Re: another question based on Digha Tika

Dear Ven. Paṇḍita,

This is an ingenious interpretation, but like Bhikkhu Bodhi I find it
difficult to believe that can have been the intended meaning of the ṭīkā
writers. Normally when here is ambiguity of meaning in a citation they
explain in detail. Do you have  a source for this interpretation ? Or,
is it your own idea ?

The passage occurs in all four of Dhammapāla's Āgama ṭīkās and also in
his Nett-pṭ. Slightly differently at Sv-pṭ I 257 (Be 198). It is also
quoted in Sāriputta's Mp-ṭ and Sp-ṭ, as well as in Vmv. Later it is
found with slight variations three times in Sv-nṭ. In none of these is
it explained. We also find the same statement but with sabbaññutāñāṇa
instead of unobstructed knowledge at Sv-pṭ II 23 (Be II 19).
> ​My understanding of this sentence is different both from you and Dr.
> Cousins. So I will give my own rendering first, and explain it.
>
> ​
> ​"By the expression "Paññāpajjotavihatamohataman" (the commentator)
> indicates perfect enlightenment. Indeed, the path knowledge, which is the
> base of the unobstructed knowledge, and the unobstructed knowledge, which
> has the path knowledge as (its) base, are called 'perfect enlightenment.'"
>
> >From my perspective, ​
>
> ​"​anāvaraṇañāṇapadaṭṭhānaṃ" is is a genitive Tappurisa compound whereas
> "maggañāṇapadaṭṭhānaṃ" is a Bahubbīhi compound. Accordingly this sentence
> is in perfect accord with your understanding which you have given as
> follows:​​
>
> ​
>
> ​On the other hand, Dr. Cousins writes:​
>
> ​> ​
> Well, we are talking about wisdom in various aspects. So I would
> understand that wisdom reaches its culmination at the moment of the
> arahattamagga. So that wisdom must be the same level of wisdom as that
> called sabbaññutañāṇa; it's just that it can't be applied until later,
> when the mind turns to different objects.
> ​
> This is different from the orthodox understanding of ​sabbaññutañāṇa, which
> is, from the abhidhammic point of view, the mental factor (cetasika) of
> wisdom accompanying one of the four sense-sphere beautiful functional minds
> associated with knowledge, and certainly different from the
> arahattamaggañāṇa (wisdom accompanying the Arahat Path supramundane
> consciousness).
>
> with metta and respect,
>
> Ven. Pandita
So are you saying that at the moment of maggañāṇa he was a Buddha but
not sabbaññū ? That seems difficult to accept.

The ancient texts do not usually say much about how the mind of a Buddha
worked. We can assume it is the same as an arahat, but that is only a
guess. If it is correct, then it is certainly reasonable to say that it
must be one of the four sense-sphere beautiful functional minds
associated with knowledge.  And that seems to be implied at Vibh-a 464:
sabbaññutañāṇaṃ pana savitakkasavicāram eva, kāmāvacaram eva, lokiyam evā.

But I tend to feel that the relationship between the different kinds of
wisdom in different  moments is rather more subtle and nuanced than you
are allowing.

Lance Cousins