http://www.singingtotheplants.com/2009/02/telling-dreams/ A Guide to Mestizo Shamanism in the Upper Amazon Fri, 30 Jul 2010 20:09:36 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 http://www.singingtotheplants.com/2009/02/telling-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-315 Steve Beyer Fri, 27 Feb 2009 13:39:00 +0000 http://www.singingtotheplants.com/2009/02/telling-dreams/#comment-315 I believe that <em>everything</em> is equally revelatory. The entire world is meaningful — the rock you tripped over, the child who smiled at you, the rain and moon. I talk about this <a HREF="http://singingtotheplants.blogspot.com/2007/12/listening-to-dreams.html" REL="nofollow">here</a>. James Hillman calls this <em>seeing through</em> — the ability to see through the literal to the metaphorical, deliteralizing or metaphorizing reality. Take a look <a HREF="http://singingtotheplants.blogspot.com/2008/02/what-are-spirits.html" REL="nofollow">here</a>. A myth, a dream, a waking experience, a hallucination are all — and probably equally — revelatory. Why else would you drink <em>ayahuasca</em>? I believe that everything is equally revelatory. The entire world is meaningful — the rock you tripped over, the child who smiled at you, the rain and moon. I talk about this here. James Hillman calls this seeing through — the ability to see through the literal to the metaphorical, deliteralizing or metaphorizing reality. Take a look here. A myth, a dream, a waking experience, a hallucination are all — and probably equally — revelatory. Why else would you drink ayahuasca?

]]> http://www.singingtotheplants.com/2009/02/telling-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-313 Fred Smith Fri, 27 Feb 2009 04:05:00 +0000 http://www.singingtotheplants.com/2009/02/telling-dreams/#comment-313 Steve, Essentially I agree with you in this very perceptive and thoughtful posting. I also understand and agree that the macrocosm is not jus in theory, but in fact, contained in the micrococm. However, I question Jeremy Taylor's statement. I'm not too sure of this, I must add, but it occurs to me that the primary virtue in manufacturing a fantasy under the circumstances he states is that it could open the hesitant dreamer to the power of his or her expressiveness, and therefore assist in conferring greater conscious access to his/her dreams. It's quite an ingenious exercise. But a consciously spun fantasy surely originates from a different place than a dream, the latter of which probably has greater connection to unconscious and subliminal activity. Do you really think that, other than the fact that both a dream and a consciously generated fantasy are equivalent in that they behave like holograms (at least in theory), that they are equivalently revelatory? I'm very uncertain about this.... Steve, Essentially I agree with you in this very perceptive and thoughtful posting. I also understand and agree that the macrocosm is not jus in theory, but in fact, contained in the micrococm. However, I question Jeremy Taylor’s statement. I’m not too sure of this, I must add, but it occurs to me that the primary virtue in manufacturing a fantasy under the circumstances he states is that it could open the hesitant dreamer to the power of his or her expressiveness, and therefore assist in conferring greater conscious access to his/her dreams. It’s quite an ingenious exercise. But a consciously spun fantasy surely originates from a different place than a dream, the latter of which probably has greater connection to unconscious and subliminal activity. Do you really think that, other than the fact that both a dream and a consciously generated fantasy are equivalent in that they behave like holograms (at least in theory), that they are equivalently revelatory? I’m very uncertain about this….

]]>