MAYAEL
I am not sure about your idea of 'the bloodline body', but what it does lead me to wonder about is how we are connected to other minds. Perhaps, it is the left side of the brain which would allow for such connections, and that is accessible in meditation.There is the eternal debate about whether mind is simply brain, but this does still leave us as being individual cells of mind. However, there is also the connection with other minds, and to what extent we are interconnected. My own view takes on Jung's idea of the collective unconscious, but I am aware that many people see this construct as dubious. Nevertheless, our relationship with other minds is one which I feel is not explored enough, although it is central to discussion about intersubjectivity


well keep in mind I'm just using this as a mental format or something to look at in order to keep track of my thoughts I don't actually think that there's a literal huge type of creature made up of every single person in the Aryan race walking around somewhere in the galaxy it's merely just a thought model.

And it works with Jung's collective consciousness theory

So like I previously said it's nonsensical to assign a thinking human mind with human morals and human opinion to the thing that created existence itself

Especially when you say god can make mistakes because a mistake is just a concept this society uses especially the Western society but it doesn't actually exist as a thing separate from the social constructs of society

And for someone to say a mistake was made they are implying that there is a law in place Rather be written or verbal that states that what was done should not have been done which also implies that there is a higher power that implemented said law and if we're talking about the all creator where there is nothing above him /it then whatever he does is not a mistake because there is no higher power above him there is no law that he has to abide by.

(Assuming it was a sky daddy that cared about social constructs.)


Ps you keep saying I'm taking people's phrases could you please point out who's phrase I'm stealing when I say sky daddy? Because I thought I was original in saying that but then again I am using the English language and I do believe all these words have been said before by somebody else. And it's a little hypocritical seeing as how your entire concept is just a molested version of other people's concepts

That art is colorful to say the least! It reminds me of some of the dreams I've had in the past

You are referring to the most high all creator nothing came before him he created all things and blablabla am i correct ?

We react to pheromones just like animals do it's just that Society has made us so numb and dumb to our animal side that we are completely unaware of it

Yes I'm very aware of Play-Doh and his Idiocracy but I was hoping you with his arrogant as you are walking around like you have a 1" cock and you know how to use it

I would have thought that you would have justified your claim toward knowledge by grounding it somewhere in your own personal experience and not just in some philosopher dude from the past named after modeling clay I mean come on you're alive he's dead it's your turn so don't take a dead man's concepts as stupid as they may be and try to coin them in an argument make up your own for the love of God

my theory based off of meditation and contemplation which I in no way can prove or even share the experience with anybody for validation so it is worth its weight in whose line is it anyways points and I think we all know how much those are worth but with that said

These tidbits of information we pull I feel we pull from our how would I put it? I guess you could call it your bloodline body? Basically I kind of piggyback some characters from a few sources to form my understanding and one of them is Manny p Hall

He once mentioned that the beginning of existence happened because of seven great spirits which are also the seventh grade luminaries in space and each Spirit was responsible for a phase of man's existence and we are in the Aryan phase currently which is phase 5 or root race is he calls it

so then if you look at existence as one big family consisting of people we come from mainly if your European like I am the fifth person in that family and that fifth person consists of everybody that has ever been born in that particular bloodline which is a very vague bloodline because it covers all of the Aryan bloodline and so try to envision it like I'm a blood cell within that massive body of the original fifth family member and I'm just one tiny little cell however I technically have the ability to gain information from all the other cells in that entire body which would be an unmeasurable number of cells /people

And this is how I explain how some people can pull certain information that others cannot and vice versa both people having gained information equally as difficult to obtain yet can't universally obtain it from either side and that is because they're from two different bodies and so in a way you have this unlimited plethora of akashic knowledge yet it is limited due to whatever body you come from

Now I'm by no means dogmatic about this viewpoint it's just a mental exercise I use and so far it seems to be difficult for me to defeat when arguing with myself LOL.

Why do you think that the all creator just so happens to sound a lot like a human? Aka Sky Daddy

The mind is definitely separate from the brain and yet the same. I have had several meditation experiences where i pulled information out of thin air so to speak
What i mean is i found information while meditating that i didn't have before that particular meditation session

words of wisdom. The Old Road indeed can be repaved but once you realize that magic is not an advantage but merely a trade-off and that you seemingly always somehow trade something that was of more value than the outcome of the magic you quickly understand that it's not worth it in best to just leave on a shelf somewhere to collect dust

think so.

