Bhava doesn't mean 'becoming'

This list of uses of bhava is incredibly helpful. Thanks. Have you thought of writing this up and publishing it? Someone ought to.

I’m reminded of other misdefinitions I’ve encountered. For example, if you look at compounds ending in -sattva in Sanskrit they never have the sense of “a type of being” (not a karmadhāraya in other words). Rather, as the second member of a compound, -sattva takes the sense of “essence, nature, or being in the abstract”.

So the least like translation of bodhisattva is “a bodhi being” or “a being concerned with bodhi”. We expect this to be an adjectival compound: “one who essence is awakening”, “bodhi-natured”, and so on. The idea that bodhisattva is a hyper-sanskritization of bodhisatta seems less likely…