why isn't Sammā-sam-buddha-sāvako "a disciple who also happens to be a Buddha"?

 If an ariya-sāvako is supposedly a "noble-disciple" (enlightened), rather than "disciple of enlightened noble one", 

then why is Sammā-sam-buddha-sāvako a "disciple of a Buddha"
rather than "a disciple who also happens to be a Buddha"? 



(these two Dhp verses are lightly modifed version of Sujato's translations)

58 – (fragrant lotus may grow out of garbage heap)

♦ 58.
♦ yathā saṅkāra-ṭhānasmiṃ VAR,	From a forsaken heap
ujjhitasmiṃ mahā-pathe.	discarded on the highway,
♦ padumaṃ tattha jāyetha,	a lotus might blossom,
Suci-gandhaṃ mano-ramaṃ.	fragrant and delightful.

59 – (like that, disciple of Buddha may blossom among ordinary people)

♦ 59.
♦ evaṃ saṅkāra-bhūtesu,	So too, among the forsaken,
Andha-bhūte VAR puthujjane.	the blind ordinary folk,
♦ atirocati paññāya,	They who outshines with their wisdom
Sammā-sam-buddha-sāvako.	a disciple of the perfect Buddha.
♦ pupphavaggo catuttho niṭṭhito.

Related topic

🔗📝what does ariya savaka and sekha actually mean?

Forum discussion

why isn't Sammā-sam-buddha-sāvako "a disciple who also happens to be a Buddha"?
Post by frank k » Sat Dec 03, 2022 10:44 am
...

So why do B. Bodhi and Sujato translate and interpret ariya-savako as (stream enterer at least) "noble disciple" everywhere in all the suttas as far as I can tell, instead of "disciple of the noble ones", which works in every single instance of the suttas, since an enlighted disciple of the ariya is also a disciple, but a disciple is not necessarily a stream enterer.