Saṃyutta Nikāya · Discourse 24.10

The Cosmos Is Not Eternal

Asassatadiṭṭhisutta — Sotāpattivagga

Setting
Sāvatthī
Speakers
The Buddha addressing the mendicants
Form
The second of the ten undetermined questions, paired directly against SN 24.9, with compression one step further advanced
Length
~1 minute to read
Northern parallel
A rough counterpart may exist in the Chinese Saṃyukta-āgama (T99), though this reading guide does not assert a specific matching sutra number
Difficulty
★☆☆☆☆ — brief and formulaic, best read immediately after SN 24.9

Why this discourse

The direct paired opposite of SN 24.9: where that discourse claimed the cosmos is eternal, this one claims it is not — the second of the ten undetermined questions, and the point where the source text's compression tightens further still, collapsing even the opening aggregate application into a single elided line.

Reading guide

The mirror claim

"The cosmos is not eternal" — the bare negation of SN 24.9's claim, examined by the identical diagnostic machinery. The two discourses are best read as a single pair: not because either resolves the question, but because both rest on exactly the same grasping.

Compression tightens a further notch

Where SN 24.9 still spelled out "when form exists, because of grasping form..." before eliding the remaining aggregates, this discourse compresses even that opening line to "when form exists..." followed immediately by an ellipsis — one further step in the gradual thinning this vagga will continue through its remaining discourses.

Undetermined precisely because both poles fail identically

That eternalism and its negation are diagnosed by exactly the same mechanism is itself a kind of answer: whichever pole a person is drawn to, the attraction runs through the same impermanent aggregates. Neither claim is being defended or refuted on its own terms — both are being traced to a common root.

Setting up the finite/infinite pair to follow

SN 24.9 and 24.10 establish this vagga's pattern for the remaining eight undetermined questions: paired opposites, each pair sharing one root diagnosis, compression increasing with each successive pair as the pattern becomes fully established.

Key terms

asassato loko — the cosmos is not eternal — this discourse's claim, the direct negation of SN 24.9's
upādāya... abhinivissa — grasping... and insisting on — this vagga's standing two-condition formula, unchanged across both poles of the pair
kaṅkhā pahīnā — doubt given up — this vagga's own criterion for stream-entry
sotāpanno avinipātadhammo niyato sambodhiparāyano — a stream-enterer, not liable to be reborn in the underworld, assured, destined for awakening — this vagga's standing conclusion
peyyāla — an elision mark — used here to compress the aggregate catechism further than SN 24.9's own already-thinned version

The text

The complete discourse: the negated claim, the compressed catechism, and the stream-enterer conclusion. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).

§1At Sāvatthī. “Mendicants, when what exists, because of grasping what and insisting on what, does the view arise: ‘The cosmos is not eternal’?” “Our teachings are rooted in the Buddha. …”

§2“When form exists …” … “But by not grasping what’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, would such a view arise?” “No, sir.”

§3“When a noble disciple has given up doubt regarding these six grounds, and has given up doubt in suffering, its origin, its cessation, and the practice that leads to its cessation, they’re called a noble disciple who is a stream-enterer, not liable to be reborn in the underworld, assured, destined for awakening.”

· · ·

Self-check quiz

Ten questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.

Question 1 of 10
What claim does this discourse examine?
Correct: A. The direct negation of SN 24.9's claim.
Question 2 of 10
How does this discourse relate to SN 24.9?
Correct: A. Both claims rest on exactly the same grasping.
Question 3 of 10
What happens to the source text's compression in this discourse compared to SN 24.9?
Correct: A. One further step in the gradual thinning this vagga will continue.
Question 4 of 10
What does it mean that eternalism and its negation are diagnosed by the same mechanism?
Correct: A. Whichever pole a person is drawn to, the attraction runs through the same impermanent aggregates.
Question 5 of 10
What pattern do SN 24.9 and 24.10 together establish for the remaining undetermined questions?
Correct: A. This vagga's template for its remaining eight undetermined-question discourses.
Question 6 of 10
Where is this discourse set?
Correct: A. Matching the setting of most of this book's discourses.
Question 7 of 10
What pair of questions follows immediately after this one?
Correct: A. SN 24.11 and 24.12, the next pair in this vagga's run.
Question 8 of 10
What does this discourse's conclusion certify?
Correct: A. This vagga's standing stream-enterer formula, unchanged regardless of the view.
Question 9 of 10
Why are these ten questions traditionally called "undetermined"?
Correct: A. Famous elsewhere in the Canon (e.g. MN 63) as questions left deliberately unresolved.
Question 10 of 10
How many total undetermined questions does this traditional set comprise?
Correct: A. This discourse is only the second of the full set of ten.
Answered 0 of 10 · Correct 0