abhidhamma

[sphairos]

Emphasis mine. How is he using "sekha" here? Is he using it to mean "Āryans in general?" I know "śaikṣa," the Sanskrit version, to just mean "a learner" as opposed to "a teacher." In guruyoga, you have a guru and a śaikṣa as a pair. Obviously that's a latter usage of "śaikṣa."

No, śaikṣa is at least a srota-āpanna, see ABK and Śrāvakabhūmi, for instance.

Where would I head in ABK to find this? I am familiar with this usage of śaikṣa from on-the-ground Buddhists. It would be interesting if it is a "technically incorrect" but "widespread" usage. The only Buddhists I've ever heard describing themselves as śaikṣas are Tantrikas in Guru-śaikṣa relationships. Zen students use the word "śaikṣa" as well but in Sino-Japanese translation. The śaikṣa is opposite the guru in this "non-ariya" usage which is either correct or incorrect depending on your context.

Basically throughout the ABK,

for instance
saṃjñācitte tu tadvaśāt // VAkK_5.9 //
...
[284|16]
yattarhi sthavirānandenārthaṃ vāgīśamadhikṛtyoktaṃ

[284|17-284|18]
"viparyāse ca saṃjñānāṃ cittaṃ te paridahyate" /
nimittaṃ varjyatāṃ tasmācchubhaṃ rāgopasaṃhitam //

[284|19]
tasmāt sarva evāṣṭau saṃjñācittaviparyāsāḥ śaikṣasyāprahīṇā ityapare /
[284|19-284|20]
te 'pi cāryasatyānāṃ yathābhūtaparijñānāt prahīyante /

śaikṣa abandons 8 "distortions" of saṃjñā and citta, because they see the 4 noble truths "as they are" -- insight into the 4NT is srota-āpatti and darśana-mārga.

What you refer to is not "Guru-śaikṣa" , but "guru-śiṣya",

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guru%E2%8 ... _tradition

śaikṣa and śiṣya are unrelated terms from different roots.

[Coëmgenu]

What you refer to is not "Guru-śaikṣa" , but "guru-śiṣya",

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guru%E2%8 ... _tradition

śaikṣa and śiṣya are unrelated terms from different roots.

Looks so. I'll change my "in the Northern tradition" to "in some modern usage." I've definitely heard people say "guru-śaikṣa," but it's probably a mistaken practice like the usage of the term "fourfold samgha" as a mistranslation of "the four assemblies" with the accompanying misunderstanding of upasakas and upāsikās as part of the samgha.