[dosakkhayo]

Here

In the #14, the table shows us that sotapanna removed all vipallasa of anicca and anatta. But he/she still have sanna and citta vipallasa of dukkha.

I guess if one has removed all of vipallasa of something, that means he/she have no more thing to improve of that.

But here

In #1 said,

“For example, the concept of anicca is understood gradually — with a glimpse of it grasped on the way to the Sotāpanna stage, getting a firm foothold at the Sotāpanna stage, strengthening at the Sakadāgāmi and Anāgāmi stages — and is fully comprehended at the Arahant stage.”

So, aren’t these statements a kind of inconsistency?

[Lal]

Yes. That sentence needs to be revised. Thanks for pointing that out.

That is an old post. I need to spend some time bringing it up to date. I will post here when done.

[Lal]

I may have to re-write that whole post with a new title. That may take a few days.

But I have revised #1 as follows:
“For example, the concept of anicca is understood gradually—from the Sotapanna Anugāmi stage to the Sotāpanna stage. Then how that anicca nature leads to suffering (dukkha) is fully grasped in stages — strengthening at the Sakadāgāmi and Anāgāmi stages — and is fully comprehended at the Arahant stage.”

[Author]

Posts