>>>First, if God can't make mistakes, then there would be something he couldn't do. Yet God can do anything. Thus God can make mistakes.<<<

I'm sure the flower power hippie all is love people would disagree with you on this but I actually agree with you on it. assuming there's a sky Daddy that is.


>>>One might object that though the person of God can make mistakes, he would cease to be God were he ever to make one (just as, by analogy, a bachelor can acquire a wife, but he ceases to be a bachelor when or if he does so). So, the person of God can make mistakes, but not 'as God'. (All one is admitting here is that God has the ability to cease to be God).<<<


I don't know why people continually make this God figure into a singular type of sky daddy being with a human mind and human limitations and attributes with a sprinkle of woden style.

>>>But I don't think that's true either. That is, I think God - as God - can make mistakes.<<<


like an infection people let whatever their perspective on reality is bleed into any thought experiment they have so much so that they might as well be the character that they're pretending to exercise in the experiment.
they use their own logic whatever is popular at the time in their social culture so their middle class rights and their modern wrongs they were taught by their parents so on and so forth become the backbone of the very thing that somehow created all of existence which includes things they are completely unaware of due to its vast complexity that will never be comprehended by a single person yet they've somehow compacted it into this Starbucks at lunch break sized concept that's easily digestible.



>>>First, to make a mistake, it seems to me, requires a false belief. So can God have a false belief? Yes, why not?<<<
well of course he could assuming sky daddy existed he would have to be able to have everything. I thought that was an obvious.

>>>Well, one might think that God cannot have a false belief for God is all knowing. However, as I have pointed out in another thread, to be all knowing is to be in possession of all knowledge. And knowledge involves having a justified 'true' belief. <<<

why do you keep humping this concept that knowledge has to have justified true belief? you keep bringing up justified true belief.

define justification? do you think there is a fundamental justification that's the same across the board therefore can be applied to all scenarios of knowledge to then say this is justified true belief and that is not a justified true belief?


>>>So, God could be in possession of all justified true beliefs, and also have some false beliefs as well. <<<

why do you think he has beliefs at all? beliefs are something human beings have out of ignorance mainly but sometimes out of necessity so they think but a belief is kind of like shoes although it makes you feel much more comfortable you don't have to have them to walk and most other mammals as far as I know don't have them.

>>>For an analogy: let's say I own all the world's Rembrandts. Well, does that mean I own no fake Rembrandts? No, for the claim that I own all the world's Rembrandts is entirely consistent with me also owning some fake Rembrandts.<<<

obviously I'm not sure what the confusion there was. perhaps people misunderstood you in thinking you said you owned all Rembrandt's and nothing else?

under the vague limitations of your statement one could conclude that you own all of the worlds Rembrandt's as well as any given number of fake Rembrandt's.

>>>Nevertheless, one might object that to be all knowing is to know all true propositions.

>>>But that is false, for a) knowledge is made not just of true beliefs, but of justified true beliefs. <<<

there you go again with that Idiocracy why do you keep saying that? is there a philosopher of the past you have a crush on? did he say it?. do you really think there isn't knowledge out there that's not true or justifiable? you don't think that there's knowledge that's untrue and not justifiable?, really?.



>>>So knowledge has at least two ingredients, not one. And thus being in possession of all knowledge is not equivalent to knowing all true propositions. It is to be in possession of all 'justified' true propositions. And b) there are clearly true propositions that it seems impossible to know. For example, take the proposition "It is raining, but no one believes it is raining". That proposition is capable of being true. Yet to believe it is to falsify it; <<<

so much salad nothing worth commenting on.



>>>and as knowledge cannot involve a false belief, that proposition - if or when it is true - cannot be known.<<<

where on Earth were you molested to get that concept? can you validate that apparent precious concept of yours?.


Thus, being all knowing does not involve knowing all true propositions. It involves knowing all 'justified' true propositions. At this point, then, it seems consistent with being all knowing that one has some false beliefs in addition to all the justified true ones.

However, one might object that God would nevertheless have to know that those false beliefs of his were false - for otherwise there would be something he did not know. But again, that's false and fails to take the above lesson. If God has a false belief P, then although the proposition "God's belief that P is false" is true, that is not sufficient to qualify it as an item of knowledge.<<<

so much salad I just don't care.


>>>Again, for a proposition to qualify as an item of knowledge, it has to be 'justified'. It is not sufficient that it be true.<<<

why on Earth does it have to be justified in order to be knowledge? who taught you that? and can I beat them with a wiffle ball bat? , explain please.

