Hey Brenda, you still out there? I was so busy the past week, I forgot to check the board after my post. Sorry about that. Yes, you are absolutely right about the self-confidence and inspiration. I now realize my dreams used to reflect a definite lack of self-confidence. They even bordered on nightmares many times. Always something going wrong; dark surroundings; confusion. Now, all of a sudden, it's like I'm a superhero! What's really interesting is the affect my new form of dreams seem to be having on how I feel while I'm awake. These improved dreams seem to lead me to feeling better, which lead to even better dreams. Last night, I had another LD. I wasn't so excited about becoming lucid, so the dream lasted much longer. I tried just exploring the dream. I'm still amazed at how clear and real my dreams appear when I become lucid. What's more, in writing in my dream journal afterward, I was able to connect seemingly unrelated dream items. I found myself thinking, "How could I switch from dreaming about this, to dreaming about that?' Then, "Oh -- I get it!' And this is all going on inside my own head with no help from the outside? How truly bizarre! I wonder how many myths and legends began with just someone's dream. Can you imagine what ancient man would have thought about becoming lucid? I can easily envision someone saying, "I had an actual conversation with God. I wasn't dreaming I tell you -- it actually happened.' I understand some myths about demons were the result of sleep paralysis. But I guess I'd better not continue on this tangent, lest I offend someone.

John:

Congratulations on your success! I hope you can keep it up, and keep sharing your results with us!

If your thoughts lead toward understanding lucidity, don't worry about them being offensive. Discussion of how ancient peoples may have reacted to lucidity might not be valid under this topic, but it certainly deserves a spot somewhere else on the forum. Especially if it leads us to a better understanding of our own "primitive" attempts at lucidity!

As long as I'm here, though, I'll ask this: If an ancient dreamer (or one from any era) became consciously aware that he was dreaming, wouldn't that tend to peel away layers of mystery, rather than add more? Perhaps humanity's first scientists were lucid dreamers who noticed that their society-founding mythologies were just dreams...

Peter

Peter,

Ancient man was supersticious about everything he didn't understand, including the human mind. Hey, we're talking about people who believed drilling a hold in a person's head would let out the evil spirits! They had no concept of what dreams really were. That's why there is such significance given to them in ancient texts. If a simple dream could have such status, just imagine what they would think of a lucid one. It boggles the mind! If anyone has any real knowledge in this area, I'd love to hear about it. "Ancient Lucidity" sounds like a great discussion topic to me.

-John

Michael,

It was in part a joke that a young person might have more important things to do than practicing lucid dreaming.

The gains presumably should be balanced again the cost in time and energy need to generate the necessary level of motivation and skill to have lucid dreams.

Folks here have reported single even short lucid dreams that have had a profound effect on them. However to carry out the plans you mention it'd be extremely advantageous to be able to have lucid dreams at will whenever one wanted. This takes a big effort I believe.

Owen

Hi, John. You're right about many ancient humans thinking dreams were journeys to other places and encounters with people and/or gods, and not understanding they were mental constructs.

Actually, I'd say that's still true of a lot of contemporary people, too. But I said it, not you, so I'll take the mail on that one. :-)

Dreams must certainly have been conceptually important to our ancestors, our first compelling glimpses into what seemed to be a world beyond ours. Your suspicion is correct that there's quite a bit of literature out there on the subject. I'll see if I can dream up some references for us.

Your last two posts have touched on what I've always thought of as a central irony of lucid dreaming. Lucid dreams are often so vivid and so lifelike that they rival waking reality in their convincing sensory power. Yet for the definition of 'lucid' to hold, that experience would have to be accompanied by at least the basic knowledge that it's a dream. Uninformed humans (ancient as you say, or modern) might well misunderstand a vivid dream to be real, but such dreams would not be lucid, by definition.

This may seem nitpicky, but I think of it as part of my job here at the Forum to emphasize that not all vivid dreams are lucid, and not all lucid dreams are vivid. The experiences we get so excited about-- that usually form the focus of our attention on this Forum-- are primarily those lucid dreams that seem like we're walking around in another world. There's a tendency for many people to erroneously call all vivid dream experiences lucid dreams, probably because it seems like we're seeing things so clearly and vividly.

When a human has a vivid dream he is convinced is real, it's a testimony to the power of the mind's ability to create a full-blown sense of reality. How he interprets that experience is a function of how much he notices, and how much he knows. Or how little. :-)

Some ancient humans did see the light and have actual lucid dreams, although the phenomenon was never widely understood. Stephen's books reference some famous lucid dreamers of antiquity. It makes great reading!

