> Somehow I get the impression that the meaning of vi~n~naa.na seems to
> be closer to what it literally means: vi + j~naa = knowing apart (or
> apart-knowledge).

I just saw how Michael Olds (www.buddhadust.org) takes vi~n~nana as
"double-knowing-knowing" so he takes it as vi + j~naa + ~naa (or j~naa).
Would you think this to be possible?

Lars