Below is from Ariyapariyesana Sutta
"Monks, there are these two searches: ignoble search & noble search. And what is ignoble search? There is the case where a person, being subject himself to birth, seeks [happiness in] what is likewise subject to birth. Being subject himself to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement, he seeks [happiness in] what is likewise subject to illness... death... sorrow... defilement.
"And what may be said to be subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement? Spouses & children... men & women slaves... goats & sheep... fowl & pigs... elephants, cattle, horses, & mares... gold & silver
[2]
are subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement. Subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement are these acquisitions, and one who is tied to them, infatuated with them, who has totally fallen for them, being subject to birth, seeks what is likewise subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement. This is ignoble search."And what is the noble search? There is the case where a person, himself being subject to birth, seeing the drawbacks of birth, seeks the unborn, unexcelled rest from the yoke: Unbinding. Himself being subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement, seeing the drawbacks of aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement, seeks the aging-less, illness-less, deathless, sorrow-less, undefiled, unexcelled rest from the yoke: Unbinding. This is the noble search.
When this is closely read, it seems the word Birth
which is relevant to Buddha's noble search (and this comes in the first Noble Truth of Dukkha as well) is not about birth from a mother -- because if it is, then how come the gold & silver
are there?
Although this footnote 2 says ...
The Burmese, Sri Lankan, and PTS editions of the Canon exclude gold and silver from the list of objects subject to illness, death, and sorrow, apparently on the grounds that they themselves do not grow ill, die, or feel sorrow.
... however it's not excluded in Sri Lankan editions of the Canon, no it is not. And who can do such a change? Only Buddha or Arhat only can understand this totally, isn't it?
And in the last paragraph, it's very clear that noble search is concluded to unexcelled rest from the yoke: Unbinding
. Is it unbinding from birth? Yes (because that's told). But birth of what? it's not the someone's birth is it? It should be birth of Yoke.
And this yoke is generated on the mentioned objects (Spouses & children... men & women slaves... goats & sheep... fowl & pigs... elephants, cattle, horses, & mares... gold & silver
) thinking they are worth or nice.
Then what we should think: Birth is dukkha, or Yoke is dukkha? Because birth, ageing or death can be a pleasurable things for some people, while some other people suffer (Dukkha
) on that (e.g. death of a terrorist is not a suffer, birth of a baby is not a suffer to his parents, ageing is not a suffer to 17 years old boy...)
What do you think, am I mistaken on this? If so please explain why the gold & silver is there? And why Birth, Age, Death are treated as Dukkha?