jneya avarana

moha(=avidya) неведение, обратное от prajna (1,6) и поэтому изначальная причина волнения (duhkha) мирового процесса.

Эти шесть элементов не всегда безусловно плохи (с точки зрения спасения); иногда они могут быть и безразличными (avyakrita), но все же они всегда "омраченные" (nivrita-achhadita-klishta), так как поддерживают веру в якобы существующую личность (satkaya-anugraha-drishti-samprayukta). ...

вера в собственное "я" не считается клешой

Вера в "Я" в буддизме не считается чем-то негативным, навроде гнева, лени и т.п.

1. moha(=avidya) неведение, обратное от prajna (1,6)
5. styana – лень, пассивный темперамент.

Хорошее воспитание просто не создает условий для работы "безверия", так что не в этой так в следующей жизни "безверующий" окажется в аду.

А вот сутре чувак притворялся быком и будда ему предсказал, что такими темпами он в след жизни переодиться в компании быков, а если будет думать, что должен переодиться на небесах, то родится быком или в аду! Это нет последствий?

Может ты просто не правильно понял? А имелось ввиду что не непосредственно неведение даст последствие, а неведение является причиной чего-то, что даст нужное последствие.

Так скажи наконец - вера в собственное я это авидья или нет, а авидья это клеша или нет?

непоследственно

ведут к неблагим последствиям, но могут иногда вести и к нейтральным?

А куда относятся гнев, страсть и гордость угадай?

Хорошее воспитание просто не создает условий для работы "безверия", так что не в этой так в следующей жизни "безверующий" окажется в аду.

Двеша (неприятие) например может быть и неприятием собственного невежества.

The theory of the two hindrances (or "obscurations" ) originates in Indian Yogācāra, where it is an integral component to the explanation of the path of the bodhisattva in contradistinction to that of the two lesser vehicles of direct disciple (śrāvaka) and solitary realizer (pratyekabuddha), a path that is explained in five stages. The basic rationale for the division of obscurations, or hindrances, into two types, is fairly straightforward, and reflective of the Buddhist view of the fundamental causes of the human condition of suffering. I.e., our direct suffering derives from the afflictive emotions we experience. ...

The shift from the doctrines of early Indian scholasticism to the Mahāyāna-based Yogācāra is radical and sweeping in many ways. The inclinations and character of the bodhisattva as Mahāyāna hero are spelled out in extensive detail, with focus being placed on three intertwined concepts: emptiness, compassion, and bodhi (enlightenment), which supercede the prior set of no-self, indifference, and nirvāṇa (cessation). Yet in defining the course of the bodhisattva's practice through the five paths, the Yogācāras take great pains to include the two lesser vehicle practitioners, in part, at least, so that fine and detailed distinctions can be made between their practices and progress in comparison with that of the bodhisattvas. The key element utilized in making this distinction is the newly introduced distinction of all mental disturbances (kleśa, doṣa) into two categories: (1) the afflictive hindrances (klesa-āvarana), which include most of the emotive, intellectual, and sensory defilements that had been outlined in detail by the Abhidharma scholars, and (2) a newly defined category, known as the cognitive hindrances (jneya-āvarana).

The general outline given to these two hindrances in basic Yogācāra texts such as the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra [YBh], formulaically explains the afflictive hindrances to be the sole object of the religious practice of the adherents of the two vehicles (although this hard definition does not hold up under close scrutiny, since, as mentioned above, the imputation of, and attachment to a self, along with a lack of thorough recognition of such things as dependent arising and impermanence clearly has a cognitive dimension). Of course, the bodhisattvas must also overcome the afflictive hindrances, but they must also be prepared, at a fairly early juncture, to cope with the correction of cognitive obscurations, which lie outside the purview of the awareness and practice of the lesser vehicle adherents. And what, exactly are these cognitive hindrances?

The establishment of the cognitive hindrances is directly related to the appearance of the Great Vehicle emptiness doctrine. As we know, the Mahāyāna doctrine of emptiness took the original doctrine of no-self to a new level by arguing that it was not only the individual self, or ego that lacked an intrinsic and defining nature, but also all the objective "things" that we perceive, whether these be physical objects, mental images, or linguistic constructs. It was understood by Mahāyānists that the uncritical acceptance of the reality of the elements of our existence was a far subtler and pervasive stumbling block than the acceptance of an ego, and if this was not overcome, the tendency to reify an ego-conception would be all the more difficult to eradicate. Thus, they said, to only eradicate the notion of an ego in the way of a lesser-vehicle arhat was a stage far removed from that of buddhahood, which implied the attainment of bodhi—enlightenment. The cognitive hindrances then, were seen to be operating at a generally subtler level than the afflictive hindrances. Also, while the karmic moral quality of the afflictive hindrances were understood to be mostly of negative value, the cognitive hindrances were for the most part understood as being karmically indeterminate, or neutral (avyākṛta 無記) a characteristic that would also tend to make them less obvious to identify and treat.

