Rājagaha, at the Bamboo Grove, the squirrels' feeding ground
Speakers
The Buddha and the householder Soṇa
Form
A peyyāla stub, its cross-reference resolved in translation to SN 35.118 — already published on this site, in Lokakāmaguṇavagga, this book's twelfth vagga
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 pointing outside this vagga entirely
Why this discourse
This is the vagga's most striking cross-reference. The Pali root itself says only “as in the previous discourse” — the same generic phrase used at SN 35.125 and SN 35.126 — but Sujato's translation resolves it here to a specific, named target: SN 35.118, the Question of Sakka, already published on this site in Lokakāmaguṇavagga, this book's twelfth vagga. Whoever is doing the resolving (compiler tradition or translator) is reaching past this vagga's own boundary entirely, to wherever the fullest matching telling of the identical catechism happens to sit — confirming that the “previous discourse” formula in this literature functions as a pointer to the nearest full statement, not a strict reference to sequential numbering.
Reading guide
A pointer that crosses vagga lines
SN 35.124, 35.125, and 35.126 all sit within this same vagga, any one of which could in principle supply the full wording. Instead, this discourse's own cross-reference is resolved to SN 35.118, a discourse in the previous vagga, where the lord of gods Sakka asked the Buddha the identical question directly.
Confirming a pattern across three stubs
SN 35.125 pointed to the discourse truly before it; SN 35.126 reached past a nearer stub to a named full telling within this vagga; this discourse reaches past this vagga's own boundary entirely. Together the three stubs show “the previous discourse” functioning as shorthand for “wherever the matching full text is,” not as a literal claim about sequence.
The same catechism, a fourth and fifth time
With this discourse, the full-extinguishment catechism has now been asked by five different figures across this vagga and the one before it — a householder of Vesālī, one of Elephant Village, one of Nāḷandā, the king of the gods, and now the householder Soṇa — confirming this is treated as a standard question posed to the Buddha, not tied to any one questioner's identity.
Key terms
soṇo gahapatiputto — the householder's son Soṇa — this discourse's questioner, given the fuller title gahapatiputta rather than simply gahapati
rājagahe...veḷuvane kalandakanivāpe — at Rājagaha, in the Bamboo Grove, the squirrels' feeding ground — a familiar setting used often across this project
purimasuttantaṃ — “the previous discourse” — the Pali root's generic phrase, here resolved in translation to a discourse outside this vagga altogether
sakko devānamindo — Sakka, lord of gods — the questioner of SN 35.118, the discourse this one's own cross-reference actually targets
pañcamaṃ — “fifth” — this discourse's own closing colophon
The text
The discourse exactly as short as the source leaves it, including its own editorial instruction. Translation: Bhikkhu Sujato (CC0, SuttaCentral).
§1At one time the Buddha was staying near Rājagaha, in the Bamboo Grove, the squirrels’ feeding ground. Then the householder Soṇa went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and said to 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 35.118.)
· · ·
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 already-published discourse does this stub's cross-reference actually resolve to?
Correct: A. Reaching past this vagga's own boundary to the Question of Sakka.
Question 2 of 5
Who asked the Buddha the identical question at SN 35.118?
Correct: A. A deity's question, already published, standing in for this discourse's own missing wording.
Question 3 of 5
What does the pattern across this vagga's three peyyāla stubs (SN 35.125, 126, 128) suggest about "the previous discourse" as an editorial phrase?
Correct: A. One stub points truly backward, one reaches within-vagga, one reaches across vaggas — all resolving to the nearest full telling.
Question 4 of 5
How many different figures, across this vagga and the previous one, have now asked this same full-extinguishment catechism?
Correct: A. A standard question, not tied to any one questioner's identity.
Question 5 of 5
What title does this discourse's questioner Soṇa carry, distinct from the plain "gahapati" used for earlier questioners?
Correct: A. A slightly fuller title than the vagga's other householder-questioners.
