Abhidhamma: Is craving really the samudaya of suffering?

SN 22.5 says:

And what, bhikkhus, is the origin (samudaya) of form? What is the origin of feeling? What is the origin of perception? What is the origin of volitional formations? What is the origin of consciousness? Here, bhikkhus, one seeks delight, one welcomes, one remains holding. Delight... is clinging. With one’s clinging as condition, existence comes to be; with existence as condition, birth; with birth as condition, aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair come to be. Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering.

SN 56.11 says:

And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination (samudaya) of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming.

AN 3.61 says:

"And what is the noble truth of the origination (samudaya) of stress?

"From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then old age & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.

"This is called the noble truth of the origination of stress.

MN 28 says:

Now this has been said by the Blessed One: “One who sees dependent origination sees the Dhamma; one who sees the Dhamma sees dependent origination.” And these five aggregates affected by clinging are dependently arisen. The desire, indulgence, inclination, and holding based on these five aggregates affected by clinging is the origin of suffering.

SN 56.11 says:

In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful

It appears for suffering to originate (samudaya), there must be attachment or becoming because it is the attachment that is suffering.

Therefore, it appears craving (alone) cannot be the samudaya of suffering.

In other words, the Suttas teach "delight is the root of suffering" (MN 1) and "delight is attachment" (MN 38; SN 22.5). In short if there is no delight and no attachment, there can be no "arising" of suffering.

The Abhidhamma knowingly says the 2nd Noble Truth according to Sutta is:

...

https://suttacentral.net/vb4/en/thittila

It's not "Abhidhamma knowingly says" because this is from Sutta directly.

The Abhidhamma then says the 2nd Noble Truth according to Abhidhamma is:

It's not "the 2nd Noble Truth according to Abhidhamma" because according to the canon name "Vibhanga - Description of Sutta" meaning "AbhidhammaNaya is describing Suttanta".

So, it's like "the 2nd Noble Truth in Suttanta should be described in more (abhi) detail (dhamma).

1. What is the meaning of the Pali word 'samudaya' according to Sutta?

The meaning of Suttanta is described by all descriptions in AbhidhammaNaya, depending on each sutta's context. The tipitaka memorizer can see all of these meaning in difference sutta, but the reader can't.

So, these descriptions from AbhidhammaNaya is the answer of the first question.

Therein what is the cause of suffering? Craving. This is called the cause of suffering.

Therein what is the cause of suffering? Craving and the remaining corruptions. This is called the cause of suffering.

Therein what is the cause of suffering? Craving, the remaining corruptions and the remaining unskilful dhammas. This is called the cause of suffering.

Therein what is the cause of suffering? Craving, the remaining corruptions, the remaining unskilful dhammas and the three skilful roots that are objects of the defilements. This is called the cause of suffering.

Therein what is the cause of suffering? Craving, the remaining corruptions, the remaining unskilful dhammas, the three skilful roots that are objects of the defilements, the remaining skilful dhammas that are objects of the defilements. This is called the cause of suffering.

Next.

2. Can craving alone be the 'samudaya' of suffering according to Sutta?

This kind of weird question occur when the reader never care the name of this canon "Vibhanga - Description of Sutta" which meaning "AbhidhammaNaya is describing Suttanta".

Wrong view reading is wrong view reading. Watchdog without the truth is wrong reading with wrong view.

What is Vibhanga?

Vibhanga means "Description of Sutta".

What angles which the reader should think of while reading SuttantaNaya is described in AbhidhammaNaya.

So, SuttantaNaya is same same as AbhidhammaNaya.

But the very weird question like this question will be created unlimited when the readers try to use the wrong view to distort SuttantaNaya to be not same same as AbhidhammaNaya.

That's why when the name of this canon is "Description of Sutta", but many reader often think it's the conflict book between suttanta and abhidhamma.

Because they didn't read the canon follow the name "Description of Sutta", but the readers often read the canon follow their view "Abhidhamma must be lacking with Sutta, others view such as 'abhidhamma is same as sutta' is wrong". And it is because the reader never care the name of this canon "Vibhanga - Description of Sutta" which meaning "AbhidhammaNaya is describing Suttanta".

What is the meaning of the Pali word 'samudaya' according to Sutta?

SN 56.11 says,

Idaṁ kho pana, bhikkhave, dukkhasamudayaṁ ariyasaccaṁ

That's translated,

Now this is the noble truth of the origin of suffering.

It's also translated

arising of suffering

The PTS Dictionary gives it as ...

Samudaya Samudaya [saŋ+udaya]

1. rise, origin D i.17; ii.33, 308; iii.227; A i.263 (kamma˚); Vin i.10; Sn p. 135; It 16 (samuddaya metri causa) etc. dukkha˚ the origin of ill, the second ariya-sacca, e. g. D iii.136; A i.177; Vism 495 (where samudaya is expld in its parts as sam+ u+aya); VbhA 124.
2. bursting forth, effulgence (pabhā˚) J i.83.
3. produce, revenue D i.227.

... where udaya has a definition like

Udaya Udaya [fr. ud + i, cp. udeti] rise, growth; increment, increase; income, revenue, interest

Can craving alone be the 'samudaya' of suffering according to Sutta?

I think it says that the origin is craving -- not "craving alone".

But it also declares that the cessation of suffering (dukkhanirodha) is cessation of craving, in the third noble truth.

With respect to the second half of your question, item 2, craving is one of the steps in dependent origination, which has numerous steps. That is how it can be claimed that craving always leads to suffering. Not because it is the only link but because once the craving step happens, some suffering is inevitable. One of the steps, as alluded to above is “birth”, or creation, or “leading to new existence” as it says in the quote in your question. In this context it is birth of identification, birth of a me or a mine. (Technically this is broken down further into coming into existence and birth, beyond the scope of this context).

Importantly craving is the location for breaking the chain. That’s why the focus on it. In this region of the links we have: sense contact, feeling (which has a feeling tone), craving (more of a raw passion or desire, or aversion), clinging (thinking about it and making it a mental thing, even to the point of obsessing) and then birth. To break the chain there at craving we need to lose ignorance though and see the three marks in everything that arises so that craving doesn’t form due to our wisdom. There can still be contact and feeling and feeling tone, but we let it go there. If it stops there, then the last part, “sickness and death” of the me or mine that was developed for that craving (ie suffering) won’t come. Note that I’m only discussing dependent origination because it reflects on the question, and discussing it only enough to answer your question. There are other, earlier links I didnt mention.

That is the sense in which it can be claimed craving “causes” suffering. If we can break (or even weaken) the craving on a single run through dependent arisings, we reduce suffering. If we can stop craving from ever developing (end the “builder of the house himself”) then we can stop all suffering. So it reflects back to the four noble truths.