Aristotle
384-322 B.C.E. - Wrote in Greek
On Prophesying by Dreams
Written 350 B.C.E
Translated by J. I. Beare
On Prophesying by Dreams
By Aristotle
Part 1
As to the divination which takes place in sleep, and is said to be based
on dreams, we cannot lightly either dismiss it with contempt or give it
implicit confidence. The fact that all persons, or many, suppose dreams
to possess a special significance, tends to inspire us with belief in it
[such divination], as founded on the testimony of experience; and indeed
that divination in dreams should, as regards some subjects, be genuine,
is not incredible, for it has a show of reason; from which one might form
a like opinion also respecting all other dreams. Yet the fact of our seeing
no probable cause to account for such divination tends to inspire us with
distrust. For, in addition to its further unreasonableness, it is absurd
to combine the idea that the sender of such dreams should be God with the
fact that those to whom he sends them are not the best and wisest, but
merely commonplace persons. If, however, we abstract from the causality
of God, none of the other causes assigned appears probable. For that certain
persons should have foresight in dreams concerning things destined to take
place at the Pillars of Hercules, or on the banks of the Borysthenes, seems
to be something to discover the explanation of which surpasses the wit
of man. Well then, the dreams in question must be regarded either as causes,
or as tokens, of the events, or else as coincidences; either as all, or
some, of these, or as one only. I use the word 'cause' in the sense in
which the moon is [the cause] of an eclipse of the sun, or in which fatigue
is [a cause] of fever; 'token' [in the sense in which] the entrance of
a star [into the shadow] is a token of the eclipse, or [in which] roughness
of the tongue [is a token] of fever; while by 'coincidence' I mean, for
example, the occurrence of an eclipse of the sun while some one is taking
a walk; for the walking is neither a token nor a cause of the eclipse,
nor the eclipse [a cause or token] of the walking. For this reason no coincidence
takes place according to a universal or general rule. Are we then to say
that some dreams are causes, others tokens, e.g. of events taking place
in the bodily organism? At all events, even scientific physicians tell
us that one should pay diligent attention to dreams, and to hold this view
is reasonable also for those who are not practitioners, but speculative
philosophers. For the movements which occur in the daytime [within the
body] are, unless very great and violent, lost sight of in contrast with
the waking movements, which are more impressive. In sleep the opposite
takes place, for then even trifling movements seem considerable. This is
plain in what often happens during sleep; for example, dreamers fancy that
they are affected by thunder and lightning, when in fact there are only
faint ringings in their ears; or that they are enjoying honey or other
sweet savours, when only a tiny drop of phlegm is flowing down [the oesophagus];
or that they are walking through fire, and feeling intense heat, when there
is only a slight warmth affecting certain parts of the body. When they
are awakened, these things appear to them in this their true character.
But since the beginnings of all events are small, so, it is clear, are
those also of the diseases or other affections about to occur in our bodies.
In conclusion, it is manifest that these beginnings must be more evident
in sleeping than in waking moments.
Nay, indeed, it is not improbable that some of the presentations
which come before the mind in sleep may even be causes of the actions cognate
to each of them. For as when we are about to act [in waking hours], or
are engaged in any course of action, or have already performed certain
actions, we often find ourselves concerned with these actions, or performing
them, in a vivid dream; the cause whereof is that the dream-movement has
had a way paved for it from the original movements set up in the daytime;
exactly so, but conversely, it must happen that the movements set up first
in sleep should also prove to be starting-points of actions to be performed
in the daytime, since the recurrence by day of the thought of these actions
also has had its way paved for it in the images before the mind at night.
Thus then it is quite conceivable that some dreams may be tokens and causes
[of future events].
Most [so-called prophetic] dreams are, however, to be classed as
mere coincidences, especially all such as are extravagant, and those in
the fulfilment of which the dreamers have no initiative, such as in the
case of a sea-fight, or of things taking place far away. As regards these
it is natural that the fact should stand as it does whenever a person,
on mentioning something, finds the very thing mentioned come to pass. Why,
indeed, should this not happen also in sleep? The probability is, rather,
that many such things should happen. As, then, one's mentioning a particular
person is neither token nor cause of this person's presenting himself,
so, in the parallel instance, the dream is, to him who has seen it, neither
token nor cause of its [so-called] fulfilment, but a mere coincidence.
Hence the fact that many dreams have no 'fulfilment', for coincidence do
not occur according to any universal or general law.
Part 2
On the whole, forasmuch as certain of the lower animals also dream,
it may be concluded that dreams are not sent by God, nor are they designed
for this purpose [to reveal the future]. They have a divine aspect, however,
for Nature [their cause] is divinely planned, though not itself divine.
