All three states of waking, etc. are only three dreams - Bhagavatam
V Subrahmanian
Waking, Dream, and Deep Sleep — All Three Are Dreams (According to the Bhāgavata)
The Śrīmad Bhāgavata contains the following verses (7th Skandha, Chapter 15):
आबाधितोऽपि ह्याभासो यथा वस्तुतया स्मृतः ।
दुर्घटत्वादैन्द्रियकं तद्वदर्थविकल्पितम् ॥ ०७.१५.०५८ ॥
An appearance (ābhāsa), though unreal, is mistaken through ignorance as a real object. Such cognition is not produced by the senses as a valid means of knowledge (pramāṇa); it is merely an illusion (vikalpitam).
क्षित्यादीनामिहार्थानां छाया न कतमापि हि ।
न सङ्घातो विकारोऽपि न पृथङ्नान्वितो मृषा ॥ ०७.१५.०५९ ॥
This appearance cannot be regarded as a real transformation (vikāra); it is itself a mithyā (dependent, unreal) entity. The body-mind complex made of prithvi and other elements, is unreal.
धातवोऽवयवित्वाच्च तन्मात्रावयवैर्विना ।
न स्युर्ह्यसत्यवयविन्यसन्नवयवोऽन्ततः ॥ ०७.१५.०६० ॥Since the body comprises the five elements, it cannot exist without the subtle elements. Because the body is illusory, its causal subtle elements are naturally illusory.
स्यात्सादृश्यभ्रमस्तावद्विकल्पे सति वस्तुनः ।
जाग्रत्स्वापौ यथा स्वप्ने तथा विधिनिषेधता ॥ ०७.१५.०६१ ॥
Each preceding illusion becomes the basis for a subsequent illusion. If the entire world-experience is mithyā, what place remains for scriptural injunctions and prohibitions (vidhi-niṣedha)?
The answer is: even within a dream one may experience both a waking state and a dream state. Within that dream, the dream-waking state enjoys a relative reality distinct from the dream proper. This is the empirical (vyāvahārika) reality within the dream. Upon waking, however, one recognizes that even that dream-waking state was not ultimately real.
Similarly, within this mithyā world, the scriptures that teach injunctions and prohibitions possess a relative level of reality and validity.
भावाद्वैतं क्रियाद्वैतं द्रव्याद्वैतं तथात्मनः ।
वर्तयन् स्वानुभूत्येह त्रीन् स्वप्नान् धुनुते मुनिः ॥ ०७.१५.०६२ ॥
By cultivating bhāvādvaita (non-duality in understanding), kriyādvaita (non-duality in action), and dravyādvaita (non-duality regarding objects), a sage acquires the maturity necessary for Self-knowledge and thereby shakes off the three dreams that constitute saṃsāra.
Śrīdhara Svāmin also gives another interpretation:
वस्तुनि भेदबुद्धिरेकः स्वप्नः — Seeing difference in objects is the first dream.
ततस्तत्तदधिकारभेदेन कर्मभेदबुद्धिर्द्वितीयः — Seeing differences in duties and actions based on distinctions among individuals is the second dream.
ततः सत्कर्मसाधितं फलं ममैव भोग्यमिति तृतीयः — Thinking that the fruits obtained through action belong exclusively to oneself for enjoyment is the third dream.
By overcoming these three, the sage becomes free from saṃsāra.
The “Three Dreams” in the Aitareya Upaniṣad
Interestingly, the Bhāgavata's teaching of “three dreams” echoes the statement of the Aitareya Upaniṣad:
त्रय आवसथाः त्रयः स्वप्नाः (1.3.12)
“There are three abodes; there are three dreams.”
Śaṅkara comments:
त्रयः स्वप्ना जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषुप्त्याख्याः ।
“The three dreams are known as the waking state (jāgrat), dream state (svapna), and deep sleep (suṣupti).”
An objection may arise:
ननु जागरितं प्रबोधरूपत्वान्न स्वप्नः ।
“But waking cannot be called a dream, since it is itself an awakened state.”
Śaṅkara replies:
नैवम् ; स्वप्न एव ।
“Not so; it is indeed a dream.”
Why?
परमार्थस्वात्मप्रबोधाभावात् स्वप्नवदसद्वस्तुदर्शनाच्च ।
“Because there is no awakening to the supreme Self, and because, as in a dream, unreal objects are experienced.”
Thus, waking, dream, and deep sleep are all dreams.
How can waking be a dream?
Because one has not awakened to the ultimate Reality of the Self. Just as unreal objects appear in a dream, so too only mithyā objects are experienced in the waking state. Therefore waking also belongs to the realm of dream.
(The Bhāgavata verses quoted above should be remembered in this context.)
Confirmation from the Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad
The same conclusion is reinforced by the Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad.
After describing the three states, the seventh mantra declares:
नान्तःप्रज्ञं नबहिःप्रज्ञं नोभयतःप्रज्ञं नप्रज्ञानघनं नप्रज्ञं नाप्रज्ञम् ।
अदृश्यमव्यवहार्यमग्राह्यमलक्षणमचिन्त्यमव्यपदेश्यमेकात्मप्रत्ययसारं प्रपञ्चोपशमं शान्तं शिवमद्वैतं चतुर्थं मन्यन्ते स आत्मा स विज्ञेयः ॥ ७ ॥
“The Fourth (Turīya) is neither the inwardly conscious state, nor the outwardly conscious state, nor a mixture of the two, nor a mass of consciousness. It is unseen, beyond empirical dealings, beyond grasp, indefinable, inconceivable, indescribable, the essence of the certainty of the one Self, the cessation of the world (prapañcopaśama), peace, auspiciousness, non-duality (advaita). That is the Self; that is to be known.”
