by Bhikkhu Anīgha
At Sāvatthī.
“Bhikkhus, these six contact-fields bring suffering when they’re untamed, unguarded, unprotected, and unrestrained. What six?
The contact-field of the eye brings suffering when it’s untamed, unguarded, unprotected, and unrestrained. The contact-field of the ear … nose … tongue … body …
The contact-field of the mental faculty brings suffering when it’s untamed, unguarded, unprotected, and unrestrained.
These six contact-fields bring suffering when they’re untamed, unguarded, unprotected, and unrestrained.
These six contact-fields bring happiness when they’re well tamed, well guarded, well protected, and well restrained. What six?
The contact-field of the eye brings happiness when it’s well tamed, well guarded, well protected, and well restrained. The contact-field of the ear … nose… tongue … body …
The contact-field of the mental faculty brings happiness when it’s well tamed, well guarded, well protected, and well restrained.
These six contact-fields bring happiness when they’re well tamed, well guarded, well protected, and well restrained.”
That is what the Buddha said. Then the Holy One, the Teacher, went on to say:
“Bhikkhus, it’s just these six contact-fields
Where one unrestrained meets with suffering.
Those who understand how to restrain them
live with confidence, not assailed.
When you see pleasant sights
and unpleasant ones, too,
subdue all manner of desire for the pleasant,
and don’t pollute the mind with thoughts of antipathy.
When you hear sounds both agreeable and disagreeable,
don’t become enthralled with agreeable sounds,
and subdue aversion for the disagreeable.
Don’t pollute the mind with thoughts of antipathy.
When you smell a fragrant, delightful scent,
and one that’s foul and unpleasant,
subdue resistance against the unpleasant,
and don’t yield to desire for the pleasant.
When partaking of a sweet, delicious taste,
and sometimes those that are bitter,
don’t partake of the sweet taste fixated on it,
and don’t despise the bitter.
Don’t get infatuated with a pleasant pressure
and don’t tremble at an unpleasant one.
Look with equanimity at the duality
of pleasant and painful pressures,
without favoring or opposing anything.
People generally let their perceptions proliferate;
perceiving and proliferating, they become engaged.
Expel all thoughts concerned with the mundane,
And go about intent on renunciation.
When the mind is well developed like this
In regard to the six,
it doesn’t waver at all in face of pressure.
Bhikkhus, conquer these passions and aversions
And go beyond birth and death!”
—SN 35.94
The development of sense restraint hinges on the discernment of what non-restraint is. “Guarding the sense doors”, as it’s called in the Suttas, is often inadvertently confused with “sensory deprivation” and blind denial, a mode of practice that is as misguided as careless indulgence.1 2
[Already] contacted, bhikkhus, one feels, intends, and perceives.
—SN 35.933
The arisen consciousness of a sense object4, vague as it may be, is itself what allows you to do anything in regard to it, including restraint. Therefore, sense restraint (indriyasaṃvara, lit. “holding back” of the faculties) is about preventing the senses from going further “into” the pressuring things that arise of their own accord. This is to be done knowing in advance that the potential increase in engagement and attention will materialize states of passion and aversion that are for now still distant.
The choice to become more involved with a sense experience than you already are is what is referred to in the typical formula found in the Suttas as “grasping at signs and features” (nimittaggāhī anubyañjanaggāhī). The signs and features of a thing are not just the particular sensory perceptions of it (shape, color, texture, etc.), but also the entire “world” of significances, feelings, memories, associations, ideas, and intentions associated with it, which proliferates the more you give that thing your attention.
This act of grasping at signs and features can be illustrated by an analogy: when presented with the thumbnail, title, and author of an online video, you already have a rough idea of what it’s about and what effect it could have on you, but you haven’t clicked on it yet. If you do click and start engaging with its content, the range of its significances (nimitta/anubyañjana), which was initially limited to only what was revealed by the thumbnail, will start to widen, and with that your emotional involvement with it.
Similarly, when an object provocative of lust or aversion is presented to any of your six senses, you have a choice to let yourself “descend” into it more—by trying to access it with other senses that are not yet in contact with it, by intensifying the experience of a given sense, etc.—or not.5
The difference between this and “sense deprivation” is that this requires discernment and cannot be done mindlessly or methodically, and it’s not about restraining everything.6
“Whatever you’ve shielded the mind from
can’t cause you suffering.
So, you should shield the mind from everything,
then you’re freed from all suffering.”
