Buddha’s question about human suffering must first be understood by recognizing where/who this question was coming from. Most people imagine Buddha’s question of suffering from the standpoint that Buddha was a man who witnessed suffering all around him, then, one day, questioned, “What is the cause of human suffering?” STOP
He did not view daily suffering in the ways which common man does, because he was a prince who lived in a palace. Everything had been handed to him, so this suffering was a novelty to him, frankly. Buddha’s innocence, or lack of general human interaction, does not disqualify him from announcing accurate proclamations; however, his basis for questioning may have suffered, itself, by way of being on a different tier than common human interaction.
Concluding that human suffering is the direct result of attachment to desire renders, “suffering,” into a narrow category. Physical anguish and mental upheaval are intricate, therefore, one notion could not accurately simplify to describe such suffering.
To say, “Human suffering is simply the result of desire; case closed!” would be more than a temporal error in the collective cognition of man, but also a grave prophesy for mankind, as it leaves the Great Question answered; and all wise men know that one of the joys of life is asking the question which nobody knows the answer to.
Is the end-game to want nothing. Is not wanting part of human enjoyment?
If you desire to never know: Game On!
If you desire to know: Game Over.
After coming to his conclusion, did Buddha suffer as any result?