The Buddha and the householder Upāli of Nāḷandā — not the Vinaya-elder Upāli, despite the shared name
Form
A peyyāla stub, its own approach formula further elided with a mid-sentence ellipsis, its cross-reference resolved in translation to SN 35.124 specifically
Length
under a 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
★☆☆☆☆ — another short stub, this time worth reading alongside its own cross-reference
Why this discourse
This vagga's third discourse asks the same full-extinguishment question a third time, from a householder named Upāli — a name this project's readers will already associate with the Vinaya elder Upāli, though nothing here identifies him with that far more famous figure. What makes this stub worth its own page, rather than a footnote to SN 35.125, is where its own editorial pointer lands: not “the previous discourse” (which would be SN 35.125, itself a stub), but explicitly SN 35.124 by name, in Sujato's translation. The compiler, or the translator resolving the compiler's shorthand, reached past the nearer stub to point at the nearest full telling instead.
Reading guide
A pointer that skips the nearer discourse
SN 35.125 sits directly before this one, but it is itself only a stub — pointing a reader there for “the full wording” would simply hand them another pointer. Sujato's translation resolves this discourse's own generic Pali instruction (“as in the previous discourse”) to SN 35.124 by name, the nearest discourse that actually spells the catechism out.
An additional layer of elision
Even the approach formula is compressed further here than in SN 35.124 or SN 35.125: “went up to the Buddha … and asked him” folds the sitting down, bowing, and greeting into a single mid-sentence ellipsis, a small additional compression layered on top of the peyyāla stub itself.
A second Upāli, not the Vinaya elder
The name Upāli belongs, most famously in this tradition, to the monk foremost in expert knowledge of monastic discipline. This discourse's Upāli is instead a householder of Nāḷandā, entirely unconnected in the text to that other figure — a genuine name collision worth flagging rather than silently passing over.
Key terms
upāli gahapati — the householder Upāli — this discourse's questioner, sharing a name with, but textually unconnected to, the Vinaya elder Upāli
nāḷandāyaṃ...pāvārikambavane — at Nāḷandā, in Pāvārika's mango grove — a setting this book has not used before
…pe… — the peyyāla ellipsis mark, here compressing even the approach-and-greeting formula, not only the catechism itself
yathā purimasuttantaṃ — “as in the previous discourse” — the Pali root's generic instruction, resolved in Sujato's translation to a named target (SN 35.124) rather than left as a bare pointer to whatever precedes it
tatiyaṃ — “third” — this discourse's own closing colophon
The text
The discourse exactly as short as the source leaves it, including its own compressed approach formula and editorial instruction. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).
§1At one time the Buddha was staying near Nāḷandā in Pāvārika’s mango grove. Then the householder Upāli went up to the Buddha … and asked him, “What is the cause, sir, what is the reason why some sentient beings are not fully extinguished in this very life? What is the cause, sir, what is the reason why some sentient beings are fully extinguished in this very life?” … (Tell in full as in SN 35.124.)
· · ·
Self-check quiz
5 questions. Click an answer to see immediate feedback. No score is recorded — this is for your own checking.
Question 1 of 5
In Sujato's translation, which discourse does this stub's own editorial note explicitly resolve its cross-reference to?
Correct: A. Reaching past the nearer stub (SN 35.125) to the nearest full telling instead.
Question 2 of 5
Why would pointing to SN 35.125 instead have been unhelpful?
Correct: A. A pointer to a pointer would not actually supply the missing content.
Question 3 of 5
What additional compression appears in this discourse beyond the catechism itself being elided?
Correct: A. “Went up to the Buddha … and asked him,” compressing sitting down, bowing, and greeting.
Question 4 of 5
How is this discourse's questioner, the householder Upāli, related to the famous Vinaya-elder Upāli?
Correct: A. A genuine name collision this reading guide flags rather than passing over silently.
Question 5 of 5
What does this discourse's own closing colophon mark it as?
