Dreams, Eternity and the Waking Collector

“Are our waking lives merely insectry, the march of ghouls collecting sensory data that our dreams convert into the product of our lives?”

When I wrote that line back in June of 2012 I was wondering if perhaps the world of dreams was more important, more central to our being, than our waking lives. Could it be that our waking hours are just errands in which we collect the ideas and images which dreams transform into infinite new experiences, free of all limitations except the amount of unique data within them?

In dreams anything can happen. There are never permanent consequences. We are immortal and the only rules that apply do so only in a given moment before we are wrestled into some new kind of logic in the next moment. And yet most people would still consider this to be the inferior portion of their existence, a trivial drama arising out of the clockwork determinism of having a brain.

Some of those who have looked at dreams (Freud, Jung, etc.) have tried to use them as some secret cipher to our waking reality. Some set of hidden codes that tell us what we don’t know about ourselves. And in this idea, the waking life is the more meaningful of the two, and dreams arise just to serve the waking self, but only if one can unlock their mysteries.

Many people believe that lucid dreaming would be an improvement. That by bringing the certainty, absolutism and control of the waking self into the dream reality, they will improve that experience. And once again, the waking reality is seen as superior and its ways more real and true.

My own experience with lucid dreaming, which came about more as a side effect of keeping a dream journal for writing purposes than as something I intended to do, proved quite different. The more control I gained, the more boring my dreams got. But even worse, I began getting caught in these endless dream-within-a-dream traps, and it eventually got downright scary. I took this as a sign of my dream self telling me to keep my fucking ego out if its nirvana.

Our ideas about dreams always place them in some sort of subservient position to waking reality, without ever really questioning that assumption. However I have recently considered another position, one that would make the comparison of relative value between dreaming and waking reality a less relevant question.

What I am about to discuss is pure speculation. There is no real evidence to support this position, nor do I think there could be. To only think about true things would be to think of nothing at all.
“Maybe your dreams are where you go when you die.”

I wrote that single thought less than a month ago, more as an idea to chew on than anything else. And in the meantime, I have, and the flavors are fascinating!

When I discuss myself, I am referencing myself as a point of awareness. When I discuss anything outside of myself, I am referencing an experience within my awareness. I am awareness. What I am aware of are experiences.

So what happens to my awareness when it is no longer having an experience of being a body in a world full of other bodies and things? Does it go to Jesus Magic Kingdom in Afterlife Orlando, or does it disappear into nothingness?

I have never had an experience of nothingness. Nothingness is an abstraction. It is not linked to the evidence of my senses through a direct experience. To posit a voyage to an unknowable nothingness is just as absurd as one to Yahweh’s Soul Aquarium. Both of these abstractions lie outside of the possibility of observation.

Yet I have had many experiences of my awareness not-anchored to physicality and its apparent rules. I have them every night, and so do you.

Why then would it be less reasonable to suggest that your dreams are where you go when you die than it is to suggest you go somewhere that lies outside of your awareness and its experiences?

I find the consequences of such a possibility fascinating. It would certainly seem to imply a teleology, and give purpose to our lives. Fill them with the kind of things you would want to take with you to eternity. As many of them as possible. If it would seem like hell in death, you should avoid it in life. Seek out those experiences in which the idea is reinforced that existence is beautiful and fascinating, rather than a dull, mundane and a meaningless task of mere survival.

Even if this concept is wrong, that our dreams are where we go when we die, it provides meaning and purpose in life. And even if your awareness ends up in the dark abyss, your life will not have been one.

Read Part 2: Objectivity, Subjectivity, Intersubjectivity, Dreams, Reality and the Afterlife

paypalme

paypal.me/JoshuaScottHotchkin

14 thoughts on “Dreams, Eternity and the Waking Collector

  1. And in the meantime, all those people hungry for enriching experiences either ignore or leave to others mundane things like washing the dishes, painting bridges, and all those boring maintenance tasks that keep the world going. On the grounds that *their* experience is far more important than everyone else’s, I suppose.

    OK, try another thought to chew on: What if atheists are absolutely right, and there is absolutely nothing after you die? Wouldn’t that make you care a lot more about all the young people that will still be alive when you aren’t there any longer, and less about your selfish wish to enrich the experiences of your own life? And wouldn’t your life be more meaningful if it wasn’t just about you?

    Like

    1. There is no evidence of an absolutely nothing. That is just a sunday school story used to fill in gaps in understanding, not something we actually have observed. I try not to make such reckless speculation using imaginary phenomena.

      Like

      1. One observation on the absurdity of this is that to deny
        God you must be God. To swear that God does not exist you must all places at once or it is theoretically possible that He is the one place you are not. You swear there is not evidence… but I have offered you evidence.

        Like

      2. There are no places. Just one mind and its many alters having experiences and interactions. Which means that everything which occurs does so within God, making concepts like sin and punishment entirely irrational. Do the alters exist only for God to self flagellate through? If you believe so, that is some pretty disturbing cosmic sadomasochism.

        Like

      1. (1) What exactly is the relationship between clarity and ego? When I say “lucidity” I just mean “clarity,” but specifically in the context of dreaming. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you seem to think a person can’t desire lucidity without also desiring control. (2) If that’s the case, what then is actually the path to egoless clarity and detachment? (3) If death is, as you put in your most recent blog post, the final liberation, eternity, a telos, from what precondition does a person get born into this intersubjective world. If the precondition is that very same death-consciousness, then that means someone would have to leave liberation. Why would they do that? On the other hand if there is some other condition that brings different personal subjectivities together, how can you say for sure it will only happen once? In other words, what is the proof of the finality of death? If you’ve elaborated on these points in other blog posts, I’ll be delighted to read.

        Like

      2. Definitively, lucid dreaming is maintaining control within dreams. The desire for control is a consequence of the limitations of the waking self. Where those limitations do not exist, there is no reason to apply the ego that is constructed to deal with them.

        Clarity is really a desire for Ultimate Knowledge, which is an exercise in power. I do not know it is possible or desirable.

        Bernardo Kastrups metaphor of the self as a disassociated identity of the primal awareness is helpful. Birth is just that. A creation born of a new splintering. We do not leave liberation to enter intersubjective reality. We are created within intersubjective reality, bound to its interdependencies in waking life.

        Proof applies only to axioms. Nothing can be known for sure. My intersubjective model is not ‘true’. It is merely a way of meditating on reality without requiring absolutes.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s