>>>What is a justification made of? Well, a justification is made of God's attitudes. That is, to be 'justified' in believing something is for God to favour you believing it. <<<

that is borderline made up troll content it is so bad I'm about to just write you off as a troll because that was a very very dumb statement I don't even know how you could rephrase that to make it make sense.

>>>If that's true, then if God believes P, then God favours himself believing it, else he wouldn't believe it. And similarly, God disfavours himself believing not-P. And thus the proposition "God's belief that P is false" is one that God does not favour himself - or anyone else - believing. It is true. But it is not justified. And thus God, in not believing it, does not manifest a deficiency in knowledge.

Thus, I can see no compelling reason to think that God cannot make mistakes. God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent. But possession of those qualities seems - at this point in my reflections anyway - to be consistent with making mistakes.<<<


it's pretty sad when a being that is not all of those attributes but possesses lesser attributes will conceptualize this idea of a being that does have those attributes and thinks that he understands those attributes and can apply them to this sky Daddy it's just ridiculous how can something lesser grasp the something greater? it's like picking yourself up from your own bootstraps grunt all you want but you're not picking yourself up likewise you're not going to conceptualize the thing that is the reason for all existence no matter how hard you try.

of course I have knowledge because knowledge is information and last time I checked I have a memory and therefore I have knowledge now wisdom is when you're able to apply knowledge in the present time in order to get a desired outcome in the future so in other words wisdom is the ability to implement the knowledge you have and get specific desired outcomes from that knowledge in other words it's the applicability.

And why do you want me to answer question about Rembrandt paintings I mean is there any possible way to get you to accept any of the information anybody has said to you on here? Do you think you're smarter than all of the people that have commented on this thread? Why did you even post this cuz you're clearly not looking for improvement on your concept and you hate scrutiny.

You say you're open to logical and constructive evaluations of your theories and if somebody objects to it that it needs to be irrational objection that makes sense and yet when people do that you deny it because for some reason you think that we should carry the same logic that you carry when logic is not fundamentally a thing in itself it's kind of like liquid it changes with society.

Now your Rembrandt painting question is a very easy question to answer so I'm assuming somebody has already properly answered it so before I answer I'm going to go back and see if anybody has given the answer that I am fairly confident is the right answer and if they have then I don't know what to tell you

you will only accept knowledge from other people so long as it fits your criteria and your understanding which will not better you in any way

it's like trying to get a woman pregnant by masturbating by yourself it's a similar effort but it's not going to yield the right desired outcome no pun intended.

perhaps you should accept the fact that you're going to get opinions that you don't understand and you don't like but that doesn't mean they're not valid try stepping outside of your bubble. And if your eyes are open as opposed to closed with your mouth open you would have noticed that I explained why fundamentally there's no such thing as a mistake. And don't change the subject to pizzas I don't play those stupid games that have nothing to do with the actual conversation you can masturbate by yourself

you talk a lot of crap for somebody that's hiding behind a keyboard you know that right? Now I'm sure the women in your life henpeck you into this beta passive little man that you are and that you don't realize that you would have your face reformed if you talked with this much attitude to somebody actual face.

The truth is you don't want to learn so there's nothing for me to tell you that you're going to absorb and somehow integrate into your life because you only want to validation for your pseudo concepts. And I've already explained why you're retarded concepts and claims don't hold water and you're literally too dumb to understand them hence why I said I'd talk to you later. and why am I replying? Well quite simple I don't like to see people get hurt and with a mouth like yours you're most definitely going to get hurt if you ever choose to talk that way outside in public and especially if you have a family it would be tragic for you to leave them suddenly because a broken home is never a good thing.

So hopefully your estrogen levels will level out soon and your mind will open and your intelligence will increase as your smart-assness decreases and you might actually understand a thing or two about reality and I've read every one of your replies on here and I would have to agree with everybody else that they do in fact get dumber the more you talk. Just think for a second that if everybody says you're an idiot and you're the only one that says you're not an idiot then there's a good chance you're the idiot. just food for thought

you seem to be at a place in your mind where you cannot except any new info whatsoever and have your survival shield up to protect your precious understanding of the world for whatever reason

And so I'll just leave the conversation for now because nothing productive can be gained from this. If you can't understand a basic concept like what I stated and see how it applies in your life then we can't have a conversation so until the shields are down have a good day

From my experience and meditation i have come to realize that daily life echoes the "beginning" all throughout existence in some way shape of form.
and so the "why" to life is somewhere in daily life you just have to find it.