(So the irony, of course, is that in these amazing experiences that seem so real, a lucid dreamer knows full well it isn't what it so vividly seems to be).

I enjoy your observations, and hope we keep hearing from you.

Dream on, Reverie

Brenda,

When we talk about "lucid dreams,' we're really referring to a state of consciousness while dreaming. So, why don't we call them "conscious dreams?' This led me to look up the word "lucid'. It's derived from Latin, meaning "to shine'. It really doesn't mean "conscious" at all. The fact that lucid dreams are also vivid and clear (shining) is merely a side affect of being conscious in the dream.

Have we encountered a clue to understanding the ancient dream world?

-John

Brenda and John:

Please pardon me for interjecting, but semantics is an armchair hobby of mine:

Neat observation, John. One definition of "lucid" is, "suffused with light." Another definition is, "having full use of one's faculties." The difference, I think, is where does the light seem to come from: is everything around you lit-up--vivid--but you are as a passive observer? Or do you recognise that the light shines from within you? The latter, I would say, has something to do w/ "lucid" dreaming.

Also, I think that b/c of the role of the subconscious in dreaming, calling any dream "conscious"--lucid or not--is at least partly misnomer.

(The definitions of "lucid" I took w/o permission from Merriam-Webster Online.)

Later.

Joshua

John and Brenda.

Dreaming lucid dreams might not have been such a good thing for our ancesters. In the middle ages in Sweden they used a plant ('bolmört' meaning 'smoke weed', though I don't know its english name) when having tooth aches. They burned it and enhaled the smoke. The smoke had a narcotic effect that eased the pain. But it gave a sleep with dreams of flying and sexual arousing. Since people lived crowded, sometimes a whole family was affected by the smoke. In the light of ongoing witchhunts it seems that these people themselves were quite convinced that they had been flying to that mountain and having done it with the deavil. An easy match for the inquisition.

Sorry I'm off the track again. Jan

Hi, John. You've brought up some interesting points of discussion. As always! :-) It's inspired me to elaborate.

Coming to universal agreement on terminology has always been tricky. It's the subject of much debate in academic circles-- sometimes interesting, sometimes tedious, but quite necessary.

Not surprisingly, those who worry about this sort of thing aren't all necessarily happy with basic accepted sleep / dreaming / consciousness definitions, and every now and then someone (psychology professor Charles Tart for example) publishes a paper making a case for their own slightly different set of terms and definitions.

So, in looking at our definitions... is the vivid and clear shining quality of a dream you're speaking of indeed a side effect of being conscious as you suggest? If that was true, how do we explain vivid, clear, shining dreams where the dreamer has no clue it's a dream? Conversely I've had non-REM lucid dreams where I'm fully conscious, but there's hardly any imagery at all. Coming up with terms and definitions requires that we check that all the facts fit, and that nothing is broad, vague, narrow, inconsistent, or misleading.

As you can imagine, though, at any given time we have to have working agreements, so when you say 'apple' I know it's not an orange you're talking about.

True, "lucid" doesn't mean "conscious". But it does mean "easily understood; intelligible". We can say an orange is a round fruit, and we can say it's a citrus, and we'd both be correct. We can call a dream "lucid" and it refers to the key issue, that is, our awareness of its being a dream while it's happening. No one word can fully describe that state, but the term "lucid dream" has come to acceptance. I'm pretty happy with that term's emphasis on the awareness factor.

Hmmm; yes... I am always carrying on here about the Definition Problem. To me, it's a Forum Fundamental; it seems so necessary that we all use the same words to describe the same things, as best as we can. :-)

The subject of dreams and consciousness in ancient people is a whole rich world of study unto itself. The late behaviorist-turned-psychologist Julian Jaynes went so far as to suggest that long ago, human conscious experience (both sleeping and waking) was profoundly different than it is today, and describes it in his controversial book, "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind". (1976). Rather heavy stuff, as you might imagine. But interesting.

Past my bedtime, Reverie zzz

Jan,

You got it! That's the sort of discussion I've been trying to cultivate.

My view is that most human beings as a whole aren't all that bright (lucid?!) Easily susceptible to any silly notion that sounds the least bit credible, especially ones which can be oversimplified into little "sound-bytes'. History is jam packed with examples of man's inhumanity to man based on misconceptions of reality (superstitions). The volcano is erupting. What should we do? Quick, let's throw in some virgins to appease the angry volcano gods! So I started wondering about the effects of lucid dreams on those same superstitious ancients. Did some past lucid dreamers get elevated to supreme witch doctor status? What were the affects on society? Could today's fanatics be the result of lucid dreamers of the past?

