Book 2, Chapter 62

127 “Again, what need is there of circuitous paths and twists, forcing us to employ interpreters of dreams? If the god was concerned for us, why not say directly, ‘Do this; do not do that,’ and give the vision to someone awake rather than asleep?

“And who would dare say that all dreams are true? ‘Some dreams are true,’ says Ennius, ‘but not all need be.’ What, then, is the distinction? Which does he regard as true, which as false? If the true ones are sent by a god, where do the false ones come from? If those too are divine, what could be more inconsistent than a god? And what could be more foolish than to agitate mortal minds with false, lying visions? But if true visions are divine while false and empty ones are human, what license is this to declare that the god produced one and nature the other, rather than that the god produced them all—which you deny—or nature produced them all? Since you deny the former, you must admit the latter.

128 “By nature I mean that condition in which the mind never stands still and can never be free of activity and movement. When the body’s weariness prevents it from using the limbs or senses, it falls into varied, uncertain visions, arising, as Aristotle says, from lingering traces of things it did or thought about while awake. Their confusion sometimes produces marvelous dream images. If some of these are false and others true, I should very much like to know by what mark they can be distinguished. If there is none, why should we listen to these interpreters? If there is one, I am eager to hear what it is; but they will be at a loss.

127 “And why do we need such a roundabout, winding path that we have to use dream interpreters? If a god cared for us, wouldn't he simply tell us, ‘Do this; don't do that,’ and show it to us when we were awake, not in our sleep?

“Who would venture to claim that every dream tells the truth? Ennius says, ‘A few dreams are true; that doesn't mean they all must be.’ Then what is the basis for that distinction? Which dreams belong in the true group, and which in the false? If a god sends the true dreams, what produces the false ones? If those are divine too, who could be less consistent than this god? What could show worse judgment than stirring human minds with false, lying visions? But suppose true visions are divine and false, empty ones human. What right have you to divide things up like that, saying a god made this and nature made that? Why not say either that a god made all of them, which you deny, or that nature made all of them? Since you deny the first, you must admit the second.

128 “By nature I mean the mind's inability ever to stop and be free from activity and movement. When the body is tired and the mind cannot use its limbs or senses, it falls into shifting, uncertain visions. As Aristotle says, these come from lingering traces of what it did or thought while awake. The confusion of these traces sometimes produces strange dream images. If some are false and others true, I would very much like to know what mark distinguishes them. Without any such mark, what makes these interpreters worth hearing? If they have one, I want very much to hear them identify it. But they will get stuck.