I will add 5 cents.
from SN 22.55
"It might not be, and it might not be for me. It will not be, [and] it will not be for me" - resolving thus a bhikkhu can cut off the lower fetters.
Ven. Bodhi comment:
This formula for resolution recommended by the Buddha is found in the suttas
in two versions, one used by the annihilationists, the other the Buddha’s adaptation
of this; as the two versions differ only with respect to two verb forms, they are sometimes
confounded in the various recensions. From the commentarial glosses, it appears that
the confusion had already set in before the age of the commentaries.
The annihilationist version — explicitly identified as uccheda-di††hi at 22:81 and
classed among the wrong views at 22:152 and 24:4 — reads: "no c’assaμ no ca me siyå,
na bhavissåmi na me bhavissati". At AN V 63–64 the Buddha describes this
creed as the highest of outsider views (etadaggaμ båhirakånaμ di††higatånaμ), the reason being
that one who accepts such a view will not be attracted to becoming nor averse to the cessation of becoming.
It is problematic how the optative clause in the annihilationist version should be interpreted;
perhaps it can be read as an assertion that personal existence, along with its world, is utterly fortuitous
(“It might not have been and it might not have been mine”). The clause in the future tense
is clearly asserting that personal existence and its world will terminate at death.
The Buddha transformed this formula into a theme for contemplation consonant
with his own teaching by replacing the first person verbs with their third person counterparts:
"No c’assa no ca me siyå, na bhavissati na me bhavissati". The change of person shifts the stress
from the view of self implicit in the annihilationist version (“I will be annihilated”)
to an impersonal perspective that harmonizes with the anattå doctrine.
In the present sutta, resolving (adhimuccamåno) on the formula is said to culminate
in the destruction of the five lower fetters, that is, in the stageof non-returning (anågåmitå).
Elsewhere the formula includes a rider, yad atthi yaμ bhËtaμ taμ pajahåmi, “what exists, what
has come to be, that I am abandoning.” Contemplation of this is said to lead to equanimity.
At MN II 264–65 practice guided by the full formula (with the rider) culminates in rebirth in the base of neit
her-perception-nor-non-perception (if the meditator clings to the equanimity) or in Nibbåna
(if there is no clinging to the equanimity). At AN IV 70–74, resolution guided by the formula,
again with the rider, leads to one of the five levels of non-returning or to arahantship.
At Ud 78 the shorter formula is applied to mindfulness of the body; one who dwells thus
gradually crosses attachment, i.e., wins arahantship.