thanks again. I am no expert, but, as a Buddhist, would like to share
my humble personal opinion, actually wild guesses, on this issue. In
all aspects, I consider myself more readily open to new suggestions.
I have read that it is possible that the literature body that now
known as the Tipitaka was not formed at the First Council. I think it
is possible that certain suttas were put to writings earlier than
others. For example, the Sutta Nipata is currently considered to be
one of the earliest written Buddhist scriptures, earlier than the
Nikayas. There are also books which are not directly from the Buddha,
for example, the Dhammapada is just a compilation of important
Buddha's sayings in verses. There are also suttas scattered
throughout the Nikayas which are not expounded by the Buddha but his
disciples, chiefly Sariputta. Such suttas are however orthodox and so
became part of the canon. Most of these findings we can accept, the
tricky part is that of Jataka. Orthodox it may be, but many may find
certain things hard to accept on face values. In countless of
lifetimes past, there is no doubt that the Buddha had been born as
animals. However, for animals that exhibit qualities that are so
human-like, or qualities surpassing that of an average person makes
it hard to believe at times. What actually makes Jataka appealing to
me is the intelligence behind the story to bring out the message on
moral values, not whether the animal-hero was Buddha in one of His
past life. This is probably something useful for Buddhist/dhamma
teachers who need a constant source of inspiration to make their
classes interesting. This I think is another way we can appreciate
the Jataka.