Yeah, so basically it runs:
First Class: more than sheer awareness here, the startling fact is the direct perception, and the depth and constancy of attention. A first class mind perceives things asensorily, by direct application of mind. The mechanism is incomprehensible to anyone not at least 2nd class. More than that, though, the 1st class mind holds all things within its range in full attention at all times. Even the things it isn't thinking about in any way - making no judgments, coming to no conclusions, not even drawing new observation from - these things are never the less fully held, in mind, with full attention, still.
There are of course degrees. A 1st class mind is not necessarily omniscient. An omniscient mind would be not only rangeless, but hold all things down to the absolute tiniest depths of their quantumscale attributes with full attention, even if without the slightest interest: a knowing of spin, charge, position, velocity and state of everything, whole and part, every particle winking and blipping into and out of existence all through and down into every object and out into all space between, illimitably. Without even trying. Full attention upon all of it, equally, even when fully disinterested in any of it. That would be an omniscient mind. Obviously, such a thing we would not call God. To omniscience you'd need to add a power as illimitable, and a peculiar and personal interest besides, for it to match the description monotheists on Earth unite in calling God. But those additional requirements to meet the agreed-upon* monotheistic premise "God" do not properly have to do with mind.
[ *Purely by way of aside, it really is "agreed-upon." At least over all of the Earth. Monotheists share an overwhelming unanimity on these three definitional aspects of God, which aspects are incomparably hugest and most essential, next to which aspects argument over the details of the God Diet, Hygiene and Anus-Related Propriety Plan are so amusingly trivial in scope that it's rather appalling and sad, to see some people seriously, sternly emphasize squabbles on these ant-like scales as if they represent even motes of difference, set next to the Everest-size agreement there clearly really is. Only the fringest of peculiar-taste sticky-outy outliers disagree on these, God's aspects: Infinite ('potent and 'scient and 'present to the omni degree, for the layperson), Eternal (which is bigger than infinite, timewise - it comes before infinite spacetime broke out), and personal (cares about you, specifically). ]
So we see, there may well be any number of 1st class minds, of varying range (all the way out to rangless) and extent (out to beyond cosmic and down to beyond quantum). A mind is first class by its direct knowing, and its effortless and full attention, even when undirected by thought. You can see how this would be breathtaking.
It's conceivable a first class mind may have form, but for one of any considerable range, form is likely unnecessary, and unlikely to be resorted to except as a lark.
Obviously a first class mind has all the lower class capabilities as well. The point is, though, it doesn't merely exceed these capabilities by extension, by doing the same things lower classes can do but to a wildly greater extent. No, a jump up in class means you can do things the rank below you cannot do at all.
Second Class: these are the minds that go beyond form. Most have a form they inhabit, but they can project mentality beyond, in some way. Some can separate their mentality and roam about from a dissociate viewpont. Some remain within their form, but project mentality (perception, perspective, knowing) from that base, outward to the limit of their range. Range varies. Some second class minds are truly rangeless, but they still must hold attention in a focused way, and turn their mentality this way and that, in order to know.
A second class mind may be able to perceive the thoughts of others, by projecting their mentality towards them, seeing if they are able to perceive the thoughts in a way that makes sense to them. Some can perceive others' thought, but cannot make sense of it. Some may be unable to make sense of a given mind, while other minds of apparently similar kind lay open to them. Individuality counts for much.
A second class mind may be able to project a shareable construct of mentality within and between two minds, for a two-way communication, or scale up the link for a multiple-point conference call.
A second class mind may be able to simply wander free in thought, leaving form behind - but perhaps may possess no capabilities beyond this. May be unable to project its thought into another mind, or unable to perceive the thought of another mind.
What all these minds have in common is ability to project mentality beyond form, in some way, in many ways, or even in all ways (if you can imagine such a thing!). What they lack is ability to know beyond some can of scan, some look, some peek into. What they lack is the ability to hold reality in mind without even thinking about it, directly and with full attention.
Even for a second class mind, it's hard to even imagine what a first class mind would be like. To imagine the experience of it.
Third Class mind: these are the minds that go beyond perception, to have an emergent consciousness of their own self as the unique viewpoint they are particularly and inexplicably attached to. This is only the primary and primal abstraction it is capable of holding and manipulating. More developed third class minds can create, define and manipulate abstractions at will, with the socially-minded examples sharing abstractions between them of breathtaking agreement in particulars, and each holding a useful knowing of what the other means, despite complete incapacity to share any of this information directly, mind-to-mind! For that is the barrier of third class minds. This mind can go anywhere in imagination, even places that don't and never will exist, but it can never get out of its brain: by which I mean, whatever physical matrix holds the mentality components and the interactions within and between them from which its autometaconsciousness is emergent.
Fourth Class mind: these minds may be capable of considerable learned, instinctive, even invented behavioral sophistication, but they aren't capable of abstraction at a meaningful level. Hence, they are not even capable of abstracting from their own fully-immersive perceptual world, a concept of self. It doesn't occur to them as necessary. Arguably, they're right! Who needs "I" when one always has the view from one's own eyes (or the local equivalent)? When one's view never shines out from any other place than that? Make no mistake: some fourth class minds are capable of a shocking degree of intelligence, genius-level practicality of invention and sophistication...all without so much as an "I" between them. This is not hive mind, it's simply a level of self without reflection. A surface of infinite shallowness, always looking out, lacking the inclination or capacity for inward looking - it doesn't come up. But don't underestimate the degree of sophistication possible to these purely-perceptual beings. Sophistication including technological sophistication, capable of projecting perception or force at interstellar distances. And they don't waste much if any of their resources on therapy.
However, those are the exceptions. Most perceptual beings lack even language, beyond bark, roar, squeak, chirp. The distinction here is so important that the fourth class is subdivided:
4A: perceptual beings incapable of meaningful communication via language.
4B: perceptual beings capable of language.
4B almost always does lead inexorably to abstraction, which tends to lead on to self. Technologically advanced civilizations who got that way without even the benefit of meaningful abstraction are invariably ancient. Attitudes that conflate knowledge with instinct and minimize or overlook the difference between symbol and referent abound. Hard to get your mind around.
Fifth Class Mind: Pure stimulus response. Instinctual beings. An amoeba, for instance. Incapable of negotiating the simplest decision tree. There is no decision involved. React. If more then one reaction is possible, the fifth class mind doesn't decide. It reacts. Whichever way the inscrutable exhortation of its drives and needs and instincts call it. It does what it does 'cause it musts what it must! This doesn't mean it's deterministic. It means only that it is incapable of deliberation.
This is by no means a blitz of non-stop action for the fifth class mind! Quite a bit of sitting quite still is frequently involved. Classic example: a fucking tree.
Sixth Class Mind: a fucking rock, for example. The awareness here is incapable of even reaction, let alone deliberation, perception, abstraction, conception, literal projection, direct knowing with full, even disinterested attention, or any other mentality. What does it know?
It knows itself, without self. This is a knowing in spin, charge, position, velocity and state of whole and part and particle winking and blipping into and out of existence, all within and throughout it.
The universe is a sixth class mind. Yup! Dumb as a rock, with a whole lot of bright spots.
But also, every thing all through and within the universe is at least a sixth class mind. Minds of second class have even been known to learn how to talk to them. Conversation is extremely limited, especially to begin with. But to a limited extent, some sixth class minds can be taught. Principally, to react. If you know how to listen, and have a gift for elicitation.