Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Philosophy of the Upanishads c11.s3.t3: 3. Dream-sleep

The Philosophy of the Upanishads c11.s3.t3

Language
English

3. Dream-sleep

c11.s3.t3.1

The principal passage on which apparently all others depend is Bṛih. 4. 3. 9–14 :—

c11.s3.t3.2

“When now he falls asleep, he takes from this all-comprehending universe the timber, cuts it down, and himself builds up of it his own light, by virtue of his own brilliance; when therefore he sleeps this spirit serves as light for itself. There are there no carts, no teams, no roads, but carts, teams and roads he fashions for himself; there is no bliss, joy or desire, but bliss, joy and desire he fashions for himself; there are no wells, pools and streams, but wells, pools and streams he fashions for himself; for he is the creator. To this the following verses refer :—

c11.s3.t3.3

Throwing off in sleep what pertains to the body,
Sleepless he contemplates the sleeping organs;
Borrowing their light he returns then back to his place,
The golden spirit, the sole bird of passage.

This lower nest he would have guarded by the life,
And himself rises aloft immortal from the nest;
Immortal he moves whither he will,
The golden spirit, the sole bird of passage.

In the dream-state he moves up and down,
And fashions for himself as god many forms,
At one time gaily sporting as it were with woman,
At another again glowering as it were with terrible mien.

Only his playground is seen here,
He himself is not seen anywhere.

c11.s3.t3.4

Therefore it is said,—he should not be wakened suddenly, for it is difficult to find a cure for one to whom he fails to find his way back. Therefore it is said,—it (sleep) is for him only a waking state, for what he sees waking, the very same also he sees in sleep. Thus therefore this spirit serves for a light for itself.”

c11.s3.t3.5

In this passage two methods of conceiving the dream are poetically united. According to the one, the spirit remains in its place, and fashions from itself “by virtue of its own brilliance its own light,” a new world of forms, using the materials of its waking hours. According to the other, the spirit in dreaming forsakes the body, and “moves whither it will,” and consequently at times finds difficulty in returning to the body.

c11.s3.t3.6

These two conceptions which are derived only from poetical imagination and do not essentially differ are taken up seriously in Bṛih. 2. 1. 18, and are reconciled with one another by limiting the wanderings of the dreamer to his own body:—“Where then he wanders in dreaming, these are his worlds; for he is as it were a great king or a great Brâhman; or he ascends as it were or descends.¹ And just as a great king takes his subordinates with him, and journeys throughout his land at will,² so he takes with him those vital spirits, and journeys about at will in his body.” This extraordinary theory which has no natural foundation of a journeying about in the body during dreams, finds its explanation as an attempt to reconcile the different conceptions of the fundamental passage above quoted. The comparison also with the great king and great Brâhman seems to be based on the succeeding words of Bṛih. 4. 3. 20, which describes as follows the transition from the dreaming consciousness of being this or that to the deep sleep consciousness of being another:—“When now (in a dream) it is as though he were slain, as though he were flayed, as though he were trampled upon by an elephant (vic'châyayati), or plunged into a pit,—everything of which he was afraid in his waking hours, that very thing in his ignorance he regards as real; or, on the other hand, when it is as though he were a god or a king, on becoming conscious I alone am this universe,—this is his highest state.” That is to say, as the paragraph goes on to state, it is the condition of deep sleep, in which a man knows himself to be one with the universe, and is therefore without objects to contemplate, and consequently without individual consciousness.¹ And when in Chând. 8. 10. 2 it is said of the dreamer :—“It is still however as though he were slain, as though he were trampled upon (vic'châyayanti), as though he experienced hardship, as though he lamented,” the connection with the passage quoted from Bṛih. 4. 3. 20 is obvious. The meaningless vic'châdayanti of Chând. 8. 10. 2 was changed by M. Mûller² into vic'châyayanti. An almost inevitable consequence of this change, bearing in mind the great rarity of this expression, is that Chând. 8. 10. 2 is immediately dependent on Bṛih. 4. 3. 20. The converse supposition, or even the idea of an interpolation of Bṛih. 4. 3. 20 from Chând. 8. 10. 2,³ is scarcely probable in view of the general character of the two passages.

c11.s3.t3.7

¹ uc'c'âvac'am nigac'c'hati, according to Bṛih. 4. 3. 13 uc'c'âvac'am îyamânaḥ.

c11.s3.t3.8

² Recalling Bṛih. 4. 3. 37–38.

c11.s3.t3.9

¹ Bṛih. 4. 3. 21 f.

c11.s3.t3.10

² Followed by Böhtlingk and myself.

c11.s3.t3.11

³ The possibility of which was still in my mind in Upan., pp. 464, 470.

c11.s3.t3.12

Pras'na 4. 5 is more certainly dependent on Bṛih. 4. 3. There, after it has been shown how in sleep manas absorbs into itself the ten indriyas, so that only the prâṇa fires keep watch in the city of the body, the dream is described as follows :—“Then that god (viz. manas) enjoys greatness, inasmuch as he sees yet again that which was seen here and there, hears yet again things heard here and there, perceives again and again in detail that which was perceived in detail in its surroundings of place and circumstance; the seen and the unseen, the heard and the unheard, the perceived and the unperceived, the whole he views, as the whole he views it (*sarvam paśyati, sarvaḥ paśyati*).” The last words especially, when compared with Bṛh. 4. 3. 20 (*aham eva idam sarvo ’smi, iti manyate*), place the derivative character of this passage quite beyond doubt.

c11.s3.t3.13

Of later passages we cite only Māṇḍ. 4, where after the exposition of the waking state discussed above it is similarly said of dreaming:—“The Taijasa, existing in the dream-state, possessed of inner knowledge, with seven limbs and nineteen mouths, enjoying that which is excellent, is his second quarter.” The expressions “seven-limbed,” “nineteen-mouthed” are explained as above on waking. The dream-soul is said to be “enjoying that which is excellent” (*praviviktabhuj*) undoubtedly with reference to Bṛh. 4. 2. 3, where it is said of the individual soul that it in contrast to the body “has an excellent provision” (*pravivikta-āhāratara.*)

c11.s3.t3.14

A discussion of the illusion of dreams with a view to elucidate the illusion of waking is furnished by Gauḍapāda 2. 1 f., 4. 33 f., where the same thoughts already appear, which later on Śaṅkara, a pupil of his pupil, has further expanded.¹

c11.s3.t3.15

¹ cp. Syst. d. Ved., p. 371.

Cites (5)