What do Birth, Age, and Death mean in the first noble truth? Below is from Ariyapariyesana Sutta


  "Monks, there are these two searches: ignoble search &amp; 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 &amp; children... men &amp; women slaves...
  goats &amp; sheep... fowl &amp; pigs... elephants, cattle, horses, &amp; mares...
  gold &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; children... men &amp; women slaves... goats &amp; sheep... fowl &amp; pigs... elephants, cattle, horses, &amp; mares... gold &amp; 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 &amp; silver is there? And why Birth, Age, Death are treated as Dukkha?
Here, "X is subject to birth, aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement" - means that X has beginning and end, that X changes with time and slowly falls apart, that X depends on external conditions to be just right for its existence, - and that therefore X is not 100% reliable, so you can't use X as foundation for building 100% stable peace and happiness. That X is never really what it looks like, so if you build your happiness on top of X, it will betray and disappoint you. Even if association with X may seem like bringing happiness on the short term, on the long term it will definitely bring eventual suffering. That's what this means.

Gold and silver are there as examples of worldly pursuits and worldly possessions. No matter how much you have, you can't buy happiness, can't buy health, and can't buy eternal life. At their best they can only bring intermittent short-term happiness mixed with troubles and pain, ending in eventual destruction.

So Birth here is coming together of any form (samskara) - and Aging-and-Death is its falling apart. Bhava is the continuity and cohesiveness we imagine in between the two.

Births and Deaths are not dukkha if there is no attachment: craving, grasping, denying - either "for" or "against". Attachment, in turn, comes from getting stuck on a certain mental context. If you stop getting stuck you can learn to be free. This is what they call Unbinding.

Not being stuck means things are just such, regardless of births and deaths. Being wrong against some definition of right is the nature of dukkha. Being just such is the nature of peace.