The time is hidden and cannot be seen

Samiddhi

Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at R̄jagahain the Hot Springs Park. Then the Venerable Samiddhi, having risen at the first flush of dawn, went to the hot springs to bathe. Having bathed in the hot springs and come back out, he stood in one robe drying his limbs.Then, when the night had advanced, a certain devatā of stunning beauty, illuminating the entire hot springs, approached the Venerable Samiddhi. Having approached, she stood in the air and addressed the Venerable Samiddhi in verse:

“Without having enjoyed you seek alms, bhikkhu,
You don’t seek alms after you’ve enjoyed.
First enjoy, bhikkhu, then seek alms:
Don’t let the time pass you by!”

“I do not know what the time might be;
The time is hidden and cannot be seen.
Hence, without enjoying, I seek alms:
Don’t let the time pass me by!”

Then that devat̄a lighted on the earth and said to the Venerable Samiddhi:“You have gone forth while young, bhikkhu, a lad with black hair, endowed with the blessing of youth, in the prime of life, without having dallied with sensual pleasures. Enjoy human sensual pleasures, bhikkhu; do not abandon what is directly visible in order to pursue what takes time.”

“I have not abandoned what is directly visible, friend, in order to pursue what takes time. I have abandoned what takes time in order to pursue what is directly visible. For the Blessed One, friend, has stated that sensual pleasures are time-consuming, full of suffering, full of despair, and the danger in them is still greater, while this Dhamma is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise.”

“But how is it, bhikkhu, that the Blessed One has stated that sensual pleasures are time-consuming, full of suffering, full of despair, and the danger in them is still greater? How is it that this Dhamma is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise?”

“I am newly ordained, friend, not long gone forth, just recently come to this Dhamma and Discipline. I cannot explain it in detail. But that Blessed One, the Arahant, the Perfectly Enlightened One, is dwelling at Rājagaha in the Hot Springs Park. Approach that Blessed One and ask him about this matter. As he explains it to you, so you should remember it.”

“It isn’t easy for us to approach that Blessed One, bhikkhu, as he is surrounded by other devatās of great influence. If you would approach him and ask him about this matter, we will come along too in order to hear the Dhamma.”

“Very well, friend,” the Venerable Samiddhi replied. Then he approached the Blessed One, paid homage to him, sat down to one side,  and reported his entire discussion with that devat̄a adding: “If that devatā’s statement is true, venerable sir, then that devatā should be close by.”

When this was said, that devat̄a said to the Venerable Samiddhi: “Ask, bhikkhu! Ask, bhikkhu! For I have arrived.”

Then the Blessed One addressed that devatā in verse:

“Beings who perceive what can be expressed
Become established in what can be expressed.
Not fully understanding what can be expressed,
They come under the yoke of Death.

“But having fully understood what can be expressed,
One does not conceive ‘one who expresses.’
For that does not exist for him
By which one could describe him.

“If you understand, spirit, speak up.”

“I do not understand in detail, venerable sir, the meaning of what was stated in brief by the Blessed One. Please, venerable sir, let the Blessed One explain it to me in such a way that I might understand in detail the meaning of what he stated in brief.”

[The Blessed One:]

“One who conceives ‘I am equal, better, or worse,’
Might on that account engage in disputes.
But one not shaken in the three discriminations
Does not think, ‘I am equal or better.’

“If you understand, spirit, speak up.”

“In this case too, venerable sir, I do not understand in detail … let the Blessed One explain it to me in such a way that I might understand in detail the meaning of what he stated in brief.”

[The Blessed One:]

“He abandoned reckoning, did not assume conceit;
He cut off craving here for name-and-form.
Though devas and humans search for him
Here and beyond, in the heavens and all abodes,
They do not find the one whose knots are cut,
The one untroubled, free of longing.

“If you understand, spirit, speak up.”“I understand in detail, venerable sir, the meaning of what was stated in brief by the Blessed One thus:

“One should do no evil in all the world,
Not by speech, mind, or body.
Having abandoned sense pleasures,
Mindful and clearly comprehending,
One should not pursue a course
That is painful and harmful.

