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/ ... 14&t=14227PHASE STATE = LD/OOBE/AP (different interpretations)