Noh, a-vidyaa on siis vidyaan vastakohta:
vidyA f. [graammaatilliselta suvultaan feminiininen sana] knowledge [...], science , learning , scholarship , philosophy RV. &c. &c
(Kantaverbi lienee vid, kuten myös sanan veda/veeda [vrt. ruotsin "veetta"*] kyseessä ollen on tilanne!)
PJ (Pat-añjali) määrittelee avidyaan seuraavasti:
अनित्याशुचिदुःखानात्मसु नित्यशुचिसुखात्मख्यातिरविद्या॥५॥
anityā-aśuci-duḥkha-anātmasu nitya-śuci-sukha-ātmakhyātir-avidyā ॥5॥(Tuossa taitaa olla pientä häikkää: äkistään pitkä a ekan sanan [anityā] lopussa tuntuu perusteettomalta...)
(anitjaasutshidukhaanaatmasu nitjasutshisukhaatmakhjaatiravidjaa)
Muutama käännösyritelmä:
[HA]: Avidya Consists In Regarding A Transient Object As Everlasting, An Impure Object As Pure, Misery As Happiness And The Not-Self As Self.
[IT]: Avidya is taking the non-eternal, impure, evil and non-Atman to be eternal, pure, good and Atman respectively.
[VH]: [BM]: Ignorance is misperceiving permanance in transience, purity in impurity, pleasure in suffering, an essential self where there is no self.
[SS]: Ignorance is regarding the impermanent as permanent, the impure as pure, the painful as pleasant, and the non-Self as Self.
[SP]: To regard the noneternal as eternal, the impure as pure, the painful as pleasant and the non-Atman as the Atman-this is ignorance.
[SV]: Ignorance is taking the non-eternal, the impure, the painful, and the non-Self, as the eternal, the pure, the happy, and the Atman or Self (respectively).
Måns Broon käännös:
"Tietämättömyys" on katoavaisen, epäpuhtaan, tuskallisen ja ei-itsen pitämistä ikuisena, puhtaana,
onnellisena ja itsenä.
(tall. kesk. er...)
* OT Muistaaksemme yksi vid-verbin taivutusmuodoista on vetha (veetha), vähän kuin lappilainen veetta. Noinkohan
arjalaiset pohjoisesta ilmastonmuutosta paetessaan kulkivat lähinnä nykyisen Ruotsin kautta? Ja sitten esimerkiksi
Liettuan, jonka maalaismurteissa on vielä käsittääksemme osin säilynyt jopa vedalainen pitch-aksentti** (udaatta, anudaatta, svarita) , joka esimerkiksi klassisesta sanskritista [noin 500 eaa -> ] on kadonnut!
** 1. Introduction
Accent as reconstructed for the athematic nouns of Proto-Indo-European (e.g. Pedersen
1926, Kuiper 1942, Schindler 1972, 1975a-c) has been quite controversial. Based primarily on
data from
Slavic, Lithuanian, Vedic Sanskrit, and Classical Greek (Kiparsky and Halle 1977), its
reconstruction has been questioned due to the fact that none of these daughter languages display
the variety of accent patterns found in PIE as well as the difficulty this variety presents for
phonological theory.
