DREAMS- An Indian Point of View

Dr. V.K.Maheshwari, M.A. (Socio, Phil) B.Sc. M. Ed, Ph.D. Former Principal, K.L.D.A.V.(P.G) College, Roorkee, India

Mrs Sudha Rani Maheshwari, M.Sc (Zoology), B.Ed. Former Principal. A.K.P.I.College, Roorkee, India

 


In the philosophical literature of the Hindus we find an elaborate account of the  process of dreams. The different schools of philosophers had different views as to the nature, origin, and functions of the dreams. Their views were based mostly on their systems of philosophy,though they advanced certain facts of experience in support of their views. The Hindu accounts of the dreams are widely different from those of Western physiology, because they are based more on  metaphysical speculation than on scientific observation and experiment.

Kanada defines a dream-cognition as the consciousness produced by a particular conjunction of the self with the central sensory or manas in co-operation with the subconscious impressions of past experience, like recollection. 1

Prasastapada defines a dream-cognition as an internal perception through the central sensory or mind, when all the functions of the external sense-organs have ceased and the mind has retired within a trans-organic region of the organism. 2 When the internal organ (manas} retires within itself, the peripheral organs cease to operate and consequently cannot apprehend their objects as they are no longer guided by the mind. During this retired state of the mind, when the automatic vital functions of in-breathings and out-breathings profusely go on in the organism, dream-cognitions arise through the central sensory from such causes as sleep, which is the name of a particular conjunction of the self with the mind, and subconscious impressions of past experience ; these dream-cognitions are internal perceptions of unreal objects. 3

Udayana says that in the dream-state, though the external sense- organs cease to operate, we distinctly feel that we see objects with our very eyes, hear sounds with our very ears, and so on. Udayana distinguishes dream-cognitions from illusory perceptions of waking life and doubtful and indefinite perceptions. Though dream-cognitions are illusory perceptions, since they apprehend objects which are not present at that time and place, and as such resemble illusory perceptions of waking life, they differ from the latter in that they are produced when the peripheral organs are not quite operative, while the latter are produced by the peripheral organs. Then, again, dream-cognitions are not to be identified with doubtful and indefinite perceptions. For dream-cognitions are definite and determinate

in character, in which the mind does not oscillate between alternate possibilities, while doubtful and indefinite perceptions are uncertain, because in them the mind is not fixed on a definite object but wavers between two objects without any definite decision. 4

Samkara Misra also holds that though a dream-cognition is produced by the mind when it has retired, and the external sense-organs have ceased to operate, it is apprehended as if it were produced by the external sense-organs (indrtyadvareneva) . 5

Sridhara also regards cognitions as presentative in character. He says that dream-cognitions are independent of previous cognitions, and as such are not mere reproductions of past experience ; they are produced through the retired central sensory or mind when the functions of all the peripheral organs have ceased ; they are direct and immediate presentations of a definite and determinate character. 6 These dream-cognitions arising from sleep and subconscious impressions are direct and immediate presentations (aparoksasanw edema) of objects which have no real existence at that time and place. 7 Thus Sndhara clearly points out that dream-cognitions are presentative in character ; they are not mere reproductions of past experience. But dream-perceptions are not produced by the external organs which cease to function at that time, but they are produced entirely by the mind (manomatraprabhavam). And these dream-perceptions are not indefinite and indeterminate in nature  but they are definite and determinate in character (pariccheda-svabhava}. And these dream-perceptions are not valid but illusory, since they do not represent real objects present to the sense-organs ” here and now “. Srldhara also holds that dream-cognitions are definite and determinate perceptions as distinguished from indefinite and indeterminate perceptions. And also he clearly shows that dream-cognitions,arising either from the intensity of subconscious traces, or from intra-organic disorders, or from unseen agencies, are purely illusory, since they consist in the false imposition of an external form upon something that is wholly internal, and as such are not essentially different from the illusions of our waking life, the only difference lying in the fact that the former are illusory perceptions in the condition of sleep, while the latter are illusory perceptions in the waking condition.

