[aliceingoogs]

But that is not all. Not only are the three sa"nkhaaraa of the Cuu.lavedalla Sutta always rigorously excluded from discussions of pa.ticca-samuppaada, but among all the suttas in which the Buddha exemplifies the expressions 'avijjaapaccayaa sa"nkhaaraa' ("with ignorance as condition, formations") and 'sa"nkhaarapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na.m' ("with formations as condition, consciousness"), there is not a single text in which he explains sa"nkhaaraa in a way that has any relevance to the three kinds of sa"nkhaaraa of the Cuu.lavedalla Sutta.

Stuka.

Just because the suttas on DO do not explain the sankhara as in MN 44, this does not mean they offer an alternative explanation (apart from one sutta, which is not exactly about DO).

The term sankhara as defined in DO are found in many suttas, such as MN 118 on Anapanasati.

Obviously, the terms kaya, vaci & citta sankhara were mere common terminology understood by the listener.