Origin of the phrase "Life is Suffering"

[balaputradeva]

I was wondering this too

[cappuccino]

I was wondering this too

Life is stress, not necessarily suffering

[form]

Every translation there will be limitations. Even the original words will have limitations.

[Bundokji]

I think its more of a conclusion than a categorical statement, especially when death and rebirth get integrated with the concept of life.

[Spiny Norman]

"Life is suffering while craving and ignorance persist"?

[Spiny Norman]

Life is stress, not necessarily suffering.

What's the practical differnce? Stress is unpleasant, isn't it?

[cappuccino]

Life is stress, not necessarily suffering.

What's the practical difference? Stress is unpleasant, isn't it?

Stress is what this teaching is … & its cessation


Just a matter of … emphasis

[Spiny Norman]

Life is stress, not necessarily suffering.

What's the practical difference? Stress is unpleasant, isn't it?

Stress is what this teaching is … & its cessation


Just a matter of … emphasis

I think "stress" is a poor translation of dukkha.

[cappuccino]

I think "stress" is a poor translation of dukkha.

Both formerly and now, it is only stress that I describe, and the cessation of stress.

[Tl21G3lVl]

The Buddha spent half his life teaching people the way to true happiness in this life and the next, in direct opposite to what that phrase implies.

[Spiny Norman]

I think "stress" is a poor translation of dukkha.

Both formerly and now, it is only stress that I describe, and the cessation of stress.

It's still a poor translation of dukkha.

I'd suggest less time quote-mining, and more time studying the suttas.

[cappuccino]

It's still a poor translation of dukkha.

Speak for yourself, you clearly do not understand

[Spiny Norman]

It's still a poor translation of dukkha.

Speak for yourself, you clearly do not understand

Meh.

[Jack19990101]

imo -
Dukkha is - Lack of spontaneity between tanha & satisfaction.
The gap between want it & have it, is dukkha.
The gap can be interpreted many varieties, based on situations. Probably each is with merit when context is supplemented.

If tanha & its satisfaction is spontaneous, there would be no dukkha.
But Dhamma says it is not achievable (dependent origination), hence that is wrong direction.

But there is escape from it. That would be the 2nd truth. Out of topic.

[mjaviem]

imo -
Dukkha is - Lack of spontaneity between tanha & satisfaction.
The gap between want it & have it, is dukkha.
The gap can be interpreted many varieties, based on situations. Probably each is with merit when context is supplemented.

If tanha & its satisfaction is spontaneous, there would be no dukkha.
But Dhamma says it is not achievable (dependent origination), hence that is wrong direction.

But there is escape from it. That would be the 2nd truth. Out of topic.

What you call gap is the very craving. What you call satisfaction of craving is the quenching of craving. There's dukkha when there's craving and it goes away when you stopped craving. It seems even by having what you wanted is not real and pure happiness. It's not going to last. So you are not as happy as possible when having the things you dreamed. This is only lay happiness. Very respectable but there's a better happiness beyond and it seems it can be reached by not craving and not by satisfying our longings.