avidya in Pali literature

[John Richards]

> 
> In sutra II.5 of Patanjali's Yogasutra, avidya is defined as follows:
> 
> anityaashuciduHkhaanaatmasu nityashucisukhaatmakhyaatiravidyaa |
> 
> "Avidya is the taking of the non-eternal, the impure, the painful and 
the 
> non-self to be the eternal, the pure, the pleasurable and the self."
> 
> I'm almost certain that there exists, somewhere in early Buddhist 
(Pali) 
> literature, a passage on avidya which uses very-similar wording. 
However, 
> I can't seem to locate it at present. Can anyone out there help?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kristen Hardy,
> student of religion,
> University of Manitoba
>  

Not entirely. I don't think you will find anything EXACTLY parallel to 
this in the Pali Canon, though there are a number of passages that 
CUMULATIVELY (taken together) come quite close.

For example passages that describe avijjaa as failing to recognise the 
three signs (lakkhana) of anicca, dukkha and anattaa, or failing to see 
the 4 truths, or failing to see the truths of assaada, aadiinava and 
nissara.na, or the failure to see that "Ya.m ki~nci samudayadhamma.m 
sabba.m ta.m nirodhadhamma.m -

Then there are verses like -

To see the essence in the unessential and to see the essence as 
unessential means one can never get to the essence, wandering  as one is 
in the road of wrong intentions. (Dhammapada 11)

that are saying something very similar. 

As are the verses

All processes (sankhaaraa) are impermanent. When one sees this with 
understanding, then one is disillusioned with the things of suffering. 
This is the Path of Purification. Dhammapada 277

All processes are painful. When one sees this with understanding, then 
one is disillusioned with the things of suffering. This is the Path of 
Purification. 278

All processes are out of my control (anattaa). When one sees this with 
understanding, then one is disillusioned with the things of suffering. 
This is the Path of Purification. 279

I hope this helps a little. Certainly, I would agree with you that 
Avijjaa as the failure to see the three lakkhana comes very close to the 
Patanjali definition - particularly if you translated this as - 

"Avidya is the taking of what is non-eternal, impure, painful and non-self 
to be eternal, pure, pleasurable and self."

(The inclusion of the "thes" rather reifies "eternal" and "self" in a way 
that many Buddhists would probably find unacceptable.)

-- 
John Richards
Stackpole Elidor (UK)
jhr at elidor.demon.co.uk
Home Page http://www.elidor.demon.co.uk