DREAMS

el Hitami
1

1.
We always give reality to the contents of the state we are experiencing now. All other states experienced in the past are believed now to be illusory. We tacitly believe that the state we are experiencing now is the only valid waking state. It is almost impossible to doubt that the objects and events we are experiencing now constitute anything but the only real world. Worlds experienced in other past states are denied this sense of reality, and are, therefore, labeled: dreams. However fantastic the content of the dream being experienced now, its reality can never be in question. Contents of past states are judged as illusory, notwithstanding the fact that at the time they were being experienced, they were considered absolutely real.

2.
For the dream that is being experienced now, the subject: me and its objects and events are factually experienced, and assumed by the subject to be real, .... as long as the present state lasts. Nevertheless, that judgment is unfailingly reversed upon entering into the next dream. The subject: me, and his sentient objects: others, cannot harbor a single doubt about the reality of the world they are experiencing now. Neither can they have the slightest suspicion that what they are experiencing now is the one and only real waking state. If these facts are challenged, the argument can be decisively settled by giving the head of the challenger a good blow; the real bruise thus acquired shall, supposedly, settle the argument. If this violent conclusion fails to convince the victim, a poll can be taken among others who shall naturally agree that the world they are experiencing now is perfectly real, and that whoever doubts that is undoubtedly insane.

3.
The sense of reality attributed to the contents of the dream being experienced now is reinforced by a series of thoughts simultaneously arising with the phenomenal component of that state. This series contains a complete and seemingly integrated past, including comprehensive histories of the dream subject, objects, events and relationships. These histories can be confirmed by others in the same dream. Here, again, the past of the dream being experienced now is firmly believed to be real, while that of any previous state is effortlessly brushed aside as unreal. The reality of the dream's past is reinforced by the apparent continuity of related events. The sense of continuity is enhanced by the firm belief in the reality of the past. When an event, together with the series of thoughts containing its past are simultaneously manifested, they reciprocally confirm each other's reality.

4.
The continuity of related events appear as a network of cause-and-effect relationships. When an event takes place now, it is believed to be an effect of a past cause. This causal relationship is manifested spontaneously with the corresponding event as the content of a present thought. The dream world being experienced now is so convincingly real and so matter of fact solid, that no doubt can be harbored as to its continuity and permanency. But, however firm the belief in the reality of the present dream and its past, it is as strongly denied when contradicted by the thought manifested present and past of the next state.

5.
Every dream has its own set of laws. Natural laws govern the phenomenal manifestation of objects and their spatiotemporal relations, while logical laws regulate thought processes. The sets of laws governing relationships between objects or events in any two dreams may exhibit some similarities or, they may differ appreciably. But, however novel, fantastic, or weird the dream manifestations, the laws currently operating now, are unquestionably accepted by the dream subject. The laws governing relationships in a particular dream may become questionable only when examined from the next state. Likewise, the credibility of dream laws regulating phenomenal and thought manifestations are never questioned until the next dream is entered upon.

6.
As soon as a dream world is projected, all dream contents are given real, independent existence. One of the dream objects is chosen as the subject: me, and the dreaming consciousness becomes completely identified with it. The dream subject thus becomes the self, and the multiplicity of the dream world becomes the other. What is essentially a totality is thus sharply split into two subsets: self and others. When consciousness is focussed on the dream subject (me), a pronounced tendency toward separateness is developed between the self and the rest of the dream world. Separateness is achieved by means of qualitative differentiation and gives birth to desires and fears. Strong desires spring-up to differentiate and fortify the self image, and to defend its boundaries against threats from others. Hence, compulsive demands for more separateness; hence, the adoption of drastic measures for asserting the self's integrity; hence, constant worrying about protecting the self from encroachments by others; hence, more fear and insecurity .... and the wheel of suffering keeps on turning on an imaginary hub.

7.
The dream-self is a complex of reflex reactions to dream events. As such, it is completely dependent on the dreaming consciousness. Thus, determinism or free-will with regard to the dreamself makes no sense; since it is not appropriate to attribute volition or agency to such a totally dependent phenomenon. When it is seen that the whole dream structure (i.e. self and others) is no more than a subjective manifestation projected in- and by the dreaming consciousness, such issues, and many others, become meaningless. Thus, worrying about one's self ceases, desires subside, fears vanish, and the pleasures and pains of dream existence are accepted at their face value.

8.