SN 1 : 20

***

[The Blessed One:]

“They are not sense pleasures, the world’s pretty things:
Man’s sensuality is the intention of lust.
The pretty things remain as they are in the world
But the wise remove the desire for them.

“One should discard anger, cast off conceit,
Transcend all the fetters.
No sufferings torment one who has nothing,
Who does not adhere to name-and-form.

“He abandoned reckoning, did not assume conceit;
He cut off craving here for name-and-form.
Though devas and humans search for him
Here and beyond, in the heavens and all abodes,
They do not find the one whose knots are cut,
The one untroubled, free of longing.”

“If devas and humans have not seen
The one thus liberated here or beyond,”
[said the Venerable Mogharāja],
“Are they to be praised who venerate him,
The best of men, faring for the good of humans?”

“Those bhikkhus too become worthy of praise,
[Mogharāja,” said the Blessed One,]
“Who venerate him, the one thus liberated.
But having known Dhamma and abandoned doubt,
Those bhikkhus become even surmounters of ties.”

SN 1 : 35

***

”Then King Pasenadi of Kosala approached the bhikkhunı̄ Khemā, paid homage to her, sat down to one side, and said to her:

“How is it, revered lady, does the Tathāgata exist after death?”“Great king, the Blessed One has not declared this: ‘The Tathāgata exists after death.’”

“Then, revered lady, does the Tathāgata not exist after death?”

“Great king, the Blessed One has not declared this either: ‘The Tathāgata does not exist after death.’”

“How is it then, revered lady, does the Tathāgata both exist and not exist after death?”“Great king, the Blessed One has not declared this: ‘The Tathāgata both exists and does not exist after death.’”

“Then, revered lady, does the Tathāgata neither exist nor not exist after death?”

“Great king, the Blessed One has not declared this either: ‘The Tathāgata neither exists nor does not exist after death.’”

“How is this, revered lady? When asked, ‘How is it, revered lady, does the Tathāgata exist after death?’ … And when asked, ‘Then, revered lady, does the Tathāgata neither exist nor not exist after death?’—in each case you say: ‘Great king, the Blessed One has not declared this.’ What now,  revered lady, is the cause and reason why this has not been declared by the Blessed One?”

“Well then, great king, I will question you about this same matter. Answer as you see fit. What do you think, great king? Do you have an accountant or calculator or mathematician who can count the grains of sand in the river Ganges thus: ‘There are so many grains of sand,’ or ‘There are so many hundreds of grains of sand,’ or ‘There are so many thousands of grains of sand,’ or ‘There are so many hundreds of thousands of grains of sand’?”

“No, revered lady.”

“Then, great king, do you have an accountant or calculator or mathematician who can count the water in the great ocean thus: ‘There are so many gallons of water,’ or ‘There are so many hundreds of gallons of water,’ or ‘There are so many thousands of gallons of water,’ or ‘There are so many hundreds of thousands of gallons of water’?”

“No, revered lady. For what reason? Because the great ocean is deep, immeasurable, hard to fathom.”

“So too, great king, that form by which one describing the Tathāgata might describe him has been abandoned by the Tathāgata, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated so
that it is no more subject to future arising. The Tathāgata, great king, is liberated from reckoning in terms of form; he is deep, immeasurable, hard to fathom like the great ocean.

‘The Tathāgata exists after death’ does not apply; ‘the Tathāgata does not exist after death’ does not apply; ‘the Tathāgata both exists and does not exist after death’ does not apply; ‘the Tathāgata neither exists nor does not exist after death’ does not apply.

“That feeling by which one describing the Tathāgata might describe him… That perception by which one describing the Tathāgata might describe him ... Those determinations by which one describing the Tathāgata might describe him ... That consciousness by which one describing the Tathāgata might describe him has been abandoned by the Tathāgata, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated so that it is no more subject to future arising. The Tathāgata, great king, is liberated from reckoning in terms of consciousness; he is deep, immeasurable, hard to fathom like the great ocean. ‘The Tathāgata exists after death’ does not apply; ‘the Tathāgata does not exist after death’ does not apply; ‘the Tathāgata both exists and does not exist after death’ does not apply; ‘the Tathāgata neither exists nor does not exist after death’ does not apply.”

