My four minds
Posted by Janka
I seem to be able to separate four distinct parts to my thought processes. In all seriousness they are probably neither distinct from each other nor undivisable into further subclassifications, but it would be interesting to know if these divisions make sense to other people.
So, four parts or maybe rather four types of thought processes. The order I present them in is not consciously significant.
Firstly, there is what I call "the perceiving mind" or sometimes "the impulse generator". Other people have called it "the monkey mind, constantly jumping from thought to thought like a monkey jumps from branch to branch". It is the part that sees, hears, reacts; it presents random concepts, ideas, impulses, desires, memories, judgments to the other parts. "Oh, the sun's out", "what time does the the Monday meeting start again", "need to remember to read that private message", "I'm hungry", "let's check Facebook", just to give examples of what it came up with while I was typing the previous sentence. In addition to outside perceptions, it seems to bring up internal impulses, negative and positive: such as "I feel cranky/content", "I am a useless/clever person", memories both when prompted by something and at seemingly random. It has no conception of time or place or continuity, really; each impulse surfaces and immediately dies, to be replaced by the next.
Secondly, there's "meta mind": the observer/commentator/decider that I think most people think when they think about "I". This is the meta-process that can think about thinking and about doing. It seems to constantly talk to or about the impulse generator, occasionally commenting on the flow mind (see below). "Glad the sun is so down that I don't need to close the curtain. Hey, I'm not concentrating again. I don't need to check the meeting time now, really. It was really a good idea to make that dish, it smells very good and I did not have to go do groceries. Then again, groceries would mean I would go for a walk... I didn't do any exercise yesterday. I really need to concentrate now, and not check facebook. --- See, that was a nice stretch of flow" - it is the "internal voice" in your head, constantly talking with itself, talking to the rest of you.
Thirdly, there is a "flow mind" that can think or do without thinking about the thinking or doing. I think the flow mind is active all the time, but it is easiest to introduce to the meta-process after you have been very "concentrated". During periods of "full flow" the observer/commentator dies down, and there are no "metathoughts" either about what you are doing or about whatever the impulse generator comes up with. The impulses sort of still are there, but they are not picked up, and the metaprocess sort of still is there (because it is part of you you), and it can recall the flow afterwards. Flow is usually thought about in the context of creative work, where it is a desirable thing: the state of thinking/doing/creating where nothing else exist to the creator. It is not only good or good in itself, though; it is also possible to be in a flow that is harmful, for example when some worry or anxiousness or the desire to be more drunk is all that is in your mind, and the metaprocess does not manage to intervene.
Fourth, there is my "tao mind", which is hard to describe because it is not verbal or an impulse that I can talk about verbally - and this is where it gets its name from too, the essence of the concept of "tao" being that it cannot be named or described. It is what is there when all the other three manage to be quiet at the same time. It does not mean there is a blank, or that observations stop; it is just that they are not picked up by the other processes. The Tibetan Buddhist tradition, I am told, describes it as "the mind in between of two thoughts", and various meditation traditions exist that attempt to invoke it - though most seem to be designed to invoke it in a particular state of peacefulness, instead of just what is. It is the "core self", while not really even being much concerned in the distinction between "self" and "world".
These are, naturally, parts of my conscious mind. There are other parts of "me" - my personality traits, my body, probably something like my internalized moral code, as some examples.
It has made my life better when I have started to think that neither of these alone is "me". When I am in an anxiousness flow, it is not "me" that is there, it is a runaway process that does not listen to the other parts, but which the metaprocess can interfere with as soon as it manages to wake up. "I" am not the one that has all sorts of silly impulses when she should be concentrated; it is a part of me that offers these impulses and I can take them or leave them. "Flow" is separate from the "meta" process, not directed meta thoughts. And so forth. I am more complex than any of the "I" I perceive, and it's fun to be consciously aware of this.
I hear you and I think I understand you. T
The conflicting minds of me trying to figure out something to do so that I wouldn’t yet start working on what I have an anxiety about.
It makes sense to me.
The fourth one is something I call by a name that is a certain monotonous sound made at a certain pitch plus a certain body position. “Tao” is a better name, although reminiscent of pandas.
To me the fourth mind is a kind of clarity, a crystal clear moment of self-awareness and “now”. “This is me, this is my life and this is happening now”. It is not unpleasant.
It’s like a sudden context switch into kernel mode. Or rather, like a sudden off game moment in an intense roleplaying session.
Natural beauty often brings it about, but sometimes I get it in very banal situations, in the supermarket or when brushing my teeth.
Glad it makes sense to others too, thanks for commenting.
Laura, for me the “tao” self is neither pleasant nor unpleasant in itself, it just, well, is. “Now, here”, like you say. I like it when I become conscious of it, but I think it is other processes that do the liking, actually. I like the “off game moment” description.