Dear Piya, Nina and friends,

:-) I support Piya's proposition in a way that I believe the right
understanding of Buddha's teaching is better achieved by cross-
studying the suttas, then understanding the suttas from the
commentaries. However, we have also seen that the commentaries
provide good references too. For example, as Nina pointed out
before, the commentary to Rahulovada Sutta reference the
Mahahatthipadopama Sutta. However, I believe we should not stop here
but go beyond what the commentaries provided.

As for Newton and Einstein, Newton was among the line of scientists
belonging to an older "era". His formulation of many physical laws
were later challenged, modified and expanded by people like Maxwell
and Einstein. The reason was Newton did not consider many factors
and conditions not known during his time. In the modern "era",
scientific thoughts having taken a great leap forward allow Einstein
to provide a more general explanation of the physical phenomenon.
However, Newton's formulations still holds, as a special case to the
more general formulations, on certain pre-assumptions.

This led me to think of the concept of karma: factors and conditions
give rise to phenomena. I would say it is the most general law in
understanding the observations we make in living and non-living
things. Interestingly, there is recently an article that explain
rebirth analogous to electric and magnetic forces:

http://www.buddhistnews.tv/current/re-birth-080903.php

metta,
Yong Peng

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Piya Tan wrote:
If Geiger is like Newton, then we have Einstein--but then again, who
would stand on Einstein's shoulders?
I try not to give "final" answers as there is so much more learn
from the Suttas themselves with or without the Commentaries and
Buddhaghosa.