Sivaditya defines a dream as a cognition produced by the central sensory perverted by sleep. 8 Madhava Sarasvatl points out the following distinctive marks of dream-cognitions as defined by Sivaditya. Firstly, they are produced by the central sensory or mind, and as such are different from the waking perceptions of jars and the like, which are produced by the external sense-organs. Secondly, they are produced by the perverted mind, and as such are different from the waking perceptions of pleasure and the like, which are produced by the unperverted mind. Thirdly, they are produced by the mind perverted by sleep, and as such are different from waking hallucinations which are produced by the perverted mind in the waking condition. 9 Hallucinations are pure creations of the mind. And some dreams also are pure creations of the mind (manomatraprabhava}. Both are centrally initiated presentations. Both are definite and determinate in character. And both are unreal. So there is a great resemblance between dreams and hallucinations. The only difference between them lies in the fact that the former are hallucinations in sleep, while the latter are hallucinations in the waking condition.This distinction has been pointed out by Madhava Sarasvatl.

Prahistapada, Sndhara, Samkara Misra, Sivaditya and others recognize the central origin of dreams. Though they hold that certain dreams are produced by organic disorders within the body, they do not recognize the origin of dreams from the external sense- organs. But Udayana admits that in the dream-state the peripheral organs (at least the tactual organ which pervades the organism) do not altogether cease to operate ; external stimuli, if not sufficiently intense to awaken the person, may act upon the peripheral organs and produce dream-cognitions. 10 Thus Udayana recognizes both peripherally excited and centrally excited dreams, or in the language of Sully, dream-illusions and dream-hallucinations. Udayana also holds that though drearn-cognitions are generally perceptual in character being produced by the central sensory or mind, sometimes, though very rarely, they assume the form of inference, when, for instance, a person dreams that he sees smoke in a particular place and from the sight of the smoke infers that there must be fire behind it, 11 Thus the Vaisesikas generally advocate the presentative nature of dreams.

The ancient Naiyayikas also consider dreams as presentative in character. Gautama does not include dream-cognition in recollection. Vatsyayana regards dream as distinct from recollection. Udyotkara and Vacaspati also agree with Gautama and Vatsyayana. 12

Thus the Naiyayikas and the Vaisesikas generally recognize the perceptual character of dreams. But there are some Nyaya-Vaisesika writers who hold that dreams are representative in character ; they are recollections of past experience due to revival of subconscious  impressions.

Jayasimhasuri holds that dreams are illusions in the condition of sleep. Dreams are illusions because in them things which were perceived in the past and in some other place are perceived here and now. 13 Thus, in the language of James Sully, ” Dreams are clearly illusory, and, unlike the illusions of waking life, are complete and persistent.” 14

Frank Padmore says : ” A dream is a hallucination in sleep, and a hallucination is only a waking dream  though it is probable that the waking impression, seeing that it can contend on equal terms with the impressions derived from external objects, is more vivid than the common run of dream.” 15 Wundt also regards dreams as hallucinations. They are as vivid as sensory experience and are projected into the external world as are sensations.

Classification of Dreams

(i) Caraka’s Classification

We find a crude classification of dreams in Caraka-samhita. Caraka says that a person sees various dreams through the mind which is the guide of the external sense-organs when he is not in profound sleep. Some of these dreams are significant ; others are not. These dreams are of seven kinds, viz. dreams of those objects which have been seen, heard, and felt, dreams of those objects which are desired, dreams awakened by imagination, dreams that are premonitions of future events, and pathological or morbid dreams. 16

Caraka seems to suggest here the following psychological facts. Some dreams are mere reproductions of past experience (anulhuta) though they are apprehended as immediate perceptions. Some dreams involve constructive imagination (kalpita) though the material is supplied by memory. Some dreams are fulfilment of desires (prarthlta}. Some dreams are stimulated by pathological disorders within the organism (dosaja). And some dreams are prophetic in character (bhavtka) ; they foreshadow future events. This fact is called dream-coincidence in modern western psychology. According to Caraka, dreams are experienced only in light sleep ; they are produced by the central sensory or mind. 17

(ii) The Yatiestka Classification

Prasastapada, Srldhara, Udayana, Samkara Misra and others describe four kinds of dreams :

(i) dreams due to mtra-organic pathological disorders (dhatudosa)

