On the other hand, to refute what I've said...
The wisdom there, AN4.92-94, could be suttamaya or cintāmaya paññā - considering that no mention of the path is until 4th case. These by themselves do not constitute awakening, bhāvanāmaya paññā is required. The sutta does in the bottom of it says that:""As for the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, his duty is to make an effort in establishing ('tuning') those very same skillful qualities to a higher degree for the ending of the (mental) fermentations."http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
In those suttas it is the 4th case (both insight & tranquility) that is mentioned to lead to maggaphala. It seems strange that Buddha taught N8P and allows for N7P.
Furthermore, I wonder if the whole split of "Tranquility vs Insight" is as sharp and divisive as the Buddha has thought. Maybe these are two factors of ONE Noble Eightfold path that culminates in Jhāna? After all, one can't have Jhāna without paññā. So it is not that case that Jhāna is done without paññā.
"There's no jhana for one with no discernment, no discernment for one with no jhana. But one with both jhana & discernment: he's on the verge of Unbinding
." - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
"Whatever qualities there are in the first jhana — directed thought, evaluation, rapture, pleasure, singleness of mind, contact, feeling, perception, intention, consciousness, desire, decision, persistence, mindfulness, equanimity, & attention
"http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... html#fnt-2
Note: Mindfulness (sati) is present in Jhāna. So it is not the case of either/or. Concentration or insight.
The phrase that "samatha leads to abandonment of lust... Wisdom leads to abandonment of ignorance
" doesn't necessarily have to signify two distinct and mutually exclusive paths with two different and mutually exclusive goals. One path, culminating in Jhānas contains multiple factors with distinct functions. One part of it destroys lust, another part destroys ignorance. These two parts are like two sides of the same ONE coin... Maybe the analytical split is only a conceptual one, done by well meaning scholars who tried to be as precise as possible and have introduced unnecessary distinctions. In reality things happen much more interdependently, homogeneously and rarely (if ever) can be split up like that. Only as an abstraction, in the head. IMHO.