I’m not sure about that segue. By, “within the symbolic content…” do you actually mean “of the symbolic content…” ? There is a difference, or maybe I’m reading it wrong. Could you please rephrase that?
I can see the totemic aspect re this discussion because of the ‘representational’ element. But what does the Freudian totem with its connotations have to do with the context of the ‘helper’ dreams? Are the ‘helpers’ of sexual significance or were you using that totem as merely an example discharged of its particular characteristics?
Interesting that you bring up Jung. He once said that God spoke through dreams and visions. That would seem to make a case for the first Hermetic principle. By the way, you didn’t say if you considered the principle a valid one.
I gather you mean, ‘allay’?
Yes, as I noted in an earlier post there may be safeguards employed. Whether by the inquirer or an ‘other’, I’m not sure.
If that is so - or more accurately, the potential for that - it implies an ‘agent’ independent of the inquirer (assuming you mean by ‘inquirer’ the person having the dream experience) who is aware of a peril that the inquirer is unaware of. Following along that line, would the frequency of ‘helper’ dreams be an indicator as to proximity to destructive regions? Similar to, let’s say, a spaceship registering the outermost traction of a black hole?
Or, upward? Though in the omnidirectional display of direction such as implied by, ‘All is Mind’, then up, down, left right, etc., may be irrelevant.
By the way, I understand how you use ‘apotheosis’, but it’s a tricky word to use in some contexts because one of its roots is, ‘the act of making someone into a god’. Then again, maybe you are of the opinion that dreams/OBEs, especially high-risk ones, are possibly preparatory for such.