> Since the Pali tradition associates this with the ditthi of
> annihilationism, i presume this implies that a sotapanna has no
> vibhavatanha - is this right?

Dear Bhante,

It seems that if one were to go by the Visuddhimagga, that this is
right. I had been told by teachers that vibhavatanha was synonomous
with arupatanha. According to the Visuddhimagga, this cannot be
because, as you say, the former is accompanied with wrong view which
is eliminated at the first path, while the latter is only eliminated
at the fourth path - all according to the Visuddhimagga (cp XVII 233
and XXII 64).

Thus, it seems to suggest that all what is left after sotapatti-phala
must be kaama-tanha, and so rupatanha and arupatanha are also a sort
of kaama-tanha, assumedly what the Vibha"nga calls "dhammata.nha".

Is this not in line with what you understand of vibhavata.nha?

Respectfully,

Yuttadhammo