(The Buddha’s reply):
“You needn’t shield the mind from everything—
Not the mind that is under control.
You need only shield the mind
from where the bad things come.”
—SN 1.24
Unlike an overzealous total avoidance, perfect sense restraint would not cripple your ability to function externally. All it asks of you is that your actions first and foremost do not transgress the boundaries of the eight precepts, and then that the intention behind whatever you do is not infected with sensual desire, covetousness, ill will, or distraction. The right restraint cannot be “overdone”, and the more it is understood, the more natural and effortless it becomes.
It also requires acknowledging the extent of your responsibility and clarifying it further until it becomes perfectly evident—that’s it’s in wilfully clicking, and not in whether thumbnails are presented to you and how appealing they are7 —as well as the ability to assess your present mental state, without which it’s impossible to accurately determine what needs to be restrained, how, and, most importantly, why.
Additionally, the attempt to guard the sense doors correctly needs to come with a willingness to put up with a degree of internal discomfort, since that’s what will be there if you restrain yourself properly instead of trying to push back the world and circumstances. 8
But when that displeasure is understood, and it is recognized that it stems not from the absence of the desirable “food” for the senses, but from the mind’s active resistance to that absence, which is then relinquished, then mere restraint becomes the foundation for the right type of joy. The one that is fully based on renunciation and is devoid of defiling inclinations:
“Bhikkhus, I will teach you who lives negligently and who lives diligently. Listen …
And how does one live negligently?
When one lives with the eye faculty unrestrained, the mind becomes “soaked” in sights cognizable by the eye. When the mind is thus polluted, there’s no gladness. When there’s no gladness, there’s no joy. When there’s no joy, there’s no calm. When there’s no calm, there’s unease. When one is uneasy, the mind does not become composed. When the mind is not composed, phenomena are not clear. Since phenomena are not clear, one is considered to live negligently.
When one lives with the ear … nose … tongue … body … mental faculty unrestrained, your mind becomes “soaked” in phenomena cognizable by the mental faculty. When the mind is thus polluted, there’s no gladness. When there’s no gladness, there’s no joy. When there’s no joy, there’s no calm. When there’s no calm, there’s unease. When one is uneasy, the mind does not become composed. When the mind is not composed, phenomena are not clear. Since phenomena are not clear, one is considered to live negligently.
That’s how one lives negligently.
And how does one live diligently?
When one lives with the eye faculty restrained, the mind doesn’t become “soaked” in sights cognizable by the eye. When the mind isn’t thus polluted, gladness is born. When glad, joy is born. When the mind is joyous, the body becomes calm. When the body is calm, one is at ease. And when one is at ease, the mind becomes composed. When the mind is composed, phenomena are clear. Because phenomena are clear one is considered to live diligently.
When one lives with the ear … nose … tongue … body … mental faculty restrained, the mind doesn’t become “soaked” in phenomena cognizable by the mental faculty. When the mind isn’t thus polluted, gladness is born. When glad, joy is born. When the mind is joyous, the body becomes calm. When the body is calm, one is at ease. And when one is at ease, the mind becomes composed. When the mind is composed, phenomena are clear. Because phenomena are clear one is considered to live diligently.
That’s how one lives diligently.”
—SN 35.97
“Bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu has three qualities, he lives full of joy and happiness in the present life, and he has laid the groundwork for exhausting the defilements. What three?
He guards the sense doors, eats in moderation, and is committed to wakefulness.
And how does a bhikkhu guard the sense doors?
“When seeing a sight with the eye, he doesn’t grasp at signs and features of it on account of which—due to abiding with the eye faculty unrestrained—bad, detrimental phenomena of longing and upset would flow in on him. He practices to restrain that; he guards the eye faculty and brings about the restraint of the eye faculty.
When hearing a sound with the ear …
When smelling an odor with the nose …
When tasting a flavor with the tongue …
When touching a touch with the body …
When cognizing a phenomenon with the mental faculty, he doesn’t grasp at signs and features of it on account of which—due to abiding with the mental faculty unrestrained—bad, detrimental phenomena of longing and upset would flow in on him. He practices to restrain that; he guards the mental faculty and brings about the restraint of the mental faculty.”
Suppose a chariot stood harnessed to thoroughbreds at a level crossroads, with a goad ready. Then a deft horse trainer, a master charioteer, might mount the chariot, taking the reins in his right hand and goad in the left. He’d drive out and back wherever he wishes, whenever he wishes.