From SN 44 : 1

***

“Bhikkhu, if one has an underlying tendency towards something, then one is measured in accordance with it; if one is measured in accordance with something, then one is reckoned in terms of it. If one does not have an underlying tendency towards something, then one is not measured in accordance with it; if one is not measured in accordance with something, then one is not reckoned in terms of it.”

“Understood, Blessed One! Understood, Fortunate One!”

“In what way, bhikkhu, do you understand in detail the meaning of what was stated by me in brief?”

“If, venerable sir, one has an underlying tendency towards form, then one is measured in accordance with it; if one is measured in accordance with it, then one is reckoned in terms of it. If one has an underlying tendency towards feeling … towards perception … towards  determinations… towards consciousness, then one is measured in accordance with it; if one is measured in accordance with it, then one is reckoned in terms of it.

“If, venerable sir, one does not have an underlying tendency towards form, then one is not measured in accordance with it;  if one is not measured in accordance with it, then one is not reckoned in terms of it. If one does not have an underlying tendency towards feeling … towards perception … towards volitional formations … towards consciousness, then one is not measured in accordance with it; if one is not measured in accordance with it, then one is not reckoned in terms of it.

“It is in such a way, venerable sir, that I understand in detail the meaning of what was stated by the Blessed One in brief.”

“Good, good, bhikkhu! ... SN 22: 37

If, Ānanda, they were to ask you: ‘Friend Ānanda, what are the things of which an arising is discerned, a vanishing is discerned, an alteration of that which stands is discerned?’—being asked thus, how would you answer?”

“Venerable sir, if they were to ask me this, I would answer thus: ‘Friends, with form an arising is discerned, a vanishing is discerned, an alteration of that which stands is discerned. With feeling … perception … determinations… consciousness an arising is discerned, a vanishing is discerned, an alteration of that which stands is discerned. These, friends, are the things of which an arising is discerned, a vanishing is discerned, an alteration of that which stands is discerned.’ Being asked thus, venerable sir, I would answer in such a way.”“Good, good, Ānanda! ... SN 22: 37

**
Here a bhikkhu has abandoned the conceit ‘I am,’ has cut it off at the root …so that it is no longer subject to future arising. ...

“Bhikkhus, when the gods with Indra, with Brahmā and with Pajāpati seek a bhikkhu who is thus liberated in mind, they do not find [anything of which they could say]: ‘The consciousness of Tathagata is supported by this.’ Why is that? One thus gone, I say, is untraceable here and now.
MN 22
***

“Then does Master Gotama hold any speculative view at all?”

“Vaccha, ‘speculative view’ is something that the Tathāgata has put away. For the Tathāgata, Vaccha, has seen this: ‘Such is material form, such its origin, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origin, such its disappearance; such is perception, such its origin, such its disappearance; such are determinations, such their origin, such their disappearance; such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.’ Therefore, I say, with the destruction, fading away, cessation, giving up, and relinquishing of all conceivings, all excogitations, all I-making, mine-making, and the underlying tendency to conceit, the Tathāgata is liberated through not clinging. (upādāna)”*.

“When a bhikkhu’s mind is liberated thus, Master Gotama, where does he reappear [after death]?”

“The term ‘reappears’ does not apply, Vaccha.”

“Then he does not reappear, Master Gotama?”

“The term ‘does not reappear’ does not apply, Vaccha.”

“Then he both reappears and does not reappear, Master Gotama?”

“The term ‘both reappears and does not reappear’ does not apply, Vaccha.”

“Then he neither reappears nor does not reappear, Master Gotama?”

“The term ‘neither reappears nor does not reappear’ does not apply, Vaccha.”

“When Master Gotama is asked these four questions, he replies: ‘The term “reappears” does not apply, Vaccha; the term “does not reappear” does not apply, Vaccha; the term “both reappears and does not reappear” does not apply, Vaccha; the term “neither reappears nor does not reappear” does not apply, Vaccha.’ Here I have fallen into bewilderment, Master Gotama, here I have fallen into confusion, and the measure of confidence I had gained through previous conversation with Master Gotama has now disappeared.”