(2) dreams due to the intensity of subconscious impressions (samskarapatava] ;

(3) dreams due to the unseen agency (adrsta) i.e. merit and demerit (dharmadharma) ; and

(4) ” dream-end cognitions ” or dreams-within-dreams (svapnantika jnana)

(iii) The Buddhist Classification

Mr. S. Z. Aung says that Ariyavansa-Adiccaransi attempted a systematic explanation of dream-phenomena from the Buddhist standpoint nearly a century ago in Burma. He recognized four kinds of dreams :

(1)   dreams due to organic and muscular disturbances, e.g. the flatulent, phlegmatic, and bilious humours ; The first category includes the dreams of a fall over a precipice, flying into the sky, etc., and what is called ” nightmare ” ;

(2)   recurrent dreams consisting in recurrence of the previous dreams, due to previous experiences The second consists of the ” echoes of past waking experiences ” ;

(3)   telepathic dreams due to sugges- tions from spiritualistic agents The third may include dream coincidences ;

(4) prophetic dreams due to the force of character of clairvoyant dreamers.The fourth is of a clairvoyant character.” 18

Thus the Buddhists add to the Vaisesika list dreams due to spirit- influence, or telepathic dreams. In addition to these various kinds of dreams, Caraka recognizes dreams which are wish-fulfilments.

Madhusudana and Samkara also recognize the influence of desireson dreams.

Kinds of Dreams

We have seen that according to most Indian thinkers, dream  cognitions are presentative in character. They are felt as perceptions and are aroused by external and internal stimuli. They are sometimes produced by extra-organic stimuli, and sometimes by intra- organic stimuli in the shape of peripheral disturbances and other organic disorders. These dreams may be called dream-illusions. And there are some dream-cognitions which are produced by the strength of subconscious impressions of a recent experience coloured by an intense emotion. These dreams are centrally excited and hence may be called dream-hallucinations. Among the Western psychologists, Spitta, first of all, drew a distinction between these two kinds of dreams, and called the former Nervenreiztraume  and the latter psychische Traume.

Sully calls the former dream-illusions and the latter dream-hallucinations.” And besides these two kinds of dreams, the Indian thinkers recognize prophetic or veridical dreams and telepathic dreams. The former are due to the merit and demerit of the dreamer, forecasting the future and so on ; and the latter are due to the suggestive force of spiritualistic agents. In addition to these, there are dreams-wi thin-dreams or ” dream-end ” cognitions.19

(i) Dreams Due to Peripheral Stimulation (Dream-Illusions)

Dream-illusions are those dreams which are excited by peripheral stimulation either internal or external. Udayana has discussed the question of the extra-organic and intra-organic origin of dreams. How can dream-cognitions arise in sleep ? What is the origin of dreams Dream-illusions are produced by the reproduction of those objects, the subconscious traces of which are resuscitated owing to certain causes. But how can the subconscious traces be revived without the suggestive force of similar experience ? What is the suggestive force here that revives the subconscious traces of past experience ? Udayana says that in dream-cognitions peripheral stimulation is not altogether absent. Dreams are not altogether without external stimuli  they are excited by certain external stimuli in the environment, and certain intra-organic stimuli. In the state of dream we do not altogether cease to perceive external objects, since the external sense-organs are not entirely inoperative. For instance, we perceive external sounds in dream, when they are not sufficiently loud to rouse us from sleep  and the faint external sounds perceived through the ears even during light sleep easily incorporate themselves into dreams. Even if all other external sense-organs cease to function in dream, at least the organ of touch is not inoperative, as the mind or central sensory does not lose its connection with the tactual organ even in dream, which is not confined to the external skin but pervades the whole organism according to the Nyaya-Vaisesika. This is the peculiar doctrine of the Nyaya-Vaisesika. In dream we can perceive at least the heat of our organism which serves to revive the subconscious traces of past experience. Hence certain extra-organic or intra-organic stimuli serve as the exciting cause of the revival of subconscious traces in dream. 20

Thus Udayana does not recognize the purely hallucinatory character of dreams. According to him, all dreams are of the nature of illusions because they are initiated by extra-organic or intra-organic stimuli. Thus he anticipates the more recent account of dreams in Western psychology.