I recently learned that my mother-in-law had many episodes of sleep paralysis. Because of her deep religious convictions, she was absolutely convinced she was under the influence of the devil. Unfortunately, she kept her episodes secret out of shame and deep feelings of guilt. Only after her death did I learn about them. If this sort of thing is going on in our modern society, who knows what people thought in ancient times.

John

What if a person of antiquity where to dream lucidly that a god personified said, 'if you set fire to that green stone over there and mix it with tin you'll be able to make a substance that will superseed flint, I call it bronze; by the way I need more virgins'?

How does a society knowingly develope more usefull attitudes toward its own perception of states of mind? Can societies ever interpret phenomena using concepts that they havent created or dissapated

Prehaps the modern lucid dreamer is as suceptable to erroneous intepretation and explanation as the historic lucid dreamer. It seems likely that there will be examples of contemparies who have been carried away by councious experiences in the dream world and who have then gone on to inspire or compel themselves and or others to great or shamefull acts, (maybe even great shameful acts) but as hysteria and the herd instinct are endemic to all peoples everywhere, would be leaders or established witch doctors dont really need a lucid dream to spark those sorts of actions, just the right (wrong) kind of social climate.

Maybe the question is more about the social responsibilities of the lucid dreaming, dare I say it 'community' which would, I suppose, be to give an informed context to anyone getting to carried away:

For instance I once explained the hypnogic state to a man who thought that the voices and images that he saw and heard as he fell asleep each night where the beginning of a madness to which he would lose his mind, a state which he feared so much he had determined to commit suicide. Once he'd been supplied with the relevant information his fears subsided and, so far, he still lives.

These are fascinating posts, and I'm honestly not trying to dismiss ideas or dim enthusiasm.

We will have a hard time discussing lucid dreaming here at the Lucidity Institute Forum without using the term "lucid dream" in some mutually agreeable way. Confusion seems to persist around the use of the term.

I'd like to offer a quick explanation here:

IF A DREAMER doesn't have a clue that it's a dream... then it's NOT A LUCID DREAM... no matter how vivid that dream is.

Many of these posts contain fascinating examples of dreams that nevertheless do not (from the description) meet this basic qualification.

So...if you think you are having a strange and powerful experience, and don't know it's a dream while it's happening, you AREN'T having a lucid dream.

And if you wake up and STILL don't realize it was a dream, it's still not a lucid dream.

(I'm not saying categorically that a person can't have an experience during sleep other than a dream, lucid or otherwise. I leave that to another discussion).

All I'm saying is, we shouldn't call them lucid dreams when they are clearly not. This is not merely my personal opinion; it's just how the term is used.

Thank you for reading this. I'm sure much of this thread will be re-directed to the discussion on What Defines Lucidity. :-)

All the best dreams to you all,

Reverie

Yes but the posts arent about the definition of what a lucid dream is, the term appears to be commonly understood, (here at the TLI) with a little latitude true.

Arent they more about the subsequent interpretation of lucid dreaming events?

It seems within the bounds of human pervercity to know that we are asleep to know that we are dreaming but still add some kind of bizarre logic to the experience once we are back in the waking world and go onto some kind of magical leap ...I dreamt it, I knew I was dreaming therefore the dreams message/events have even more truth and importance than they would otherwise...we really should burn those virgins...I really was flying with the devil...the phrophecy will come to pass?

Hi, Robert and company!

I think I get what you're driving at here, Robert. But if you'll permit me, let me explain a bit more.

To talk about whether people might act on a lucid dream is a separate discussion than what I'm saying. It would indeed be an odd leap for one's knowledge that it's a dream-- I.E. a mental construct-- to compell someone to behave as it it had importance and should be acted upon. That would seem more likely with a vivid dream where the dreamer had no idea it was a dream. ("A man came to me last night when I was asleep and said I should paint my face and run up the mountain naked!")

I'm saying that in the various dream reports here in this thread, as they are written, it doesn't appear these dreamers really knew they were dreaming.

If they did know they were dreaming, I don't feel it's supported by these dream accounts as they've been presented.

This brings us to an interesting problem of semantics. Is it still a lucid dream when someone misunderstands what a "dream" is? In other words, if someone knows it's a dream while it's happening, but thinks a dream is something other than a pure mental construct, is it still a lucid dream?

I would maintain that it is not a lucid dream, because the definition of what a dream is, has not been met.

That is not to say that yours or anyone else's discussion here isn't interesting or worthwhile, because it certainly is.