“It is enough to cause you bewilderment, Vaccha, enough to cause you confusion. For this Dhamma, Vaccha, is profound, hard to see and hard to understand, peaceful and sublime, unattainable by mere reasoning, subtle, to be experienced by the wise. It is hard for you to understand it when you hold another view, accept another teaching, approve of another teaching, pursue a different training, and follow a different teacher. So I shall question you about this in return, Vaccha. Answer as you choose.

“What do you think, Vaccha? Suppose a fire were burning before you. Would you know: ‘This fire is burning before me’?”

“I would, Master Gotama.”

“If someone were to ask you, Vaccha: ‘What does this fire burning before you burn in dependence on?’—being asked thus, what would you answer?”

“Being asked thus, Master Gotama, I would answer: ‘This fire burns in dependence on fuel of grass and sticks.’”

“If that fire before you were to be extinguished, would you know: ‘This fire before me has been extinguished’?”

“I would, Master Gotama.”

“If someone were to ask you, Vaccha: ‘When that fire before you was extinguished, to which direction did it go: to the east, the west, the north, or the south?’—being asked thus, what would you answer?”

“That does not apply, Master Gotama. The fire burned in dependence on its fuel of grass and sticks. When that is used up, if it does not get any more fuel, being without fuel, it is reckoned as extinguished.”

“So too, Vaccha, the Tathāgata has abandoned that material form by which one describing the Tathāgata might describe him; he has cut it off at the root, made it like a palm stump, done away with it so that it is no longer subject to future arising. The Tathāgata is liberated from reckoning in terms of material form, Vaccha, he is profound, immeasurable, hard to fathom like the ocean. ‘He reappears’ does not apply; ‘he does not reappear’ does not apply; ‘he both reappears and does not reappear’ does not apply; ‘he neither reappears nor does not reappear’ does not apply.

The Tathāgata has abandoned that feeling by which one describing the Tathāgata might describe him…has abandoned that perception by which one describing the Tathāgata might describe him…has abandoned those determinations by which one describing the Tathāgata might describe him…has abandoned that consciousness by which one describing the Tathāgata might describe him; he has cut it off at the root, made it like a palm stump, done away with it so that it is no longer subject to future arising. The Tathāgata is liberated from reckoning in terms of consciousness, Vaccha; he is profound, immeasurable, hard to fathom like the ocean. ‘He reappears’ does not apply; ‘he does not reappear’ does not apply; ‘he both reappears and does not reappear’ does not apply; ‘he neither reappears nor does not reappear’ does not apply.”

MN 72

* I declare, Vaccha, rebirth for one with fuel, not for one without fuel. Just as a fire burns with fuel, but not without fuel, so, Vaccha, I declare rebirth for one with fuel, not for one without fuel.”* SN 44: 9

* Sa-upādānassa khvāhaṃ Vaccha upapattiṃ paññāpemi no anupādānassa.

["The reason why the Tathāgata is not to be found (even here and now) is that he is rūpa-, vedanā-, saññā-, sankhāra-, and viññāna-sankhāya vimutto (ibid. 1 <S.iv,378-9>), i.e. free from reckoning as matter, feeling, perception, determinations, or consciousness.]

This is precisely not the case with the puthujjana, who, in this sense, actually and in truth is to be found." (Nanavira)

“Bhikkhus, there are these three characteristics that define the determined. What three? An arising is seen, a vanishing is seen, and its alteration while it persists is seen. These are the three characteristics that define the determined.

“Bhikkhus, there are these three characteristics that define the un-determined. What three? No arising is seen, no vanishing is seen, and no alteration while it persists is seen. These are the three characteristics that define the un-determined.” AN III 47

***
See that you are not what you believe yourself to be. Fight with all the strength at your disposal against the idea that you are nameable and describable. You are not. Refuse to think of yourself in terms of this or that. There is no other way out of misery, which you have created for yourself through blind acceptance without investigation. Suffering is a call for enquiry, all pain needs investigation. Don't be too lazy to think. ...