In the same way, a bhikkhu trains to protect, control, tame, and pacify these six senses.
—SN 35.239
No circumstance or accident can force you to give your attention to something out of lust or ill will, hence the above simile of the master charioteer who is in full control.9
The way to prevent the mind from going down the rabbit hole of provoking sense objects is to keep it anchored to a broader context or theme than the particularity and variability of those objects10. That is why lack of sense restraint is said to be a consequence of insufficient recollection and awareness (satisampajaññā).11
“And how, bhikkhus, is there restraint? When a bhikkhu sees a sight with the eye, if it’s agreeable he doesn’t harbor passion for it, if it’s disagreeable he’s not averse to it. He lives with recollection of the body established and with an immeasurable mind. And he understands as it is the liberation by mind and liberation by understanding where those bad, detrimental qualities cease without remainder. When he hears a sound with the ear …When he cognizes a phenomenon with the mental faculty, if it’s agreeable he doesn’t harbor passion for it, if it’s disagreeable he’s not averse to it. He lives with recollection of the body established and with an immeasurable mind. And he understands as it is the liberation by mind and liberation by understanding where those bad, detrimental qualities cease without remainder. It is in such a way that there is restraint.
“Suppose, bhikkhus, a man would catch six animals—with different domains and different feeding grounds—and tie them by a strong rope. He would catch a snake, a crocodile, a bird, a dog, a jackal, and a monkey, and tie each by a strong rope. Having done so, he would bind them to a strong post or pillar. Then those six animals with different domains and different feeding grounds would each pull in the direction of its own feeding ground and domain. The snake would pull one way, thinking, ‘Let me enter an anthill’ … as above … The monkey would pull another way, thinking, ‘Let me enter a forest.’
“Now when these six animals become worn out and fatigued, they would stand close to that post or pillar, they would sit down there, they would lie down there. So too, bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu has developed and cultivated recollection of the body, the eye does not pull in the direction of agreeable sights nor are disagreeable forms disturbing; the ear does not pull in the direction of agreeable sounds nor are disagreeable sounds disturbing; the nose does not pull in the direction of agreeable odors nor are disagreeable odors disturbing; the tongue does not pull in the direction of agreeable tastes nor are disagreeable tastes disturbing; the body does not pull in the direction of agreeable tactile objects nor are disagreeable tactile objects disturbing; the mind does not pull in the direction of agreeable mental phenomena nor are disagreeable mental phenomena disturbing.
“It is in such a way that there is restraint.
—SN 35.24712
A common mistake that impedes properly targeted restraint is to confuse preferences, or “likes and dislikes”, with desires. But preferences are a matter of each sense “animal” having its own feeding ground, and within that, happening to find some things agreeable and some things less so. This is due to various factors related to your history, environment, and inclinations that have been accumulated through repeated past choices, and is not the issue per se. The real concern is whether the animals are pulling you towards what they like and away from what they dislike (and even more importantly, whether you yield). It’s paramount to keep that distinction in perspective, since only then will you be able to rightly “tie them to the post” instead of being caught in the two extremes of running along with them and beating them up.
Both of these attitudes can be very subtle and will generally go unnoticed, since one starts out being unclear about the true intention simultaneously underlying one’s actions, including the efforts to practice. There is a reason why, in the progression of the Gradual Training13, one is instructed to take on sense restraint only once the first step of virtue and “seeing the danger in the slightest fault” is well established (which means unwavering observance of the eight precepts at minimum, not only in the letter but in spirit too14).
If you have not—as a prerequisite, not even as a guarantee—indefinitely abandoned the possibility to break these precepts in the future and any openness to acting unskilfully by body and speech15, you will be grasping at the signs and features of things that induce unwholesome states on some level, whether you realize it or not. Your intentions for the future, as in the actions that you are at least open to doing at some undefined point later on, influence every moment of your present, no matter if you’re not planning or dwelling on them at all.
“Bhikkhus, suppose a sheaf of barley was placed at a crossroads. Then six men would come along carrying flails, and started threshing the sheaf of barley. So that sheaf of barley would be thoroughly threshed by those six flails. Then a seventh man would come along carrying a flail, and he’d give the sheaf of barley a seventh threshing. So that sheaf of barley would be even more thoroughly threshed by that seventh flail.
In the same way, an unlearned ordinary person is threshed in the eye by both pleasant and unpleasant sights. They’re threshed in the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind by both pleasant and unpleasant phenomena. And if that unlearned ordinary person has intentions for being [bhava] again in the future, that inept man is even more thoroughly threshed, like that sheaf of barley threshed by the seventh man.
