Sekha wrote:ok... and how do you prove that?
At AN 4.159, Ananda uses the same line of reasoning, explaining in dependence on craving, one abandons craving; in dependence on conceit, one abandons conceit. Thus, in 51.15, Ananda seems to be using chanda in the unwholesome sense, despite the discourse appearing in the Iddhipada Samyutta, which are wholesome.
so what? Anyone will agree that Ananda knows better than you the meaning of chanda! Why could it not have both a wholesome as well as an unwholesome side, just like the word 'desire'?
I think the onus rests upon you, to demonstrate Buddha taught in dependence on craving, one abandons craving.
This is quite easy, my friend. In dependence on the four right strivings, ie. in dependence on chanda, one cultivates dispassion, which is described at AN 10.60 for example:
There is the case where a monk — having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building — reflects thus: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the stilling of all fabrications (= sabba·saṅkhāra·samatha), the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving, dispassion, Unbinding.' This is called the perception of dispassion.
And since chanda is a saṅkhāra, it is abandoned like any other saṅkhāra. So on dependence on chanda, one eventually abandons chanda. Simple.
Sekha wrote:And even if you can, do you seriously want to say that you know and see the Dhamma as well as Pali language better than Ananda did when he was a sotapanna?
ok... and how do you prove that Ananda was a sotapanna when these discourses were uttered?
well, you're right, I can't prove it either. But the contrary is just very improbable, and on the other hand, since there is no mention of the Buddha in the introduction, this sutta has most probably been uttered after his passing away, that is when Ananda was an arahant, provided it is true that he actually became one soon after, just before the first council.
And anyway, who are you to say that Ananda was wrong, and that you know the Dhamma better than him? You need some pretty damn good backup for such a claim, and you come up with rather weak evidences.
Sekha wrote:See in support of this vision, and of SN 51.15, the simile of the raft:
My response here is simply you have quoted MN 22 out of context. I read MN 22 as explaining good dhammas are not attached to & used for attacking others and for defending in debate. I read MN 22 is not explaining the mind of the arahant become void of good dhammas, such as void of wisdom.
The simile of the raft says that having used the Dhamma, one lets go of it. Just as having used chanda as a basis for the four right strivings, one lets go of it. I repeat what I said just above, and of which you don't seem to have taken any note: the wholesome chanda is not like a bag that keeps being filled with wholesome stuff. It appears to be rather like a knife that gets sharpened all the time until it gets completely worn out and disappears.