[[arahant]]
No it probably has a different syllable but I don't know how to properly write that in wiktionary style for Sanskrit. Regarding the encyclopedic/dictionary line, that material is right on the border. It pertains, actually, to usage. Sounds like a great idea for a Wikibook.Geof Bard 19:18, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
OK. If you're not sure about the pronunciation, it's best not to include it.
The reason that I determined that it was more encyclopedic was that it could easily get out of hand if we tried to do the same thing for everything. If we had, for example, on the entry predestination, what each Christian sect believed about predestination, we'd have quite a long thing that would read more like a Wikipedia article.
Oh no not at all. The point pertains to how you can use it and is essential to understanding of what the connotations are. Quite different than these expansive encyclopedistic ramblings. If I don't convince you I am OK agreeing to disagree. Maybe it should be reverted but in a more concise manner? Geof Bard 19:33, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I'll agree that you can add it back because you probably know better than me that it's relevant. It should probably read more like a usage note, however, stating that the word is more common in Theravada circles than Mahayana ones, if that's what you mean to say.