<p>Obviously as with any non-trivial teaching or practice there is infinite amount of real life situations, and infinite amount of mistakes the students can make.</p>

<p>So while Dharma was presented both in summary and in details by the Buddha, there is always room for explanations about how this teaching should be applied in practical situations, and how to differentiate between mistaken understanding and valid understanding of the teaching.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-10-31T16:32:13.417Z
2019-10-31T16:32:13.417Z
Andriy Volkov
<p>The Buddha is <a href="http://www.buddhanet.net/brahmaviharas/bvd073.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">omniscient</a>. His knowledge is unobstructed. There is no knowledge that is hidden to him once he sets his mind on the subject. The Buddha has no peer except other Sammasambuddha in the past. So what you are saying is technically not possible.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-18T10:11:15.617Z
2018-11-18T10:11:15.617Z
2020-06-17T09:56:10.877Z
Sankha Kulathantille
<p>About the 1st Noble Truth, the Buddha said: "<em>this suffering is to be comprehended</em>". If we question or doubt the completeness of what the Buddha taught, it simply shows we have not comprehended what suffering really is. </p>

<p>The Buddha summarised all suffering as attaching to the five aggregates (as "self"). When the peace &amp; freedom of non-attachment &amp; not-self is discerned, there will be no doubt this is the only way to end suffering, completely. </p>

<p>This said, worldly Buddhism and other religions offer other ways to end suffering, such as believing in life after death. But these faith methods are not completely reliable. </p>

<p>While the non-attachment method is completely reliable when operative, many people can't actually practise it because the "self" instinct can be difficult, often impossible, to remove. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-19T11:25:15.737Z
2018-11-19T11:30:26.337Z
2018-11-19T11:30:26.337Z
Dhamma Dhatu
<p>Many people do not understand the difference between the Path and the Noble Path.
From a child to adult and every person in all walk of life follow the Eightfold Path. Buddha taught the <strong>Noble</strong> Eightfold Path.
Eightfold Path has different variations.</p>

<ul>
<li>Lokiya Eightfold Path</li>
<li>Alokiya Eightfold Path</li>
<li>Run off the mill Eightfold Path</li>
<li>Noble Eightfold Path.</li>
</ul>

<p>Buddha explained all of above but in an indirect way. Many people do not see this.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-18T01:18:10.047Z
2018-11-18T01:26:17.747Z
2018-11-18T01:26:17.747Z
SarathW
<p>Maha Satipattana Sutta has a very detailed definition on the Four Noble Truths, and the first one in more detail. It would be hard to break it down further. One is better off just finding an example for each instead. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-20T15:12:01.363Z
2018-11-20T15:12:01.363Z
Ravindranath Akila
<p>In the parable of the Simsapa leaves in <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.031.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN 56.31</a>, the Buddha took some Simsapa (Indian rosewood) leaves in his hand and said that the leaves in his hand were far less in number than the leaves in the forest. Similarly, he had realized far more than he taught. However, that which he taught is all that is needed for the path to end suffering. That which he did not teach is not relevant to the path to end suffering.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, in <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">DN 16</a>, he declared that he did not hide (in a "closed fist") any teachings from his disciples. He said he did not separate some teachings as being exotic or esoteric.</p>

<p>Based on these statements, we can say that more details regarding the path is unnecessary. Also, since the Shakyamuni Buddha was the last <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/20938/471">Sammasambuddha</a> (or Buddha with full perfection), it is unlikely that anyone else coming after him would know more of the path than he does, unless they too achieve the same level of perfection.</p>

<p>Hence, it is plausible that primarily relying on the Buddha's original words (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhavacana" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Buddhavacana</a> or the Buddha's Words) in most of the <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sutta.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Sutta Pitaka</a> (and the corresponding Mahayana Agamas) is sufficient for understanding his teachings and the path. I say "most", because there are parts of the <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sutta.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Sutta Pitaka</a> which contain teachings or writings from other people e.g. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sariputta" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Sariputta</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%80nanda" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ananda</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maudgalyayana" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Mogallana</a>, elder monks, elder nuns, a few advanced householders etc. Some parts of the Sutta Pitaka like some books in the Khuddaka Nikaya even come from later periods, like the Milindapanha. You can find more scholarly information on the authenticity of the Buddha's original words in the book "<a href="https://ocbs.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/authenticity.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts</a>" by Bhikkhu Sujato and Bhikkhu Brahmali.</p>