” Dream-appearances,” says Mr. A. E. Taylor, ” which Volkmann classes as hallucinations are more accurately regarded by Wundt as generally, if not always, based on illusion > i.e. they are misinterpretations of actual minimal sense-Impressions such as those due to slight noises, to the positions of the sleeper’s limbs, to trifling pains, slight difficulties in breathing, palpitations, and the like.” 21 Sully says, ” Dreams are commonly classified with hallucinations, and this rightly, since, as their common appellation of c vision ‘ suggests, they are for the most part the semblance of percepts in the absence of external impressions. At the same time, recent research goes to show that in many dreams something answering to the  external impression ‘ in waking perception is starting point “. 22

Bergson says, ” When we are sleeping naturally, it is not necessary to believe, as has often been supposed, that our senses are closed to external sensations. Our senses continue to be active.”  Our senses continue to act during sleep they provide us with the outline, or at least the point of departure, of most of our dreams.” 23

Prasastapada also describes the intra-organic stimulation of dream- illusions, which has been explained and illustrated by Udayana, ridhara, Samkara Misra Jayanarayana   and others. There are some dreams which are due to intra-organic disturbances such as the disorders of the flatulent, bilious, and phlegmatic humours of the organism, which are supposed by the Hindu medical science to be the causes of all organic diseases (dhatudosa)?

Those who suffer from disorder of flatulency dream that they are flying in the sky,wandering about on the earth, fleeing with fear from tigers, etc. These are kinesthetic dreams of levitation. 24 And those who are of a bilious temperament or suffer from an inordinate secretion of bile dream that they are entering into fire, embracing flames of fire, seeing golden mountains, flashes of lightning, meteor- falls, a huge conflagration, the scorching rays of the mid-day sun, etc. And those who are of a phlegmatic temperament or suffer from phlegmatic disorders dream that they are crossing the sea, bathing in rivers, being sprinkled with showers of rain, and seeing mountains of silver and the like. 25

Dream- Hallucination

There are many dreams which are not excited by peripheral nerve-stimulation but by the intensity of the subconscious impressions left by a recent experience (samskarapatava).^ On the physical side, these dreams are due to central stimulation, and hence may be called dream-hallucinations. These dreams are generally excited by intense passions. For instance, when a man infatuated with love for a woman or highly enraged at his enemy, constantly thinks of his beloved or enemy, and while thus thinking falls asleep, then the series of thoughts produces a series of memory-images, which are manifested in consciousness as immediate sense-presentations owing to the strength of subconscious impressions. 26These dreams are purely hallucinatory in character.

We find a similar Buddhist account of dreams in Mr. Aung’s Introduction to the Compendium of Philosophy in which he has summarized Ariyavansa-Adiccaransi’s explanation of dreams. “When scenes are reproduced automatically in a dream with our eyes closed, the obvious inference is that we see them by way of the door of the mind. Even in the case of peripheral stimulations, as when a light, brought near a sleeping man’s eye, is mistaken for a bonfire,, it is this exaggerated light that is perceived in a dream by the mind-door. … If these presentations do not come from without, they must come from within, from the  inner ‘ activities of mind. That is to say, if peripheral stimulations are absent, we must look to the automatic activity of mind itself for the source of these presentations ;or, to speak in terms of physiology, we must look to the central activity of the cerebrum, which is now generally admitted to be the physical counterpart of the mind-door, the sensory nerves being the physical counterpart of the five-doors in an  organized sentient existence ‘ (pancavokara- bhava] . ‘ ‘

But Udayana surmizes that even these centrally excited dreams due to the revival of subconscious traces are suggested by extra- organic or intra-organic stimuli. 27

II.  Dreams as the fulfilment of Desires (Dream- hallucinations)

Caraka says that some dreams are about those objects which are desired (prarthita}. 28 * Madhusudana defines dream as the perception of objects due to the desires (vasana] in the mind (antahkarana] when the external sense-organs are inoperative. 29 Sarhkara also recognizes the influence of desires (vasana’) on dreams. 30 Dr. M. N. Sircar truly observes :  Here the word * desire ‘ is significant, it introduces a volitional element in dream. It seems to hold that desires get freedom, in a state of passivity and acquire strength, finally appearing in the form of dream construction.” 31 This reminds us of the Freudian theory according to which, dreams arise out of the unfulfilled desires of the unconscious. These dreams also should be regarded as dream-hallucinations, because they are not excited by peripheral stimulation 5 they are centrally initiated presentations or hallucinations.

