DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Is the First Noble Truth well spoken? Is it incomplete?

**Soolfelpecelf** · 11-11-2010, 11:45 AM

Instead, the Buddha provided a gradual teaching, listing what ordinary people regard as suffering (birth, sickness, death, sorrow, pain, separation, etc) and then revealing, on the level of ultimate truth, all suffering is grasping.

I need to get one point clarified Element.

I remember sometimes back you said in a thread that phenomena are inherently dukkha. So why do you say that "birth, sickness, death, sorrow, pain, separation" lie in the scope of mundane teachings for ordinary people and grasping lies in the scope of super-mundane? If a phenomenon is inherently dukkha then why is saying "birth is dukkha" mundane?

Personally I think what you say here is correct. Saying birth/sickness are dukkha is mundane because that is how ordinary people view dukkha but on a more super-mundane level it needs to be understood that it is attachment that is ultimately causing dukkha. I am raising this question only because what you say here seems to contradict what you said earlier that phenomena are inherently dukkha.

11-11-2010, 11:45 AM	#14
Soolfelpecelf Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 509 Senior Member	Instead, the Buddha provided a gradual teaching, listing what ordinary people regard as suffering (birth, sickness, death, sorrow, pain, separation, etc) and then revealing, on the level of ultimate truth, all suffering is grasping. I need to get one point clarified Element. I remember sometimes back you said in a thread that phenomena are inherently dukkha. So why do you say that "birth, sickness, death, sorrow, pain, separation" lie in the scope of mundane teachings for ordinary people and grasping lies in the scope of super-mundane? If a phenomenon is inherently dukkha then why is saying "birth is dukkha" mundane? Personally I think what you say here is correct. Saying birth/sickness are dukkha is mundane because that is how ordinary people view dukkha but on a more super-mundane level it needs to be understood that it is attachment that is ultimately causing dukkha. I am raising this question only because what you say here seems to contradict what you said earlier that phenomena are inherently dukkha.
	Quote