[Buddha-l] bodhi

[Dan Lusthaus]

Eric,


> Dan, it seems to me that you presume that words refer to things or 
> concepts and that there's only one right meaning for a word ever.

I have no idea where you get that erroneous idea from. Clearly everyone 
agrees that the meaning "awakening" is attested. I provided Chinese 
examples. The question is whether budd terms can *also* mean "illuminate", 
"enlighten", etc. Richard thinks not. I used to think so too. But have seen 
examples over the years of buddh terms used in conjunction with light 
imagery, so I am not ruling that out. This would be exactly the opposite of 
what you accuse me of.


> The Buddhist light metaphor probably came from Zoroastrian Iran. The 
> Western light metaphysics comes from Plato, he introduces it in the myth 
> of the cave in Politeia.

While likely that Iranian light imagery -- whether Zoroastrian otherwise --  
did play some role in certain Mahayana developments, the light imagery, as I 
mentioned, is already clearly evident in the Pali Nikayas. So, if at that 
point it is meaningful to say that these ideas in early Nikaya Buddhism have 
Persian origins (as perhaps did the Sakya clan long before Gotama's 
lifetime), then make yourself happy to do so. Why Buddhism is better if 
central images and ideas are considered non-indigenous is unclear to me.

Plato's cave in the Republic is only one of the better known analogies; it 
is not the arche. (Even in the Republic, the divided line analogy gives it a 
different twist; the sun did not shine on Greece alone). But don't get too 
fixated on searching for origins. They are elusive. A line commonly 
accredited to Rumi -- "the light that is one though the lamps be many" can 
be found in many Buddhist texts many centuries before Rumi lived.

>The word awakening is not a standard metaphor in the West, so you'll have 
>to introduce it first and then use it very consequently.

Problem is, it does not always translate very sonorically. Trying to make 
some adjectival or adverbial form of "awaken" seamlessly fit a passage in 
English can be difficult and frustrating (I used to do that, but have 
"relaxed" my vigilance, so I guess I've gone back to sleep); all the more 
aggravating when an "enlighten" derivative works perfectly -- sonorously and 
in terms of conveying the sense to the English reader. In other words, some 
of us retain it not to valorize Europe's 19th century, but because it works, 
and it is recognizable, and the alternative can be very awkward in many 
circumstances.

Dan