Key Buddhist Dharma: the Six Sense Bases
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 лип 2024
- What are the six sense bases of Buddhism and why are they important? We'll look at both of those questions in this video, investigating how the sense bases relate to such things as consciousness, dependent origination, and indeed the whole world.
📙 Check out my new book, A Handbook of Early Buddhist Wisdom, with a Foreword by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook
🧡 If you find this material useful, check out my Patreon page and get fun benefits like exclusive videos, audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: / dougsseculardharma
🧡 You can also make donations through: paypal.me/dougsdharma
☸️ Free mini-course at the Online Dharma Institute: onlinedharma.org.
🎙Check out my podcast with Jon Aaron, Diggin' the Dharma: digginthedharma.com/
✅ Videos mentioned:
The Four Elements in Early Buddhism (playlist) -- • The Four Elements in E...
Dependent Origination (playlist) -- • Dependent Origination
Webpage: www.dougsdharma.com/
Facebook: / onlinedharmainstitute
Twitter: / dougsdharma
❤️ Thanks to Patreon Patrons:
Aziz Rahman
John Oborne
Anonymous (3)
Scarlett Farrow
Jimmy Maa
Debbie Mattison Fine Art
Steve H.
Ron Peat
Carlos Gutierrez
Matthew Smith
JC
Shantha Wengappuli
Karma_CAC
Johan Thelander
Jorge Seguel
Christopher Apostolof
GailJM
Brett Merritt
David Bell
T Pham
VCR
Upayadhi
Andi and Erik
ATGuerrero686
Michael Scherrer
Michael Seefeld
khobe schofield
Alex Perdomo
Benji Forsyth
Blaze Way
Sonny Flink
Steve Marlor
Joy L Lee
Andrew Tom
Anthony Tucker
Karlee R
Ethan M
Billy in Singapore
Matthew G Mynttinen
Olivia Otter
Carl Lennartson
xiao mao
Jeff Harvey
Andrew Ingrouille
Kenneth Grandchamp
Doug Fonner
Rene Gariepy
Russell Needham
Smoggyrob
Mac Roja
Bernardo
Clémence Ortega Douville
Kwan Alex
Scott Johnston
Richard J Beninger
Nathanael O. Arnquist
SaturnianMandala
Trin P
Letesa Isler
Dave Gorman
Dorien Izel
Robert Paterson
DunJing
Jake Tobiason
00:00 Intro
00:39 What are the sense bases?
02:23 Not further analyzed
03:25 Objective or subjective external bases?
05:11 Why are the sense bases important?
05:45 Sense bases and consciousness
08:54 Sense bases and dependent origination
12:40 Sense bases and “the All”
Note: as an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Amazon links are affiliate links where I will earn a very small commission on purchases you make, at no additional cost to you. This goes a tiny way towards defraying the costs of making these videos. Thank you!
🧡 If you find benefit in my videos, consider supporting the channel by joining us on Patreon and get fun extras like exclusive videos, ad-free audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂
📙 You can find my book here: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook
“Desiring seclusion
you’ve entered the forest,
and yet your mind
goes running outside.
You, a person:
subdue your desire for people.
Then you’ll be happy, free
from passion.
Dispel discontent,
be mindful.
Let me remind you
of that which is good-
for the dust
of the regions below
is hard to transcend.
Don’t let the dust
of the sensual
pull
you
down.
As a bird
spattered with dirt
sheds the adhering dust with a shake,
so a monk
-energetic & mindful-
sheds the adhering dust.”
((SN 9:1)
Dream perception of "external objects" and perception of physical "external" objects operate in an identical way, in some Dream Yoga practices there's a practice of seeing the "waking dream" and "sleeping dream" for what they are, fabrications, and repeating "this is a dream" as a mantra.
Interesting, thanks!
Although it is brief explanation, it’s awesome analysis of the Supreme Buddha’s teaching of the 5 aggregates, 6 senses, clinging and attachment…Doug. Thank you 🙏❤️
This is really interesting how the Buddha analysed the flow of events that lead to suffering.