Each of the five stages in the path to perfect enlightenment laid out by the Yogācāras were distinguished from each other primarily by the extent to which the practitioner had first quelled, and then permanently eradicated each of the two hindrances, with final eradication of the most subtle forms of the cognitive obscurations (their habit-energy form) being the final counteraction leading to the attainment of buddhahood. Each of the types of hindrances is really a rubric for a broad category of mental disturbances and imbalances, each one having a varying number of manifestations. For example, each of the types of hindrances has subliminal and conscious manifestations; each exists in dormant and active form; and each can carry on to some extent in the form of karmic impressions (vāsanās) after the main dormant and active forms have been quelled or eliminated. And despite the repeated hard and fast lesser vehicle/greater vehicle distinctions that are made between two, a little bit of understanding of the standard descriptions of both kinds of paths is going to lead the astute student to wonder ...

What we have attempted to provide above is a basic overview of the origination of the two hindrances theory in its traditional Yogācāra format. It should be noted, however, that when we see the hindrances discussed in later East Asian works (a prime example being Choenul's text translated below) it is quite often a quite different model of the hindrances that is being invoked—one that is derived not from standard Indian Yogācāra works such as the YBh, Madhyānta-vibhāga, or Mahāyānasaṃgrāha, but from the presentation of the hindrances given in Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith and related tathāgatagarbha texts. ...

The AMFs articulation of the hindrances is fully embedded within its framework of intrinsic enlightenment 本覺 vs. activated enlightenment 始覺, beginningless ignorance, and the treatise's description of the fall into suffering and the production of karma through nine progressive stages that originate with the first movement of mind. The afflictive obstructions of the AMF are precisely this first movement of mind, termed as "intrinsic ignorance," or "non-enlightenment." The sentient being does not cognize the quiescent and unitary nature of suchness that is the one mind, and thus the mind karmically moves, initiating, in a downward spiral: the perception of the subjective perceiver and objective world, mental discriminations, continuity, attachment, definition of names, production of karma, and finally, suffering and transmigration. But the content of the hindrances itself is defined clearly as the inability to perceive suchness, which means that precisely speaking, it is much more like a cognitive obscuration than an emotive affliction.

The cognitive obstructions of the AMF are defined in the context of the activation of enlightenment 始覺, viz., they are defined as the inability to discriminate the things of the world in an accurate manner—an impairment of correct discriminating function. Although the framework of this pair cannot be said to be utterly bereft of any connection to the original Yogācāra set, the entire view toward the understanding of the makeup and activity of unenlightened vs. enlightened mind that is being put forth is significantly different. In terms of precise definition, the afflictive obscuration (truly, here, an obscuration) is decidedly cognitive in character, even if we can observe that its end result is a descent into affliction. There are a bunch of other ramifications here in terms of the degree to which this view characterizes the activity of the bodhisattva, and leaves out the discussion entirely of the two vehicles, but exploring them here would be too much of a digression. ...

The final scriptural articulation of two hindrances, which appears slightly after Weonhyo's time, is that outlined in the Yuanjue jing (Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment). The discussion in that text moves yet again further from the original Yogācāra model. Despite its superficial invocation of the Yogācāra model of the practitioners of the three vehicles working at quelling and eliminating through the five paths, the fact is that the only real concern of the SPE is the cognitive hindrances, which it approaches from various angles in a number of chapters, placing special stress on the fact that the most dangerous sort of cognitive hindrance is the mistaken belief that one has attained some level of enlightenment, and is thus qualified to act as a guru.

... Nonetheless, there are interesting observations made regarding the hindrances along the way, which certainly have contributed something to my understanding of the issue, for example, the citation from the Cheng weishi lun that makes it clear that in actual function, the hindrances cannot but overlap into each other's territory—the afflictive hindrances must certainly affect cognition, and the cognitive hindrances must certainly buttress afflictive mentation. Nonetheless, they are defined as such based on their primary function.

   The sūtra says: ‘Action is threefold:
     (i) meritorious action (punyakarma),
     (ii) demeritorious action (apunyakarma) and
     (iii) unchanging action (āniñjyakarma)’.
  (i) What is meritorious action? It is wholesome action (kuśalakarma) associated with the realm of the sense pleasures (kāmapratisaṃyukta).
  (ii) What is demeritorious action? It is unwholesome action (akuśalakarma).
  (iii) What is unchanging action? It is wholesome action associated with the form realm and the formless realm (rūpārūpyapratisaṃyukta).

  The sūtra says: ‘Meritorious, demeritorious and unchanging (punya, apunya, āniñjya) actions are the formations (saṃskāra) conditioned by ignorance (avidyā).’
  Why are meritorious and unchanging actions called formations conditioned by ignorance? Ignorance is twofold:
    (i) ignorance of results (vipāka-avidyā) and
    (ii) ignorance of reality (tattvārtha-avidyā).
  (i) Ignorance of results produces the demeritorious formations (apunya-samskāra).
  (ii) Ignorance of reality produces the meritorious and unchanging formations (punya-āniñjya-samskāra).

Возможно две авидьи соотносятся с двуя аваранами.