go as far
as to say, that the continuous application of post modern thought would finally
endorse a world view of fractured reality (or reality that exists only in the
moment) and searching of a ‘pattern’ of any kind may be concluded as a useless
proposition! We now should be content to see the tusk or a tail or a nail, or a
hair and not be bothered about the elephant! This attitude has repercussions on
relationships as well. “I” is very distant from any other entity. The post
modern thought, makes “me” very exclusive. The higher version of being critical
is to deconstruct the source of power itself – i.e. thought. What happens to
the mind?! We reach ‘Nothingness’! In short, we reach the annihilation of the
mind and all kinds of meaning the mind creates. The earlier world view was
interested to “root” the thought to a soil, to grow a tree and fruits (i.e. an
idea leading to a tangible manifestation). This post modern world view will not
let the idea embed itself in the soil, so there is no question of the tree or
the fruits! In other words, post modern thought does not seem to be interested
in the act of creation/ engagement/ manifestation – it will only be interested
in the reverse process of manifestation to formlessness. By deconstruction any
phenomenon, the post modern tendency tries to untangle/ unwrap itself/ or peel
itself from any known bondages or constraints of existence. I term this as
symbolically ‘escaping’ from a space-time existential reality. The nature of
art, architecture and anything therefore – may appear fragmented/ disconnected
to the local experience of context.
I conclude, by
saying, that engagement with constraints is a solid way to realize the
potential of going beyond the context and reaching a quality of timelessness. The
other way of deconstructing engagement itself, I feel, may lead to annihilation
of the self.
