Search & Read
A Cool Dream
Peter: Hi, James and Isabella. I think I am understanding the importance of sharing, especially with our teachers. The act itself fosters discrimination. I have always been very reticent about sharing. The importance of the current dialogue is becoming apparent and again I feel very blessed having you as teachers. I would appreciate your insights into the following dream.
The setting: long, windy, almost treacherous roads, not of earthly substance and not of an earthly plane, almost like paths of light through space. The vehicle I was in was definitely of earth, a Toyota Land Cruiser.
James: There are two dimensions of reality, satya (not earthly, i.e. material) and mithya, a practical, everyday transactional reality in which we must navigate. Vehicles are generally one’s ego/body in dreams.
Peter: I was being driven by a “servant” who had the distinct quality of a colonial manservant. Not very skilled at what he was doing, his driving was hesitant and unnatural, typical of a servant who was entrusted with a duty beyond his capacity.
James: Peter has low self-confidence, does not feel competent to walk the spiritual path.
Peter: The servant had the demeanour of manservants of that time, proud of their position, performed the task at all costs despite the obvious fear that constantly being out of one’s depth the station carried. As the passenger I observed the driving, and while often wanting to help, allowed the driver to proceed.
James: The self is not a doer, a driver. It sits in the back seat and observes Peter trying to negotiate his way through life.
Peter: Next, we came to a great river and we needed to cross. We were crossing the river via a flood bridge, the type where the river flows over the construction and has flutes where the water drains. The driver proceeded and the vehicle began to slip dangerously to the edge. We were also approaching a section of the bridge that was in much deeper water and stronger flow. A second car appeared and the driver shouted, “You need to use 4x4!” The second driver then became a passenger. I could see my driver was in great distress and I asked if he had driven a 4x4 before. He said he had not. I asked if he minded if I drove, stating I had driven 4x4s a lot. He said okay, so I took the controls, flipped a few switches and engaged 4x4. The vehicle then transformed into a low-gravity, single-track, Caterpillar-type propelled vehicle, the type of propulsion used in bulldozers and heavy-duty construction machines. We traversed the rest of the river and deep water section with ease, getting to the other side.
James: Peter is at some kind of emotional/spiritual crossroads but he is full of fear, so you, the self, has to take over the driving. Vedanta is the vehicle (a 4x4), the perfect vehicle for maneuvering through life.
Peter: On the other side, the vehicle changed back to the Land Cruiser and I jumped into the passenger seat, which was extremely comfortable and “buoyant.” I was a passenger again but completely different to before the crossing, as in fact I was driving – in charge, not passive. I had a new driver who looked exactly like me.
James: Once you know who you are (the other side) life is good and Peter is happy. The meaning of this is that you can’t let Peter set Peter’s agenda if you want to be happy. Isvara is telling you that you have Vedanta and that it should determine how you drive through life. Basically, this means letting go of Peter and his story. It is just a fear story, a prolonged nightmare that has become normalized.
Peter: In the back I had passengers, who felt like children, and I turned to them and said, “Let’s go have some fun.” Off we set across the landscape in front of us, distinctly African bush, full of adventure.
James: There are blissful happy thoughts to be had if you let the self, i.e. Vedanta, drive your life. Life is a wonderful adventure when you know who you are. Your life so far has been driven by one heavy unhappy thought: fear. Fear engenders the search for its opposite – love. But it is extremely rare to find self-love in samsaric relationships. The only solution is to seek the self.
Peter: In my reflections I have become aware of the idea and possibility that the two of you are embodying for (an old) Peter symbols or icons of a slightly different nature to that of teachers of Peter now, that of being appropriate parents.
James: Spiritual teachers may be parent-like, but they are not parents. To objectify parents you need to be thinking of yourself as a child, i.e. immature. The essence of the Peter story is a seeking of love. Temporarily you can transfer your love-object to a guru, but you have come to the wrong guru if you want it to last. In our tradition we help you transfer your love to the teaching and the teaching transfers it back to you, the self. The parent-child metaphor is appropriate for religion where the jiva is meant to remain undeveloped and dependent on God, but it is not appropriate for Vedanta. We worship the self with understanding, as parents worship children. Children worship out of ignorance.
Peter: In the last dream I went to that blue towel in the bubble of light which you correctly analyzed as the self, and behold, there was the young Peter, waiting. The union was quite something and the two of you appeared at the edge of the light, yet was not quite you, and I turned to the boy and said, “I want to introduce you to our new parents.”
James: You (Peter) are reborn when you embrace the light of awareness as revealed by the teachings of Vedanta.
Peter: This morning I was discriminating on the guna quality of anxiety, as I have not fully unpacked this.
It seems to be of equal intensity of both rajas and tamas, both tuned up to quite a pitch, fighting with each other, yet neither giving quarter. Depression and anger seem to co-exist in equal proportion. There is an intense need to do, yet the doing carries a dull and heavy feeling. Your comments on this would be most helpful.
James: You are missing the point of the guna teaching, Peter. You are meant to discriminate the gunas from the self, not analyze the gunas.
Depression and anger are well known to you. They are not real. Your attention should go to the teachings as soon as you feel them.
Peter: I was reflecting on a conversation I had with my ex-girlfriend, and the ridiculousness of relationships came into focus. A jiva relationship cannot be a platform for moksa, and to think it can is ridiculous. A jiva relationship stated to be based in self-knowledge, which states the relationship cannot continue because of the shortfalls of an apparent jiva personality, as that the personality is cast in stone, therefore cannot change or be different is not rooted in self-knowledge. To profess so is ridiculous. In this case jiva is fully identified with its own likes and dislikes, not self-knowledge.
If self-knowledge pervades a relationship, it is known the jiva is not real, it comes from Isvara – is not who we are. Love that is rooted in the self identifies with the apparent other as the self, holding the “other” jiva in the same awareness as one’s own – not real.
Through discrimination the opportunity is created to identify with objects in a different way, thus allowing the jiva to make different choices and thus construct a new narrative that is as unreal as the first yet has totally different apparent outcomes.
Am I on the right track here??
James: Yes, indeed. You have to take responsibility for your own happiness before a relationship can work. If the inner child has not become an adult, i.e. individuated, all relationships are just attempts to make the original flawed parent-child relationship work. Moksa is freedom from dependence on objects, the love relationship being the primary object of all samsaris.
~ Love, James