Guest guest Posted December 21, 2007 Report Share Posted December 21, 2007 3. Classification of the Mind ‘Mind’ is a general term used to designate the thinking aspect involved. In the computer terminology it can be thought of as software in contrast to the hardware, the brain. In Vedanta, mind is considered as ‘flow of thoughts’ (vRitti dhaara) or more correctly the basis on which the thoughts flow, rather than the flow itself. Like flow of water is called river, flow of thoughts is the mind. We can have stagnant water but we cannot have stagnant thought, since thought it self involves a movement, although we could have regurgitated thoughts or a whirlpool of thoughts, when we are intensely attached to a particular theme. Mind can only think one thought at a time, but it can jump from one thought to the next like a monkey jumping from one branch to the other, without coming down to the basis or ground. These are interconnected thoughts. Interestingly the very sequence of thoughts defines the time and occurs in time. Thus time becomes part of the embedded system in the definition of the mind, since flow of thoughts involves flow of time. Dr. Ananda Wood (an author of an advaita text and a moderator of the internet Advaitin list) thinks that since simultaneously two thoughts are not perceived in the mind, ‘space’ that is based on simultaneity is more an imagination by the mind than ‘time’. However, according to Vedanta ‘space’ is the first ‘subtle element’ in the sequence of creation, although sequence itself implies a time-factor. The fact is ‘space and time’ are inseparably interrelated, as movement in space defines time and movement in time defines space; and this is recognized by modern science as space-time continuum. The point of our concern here is both are intimately connected with the operation of the mind. Thus subjectivity through the mind enters in the perception of ‘time and space’. We will address this issue more later when we discuss the perception of spatiotemporal objects and thus the world through the mind. Mind has been classified depending on its function and field of operation. Understanding of this helps to identify its role in each operation. We will present some aspects of it to unravel the mysteries of the mind. Freudian Classification: Sigmund Freud (early 20th Century) provided a topographical view of the mind in terms of (a) the perceptual aspect of the mind, called conscious mind, (b) autonomous functional mind called ‘subconscious mind’ and © ‘unconscious mind’, a storehouse of suppressed or oppressed thoughts and memories from the conscious level that may still influence the conscious mind. Conscious mind constitutes the ‘ego’ which plays the role of a deliberate agent in all our actions and enjoyments. The unconscious mind is involved in instinctive or impulsive desires and reactions. Conscious, subconscious and unconscious minds form hierarchical architecture, wherein actively repressed thoughts from the conscious mind form the contents of the unconscious. These can be tapped by psychoanalysts or under hypnotic states or through what are known as ‘Freudian slips’. The most important constituent of the mind is the ‘ego’, but according to the Freudian analysis, it constitutes only a peripheral conscious state, in the waking state. The unconscious mind plays a more dominant role in the dream state. Freud recognized that prior thoughts, desires, suppressive and oppressive thoughts in the past can leave behind subtle impressions buried deep in the mind, which he calls as unconscious (meaning one is not keenly conscious) and they could find expressions in conscious mind when one is not vigilantly aware – which a psychoanalysts call as ‘slips’. In comparison to the Vedantic analysis of the mind, as we shall see below, these classifications sound very elementary, nevertheless are given a prominence in the western psychology, particularly in relation to mental disorders. Four components of the mind: Vedanta provides a different classification for the mind, which is the basis for the flow of thoughts. It is divided into four components based on their functions: a) mind (manas), b) intellect (buddhi), c) ego (ahankaara) and d) memory (chitta). All four components together generally referred to as just ‘the mind’. The four components of the mind along with five faculties of senses (that is the power of seeing, power of smelling, etc – that give rise to knowledge), five faculties of action (motor driving faculties related to hands, legs, speech, two excretory organs – that produce results) and five physiological functions called 5-praaNas (power of breathing, digestion, circulation, etc – that sustain life), all together we have nineteen entities (4+5+5+5 =19) constituting what is called ‘subtle body’ (suukshma shariira). This is in contrast to gross physical or material body (sthuula shariira) consisting of skin, flesh, bones, fat, blood, etc., along with all the physical organs of the body, including the brain. Thus subtle body is considered to have 19 gateways through which it interacts with the gross body and through the