Recently i happen upon Text-critical History is not Exegesis by Alexander Wynne, the article is well-written and easily followed, and the article argues that Two Path Theory (TPT) can be found in EBT.
Quote from article
We therefore understand the TPT as a characterisation of certain trends in early Buddhist soteriology. It does not offer a general theory of early Buddhist meditation, covering the entire path of spiritual development from start to finish; it is concerned neither with the preliminary levels of calm, nor with entry-level āinsightā contemplations. It is, rather, concerned with the specifics of what happens at the higher reaches of the path, as imagined in certain early Buddhist texts. The question is this: are there, in the early texts, rival versions of the trifold Buddhist way of sÄ«la, samÄdhi and paƱƱÄ, which ultimately focus on either samÄdhi or paĆ±Ć±Ä at the expense of the other? Keeping this question in mind, we will now consider the key texts.
However i found some flawed/shaky argument in the article consideration of key text
AN 6.46
On It 51
Quote from article
With regard to the meditators, a couple of verses from the Itivuttaka (It 51) equate the attainment of cessation (nirodha) with touching the ādeathless dimensionā through the body:
ā
Understanding the realm of form,
but not abiding in the formless [realms],
released (vimuccanti) in cessation (nirodhe),
those people abandon death.
ā
Touching the deathless dimension (amataį¹ dhÄtuį¹),
which lacks material substratum, with the body,
Witnessing the relinquishing of material attachment,
being without defilements,
The Fully Awakened One teaches the state devoid of grief and defilement
In It 51 equate attainment of cessation not only ātouching the ādeathless dimensionā through the bodyā, but also ābeing without defilements (asava)ā, avijja (ignorance) is regarded as source of asava in AN 6.63, and avijja is given up with panna in AN 2.31. So It 51 do not support a meditator-only soteriology.
Equating atthapadam as synonym of nibbana
Quote from article
But apart from this, the term only occurs in the definition of the Dhamma devotees at AN 6.46, and in one other sutta, AN 4.192, which mentions the wise bhikkhu who expounds the atthapadaį¹ which is ācalm, supreme, beyond the scope of logic, subtle, to be known by the wiseā. There can be little doubt that atthapadaį¹, here, is a synonym for Nirvana, and means something like āspiritual purposeā. In this sense atthapadaį¹ seems more or less equivalent to amatapadaį¹.
the term ācalm, supreme, beyond the scope of logic, subtle, to be known by the wiseā is not only used to refer to Nirvana, but also Dhamma as in SN 6.1, MN 95. In this light, atthapadam can also refer to āSaying related to the goalā, rather than āPlace of goalā or Nirvana or āamatapadamā.
If this being the case, the next argument rest on shaky ground and is not definitive.
Quote from article
This parallel suggests that those āworking out the doctrineā were not merely doctrinal experts, but rather liberated Arahants.
SN 12.68
Asserting Musilaās silent as ageement
Quote from article
so when saviį¹į¹ha asks if MusÄ«la sees that āNirvana is the cessation of becomingā, and MusÄ«la affirms that he does, saviį¹į¹ha concludes that he is an arahant. By staying silent at this point, MusÄ«la indicates his agreement with saviį¹į¹haās conclusion.
While staying silent can mean agreement, such as in silent when a monk is invited, it can also mean refusing to answer question, like Buddhaās silent in SN 44.10, or unable to answer question, like Aritthaās silent in MN 22.
Musilaās silent is more likely to be āunable to answer questionā, considering:
-
Savittha praise Narada at the end of SN 12.68, but not Musila, which imply that Savittha do not regard Musila as well-spoken. This parallel Buddhaās praising Sariputta or other disciple at the end of sutta when they have well-spoken.
-
Savittha is contemporary to Sariputta in AN 3.21, in which Savittha, Sariputta, and Mahakothitta speak on their differing view on which kind of monk is the best, and the Buddha rebuke all of their view. This imply Savittha is contemporary to Sariputta before awakened, and thus is a relatively senior monk.
So from these a narrative can be constructed, in which Savittha as a mentor questions Musila & Narada as junior monks, Musila unable to answer when asked if he is arahant, while Narada able to answer, thus earned praise from Savittha.
If this being the case, SN 12.68 actually affirm the calm-insight soteriology, rather than divide it.
Metaphor of thirsty man
Quote from article
NÄrada must be speaking metaphorically, and since the notion of ātouching with the bodyā is associated above all with the formless states (ye te santÄ ÄruppÄ) or the eight āreleasesā (vimokkhas), NÄrada must surely be referring to these. The metaphor of a thirsty man suggests that NÄradaās āspiritual thirstā is due to not attaining the formless spheres and their goal, cessation.
Considering only five of eight release related to formless states in AN 8.66, the metaphor of a thirsty man can also suggest that Narada has yet to achieve any of eight liberation, some of which is not related to formless states.
SN 12.70
Argument from silence
Quote from article
Although the text does not mention the four jhÄnas, it seems that the insight-liberated bhikkhus did not follow the way of jhÄna, as the canonical texts normally present it.
Considering in SN 12.70 the Buddha do not ask Susima whether or not he achieve jhana, but only whether or not āexperience peaceful liberation that are formless, transcending formā / āApi pana tvaį¹, susima, evaį¹ jÄnanto evaį¹ passanto ye te santÄ vimokkhÄ atikkamma rÅ«pe ÄruppÄ, te kÄyena phusitvÄ viharasÄ«ā. The argument from silence can also be made for supporting Pannavimutta require jhana/ āpeaceful liberation that are in formā, due to only five of eight vimokkha related to formless state.