Yes!
Thanks for this Doug, very interesting. Especially the idea of the mind being one of the senses. I think this may be very productive during meditation 😉🙏
Absolutely!
This was a very nice video, I'm glad I clicked onto it
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you!
🙏😊
You explain six sense bases nicely and the level is appropriate for a beginner. It is true that for explanation Buddha has broken these 12 bases to two groups: 6 external and 6 internal. However, arising of each base is always with the corresponding external base. For example eye depends (paticca) on sight. In essence Buddha is not referring to the eye that is made of tissue, blood, lens etc. This is a very important point to ponder- I assume you take your audience to this level at the right time. Thank you.
I think these can be seen in different ways, as organs and as abilities.
I think of all the consciuosnesses, the consciousness of the mind is the most crucial and most troublesome. To me, it's the mind that controls how we interpret what we receive from all the other senses and how to react to them. The mind may even tell us to awaken another sense. for example, when we see a beautiful rose flower, the mind may wonder what it smells like. Without the mind doing all the interpretations and reactions, the other senses are simply doing what they are supposed to do without any subjective side effects. It's the mind that decides what is preferable and what is unacceptable, thus inducing craving, rejection, love, hatred, etc. Isn't the main path of Buddist practice and meditation the taming of the mind?
Yes, in that case the "mind" includes all of its various aspects, all the varieties of consciousness, feeling, perceptions, and volitions.
Mind is not a thing, an object doing something, it is a product of that translation, hence you think you have a mind and use it much like your mobile phone. If the mind is an illusory object created by the impermanence of the 6 senses (6 thieves) then so is time and space....
Thanks Doug. What I have issues with is Vedana or what is called 'tones' like feeling tone for example 🙏🏽
The Heart sutra is all about the question What is the sense of self, which is what the 6 senses are, which is what reality is, which is impermanent. A good translation is Red Pines translation of the Heart Sutra....
Brilliant thanks
Very welcome!
Your mind or your consciousness can know or feel anything around us because of six senses basics: eyes, nose, taste ( mouth and tongue), ears, touch ( body) and the last main thing is the brain.
Thank you Doug. Love the blue background lighting too. It is a lamp, correct?
Correct!
Thank you Doug. Few observations:
1. The mind is about cognition and besides the thoughts there are the "Objects of Mind" - the mental states or the mood of the Mind - like sometimes the mind is sad, happy, expanded, constricted, clear, dull, so on ....
2. The consciousness & the sense consciousness ( vinnana) are different. The Consciousness is the underlying base of all the phenomena and the sense consciousness (vinnana) is the manifestation of the consciousness through the 6 sense bases. Sense impingement is the external Object and the sense impression is the internal Subject in context to the Contact (phassa).
3. The Cultivation (bhavna) or the practice of meditation or the mindful observation etc is about noticing the dynamics of the sense impingement phenomena and being aware about "the attachment".
Consciousness with a "capital C" isn't something found in the early texts. In the early texts, consciousness only comes in flavors, by senses. There is no underlying base of all phenomena found in the early texts; this is reflected in the teaching of MN 1. This is an interesting distinction from what came later.
@@DougsDharma Nibbana Sutta: There is an Unborn Unoriginated Uncreated & Informed.
If there was not this Unborn, this Unoriginated, this Uncreated, this Unformed.
Freedom from the world of the born, the Originated, the Created, the Formed would not be possible
The teaching of Lord Buddha is quite subtle and intuitive. Moreover the linguistics is a changing condition, the English used by Shakespeare in Hamlet is quite different from the English of the present times. It's not easy to comprehend the ancient historical texts through modern research methods. Like the principles of Classical physics can't be used for analysing Quantum mechanics etc.
The understanding & realisation of this Unborn Uncreated Deathless Dhamma is what the Buddhist practice is all about.
