Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rules

For general lucid chat - ask questions, share advice, set lucid dream challenges and explore the lucid realm together.
User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3643
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rules

Postby Summerlander » 15 Feb 2014 01:15

Phase State: A Question of Fidelity and Rules

Is it wrong to have sexual intercourse with a stranger in a dream when you are married? Of course not. Why not? “What’s the difference between dreaming about extramarital copulation and actually doing it in real life?” - you may enquire. Why would the action in question not necessarily qualify as cheating in the context of dreaming? Because, for starters, if it was just a dream, it didn’t really happen. (Although some may contend that, experientially, the mental event was “real” for the dreamer at the time.) Secondly, what comprises your sense of identity is severely perverted in the dream state. The dreamer does not think clearly; lacks memory; accepts the absurd with ostensibly unsullied logic; believes disjointed, desultory dream scenes; and may also believe himself/herself to be somebody else. In other words, in the dream, the waking self (the person who married and/or pledged loyalty to your partner) does not exist. You feel different. You are different. You may even dream about having sexual intercourse with someone you are not attracted to and be puzzled by this upon awakening.

Now, let’s change the question to: Is it wrong for a married person in the phase state (lucid dreaming/OOBEs/astral projection) to have sexual intercourse with a stranger in its corresponding phantom reality? This question will be tackled from a number of different angles, but, before we begin to do this, let’s take a look at some scientific evidence that has recently emerged which appears to support what Sir Roger Penrose propounds: brain waves, along with consciousness, have their origins in quantum mechanics. What is evident is that neurons can indeed house quantum vibrations and the phenomenon of consciousness may go deeper in reality than previously thought. Let’s suppose that Penrose’s theory is absolutely right and recollect the following about quantum realm rules: they enable wave-particle duality; superpositions; entanglement; uncertainty until something is measured; entropy reduction via observation; and any other phenomena that the quantum physicist would care to annex to convey a complete picture (so far possible) of “quantum weirdness.” The flexibility of this subatomic level of reality, where human logic appears to falter, is akin to the nature of ordinary dreams.

Before I’m accused of putting forth a sophism, let me explain. Recall the times when you were lucid dreaming and noticed how prone to instability the mental world is. How lettering in the dream world tended to change rapidly. How sometimes you thought you read something, and, the more the environmental element was inspected, the further the original illusion was shattered. How sensorial stimulation helped to bring about a degree of manifest certainty, sense, and control. How the dream character became more alive as your lucidity dwindled. How you became less “yourself” and waking life memories dissipated with the encroachment of the non-lucid dream state, causing you to embrace the absurd as if it made sense. Doesn’t this seem compatible with quantum dynamics? Is the dream world, and the so-called subconscious content, nothing more than (largely visual) expressions of quantum data of varying potentials in our brains? Could a random array of quantum vibrations in the cerebral system be responsible for memory and a mishmash of concepts which take articulation in thoughts and dreams (which vary in relevance to the waking world)?

The dream world, in a sense, appears to be a reflection of the boundary between the quantum and the classical. Do we see “decoherence” (the reduction of physical possibilities into one outcome), or the process of it, taking place in lucid dreams when we use techniques to stabilise them? Consciousness may well be one outcome of the boundary between micro and macro provided that there is a structural arrangement such as the brain to help it come to fruition. Yes, consciousness would still be a product of the physical world, and dreams could be interpretations, or reverberations, of quantally encoded data. If this is the case, the mechanism is within you, in your core, a part of you, and one should not feel guilty or ashamed of shaping the lucid dream as one sees fit. The power to apparently choose to manifest an illusory world, from a quantum mechanical plethora of discreet illusions buried in unconsciousness, is within you, and consciousness ostensibly enters the equation when the illusion is coherent, real, and it finally matters.

So, even if quantum-mechanically derived, dreaming - along with consciousness - is something personal and does not require policy or dictation. Real world rules of thumb are not applicable when the experience in the phase state is perceived to be entirely subjective - not to mention in detail that the world perceived therein is also ostensibly removed from the classical laws of physics that we’re so accustomed to in our quotidian lives. We do not have complete control of what arises in the lucid dream world. The nature of the lucid dream is often characterised by phantasmagoria which may heighten the effect of illusions and can bring about the emergence of familiar forms unrelated to the context or meaning of precedents but somehow befitting in superposition or juxtaposition. The definition of emergent forms is emphasised further by what appearances may remind the lucid dreamer of. For this reason, people shouldn’t feel guilty about what naturally arises in their minds.