<p>But this does not mean that it's wrong to elaborate or expand on the Buddha's teachings, while not contradicting the original teachings. In fact, I think teachers over the ages would definitely try to explain the teachings using new methods and analogies. However, such elaborations or expansions should be considered secondary sources, which are less important compared to the Buddha's original teachings.</p>

<p>Many traditional Theravadins say that the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidhamma_Pitaka" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Abhidhamma</a> was taught by the Buddha, but academic scholars say that this is a later work by disciples. To me, I would consider the Abhidhamma as a secondary source, that explains the Buddha's original teachings in the Sutta Pitaka. The many carefully collated lists in the Abhidhamma are useful.</p>

<p>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visuddhimagga" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Visuddhimagga</a> (or Path of Purification) written by Buddhaghosa in the 5th century in Sri Lanka is another useful secondary source that expands on Buddhist meditation practice and doctrine. It can be downloaded <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>.</p>

<p>Also many traditional Mahayanists say that the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahayana_sutras" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Mahayana sutras</a> were taught by the Buddha in the second and third turning of the wheel, but academic scholars say that these are later works by Mahayana authors. To me, I would consider these as secondary sources too. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagarjuna" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Nagarjuna</a>'s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C5%ABlamadhyamakak%C4%81rik%C4%81" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Mūlamadhyamakakārikā</a> contains an expansion on the Buddha's original definition of emptiness. I tried to analyze the link between Madhyamaka emptiness and Theravada emptiness in <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/28981/471">this question</a>.</p>

<p>Of course, I understand that there will be traditional Theravadins and traditional Mahayanists who will disagree with some of my opinions above.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-18T04:00:09.020Z
2018-11-20T15:41:45.667Z
2018-11-20T15:41:45.667Z
ruben2020
<p>(One of the reasons for asking this question is that I thought that maybe some people needed some extra/other knowledge/insight in order for the Noble Eightfold Path to become more accessible to them.)</p>

<p>Not necessarily to be "better" in knowledge and understanding than the Buddha overall, but to have a better understanding or additional explicit knowledge of some things or see certain things in more detail or accuracy with regards to certain aspects about the way out of suffering, and that may also address particular, "extreme" types of ignorance, mental illness, psychosis.   </p>

<p>To be able to answer other questions related to the way out of suffering that the Buddha was never asked. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-19T13:09:21.670Z
Given your recent edit something like this too might be relevant: [How to explain what Buddhism is?](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/7258/254)
ChrisW
<personal-practice><teaching>
Is it possible and good to know and/or talk about other/more details about the way out of suffering than the Buddha did?
# Is it possible and good to know and/or talk about other/more details about the way out of suffering than the Buddha did?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-11-17)

(One of the reasons for asking this question is that I thought that maybe some people needed some extra/other knowledge/insight in order for the Noble Eightfold Path to become more accessible to them.)

Not necessarily to be "better" in knowledge and understanding than the Buddha overall, but to have a better understanding or additional explicit knowledge of some things or see certain things in more detail or accuracy with regards to certain aspects about the way out of suffering, and that may also address particular, "extreme" types of ignorance, mental illness, psychosis.

To be able to answer other questions related to the way out of suffering that the Buddha was never asked.

**Tags:** personal-practice, teaching

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Given your recent edit something like this too might be relevant: [How to explain what Buddhism is?](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/7258/254)  

---

## 6 answers

### Answer by username_7 on 2018-11-18. Score: 6

In the parable of the Simsapa leaves in [SN 56.31](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.031.than.html), the Buddha took some Simsapa (Indian rosewood) leaves in his hand and said that the leaves in his hand were far less in number than the leaves in the forest. Similarly, he had realized far more than he taught. However, that which he taught is all that is needed for the path to end suffering. That which he did not teach is not relevant to the path to end suffering.

Meanwhile, in [DN 16](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html), he declared that he did not hide (in a "closed fist") any teachings from his disciples. He said he did not separate some teachings as being exotic or esoteric.

Based on these statements, we can say that more details regarding the path is unnecessary. Also, since the Shakyamuni Buddha was the last [Sammasambuddha](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/20938/471) (or Buddha with full perfection), it is unlikely that anyone else coming after him would know more of the path than he does, unless they too achieve the same level of perfection.