As for most people here understanding what a lucid dream is, it's been my recurring experience through the years, with the Lucidity Institute and elsewhere, that many bright and educated people do indeed misunderstand and misuse the term.

Reverie

Hi Rob, Reverie, and all,

Just jumping in here for a moment to share this thought.

Rob: I'd be more inclined to call it bizarre thinking than logic. When you say: "... therefore the dreams message/events have even more truth and importance than they would otherwise..." This type of statement would indicate to me that the person doesn't really have a clear understanding that what they were experiencing was a complete illusion fabricated by the brain. A good point to discuss as, indeed, there still seems to be some confusion on this even amongst our fellow oneironauts.

And yes, this topic does belong elsewhere. We'll try to gather it up and move it over the weekend. ;)

Bright dreams to all! Keelin

Keelin:

Forgive me for sticking one last note in before you move this thread to hopefully greener pastures, but I feel a need to place the other bookend to the one that I wrote on Wednesday (and about 15 posts ago) when I asked:

"If an ancient dreamer (or one from any era) became consciously aware that he was dreaming, wouldn't that tend to peel away layers of mystery, rather than add more?'

It seems that what you and Reverie are confirming is that true lucid dreaming contains in its nature the power to illuminate the dark things that humans are capable of imagining. When we consciously know we are dreaming, that the stuff of our dreams are no more than a construct of our own flailing minds, we can consign to imagination what we otherwise might have believed to be the work of supernatural forces.

True lucid dreaming simplifies reality by peeling the shades of gray that normal dreaming, by its nature, can pile on to our unconscious perception. That simplification can lead to some profound thought or beauty, and maybe even a deeper understanding of our place in, well, everything. But if it leads to something else, like imagining afterward that there was more to the dream than just your own input, then the lucidity may have been mistaken, or abandoned.

This thought is likely redundant, but you, and Reverie, are making a very important point that can't be restated enough: the definition of lucid dreaming is simply an individual's conscious awareness of their dream state, experienced during the dream. No matter how ancient, primitive, magical, religious, or scientifically skeptical the dreamer might be, his dream is only lucid if he is consciously aware that he is dreaming. Anything else, and any interpretations gleaned later is a departure from lucid dreaming.

Peter

Why not have certian words and phrases flaged each time they are used; when site users type in lucid dream, automatically a comment box containing TLI's deffinition of what is meant by the phrase appears?

I'm more inclined to think that contributers can be less than exact in their writing (including me) than that they are really all that confused over what a lucid dream is defined to be.

Many may except that dreams and lucid dreams are '...illusions fabricated by the brain' but people even societies still act on their internal mental experiences whether they realise this or not.

It doesnt follow that those actions will be negative, for instance the fellow who makes a cognitive leap in research on the back of '...illusions fabricated by the brain' might be seen as a worthy individual but is the process he's expierenced going to be any different from someone who has a lucid dream that inspires them to something less worthy?

Bizarre thinking/Bizarre logic, if logic is a specialised form of thinking then whats the difference between the two phrases?

Robert:

You may be reading way too much into this thread. TLI isn't trying to inflict its definitions upon the participants of this forum. Though the word was used several times, it's not even about semantics. This thread is about one fundamental rule for lucid dreaming -- that one must be consciously aware that they are dreaming in order to be lucid. This is an established parameter, not a definition.

What I was attempting to point out was that having that conscious awareness can lead to greater understanding, not deeper mystery. Lucidity can help the dreamer to fathom the chaos of their own unconscious mind, to unlock its mysteries. A lucid dreamer's understanding that the things they are experiencing in a dream are illusions fabricated by their brain is priceless; whether they choose to define their experience by attaching meaning as dictated by societies or their own post-dreaming imagination is up to them. It is simply not the primary goal of TLI to discuss that end of the LD experience -- there are plenty of sites out there that deal in the meanings of dreams.

And please don't assume that this means LD's should be devoid of meaning, or bereft of inspiration. They're still dreams, and still valuable tools for creativity and growth. That's a major reason we're making this extra effort to pay attention to them.

Peter

Isnt it usual for there to be a gap between what we think we are writing, what we have actually written and what is eventually read, or read into, (prehaps even felt into) the end product?

I'm serious, I think as part of the redesign of the forum site it would be advantagoues to have accepted definitions of key phrases, such as lucid dream, flash up when the phrase is keyed in.

Presumably forum participants already agree on the definition of lucid dream so it doesnt seem to follow that a formalized interpretation would be an 'infliction'.

Is it really true that greater awarness always leads to greater understanding? Although it would be great if it where the case, it just doesn't ring true.

A thread is likely to be about at least as many subjects as there are contributers.

