Yong Peng wrote:

>However, after consideration, I suggest that we keep the
>word 'Sugata' and give it a good footnote. The views that were given
>are all good. They neither distort the original teaching nor diminish
>the honour of the Buddha, and they come from reputable sources. So, I
>suggest that we put them all into the footnote.
>
>If there is any objection, we will take a vote using the Polls
>facility provided by Yahoo! Groups.
>
>Please give your opinions.

I'm happy with 'the Sugata'. But if there needs to be a vote, these are the
common renderings that come to mind:

Group I (transliterations)

the Sugata

the Sugato (using the nominative form seems to be the norm among scholars
from France, Germany & Eastern Europe)

the Sugat (common in Indian Ambedkarite works and some 19th century British
translations)

Group II (emphasis on the '-gata')

the Well-gone.
the Well-gone One.
the Wayfarer.
the Well-farer (Rhys Davids, Woodward, Horner, Walshe, Norman.
Most common PTS rendering).
the one who has walked the path (Ven. Ananda B. Metteyya. Probably wouldn't
work too well in the vocative case!)

Group III (emphasis on the 'su-')

the Sublime One (~Naa.namoli)
the Felicitous One (Thomas Cleary)
the Fortunate One (Bodhi)
the Auspicious One (Childers, Ven. Naarada)
the Blest One (Childers)
the Happy One
the Blissful One

Best wishes,

Robert