We’re talking about what dukkha is, less what the cause of it is.
1 Like
I am not an expert so I cannot define what is dukkha. However, as I understand, dukkha is the negative state of mind that opposes what it does not like. Because the mind craves for what it likes, it opposes what it does not like, and this state of opposing, disliking mind is what we called dukkha.
English is not my language, so I cannot choose the best wordings to express it.
It’s in DN 16
I’m now old, elderly and senior. I’m advanced in years and have reached the final stage of life. I’m currently eighty years old. Just as a decrepit cart keeps going by relying on straps, in the same way, the Realized One’s body keeps going by relying on straps, or so you’d think. Sometimes the Realized One, not focusing on any signs, and with the cessation of certain feelings, enters and remains in the signless immersion of the heart. Only then does the Realized One’s body become more comfortable.
I think the part in bold is the key to contextualising everything before it. The reason we know this is because he says in short, which is another way of saying in summary. Birth, ageing etc. is suffering because of clinging. Absent of clinging they are not suffering.
If he said in short, the five aggregates are suffering, we could assume that he suffered while alive. But because he said in short, the five aggregates affected by clinging are suffering, we know that he did not suffer because he had already uprooted clinging…
It means that when there is clinging then there is birth, and when there is birth there will be physical pain and mental pain both of which are dukkha. Clinging > existence > birth > ageing, sickness, death, pain etc. If we accepted your interpretation then we would have to also say that lamentation and grief are not dukkha, its just clinging to lamentation which makes it dukkha. That isn’t what the Buddha said though. When asked what is dukkha, he said that lamentation is dukkha. That birth is dukkha, and that physical pain is dukkha.
When Buddhas or Arahants awaken dependent origination ceases. There is no more ignorance, and so no more formations to establish conciousness. That doesn’t however then abolish ignorance in the past. It’s not retroactive. Before awakening there was ignorance and formations, and because of that ignorance and those formations there is dukkha now in the present. When there is ignorance, dukkha arises. This then is their old kamma, their body and mind which they have to carry around until their death at which point there is total freedom from all forms of dukkha forever. Whilst alive there is no more dukkha of the mind, of wailing and lamentation, but there is still the experience of the dukkha of pain and of the unsatisfactoriness of life.
2 Likes
That is only part of it. As shown above, the Buddha’s own definition of just what dukkha is is broader than mental turmoil.
1 Like
Since you did not clarify what do you mean. I assumed what you mean as:
It is not because you cling to lamentation which makes it dukkha. You do not cling to lamentation. You cling to something that you like, and if you do not get that then lamentation will arise in your mind and that is what we called dukkha. If you do not cling to something that you like then if you do not get that, lamentation will not arise.
Just like if you love your wife so much, you cling to her and if you lost her, lamentation will arise. However, if you do not love and cling to your wife then when your wife walks away, lamentation will not arise.
Lamentation is the negative state of mind that opposes to what it does not like. In this case, it opposes to the lost since it does not want that.
I agree. I wasn’t arguing otherwise. I was arguing that pain is dukkha in the same way that lamentation is dukkha. When the Buddha was asked just what dukkha is, he said it is lamentation and it is pain (and other manifestations of it too).
1 Like
Regarding what is dukkha, according to SN/SA suttas, the Buddha also states that anicca ‘impermanence’ (regarding the five aggregates/the sense spheres) is dukkha.
So, it will be better to see the reason why “impermanence is suffering” indicated in the texts (pp. 55-6):
Pages 55-60 from The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism Choong Mun-keat 2000.pdf (447.3 KB)
I think this is the limitation of language when we say “pain is dukkha,” “lamentation is dukkha,” “separation from what is pleasing is dukkha,” “death is dukkha”… This can be misunderstood as pain = lamentation = “separation from what is pleasing” = aging = death = dukkha. This may make us think that they are the same, and we cannot have pain that is separated from dukkha, we cannot have lamentation that is separated from dukkha, we cannot have death that is separated from dukkha…
If we are experiencing pain and we do not cling to pleasant feeling (or we do not oppose to painful feeling) then our mind will not fall into a negative state such as grief, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, despair… The body is in pain, but the mind is not in pain. The pain of the body is simply an unpleasant feeling. If the mind does not oppose to that unpleasant feeling, negative state of mind such as sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, despair will not arise.
The mind falls into a positive state when it likes something, and it falls into a negative state when it dislikes something. When it falls into a negative state, we call that state as dukkha. We say that the mind is in pain when it is in its negative state.
If we hate our enemy and we see that our enemy is death. This death does not bring sorrow, pain, lamentation, grief to us. Therefore, there is a case that death is separated from dukkha. That death can bring dukkha to other people if they oppose it, but not for us.
When we see our enemy is in sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, despair state, we do not dislike that. We do not crave for our enemy not to be so. Therefore, we do not suffer or experience dukkha. So, there is a case that sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, despair does not bring dukkha to us.
Therefore, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, despair… does not equal to dukkha. They are not the same. However, dukkha does not exist separatedly from them since dukkha is simply those negative states of mind.
It is not easy to explain this concept because of the limitation of language. Moreover, my English is not very good, so that is the best that I could do.
1 Like
Birth, pain, lamentation etc. are dukkha only because there is clinging involved. To expand:
- It is because of clinging that birth occurs and subsequent pain, lamentation, grief arises
- It is because of clinging that pain, lamentation and grief causes suffering
If birth, pain, lamentation etc. are dukkha unconditionally, then the Buddha would not have been able to summarise them all as the five clinging aggregates.
Suppose you held up a trophy and said this is the official trophy of the FIFA world cup. What makes it official? It is the designation of offical by the FIFA authorities. If, after you made the statement the FIFA authorities rescinded the designation (e.g. they picked a different trophy for the world cup), the original trophy would no longer be the official trophy.
Similarly, you hold up pain and say pain is dukkha. What makes it dukka? The presence of clinging. Once clinging is absent, pain is no longer dukkha, but simply a sensation.
Another way to see this is by examining the short form of the four noble truths:
this is suffering
this is the cause of suffering
this is the end of suffering
this is the path to the end of suffering
The cause of suffering is defined as craving
The end of suffering is defined as the uprooting of craving
Since the uprooting of craving is sufficient to end suffering, the Buddha didn’t suffer while alive.
If the Buddha suffered while he was alive, the end of suffering would have been defined as death after craving has been uprooted.
As mentioned in another comment, if pain was dukkha, the Buddha would have been bothered by it:
After the Buddha had commenced the rainy season residence, he fell severely ill, struck by dreadful pains, close to death.
Atha kho bhagavato vassūpagatassa kharo ābādho uppajji, bāḷhā vedanā vattanti māraṇantikā.
But he endured unbothered, with mindfulness and situational awareness.
Tā sudaṁ bhagavā sato sampajāno adhivāsesi avihaññamāno.
Finally…
That doesn’t however then abolish ignorance in the past. It’s not retroactive.
Sure, ignorance in the past can cause pain in the present. However the absence of ignorance in the present means that there is no craving. Thus, the pain felt does not cause dukkha.
2 Likes
That isn’t what the 1st Noble Truth says though. When asked what is dukkha, the Buddha gives a list of things which are dukkha. He doesn’t give a list of things which are only dukkha if clung to, and if we read it that way we would also have to say that lamentation is only dukkha if clung to, it being in the same list as physical pain and ageing.
1 Like
Why birth is dukkha?
The way i see , people are conflating second noble truth with the first noble truth . Even weirder commingled four noble truth into just one . The Path is gradual , one speaks from ordinary mind where one is still in ignorance state . One begins a journey leaving a place proceed towards the terminus . But if one were to mistaken the destination as the departure it is a deviation from the course . The ultimate reality is not the conventional .
The above appears to be saying craving (tanha) is the condition for feeling (vedana).
When the 1st Noble Truth refers to “pain”, it is referring to pain born from aging-&-death, i.e., the sense of loss, per the below:
SN 12.2
SN 22.1
The 1st Noble Truth is not referring to painful feelings with sense contact as the preceding cause/condition.
1 Like
The above sems to be saying craving (tanha) is the condition for feeling (vedana).
When the 1st Noble Truth refers to “pain”, it seems to be referring to pain born from aging-&-death and the the sense of loss, per the below:
And what is dependent origination? Ignorance is a condition for choices. Choices are a condition for consciousness. Consciousness is a condition for name and form. Name and form are conditions for the six sense fields. The six sense fields are conditions for contact. Contact is a condition for feeling. Feeling is a condition for craving. Craving is a condition for grasping. Grasping is a condition for continued existence. Continued existence is a condition for rebirth. Rebirth is a condition for old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress to come to be. That is how this entire mass of suffering originates. This is called dependent origination.
SN 12.1
They regard consciousness as self, self as having consciousness, consciousness in self, or self in consciousness. They’re obsessed with the thought: ‘I am consciousness, consciousness is mine!’ But that consciousness of theirs decays and perishes, which gives rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress.
SN 22.1
The 1st Noble Truth is not referring to painful feelings with sense contact as the preceding cause/condition.
2 Likes
That is talking of conditioned conciousness. Which is not talked about much. The infinite conciousness Buddha talks about. Is your awakened state. The Highest Conciousness. Reaching the source of all. But just knowing. What ends is your using names like life and death. Thats the real ending of your world which was mind-made.
With respect, would you be willing to offer citations from the Pāli Canon?
By “infinite consciousness” the assumption is that you’re pointing to a “timeless awareness” or a “deathless consciousness.”
If so, can you find teachings in support of this in the suttas?
Such concepts are present in a number of Mahayana sutras – perhaps you’re relying on them for your position?
I am getting you interested. Thats good. Countless info in here. But its not from Mahayana. Search Higher Conciousness in suttacentral.
from avijja to bhava , there is not mentioned with craving , clinging n existence as conditions , that directly link to dukkha (of psychological sorrow) , not just craving alone causes dukkha instead it point dukkha to something as a whole starting from avijja as a condition . Dukkha as a end result after birth link . So the dukkha are referring to the whole conditioning of the dependent origination in which the entire mass of suffering manifest .
Sn12.1
“And what is dependent origination? Ignorance is a condition for choices. Choices are a condition for consciousness. Consciousness is a condition for name and form. Name and form are conditions for the six sense fields. The six sense fields are conditions for contact. Contact is a condition for feeling. Feeling is a condition for craving. Craving is a condition for grasping. Grasping is a condition for continued existence. Continued existence is a condition for rebirth. Rebirth is a condition for old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress to come to be. That is how this entire mass of suffering originates. This is called dependent origination.
With respect, what I’m interested in is what suttas you can cite to support your claims about “infinite consciousness.”
If you mean the 2nd arupa attainment, that could be considered a kind of “infinite consciousness”, sometimes described as adhicitta, or “higher mind.” But this is clearly referring to a conditional state.
If by “infinite consciousness” you’re claiming a “deathless, timeless, consciousness” perhaps you’d be willing to say so —and then cite from the suttas rather than refer to discussions about suttas.
Best wishes 
I start with this one.
Your not going to have nirvana on earth without a a higher conciousness. Its the most happy state. Peaceful etc. By then you should be able do more than before. Its actually old tradition already to believe this end in India. This ending was shared in common like saying deathless.
Instead of asking where the four great elements, cease without remainder, you should have asked:
‘Where do earth, water, fire and air no footing find?
Where are long and short, small and great, fair and foul -
Where are “name-and-form” brought to an end?’“And the answer is:
Consciousness that is signless, limitless, all-illuminating,
Then water, earth, fire, & wind find no footing,
Then long & short, small & large, pleasant & unpleasant -
Then “name-&-form” are all brought to an end.With the cessation of viññāṇa [divided-knowing]
all this is brought to an end.’”Thus spoke the Exalted One. And Kevaṭṭa, the young householder, pleased at heart, rejoiced at the spoken word.
Here ends the Kevaṭṭa Suttanta.