Q: How is it that in spite of so much instruction and assistance we make no progress?

M: As long as we imagine ourselves to be separate personalities, one quite apart from another, we cannot grasp reality which is essentially impersonal. First we must know ourselves as witnesses only, dimensionless and timeless centres of observation, and then realise that immense ocean of pure awareness, which is both mind and matter and beyond both.

Q: Whatever I may be in reality, yet I feel myself to be a small and separate person, one amongst many.

M: Your being a person is due to the illusion of space and time; you imagine yourself to be at a certain point occupying a certain volume; your personality is due to your self-identification with the body. Your thoughts and feelings exist in succession, they have their span in time and make you imagine yourself, because of memory, as having duration. In reality time and space exist in you; you do not exist in them. They are modes of perception, but they are not the only ones. Time and space are like words written on paper; the paper is real, the words merely a convention. How old are you?

Q: Forty-eight!

M: What makes you say forty-eight? What makes you say: I am here? Verbal habits born from assumptions. The mind creates time and space and takes its own creations for reality. All is here and now, but we do not see it. Truly, all is in me and by me. There is nothing else. The very idea of 'else' is a disaster and a calamity.

Q: What is the cause of personification, of self-limitation in time and space?  (...) Q: Yet personality must have a cause.

M: How does personality, come into being? By memory. By identifying the present with the past and projecting it into the future. Think of yourself as momentary, without past and future and your personality dissolves.

Q: Does not 'I am' remain?

M: The word 'remain' does not apply. 'I am' is ever afresh. You do not need to remember in order to be. As a matter of fact, before you can experience anything, there must be the sense of being. At present your being is mixed up with experiencing. All you need is to unravel being from the tangle of experiences. Once you have known pure being, without being this or that, you will discern it among experiences and you will no longer be misled by names and forms.
Self-limitation is the very essence of personality.

Q: How can I become universal?

M: But you are universal. You need not and you cannot become what you are already. Only cease imagining yourself to be the particular. What comes and goes has no being. It owes its very appearance to reality. (...)

Q: All you say sounds very beautiful. But how has one to make it into a way of living?

M: Having never left the house you are asking for the way home. Get rid of wrong ideas, that is all. Collecting right ideas also will take you nowhere. Just cease imagining.

Q: It is not a matter of achievement, but of understanding.

M: Don't try to understand! Enough if you do not misunderstand. Don't rely on your mind for liberation. It is the mind that brought you into bondage. Go beyond it altogether.

What is beginningless cannot have a cause. It is not that you knew what you are and then you have forgotten. Once you know, you cannot forget. Ignorance has no beginning, but can have an end. Enquire: who is ignorant and ignorance will dissolve like a dream. The world is full of contradictions, hence your search for harmony and peace. These you cannot find in the world, for the world is the child of chaos. To find order you must search within. The world comes into being only when you are born in a body. No body — no world. First enquire whether you are the body. The understanding of the world will come later.
***
By the body Nisargadatta Maharaj means entire set of aggregates, puggala. "Pure being" usually means the state of sekha, where conceit "I am" still is present, but without sakkayaditthi, and from description it rather denote non-returner, than sotāpanna. Sometimes it may refer to asankhata dhatu. Generally the teaching of NM should be seen in perspective of Khemaka Sutta, and most certainly offers better guidance than "teachers" promoting "there is no self" idea, which is pure water ucchedavada.

While verbatim such statement isn't in Suttas, we can say in Dhamma terms that Buddha asks us to transform our experience from being person (sakkaya) into asankhata dhatu. If someone isn't satisfied with such proposal, another one: asankhata dhatu is what will remain when you successfully realise cessation of being (bhava), or cessation of conceit "I am".

Being a person is always particular, if I am, I am in spacial world. "Pure being" "I am" without self-identification with this or that isn't really pure, since conceit I am is derived from temporal things, but the less one is emotionally attached to temporal aspects of experience, the more firmly one is present Now.