--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M" <compost1uk@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@> wrote: > > > > > > I've mentioned one lucid dream I've had several times on > > > FFL and that was the one with "Jesus" who looked more like > > > Naveen Andrews than the way that Christianity portrays him. > > > He told me he wanted to tell me something and I had to walk > > > over to talk to him and there were fundamentalist Christians > > > who seemed to be stuck in the ground telling me I had no > > > right to talk to him. He just nodded at them in disgust > > > and said "pay no attention to them." He essentially warned > > > me that things were going to get really bad in the world > > > (and it did happen). The experience makes it a little > > > difficult for me as I really didn't think there actually > > > was such an individual as Roman history makes no mention > > > of him (and they were good historians) and might actually > > > may be a work of fiction derived possibly from some activist's > > > activities (which would have been so minor the Romans wouldn't > > > have bothered with a mention) and a mystic at the time. Some > > > theologians seem to buy into this idea. > > > > Interesting. I think it points up a curious "tension" in > > this thread between, on the one hand, the idea of cultivating > > dreams because they might have the potential to point to > > something, or to intimate something "profound" (though like > > looking for a black cat through a very dark glass darkly!). > > And on the other, trying to take control over dreams and > > direct them. I would have thought trying to practise > > the latter technique might bollocks up any hope of benefit > > from the former? i.e. It is the innocence of the state of > > dreaming that *may* allow it to open a door to something? > > Perhaps. > > An excellent point, and since I initiated the > thread, I'll reply. > > The dichotomy you mention between the idea of > innocently "interpreting" dreams and the idea > of waking up in them and controlling them via > the techniques of Dream Yoga or Lucid Dreaming > is based on a dichotomy between these approaches' > core beliefs about what dreams ARE. > > The Western "interpret dreams" approach is largely > based on the idea that dreams have no real exis- > tence. They are mental constructs only, something > that happens in the brain and may or may not have > something to do with the release of stress.
Oh yes, that's true of course. But the West has more to offer than just that I think. You could say there are three "Western" views (and no doubt more): (i) Dreams are just "noise" in the brain. Perhaps performing some function that helps the neurons get through their daily drudge. This is not just a modern idea from our scientific age. Take this on Romeo & Juliet: "Mercutio treats the subject of dreams, like the subject of love, with witty skepticism, as he describes them both as "fantasy." Unlike Romeo, Mercutio does not believe that dreams can foretell future events. Instead, painting vivid pictures of the dreamscape people inhabit as they sleep, Mercutio suggests that the fairy Queen Mab brings dreams to humans as a result of men's worldly desires and anxieties. To him, lawyers dream of collecting fees and lovers dream of lusty encounters; the fairies merely grant carnal wishes as they gallop by." (ii) Dreams are something we can analyse for meaning because they reveal something about our subconscious, our deeper self. Manufacturers of leather couches have benefited greatly from this idea. http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/wpr0052l.jpg (iii) The great tradition that I guess we get from the ancient Greeks, the Eqyptians and what-not, that dreams can reveal the future and perhaps give us wisdom too. As per Romeo above. A very long and deep tradition in the West! And it's this tradition that I had in mind in my post. For example it is alleged (but is it true?) that the physicist Niels Bohr developed the model of the atom based on a dream of sitting on the sun with all the planets hissing around on tiny cords. Wow! And there are of course vast numbers of stories just like that. Some here: http://www.dr-dream.com/hist.htm Personally, given the choice of gaining control of my dreams to wander around alternate, "parallel", dimensions, or instead being given the skill to listen to and appreciate my dreams for what they might *reveal* to me, I think I would choose the latter. (Second Life is quite good at the former!). I'm a Westerner after all, living in a part of the world with a long history of Celtic mysticism and standing stones The thing is, as I think you would agree, whether you're a would-be Niels Bohr hoping to cheat on your PhD, or, more traditionally, a big-wig general looking for military inspiration, the Western approach might appear more promising. And surely dreams are only likely to reveal their secrets (if at all) to the receptive and the innocent, not to those looking to take control of their dreams as a director does a film! But you choose your poison of course... > The Eastern approach to dreams is that they are > REAL. They're really happening, just on another > plane of existence, in what Castaneda called a > "separate reality." Your relationship TO the dream > if you can wake up in it and change it is the SAME > as your relationship to the daily world you see > around you in the waking state. > > On the whole, those who are interested in Dream > Yoga and Lucid Dreaming (in my experience) are not > terribly interested in "interpreting dreams," as > symbols for something else. They treat the dreams > as very real (in another plane of existence) and > something that one doesn't "analyze" for possible > "meaning," but that one *interacts with*, in the > same way that one interacts with daily life. > > Me personally, I've never been much for symbology, > or for "analyzing dreams" to suss out their pos- > sible "meaning." That has been true my whole life, > and continues to this day. I understand that not > everyone is like that, and that many look to dreams > as symbols from which they can learn something, in > much the same way that JohnR looks to the Ramayana > as a set of symbols from which he can learn some- > thing. And that's cool, if that's what gets you off. > > When I was practicing Dream Yoga and Lucid Dreaming, > I wasn't looking for "meaning" from dreams. I was > treating them as a "separate reality," an environ- > ment in which I could be as interactive as I was > in my daily life. The dreams were REAL, within > their own reality. > > Eastern philosophies tend to agree with this latter > view. They tend to view dreams as NOT "happening > inside one's brain," but as another level of reality > (the astral plane) that one accesses during dreaming, > and between incarnations. Thus they are looking to > gain more mastery over their actions in this separate > dreaming reality, just as they are looking to gain > more mastery over their actions in waking reality. >