When observed from the present waking state, all dream appearances share the same degree of unreality. As figments of imagination, they are all equally illusory. It follows, that, from the waking standpoint, there can be no difference between dream objects; nor can there be any difference between the dream-subject and its dreamobjects: sentient or insentient. As far as being dream appearances, they are as real or unreal as each other.

9.
The dream-self is the symbol of the dreaming consciousness acting as the center of dream manifestations. When viewed through the time-dependent limitation of thought, it manifests as an ego. When translated through the space-limited sensorial realm it appears as a body. Problems arise when these symbols are given reality and confused with what they represent. If, within the dream, it is realized that what is being experienced now is no more than a temporary symbolic manifestation in consciousness, the wrong point of view is immediately given up. Otherwise, any attempt by the dream-subject to modify or annihilate itself will end by strengthening the self-image. Rejecting the dream-ego is no better than blindly accepting it, since in both cases reality is being attributed to what is no more than a symbol in dream thought.

10

10.
As long as the dreamer identifies with the dream-subject, it can never realize that, as such, it is only another dreamobject. The dream-subject can never wake up from the dream. When there is an awakening, the dream-subject is no more. No dream action can cause the dream-self to wake up. Both the action and the actor are dream illusions.

11

11.
In a dream, 'death' signifies the cessation of the dreamsubject's existence in that state only. The dream may, or may not continue without the dreamsubject. However, the ego-sense (assuming either the sameor a different form) is carried over to the next dream as that dream's subject. As long as the ego-sense is maintained, the tendency to identify with a dream-subject will persist and will continuously re-manifest itself in every dream.

12

12.
From the standpoint of the dream-subject, no cause for the dream can be correctly surmised. As long as the dream is believed to be real, any explanation will reflect this belief and, therefor, cannot have any truth in it. Concepts concocted by dreamed entities share the same level of unreality. All dream thoughts, ideas, explanations, and conclusions cannot be but figments of dream imagination. In the next dream (i.e., the relative waking state) it is realized that all of the previous dream's mental activities are illusory creations of the dream-subject's own fabrication. Upon 'waking', no explanation for the cause of the dream is thought to be worth the effort. No more attempts at understanding are made; for what is sought to be explained is now seen to be devoid of reality. It is now clear that all such explanations are useless, futile, and meaningless.

13

13.
As dream creations, the self and its world may be considered unreal. Nevertheless, the factuality of dreaming cannot be denied. As a series of objects and events, the dream world is illusory- in the same sense as reflections in a mirror are illusory. However, the experiencing of that illusion cannot be denied- just as the seeing of reflections in a mirror is undeniably experienced, i.e., perceived or cognized. When both the dream-subject and its objects are seen as a simultaneous manifestation of the dreamer's non-dual being, then the experience itself (the dreaming), regardless of content, is seen to be real. That experience is knowledge (=consciousness =awareness= intelligence) which is essentially pure - because it is not sustained by anything other than itself. It is that knowledge which is the womb and source of myriads of dream worlds continuously appearing and disappearing in it. It is in that knowledge that are born all dream objects, events, and relationships. When the dream is over, it is realized that, in reality, there was no dream-subject, no dream objects .... only consciousness unfolding itself to itself for no reason whatsoever. Once this is understood, the dream world is seen to be both real and unreal, or neither real nor unreal, or...., or... Does it really matter then?
14

14.
The contents of experience are: objects, events, and relationships cognized through: sensations, thoughts, and feelings. Names are given as descriptors or qualifiers to the contents of experience to differentiate them from each other. We call a particular state: "waking" - to differentiate it from another state that we label as: "dreaming". When it is comprehended that all states of manifestation are essentially of the same nature, then what is the need to give them different names ? Furthermore, if all states of manifestation are basically one, it would be wrong to hasten and label them all as dreams or qualify them as unreal, because this would imply the existence of other states that could be real. This which is the content of experience is neither real nor unreal. It is just what it is: consciousness unfolding itself to itself as limitless-endless sets of manifestations.

15

15.
You can only experience two alternating states: a state of manifestation, called "waking" when experienced now, and "dreaming" when recollected as a past state, and a state of non-manifestation, namely, deep dreamless sleep. Correctly speaking, however, you can only experience manifestation, since "you" are not there to experience nonmanifestation. Looked at from a higher point of view, it can be seen that, in reality, there can be no difference between states of manifestation and non-manifestation. In non-manifestation there is no self, there is no other; in manifestation, also, there is no real self -only an imagined subject, there is no real other -only imagined objects. Both states are , therefore, completely devoid of any real content and, in reality, only one "state" eternally IS.