Well That sounds about as retarded as any of the other retarded beliefs stated here today

I think that everyone is overlooking a vital realization and that is that "mistake" fundamentally isn't real ,
People are taught this concept called mistake but that doesn't mean anything . it is a word for when things don't go as we have planed, especially it it surprises us in a negative way.

Burning the cake isn't a mistake because the world has burnt cakes in it and the physical matter is capable of being burnt and so if it's able to burn and it does burn then it's no mistake that the ignorant person forgot the cake in the oven to long

Its just the persons opinion that it's a mistake but fundamentally there's no such thing.

nice

I understand that. I was just pointing it out in order to show one of the many changes thst have been adopted in western culture . that's one of the problems when adopting a religion from a different time and language is that so much is lost and what's not lost is subject to the opinion of the translator because when translating a language the translator often times has to just pick a word that he thinks makes the most since because there might not be a word in English for whatever the word may be is said original tongue and worst of all most of the scriptures are in either dead Hebrew or dead Greek meaning we don't 100% know how to translate it we're only guessing because it's not used anymore so we might be unaware of how to take certain words and what their meanings and values were/are so it's a shot in the dark at best.

I remember this video I watched this guy was explaining difficulties of translating different languages and gave an example this time he was over in Asia I can't remember exactly where but it was a community where they mainly relied on boats for everything and he was talking to the translator in front of people and said a Passage in the particular book that they were discussing and he said the person was on the fence about a situation (in the book)

And the interpreter stopped and looked at him and kind of paused and then turn back to the audience and said a word and the audience laughed so he asked the interpreter "why did they laugh? It's a serious situation and he can't decide what to do next an interpreter told him that they don't have a word for fence because there are people that live in and on the water so the closest thing to "being on the fence" was something like "so he stood with his legs in separate boats wishing they were together"

What you can imagine would be an awkward silly situation to be standing one foot in one boat the other foot in the other and as you're starting to do the Jean-Claude Van Damme splits you're complaining that they're not one boat

so I can imagine you would completely missed the entire point of that scenario because you'd be envisioning some goofy situation where John Claude Van Damme is doing the splits across two boats lol.

and in the bible it seems as if names are important god supposedly emphasizes on it as well as Moses asks specifically for his name and the reader kinda gets the impression that you can't just nickname god or his son/mini me/self Because names are important

And yet here we are calling gods son by a name that didn't exist at the time that he supposedly was on earth and to make the situation even more awkward and confusing this name that we call him by that he new nothing about at the time isn't even the English translation of the Hebrew
Because supposedly his name was Yeshua which is best translated as salvation which sounds nothing like Jesus to me , but that could just be me and there of course was his other name which was more of a title than anything and that was The Christ The Anointed One
Which comes from Christo's so in English hos name and title/ spiritual job/ position was " Anointed Oil Of Salvation"
And it seems kinda funny to name a baby something like Salvation

but it makes more sense when you read the stories under the context of The Story characters are merely place holders and that the real meaning hidden within the story it's different than the story itself.

I'm not attacking you or challenging your Viewpoint just having conversation that's all.

Well for one the name Jesus couldn't of existed untill 1535ish because the letter j didn't exist untill around 1535. So there's a good possibility that the name Jesus was fabricated at the time of the making of the original king James bible .

There's hardly any recorded history on Jesus outside of the bible because he was ( originally) just a symbol a kind of place holder in the story but thanks to how stupid mankind seems to be and are lovely inherent habit to misunderstand and in force said misunderstanding we have turned the bible in to this fallacious literal thing that would look absolutely ridiculous to a people that have never seen or heard of it before and the only reason we justify are belief in it is do to indoctrination and the biological drive to survive so seeing others believe in something subconsciously makes us lean toward believing in it .

