May I add something here...

"udaya" means rise (as in suryodaya [surya + udaya] = sunrise) or arising.

the prefix "sa.m" simply indicates a fuller or more complete state, so we're
really dealing with the word "udaya" here.

As you see, the use of "udaya" (or samudaya in this case) does not indicate
a cause at all. It simply states the fact of arising.
And "nidaana.m" is cause. The two words are therefore quite distinct.

The sentence "Lobho kammaana.m samudayaaya nidaana.m hoti", translated as,
"greed is the cause for the arising of action" may provide clarity.

Metta.
________________________________________________________

On 1/11/07, Ong Yong Peng <pali.smith@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Johnny,
>
> "dukkhasamudaya.m ariyasacca" ... let's drop 'ariya-sacca', which
> simply means noble truth.
>
> 'dukkha-samudaya' can be understood as the cause of dukkha, where
> dukkha means "suffering and dissatisfaction".
>
> samudaya and nidaana are synonyms of each other, except that nidaana
> has a wider usage than samudaya.
>
> In the sentence "Lobho kammaana.m samudayaaya nidaana.m hoti", greed
> is the cause for the rise of action. It means that lobha (greed) gives
> rise to action. We can also say "Metta.m kammaana.m samudayaaya
> nidaana.m hoti", metta (loving kindness) gives rise to action. Since
> kamma is semantically neutral, both sentences are equally valid.
>
> The first two noble truths form a simple linear "cause>effect"
> relationship. This relationship can be expanded into a cyclical model
> by applying the concept of paticca-samuppada. The same applies to the
> second pair of noble truths.
>
> metta,
> Yong Peng.
>
> --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com <Pali%40yahoogroups.com>, johnny pruitt wrote:
>
> > I had an insight that I thought I would share. Not sure if it is
> just pa~nca or not. In the Anguttara Nikaya, as presented in the New
> Course In Reading Pali lesson 2, the Buddha gives a discourse stating
> Lobho nidaana.m kammaana.m samudayaaya, doso pe ,moho
> nidaana.m kammaana.m samudayaaya which I translate as Covetousness
> is the origin for the arising of action, Aversion is the origin for
> the arising of action, Delusion is the origin for the arising of action.
> > In this context samudaya seems to imply the "arising" of kamma.
> Because nidaana implies origin or place.
> > The Second Noble Truth uses the phrase Dukkhasamudaya.m
> ariyasacha.m in this phrase samudaya is used in the sense of
> origin instead of nidaana. Also the Buddha in elaborating on the
> Second Noble Truth states that covetousness is the origin of suffering
> > At first I thought that this altering of the meaning for samdaya,
> namely, samudaya changing from arising to origin, was just a matter of
> interchangeability. However, as I thought about it I had the notion
> that maybe in the Second Noble Truth lord Buddha was implying the
> doctrine of the Twelve Linked Chain of Dependent Arising and that
> covetousness is only what CONDITIONS suffering instead of the origin.
> Thus the Second Noble Truth could be restated as the Arising-condition
> of suffering instead of the flat out Origin Of Suffering. Also in the
> Twelve Linked Chain of Dependent Origination Avijja is the greatest
> conditional dhamma of the chain of suffering and can be conditioned by
> suffering also. The Ta.nhaa and Upadanaa are farther in the list and
> must have a more minor role in the cause of suffering.
> >
> > The general idea behind this is weather Lord Buddha actually was
> implying the Dependent Origination or not in the second noble truth by
> using the word samudaya rather than nidaana.. Usually the dependent
> origination falls under the Nirodhagaminii pa.tipadaa Ariyasacha.m in
> the fist of the eight fold path yatthaayida.m sammadi.t.thi
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]