Brother John,

The 2nd noble truth is not redundant at all !

The confusion seems to stem from the fact the words "arising" and "cause"
can sometimes be used interchangably in english - but not so in pali with
samudaya and nidaana.

*1st noble truth* simply states the *factum* of suffering - that there is
suffering (or that suffering arises / happens ~period~) and simply proceeds
to enumerate the five states (not causes) that constitutes suffering as
birth, aging, disease, dissociation from loved ones, not getting what one
wants; and then goes on to dwell on the understanding of that truth.

*2nd noble truth* (now that the fact of suffering [or arising of suffering]
is enunciated) proceeds to state the *cause* of why
suffering takes place (I have substituted the words "takes place" for
"arises" to avoid confusion)
as attahment to desire (tanha) and breaks up desire into 3 types -- desire
for sense pleasure (kama tanha), desire to become (bhava tanha) and desire
to abandon (vibhava tanha).

Metta.
______________________________________________________________

On 1/13/07, johnny pruitt <mahasacham@...> wrote:
>
> Dear P G Dave
> I guess this is what I was getting at. The definition of samudaya as
> opposed to nidaana. So the second noble truth is basically saying the
> arising of suffering not the cause of suffering. This seems to be redundant
> because the first noble truth already stated the arising of suffering. Hope
> I havent missed the point. Hope this clears things up. Also in my opening
> sentence of my last email I meant to say papan~ca not Pan~ca. Ha Ha Ha.
>
> Mettacitena
> John Pruitt
>
> P G Dave <pgd2507@... <pgd2507%40gmail.com>> wrote:
> 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@... <pali.smith%40gmail.com>>
> 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><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]
>
> ---------------------------------
> It's here! Your new message!
> Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
>
> ---------------------------------
> Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and
> always stay connected to friends.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


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