Waking and Dream States

[Guest guest]

PraNAms to all

 

In response to some discussions I bagan to put in writing what I understand - If

it helps others it is a blessing if not it is also fine.

 

-----------------

Comparative analysis of waking and dream states

 

Analysis of dream states has been done in Mandukya and Brahadaranyaka

Upanishads. Debate goes on in terms of the reality or relative reality of each

state and the world of objects that are perceived in each state. Here I present

some similarities and differences and to what extent one has to dwell on these

to appreciate that which is beyond any state. References to Brahmasuutras 2-2-28

and 2-2-29 are often given to prove that the two states are not really equal.

We will examine these two sutras as well and also how advaita Vedanta, from my

perspective, looks at it from the relative and absolute references. This

analysis is not for academic interest but for those who can use it as a direct

illustrative example that nature provides us to understand that which transcends

the states. All other examples that we take to illustrate the advaitic concept

– like snake/rope or silver/nacre etc all have certain limitations and care

should be exercised in

extending these examples beyond their range of applicability. On the other hand

dream example is directly relevant and within everybody’s experience which can

be used to appreciate the absolute reality.

 

The analysis of dream and waking states are important to examine ones own

experiences to help to transcend both states - this is the anubhava

(experience) part that is emphasized when it is said that shastra (scriptures),

yuki (logic) and anubhava (experience of the three states – waking, dream and

deep sleep) needed to be used to arrive at that which is beyond the three

states, the turiiyam. We are using all the three means (shastra, yukti and

anubhava) here to help us transcend all the three states of consciousness. There

are several lessons that we can learn by examining waking and dream and of

course deep sleep state too.

We will be addressing the following one by one:

1. Oneness of the material and efficient causes.

2. Relative realities of the two states

3. micro and macrocosms in the two states

4. How to use this analysis to transcend the two states

5. What are the differences between the two states

6. Relevance of the Brahmasuutras 2-2-28 and 2-2-29

7. Expanding the mind for self-realization and jiivanmukti (sadyomukti)

8. Concluding remarks.

 

1. Oneness of the material and efficient causes: We are all aware that any

creation requires 1) the knowledge of creation (the know-how of how to create),

and 2) the material for creation. If this universe is a creation, as it is an

ordered and well behaved thermodynamic system, and if there is a creator of such

universe, he has to be the intelligent and instrument cause, and the material

cause. Creation of the universe is unlike any other creation that we are

familiar –ex. creation of a pot or creation of a house – where material and

intelligent causes are separate – the pot-maker is different from the clay.

The know-how of how or what to create as well as material needed for creation of

the entire universe have to come from a single source, since we cannot afford to

have two separate causes. The cause for the entire creation cannot be outside

the creation since that outside also has to be created (hence that outside

becomes inside the creation

or creation has to be infinite) and cannot be inside of the creation since

anything inside the creation is part of creation. Hence God, or the creator

cannot be separate from the creation. In addition, since creation is not a

random phenomenon, there should be some basis for the creation, even if God

wants to create. We need to know on what basis He is going to create – does He

have a blue print for His creation and if so where does He get that blue print.

The dream example provides a glimpse of this process at local level. The

dreamer, the creator of the dream universe, should have the know-how of how and

what to create in the dream world of plurality and also needed material for the

creation. Since the dream is projection of the waker’s mind into varieties of

objects that are created in the dream, whatever that are created have their

roots in the waker’s mind. That is, the mind should have the know-how of what

is being created. One cannot

create a gaagaabuubu in the dream unless one knows what that is. The dream

provides a direct nature’s clear example of how both the material cause and

the efficient cause can be one and the same. In the dream case, it is the

waker’s mind supported by the consciousness can be both material cause and the

efficient cause for the dream creation. Similarly the scripture says the waking

world is also a creation where the efficient and material cause for creation can

be one and the same. Thus dream analogy provides a perfect example to learn that

efficient and material causes can be one and the same.

 

2. Relative realities of the waking and dream worlds: We say the dream world is

not real and it lasts only for a short duration while the waking world is real

since it lasts long. Thus time-wise they are not comparable. Space-wise also

they are not comparable. For example, the elephants and the rivers and mountains

in the dream are not real as in the waking state since the dream is projection

of the waker’s mind, which does not have place for all the elephants, rivers

and mountains. Such a comparative analysis does not help us in understanding the

relative reality of the two. These statements ignore the fact that we are

comparing the waking and dream states, sitting in the waking state, and some

even quoting Brahmasuutras or bhaashyaas for support. We ignore the fact that

those particular Brahmasuutra statements are made to dismiss some other

doctrinal arguments. We should be careful in understanding what exactly the

sutras compare and how one should

interpret these in term of our spiritual study.

