[Buddha-l] liturgical languages

[jkirk]

> On Fri, 13 May 2005, jkirk wrote:
>
> > Yes, this strikes me as an important difference. There seems to be a
subtle
> > difference between glossing bodhi as "enlightened" and glossing it as
> > "awake." Awake suggests and ongoing process, whereas enlightened with
its
> > past perfect ending suggests a concluded state, thus subjecting the
process
> > to essence and therefore contradicting the anatta and anicca
propositions.
> > ("Awakened" also is a past perfect, so I'd jettison it in favor of
merely
> > using "awake" for bodhi and for a Buddha----one who is awake.) The
teachings
> > on practice would thus seem to me to favor "awake" as a process or
ongoing
> > condition descriptive of bodhi, from which "things" or "life" become
freer
> > from delusion than otherwise, but is also a state that is never finished
> > until parinirvana, as in the case of the Buddha.
>
> Joanna,
>
> In the case of the Buddha's parinivana, would that not also ultimately
> indicate an accomplished state, thereby subjecting the process of
> enlightenment to some essence and, as you note, contradict the anatta and
> anicca propositions?
>
> Regards,
>
> Stan Ziobro
============
Hi Stan,
After I wrote my comment I guessed this question would come along :) ------
Well, not if one considers parinirvana a transformation, ergo change
(anicca), not stasis.
So bodhi is not actually fnished but transformed.
That's also how I personally view it as well.