—SN 35.248
- See also “Unwelcoming of the Hindrances”, and “Sense Restraint is Not Just For Monks”. ↩︎
- And is typically implemented during so called “meditation retreats”. ↩︎
- It could be said that you have more control over other people’s senses than your own (hence the six senses are compared to an empty village liable to attack by bandits in SN 35.238). You can introduce things into someone else’s senses that they were entirely unconscious of, but when it comes to yourself, all you can achieve through your own will is to experience something to a greater degree (i.e., it must have already been known or “contacted” to some extent at least in mind). The “real” five-sense confirmation of an imaginary experience is simply an increase in intensity of the same thing; it’s not a new thing altogether. Therefore, the opposite also applies: you cannot get yourself to totally not experience something volitionally, as the very attempt to do away with it requires you to be aware of it at least in imagination. At most, you can intentionally decrease the intensity of things you’re currently conscious of by not placing them at the center of your attention. You don’t have a final say in exactly when a phenomenon will completely disappear from your overall experience (including the sixth sense) without any residue—and fortunately, it doesn’t matter when it does. You would already have a purified mind if there is no delight or resistance throughout its undetermined duration. ↩︎
- Including a mental knowledge that you may come across it existing prior to the physical encounter. It’s important to understand that the mental faculty is as valid and real as the other five. The experience of a phenomenon does not begin an end with its presence to the five senses. ↩︎
- And the choice to “click” begins with the mind, and is therefore always intentional. You cannot accidentally end up absorbed in the pleasant characteristics of a sight, sound, etc. Similarly, you can cover your eyes each time an enticing sight comes up, but continue to be involved with it on a mental level if you don’t discern your intentions clearly enough. “Involvement” includes either delighting in the prospect of it, or anxiously trying to “counter” it and abolish the feeling it evokes: expanding the analogy, the latter would be like clicking on the thumbnails that attract you just to leave a dislike and a negative comment, and on those that repel you just to do the opposite. If you do that, you are still clicking, and that is the mistake. ↩︎
- Which is technically impossible, and the attempt to do so is in itself actually a lack of restraint: an intention rooted in aversion. See “You Don’t Need to Say ‘No’ to Everything” and “Sensuality VS Agreeability”. ↩︎
- Naturally, a lack of sense restraint will bring you to a state of mind where you will be tempted even more—you get a greater number of suggestions for content similar to what you’ve been “clicking” on recently. But even then, you can’t undo the proliferation and wipe the slate clean by choice; you can only work from where you currently are: accept that the new temptations that resulted from carelessness will be lurking around in your mind, and now restrain yourself in regard to that. Eventually, the pressure would have to diminish through lack of further fuel. ↩︎
- It is necessary to tailor your environment so you’re not too frequently exposed to things that would easily overwhelm you. But never to the point where you place the all the burden of restraint and maintaining internal purity on the outer environment and setup and not your own intentions. ↩︎
- Even when the senses have to engage with things out of practical necessity that could arouse defilements (which, to be sure, does not extend to anything against the precepts), it’s perfectly possible to remain mindful of the intention to fulfill that task and nothing more, thereby never becoming preoccupied with the alluring details of the respective objects even as they are present. This is how you would prevent the unavoidable act of eating, the best example of this, from becoming tainted with delight in the agreeability of the food (“Simile of the Son’s Flesh”). ↩︎
- For another example of this, see “Appointment With Death”. The same principle of yoniso manasikāra applies to all the various ways of establishing sati. A particularly relevant one in the context of restraint is the recollection of the danger in sensuality. ↩︎
- AN 10.61. Trying to immerse yourself in things like bodily sensations and positive mental images or mantras, which is the opposite of satisampajaññā, would be choosing non-restraint on one domain so as to restrain another. The right themes of sati are wholesome precisely because they can never be “grasped at” in the same way that sense objects can. They don’t capture your attention, but rather contextualize it. ↩︎
- “The Six-Sensed Animal” ↩︎
- Found in MN 107, MN 39, among others. ↩︎
- With potential wiggle room when it comes to the sixth precept. See “Accomplished in Virtue”. ↩︎
- Keeping one’s speech in check, not only bodily activities, is crucial, and the need for it is often overlooked. Uncontrolled speech intrinsically keeps the mind tied to concerns in regard to the agreeable and disagreeable. ↩︎