A special proof [of their not being sent by God] is this: the power of
foreseeing the future and of having vivid dreams is found in persons of
inferior type, which implies that God does not send their dreams; but merely
that all those whose physical temperament is, as it were, garrulous and
excitable, see sights of all descriptions; for, inasmuch as they experience
many movements of every kind, they just chance to have visions resembling
objective facts, their luck in these matters being merely like that of
persons who play at even and odd. For the principle which is expressed
in the gambler's maxim: 'If you make many throws your luck must change,'
holds in their case also.
That many dreams have no fulfilment is not strange, for it is so
too with many bodily toms and weather-signs, e.g. those of rain or wind.
For if another movement occurs more influential than that from which, while
[the event to which it pointed was] still future, the given token was derived,
the event [to which such token pointed] does not take place. So, of the
things which ought to be accomplished by human agency, many, though well-planned
are by the operation of other principles more powerful [than man's agency]
brought to nought. For, speaking generally, that which was about to happen
is not in every case what now is happening, nor is that which shall hereafter
he identical with that which is now going to be. Still, however, we must
hold that the beginnings from which, as we said, no consummation follows,
are real beginnings, and these constitute natural tokens of certain events,
even though the events do not come to pass.
As for [prophetic] dreams which involve not such beginnings [sc.
of future events] as we have here described, but such as are extravagant
in times, or places, or magnitudes; or those involving beginnings which
are not extravagant in any of these respects, while yet the persons who
see the dream hold not in their own hands the beginnings [of the event
to which it points]: unless the foresight which such dreams give is the
result of pure coincidence, the following would be a better explanation
of it than that proposed by Democritus, who alleges 'images' and 'emanations'
as its cause. As, when something has caused motion in water or air, this
[the portion of water or air], and, though the cause has ceased to operate,
such motion propagates itself to a certain point, though there the prime
movement is not present; just so it may well be that a movement and a consequent
sense-perception should reach sleeping souls from the objects from which
Democritus represents 'images' and 'emanations' coming; that such movements,
in whatever way they arrive, should be more perceptible at night [than
by day], because when proceeding thus in the daytime they are more liable
to dissolution (since at night the air is less disturbed, there being then
less wind); and that they shall be perceived within the body owing to sleep,
since persons are more sensitive even to slight sensory movements when
asleep than when awake. It is these movements then that cause 'presentations',
as a result of which sleepers foresee the future even relatively to such
events as those referred to above. These considerations also explain why
this experience befalls commonplace persons and not the most intelligent.
For it would have regularly occurred both in the daytime and to the wise
had it been God who sent it; but, as we have explained the matter, it is
quite natural that commonplace persons should be those who have foresight
[in dreams]. For the mind of such persons is not given to thinking, but,
as it were, derelict, or totally vacant, and, when once set moving, is
borne passively on in the direction taken by that which moves it. With
regard to the fact that some persons who are liable to derangement have
this foresight, its explanation is that their normal mental movements do
not impede [the alien movements], but are beaten off by the latter. Therefore
it is that they have an especially keen perception of the alien
movements.
That certain persons in particular should have vivid dreams, e.g.
that familiar friends should thus have foresight in a special degree respecting
one another, is due to the fact that such friends are most solicitous on
one another's behalf. For as acquaintances in particular recognize and
perceive one another a long way off, so also they do as regards the sensory
movements respecting one another; for sensory movements which refer to
persons familiarly known are themselves more familiar. Atrabilious persons,
owing to their impetuosity, are, when they, as it were, shoot from a distance,
expert at hitting; while, owing to their mutability, the series of movements
deploys quickly before their minds. For even as the insane recite, or con
over in thought, the poems of Philaegides, e.g. the Aphrodite, whose parts
succeed in order of similitude, just so do they
the
'atrabilious'
go on and on stringing sensory movements together.Moreover, owing to their
aforesaid impetuosity, one movement within them is not liable to be knocked
out of its course by some other movement.
The most skilful interpreter of dreams is he who has the faculty
of observing resemblances. Any one may interpret dreams which are vivid
and plain. But, speaking of 'resemblances', I mean that dream presentations
are analogous to the forms reflected in water, as indeed we have already
stated. In the latter case, if the motion in the water be great, the reflexion
has no resemblance to its original, nor do the forms resemble the real
objects. Skilful, indeed, would he be in interpreting such reflexions who
could rapidly discern, and at a glance comprehend, the scattered and distorted
fragments of such forms, so as to perceive that one of them represents
a man, or a horse, Or anything whatever. Accordingly, in the other case
also, in a similar way, some such thing as this [blurred image] is all
that a dream amounts to; for the internal movement effaces the clearness
of the dream.
The questions, therefore, which we proposed as to the nature of
sleep and the dream, and the cause to which each of them is due, and also
as to divination as a result of dreams, in every form of it, have now been
discussed.
THE END
|