gross body with the external world. Thus mind is considered as locus for all faculties for physiological functions. Death is defined as the separation of this subtle body from the gross body. The process of death involves mind collecting all its 19 physiological functional group and existing the body. In the common language, we say ‘He is dead and gone’ – implying that someone residing in the body has left the body. Thus gross body, which is product of food, sustained by food and it will eventually go back into food (for insects), is left behind when the subtle body leaves stopping all associated physiological functions. Doctors cannot define what life is, but can only know if a person is alive or dead by expressions of life through the physiological functions. According to Vedanta, death occurs when this subtle body finds the gross body no more conducive for its residence. Hence, in simple terms, death is described as changing worn out clothes by the subtle body or shifting its residence, since we say ‘he is dead and gone’. Worn out does not necessarily mean that the body is dilapidated and hence not useful. It could be any body that is no more conducive for the subtle body to express itself for one reason or the other. Extending this argument, then, the birth is the subtle body entering with its package at the conception. Parents give birth only to the physical body and not to subtle body; the subtle body enters taking its new residence. As the new body matures, the faculties get expressed more and more vividly to yoke out experiences with the external world. Biologically, one can only account for the physical body in terms of chromosomes and genetic codes, but expression of life through the mind, physiological functions, and individuality comes with its own inherent traits that differ from one child to other, even born of the same parents. Even if one clones and creates an offspring duplicating the mother, the individuality of the child is different from that of the mother and they even can compete with each other for their survival. Hence genetically they may be the same, but subtle bodies are different. Subtle body is considered made up of subtle matter, which is not perceptible to the sense organs. Even the existence of mind cannot be established by direct perceptual or empirical means. It has to be inferred since it is subtle. But we all accept that we have a mind of our own and we can theorize its nature based on its functions and working; but none of the theories can be validated by any objective scientific means. The tools of validation that we normally use in the field of objective sciences are inadequate to handle the subtle matter. Validity or invalidity, therefore, cannot be established by objective means. Hence one can only infer based on the individual behavior to the external stimulus, just as a physician uses external stimulus to infer the working of the physiological functions. In fact, according to some idealists, existence of the objects and the world ‘out there’ also cannot be established independent of the mind. ‘Can the world be established independent of the mind?’ and conversely ‘Can the mind be established independent of the world?’ are questions that concerned many philosophers. Here, we only recognize that there is interdependency of the world and the mind and it appears that one cannot be establish independent of the other. Of the four components that were defined, mind, intellect, ego and memory, each has its field of operation. The mind in the above is locus of emotional thoughts –classified as nine moods or feelings of expression (nava rasas) consisting of love, passion, anger, jealousy, etc. In addition, the mind is also a clearing house for input from the senses and output through organs of action, thus can be thought of as receiving and dispatching clerk. Furthermore, it is also a ‘doubting Thomas’, entertaining all the doubts and the associated worries, and indecisions. Some people cannot make up their minds easily, because they are dominated by this part of the mind, which is indecisive. This emotional component of the mind is where intense attachments and emotions play a major role, many times overpowering logic and reason. Some constantly doubt themselves about their capabilities, doubting and worrying at every step - whether something will materialize or not, whether the house is locked or not, whether stove is off or not, whether he is going to be successful or not, etc. with constant worries, nostalgia and nervous break down occurring at this level. At the same time it is also a center of beautiful expressions of love, admiration, compassion, etc. In general, nature appears to maximize this component more in women, perhaps for the protection of the offspring. I am reminded of the song by the professor in ‘My Fair Lady’ – ‘Why cannot the women be like men or like me?’ The second level of the mind is the ‘intellect’ (buddhi) which is the locus of discriminative thoughts, right from wrong, thoughts of decisive character, field for logic, reason, judgment, etc. In contrast to the lower mind, the intellect can be considered as officer in charge, analytical and synthetic, objective and can hop from the known to the unknown to gain knowledge. Those that are predominately intellectual (where this component of the mind is well developed) are less emotional, more analytical, decisive, logical, reasonable and determined with ‘will’ to proceed and a goal to reach, with attachments governing less in their actions. The third component is the ego. In Sanskrit it is called ahankaara. It is may be defined as – ‘aham, aham, aham, iti karoti, ahankaara’ – the one who claims as ‘I am – I am – I am’ in all our transactions involving, of course, our mind. In our discussions of ‘who am I?’ it is this ‘ahankaara’ that responds with the answer. In the western psychology, it is this ‘ego’ that is considered as the conscious mind. However, according to Vedanta, ego is just a pattern of thoughts of ‘I-ness’ that arise in the mind, that tries to identify with a set of thoughts as ‘I am this’ and with another set of thoughts as ‘this is mine’ (mamakaara) as ownership of thoughts. Thus ego involves two aspects – ‘I am this’ (ahankaara) and ‘that is mine’ (mamakaara) or simply ‘I and mine’. In the identification of ‘I am this’, there is an inclusiveness of ‘this’ as part of I. In this very inclusion, there is also exclusion involved as ‘this’ is separate from ‘that’ as ‘I am not that’, thus differentiating ‘this’ from ‘that’, and similarly ‘mine’ from ‘not mine’. By inclusiveness and by its mirror part, exclusiveness, ego tries to define or crystallize itself differentiating I vs. you, he, she, it, or they, etc., and mine vs. yours, his, etc. According to Vedanta, this ego is a fake or false ‘I’, since, as we discussed before, it involves identification of ‘I am’, the subject, with an object ‘this’, with ‘this’ keep changing from body, mind to intellect. Thus the meaning of ‘I’ that I associate with keeps shifting when I say ‘I am six feet tall or I am black or white or brown’ – where identification is at the gross body level - or ‘I love her’, ‘I am envious of him’ or ‘I hate this’, - where identification is at emotional component of the mind - or ‘I am an engineer’, a doctor, scientist, etc., where the identification is at the intellect level. The locus where ‘I’ is placed shifts form gross body level to emotional mind level to intellect level. The essence of ego is identification of ‘I’ with ‘this’; I being an invariable, while ‘this’ being a variable, I being a conscious entity while ‘this’ being an inert entity. In the statement of Descartes that ‘I think, therefore I am’, my existence is ascertained by thinking process which was criticized later by Immanuel Kant (18th Century), whose arguments were no better either. According to Kant, self-consciousness or subject consciousness, ‘I am’ is established by the consciousness of objects – ‘this is’. Thus, ‘this is’ is required to establish ‘I am’ since mind can operate only in the subject- object duality. The problem here is not the duality par sec but what is considered as an independent variable and what is the dependent variable. That is, is consciousness of ‘this is’ is required to establish ‘I am’ or is it the other way around?. At the ego level, we do operate without being keenly aware of it, when we say ‘I am this’. Without ‘this’ to identify with, I do not seem to have any other existence. No body stops their introductions saying ‘I am’ without any object ‘this’ attached to it. Hence Kant’s conclusion that self-consciousness appears to arise only with the object consciousness seems to be justified. However, we just now noted that locus of ‘I am’ keeps shifting from body level to mind level to intellect level, with adjectives that are added keep changing with the changing bio-data. That there is a changing part and a changeless part in this duality of ‘I am’ and ‘this is’ in the equation of ‘I am this’. It is obvious from this analysis that ‘I am’ seems to be more substantial than ‘this is’ since ‘this is’ keep changing without the changing ‘I am’. In the dependent and independent variables, the one that is changeless is independent and the one that is changing is dependent. Hence Kant’s conclusion is wrong. In fact, Descartes statement ‘I think, therefore I am’, ‘I’ is there before the action verb ‘think’. Hence by implication the subject ‘I’ should be there independent of what ‘I think’ since what I think keeps changing or dependent variable while thinker I appears to be be constant and thus independent. Additional implication of Descartes statement is the requirement that I need to keep thinking to ascertain myself that ‘I am’. Thus there are two aspects involved based on the above discussion- ‘I am this’ and ‘I think, therefore I am’. Vedanta rejects both these assertions on the basis that ‘I am’ is independent of ‘this’ and ‘I am’ is present before I can think (thinking is locussed on ‘I’, than ‘I am’ locussed on thinking). Vedanta arrives at ‘who that I am’ is by rejecting any assertion with ‘I am not this’ ‘neti, neti, not this, not this’. Thus according to Vedanta, ego is a false ‘I’ where subject is confused