I keep returning to a small question from the early suttas: when a teaching is repeated, does it become a map, a habit, or a tool? In my own reading, the Buddha often uses an image only so the listener can test it against experience. That test feels more important than the image itself.
For example, when the texts speak of rebirth as conditioned arising, I am drawn to the process: craving, grasp, becoming. I do not need to settle every metaphysical detail to notice that my mind repeats a pattern. Yet I also wonder if some readers will experience that as too narrow, while others will say it is the whole point.
What do you think? Can a teaching remain useful when the listener changes, or does it need a fixed interpretation to keep its shape?