16

16.
When looked at through the dream-subject's mind, the dreamer can never be perceived, thought about, or cognized. To start the search by trying to understand the mystery of the dreamer while still attributing reality to appearances is bound to lead to grave errors. This is because the dreamer is neither an entity nor a concept and, therefor, completely ungraspable by an image identified mind.

17

17.
When a state of manifestation becomes a dream, (i.e., when looked at from the next state), it is realized that whatever took place then could not possibly affect the dreamer ( erroneously thought to be the subject of the present state). Dream pleasures may have made the dream-subject happier, but not the dreamer. Dream pains may hurt imaginary dream bodies, and dream miseries may disturb illusory dream minds, but not the dreamer. But neither can the pleasures and pains, joys and miseries (or any other physical, emotional, or mental condition) affect anything but an imaginary ego-entity manifested and maintained for the duration of one dream only.

18

18.
Since the dreamer is completely independent from the dream worlds manifested in it, it is absolutely free (not in the sense of being free from something). Since it is not affected by dream happenings or alternating conditions, it is immutable (changeless). Since it is beyond ego-centered fears and desires, it is always in deep unperturbed peace. If you want to taste this, watch for the moment of truth. That happens when, in-the midst of a dream, and while the dream is still going on, there is a real awakening.

19

19.
Real awakening takes place when consciousness, which was identified with the dream-subject, is re-centered in the dreamer, and it is clearly seen that whatever is taking place "now" is nothing but a dream. Then and there the false identification with the dream subject is severed, the objective reality attributed to the dream-world is withdrawn, and the dreamer consciously re-assumes his pristine state of witnesshood.

20

20.
At the dawn of the great awakening, the "dreamer" is experienced as the real creator of its imaginary worlds, the desire- and fear-free experiencer of all the joys of its creativity, the ever-present witness to the exquisite beauty of its creations, the all-encompassing knower of its everchanging manifestations. However, and maybe sometime later, when examined through the wisdom-eye of direct (concept-free) experience, it will be clearly seen that the "dreamer" is not an entity at all, and therefor, it can be neither an object nor an agent (perceived / perceiver, concept / conceiver, cognized / cognizer, etc.). Since the factuality of perceiving, thinking, cognizing, and feeling is existentially undeniable, the "dreamer" may be seen as pure knowing-ness (i.e., without a knower or anything known), or pure experiencing (i.e., without an experiencer or anything experienced), or pure functioning (i.e., without a doer or anything being done). Grave difficulties may now arise for it is almost impossible, especially in a dream, to conceive of an "-ing" without an "-er". Besides, since the "dreamer" is not an agent or an entity, functioning or experiencing cannot be logically ascribed to "it".
21

Not being an object, the "dreamer" cannot be the known, the experienced, the created. Not being an agent, the "dreamer" cannot be the knower, the experiencer, the creator. Not being a function, the ''dreamer" cannot be the knowing, the experiencing, or the act of creation. Being neither known, knower, nor knowing, while, nontheless including in itself all three as undeniable empirical factualities, the "dreamer" can, at best, be described as absolute self-encompassing knowledge (consciousness / awareness / intelligence). The "dreamer" may, likewise, be described as pure (i.e., conflict-free) experience (peace / bliss/ happiness / joy / contentment); or, as the eternal ground of creativity (Being / Isness / Thatness/ Existence)

22

21.
Falling back on the direct experience of awakening, it is realized that THAT which we called the dreamer is at best described as the very essence of I-ness (Identity / IPrincipal) . Nothing can exist outside or apart from this I-ness, and therefor, assigning tags, names, or descriptions to THAT from which nothing can be differentiated becomes completely non-sensical. To cut-off all the possibilities of image and concept generation, THAT may be pointed-at using negative terms only, such as: nameless, attributeless, unknowable, uncreated. Neither does this avail, since negative terms have an uncanny tendency to imply the existence of their positive counterparts. In truth, all counterparts, positive and negative, can only appear to exist in THAT as the content of experience and, being parts, they can never identify the WHOLE.

23

22.
With so much philosophical rigmarole, it is no wonder that we, poor dream-subjects/objects, have found it more comforting to worship so many false, but infinitely less complicated idols. At the moment of truth, when real awakening is experienced, all such intellectual acrobatics become meaningless, and the whole sack of mental garbage is incinerated in the intensity of BEING.

24