14 questions left unanswered

I am questioning myself and my practice of answering questions and was stopped by the following website. http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/archives/sutra/level4_deepening_understanding_path/interferences/fourteen_questions_which_buddha_rem.html > There are fourteen unspecified points (lung-du ma-bstan-pa bcu-bzhi), > which are points about which Buddha did not specify an answer when > asked. Often this set of fourteen is referred to as the “fourteen > questions to which Buddha remained silent.” > > The Mahayana Version To those who believe in a true findably existent > “me” or “self” (bdag, Skt. atman) and a true findably existent > universe, Buddha did not answer when they asked are the “I” or the > “self” and the universe: > > eternal, not eternal, since they undergo gross impermanence at the > time of their destruction, as both, in the sense that some beings and > their environments, like the Creator Brahma and his heaven, are > eternal; while all else, such as his creations, are not eternal and > end at the time of their destruction, neither, since it is impossible > to know? Are “I’s” or “selves” and the universe: > > finite, infinite, both finite and infinite, in the sense that limited > beings (sentient beings) are infinite in number, but the universe is > finite in size, neither, since it is impossible to know? Does the “I” > or the “self” of a Buddha: > > continue to exist after death, not continue after death, both, in the > sense that the body does not continue, but the life-force (srog) does, > neither? Buddha did not answer these because there is no such thing > as a true findably existent “me” or “ self” for either limited beings > (sentient beings) or a Buddha, and no such thing as a true findably > existent universe. Therefore, there can be no question whether such > things are eternal or not eternal, or finite or infinite. It is like > asking do rabbit-horns, turtle-hair or chicken-lips last forever or > only a limited time. If Buddha said the “me,” and so on are eternal, > these people would fall to the position of eternalism. If he said they > are not eternal, they would fall to the position of nihilism, since > they would not understand his answer. Therefore, it was more skillful > not to specify an answer at all. > > To those who believe in a true findably existent body and life-force, > Buddha did not answer when they asked are the body and life-force: > > the same entity, totally separate and different entities? He remained > silent for a similar reason, since they would only misunderstand > anything he said. The question is in 2 parts, but they are really part of the same question of how questions and answers benefit our practice. A) Do you agree that the Buddha did not address these points in his sermons? (B) How does this questioning and answering aid our practice that moves toward awakening and what benefit can be derived from asking the type of questions we ask and answering the type of questions we answer?