Vijjā as scientific knowledge as opposed to pañña

[Viveka]

On a simmilar theme, I’d be grateful to hear the views of Pali scholars on the use of ‘Knowledge’ in SN45.1 Ignorance. @sujato @Brahmali

Knowledge precedes the attainment of skillful qualities, with conscience and prudence following along.
Vijjā ca kho, bhikkhave, pubbaṅgamā kusalānaṃ dhammānaṃ samāpattiyā, anvadeva hirottappaṃ.
https://suttacentral.net/sn45.1/en/sujato

I’ve read through the references provided, and see that Vijja is used in multiple ways throughout the suttas.

However, I’m interested in teasing out the differences between ‘knowledge’ versus ‘understanding’ in this sutta. (Bhikkhu Bodhi translates it as ‘True Knowledge’).

In particular I feel that the knowledge of ‘facts’ alone, is not sufficient - it requires understanding. Understanding is what happens to those facts within the mind. It is understanding that leads to right view - not just the facts/knowledge alone.

This line of questioning has been stimulated by the thread on

Probability of our civilisation to survive without facing a catastrophic collapse estimated at less than 10% in most optimistic scenario

Interesting study, concerning findings. Probability of our civilisation to survive without facing a catastrophic collapse estimated at less than 10% in most optimistic scenario. Nature: Deforestation and world population sustainability: a quantitative analysis (…)" While the extent of human contribution to the greenhouse effect and temperature changes is still a matter of discussion, the deforestation is an undeniable fact. Indeed before the development of human civilisations, our…

and statements like

@sujato

At the end of it all, after decades of thorough and detailed research had been presented, the Dalai Lama called for “more research”.

And the fact that ‘information’, and ‘knowledge’ do not yield specific results… rather it is how they are processed and understood.

Now I know that it is a bit cyclical, in that information - like hearing the Dhamma- leads to wisdom… but I can’t help but feel that the emphasis should not just be on the ‘knowledge’ but the understanding of it, even before it moves towards wisdom (and not encroaching on the meaning of ‘Direct Knowledge’). One might recite the dhamma without understanding it - one has knowledge of it, but not understanding. The knowledge of it won’t move one along the path. “A sage, firm in knowledge, gives rise to right view”.

Ajahn Thanissaro translates it as ‘Clear knowing’, which seems more in line with ‘understanding’.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.001.than.html

If taken as the opposite to Avijja - delusion/ignorance, then ‘understanding’ would seem a reasonable antonym.

Looking at various translations of Vijja, (and related terms such as Panna, Nana, and Abhinna) I see that it doesn’t ever seem to be translated as ‘understanding’, could someone shed a bit more light on this

With much metta