[Buddha-l] liturgical languages

[jkirk]

Ok----the translation I prefer for the reason I gave converts "awakened"
as a verb form into a predicative adjective, "awake": the Buddha is now
awake;
thus not strictly conforming to the Sanskrit but making for a more useful
translation
from the standpoint of anatta and anicca, since awake can be read or
understood
as an ongoing process of cognitive etc experience.
According to the OED, this adjectival usage of awake came along later than
the
verb form.
Using "awakening" for bodhi strikes me as good (for my purposes anyway)
because it suggests a process that is continuing.
Joanna
=================

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Nance" <richard.nance at gmail.com>
To: "Buddhist discussion forum" <buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com>
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] liturgical languages


> Joanna wrote:
>
> "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.
>
> If you want to stick close to the Sanskrit, the appropriate
> translation would be something like "awakening" for the Sanskrit
> "bodhi" (the term is a noun) and one who is (or has) "awakened" for
> the Sanskrit "buddha" (it's a bhuute k.rdanta, past passive
> participle).
>
> Pedantically yours,
>
> R. Nance
>
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>