Sense and the 5 khaṇḍa

I’m unable to find any suttanta references to khaṇḍa and the 6 senses. For instance taste. It is just not to be seen anywhere yet it is second nature. There are pretty much no English dhamma talks on the 5 khaṇḍas that relate them to the 6 senses too

Can anyone find such references ?

How can one know taste without perception.?
There are only references to conscious ness and the 6 senses …

1 Like

Bhante, what did you mean by the word “taste”, Vedana-khanda or Rasa-ayatana?

I guess you didn’t mean the below.

“‘cha vedanākāyā veditabbā’ti – iti kho panetaṃ vuttaṃ. Kiñcetaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ? Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇaṃ, tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso, phassapaccayā vedanā; sotañca paṭicca sadde ca uppajjati sotaviññāṇaṃ, tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso, phassapaccayā vedanā; ghānañca paṭicca gandhe ca uppajjati ghānaviññāṇaṃ, tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso, phassapaccayā vedanā; jivhañca paṭicca rase ca uppajjati jivhāviññāṇaṃ, tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso, phassapaccayā vedanā; kāyañca paṭicca phoṭṭhabbe ca uppajjati kāyaviññāṇaṃ, tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso, phassapaccayā vedanā; manañca paṭicca dhamme ca uppajjati manoviññāṇaṃ, tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso, phassapaccayā vedanā. ‘Cha vedanākāyā veditabbā’ti – iti yaṃ taṃ vuttaṃ, idametaṃ paṭicca vuttaṃ. Idaṃ pañcamaṃ chakkaṃ.

That might help.


I don’t think you get my point.
When it comes to the five khaṇḍa, there is no mention of the 6 sense doors. The references that you give, do not mention each khaṇḍa as it applies to each of the 6 sense doors.

In the suttas you will pretty much only find consciousness mentioned. maybe feeling too, lets say for eye door or any door. Granted, usually only the first and last are mentioned.

Please read the references you sent me, and see if there is , for example perception as it relates to the 6 sense doors. Normally you only get the door, the object, the consciousness and the contact. sometimes there is a mention of feeling.

It is totally funny to see westerners give videos of the 5 khaṇḍa but not mention the six senses as they apply. Try to find it (without abhidhamma based lectures). I have not found it in the lectures and I have not see it in the suttas. My guess is they don’t mention it because it is not in the “exclusive-suttas”.

I don’t see sañña or saṅkhāra

Something like this?

Okkantasaṃyuttaṃ »


Rūpasaññā, bhikkhave, aniccā vipariṇāmī aññathābhāvī; saddasaññāgandhasaññārasasaññāphoṭṭhabbasaññādhammasaññā aniccā vipariṇāmī aññathābhāvī. Yo, bhikkhave, ime dhamme evaṃ saddahati adhimuccati, ayaṃ vuccati ‘Saddhānusārī…pe… sambodhiparāyano’”ti. Chaṭṭhaṃ.


Rūpasañcetanā, bhikkhave, aniccā vipariṇāmī aññathābhāvī; saddasañcetanāgandhasañcetanārasasañcetanāphoṭṭhabbasañcetanādhammasañcetanā aniccā vipariṇāmī aññathābhāvī. Yo, bhikkhave, ime dhamme evaṃ saddahati adhimuccati, ayaṃ vuccati ‘Saddhānusārī…pe… sambodhiparāyano’”ti. Sattamaṃ.

The organs are the doors. They are to do with consciousness: ears to sota vinnana, eyes to cekkhu vinnana, nose to gana vinnana etc. I’m not sure about sutta, but many links available for abhidhamma.

Abhidhamma Class No. 83 Vithi - Part 2: Six Types of Vinnana and Vithi / The mango simile Vinnana cittas (consciousness) may be classified as follows according to the six sense-doors and the six physical bases (vatthu):

Adittapariyaya Sutta, Ādittapariyāya-sutta: 1 definition Everything is burning: the eye, the eye consciousness (cakkhuvinnana), and the contact of the eye with objects (cakkhu samphassa), and the sensations that arise there form. It is the same with the other senses: they are aflame with lust, anger, ignorance and the anxieties of birth, decay, death, etc.; knowing this, the follower of the Noble Eightfold Path feels revulsion towards them and divests himself of passion for them and ultimately attains supreme freedom.

Abandonment [Chapter 10] This use of fire is a reference to the Buddha"s third sermon, the “Fire Sermon” (Adittapariyaya Sutta; Vinaya Mahavagga: [1], 21). Its theme is that: “All is burning … the eye … ear … nose … tongue … body … mind are burning with the fires of greed … hatred … delusion … with birth, death, sorrow, pain, lamentation, grief and despair.” It was one of those “fire and brimstone” talks about where the real fires were and how to put them out. The metaphor of fire is a powerful one. It was used because the Buddha was talking to a group of fire worshipping ascetics. Yet, sure enough, the origin of suffering—the feeling that we want to have something, become something or get rid of something—has the power to get us heated up. It also has the fire like quality of consuming our attention and producing a lot of smoke that blinds our sense of perspective.

