Five or six? See below. --ED
"Ayatana (Pali; Sanskrit) is a Buddhist term that has been translated as
"sense base", "sense-media" or "sense sphere." In Buddhism, there are
six internal sense bases (Pali: ajjhattikani ayatanani; also known as,
"organs", "gates", "doors", "powers" or "roots") and six external sense
bases (bÄhirÄni ÄyatanÄni or "sense objects"; also
known as vishaya or "domains"). Thus, there are six internal-external
(organ-object) pairs of sense bases:
* eye and visible objects
* ear and sound
* nose and odor
* tongue and taste
* body and touch
* mind and mental objects
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma_(Buddhism)>
Buddhism and other Indian epistemologies identify six "senses" as
opposed to the Western identification of five.
In Buddhism, "mind" denotes an internal sense organ which interacts with
sense objects that include sense impressions
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phassa> , feelings
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedana> , perceptions
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa%C3%B1%C3%B1a> and volition
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa%E1%B9%85kh%C4%81ra> ."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayatana
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayatana>
--- In [email protected], "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> wrote:
>
Chris,
Truthfully I haven't thought about that a lot.
Just off-the-cuff I'd say I would object to saying that the awareness of
mentation was a sixth sense. All your other senses bring you awareness
of real
things. Mentation is not a real thing, it is a collection of illusions,
so I
believe it is not in the same category as the other senses.
This answer was arrived at without much thought so don't hold me to it
to
closely in the future...
...BIll!
> Do you disagree that the awareness of mentation is a sixth sense? (as
I have
considered the heart sutra et alia to imply? And which I personally find
to be
a very freeing bit of Buddhist insight).
>
> Thanks,
> Chris Austin-Lane
> > ED,
> >
> > I'll answer your questions below in the reverse order that you asked
them:
> >
> > [ED] By 'senses' I assume you refer to the five senses: ...
> >
> > I do mean what we call the five senses.
> >
> > From an illusory dualistic and discriminating (categorizing/judging)
perspective there is a 'me/I' (self) so 'I have 5 senses. I see
something blue
and it is pretty.'
> >
> > Contrast this with a non-dualistic, non-discriminating perspective
which
would be: 'Just THIS!' - just awareness. That is no distinction between
'self'
and 'sight', no catagorization of the awareness as 'blue' and no
judgement made
that it is 'pretty'.
> >
> > Just THIS! That is Buddha Nature.
> >
> > [ED] Was it the position of your Zen teachers?
> >
> > I've never discussed Buddha Nature in this manner with my Zen
Buddhist
teachers. If I had they would have probably told me to 'empty my bowls'
-
meaning 'don't try to intellectualize Buddha Nature'. But to directly
answer
your question, no - none of my teachers ever told me this.
> >
> > [ED] Is this position traditional in Zen?
> >
> > I don't know if there's anyone or any organization that could
officially
speak for Zen Buddhism. I think it is the 'traditional position' because
most
of the traditional koans and stories (mondos) of historical zen adepts
that I've
read or heard about support this position - at least it seems that way
to me.
> >
> > In the end however I don't need any validation from traditional zen
or from
living Zen Buddhist teachers. I have experienced it myself.
> >
> > ...Bill!
> >> Bill,
> >>
> >>> I consider the 'root of zen' to be our senses ...
> >>
> >> Is this position traditional in Zen?
> >>
> >> Was it the position of your Zen teachers?
> >>
> >> Thanks, ED
> >>
> >> PS: By 'senses' I assume you refer to the five senses: seeing,
hearing,
> >> touch, tasting, smelling.
> >>> ED,
> >>>
> >>> I consider the 'root of Buddhism' to be the sutras, and especially
> >> those that are presented as a first-hand account of the teachings
of
> >> Siddartha Buddha.
> >>>
> >>> I consider the 'root of Zen Buddhism' to be the account of
Siddartha
> >> Buddha's 'Flower Sermon' on Vulture Peak when he is reported to
have
> >> wordlessly trasmited the Dharma to Mahakasyapa.
> >>>
> >>> I consider the 'root of zen' to be our senses: Just THIS!
> >>>
> >>> ...Bill!