But one wonders: Is there a chance that dream content could originate from other universes if the many-worlds interpretation of quantum theory is true to reality? Would this make extramarital relations in lucid dreams a betrayal on the lucid dreamer’s part? Well, firstly, dreams are not objective worlds and the oneironaut certainly does not travel to parallel universes in the phase state even if conscious experience requires quantum mechanics. Our universe, according to some theoretical physicists, has long decohered from those other universes (if indeed they exist) since the Big Bang, and, therefore, lucid dreams could only be built upon potentials which are prominent at the quantum level. In other words, dream environments would be the result of brain mechanisms “colouring” in already existent reality templates as the process by which the organism’s subjective, and illusory, worlds are built. Lucid dreaming is one of nature’s great gifts to us for it enables us to create ideal worlds. Why not make the most of this amazing “gift”? Why restrict our sense of freedom by narrowing our range of experience?

If you believe that the phantom world of the phase state is in your head (entirely subjective) then you cannot be accused of infidelity in regards to the aforesaid question. This, I think, is how the question should be answered if the phase state is experienced and regarded as lucid dreaming (knowing that one is dreaming while it’s happening). If having sex with dream characters in lucid dreams equates with infidelity then there ought to be a law against certain ways of thinking, too. In fact, let’s censor imagination while we’re at it! This, of course, would be madness as legislators, detectives, and law enforcers, are required to imagine crimes during suspicion and investigation in order to anticipate or solve them. (Unless people are okay with these individuals being the exception as they welcome the mental shackles of such dystopia.) Onanism would be out of the question, and, to append to the hideous insalubrity of sexual repression, couples would not be able to fantasise let alone roleplay with the intent of reaching sexual arousal. (Relevant reminder: couples often pretend to be someone other than themselves during roleplay.) Erotomaniacs by nature would be doomed and discriminated against.

Human beings like novelty, otherwise they would not appreciate the element of surprise. (Christmas; birthdays; anniversaries; marriage proposals; friendship tokens; new places for conjugality; the exploration of different forms of intimacy; the excitement of tasting the forbidden fruit, etc. - The list goes on in exposing our propensity to seek out the new and exciting.) To censor imagination and make thought crime a viable concept is to shackle the mind and pave the royal road to a dystopia where consternation and inanity rule. To deny our impulses is to deny our very nature. If our impulses are unhealthy, then we must find a healthy outlet because repression is not the way.

The way is to change our thinking patterns away from real danger and arrive at a healthy solution. We cannot help feeling sexually attracted to people other than our beloved partners but it is possible to avoid betrayal when one is committed. Although sexual congress comes with the package of a loving relationship, lust should not be mistaken for love. Both can co-exist, however. I love my wife and enjoy our conjugality. I’d rather experience the act of making love to her in real life than in my dreams - although the “Stacey” element does enter my dreams occasionally and we do just that. But it is also true that the mind wanders and I have found myself having animalistic coition with floating shapes resembling torsos with female thighs in lucid dreams. This should strike you as a reflection of my sexual orientation, something that developed to include not just my wife’s shape and form, but, in fact, the female form in general regardless of whether love enters the equation or not. If you doubt this, ask yourself the following: Why is there a cosmopolitan, and rather coy, admission that “bad boys” and “femme fatales” have sex appeal? Where is this “guilty pleasure” malarkey coming from?

My erotic lucid dreams, with the incomplete female forms, were not concerned with completion or further details to what had already been unthinkingly manifested. The mind stopped at what was sufficient to achieve the goal of sexual gratification. And if a realistic completion of the object of attraction does enter the equation within the phase state context, it is merely to make the experience more true-to-life (if one desires so) - the sort of visual realism that is absent in real life roleplaying. In essence, lucid dream sex with strangers (dream characters) is tantamount to masturbation is moralistic terms: one does what one likes to oneself.

I am sure that my wife would rather hear that I have become intimate with her in a lucid dream than a stranger and no explanation is required for that. The ego in all of us, the sense of self-importance, is undeniable. But let’s recall that “dream Stacey” is not really Stacey. In fact, the dream character that resembles my wife may fluctuate due to the phantasmagorical nature of the dream world, and, without anything that I can possibly do to prevent the slightest modification, I may find myself inevitably copulating with what appears to be a stranger. At this point, my wife would probably say, “If the character was no longer me, why didn’t you halt the sex act?” To which I may reply, “My dear, it was never you in the first place; it’s always been me!”

You may think my wife is being completely unreasonable, but, the truth is that she would not have been as lenient if I’d had sexual intercourse with someone in the real world who happened to be the spitting image of her. It wouldn’t matter if the real woman resembled Stacey, I would be liable to the accusation of infidelity. My wife’s rebuke would be morally justified. But the dream context seems to make it okay for me to be intimate with a character that resembles my wife. (Note: it would also be ludicrous if she rushed to sign divorce papers based on a lucid dream I had where I slept with a stranger.) The dream context also seems to make the scenario of me intimately engaged with a stranger as “not so bad.” (It won’t warrant divorce, a lover’s tiff maybe.) It seems that infidelity reasonably applies only when there is intimate physical contact between spouse and lover. Bottom line: dream people are not real people. Dreamers do not make contact with anybody in dreams or lucid dreams. If this view is held, then no real blame is applicable in the case of dream or phase state erotica.