Prophetic or Veridical Dreams

But all dreams cannot be explained by peripheral stimulation, due to the action either of external stimuli or internal stimuli, and by central stimulation. There are certain dreams which are prophetic in character ; they are either auspicious or inauspicious. Auspiciousdreams betoken good and inauspicious dreams forebode evil. The former are due to a certain merit (dharma) of the person, and the latter, to a certain demerit (adharma). Some of these prophetic dreams are echoes of our past waking experiences, while others apprehend entirely novel objects never perceived before. The former are brought about by the subconscious traces of our past experience, in co-operation with merit or demerit, according as they augur good or evil, while the latter, by merit or demerit alone, since there are no subconscious traces of such absolutely unknown objects. But merit and dement are supernatural agents ; so this explanation of prophetic dreams seems to be unscientific. But we may interpret the agency of merit and demerit as ” the force of character of clairvoyant dreamers ” after Mr. Aung.

Prasastapada and his followers recognized only three causes of dreams :

(i) intensity of subconscious impressions,

(2) intra- organic disorders, and

(3) adrsta or merit and demerit of the dreamer.

(samskarapatavat dhatudosat adrstacca.) 32

Telepathic Dreams

And besides the peripherally excited dreams, centrally excited dreams, and prophetic dreams, Ariyavansa-Adiccaransf, a Buddhist writer, has recognized another class of dreams which are due to spirit-influence, or ” due to suggestions from spiritualistic agents “in the language of Mr. Aung ; these may include ” dream- coincidences “. They may be called telepathic dreams. 33

Dreams-within-dreams

Besides these dream-cognitions which we do not recognize as dreams during the dream-state, sometimes we have another kind of dream-cognitions which are recognized as dreams. Sometimes in the dream-state we dream that we have been dreaming of something | this dream-within-dream is called svapnantlka-jnana which has been rendered by Dr. Ganganatha Jha as a ” dream-end cognition ” 34 ; in this ” dream-end cognition ” a dream is the object of another dream.35 Such a ” dream-end cognition ” arises in the mind of a person whose sense-organs have ceased their operations  so it is apt to be confounded with a mere dream- cognition. But Prasastapada, Sridhara and Samkara Mis’ra rightly point out that our ” dream-end cognitions ” essentially differ from mere dream-cognitions, since the former are representative, while the latter are presentative in character. The ” dream-end cognitions ” are recollections of dream-cognitions, while dream-cognitions resemble direct sense-perceptions. Dream-cognitions are presentative in character, though they arise out of the traces left in the mind by the previous perceptions in the waking condition ; and these presentative dream-cognitions again leave traces in the mind which give rise to ” dream-end cognitions “. Thus dreams-within-drearns are representative in character. 36

Morbid dreams

Caraka and Susruta describe various kinds of dreams which are the prognostics of impending diseases and death. Caraka suggests a physiological explanation of the morbid dreams which precede death. These horrible dreams are due to the currents in the manovahmnadis being filled with very strong flatulent, bilious, and phlegmatic humours before death.38

From this we may infer that dreams are due to the excitation of the manovaha nadi which, in the language of Dr, B. N. Seal, is ” a generic name for the channels along which centrally initiated presentations (as in dreaming or hallucination) come to the sixth lobe of the Manaschakra “, 39

Samkara Misra says that dreams are produced by the mind when it is in the svapnavahansdiznd disconnected with the external sense- organs except the tactual organ ; when the mind loses its connection even with the tactual organ and retires into the punt at there is deep dreamless sleep. Thus dreams are produced when the mind is in the svapnavaha nadi}-

