Nimitta, no one can stop the succession of that which is conditioning it

-



[Azita] I don't quite understand how nimitta (sign, image) of sañña (memory) works, could you explain, please?

[A. Sujin] And what about nimitta of visible object? Nimitta of seeing? Is nimitta different? Or nimitta has to be nimitta. And so what is meant by nimitta? One knows from hearing that citta arises and falls away in split second, what does it mean? It arises to experience an object. That's why there are so many things when citta experiences it one by one so very rapidly that it seems that everything is there, right? Thinking just about it. So just one moment of experiencing an object, can it appear as it is, no thing no one?

[A] No, it's too fast.

[Su] That's why beginning to understand what is meant by nimitta. Can just one single moment of seeing be known?

[A] No

[Su] But now, no counting, it's there! But what have we learned from the enlightenment of the Buddha? Whatever is there is not permanent at all. It seems like it's there for quite a long time, even it's so short, it's longer than it is because it just arises and then falls away, instantly. And the Buddha taught about each moment arising and falling instantly, followed by what is there by conditions, instantly, all the time, unknown. That's why what is there which is not known, the succession is the arising and falling of whatever is there, no matter what. For example, that which is seen, it impinges on the eyebase, it's seen and then gone, but so many many many, uncountable moments.

So it seems like it's there, the whole body of a doll, or whatever, the leaf the plant the bed the curtain and so on, it's there, how fast it is, how rapidly it is arising and falling away in succession. No one can stop the succession of that which conditions, as soon as it has fallen away, it conditions the next one instantly on and on and on. So what appears now is not the way it is or not as it is arising and falling away. So as one learns contemplating on it, about the truth, can just one single reality be object of understanding? Impossible. That's why the Buddha taught about [them] one by one, from moment of birth, on and on, to moment of seeing and then on and on to moment of hearing and so on. Unknown, right now, he talked about the citta before seeing, he talked about the citta which follows after seeing, but does not see, what does it mean? Because now there is only seeing appearing as object, right now. It's there, it's known, the object is known, the seeing is known as seeing, no moment of arising and falling away is known.

That's why what appears is the succession of that which arises and falls away so very very fast. So it appears as one thing, like seeing is seeing, but actually how many moments of seeing? Because only one single seeing cannot be experienced and that is the meaning of nimitta, no matter what nimitta of rupa, right? Even it does not appear as a doll yet, but even just that, when we understand how can it be there there must be citta before that and what citta arises before seeing and so on, unknown, what appears it's only seeing. So it's the seeing is nimitta of the reality which experiences an object, right?

[A] Maybe I've placed too much emphasis on sañña because it just arises and falls away with those cittas that experience.

[Su] It is always citta, but it arises with citta, falls away with citta. So when citta arises it's there and when citta falls away it falls away, together. So what appears now is just like citta, appearing as the nimitta of citta, so sañña, no matter what it remembers, it is nimitta of sañña because what about the sañña which arises with pañca-dvāra-āvajjana citta (sense-door-adverting consciousness). It's not the one arising with cakkhu-viññana (seeing consciousness), right? Experiencing the same object, but [it's] different sañña, because it arises with different citta. So, even [if] sañña is now, it's the object of beginning to understand that right now that which marks and remembers is there, otherwise there cannot be anything there cannot be a door, there cannot be a flower, there cannot be a bed or anything, but sañña which marks, which remembers what is there, takes it for that.

So, how many saññas to condition such nimitta of something? So sañña has to be nimitta of sañña too. As nimitta of seeing, nimitta of like or dislike or whatever. That's why there is the word rūpa-nimitta, vedana-nimitta, sañña-nimitta, sankhara-nimitta, viññana-nimitta. What else? All there, five khandhas, include whatever is there. It's only nimitta which appears, to be taken for this and that, even is not taken for this yet, but the nimitta of that, it is different from another nimitta, otherwise, how could there be different ideas of different ones, as a doll is not a flower.

Sañña is also nimitta because only one sañña with one citta cannot be object of understanding, by way of the processes that the Buddha taught, from one moment to another moment. To understand that what we are hearing now is there now, no matter what, is there, unknown. That's why beginning to hear about it to understand that what can be understood must be right now because it's there, [that] which hasn't been known yet, but it's there. That's why from hearing that can begin to be object of understanding, one by one, a little more, as usual, as natural, as the way it is because no one can do anything, no one can make anything arise at all, all are dhammas.

(Reviewed Nov 2021)


  • Audio of the entire discussion:

Video image: Southern gate detail, Sanchi, stupa #1