--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Alan McClure" <alanmcclure3@...> wrote:

> Ya.m kho bhikkhave dukkhe a~n~naa.na.m, dukkhasamudaye

a~n~naa.na.m,

> dukkhanirodhe a~n~naa.na.m, dukkhanirodhagaaminiyaa pa.tipadaaya
> a~n~naa.na.m,
>
> Ya.m [pro] it

Hi Alan,

I agree that this is a pronoun but with the meaning "whatever"
instead of "it". The "ya.m" qualifies "a~n~naa.na.m" in each of its
four occurrences in the sentence but omitted in the last three due to
ellipsis. Your sentence is incomplete without the concluding main
clause "aya.m vuccati bhikkhave avijjaa". What you have is a chain of
four relative clauses:

Indeed, monks, whatever is nescience regarding unsatisfactoriness,
(whatver is) nescience regarding the origin of unsatisfactoriness,
etc.; that, monks, is called ignorance.

Another possible translation is: Indeed, monks, that which is
nescience regarding unsatisfactoriness is called ignorance, that
which is nescience regarding the origin of unsatisfactoriness is
called ignorance, and similarly for the remaining two.

Jim

[...]

> "It is ignorance of unsatisfactoriness, of the origin of

unsatisfactoriness,

> of the cessation of unsatisfactoriness, and of the path leading to

the

> cessation of unsatisfactoriness."