There's a theory -- I'm not sure who deserves credit for it -- that dreaming goes on all the time, but that it is imperceptible when we are awake because it is drowned out by the much "brighter" and "louder" stimuli of waking consciousness -- much as the stars are always there but only become visible when there is no sunlight. In theory, then, it should be possible to experience dreaming during waking if the "sunlight" can be tuned out.
I think that's what's happened with my two recent "vision" experiences. Both occurred while I was praying the Rosary -- a meditative-like state where the discursive mind is disengaged and external stimuli are tuned out -- and at least one of them had features that mark it as being more like a dream than like a hallucination. In the "Étude brute?" vision, I was able to move and act in the vision -- walking through a wall from one cavern into another -- while at the same time my physical body was sitting in a chair and not moving at all. I would assume that in a classic hallucination, you would sea unreal stimuli within the real world and would react to them by actually moving your physical body. Therefore, I think that what I had is probably accurately described as a "waking dream," and I have referred to it as such.
On July 9, I was reading Doctrine and Covenants Section 110 and noticed language that hadn't really stood out to me that last time I'd read it (which was more than 20 years ago):
The veil was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our understanding were opened. We saw the Lord standing upon the breastwork of the pulpit, before us; and under his feet was a paved work of pure gold, in color like amber. . . .
After this vision closed, the heavens were again opened unto us; and Moses appeared before us . . . .
After this vision had closed, another great and glorious vision burst upon us; for Elijah the prophet, who was taken to heaven without tasting death, stood before us . . . (vv. 1-2, 11, 13).
In the past, I had always thought of this as a series of actual visitations by Jesus, Moses, and Elijah. The visionary character of the experience (indicated by the phrases I have bolded) hadn't really registered. The language about the heavens opening and closing never had any specific meaning for me before, but now I recognize it as a very natural way of describing visions like my own. There is a sense that the visual field "opens up," as if one is seeing behind a backdrop, and when I read Smith and Cowdery's language about a veil being taken away and the heavens opening, it seemed to me that they had to be describing the same kind of experience. These things are impossible to express properly in words, but the words they chose are immediately understandable to one who has had the experience, just as those who have experienced the "fire on Emmaus" know it when it is described.
So Moses and Elijah weren't actually there in the Kirtland Temple and didn't actually give Smith and Cowdery the "keys." They just had a vision that that happened, which is not the same thing at all. I'm not discounting dreams and visions, of course, but vision is not reality. I mean, I myself have had a vision of the Holy Family, but I would never presume to say that I have seen Jesus Christ with my own eyes or anything like that.
Visions need to be clearly distinguished from actual events. Visions are symbolic.
2 comments:
There seem to be different opinions about whether the events captured in section 110 actually happened or not (and were recorded accurately), since Joseph Smith continued to refer to the return of Elijah as a future event and didn't ever refer to this event in a public or private discussion during his lifetime.
Even though the current Section 110 has been changed to read in the first person, as if Joseph and Oliver are writing and saying this, the original journal entry it comes from was written by Warren Cowdery in JS's journal, and it was in the third person.
I like your interpretation or thought of this being a vision as a way to say it kind of doesn't matter. It was a vision of Elijah, even if what was recorded by Warren is accurate, not Elijah himself, so whether it did happen or it didn't, Elijah didn't actually return in 1836. Which has fairly significant implications for the LDS church if so.
Perhaps whoever wrote the vision was not writing a vision had by Joseph and Oliver, but rather a vision the writer had ABOUT Joseph and Oliver. Perhaps this recorder (whether Warren or not) saw a yet-future event.
Post a Comment