Hence, it is plausible that primarily relying on the Buddha's original words ([Buddhavacana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhavacana) or the Buddha's Words) in most of the [Sutta Pitaka](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sutta.html) (and the corresponding Mahayana Agamas) is sufficient for understanding his teachings and the path. I say "most", because there are parts of the [Sutta Pitaka](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sutta.html) which contain teachings or writings from other people e.g. [Sariputta](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sariputta), [Ananda](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%80nanda), [Mogallana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maudgalyayana), elder monks, elder nuns, a few advanced householders etc. Some parts of the Sutta Pitaka like some books in the Khuddaka Nikaya even come from later periods, like the Milindapanha. You can find more scholarly information on the authenticity of the Buddha's original words in the book "[The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts](https://ocbs.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/authenticity.pdf)" by Bhikkhu Sujato and Bhikkhu Brahmali.

But this does not mean that it's wrong to elaborate or expand on the Buddha's teachings, while not contradicting the original teachings. In fact, I think teachers over the ages would definitely try to explain the teachings using new methods and analogies. However, such elaborations or expansions should be considered secondary sources, which are less important compared to the Buddha's original teachings.

Many traditional Theravadins say that the [Abhidhamma](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidhamma_Pitaka) was taught by the Buddha, but academic scholars say that this is a later work by disciples. To me, I would consider the Abhidhamma as a secondary source, that explains the Buddha's original teachings in the Sutta Pitaka. The many carefully collated lists in the Abhidhamma are useful.

The [Visuddhimagga](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visuddhimagga) (or Path of Purification) written by Buddhaghosa in the 5th century in Sri Lanka is another useful secondary source that expands on Buddhist meditation practice and doctrine. It can be downloaded [here](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf).

Also many traditional Mahayanists say that the [Mahayana sutras](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahayana_sutras) were taught by the Buddha in the second and third turning of the wheel, but academic scholars say that these are later works by Mahayana authors. To me, I would consider these as secondary sources too. [Nagarjuna](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagarjuna)'s [Mūlamadhyamakakārikā](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C5%ABlamadhyamakak%C4%81rik%C4%81) contains an expansion on the Buddha's original definition of emptiness. I tried to analyze the link between Madhyamaka emptiness and Theravada emptiness in [this question](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/28981/471).

Of course, I understand that there will be traditional Theravadins and traditional Mahayanists who will disagree with some of my opinions above.


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2019-10-31. Score: 2

Obviously as with any non-trivial teaching or practice there is infinite amount of real life situations, and infinite amount of mistakes the students can make.

So while Dharma was presented both in summary and in details by the Buddha, there is always room for explanations about how this teaching should be applied in practical situations, and how to differentiate between mistaken understanding and valid understanding of the teaching.


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2018-11-18. Score: 2

The Buddha is [omniscient](http://www.buddhanet.net/brahmaviharas/bvd073.htm). His knowledge is unobstructed. There is no knowledge that is hidden to him once he sets his mind on the subject. The Buddha has no peer except other Sammasambuddha in the past. So what you are saying is technically not possible.


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2018-11-19. Score: 0

About the 1st Noble Truth, the Buddha said: "*this suffering is to be comprehended*". If we question or doubt the completeness of what the Buddha taught, it simply shows we have not comprehended what suffering really is.

The Buddha summarised all suffering as attaching to the five aggregates (as "self"). When the peace & freedom of non-attachment & not-self is discerned, there will be no doubt this is the only way to end suffering, completely.

This said, worldly Buddhism and other religions offer other ways to end suffering, such as believing in life after death. But these faith methods are not completely reliable.

While the non-attachment method is completely reliable when operative, many people can't actually practise it because the "self" instinct can be difficult, often impossible, to remove.


---

### Answer by username_5 on 2018-11-18. Score: 0

Many people do not understand the difference between the Path and the Noble Path.
From a child to adult and every person in all walk of life follow the Eightfold Path. Buddha taught the **Noble** Eightfold Path.
Eightfold Path has different variations.

* Lokiya Eightfold Path
* Alokiya Eightfold Path
* Run off the mill Eightfold Path
* Noble Eightfold Path.

Buddha explained all of above but in an indirect way. Many people do not see this.


---

### Answer by username_6 on 2018-11-20. Score: 0

Maha Satipattana Sutta has a very detailed definition on the Four Noble Truths, and the first one in more detail. It would be hard to break it down further. One is better off just finding an example for each instead.


---