Śaṅkara comments:
प्रतीयमानपादत्रयरूपवैलक्षण्यात् ।
“The Self is distinct from the three states that are experienced.”
He illustrates this:
प्रतीयमानसर्पदण्डभूच्छिद्रादिव्यतिरिक्ता यथा रज्जुः
“Just as a rope is distinct from the snake, stick, crack in the ground, and other appearances imagined upon it.”
Similarly, due to ignorance of Brahman, one and the same Brahman is experienced as the three states of waking, dream, and deep sleep.
Gauḍapāda on the Unreality of the World
The Māṇḍūkya Kārikā states:
प्रपञ्चो यदि विद्येत निवर्तेत न संशयः ।
मायामात्रमिदं द्वैतमद्वैतं परमार्थतः ॥ १७ ॥
“If the world truly existed, it could indeed cease. But it is merely māyā; duality is only an appearance. In truth, Reality is non-dual.”
Śaṅkara explains:
If the world truly existed, it could cease. But like the snake imagined on a rope, it never truly exists in the first place. Just as the snake disappears upon discrimination, so too this world of duality is only māyā. In ultimate reality (paramārtha), there is only non-duality.
The next verse says:
विकल्पो विनिवर्तेत कल्पितो यदि केनचित् ।
उपदेशादयं वादो ज्ञाते द्वैतं न विद्यते ॥ १८ ॥
“If duality were truly imagined by someone, it would cease. This teaching exists only for instruction; once Reality is known, duality no longer exists.”
Śaṅkara explains that distinctions such as teacher, scripture, and student are themselves provisional, serving only until knowledge arises. Once the Truth is realized, duality is no more.
The spirit of these Kārikās and Śaṅkara’s Bhāṣya is clearly reflected in the Bhāgavata verses discussed earlier.
Cause and Effect Are Not Truly Different
The Bhāgavata further says:
कार्यकारणवस्त्वैक्यदर्शनं पटतन्तुवत् ।
अवस्तुत्वाद्विकल्पस्य भावाद्वैतं तदुच्यते ॥ ०७.१५.०६३ ॥
“Seeing the identity of cause and effect, like cloth and threads, is called bhāvādvaita. The effect has no independent reality; therefore distinctions are unreal.”
This is beautifully taught in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (6.1.4–6):
वाचारम्भणं विकारो नामधेयं मृत्तिकेत्येव सत्यम् ॥
“The modification is merely a name arising from speech; clay alone is real.”
Likewise for gold and iron.
The teaching is that the cause alone is the underlying reality pervading all effects. Pots, ornaments, and other products are merely names and forms. Their substance is nothing but their material cause.
Therefore, when the Bhāgavata says:
अवस्तुत्वाद्विकल्पस्य
“The distinctions are unreal,”
it echoes precisely the Upaniṣadic teaching that effects possess no independent reality apart from their cause.
Śaṅkara’s Brahma Sūtra Bhāṣya
Śaṅkara says in the Bhāṣya on Brahma Sūtra 2.1.14:
सर्वव्यवहाराणामेव प्राग्ब्रह्मात्मताविज्ञानात्सत्यत्वोपपत्तेः स्वप्नव्यवहारस्येव प्राक्प्रबोधात्...
“All worldly and Vedic transactions remain valid prior to the realization of Brahman as the Self, just as dream transactions remain valid prior to awakening.”
Until the realization of the identity of the Self and Brahman arises, no one regards worldly modifications as unreal. Through ignorance, every being identifies with them as “I” and “mine,” abandoning its natural identity as Brahman.
This is precisely the idea contained in the Bhāgavata statement:
जाग्रत्स्वापौ यथा स्वप्ने तथा विधिनिषेधता ॥ ०७.१५.०६१ ॥
Just as waking and dreaming can exist within a dream, so too scriptural injunctions and prohibitions have validity within the empirical realm.
Reflection in Gauḍapāda Kārikā
The Bhāgavata verse:
न सङ्घातो विकारोऽपि न पृथङ्नान्वितो मृषा ॥ ०७.१५.०५९ ॥
finds a close parallel in Gauḍapāda’s Kārikā:
सङ्घाताः स्वप्नवत्सर्व आत्ममायाविसर्जिताः ॥ (3.10)
“All aggregates are like dream-objects, projected by the māyā of the Self.”
Śaṅkara comments:
आत्मनो माया अविद्या... न परमार्थतः सन्ति
“The body and all aggregates are projected by ignorance (avidyā), the māyā of the Self; they do not exist in the ultimate sense.”
Conclusion
Thus, numerous Upaniṣads, Gauḍapāda’s Kārikā, Śaṅkara’s Bhāṣyas, and the Bhāgavata speak with one voice:
Waking, dream, and deep sleep are all “dreams” from the standpoint of ultimate Reality.
The world of plurality is mithyā—an appearance dependent on Brahman.
The sole Reality is non-dual Brahman, the Turīya, which is beyond all three states.
Realization consists in awakening from these three dreams to one’s true nature as Brahman.
Om Tat Sat.