with an object ‘this’, in the ‘I am this’ identification. Vedanta does not say you are ‘some thing’ else than ‘this’, since any ‘something’ is another object ‘this’. Only way to arrive at my real nature of ‘I’ is by intuition by rejecting any thing that can be objectified as not I am – as ‘I am not this’. I can reject anything and everything as not ‘I’ but I cannot reject ‘I- itself since I have to be there to reject. This process of sublation or negation is called meditation where I drop the false I, to ascertain my real nature. That is true conscious entity, ‘I am’- without any this or that attached to it – as in the biblical statement ‘I am that I am’. This is concerning the first statement ‘I am this’. Relating to the second statement, ‘I think, therefore I am’ Vedanta ascertains that ‘I’ exists in deep sleep state without any thinking, since ‘I am’ there in the deep sleep enjoying the sleep, where there is the absence of any ‘this’ and ‘that’ that I can identify with. Hence I get up from sleep, saying that ‘I slept very well’, implying that I was there very much in deep sleep, sleeping very well. Vedanta points out that if ‘I’ really ceases to exist in deep-sleep, then no body would like to go to sleep. However, everybody longs for a good night sleep, after tiring oneself like a rat, racing for ‘this’ and ‘that’. People are ready to take pills to get sleep. Hence deep sleep experience points out, according to Vedanta, that one can exist as pure ‘I’ without any identification with an object I. Only problem in the deep sleep is I am also not conscious of myself in that state. Since all problems cease in deep sleep state, where everybody is happy and no body complains (they may complain is they do not get sleep), whether it is a king or a pauper on the street. All subject-object ( I and this) duality ceases in the deep sleep state, with I alone remaining without any inclusions or exclusions, since there is no ‘this’ and ‘that’ that I can perceive. Vedanta says cessation of identification of ‘I’ with any ‘this’ is the key to happiness. This can be done by removing all ‘this’ as in deep sleep state. However that is only a temporary since once I am awake, all ‘this’ and ‘that’ will also arise. I am back to the miserable state of false identification as ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’, suffering the limitations of ‘this’ and ‘that’. The point is the deep sleep experience points out that there is a possibility of existing as pure I, as consciousness and existence, without any identification with this or that. Vedanta says this cessation of identification with this and that can be accomplished in the waking state itself, in spite of existence ‘this’ and ‘that’. ‘I am’ is self-conscious and self-existent entity, independent of any ‘this’ and ‘that’ or independent of the external world. Hence Kantian statement that self-consciousness depends on the object consciousness is to ascribe reality to the false I, the ego. Vedanta says, the fact is the other way; the object consciousness depends on ‘I am’. Thus the ‘ego’ or ahankaara, is a component of the mind with a false notion that ‘I am this’. This ‘ego’ component, ahankaara, is called notional mind, since identification ‘I am this’ is only a notion in the mind. When I realize my true nature, these false identifications or notions drop, or more correctly the reality that I assign to the notions is withdrawn. Then, I will be ‘as though’ operating as pure self, without any false identification, treating the mind as just a subtle body that I can use to transact with the world, through the 19 gates discussed earlier. We will address this aspect again when we discuss our true nature and the nature of the world that we transact with. Going back to our classification, the last component of the mind to be discussed is memory, chitta. All objective knowledge that is gained is stored in the memory, which forms the basis for all re-cognitions. We can build up our memory bank by gaining the knowledge, storing the information and retrieving it whenever it is needed for communication and transactions. New knowledge is build based on the past knowledge stored in the memory. There are two aspects involved, capacity to store and the capacity to retrieve that knowledge. Retrieval and restorage keep the knowledge fresh in the memory and those that are retrieved less and less will get buried in the memory and retrieval also becomes increasingly difficult. With age, the capacity of hardware degrades and therefore memory fails, retaining mostly the long time memory, while loosing the short time memory. As we get old, we remember all our childhood experiences and declaring to every listener how things were great in those days, while forgetting where we put our keys or check book an hour back. Thus we have four components of the mind that are involved whenever we transact with the world, ‘out there’ – mind, intellect, ego and memory. The working of the mind can be classified in various other ways, and these will be discussed next. Hari Om! Sadananda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.