 

First, we should be aware that we are doing the comparison in the waking state

about the dream state and its relative validity, in relation to the waking

state. It is the waker’s claim that dream is not real since time and special

coordinate system do not correspond to that of the waking state. Dreamer has no

problem in seeing multistoried buildings that are gigantic in comparison to his

size that are blazing with fire and elephants and the rivers and mountains that

are infinitely large compared to his size. All these can exist comfortably in

the world of dream without any space or time incompatibilities. No dreamer will

complain that his head is aching that he cannot accommodate all these gigantic

things in his world of plurality. In fact no dreamer thinks that they are all

in his mind! There are dream hospitals, dream doctors and dream medicines for

dream diseases, and dream banks also to finance these which are all needed for

the subjects in the

dream. They are all sublimated or negated only when one wakes up from a dream.

Hence Shankara drives this fact in his aatma bodha – …sakaale satyavat

bhaati prabodhe satyasat bhavet|| and also in his Dakshinamuurthi sloaks,

vishvam darpaNa dRishyamaana nagarii tulyam nijaantargataam.. As long as dream

lasts, they are experienced as real, and only when awaken from the dream; one

recognizes the unreality of those in relation to the waking state.

 

The purpose of this analysis is to understand that in each state the world

appears to be real in that state but that is only real, relative to that state.

But once one transcends that state, what is considered real is dismissed as

unreal. In the same token even this waking state appears to be real in that

state until one transcends that state. The two systems are parallel although the

relative realities are different. We categorize that the waking state is

vyavahaarika and dream state is praatibhaasika, but the parallelism has to be

understood while appreciating their divergence. We will bringing out some of

these, but suffice here to know that both are relatively real, and the degree of

the reality is the same in their own states. Only when one compares the two

states, say in the waking state, then the dream state appears to have a lower

degree of reality, in relation to the waking state. Similarly when one

transcends to the highest state,

paaramaarthika, both waking and dream states are sublimated as unreal. Thus

dream example provides a direct example for the possibility of higher state of

consciousness where the multitude of plurality that is perceived will not have

any validity. Thus mithyaa aspect of the waking world is to be understood using

the dream example, otherwise mithyaa aspect of the waking world is difficult to

know until one realizes the paaramaarthika satyam and it may become the case of

catch 22. At vyaavahaarika level, the praatibhaasika is dismissed as unreal and

at paaramaarthika both vyaavahaarika and praatibhaasika are dismissed as unreal.

But as long as one does not have the reality of the higher state, the lower

state is taken as real, just like as long as I do not see the rope as rope, the

snake that I see where the rope is, is as real as the real snake bites.

 

To be continued.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

Before this analysis goes to the second part, please permit me to record the

following:

 

It is a common experience that the contents of most of our dreams are not

remembered on waking although there is a definite memory of dreams having

occurred. Those dreams simply refuse to reveal even if we try our best. Then,

there are dreams which are remebered in patches. In the third category are

dreams the details of which (we believe so in the waking state!) are clearly

remebered.

 

All this point to the fact that the recollection of dreams, even vivid dreams,

is probably only a hazy, zig-zag, incomplete percolation of information into

waking from another plane, whatever it is. There is, therefore, every reason to

suspect that what we 'recall' in waking is perhaps not what 'really' happened

in the dream. It is a big distortion - a big untruth.

 

It is, therefore, very unreasonable on our part to dismiss dreams as dreams due

to the spatio-temporal 'illogicity' of their contents. The 'illogicity' could

very well be the result of distortion. It is a fact the 'illogicity' is not

questioned during the course of the dream. It is only on waking that we become

wise and throw our dreams in the bin.

 

MN

__________________

 

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada

wrote:

> In response to some discussions I bagan to put in writing what I understand -

If it helps others it is a blessing if not it is also fine.

>

> -----------------

> Comparative analysis of waking and dream states

[Guest guest]

--- On Sun, 3/29/09, Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote:

 

It is, therefore, very unreasonable on our part to dismiss dreams as dreams due

to the spatio-temporal 'illogicity' of their contents. The 'illogicity' could

very well be the result of distortion. It is a fact the 'illogicity' is not

questioned during the course of the dream. It is only on waking that we become

wise and throw our dreams in the bin.

 

-------

Nairji - PraNAms

 

Yes you are right. The purpose of my analysis is only to emphasize how to use

the dream and deep sleep experiences to help us transcend these states - to

understand the paaramaarthika that is underlying all the three states; without

going into details of specific nature of particular dreams. I will keep in mind

all the comments that are relavent as I compose the other parts since I am doing

them as I progress - the outline I have provided is based on my current

thinking of what I would like to cover - What will comeout will be His wish. I

was motivated to write as I am discussing the micro and macro cosmic visions

needed to understand and apply the Tittiriiya Upanishad Shiikshaavalli that I

just started here in VA. The dream provides a perfect example to have that

vision.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda