ok so the phrase anabhisambuddhassa bodhisattasseva occurs:
VN: 0
DN: 0
MN: 6
SN: 11
AN: 12
KN: 2 (1 Patis 1 Mil)
AB: 0
VM: 0
Working backwards, we can exclude KN as entirely late, so AN:
AN9.41 is a “tevijja” (in that it recounts the jhana formula, although it omitts the tevijja themselves) sutta, modified with the formless attainments and the cessation of perception and feeling, using the repeated frame of the gratification, danger and escape teaching, and ending in:
And so, going totally beyond the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, I entered and remained in the cessation of perception and feeling. And, having seen with wisdom, my defilements were ended.
So kho ahaṁ, ānanda, sabbaso nevasaññānāsaññāyatanaṁ samatikkamma saññāvedayitanirodhaṁ upasampajja viharāmi, paññāya ca me disvā āsavā parikkhayaṁ agamaṁsu.
No mention of the nidanas.
AN5.196 is a sariputta sutta that describes 5 allegorical dreams unrelated to doctrine, its quite vivid though and I highly recommend checking it out. (it also accounts for all bar 2 of the uses of anabhisambuddhassa bodhisattasseva)
AN3.104 gives (the complete sutta):
“Mendicants, I went in search of the world’s gratification, and I found it.
“Lokassāhaṁ, bhikkhave, assādapariyesanaṁ acariṁ. Yo loke assādo tadajjhagamaṁ.
I’ve seen clearly with wisdom the full extent of gratification in the world.
Yāvatako loke assādo, paññāya me so sudiṭṭho.
I went in search of the world’s drawbacks, and I found them.
Lokassāhaṁ, bhikkhave, ādīnavapariyesanaṁ acariṁ. Yo loke ādīnavo tadajjhagamaṁ.
I’ve seen clearly with wisdom the full extent of the drawbacks in the world.
Yāvatako loke ādīnavo, paññāya me so sudiṭṭho.
I went in search of escape from the world, and I found it.
Lokassāhaṁ, bhikkhave, nissaraṇapariyesanaṁ acariṁ. Yaṁ loke nissaraṇaṁ tadajjhagamaṁ. I
’ve seen clearly with wisdom the full extent of escape from the world.
Yāvatakaṁ loke nissaraṇaṁ, paññāya me taṁ sudiṭṭhaṁ.
As long as I didn’t truly understand the world’s gratification, drawback, and escape for what they are, I didn’t announce my supreme perfect awakening in this world with its gods, Māras, and Brahmās, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans.
Yāvakīvañcāhaṁ, bhikkhave, lokassa assādañca assādato ādīnavañca ādīnavato nissaraṇañca nissaraṇato yathābhūtaṁ nābbhaññāsiṁ, neva tāvāhaṁ, bhikkhave, sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamaṇabrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadevamanussāya ‘anuttaraṁ sammāsambodhiṁ abhisambuddho’ti paccaññāsiṁ.
But when I did truly understand the world’s gratification, drawback, and escape for what they are, I announced my supreme perfect awakening in this world with its gods, Māras, and Brahmās, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans.
Yato ca khvāhaṁ, bhikkhave, lokassa assādañca assādato ādīnavañca ādīnavato nissaraṇañca nissaraṇato yathābhūtaṁ abbhaññāsiṁ, athāhaṁ, bhikkhave, sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamaṇabrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadevamanussāya ‘anuttaraṁ sammāsambodhiṁ abhisambuddho’ti paccaññāsiṁ.
Knowledge and vision arose in me:
Ñāṇañca pana me dassanaṁ udapādi:
‘My freedom is unshakable; this is my last rebirth; now there’ll be no more future lives.’”
‘akuppā me vimutti, ayamantimā jāti, natthi dāni punabbhavo’”ti.
And that’s the entirety of AN’s use of anabhisambuddhassa bodhisattasseva, so no association with either stream entry, in that all occurrences describe the awakening, not an intermediate stage, and no association with the nidanas, if anything the leaning seems to be towards gratification, danger and escape.
SN:
SN51.21 has
When the four bases of psychic power have been developed and cultivated in this way, a mendicant wields the many kinds of psychic power: multiplying themselves and becoming one again … controlling the body as far as the Brahmā realm.
Evaṁ bhāvitesu kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu catūsu iddhipādesu evaṁ bahulīkatesu anekavihitaṁ iddhividhaṁ paccanubhoti—ekopi hutvā bahudhā hoti, bahudhāpi hutvā eko hoti …pe… yāva brahmalokāpi kāyena vasaṁ vatteti.
When the four bases of psychic power have been developed and cultivated in this way, they realize the undefiled freedom of heart and freedom by wisdom in this very life. And they live having realized it with their own insight due to the ending of defilements.”
Evaṁ bhāvitesu kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu catūsu iddhipādesu evaṁ bahulīkatesu, āsavānaṁ khayā anāsavaṁ cetovimuttiṁ paññāvimuttiṁ diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharatī”ti.
which refers if anything to the tevijja account.
SN51.11 is again a tevijja account.
SN36.24 is the first that can be interpreted as a conditionality sutta, I give it here in it’s entirety:
“Mendicants, before my awakening—when I was still unawakened but intent on awakening—I thought:
“Pubbeva me, bhikkhave, sambodhā anabhisambuddhassa bodhisattasseva sato etadahosi:
‘What is feeling? What’s the origin of feeling? What’s the practice that leads to the origin of feeling? What’s the cessation of feeling? What’s the practice that leads to the cessation of feeling?
‘katamā nu kho vedanā, katamo vedanāsamudayo, katamā vedanāsamudayagāminī paṭipadā, katamo vedanānirodho, katamā vedanānirodhagāminī paṭipadā?
And what is feeling’s gratification, drawback, and escape?’
Ko vedanāya assādo, ko ādīnavo, kiṁ nissaraṇan’ti?
Then it occurred to me:
Tassa mayhaṁ, bhikkhave, etadahosi:
‘There are these three feelings:
‘tisso imā vedanā—
pleasant, painful, and neutral.
sukhā vedanā, dukkhā vedanā, adukkhamasukhā vedanā.
These are called feeling.
Imā vuccanti vedanā.
Feeling originates from contact.
Phassasamudayā vedanāsamudayo.
Craving is the practice that leads to the origin of feeling …
Taṇhā vedanāsamudayagāminī paṭipadā …pe…
Removing and giving up desire and greed for feeling: this is its escape.’”
yo vedanāya chandarāgavinayo chandarāgappahānaṁ. Idaṁ vedanāya nissaraṇan’”ti.
SN35.117 exists purely to explain the tension between pañca kāmaguṇā and saḷāyatana and is a great example of a place that is suggestive of doctrinal development, the relative lateness of the bulk of SN compared with the earliest parts of DN and MN, and lots of other things besides, once again, I highly recommend a careful and suspicious reading of this sutta. in as much as it bears on the tevijja/nidana issue it leans in the direction of nidanas.
SN35.14 is a gratification danger escape sutta
SN35.13 gives:
But when I did truly understand these six interior sense fields’ gratification, drawback, and escape in this way for what they are, I announced my supreme perfect awakening in this world with its gods, Māras, and Brahmās, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans.
Yato ca khvāhaṁ, bhikkhave, imesaṁ channaṁ ajjhattikānaṁ āyatanānaṁ evaṁ assādañca assādato, ādīnavañca ādīnavato, nissaraṇañca nissaraṇato yathābhūtaṁ abbhaññāsiṁ, athāhaṁ, bhikkhave, sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamaṇabrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadevamanussāya ‘anuttaraṁ sammāsambodhiṁ abhisambuddho’ti paccaññāsiṁ.
Knowledge and vision arose in me:
Ñāṇañca pana me dassanaṁ udapādi:
‘My freedom is unshakable; this is my last rebirth; now there’ll be no more future lives.’”
‘akuppā me vimutti, ayamantimā jāti, natthi dāni punabbhavo’”ti.
SN22.26 applies the gratification formula to the aggregates formula.
SN14.31 applies the gratification formula to the four elements.
Which brings us to the first unambiguous nidana sutta, SN12.65, giving the 10 links, SN12.10 gives the 12 links, SN12.4 gives the nidanas in relation to Vipassi, but gives the 12 links instead of the 10 given in DN14 (which I will have more to say about later).
That’s it for SN, again the balance of doctrine is if anything towards the gratification danger and escape formulation, at least outside of SN12.
on to MN:
MN100 is a tevijja sutta and alludes, one assumes, to an application of the undeclared points to the gods:
But Master Gotama, do gods survive?”
Kiṁ nu kho, bho gotama, atthi devā”ti?
“I’ve understood about gods in terms of causes.”
“Ṭhānaso metaṁ, bhāradvāja, viditaṁ yadidaṁ— adhidevā”ti.
“But Master Gotama, when asked ‘Do gods survive?’ why did you say that you have understood about gods in terms of causes?
“Kiṁ nu kho, bho gotama, ‘atthi devā’ti puṭṭho samāno ‘ṭhānaso metaṁ, bhāradvāja, viditaṁ yadidaṁ adhidevā’ti vadesi.
If that’s the case, isn’t it a hollow lie?”
Nanu, bho gotama, evaṁ sante tucchā musā hotī”ti?
“When asked ‘Do gods survive’, whether you reply ‘Gods survive’ or ‘I’ve understood in terms of causes’
“‘Atthi devā’ti, bhāradvāja, puṭṭho samāno ‘atthi devā’ti yo vadeyya, ‘ṭhānaso me viditā’ti yo vadeyya;
a sensible person would come to the definite conclusion that
atha khvettha viññunā purisena ekaṁsena niṭṭhaṁ gantabbaṁ yadidaṁ:
gods survive.”
‘atthi devā’”ti.
“But why didn’t you say that in the first place?”
“Kissa pana me bhavaṁ gotamo ādikeneva na byākāsī”ti?
“It’s widely agreed in the world that
“Uccena sammataṁ kho etaṁ, bhāradvāja, lokasmiṁ yadidaṁ:
gods survive.”
‘atthi devā’”ti.
MN85 is a tevijja sutta.
MN36 is a tevijja sutta.
MN19 is a tevijja sutta.
MN14 is a gratification danger escape sutta.
MN4 is a tevijja sutta.
So MN, when it says anabhisambuddhassa bodhisattasseva, overwhelmingly goes on to describe the tevijja sequence, and the one time it doesn’t it refers to the gratification danger and escape formula.
OK. Good. that’s it for anabhisambuddhassa bodhisattasseva in the canon. However, in DN14 we get a pretty clear claim that Vipassi gains enlightenment by penetrating DO in the 3 watches of the night, not at some earlier time in winning stream entry:
Then the Blessed One Vipassī, the perfected one, the fully awakened Buddha, thought,
Atha kho, bhikkhave, vipassissa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa etadahosi:
‘Why don’t I teach the Dhamma?’
‘yannūnāhaṁ dhammaṁ deseyyan’ti.
Then he thought,
Atha kho, bhikkhave, vipassissa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa etadahosi:
‘This principle I have discovered is deep, hard to see, hard to understand, peaceful, sublime, beyond the scope of logic, subtle, comprehensible to the astute.
‘adhigato kho myāyaṁ dhammo gambhīro duddaso duranubodho santo paṇīto atakkāvacaro nipuṇo paṇḍitavedanīyo.
But people like attachment, they love it and enjoy it.
Ālayarāmā kho panāyaṁ pajā ālayaratā ālayasammuditā.
It’s hard for them to see this thing; that is, specific conditionality, dependent origination.
Ālayarāmāya kho pana pajāya ālayaratāya ālayasammuditāya duddasaṁ idaṁ ṭhānaṁ yadidaṁ idappaccayatāpaṭiccasamuppādo.
Now, the thing to note here is that this sutta has been preceded by 13 other suttas, fully 11 of which describe the same event in the current Buddhas life but with the tevijja.
Finally pretty much the only time the Vinaya mentions DO, at least the only time it mentions vedanāpaccayā taṇhā, it’s pretty weird, first claiming that the Buddha is already enlightened, then saying “in the first watch of the night” and describing DO, then ending in a poem that claims that clear comprehension of DO is enlightenment:
Soon after his awakening, the Buddha was staying at Uruvelā on the bank of the river Nerañjara at the foot of a Bodhi tree.
Tena samayena buddho bhagavā uruvelāyaṁ viharati najjā nerañjarāya tīre bodhirukkhamūle paṭhamābhisambuddho.
There the Buddha sat cross-legged for seven days without moving, experiencing the bliss of freedom.
Atha kho bhagavā bodhirukkhamūle sattāhaṁ ekapallaṅkena nisīdi vimuttisukhapaṭisaṁvedī.
Then, in the first part of the night, the Buddha reflected on dependent origination in forward and reverse order:
Atha kho bhagavā rattiyā paṭhamaṁ yāmaṁ paṭiccasamuppādaṁ anulomapaṭilomaṁ manasākāsi—
“Ignorance is the condition for intentional activities; intentional activities are the condition for consciousness; consciousness is the condition for name and form; name and form are the condition for the six sense spheres; the six sense spheres are the condition for contact; contact is the condition for feeling; feeling is the condition for craving; craving is the condition for grasping; grasping is the condition for existence; existence is the condition for birth; birth is the condition for old age and death, for grief, sorrow, pain, aversion, and distress to come to be.
“Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, saṅkhārapaccayā viññāṇaṁ, viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṁ, nāmarūpapaccayā saḷāyatanaṁ, saḷāyatanapaccayā phasso, phassapaccayā vedanā, vedanāpaccayā taṇhā, taṇhāpaccayā upādānaṁ, upādānapaccayā bhavo, bhavapaccayā jāti, jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā sambhavanti. This is how there is the origin of this whole mass of suffering. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa samudayo hoti.
…
“When things become clear
“Yadā have pātubhavanti dhammā,
To the energetic brahmin who practices absorption,
Ātāpino jhāyato brāhmaṇassa;
Then all his doubts are dispelled,
Athassa kaṅkhā vapayanti sabbā,
Since he’s understood the end of the conditions.”
Yato khayaṁ paccayānaṁ avedī”ti.
…
“When things become clear
“Yadā have pātubhavanti dhammā,
To the energetic brahmin who practices absorption,
Ātāpino jhāyato brāhmaṇassa;
He defeats the army of the Lord of Death,
Vidhūpayaṁ tiṭṭhati mārasenaṁ,
Like the sun beaming in the sky.”
Sūriyova obhāsayamantalikkhan”ti.
So. In summary, it seems that the idea that insight into DO was some stream entry event well prior to the awakening has little basis in the suttas, and at least at DN14 it is equated with the awakening itself.
Next, the association between tevijja and awakening is overwhelming, occuring repeatedly in DN and MN, and being alluded to or qouted from in SN and AN.
Finally, the above might not be comprehensive with regards to discussions of the Buddha before awakening, so if you know any good search terms apart from anabhisambuddhassa bodhisattasseva let me know and I will look into them.
I will leave it there and put together a further response to the finer points in a bit.
… One thought that does occur to me though is that the repetitions in the NIkayas make it very hard to see the forest for the trees, and one thing that suttacentral and digital pali reader have finally alowwed me to do is get a real and objective sense of how often particular doctrinal assertions occur, how they are clustered, and as I go on, more and more how they appear to develop over time. And at least for the 4 nikayas how they develop over time appears more or less to start with the “tevijja account”, sometimes called the sekha patipada, and evolve from there.
another thought about DO…DN1 has
Now, when those ascetics and brahmins theorize about the past and the future on these sixty-two grounds, all of them experience this by repeated contact through the six fields of contact. Their feeling is a condition for craving. Craving is a condition for grasping. Grasping is a condition for continued existence. Continued existence is a condition for rebirth. Rebirth is a condition for old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress to come to be.
yepi te samaṇabrāhmaṇā pubbantakappikā ca aparantakappikā ca pubbantāparantakappikā ca pubbantāparantānudiṭṭhino pubbantāparantaṁ ārabbha anekavihitāni adhimuttipadāni abhivadanti dvāsaṭṭhiyā vatthūhi, sabbe te chahi phassāyatanehi phussa phussa paṭisaṁvedenti tesaṁ vedanāpaccayā taṇhā, taṇhāpaccayā upādānaṁ, upādānapaccayā bhavo, bhavapaccayā jāti, jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā sambhavanti.
When a mendicant truly understands the six fields of contact’s origin, ending, gratification, drawback, and escape, they understand what lies beyond all these things.
Yato kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu channaṁ phassāyatanānaṁ samudayañca atthaṅgamañca assādañca ādīnavañca nissaraṇañca yathābhūtaṁ pajānāti, ayaṁ imehi sabbeheva uttaritaraṁ pajānāti.
The Realized One’s body remains, but his conduit to rebirth has been cut off.
Ucchinnabhavanettiko, bhikkhave, tathāgatassa kāyo tiṭṭhati.
As long as his body remains he will be seen by gods and humans.
Yāvassa kāyo ṭhassati, tāva naṁ dakkhanti devamanussā.
But when his body breaks up, after life has ended, gods and humans will see him no more.
Kāyassa bhedā uddhaṁ jīvitapariyādānā na naṁ dakkhanti devamanussā.
When the stalk of a bunch of mangoes is cut, all the mangoes attached to the stalk will follow along.
Seyyathāpi, bhikkhave, ambapiṇḍiyā vaṇṭacchinnāya yāni kānici ambāni vaṇṭapaṭibandhāni, sabbāni tāni tadanvayāni bhavanti;
In the same way, the Realized One’s body remains, but his conduit to rebirth has been cut off.
evameva kho, bhikkhave, ucchinnabhavanettiko tathāgatassa kāyo tiṭṭhati,
As long as his body remains he will be seen by gods and humans.
yāvassa kāyo ṭhassati, tāva naṁ dakkhanti devamanussā,
But when his body breaks up, after life has ended, gods and humans will see him no more.”
kāyassa bhedā uddhaṁ jīvitapariyādānā na naṁ dakkhanti devamanussā”ti.
So here we have a six link DO given in the context of all other philosophies, then an application of the gratification danger and escape formula in it’s longer form of arising, ceasing, gratification, danger, escape. (this six link example is the equal shortest I am aware of (unless one takes namarupa itself to be an example of a 2 link DO) with Snp4.11 which gives namarupa as a base and rather than birth and then death, just gives conflict.)
conflict
grasping
craving
feeling
contact
namarupa
(I have “updated” the terms here for the sake of consistency)
This doesn’t really bear on the whole question of DO = Stream Entry, but I think it is suggestive that DO was more or less used to show how the Buddhist perspective differed form the other philosophical perspectives of the day. that is DO amounts to “the philosophy of early Buddhism” at least in DN1.
It also shows that a sequence something like
sensation
affect
prefrence
incorporation
is plenty enough o get off the ground philosophically speaking.
and that gratification, daner, escape continues to be a pretty signigficant piece of the puzzle that people don’t seem to me to talk about often enough.
Finally in relation to " the crucial thing about the anatta insight is that it rules out the causal interpretation of the nidanas, that is, per the undeclared points, vinnana and namarupa are not identical nor different nor both nor neither, rather they are mutually dependant."
What I mean is that the DO is very often elucidated in contrast to the undeclared points, the argument goes something like this;
is the soul identical to the body?
is the soul one thing and the body a different thing?
and the Buddha refrains from affirming either position.
this is then contrasted to DO in one of the standard formulations.
reading between the lines we have a philosophical argument:
Q:
is A real?
is A illusion and B real?
are both A and B real?
are niether A nor B real?
A:
none of those reflect the truth, rather
A appears
A appears when B appears
A dissapears
A dissapears when B dissapears
that is, it’s not that the body is one thing and the mind is another thing, or that the mind and the body are the same thing, rather the mind depends on the body, they are “tangled up”.
understanding the interdependance of phenomena (either conceptually or “physically”) the Buddha has realised that questions of “existance” and non-existance" and “identity” and “difference” are misguided, there being a more fundemental relation between phenomena, that of dependence, that underwrites thier status and undermines absolutist metaphysics and anti-realisms both.
If this is true then it applies to every term in the DO as well, that is questions along the lines of
Is craving real or is craving an illusion and only feeling real?
or is contact one thing and feeling a different thing?
etc
would all be examples where the dependence relation applies.
This is why I have come to view the gloss of “there is no such thing as a self” as simply misrepresenting the early Buddhist position, it’s simply in total conflict with the basic postion of denying realism and anti realism and asserting dependence.