If, however, you believe that shared dreaming is possible, that perhaps quantum entanglement may enable this, and, as a spouse, willingly copulate with a stranger in dreamland whilst inviting the possibility that another dreamer shares your perceived environment through the eyes of the dream character, then perhaps you ought to be honest with yourself and your partner in waking life. Marriage or commitment may not be for you. The stigma of infidelity is unavoidable if you hold the belief that sexual intercourse with other dreamers is possible in the dream world. The only way that phase state practitioners avoid being painted with that brush is if they believe their experiences to be entirely subjective.

Lucid dreaming, when viewed as subjective, provides your own private world, where you can’t possibly harm anyone, where there are no rules but the ones you make or imagine to exist, where your impulses need not be restrained. Infidelity does not enter the equation. Astral projection believers, on the other hand, do not have the privilege of avoiding the infidelity brush. If you believe that the phantom world of the phase state is objective, and that characters therein are sentient beings separate from your mind, then you are somewhat bound by real world morality. If you break the moral boundaries, you willingly desert your conscience. You cannot possibly retain your conscience, in the phase state, whilst behaving in a manner that would be deemed unscrupulous in the real world as this would conflict with your beliefs. The case is the same when, as a spouse, you believe you are having a genuine OOBE, i.e. truly out of your physical body as an independent point of consciousness, and you decide to spy on your sexy neighbours.

Lucid dreaming (reminder: knowing that you are dreaming while it’s happening), on the other hand, can help you to creatively spice up your love life as one of its many upsides. It can certainly be inspirational when it comes to roleplaying with your partner in waking life if you’re into that sort of thing. Whatever you happen to believe about the phase state, be it that you regard it as the source of lucid dreaming, or astral projection, or real OOBEs, when it comes to the impulse that tends to lead to infidelity, repression is not the key. A healthy outlet must be found - whether you wish to alter your thinking patterns or change your lifestyle (which could mean returning to bachelordom). If a healthy outlet is not found and prolonged repression is employed, one may stumble upon an unhealthy one. To illustrate, I present you here with a story about repression and horror, the story of a man who was gravely ill and whose upbringing did not help his case. I give you the story of Ed Gein: http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=14227

PHASE STATE = LD/OOBE/AP (different interpretations)
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
torakrubik
Posts: 559
Joined: 29 Jun 2011 20:44
Location: England

Re: Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rul

Postby torakrubik » 15 Feb 2014 02:35

A thorough albeit lengthy answer to a big question! I was researching just today on Penrose and his quantum biological theories. I guess the main point here was to illustrate that the dreamer's belief dictates their moral stance on infidelity, regardless of the actual dream workings? I liked the way you tied in quantum mechanics to this too, very interesting post.
Dreaming is my drug

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3643
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rul

Postby Summerlander » 15 Feb 2014 02:57

Yes, that's exactly it. I'm glad you understood it. I like to keep myself updated about scientif discoveries and their implications. I also have always wanted to explore this topic of what people believe about lucid dreaming and what it means morally. I feel that people have always evaded the question and now I've finally explored it. Hopefully readers will point out what I've missed or where I might have gone wrong. I'm open to the challenge. Thanks for your input and I'm glad you're familiar with Penrose. I think his theory, couple with Tonomi's integrated information one, might help to shed some light on the nature of consciousness.

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

Snaggle
Posts: 590
Joined: 02 Oct 2011 13:08

Re: Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rul

Postby Snaggle » 15 Feb 2014 03:41

Is it wrong to have sexual intercourse with a stranger in a dream when you are married? Of course not.


Summerlander this depends entirely upon the morality of the dreamer. A Neoplatonist or Christian should find this wrong. Christians who lust after a woman have already commited adultery with her in their hearts which is just as sinful as doing it physically according to the Jesus of the gospels. Anyone who is chaste might also fine it immoral and a sign their chastity is a sham not truly rooted in their hearts.

The same goes for Lucid adultery with a dream character, only in this case also raises the question of whether or not they love their spouse. If one really loves and is loved by ones spouse sex with anyone else is almost completely empty and meaningless. This would also apply to "phase state" adultery what was believed to be real.
"There is only one God and his name is Death.
And there is only one thing we say to death "not today"
- Syrio Forel

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3643
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rul

Postby Summerlander » 15 Feb 2014 10:54

I'm well aware of religion and thought crime. But for this question I tried to leave religion out of it and target only secularists because I don't respect religions as ideologies. I got married at the registry office, you know what I mean? Religious people have not thought deeply about morally and have just merely accepted their faith's garbled version. In religion, thought crime is real, in State law there is no such thing. Hence the degree of separation between church and state even if it isn't official in some countries. I can tell you that a lot of Christians here in England don't behave according to the tenets of their faith and don't even care to spread the gospel. But I can see the experience in Somewhere like America being different.

