Original sin isn’t the issue, maybe worthy of a conversation, still it doesn’t change the incarnation nor would it change post Incarnation. This ties in with the 4th ecumenical council and Christs nature. “united with neither confusion nor division.”-451. This is another point definitely worthy of discussion and in relation to the Incarnation. As you read the Nature of Christ you will notice the hypostatic union which is of course east and west, and by critically acclaimed greek philosophers above such as with Plato. In this case Aristotle who is also linked in this thread earlier with the Father in relation to the OP and understanding death.
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FChristology&ei=QwKkU56iKtWeyASf6YDgCw&usg=AFQjCNElQx2R-yVhm5MboCPjujiEPZl9fw
A theological term used with reference to the Incarnation to express the revealed truth that in Christ one person subsists in two natures, the Divine and the human. Hypostasis means, literally, that which lies beneath as basis or foundation.
NOTE- Hence it came to be used by the Greek philosophers to denote reality as distinguished from appearances (Aristotle, “Mund.”, IV, 21).
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CDMQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newadvent.org%2Fcathen%2F07610b.htm&ei=twCkU_6pDYfNsQSly4DQDg&usg=AFQjCNHZw0aGcBZ9H4QZj0xK87zahRpoWQ
Anyway this gives one insight into sin and the incarnation.
The Liturgy linked above you see repetitive wording of Mary a Virgin with no spot. A Virgin is a virgin, the linguistics further define, not what a Virgin is since its self descriptive. This is repetitive language and from very early on with Immaculate, spot, stain etc. So sin would be the conclusion and the east would have to reach this point also, especially when understanding a Saint and the particular and general judgement. Or we don’t want to elaborate here but we will with Marys death which isn’t elaborated on by definition, but sin with Mary in fact is.
As to the particular judgement and general judgement the Church’s have the same belief *. This could be found by the West right below and in the CCC 675 to 682 and of course with further in depth reading.
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newadvent.org%2Fcathen%2F08550a.htm&ei=_wWkU-SUK4WayATj1oDIDg&usg=AFQjCNFOmTGQu-U-voXHLO7g6bseY735Rw
As indicated above, the earlier testimony varies and this Saint is very telling in this regard.
Epiphanius of Salamis, a Jew by birth, born in Phoenicia, converted to Christianity in adulthood and has lived as a monk for over 20 years in Palestine with 335-340 for 362 years, writes in “Panarion” in “Contra antidicomarianst” about the death of the Virgin Mary following: “If any think < I > am mistaken, moreover, let them search through the scriptures any neither find Mary’s death, nor whether or not she died, nor whether or not she was buried — even though John surely traveled throughout Asia. And yet,nowhere does he say that he took the holy Virgin with him. Scripture simply kept silence because of the overwhelming wonder, not to throw men’s minds into consternation. For I dare not say — though I have my suspicions, I keep silent. Perhaps, just as her death is not to be found, so I may have found some traces of the holy and blessed Virgin.[3]” “The holy virgin may have dead and been buried — her falling asleep was with honor, her death in purity, her crown in virginity. Or she may have been put to death — as the scripture says, “And a sword shall pierce through her soul” — her fame is among the martyrs and her holy body, by which light rose on the world, [rests] amid blessings. Or she may have remained alive, for God is not incapable of doing whatever he wills. No one knows her end. But we must not honor the saints to excess; we must honor their Master. It is time for the error of those who have gone astray to cease.[4]” On how the Virgin Mary died between Christians in the late 4th century there were different opinions, including the opinion was martyrdom Mary. For this reason, Ambrose, for example, wrote: “Neither the letter of Scripture nor Tradition does not teach us that Mary had left this life as a consequence of suffering from bodily ulcers.”
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FDormition_of_the_Mother_of_God&ei=BwmkU6j_K4mjyAT7_oBI&usg=AFQjCNHLJc1ZSenDTD9IiOSZ_giHoa1Fqg
As to the Christian understanding of the resurrection alluded to, perhaps we can apply this to Enoch and Elijah? You see scripture does speak on this point.
Elijah wanted to die, that didn’t happen in the Bible because its Gods will, not ours. The suggestion that Mary wanted to die is validated where and how? Who is so sure Gods will for Mary was different and how do you arrive at this conclusion? Because there are bodies in a grave? Because there is a 5th century Marion increase in devotion?
Isn’t this why Marys death was never defined? Further in the early writings from the 5th century it was very common to suggest Saints from the earlier centuries confirm and validate their teachings. Though no footnotes are ever provided to verify. For example Saint Maximus suggests his work is believed by St Athanasius among many others from earlier centuries. But this cannot be validated. Or when did the east start investigating private revelation?*
