On Dreams

[Guest guest]

Brother Keval,

 

After many months, following our last exchange (below) it has now

been impressed upon me, via dialogue with an esteemed friend, that

your position was correct and mine was wrong.

 

Accordingly, I have decided to stop recording and broadcasting any

dreams I may have in future.

 

Allow to me thank you for offering the correct advice and kick myself

for not taking it then.

 

Regards

 

Om Amriteshwaryai Namah

 

fg

 

Ammachi, "faintglow" <faintglow> wrote:

> Brother Keval,

>

> You make a valid point about dreams constituting the excrement of

the

> mind. Certainly, there are dreams that fall in that odious

category.

> However, I would submit, most humbly, that there might be other

kinds

> of dreams as well. If there are 'good' thoughts in the mind, they

> could be reflected too.

>

> Despite the obvious unpleasantness, even the 'reflected crap' type

of

> dreams may, on analysis, yield useful information to the sadhaka.

To

> extend your analogy with the bodily effluents, there is a place for

> pathology in modern medicine. The lowly stool sample can reveal the

> tenacious tape-worm, living inside.

>

> The analysis of dreams as pioneered by Freud and extended by others

> might help to a limited extent when used as a diagnostic aid to

> identify internal pathogens. But IMHO, the theory and practice of

> psychoanalysis is typically vitiated by at least two flaws:

> (a) Overreach - The attempt to explain all phenomena in terms of

> sexuality is excessively reductionistic. While it cannot be denied

> that sex is the king cobra of all spiritual predators (anger,

greed,

> envy and pride being some of the others), some of the explanations

> that get thrown up by the tendency to overextend the psychoanalytic

> discipline are only slightly less ludicrous than the idea, for

> instance, that current is produced in a battery by electrons

rushing

> to complete an oedipal embrace with the oppositely charged

electrode.

> (b) Misspecification - The discipline assumes that happiness will

> result from merely moving garbage around from the unconscious to

the

> conscious. Flowing from this, is the idea that expression is good

and

> repression is bad. The deeper spiritual view, of course, recognizes

> that repression and expression are but two sides of the same coin.

> All too often, psychoanalysis is not content with putting the

> specimen on a slide, analysing and cataloguing it but must go on to

> place the unsavory item in a showcase in the living room and claim

> that this is therapeutic.

>

> Finally, there might be dreams that go beyond the scientific, those

> that involve supernatural transmissions. As I recall from Amma's

> pronouncements on the subject, She has said that dreams about Her

> might occur when the devotee thinks about Her or when She thinks

> about the devotee, among other possibilities. In other words, my

> dreams involving Her might be my imagination, or they might be Her

> imagination. In the absence of supporting evidence, I am reluctant

to

> make the heroic assumption that She is transmitting to me. It is

more

> likely, in my view, that my dreams represent a simple re-ordering

of

> the thoughts in my head, wish-fulfillment etc.

>

> Om Amriteshwaryai Namah

>

> fg

>

> Ammachi, Mike Brooker <patria1818>

wrote:

> > I wonder how Freud would have interpreted your dream

> >

> >

> > I have rarely been able to recall dreams. I don't

> > bother to analyze or decipher the contents of the few

> > dreams I do remember - unless, of course, I were to

> > have such a vivid dream about Amma! IMHO dreams are to

> > the mind what urine and s*** are to the body. i.e.

> > mental excrement that the thought process is unable to

> > handle during the waking day, or the mental equivalent

> > of toxins that would cause damage if retained in the

> > body.

> >

> >

> > Keval