Putting It Out There

standing-on-the-edge-of-the-worldHere is an excellent example of how each dream we have during the night can add to the understanding or viewpoint of the initial dream, or at least move the conversation forward. In her first dream, The Negotiation, Jeane put conditions on her ability to receive a package, i.e., information. In her second dream she is demanding greater freedom. And it’s all a part of an inner conversation with herself. (At the end of this post there are instructions and a link to download this recording to your computer.)

Jeane: So the second dream keeps eluding me. Again everybody in this dream is masculine, except there’s a man and he has a son who seems like he’s just at that early adolescent stage who’s with him. But it’s a society that’s more Middle Eastern, so the boy’s a little more mature for his age and still innocent.

But it feels like the man is trying to negotiate something, like you’d say it is like the society is such that people are almost like serfs in a way, and he’s going into a courtyard with someone who’s in charge, and you feel like he’s trying to do something that protects more of the freedom of his son in a society which kind of places you where you are.

I mean, it’s not like you have much freedom of choice. He’s trying to see that he can get what freedom there is, that’s the best way I can put it, because he doesn’t particularly like the system, I think, but I can’t remember enough details of that dream.

I can just remember the feel of it, like outside in the courtyard with the sun shining down and they’re wearing more Middle Eastern garb, but you can see what he’s trying to do is something that creates more liberation for his son, within a society where other people are kind of determining where you’re at.

John: The only thing that’s unusual about it is that the personal has to do with something that involves the son as if that is something separate, and that you’re compromising yourself to try to make that happen in relationship to the collective. There’s something in the collective that opposes that.

So, if you pulled it all together, it’s different. In other words, if you pull all of that as part of yourself, then what it is like is you’re standing with a certain impetus of something that wants to come through that is opposed by that which is in the overall environment around you. And so you’re having to feel the tension of what that’s like to try to make that come through.

So the sensation is that there’s a sense of what is in front that one has to get through, that stands as a block or a barrier. But then there’s the suspense of something inside that is identified as connected to you, that you’re trying to bring with you, that is part of you, that you’re trying to get accepted, or to fit in, to the overall space, or the freedom of the space.

So you’re trying to bring one thing that’s one way into something else that’s another way, and that something else that’s the other way is a type of overall collective. And the part of you that you’re trying to bring through, in trying to bring it through there’s something pent up, there’s an energetic block.

So the dream doesn’t tell you, doesn’t complete that. It just says that that exists. You can even call it latent suspense or tenuous potentiality. You don’t know which way it’s going to go, whether it’s going to knock you back, but you’re bringing it into the scenario. In other words, in spite of that you’re still bringing that with you. You haven’t let go of it, you’re bringing it with you.

So how does that fit with the first dream? So in the first dream you hear the memo, so in this dream you have the sense of what needs to be. In the first dream you bring something through and you do what’s necessary to get it there, and in this dream you take and you get it there, you get into the courtyard with it.

In the first dream there is something that needs to be accepted or abided by, almost like an element that needs to, almost like a kind of compromise or something. It’s viewed as a type of intermediating conduct in the first dream, and in the second dream it is still something that is more like a type of… in other words, it’s like the decision hasn’t been made yet. It sits there, but the decision hasn’t been made. You haven’t broken through, in other words. You’re there, but how does that create the correspondence so that you, with the son, are accepted by this other?

In the first dream there is a kind of a manner of negotiating. In other words, there’s a compromise that’s made. The second dream is giving you information on the first dream because there’s something kind of wrong with that first dream, the fact that there is an interceding idea that’s brought into the equation in order for it to happen, which means that’s a type of negotiating.

The second dream may be complete. I keep thinking there has to be a third dream, but it may be complete in and of itself because in the first dream you don’t wait, you figure out how to make it so that it can be accommodated. So that actually compromises it. And in the second dream it sits there as something yet unresolved; the decision hasn’t been made.

Now, on a higher energetic level maybe that’s as good as it gets? Because when you actually take and you get something so that it is accommodative, when you arrange that in the outer so that it’s accommodative, it’s supposed to complete something. But what it does is it tends to cause a letting go. You lose a suspense. You lay back. You lose an edge. There’s an acuity that goes away. It makes no sense, but that seems to happen.

But in the suspense of this sort of thing, there is still a process that’s animated, that can work towards bringing it across. So this is like a correction to the first dream in which there is a negotiated consequence. And so you’ve taken this and you’ve actually progressed this. In other words, you didn’t stay in the negotiation where something isn’t quite right – you’ve gone back into holding it in its suspense.

You’d like the full package. You’d like all of the information, so you’re left agape. But you’ve taken a step back to try to catch up with it and accommodate it. I mean, you have your defense mechanism there.

In the second dream, you’re standing out there, you’ve brought your son along and whatnot and you’re standing out there; there’s nothing that says that this is going to be acceptable. You introduced a mannerism in the first dream where you were going to get this or that or the other to help accommodate it.

When you receive it, the question is: are you going to be able to receive that or not? And the issue you have with receiving it is that you might be disappointed because you haven’t gotten some interceding thing in the picture first. So that’s a compromise. In other words, you created a conditionality upon which you could receive it.

And in the second dream you’re just standing out there. You don’t know. I mean, you’re putting it all forward, but the collective could say no. You could get swatted down on that one. On the first dream you have a fall back. In other words, you weren’t going to be happy unless something else was there first. That’s where the concept comes in. It’s not totally let go.

The second dream has more possibility and potentiality to it because you’re standing out there and it can go this way, or it can go that way, but you’re energetically engaged. In the first dream you brought something else in there to help condition the unfoldment. But in the second dream you don’t know whether your son and you are going to be rejected by the collective force out there that has its ways, or not. You’re making your statement; the reply hasn’t come back. You’re just there.

To download this file, Right Click (for PCs) or Control Click (for Macs) and Save: Putting It Out There

Leave a Reply