He's one of a very few that need grasped from my gut feeling before you can write authoritively on dreams.
Next one I'm swinging towards you is doing odd things with love from a Server and Exhorter perspective…. his dream world is bit different, and it's end product is perhaps the most challenging work ever produced in the history or books. It challenged me, and later on I discovered Jung was obsessed with the work as well:
I was approached by a person, older female, who was internally destroyed by not understnading men, and was deeply into occult and random philosophies, and organized them sociallyceven if she didn't beleive in them, such as a Advaita Non-Dualism group. Her husband had prostate cancer, and it made a bad relationship go to non-existant. I kid you not, she's running for president of the United States in Washington State now, and wrote a few odd typology texts. Has several strong Facilitator traits.
She ended up deeply greived about male psychology, and was becoming a man hater (she denies that last part)….. so I gave her a link to a untranslated copy of that text- given she's a computer programmer….. and no one has ever heard from her since. She's gone down the rabbit's hole, and isn't coming back. She should of taken the blue pill.
Anyway, the concept of the movie 'Inception is based on this work'. They started transating the work 500 years ago, but didn't succeed until just a couple of years ago- given how difficult of a task it was. Ironically, it's the model that all present day books are based off of.
I experienced only once this sort of dream in a dream phenomena, and am convinced it's a actual part of the brain, some odd feedback loop rarely remembered upon waking, and it's always bothered me, as I was 'lucid' in a sense, but not in the normal sense of when lucid dreaming occurs…. my cognition differed substantially, and I could see one dream while in another, but the dream being perceived went on on it's own theme without awareness, while the macrodream was fully aware of it, while still talking to a dumbed down part of me in the marcodream.
I believe this book describes real phenomena. So did Jung. Jung the Facilitator and I the Contributor are not the same type. It's one of the milestones in psychology that has to be understood and digested before a comprehensive understanding of consciousness can be claimed.
You may be in a good position to interprete this text. You must be aware though- given it's antiquity and isolation, and how difficult it is to understand…. it's the forrunner for a lot of thoughts- your essentially dealing with something lacking a lineage in philosophy or history, it's the first case of its own category. Don't take anything, even the placement of images and spacing of words, for granted.