The Buddha’s wrong question
The question which the archaic Sakya (i.e. Scythian) Buddha asked was: “What is the cause (and what is the ending) of dukkha”, whereby dukkha can be variously translated to mean: unpleasantness, sorrow, suffering, distress, dissatisfaction and so on.
The question which the archaic Sakya Buddha would have asked had he been a more discrete observer, and which would have satisfied his actual question, would have been: “What purpose does dukka serve?”
The naïve and wholly insufficient answer achieved by the archaic Sakya Buddha, and which triggered his enlightenment and subsequent joy, was: “Dukkha is caused by impermanence! (later, and even less sufficient, by craving)”. What extraordinary nonsense, but a golden herring that served as the phoney goal of a vast (misdirected) religion.
The far more awakened understanding of dukkha given (by the modern Buddha, Maitreya) is: “Dukkha signals (system’s performance) failure.”
Dukkha is a warning signal (or symptom, actually a syndrome of sensory functions), hence an essential human resource in that it compels a change of performance (and with it behaviour).1 Were dukkha not a vital self-regulation means, evolution would have eliminated it long ago.
Later Buddhist morality stated: ‘Dukkha ends when craving ends.’ For instance, when craving is satisfied and which is signalled with sukkah.
Modern Buddhist behaviour theory states: ‘Dukkha ends when failure ends.’
1 … Viz. “Suffering is a great teacher!”; “No pain, no gain!”