Pip: Dippack Mistri has a question for you — and it is not the one you think it is. It starts with love, but it ends somewhere considerably more uncomfortable.
Mara: Today we’re covering what the post frames as the truth about love — specifically, what happens to intimacy, fidelity, and the partnered mind when we move beyond the waking state into dreaming, fantasy, and imagination.
Pip: Which is a polite way of saying: the vows you made do not follow you into your dreams.
Mara: That is essentially the argument. Let’s get into it.
Awakened Soul: What the Dreaming Mind Reveals About Love
Pip: The post opens with a pointed question — where do those partnership vows go when you fall asleep? It’s framing love not just as a waking-state agreement, but as something that has to hold across three distinct states of being: waking, dreaming, and something subtler still.
Mara: The post sets up the dreaming state as a place where the coupled mind simply does not behave. Here is the line: “The mind here is in a state of disarray. Much drama is played out in dreams, pleasant and unpleasant.”
Pip: So the romantic architecture we build in waking life — the vows, the co-presence, the lovey-dovey — does not load correctly in the background process.
Mara: Right, and the post gets specific about why. It traces erotic dreams back to biological causes, the imbalance of humours and hormones, particularly at puberty, where the subtle mind generates vivid erotic experience involving, as the post puts it, “a subtle stranger” — not a future partner, not someone the person is in love with.
Pip: Which does put a dent in the idea that desire is naturally pair-bonded.
Mara: The post pushes further into imagination and daydreaming as an extension of the same phenomenon. It argues that stored memories — screenshots accumulated throughout the waking day — reassemble in the dreaming mind in ways that are “discordant,” not congruous. The waking mind constructs fantasy coherently; the dreaming mind does not follow the script.
Pip: And the post’s uncomfortable corollary is that this applies to everyone — not just teenagers with posters on their walls, but adults, partners, people in committed relationships.
Mara: The post asks directly: “Do you know for certain what your partner thinks, imagines and dreams?” The answer implied is no — and the post argues that is structurally unavoidable, because “imagination, the subtle mind, has no boundaries. No piety. No control. No policing.”
Pip: The post lands on a genuinely sharp claim: that human society judges fidelity only by the waking, gross state — and in doing so, misses two-thirds of what a human being actually is.
Mara: The post calls that a failure of consciousness. The closing argument is that for an awakened person, waking and dreaming are not categorically different. The distinction only holds for those who remain, in the post’s framing, unawakened.
Pip: So the real question is not whether your partner is faithful. It is whether either of you is awake enough to know what faithful even means.
Mara: The thread running through all of this is that the frameworks we use to judge love — vows, fidelity, trust — are built for one state of being and applied to three.
Pip: Next time, maybe we ask what else we are only examining in the waking light.
Discover more from DIPPACK MISTRI
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.