Yes I did a video on that: ua-cam.com/video/-Wz3N5IAGDM/v-deo.html
balance
Also it's important to understand that there is only 1 Vijñāna i.e consciousness. And Vijñāna cannont be at every six sense bases at once. Yet it seems like that because the consciousness (Vijñāna) is moving so fast, when we see and hear at the same time. Consciousness is moving so quickly between eye consciousness and ear consciousness. That we percieve it as I seeing and I hearing. But what is actually occuring is a phenomenon. This is why when we are asleep, and we hear sounds. We wake up when it's loud enough! The Vijñāna (Consciousness) quickly moves to the ear, and ear consciousness arises so Another example. When the consciousness is so focused on the mind/mental objects such as day dreaming. We sometimes do not hear when people were spekaing to us, till Vijñāna (consciousness) moved backs to ear, so ear consciousness rises again
In early Buddhism, consciousness is multiple, there isn't one consciousness that persists and "moves". See my earlier video: ua-cam.com/video/NoFF8-rA1zE/v-deo.html
An interesting issue to reflect on in this context is as follows
The suttas say that eg 'dependent on eye and forms raises eye-consciousness; the meeting of the three is contact...'. Note that 3 things meet, not 2. It is not said that the meeting of eye and forms is eye-consciousness. The wording in the suttas, if taken literally, suggests the eye-consciousness starts to arise before it comes together with eye and forms in phassa/contact. This seems to mean phassa is not mere sensory contact, but sensory 'stimulation', albeit of a rudimentary kind.
Any thoughts on this?
Also, the dhammas discerned by the mano/mind are perhaps best seen as significant patterns in the incoming sensory data.
Please refer to my reply to Abr Lim. Let me know if not clear.
Yes, it's hard to parse how these three things come together in this way. I think the most natural way to interpret it is to gloss it as eye and forms producing consciousness, although as you note that doesn't precisely reflect the sutta description. Elsewhere (e.g., SN 36.10, etc.) contact is analogized to rubbing two firesticks together, the firesticks being contact and the fire being vedana. The fact that there are two firesticks I think suggests sense base and sense object "rubbing together".
I realize this might be a bit of a stretch, but I was wondering if it's possible to do a video on transgenderism? I think analyzing this topic in relation to the Buddha's teachings on self could be interesting.
It's not something I know enough about to be able to speak meaningfully, though you're right that it would be interesting!
A sense is based on the presence of an organ.
Which organ is the basis for touch and intellect?
The four sense are elaborated by internal organ like eyes, tongue, olfactory system and auditory systems.
The organ of touch is the skin. The organ of the intellect would be the brain, though in the abhidhamma it was I believe associated with the heart.
@@DougsDharma, The skin has nerves that respond to touch. A nerve is not elaborated with parts that interpret touch.
The sensory nerves of smell convey touch.
😊🙏
🙏😊
I think you asked once the type of buddiaim I am learning…. I been practicing tibian
the origin of consciousness as you describe in this video is not clear to me. does the consciousness arises from the contact between the internal and external sense bases? Or there must be consciousness arising independent of the contact between internal and external sense bases and is even one of the condition that gives rise to contact? I know suttas discussing the relations between consciousness, internal and external sense bases may be confusing, at least to me. I just want to know if you have definite answers to these questions.
Another question I have is the following. The suttas seem also to either talk about a kind of consciousness different from the six types of consciousness or give some kind of importance to the mind-consciousness that is not shared by the rest of the five. Is it just me or do you also share this sentiment?
Thank you for your sharing and clarification in advance.
I hope you forgive me for answering your question before Doug does.
In Western philosophy the word attention is a must for you to notice anything. For example when you drive your car you pass so many things but only notice a subset. Buddha has used two words to describe the word attention: attention and contact (manasikara and phassa). To keep things simple, when I used the word ‘noticing’ above is same as ‘you are conscious of’ something.