Better yet i think i found it . im not 100% sure (still listening to it as I type this) but so far I think this is the right video. Quite fascinating when you listen to it because it's a perspective that at least I've never heard of

https://youtu.be/v5uR75rxgks

I wish I could find the video but one of the videos I watched it finished putting the last nail in the coffin for my religious beliefs was a video by Manny P hall explaining the history of how the Bible was made and it's interesting to hear an opinion from somebody that died 30 years ago and was born in the 1800 because the gossip of the 50s is a little bit different than the gossip with nowadays and there's definitely information lost any information age when we all went to digital because he touches on some key points that are very hard to confirm yet sound valid

I was obsessed with figuring out the book of revilation for about 12 years . i just had to find this key or something that would let me decode it . that was ba k when i was still a Christian and ironically i lost my faith on the path i took to strengthen it because i started studying all kinds of religions and cults and magik /magic . but that little story aside the way i look at the bible is the same way i look at all other religions and the stories they tell and thst is that i feel like they are all telling the same story just their particular method of coating and hiding the message in allegories and apocalyptic Styles and that is the story of man from birth to death/ immortality and the struggles the lion between
It is a quest for immortality trying to find something that was lost long ago

among the philosophical Community yes depression seems to be a common occurrence however I was talking about before social hierarchies developed philosophers back when things were tribal

I do think that individualism has a hand in depression at least here in the US that is.
But from what I've gathered from anthropology and many other avenues is that the concept of "individual" is a relatively new social complexity and that for the majority of mankind's history the individual person didn't exist instead it was only the "tribe" that held an identity that was separate from the tribe on the other side of the mountain so to speak.
Now i have no idea what level of depression people had back then if they even had any at all?
My personal assumption is that depression wasn't even a thing back then and that's just my assumption basses on the few tribes still around today and the little bit that we know about them .

I feel like depression has this way of convincing people that their problems are so unique and can't be fixed or understood by others when in reality the issues and feelings that we have are probably pretty common despite how much we convince are selves otherwise .
It's also strange how the mind can not do what you want even though you are your mind lol example being me

I can sit here and explain hundreds of different reasons as to why life is better right now then it has been for thousands of years and how lucky i am to be here right now and yet still be depressed and look at the world and think of the future and be negative and knowing that the problem is just my perspective because i was raised wrong and knowing that i still can't change my perspective almost as if there's "me" the experiencer abd then there's "me" the giver of feelings and the 2 are separated yet held within the same mind abd can some how disagree with each other . It's so odd how the human being is multifaceted

I completely understand
I think I have a genetic disposition for it or something because I love life and I have an amazing wife and kid but there are times where I'm not sure if I can make it 5 more years and everything makes me bittersweet sad and then there are times that I'm not effected by anything and im like Thor in life emotionally. Certain time phases in life seem to be correlated to these "dips" in life happiness/ satisfaction

very well said .

I have had depression off and on all my life and I can say that you are hitting the nail right on the head

>>>Well if it doesnt exist, then our perceptions wouldnt even exist.<<<

And how did you come to that assumption? and it is just an assumption hopefully you realize that.


>>>It would mean that there is nothing in existence at all.<<<

according to what ? . again why/how did you come to that seemingly random negative opinion ?

>>> And our perception is just a made up. I mean, it is certainly the perspective you observe something to be complex, right?<<<

it's very easy for us to form an opinion and twisted view of an experience that we have had and not realize this because we do it 24/7 so it's an automatic unconscious habit we all have.

with that said the experience that you remember is made up like you said
but with practice a person can learn how to observe life and just be in the moment and observe without judgement or opinion (more like greatly reduced IMO I don't think a person can live in the moment completely without opinion but you can reduce it significantly).





>>>It's your point of view that's complex, not the element you are viewing. So the actual self of things shouldn't be too disorienting itself.<<<



well like we've been talking about this would be perspective face it's entirely your perspective if you want to take it as simple or complex but it's up to the experiencer.

>>> Putting the ideology of disagreeing in simplicity of things in people's mind won't be of any use. Rather it would be a bit nonsensical in a way.<<<
perspective perspective perspective

As far as I understand, wisdom is the ability to take information which is knowledge of the past and apply it in the present in order to achieve a specific desired outcome in the future .

And how do you know that this fundamental reality of Simplicity exists? Didn't you use your perspective to observe it? Which is different than mine

but can any of this be observed in real life?

What exactly is the point/goal of this?

I agree . and yes it was an interesting time in my life I was going through several life and perspective shifts and as they say when it rains it pours..

I'm having trouble with the quote feature on this platform so bear with me well I do a copy and paste jerry-rig real quick


>>>am a bit surprised that you had such long times of pronounced dreaming. I presume that you were able to get up do some activities, like eat and drink. <<<<

I think you misunderstood exactly how I experienced those dreams so I will try to rephrase it a little bit

The way I experienced those long dreams is not comprehendible and the reason I confidently say that It's not comprehendible is because me being the one that had them I cannot fully comprehend them like I did when they happened if that makes any sense?

