Thanks again Geoff.
You said -
The Dhammasaṅgaṇī states that vipassanā is present in rūpāvacarajjhāna as well as lokuttarajjhāna.
Even if I accept that the 2nd peyyala is with reference to paras 2 to 145 of the rupavacarakusala dhamma list, para 55 does not say what you say it says. Your quote above posits an absolute ontological statement, whereas all the dhamma formulations are conditional ontic commitments formulated in the locative absolute formation. If they were not conditional, how else would an Abhidhammika account for the piti, sukha, vitakka, vicara etc peyyalas having a place in the respective jhanas? I don't believe it is possible to invoke para 55 as proof per se for the presence of vipassana in rupavacarajjhana, without at least proving the existence of the conditions for vipassana's hoti at that samaye.
Which leads to the next problem about the place of para 55 in the scheme of the arupas. You said -
Omissions are made of paragraphs no longer relevant to the higher jhānas. The formless attainments retain the same paragraphs as those pertaining to the fourth jhāna, with further omissions appropriate to the fourth formless attainment.
Could you pls point out where in the cattāri arūpajhānāni soḷasakkhattukāni are the instructions to be found as to which of the 144 peyyala should be excluded as irrelevant? Or are the instructions part of the post-canonical/modern understanding?
I'm not too keen on exploring what the Abhidhamikas from the various schools have to say. Why appeal to these commentaries to authorise your reading of the suttas? Reliance on this particular English translation of the Petakopadesa, just because this translation adopts renderings which suggest discursiveness, rather than the alternatives of stability, isn't quite helpful, especially when you resort to statements such as -
Survey the appropriate passages from the Suttapiṭaka and Abhidhammapiṭaka, as well as the context of that section of the Peṭakopadesa. Then survey the appropriate passages from non-Pāḷi Abhidharma sources.
It doesn't add anything to the discussion as to which of 2 "flavours" of vitakka-vicara are to be read into the 1st Jhana formula. If you really feel that your survey is exhaustive, pls lay out the reasoning, rather than assume that the other's survey is incomplete.
In fact, if we revert to the "unloaded" Pali text of the Petakopadesa, one wonders if the 3 similes (especially the winged bird simile) are not pointing towards what Ven Analayo calls the ripples of the mind during 1st Jhana.
May I ask for a favour for the rest of the translation of section 72 of the Peta. I am curious as to how the translator would have rendered the passage on the perceptions of sensuality etc and its sequel the vitakka of sensuality.