Here is the difficult part to explain….so let me rewrite what Buddha said;
““And what, bhikkhus, is the origin of suffering? In dependence on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. “
Dukkha Sutta (SN 12.43).
The key word here is ‘in dependence’ (paticca in Pali). Each internal sense base’s existence is because of the existence of the corresponding external sense base at that moment: that is there is no hearing without a sound and there is no sound without hearing. ( you will have a tough time to follow this if you take the ear as an internal sense base).
So Sutta says that when two bases (one internal and one external ) comes together consciousness arises and connecting these three is contact (phassa).
In simple terms: in dependence of a mother and a father a baby is born. Baby creates the non-existing mother and father or baby creates the parents while parents create the baby - one cannot be without the other.
From what I try to understand or misunderstand (in theory 🤔) there are two: body and mind. The body comprises of the basic 5 senses and the sixth one is the mind. The more significant one is the mind. The first level is the first 5 senses: eyes see, ears hear, nose smells, tongue tastes, and body touches. Then it goes to the deeper level where the mind starts. The eyes see a lady then the mind starts (goes beyond what the eyes see) she's ugly! 😅 (or if the mind doesn't register then one will not know the eyes see the lady because the mind is busy thinking about something else or feeling something else like sleepiness). So the mind is kind of fluid.🤔 So I guess one has to practice observing the mind. 🤯 so confusing...
Is dharma mean nature?
That's one way to understand the word, yes. It has many senses.
anyone think it is a good idea the sixth sense that is refer to as the organ of thinking should be called the brain now that we have discover it is the organ that thinks so that all senses can now be body parts so to speak
Well it could be analogized in this way, though it should also be understood as an ability of a kind, not just a physical object.
…no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body and no mind; no shape, no sound, no smell, no taste, no feeling and no thought; no element of perception, from eye to conceptual consciousness…
I like this explanation by Mindah : ua-cam.com/video/m1-2e6NYA4o/v-deo.html
Hi Doug, I like a lot of your videos but this one is lacking depth. It reads as a purely textual understanding, lacking direct knowing and seeing. Furthermore, you are unconsciously projecting physicalism onto the Dhamma, as 99% of western Buddhists do. Here’s my understanding based on knowing and seeing through sense restraint and detachment (“meditation”). The salayatana (sense bases) are one among many frameworks for exploring the constellation of our experience. Others include the four foundations of mindfulness and the five aggregates, among others. The sense bases, if investigated through first Jhana, after the arising of right view (stream entry), can be seen to represent all observable phenomena (the empirical world of modern science). The significance of including Mano as a base (which is the brain and not mind) helps the meditator to discern that all of sensuality (“the world”) is dependently arisen and not under our control, including mental phenomena like thoughts, images, ideas, etc. we can then depersonalize all that constitutes experience (seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, sensing, and ideation) as arising and passing phenomena within a broader field of knowing. Included within this arising and passing phenomenon is the sense “I” and “me” Essentially all experiences, everything within the causal chain of dependent orientation, arises within this broader field of knowing (vijja). Most modern Buddhists mistakenly believe that dependent origination describes all there is because we come from the standpoint of materialism. However, if that were true, no liberation would be possible. Dependent origination only describes the causal arising of suffering from its roots in unknowing/ignorance and craving. The cessation of that process is liberation. This can be glimpsed if you spend enough time in sensory detox, in seclusion, abstaining from all sensuality, including indulging in ideation. Also it can be seen that this internal/external sense phenomena co-arise inter dependently and so the designation of “me” to internal and “not me” to external. They are all “non me” belonging to nature.
Thanks for your thoughts. For sure, dependent origination only describes the arising of suffering, not all of causality generally. I don't think this mistake is due to materialism, much less physicalism; it stems at least in part from reading later interpretations of "Indra's Net" and other notions of "interbeing" back into the early meaning of dependent origination. I did a video on this general issue here: ua-cam.com/video/CQN7sVmckso/v-deo.html
Thank you!
You're welcome!