Understanding on MN 148

Would it be correct to use the definition of fully understood that figures on SN 22.23:

"… And what, students, is full understanding? The destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion. This is called full understanding.”

to MN 148 when it says “the six internal basis should be understood…”?

Interesting question. MN 148 uses the term ‘veditabbā’, such as found in ‘paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhī’. SN 22.23 uses the term ‘pariññeyya’. I look forward to an answer discussing the distinction.