Shree: Dilemma and Anchor in self + architecture

 

Shree: Dilemma and Anchor in self + architecture

this tendency can be very annoying to accept. for me, this might be the biggest learning experience given by God. acceptance means to become loving and non judgmental about existence itself that is currently perceived or formed by vibrations and constructs, ego and attachment. so the water gets coloured in the manner we perceive it. this raises exploration of various fields of knowledge and scales of spaces and time zones and life forms. the voice is of the critique and i am never sure as to what i am doing, what i may get, what should i plan. for many years this was considered as something of a fault, something that cannot be controlled or outgrown.

in the field of knowledge, it has taken me to interdisciplinary fields to pacify this tendency and to philosophy as well. the strong point about this tendency is that i perhaps never take anything at face value unless it has been thought over and internalized. as i read texts on  philosophy and encounter situations around (that i make of course), i realize that things ought never to have been in control anyway  - happy times or unhappy times. we are not the doer in any case and we are not the absolute permanent truth as some concrete product (even concrete changes by the way). if i change as vibrations, if mind and body changes, if perception changes then what am i expecting as something of permanent nature? doubt or dilemma of existence can also mean possibility or potential to change and to keep improving and progressing. doubt may also force one to keep evaluating the self, which can be a tiring process.

tendencies are constructed or imagined and they are not good or bad - they are to be seen neutrally., vibrations make you do something or make you imagine something and all is only a construct of the mind. since we are born as vibrations, we create situations and all kinds of responses. to think that i need to have a particular personality or live in some space or some time is an incomplete undertaking, fuelling more desires. any person is imperfect and represents a potential to become the One, just as i. so it is not important what happens outside - it is more important what are you creating and how do you accept this force of creation?

the second thing is about identity crisis in society, culture, fields of knowledge and the self (in increasing internalization of tendency of dilemma and crisis). from this perspective, the past appears stable, although dilemmas had existed at all times, except their nature may have been different. a human being is a human being so he/she expresses the same tendencies irrespective of situations except in unique or particular ways. the present is seen something like a "given" but it represents the reality of existence and vibrations - just like any other time - are you alive to the idea of existence?

in continuation to self crisis is linked the rate of change of variables of manifestation (by our own making) and the resignation of instability that has seeped in our minds. it seems quite pointless to plan anything, to discuss anything, to predict anything (and the loss of a stable past or future in terms of loss of timeless values is the biggest hit we all are facing currently) since what is "common and agreeable to all" is a big question. this is the price of extreme individuality, deconstruction and faster rate of change.

central to this issue then, is how does one generate a feeling of an "anchor" in existence or delightful being as an experience?  Then can time be seen from this perspective of offering anchors because of the value systems, behavior, settings, rituals, activities, form of architecture and can therefore indigenous mindset be contrasted/ compared with modern mindset? An indigenous built form of a hut represents the entire socio-political-cultural-spiritual beliefs of a society (materials only make it tangible space). Then we are indicating what about the reading of space itself (which is contextual) and representing space as a value system (again contextual) and idea diagrams? aren't these important?  Architecture is not just a form, but it represents an evolution of society and value system of a human being. It may be seen in purest abstract terms but it has to address the dimension of psychology and metaphysics, else it is not complete. so where are we heading in this case?

this is where we are heading perhaps. the challenge is to feel the anchor within us and architecture expressing that anchor.

Hari Om.