Phassa, Cakkhayatana, Akusala Vipakacitta, Kusalavipaka Citta, Adittapariyaya Sutta.

yes… we are all believers , but I find it interesting that something that is so fundamental in Proper Theravāda is not mentioned everywhere. where it systematically goes through each khaṇḍa for each sense door and sense object. You have to look hard, but there is only one thing here or there… for instance exclusive to saññā , shhh… don’t want to tell suttantas this.
But … i’ve listened to a few talks by westerners on the khaṇḍa and they don’t mention the sense doors. I’m thinking… how can you explain without the sense doors. khaṇḍa of what? is my thought.

Dvara is sense door: ear, eye, body, nose, mouth, mind. I would say the entire nervous system and the brain are parts of the process of seeing, hearing, etc. In terms of mind (mano or vinnana), consciousness only occurs at the door as cekkhu vinnana

Vedanakkhanda - feeling aggregate and vinnanakkhanda have to do with sense doors. The two are linked/interdependent in terms of sense (ayatana and dvara)

Dhamma Discourses To Foreign Yogis at Mahasi Meditation Dhamma Discourses To Foreign Yogis at Mahasi Meditation - Google Zoeken

I guess what the bhante is seeking for is, a process of relation between six senses and five khandas (specially sanna and sankhara), only from suttas, just as in Chachakkasutta.

If one needs just the mention of sanna and sankhara (without a process) against the objects of the six senses, then there is the Okkantasaṃyutta.

Yes Bhante, that is the point.

Bhikkhu Bodhi, connected discourses of the Buddha, p 1064, note 81:

“Strangely, the Nikāyas (i.e 4) do not offer an analysis of the form derived from the four great elements ‘catunnaṃ mahābhuthāya rūpānaṃ’. This analysis first appears only in the Abhidhamma Piṭaka, to wich such forms includes the fives senses faculties, four senses objects (the tactile object being attributed to three elements excluding water element).”

 Here Bhikkhu Bodhi points out a major breach and weakness in the theory of "suttabased only " who does not accept Abhidhamma as authentic Buddha ' s Teaching.

The four Nikāya not only lack the descriptive analysis of the derived materiality. But it fails also to provide the link between khandas, āyatanas, and dhāthu, since the senses bases and sense objects are not mentioned as materiality derived from the four great element.
Then, it means with the 4 Nikāyas, the objects of vipassanā lacks precision and clarity, to the point that is difficult to say how they differ and corresponds. It means one who follows strict four Nikāya only does not know what are the objects of vipassanā with wich he has to practice.

Even between the 18 dhāthu and 12 āyatana, the 4 Nikāyas are not enough to discriminate clearly their differences and to explain their subtilities:

" The eighteen elements are an elaboration of the twelve sense bases. They consist of the six sense faculties, the six senses objects, and the six types of consciousness. Since six types of consciousness have been extracted from the mind base, the mind element must be a simpler type of cognitive event. The Nikāyas do not specify its precise fonction. The Abhidhamma identifies it with a type of consciousness that fulfills more rudimentary roles in the process of cognition than thevmore discriminative mind-consciousness element."

Bhikkhu Bodhi, in the Buddha ’ s words, p 312


Before your post… everyone here thought I was crazy for saying this… I’m glad you have this quote.
The same is true for English dhamma talks on khanda… and 6 senses… Nobody really speaks of it. Imagine a 30 minute dhamma talk on the 5 kanda and not mentioning the senses. Seems strange, but this is the common English dhamma.

Yes Bhante. Fournikāyist can not connect aggregates and sense bases, so they have either to guess a link or to skip one of the two to seem consistent… They prefer to skip the āyatana ( bases and objects) because dhammāyatana and manāyatana are much unclear to them…since dhammāyatana can involve both materiality and mentality… There is water element, but also the tactile object (pothabbāyatana) contains the three other great elements…
How they will know if any of the sense bases or senses objects contains one or several of the four great elements, or if the mind-objects base (dhammā yatana) contains some elements?
They can not know it, it is only given in Abhidhamma and absolutely impossible to know with the Four Nikāyas only. Hence they can only give Dhamma talks about kahṇḍās to keep some appearance of consistency.


Did you intend this to sound like this.?

Yes Bhante. It is the closest word to their method… Since they reject also a big part of the Kuddhaka Nikāya , reject Abhidhamma, the commentaries and have absolutely no interest in Vinaya. Hence I call them fournikāyist as the four Nikāya are their reference :joy: