“….a KEY CONCLUSION that arises out of a series of posts.” Presicely, Lal. That it what I tried to do. But instead of simplify, I perhaps over-simplified. The idea was to make of this maze of terms a clear idea of what in effect makes for an Arahant.
Please clarify what you mean by “There must be a step earlier than that you could not understand”. I have no idea what that step might be. Not that I claim to have understood ALL steps everywhere, in every post; in this connection, I mean, what might be the step I have not understood?
“kamma viññāna created via the Akusala-Mula PS process do not arise in an Arahant.” was not a question I asked. It was a statement of yours, Lal. I only saw from it that they (kamma vinnana) arise neither from the kusala-Mula PS process, taken as equivalent to (the perception of) nicca. So therefore the conclusion I came to was that an Arahant has seen anicca perfectly.