Ich dringe langsam etwas tiefer ein in die Oberflächlichkeit. Begriffe, die ich aus verschiedenen Wissenssystemen wie den Vedas, Agamas, Shastras aufgenommen habe, verbinden sich langsam. Ich sehe grobe Wurzelsysteme. Z.B. wie die 5 Elemente (Wasser, Feuer, Erde, Äther und Luft) als Ausgangspunkt in den Lehren des Vedas sich in Vastu oder Ayurveda weiterentwickeln, also in den Raum und den Körper. Ich sehe, wie sich im Tempel verschiedene Wissenssysteme verschränken und sich das in zeitgenössischer Kunstpraxis auch heute noch niederschlägt. Und es wird deutlich, wie die Auslegung und Aneignung dieser Wissenssysteme hochpolitisch ist. Dieses Wissen wurde kolonialisiert und wird nun an den Universitäten auf seine Kolonialisierung hin kritisch hinterfragt. Es ist aber auch noch aktiv in vielen Ashrams und Gurukuls, oftmals mit viel Stolz und dem Verweis, die Tradition wiederzubeleben.
Following Deleuze's ideas, I have rhizomatically connected different concepts, visited plateaus, left my home and allowed parts of myself to deterritorialize. A 'body without ogans' has emerged, lines of flight of the mind have formed. The plane of immanence has opened up, folded, its inclusions have opened up new worlds for me, which are now slowly aligning with reality and everyday life.
This is a painful process. The naive world of wonder and mild fascination, the honeymoon of spiritual exploration comes to a first caesura. This superficiality, i.e. the linking in immanence, is an active exploration, a thinking in the sense of expansion. I have combined it with an internalization, a tracing in meditation, spiritual practice, temple visits, exhibitions, 'folklore', study groups and conversations.
Now I have been on a 4-day intensive course on Vastu (architecture). Didactically it was well structured: slowly introducing the world of thought derived from the Vedas, leading to basic concepts of space, vibration, geometry, cosmology, energy. The Upanishads shone through again and again. We practiced puja and a temple visit - and finally practical applications in architectural plans.
The tasks are now much more difficult. The pure resonance and association needs to be checked for legitimacy. And this is where the question of the criterion arises. How should knowledge be measured? I discuss this with my teacher on the basis of Hegel and the Taittiriya Upanishad, but also in postmodern reflection. However, this oscillating thinking escapes systematic access. So how should it express itself? In the last few months, a lot has been condensed for me through personal experience. I have written letters that have followed the inner movement that feels drawn to something. And I have visualized and exhibited knowledge as a starting point for questions: a diagram of a temple exhibited in a gurukul that practices tantric rituals.
