Sylvester wrote:Hi Dave
I should explain my resort to AN 2.126 against a liberal reading of AN 3.65.
It would be a "gamble", if we discounted the voice of another as a necessary condition. I take the more conservative reading of the meaning of "condition" (paccaya) in AN 2.126 to mean a necessary condition, rather than a sufficient condition, for Stream Entry. As a necessary condition, the presence of the Buddha's voice is no guarantee that the auditor would make the breakthrough to the Dhamma.
The suttas qualify as a voice/voices of another/others, right?