Anyway, thank you for raising that point but I'd rather not go there too deeply. I don't know if you read the whole thing but I do mention, in a few words, that a society that entertains the idea of thought crime would be a dystopia, and its legislators, and law enforcers too, would be somewhat hypocritical. Another important thing to point out about religion: the love for your maker is supposed to be greater than what you have for your partner. And the ideology also fails where it considers homosexuality a sin and, their notion that when you love someone you don't even think, or shouldn't even think, about others in a sexual way is a bit misguided, too. Not to mention that polyamori is completely discarded or thought not to be possible.

Much to their disappointment, the laws in the UK have changed and gay people are allowed to get married. But I would really like to pose Christians a question: If love is supposed to be so profound and completely override sexual urges for others, if it comes from a source completely separate from your so-called "carnal sin," why is it that your loving relationships have to be in accordance to your sexual orientation as explicitly revealed in the Bible? But I don't wish for this topic to go there any more than it has. Christianity has a warped view of sex and has always tried to suppress it to the detriment of mankind. It has completely brainwashed many when it claims a virgin gave birth to the Messiah.

If you think that religion should be respected and taken into account, Snaggle, I invite you to checked out the "Ed Gein" link I provided above where I talk extensively about him and reveal a deep connection between the gospel that was drilled into his head by his mother, who even forbade him to masturbate and censured him when he was caught, and the unhealthy sexual outlet that he found in his schizophrenia.

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
HAGART
Posts: 3179
Joined: 05 Jan 2012 21:09
Location: CANADA

Re: Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rul

Postby HAGART » 16 Feb 2014 00:39

Here's what I would say in as few words as possible:
With all I have done in lucid dreams, (with the freedom of choice, and premeditation), I should be in jail right now, but thankfully there are no thought-police. 8-)

A regular dream can be called an accident, but a lucid one is premeditated. After a lucid dream, with the freedom of choice, we question our own morals and motives, and realize we all have slightly twisted minds that don't fit the "ideal human" which is an unrealistic concept. To be human is to be immoral. We are not robots!
If we all lucid dreamed this world would be a better place.

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3643
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rul

Postby Summerlander » 16 Feb 2014 01:56

Well put. Our nature, against ideal anthropy, is flawed or incompatible from the get-go. So why pretend to be something we're not. And yes, there is a sense of premeditation in lucid dreams. But no worldly law forbids us to dip our wicks in our mental territory just like state law does not prohibit masturbation. (Though some religions frown upon it.) There is no such thing as thought crime - law enforcers are concerned with actions that can be objectively verified. Nobody cares if Arnie imagines he's punching the lights out of his wife's stalker in True Lies. People even find it funny because we are all "guilty" of such healthy outlets of the mind, which, let's face it, often help to release tension and lighten the mood. :-D

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3643
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rul

Postby Summerlander » 16 Feb 2014 02:43

Absolutely. You are not harming anyone. Lucid dream sex may even help married sex addicts to save their relationships. Philanderers who believe old habits die hard may finally settle down if they use lucid dreaming to satiate themselves sexually. It is a pragmatic solution and better than no solution at all. Likewise, the wanton lady may try to preserve her marital chaste using the same oneiric tool.

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
HAGART
Posts: 3179
Joined: 05 Jan 2012 21:09
Location: CANADA

Re: Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rul

Postby HAGART » 16 Feb 2014 03:05

I deleted my post because I'm a coward, but I shouldn't be and I'll say it again since this is what I think you responded to:

I said:
It's all mental-masterbation. (No less, no more, it just is)

(The only reason why I deleted it was because I went further and essentially admitted, in more or less words, that I mentally masterbate a lot (sexual fantasy). But hey! I bet everyone does!) Since when was sexual desire a crime?

No harm, no foul. But a lot of my sexual lucid dream escapades do end in 'fouls'. ;)
If we all lucid dreamed this world would be a better place.

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 3643
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Phase State (LD/OOBE/AP): A Question of Fidelity and Rul

Postby Summerlander » 16 Feb 2014 13:50

Yeah, the foul (undesired exit from the phase state) is a problem and tends to occur when we succumb to sexual desire due to the excitement.

But there are ways to make it last. If you happen to be copulating an attractive dream character and the scene begins to fade, stop a minute to touch the character's hair, body, and even touch and look at the floor. I know it's hard and I don't always get to do this but, an interruption to stabilise the dream world could mean the timely extension of pleasure.

Even during the sex act, we could try to focus on amplifying the senses and also the movement. It's a challenge though because we tend to focus on the emergent pleasure and a strange indolence makes us neglect the dream environment.

[ Post made via Android ] Image
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava


Return to “General Lucid Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest