[sybe07]

Do you know why in the second noble truth seeking delight here and there is mentioned as cause for future rebirth but there is no mentioning of aversion/hate as a cause for rebirth.
Why is this?

-“Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of the origin of suffering:
it is this craving which leads to renewed existence, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there; that is, craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence, craving for extermination. SN56.11

[Johnny_Lim]

Aversion is another manifestation of greed. Saying I hate this implies I love the opposite of it. For instance, a person hates his house to be in a mess. That also tells us that he is attached to his house being clean and tidy. And when he cannot get what he desires, he is in distress. Because of the perception of ‘I am’ suffering, this person wishes for the non-existent of that unpleasant experience.

[Lal]

Good point, Siebe.

The confusion arises because of the wrong translation of taṇhā as “craving.”

In SN 56.11, the Pali verse is: “Idaṃ kho pana, bhikkhave, duk­kha­sa­muda­yaṃ ariyasaccaṃ—yāyaṃ taṇhā ponobbhavikā nandi­rāga­saha­gatā tatra­tat­rā­bhinan­dinī, seyyathidaṃ
—kāma taṇhā, bhava taṇhā, vibhava taṇhā.

As you point out, the translation you quote is “Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of the origin of suffering:
it is this craving which leads to renewed existence, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there; that is, craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence, craving for extermination. SN56.11″

As I have pointed out in recent posts, taṇhā is “getting attached” to something. One could get attached via anger too. One gets attached via greed (craving) or anger because of the ignorance of the Noble Truths. The first stage of understanding those truths is to get rid of sakkāya ditthi.

P.S. Yes. I am glad to see that Johnny has the right idea. I will write more about it in the next post.

[y not]

Aversion may not be ‘another manifestation of greed’.

If a person hates someone, it is not because he loves somebody else. There is only aversion – and, not wanting to do harm to that person, and not wanting to harm oneself by vaci and mano sankhara, the desire is just to keep away. But this is not greed.

However, ‘Because of the perception of ‘I am’ suffering, this person wishes for the non-existent of that unpleasant experience.’still holds.

[sybe07]

Oke, thanks.

My feeling says it is especially the delight seeking/seeing activity- an orientation on something which lies in the future, a focus on the future-, from which a future (renewed existence) is created. Delight seeking feeds the process of becoming. Seeking delight in sense pleasures, in existence and in not to exist anymore and be freed of suffering.

The second noble truth, is, i think especially about this seeking delight as the most fundamental cause for renewed existence. Hate is secundary and arises when ones delight seeking activity is blocked/frustrated.

In that sense i think craving is not bad as cause. Craving as in delight seeking.

[Lal]

y not: “But if a person hates someone, it is not because he loves somebody else.”

If you trace back to the root cause of why one hates another, you will be able to see that it was greed and/or avijja. Hate does not arise by itself. All attachments arise due to the wrong views and wrong perceptions that things in this world lead to happiness. But it is, of course, not easy to “see”.

Siebe: “In that sense i think craving is not bad as cause. Craving as in delight seeking.”

Yes. That is because of what I mentioned above too.
– The Buddha said, “My Dhamma is hard to “see”. It takes a real effort.

One way is to comprehend Paticca Samuppada. “Tanha paccaya upadana” ends up in “jati paccaya jara, marana, soka, parideva, dukkha, domanassa..” or the “whole mass of suffering.”

[Author]

Posts