Dear Connie, Dmytro, Nina, Piya, Stephen and friends,

thanks for the reminder, Dmytro. Nina mentioned Connie attempted AN1
translation before. It has slipped from my head she posted it to the
list.

Nina, Connie's message is here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/5244

Accordingly, it seems that Stephen and Dmytro had concluded nimitta as
a mental construct. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/5273

What is tricky here is the Buddha saying "such a dhamma ... nimitta"
rather than "such a mental construct ... nimitta".

Secondly, the Buddha really talked about two types of nimittas giving
rise to two type of impediments, and how to abandon the impediments
(not nimittas) with something else.

1. subhanimitta (gives rise to) sensual pleasure (negates with)
asubhanimitta.

2. pa.tighanimitta (gives rise to) ill will (negates with) mettaa
cetovimutti.

We have to establish certain things first.

(1) What exactly is cetovimutti?
(2) asubhanimitta is different from pa.tighanimitta?
(3) can sensual pleasure be stimulated without an external object, i.e.
by mental contruct?
(4) is imagination a mental construct?


metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Dmytro O. Ivakhnenko wrote:

> Since the passage you are translating, you can use nimitta as "sense-
object" which is canonical usage.

It is not a canonical usage.