According to the Dzogchen tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, there is no difference between reality and night dreams. Is this true?
This is how I see it. All that exists within Consciousness/creation are frequencies of knowledge. Information vibrates in wave form. The degree to which we are aware of our SELF in relation to it, is the degree to which we gain clear understanding of the information itself.
Anything that can be detected in any way is only one or another grouping of energy frequencies. It matters not if what is detected be of one rate of frequency or another. It all falls into the same category as something being detected. All frequencies have a contextual reality to which they apply. Dream images apply to dreams. Physical reality applies to the waking state in the 3rd dimension. What matters is the SELF that is detecting it, and the degree of Awareness that point of sentient being is capable of.
At some point, when self is truly SELF AWARE, one sees the entire creation as objectifiable by that one subject. That one subject remains unchanged by the nature of that which is ever changing, i.e. the Consciousness of Creation. The only way that what is being observed even matters, is to what degree we identify our own effulgence with it, and our capacity to know its context. All that matters is just the ability to perceive the frequencies within the contextual reality to which they apply. That is one of the abilities all beings must accomplish for true freedom within the Consciousness of Creation.
However, that is from the standpoint of having a point of sentience with the creation. From a Cosmic standpoint, there is no self IN the creation. We learn to have that consciousness WHILE projecting an "ambassador" so to speak, into the creation as a point of discernible sentience. In this way, we enjoy the creation via different frequencies of sentience in the creation. In the third dimension, there is the physical body. In the 8th dimension there is another form taken of higher frequency that is also a point of sentience in harmony with the principles of that dimension. The sentient self may be a group point of sentience, for example. What never changes is the SELF AWARENESS of each point of sentience.
If you must drive a truck, you must objectify the information that makes it possible, then perform the action. If you are daydreaming about driving a truck, you need only objectify the thought of you driving the truck. If you desired deeply to drive a truck in the third dimensional frequency consistently over a formidable period of time, that objectifiable thought information would be created into a third dimensional objectifiable thought and actually experienced via your third dimensional form. You would then realize how to transition your objectification of energy from one dimension into another....from thought frequency into physical third dimensional form. This can go on and on through dimensions when we become more awakened.
Think about how we perceive reality. All reality for each of us is a perceptual phenomenon. Even the manifestation of the same frequency of information is not the same thing for everyone. The sentient being detecting that thing, will alter its meaning to adhere to its own ability to fathom that thing. A thing is changed via observation in several ways. Primarily, the sentient being will objectify that information and by doing so, change it to create a personal reality paradigm out of it. They experience the reality of that change, and ONLY them. One does not perceptually alter information for anyone else because that is an impossibility.
One can explain their own perception. But still, what the other person hears, and how they interpret it, may or may not wholly match the perception of the person explaining it. So what is reality? Is something more real if it is vibrating at a different frequency? Depth of reality is equal to depth of SELF AWARENESS, because AWARENESS gives existence for that self to what is being objectified BY that self. It cannot GIVE reality, existence or awareness to another thing in the creation. It can only catalyze the nature of response of that thing.
Dreams are not bound by linear time and space. They are difficult to make sense of. However, the mechanic for perceiving them is the same as the mechanic we use to perceive the frequency of waking human consciousness. The principle of a subject objectifying information is the same, no matter if it is a "dream" frequency or a 3d rock frequency. What is more real when perception levels everything out to the same playing field?
Its not that a thing is more real, but that one, via awareness, understands how to function with that information in the context to which it applies. If you daydream the house is on fire, you won't physically go running out of the house because the information being detected does not apply to physical reality. This is where schizophrenics have such a problem. They lose context for their thoughts and imaginings.
The bottom line here is: What is the difference, when the only abiding, never changing reality is the SUBJECT? Whether the subject is watching the Consciousness frequency of a dream, or a daydream, or a physics class, or meditation, or a movie, or whatever it is, our perceptual cognitive process is exactly the same. WHAT the information is, does not matter. The body responds to thoughts and emotions due to physical experience.
It releases chemicals, it has neurological response. The body responds the same way to imagination, thoughts, emotions, and memories, only maybe not so intensely. Did it matter what frequency it was? No. Only context made the difference.
So what does it matter what frequency of what we are objectifying is? To the subject, it is all leveled to the same playing field. It is information. It is processed and interpreted by us, the subject, and the subject responds to that meaning projected onto it by the subject. The only thing that matters is recognition of context for the purpose of proper application of action and thought in regards to the information.
So I personally do not think it matters what a person calls real or unreal. What matters is the SUBJECT and correct context for information. That's it. Nothing is more real to a fully aware Subject than anything else. Discerning then in my opinion must include context, then after that, one merely experiences as they desire. This is how I perceive it anyway. So I guess you could say I agree. Maybe I just should have written that.