Thus, according to Caraka  the manovaha nadl is the seat of dreams  and according to Samkara Misra, the svapnavaha nadi is the seat of dreams. What is the relation between the manovaha nadl and the svapnavaha nadl ? Dr. B. N. Seal says that according to the writers on Yoga and Tantras, ” the Manovaha Nadl is the channel of the communication of the Jtva (soul) with the Manaschakra (sensorium) at the base of the brain. It has been stated that the sensory currents are brought to the sensory ganglia along different nerves of the special senses. But this is not sufficient for them to rise to the level of discriminative consciousness(savtkalpaka jnand). A communication must now be established between the Jiva (in the Sahasrara Chakra upper cerebrum) and the sensory currents received at the sensorium, and this is done by means of the Manovaha NadL When sensations are centrally initiated, as in dreams and hallucinations, a special Nadi (Svapnavaha Nadi) which appears to be only a branch of the Manovaha Nadi serves as the channel of communication from the Jtva (soul) to the sensorium

 

References-

1  Vaisesika Siitra (Gujrati Press, Samvat, 1969).., ix, 2, 6-7.

2  Prakaranapancika of alikanatha (Ch.S.S., 1903-1904)., p. 183.

3 Ibid., p, 183.

4  Kiranavall of Udayana (Benares, 1885 and 1887, p. 273.

5  Upaskara of Samkara Misra (Gujrati Press, Samvat, 1969)., ix, 2, 7.

6 Purvadhigamanapeksam paricchedasvabhavam manasarii manoma-traprabhavarii tat svapnajnSnam. , Nyayakandali of Srldhara (V.S.S., Benares, 1895 p. 184..

7 , Nyayakandali of Srldhara (V.S.S., Benares, 1895p. 185.

8  SaptapadarthI of Sivaditya (V.S.S., Benares, 1893).., p. 68

.9 Mitabhssim, p. 68.

10 Nvsyakusumanjali, , p. 9.

11  Kiranavall of Udayana (Benares, 1885 and 1887, p. 273.

12 Umesha Mishra : ” Dream theory in Indian Thought,” The Allahabad University Studies, vol. v, pp. 274, 275.

13  Nyayatltparyadipika of Jayasimhasuri (B.I., 1910)., p. 67

14 Illusions, p. 137.

15 Apparitions and Thought Transference p. 186.

16 Caraka SamMta”, Indriyasthsna, ch. v.

17 Caraka Sarixhita, Indriyasthana, ch v. 2 PBh., p. 184,

18 Compendium of Philosophy p. 48.

19 Sully, I Hustons  p. 139

20 Udbodha eva kathamiticet. Mandataratamadinyayena bakyanamevakbdadinSmupalambkat, antatah sarirasyaivosmadeh. pratipattek, Nyaya-kusuma”njali, ck. Hi, p. 9.

21 Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, vol. v, p. 29.

22 Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics Illusions, p. 139.

23Ibid  Dreams, p. 31, and p. 48,

24 Cf. Conklin, Principles of Abnormal Psychology, p. 342,

25  Upaskara of Samkara Misra (Gujrati Press, Samvat, 1969).  ix, 2, 7,  PEL, p. 184,

26  Nyayakandali of Srldhara (V.S.S., Benares, 1895).,p. 185. 2 p

27 Nyayakusumanjali, ch. iii, p. 9.

28 Caraka Samhita, Indriyasthana, ch. v.

29 Compendium of Philosophy p. 48.

30 Siddhantabindu, p. 189. 6 S.B., iii, 2, 6.

31 Vedantic thought and Culture y p. 172.

32  Vedantic thought and Culture p. 1 84.

33 Compendium of Philosophy,

34 Introduction, p. 48.

35  English translationof Nyayakandali of Srldhara (V.S.S., Benares, 1895).., p. 388.

36  Sully : ” There is sometimes an undertone of critical reflection,which is sufficient to produce a feeling of uncertainty and bewilderment,and in very rare cases to amount to a vague consciousness that the mental experience is a dream.” Illusions, p. 137 n.

37   Nyayakandali of Srldhara (V.S.S., Benares, 1895).., pp. 185-6

38 Caraka Samhits, Indriyasthana, ch. v.

39 The Positive Sciences of the Ancient Hindus, p. 221.

 

 

 

 

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.