Robert:

Please note that I said "Greater awareness CAN lead to greater understanding." Of course it doesn't always lead to it, but conscious awareness (of anything, not just dreams)can certainly do more to foster greater understanding than can unconscious ignorance.

Peter

It can, yet it can also lead to the opposite.

Robert:

I agree. As any improperly used tool can have a negative effect, like cutting your hair with a chainsaw, so too can a lucid dream be misused after waking. It can, for instance, be twisted into a "meaningful" memory that conforms to the dreamer's established expectations or superstitions.

Perhaps your point is that ancient people were more inclined to attach erroneous meaning to their dreams upon waking. That could be true, because superstition, born of ignorance, was a major part of their lives.

Okay. That makes sense. But can we change ancient to primitive, so we can include modern folks who still allow superstition (and ignorance) to dominate their waking lives?

Also, it needs to be asked whether the LD is still an LD after its user has attached new meaning to it. After all, if a lucid dreamer chooses to abandon his conscious realization during the dream that it was all "just a dream," isn't he also convincing himself that the LD wasn't really an LD?

Peter

Fellow Lucid Dreamers:

The following thread started in the Learning Lucid Dreaming/Frustration Support Group forum last week. Though conversation strayed dramatically from the FSG forum's theme, it did provide us with an interesting new subject for discussion!

Peter

Thats an interesting question.

Is an LD an LD after its user(sic) has attached new meaning to it.

Begs the question(s) can meaning be seperated from conciousness? Can one exist without the other?

In an LD it seems that both will be present...Can knowing a state of awarness and knowing that you knew of a certian state (in the sense of having experienced it) be altered by a denial/conviction? To a certian extent maybe.

Sounds almost like, if I look through a pair of glasses with another pair of glasses will the view that I had when I looked through the first pair be altered.

Prehaps the original view remains the same yet the viewer is changed? Looks like its looping back to states of awarness and their erroneous and correct interpretation.

Or states of being and what colours them?

Robert:

Your thoughts may have touched on the importance of perception and memory as they relate to lucid dreaming.

Hopefully Stephen will chime in with a far more learned take on your question, but in the meantime let me offer a quick response:

Yes, consciousness in an LD cannot be separated from meaning. Even if you manage to eliminate all stimuli from your dream, you are conscious of the nothing that is left (and that feeling can carry more personal meaning than the most crowded of dreams!). By lucidly dreaming, you are on some level lending order, or meaning, to the chaos that otherwise would have been your "normal" dream. Lucid dreaming is a nearly perfect form of "here and now" perception, but that meaning exists in its purity only as long as you are consciously experiencing the dream. And, since the dream, and all of its content and context, stem from your own mind, your own creation, that meaning can be fundamentally important to you -- even rapturous.

Now it is time to add those extra glasses:

What we do with that moment of lucidity upon reentering the waking world is entirely up to us. We can immediately file it away as a true conscious memory, and, perhaps with the reinforcement of writing it down, accurately retain the experience as a moment of our lives. It could be a deep, scary, sexy, fun, or bizarre moment, sure, but the moment we remember is the one we passed through.

Or, we can put on those extra glasses, and convert the memory by painting over its "here and now" aspect with flourishes of meaning based on our personal expectations, beliefs, and superstitions. Eventually the original singular conscious experience of the lucid dream might be obscured by opaque layers of personally important details that were reflexively added over time to the memory. So, yes, the lucid dream can have its brief existence wiped out by your changing perception of the memory.

If the waking life of a primitive mind is showered in dogmatic paradigms like superstition or religion, there is a good chance that an LD experience might be redefined over time into something magical involving external stimuli that was not have been in the original dream. On the other hand, that primitive mind might be able to use lucidity to overcome his waking-life oppressions by experiencing (and remembering) that precious moment when he knew that "this is all a dream,' and the stuff that would otherwise have been meaningful outside the world of his own mind suddenly lost some of its luster. I think many shamans made their living by establishing and communicating that ability to sidestep the rules of acceptance.

Oh, and this sort of contextual re-fabrication, or denial of the perceptions we witnessed with our own conscious perception, happens fairly regularly in the waking world as well. Witnesses at a trial, or old friends reminiscing past glories, will attest to that!

I hope that made sense. If not, then you'll have to wait for someone with a better perception of, um, perception, to log on.

Peter

Robert:

I just noticed that you paraphrased my entire answer in the last four lines of your post.

I wish I had noticed that BEFORE I did all this typing!

Peter

I dont Know, the time we spend focused on the subject will hopefully bring dreaming dividends, its good excercise. Sleep well.