340. Now one might object that dream-experiences could not come about if the physical body was a "corpse". But from where does one know that? Is there any kind of reality which renders this in the smallest way a probability? No, absolutely not. One cannot find a single thing that could in any way prove that this "awake state" should not exist, and continue to do so, even though the process we call "death" had suddenly taken place in the physical body. On the contrary, everything shows that it does indeed exist and that it continues to do so.
      Naturally, it should be clearly understood here for what purpose, in reality, the physical body is a tool. After all, it is generally understood to be a tool used by the I for making direct contact with physical matter, with purely material energy, or with purely material events in daily life. But dreams prove to be experiences which take place without any assistance on the part of the physical senses. That these latter experiences in many cases prove to be fragmentary recollections of things one has experienced or thought of in one's awake physical existence, does not invalidate their identity as "experiences". One might say that they are "memory-pictures" of physical day-conscious life. But what are "memory-pictures'? Are we not already touching upon a form of experience that is not physical? Are "memories" not precisely the details in an individual's "inner world", that is to say a world he experiences alongside his outward physical one?
      When an individual "remembers" something, is this not, in fact, the same as "seeing" or "reviewing" his own inner collection of experience-material? Is this material not clearly a world of details, both beautiful and ugly, both pleasant and unpleasant?
      That all these details simply express experiences or events that have already taken place during awake, physical existence, does not at all alter the fact that the I, by virtue of the memory-faculty, "sees" or "experiences" these things over again. But when an individual, by means of memory, experiences these things over again in all their details in this way, the fact emerges that the memory-faculty is not a physical form of experiencing, especially as it comes about quite independently of whether or not what is remembered has long since ceased to exist on the physical plane. But if, in spite of this, the I can "see" these things in detail, noting colour and light, structure and size, then it also emerges as a fact that they must exist as "copies". But if they exist as perfect "copies", as things which have colour and structure, then it also becomes a fact that they must exist as some kind of matter. Genuine realistic things cannot exist in some kind of "nothing". The matter in which these details are manifested is not, of course, physical and can neither be heard, seen or in any other way experienced through the physical senses. It thus becomes a fact that the I, besides inhabiting a physical world, can also inhabit another world and can have experiences by means of matter which is not of a physical nature. So it is not so strange that experiences met within this other world can take place even though the physical body, with all its senses, is in a complete state of rest or sleep.
      When a remembered experience takes place while an individual is in his awake physical day-conscious existence, we call it "memory". When it takes place at a moment when the said individual finds himself in night-consciousness, that is to say, asleep, we call it "dreaming".