[Buddha-l] bodhi

[Erik Hoogcarspel]

Dan Lusthaus schreef:
> 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.
>   
OK. I think the issue at had is the word 'bodhi'. It would be hard to 
come up with a statement that holds for the entire Buddhist discourse, 
so of course you're right. Question is would it hold for the 
Sautraantika's? Is it Buddhavaacana? And why would anyone use the light 
model in stead of the awakening model for the experience of becoming 
aware. What are the connotations? Light comes from above, awakening is 
something that you do youself. If I'm not mistaken the awakening model 
predominates also in the oldest Upani.sads. The Buddha used the 
awakening model because this was appearently clear for everyone.
>   
> 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.
>   
I suppose you can say anything you want as long as you keep it vague 
enough. To use words is not the same as to use a model or paradigm, it 
depends on the connotations. I think the influence of the Persian light 
imagery has much more impact in mahayana buddhism than in the Nikaya's 
and that there the awakening model predominates..
> Plato's cave in the Republic is only one of the better known analogies; it 
> is not the arche. 
>   

The symbolic meaning Plato gives to sunlight is quite new, that's why 
the cave parable had such an impact.
> 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.
>
>   
I'm with you here, but I fear the light model is getting stale too. 
Perhaps we should think of another metaphor, or just hold on to 
awakening model untill nobody knows different anymore.

erik