Hello all,
Some people question the commentaries written by Elders (Theras). But the suttas were written and codified by Elders.
One of the people who personally heard from the Buddha didn't want to learn that kind of suttas.
“Friend Purāna,” the elders said to him, “the Teaching and Discipline have been recited together by the elder monks. Please submit yourself to this recitation.”
“Friends,” he replied, “the Teaching and Discipline are well-recited by the elders. But in the way I have heard them in the Exalted One’s presence, in the way that I have received them in his presence, thus will I bear it in mind.” — Cūlavagga XI,l,11 (ii,288-9)
This is not surprising since the suttas are more like "short-notes". Unfortunately a lot of detail may and has been missing. This is why it may be important for commentaries to fill in all the missing details.
For example in MN35 sutta gives it strait-away that suttas omit perhaps most of what was said by the Buddha.
Saccaka, the son of Nigantha, a clever disputant, considered wise by many lived in Vesàli. He would go about Vesàli saying. I
do not see a recluse, a brahmin, a leader of a crowd, a teacher of a crowd, or one acknowledging he is perfect and rightfully enlightened not shivering, trembling and sweating when invited to a dispute by me. Even a lifeless pillar drawn to a dispute by me would shiver and tremble, so what of a human being.
...Like a strong man taking a sheep by its long fleece, would pull it and drag it about. Or like a strong brewer of liqueur submerging a huge crater in a deep pond, would shake it about, and holding it by the ears would shake it about. In the same manner we would pull and drag about the recluse Gotama in a dispute. Like an elephant of sixty cubits, descending a deep pond, would enjoy the game of washing hemp. We would enjoy the game of washing hemp with the recluse Gotama.
http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/ ... ta-e1.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And yet Saccaka, such a great debater, was easily refuted by the few sentences (of "arguments") written in the sutta. I think that there was a lot more said than written in the sutta.
Basically the Buddha said: "Does a king, a ruler, has power over his kingdom?" Yes. Do you, Aggivessana (Saccaka), have power over your 5 aggregates? No.
And then Buddha has said the standart block of
is this aggregate permanent or impermanent? Impermanent. Is what impermanent happiness or suffering? Suffering. Is what impermanent and suffering fit to be regarded as Self? No.
Again, neither does this block would convince all smart Indians (some held ideas that Self was impermanent and some held it was suffering.)
So obviously there was a lot said between the Buddha and Saccaka than written in the sutta.
Thus of course the later detailed commentaries may contain a lot of "new" information , not because it is "new", but because it wasn't written down in the suttas by the Elders.
With best wishes,
Alex
