On Pali Canon only Sola Scriptura

Discussion
1

Is it possible that we have lost a considerable amount of early material that was never collected in the Theravada Canon that was preserved in other canons and is perfectly valid?

Also assuming something isn’t early material, does it stop being valid for use?

1 Like
2

Of course. The Canon did not fall from the sky. The Suttas were first memorized and then transmitted orally before being written down.

Tradition says that this all happened very quickly. But from a historical-critical perspective, I think there’s room for doubt.

3

I am wondering if beings that are not described in the Pali suttas can be considered real.

I know that in Sri Lanka and Burma, there is a being called Lokanatha that is venerated.

4

Well, I haven’t seen an @Aahan mentioned in the suttas, but I have some confidence that he is real. Or at least as real as any of us. :blush:

3 Likes
5

Oops, I meant deities and the like. My mistake.

1 Like
6

Well, I was actually trying to make a point. There are a lot of true things that aren’t listed in the suttas. Just because a specific god is not listed doesn’t mean they aren’t real.

7

Completely agree. That said, investigation of such deities may in the end be unprofitable and it is one of the natures of the Dhamma to be a refuge, possibly from the fruitlessness of exactly such endavours.