Question :

The Buddha offers a specific diagnosis of the suffering that is part of human
existence. Explain the Buddha's diagnosis. Does this diagnosis ring true to you, or has
the Buddha ignored some aspect of human life, or made some other mistake? Offer
two specific reasons or experiences that support your answer, and explain how they
support it.
Answer:
To answer this question, I shall first give a description of first two noble truths as
they represent what the Buddha offers as the specific diagnosis of the suffering that is
part of human existence. I will then argument in favour of this diagnosis being true.
Here, I shall describe the first two noble truths.
First noble truth defines what is suffering. Second noble truth specifies the origin or
cause of suffering. As per translations from Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta by
Piyadassi Thera1, Buddha addressed five monks (bhikkhus) in the Deer Park at
Isipatana (the Resort of Seers) near Varanasi (Benares) and said:
"The Noble Truth of Suffering (dukkha), monks, is this: Birth is suffering, aging is
suffering, sickness is suffering, death is suffering, association with the unpleasant is
suffering, dissociation from the pleasant is suffering, not to receive what one desires is
suffering in brief the five aggregates subject to grasping are suffering."
"The Noble Truth of the Origin (cause) of Suffering is this: It is this craving (thirst)
which produces re-becoming (rebirth) accompanied by passionate greed, and finding
fresh delight now here, and now there, namely craving for sense pleasure, craving for
existence and craving for non-existence (self-annihilation)."
Buddha further talks about three phases of first and second noble truth respectively as
per follows.
Quoting from translations of Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta by anamoli Thera2, the
three phases for first noble truth are:
1. "Suffering, as a noble truth, is this."
2. "This suffering, as a noble truth, can be diagnosed."
3. "This suffering, as a noble truth, has been diagnosed."
Similarly three phases of second noble truth are:
1. "The origin of suffering, as a noble truth, is this"
2. "This origin of suffering, as a noble truth, can be abandoned."
3. "This origin of suffering, as a noble truth, has been abandoned."
Before giving the examples to support that this diagnose of suffering is correct, it is
important to understand that these two noble truths should not be seen as absolute. In
teachings of Ajahn Sumedho3 "You can see that the First Noble Truth is not an
absolute statement because of the Fourth Noble Truth, which is the way of nonsuffering. You cannot have absolute suffering and then have a way out of it, can you?"
Hence examples discussed below may seen to be not equally applicable to all. In fact
Ajahn Sumedho3 says "As we awaken to this dukkha, we begin to find the way out".

Hence a person with deeper understanding of suffering in all three phases mentioned
by Buddha may handle these examples in better way and may not suffer as such.
None the less, as my first example, I shall use the experience of a person (our
subject) looking for a partner to support that it is true that dissociation with pleasant,
association with unpleasant and further clinging to pleasant makes them suffer.
Suppose a person looking for a partner comes across another person that they like.
They start dating each other but it does not work. The subject liked the person and
was looking forward to relationship, it would be quite saddening for the person to
dissociate with the relationship. On the other side if subject got into long term
relationship with someone they liked in the start but later as they spend more time
together into relationship, persons liking may fade away. But their joint commitment
may have grown meanwhile like they bought property together or had a baby which
makes walking away from relationship harder. Here association with unpleasant or a
person that subject does not like may cause them suffering. On a subtler level,
suppose the subject finds a partner of choice and their relationship grows well and
there liking increases, still subject may develop strong craving for other person and
the relationship, leading to fear of loosing that person which would again lead to
suffering of the subject.
As my second example to support Buddha's correct diagnosis of suffering we may
look at the experience of an employee in a new job that they like initially because of
the challenges and learning involved in the job. As they learn more and more and job
tasks start becoming mundane, they start loosing interest in it and slowly the same job
becomes unpleasant. It may be because in start they have some specific experience of
the challenge and pleasant feeling of successfully overcoming it. But the employee if
develop craving for this feeling of success over new challenges, it may not be forever
repeatable. In fact their is impermanence attached to everything and craving for a
pleasant experience can not be fulfilled for ever that leads to suffering.
Importance of impermanence as central theme to understand the noble truth of
suffering is clear from these lines mentioned in Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
translated by anamoli Thera2. where Kondaa describes his understanding of
Buddha's teachings as
"Whatever is subject to arising is all subject to cessation."
At which Buddha says: "Kondaa knows! Kondaa knows!," and that is how that
venerable one acquired the name, Aa-Kondaa Kondaa who knows.
Sickness and ageing limits a person's capability and can be intuitively related to
suffering. The subtle part of the noble truth of suffering is this: people attach to or
averse from things ignoring their impermanence.
Before I give reasons in support of these diagnosis being correct, I shall like to make
one observation:
Buddha's teachings can not be fully appreciated by theoretical discussion and practical
use of teachings beyond mere intellectual knowledge is a key theme.
As an example, specifying the three phases explicitly for each of noble truth, Buddha
lays importance on developing deep understanding beyond theoretical knowledge.

Looking at three phases of first noble truth it is clear that it is not sufficient to be able
to define suffering but to really understand the teaching of first noble truth
the subject (student) has to have the experience that develops the understanding that
suffering can be diagnosed in real world. Taking that practice further the subject also
need to develop real understanding where they have actually diagnosed the suffering.
As an analogy a medical student may read a book and learn about characteristics of 10
different diseases. The student has thus theoretical knowledge to talk about those
diseases but that knowledge is still not of real practical significance. In second phase
student also needs to understand that there are specific tests like blood test for
example through which all the diseases can be diagnosed. Further progression through
third phase would enable a student to look at a blood test and specify the exact disease
for patient. Hence only after progressing through all the 3 phases can a practitioner
claim that they understand the first noble truth.
Impermanence:
Now during this utterance, there arose in the venerable Kondaa the spotless,
immaculate vision of the True Idea: "Whatever is subject to arising is all subject to
cessation."