Because over the course of about two or three days they faded into just being a memory and I made it back into reality so to speak and while feeding back into reality I had to lose the majority of those memories because how I experienced it was somehow I experienced every day of waking up going to work getting a job getting promoted moving packing a moving truck dealing with crap at work again taking my kid here and there every single day of life in a linear fashion not just as a memory but as a everyday experience so in my mind 3 months had gone by linearly day after day not in passing memory and so upon waking up and realizing it had only been one actual night in fundamental reality this clearly caused confusion and a lot of emotions because now the process started of me getting my cognition back to normal but to do so I had to lose the linearity of all those memories and I had to turn it into a smaller past memory or reference memory is some call it.

I know it doesn't make any sense how on Earth could somebody dream of day-to-day life not skipping through it for three solid months within only one night it sounds crazy and I can't even really imagine it even though I did it and I don't want it to happen again because it made me question the value of everything and on top of that left me in a very confused state where I did not leave the house for a few days until I came back to normal felt a little unhealthy for the mind LOL

>>>I also hope that you have a supportive network, because I don't think that I would ever get enough peace from others and various duties.<<<


nope I'm a one-man wolf pack lol.

>>>I do have an ongoing interest in dreams, but probably also see it in the context of some other perspectives, including ideas such as Aboriginal dreamtime and shamanic journeys. I believe that it is a fascinating area, but I do think that there are some potential dangers, like having difficulty with making a way back to reality.<<<

I do too that is in fact one the reasons I stopped pursuing it was I had does long dreams and then I also had dreamed that it appeared as if a hitman was trying to dispose of me and almost succeeded I don't want to go into detail on it but it was quite scary.

I've also interpreted dreams that I've had to mean something it's going to happen in the future and lo and behold they do in fact come true but not verbatim what I mean is I interpret what I feel is the moral of the story and what the outcome was supposed to convey and then a situation sometime later on in life happens to everybody's surprise except mine when I see how the moral of the situation happens to a line in a mirror Lake similarity TV Green version that I had earlier interpreted

The dream realm also seems to have levels to it or you could look at it like a % 1 ratio with a standard dream being like a level 1 or something like 50% because the realness or intensity can be experienced in different amounts as well as with lucid dreaming there seems to be different amounts of how Lucid you can be in the dream likewise there seems to be different amounts of how real the dreams they can seam.

I've on a few occasions had dreams where i became 100% lucid as in i was 100% the "me" that i am when awake and to top it off I was having one of the level 4 dreams as i like to call them

They make real life seem like some old Nintendo video game on a broken TV screen LOL everything is so sharp and vibrant and high definition and you can feel every fiber body and you can feel the air as it goes in your lungs it's like your completely integrated into everything Everything You Touch taste smell is a thousand times more than you do in the waking state yet somehow you can comprehend it in the moment and in this state you can experience a ridiculous amount of information within just a few split seconds of actual reality in fact one time I lay down to go to sleep and instantly fell into this state the second my head hit the pillow and i had a long vivid dream then woke up from the dream plane exploding and I jerked so hard that i came off the bed like I had bounced off of it and freaked my wife out because she said i had just closed my eyes 3 to 5 sec before freaking out .
I was surprised to see that the clock hadn't even changed the minute hand yet! . how the mind can take in that much info 8n a few sec is crazy .

I remember Terence McKenna said one time that the Matrix is language and I couldn't agree more.

Language is only about 150k yr old and life has been on this planet allot longer then that

And like i said (to me) the only difference between this realm and the dream realm is that this realm is held together by language and group belief and i say that for many reasons thst im not going to go into in this thread because it would take far to long and i would get way to side tracked so i will try to stay on point.

I feel that we have such a hard time understanding dreams because we've grown accustomed to using only one Avenue for understanding things and that is language

you most likely don't know how to use a spear to kill your lunch if you've lived in the city your entire life and that's only because you haven't had the practice where is somebody that does it daily can "catch his lunch" relatively easy
And so apply that mentality to language and a world not held together by language. So in a world that does not have language as its means of fundamental communication that means that it has some other form of fundamental communication and from what I can see the form of communication that predates mankind in his opinions and habits and styles is the communication of experience because why else would it be anything different? Because there's one thing that all animals have in common with us and likewise us with them and that is that we all experience

And so this is why when you dream you have crazy experiences that are obviously not literal that is because experience is like talking is to us it's just that our minds are so atrophied to that aspect of life that we don't understand it much like you can't expect a two month old baby to give a speech on quantum mechanics and not mumble his words.