Audio recorded at Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. Ilia S. Durovic teaches the Three Principal Aspects of the Path—renunciation, bodhicitta, and wisdom understanding emptiness—as the essence of all Buddhist doctrine in this 112-minute session. He begins with bodhicitta as the foundational motivation: wishing all beings free from suffering and established in happiness, which animates the entire spiritual path. He then shifts to the central topic: why wisdom understanding emptiness is essential and cannot be skipped, even by practitioners strong in the first two aspects. Using dependent origination as the gateway to emptiness, Durovic walks through how all phenomena—both samsaric and nirvanic—arise from causes and conditions and therefore lack inherent or truly established existence. He illustrates with concrete examples: a flower depends on seed, water, and soil; the self depends on parents, karma, and negative emotions. He explains five main logical reasonings for emptiness, with dependent origination as the most powerful, and distinguishes between analytical meditation (using reasoning to develop insight) and placement meditation (resting in the realization). Pitched at practitioners ready to engage rigorous logical analysis of Buddhist philosophy.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 2003-08-20 – The Three Principle Aspects of the Path 2.mp3
UUID: 4775257b-81cf-41c8-9f3e-6756033a7f3f
Teacher: Ilia S. Durovic
Collection: Three Principal Aspects
Date: 2003-08-20
Recorded at: Tibetan Buddhist Institute, Adelaide
Words: ~5,541
# 2003-08-20 – The Three Principal Aspects of the Path 2
**Collection:** Audio Recordings — Three Principal Aspects
**Duration:** 112.6 minutes
**Words:** 5,547
**Model:** Deepgram Nova-3
**Corrections applied:** 16
**Transcribed:** 2026-03-08 11:47
—
First of all, we have to meditate on bodhicitta. What we should do is to think that we, along with all sentient beings, do not want to experience suffering and in order to be separated from suffering and established in happiness with all its excellent qualities, then we are doing things in order to create merit, in order to achieve Buddhahood. Now this mind working to achieve Buddhahood—in order to achieve this we need to completely get rid of all our faults and completely develop all our qualities. So what we’re going to do in order to move towards this is we’re going to study and contemplate and meditate on a teaching that is the essence of all of the teachings, which is the three principal aspects of the path. So we should think on this for a few minutes.
As explained in the Entering the Middle Way text, if beings again and again listen to teachings on emptiness, and by listening to teachings on emptiness again and again, they may develop very strong imprints on their mind stream with regards to emptiness. And by developing these strong imprints on their mind stream with regards to emptiness, their liking for the teachings on emptiness grows and grows and grows and becomes stronger and stronger and stronger. Then eventually, after they’ve done this process many times, when they hear the teachings on emptiness, their liking for these teachings, for this understanding, will be so great that the hairs on their body will stand up and they will cry, their tears will run from their eyes because they will understand that this experience, the understanding of emptiness, is the gate or is the way to developing great happiness. Not only to develop this great happiness and get rid of negativities but also once that has been realized then by practicing giving or generosity, by practicing ethics, by practicing joyful effort, by practicing patience, by practicing meditation, and by practicing wisdom, then they will attain complete Buddhahood.
So in that case, when people listen to teachings on emptiness, they should be very, very, very happy. The students should react very pleasantly to these teachings. They should be very, very excited about or happy about listening to them. So we have to do like this. We should be very happy to be able to listen to teachings on emptiness. We should be very joyful about having this opportunity to be able to listen to these teachings. And we shouldn’t be sitting there thinking, well, maybe it is or maybe it isn’t. I have my doubts about this or I’m not quite sure about that. We should be thinking, this is great that I can have this opportunity to hear this because this gives me the opportunity to help understand emptiness, so we should be very happy about this. If we aren’t very happy about it and we are very negative about listening to the teachings on emptiness and think, maybe, maybe not, these kind of things, then there’s a chance that we’re doing something very negative. There’s a chance that by doubting or by being negative about these teachings that we could be setting a cause for or establishing a cause for being reborn in a lower realm in our next rebirth. If we can listen to the teachings being very happy about them, being very happy about the fact that we can hear about emptiness which is an explanation that will help us, then that’s a great chance to develop great virtue by listening to the teachings. We have to listen well. We have to listen happily to the teachings.
So tonight, we’re hopefully placing a seed for liberation in our minds so we should listen well so we can plant this seed for liberation in our minds. In discussing emptiness there will usually be five different topics within the discussion of emptiness. The first one being the reasons that we should develop an understanding of emptiness. The second being the way to understand emptiness. So the first of the five is the reason we have to develop an understanding of emptiness. Second is the way we understand emptiness. The third is the faults of not understanding emptiness. The fourth is the benefits of understanding emptiness, and the fifth is the unique presentation of emptiness of the Prāsaṇgika consequentialist school.
Now in the three principal aspects it says, if we do not possess the wisdom comprehending the mode of abiding, even though we may become familiar with renunciation and bodhicitta, we are unable to sever the root of existence. Now where it says the wisdom comprehending the mode of abidance, what this is referring to is emptiness. And with regards to this, it’s usually said that there are two different types of truths. There are two different truths of reality. The first truth is the conventional truth, which is mistaken, which isn’t the true way that things exist. The other truth is the ultimate truth or the truth of the ultimate non-inherent existence of things. So when we talk about the mode of abidance, it’s usually divided into these two different truths.
So the reason that we need to develop an understanding of emptiness is if we haven’t developed an understanding of emptiness, then we can’t achieve Buddhahood and we can’t achieve liberation. If amongst the five paths of the Mahāyāna, if we haven’t achieved an understanding of emptiness then we can’t progress to the four latter paths. So we can’t progress to the path of preparation, the path of seeing, the path of meditation or the path of no more learning. Likewise on the Hīnayāna path, if we haven’t developed an understanding of emptiness then we can’t progress past the first path and we can’t become an arhat. So we need this understanding of emptiness to complete these two paths.
Now in the Heart Sūtra, in the mantra of the Heart Sūtra, when it talks about the first gate—the first gate refers to the first path, and it says, gate, gate, paragate, parasamgate, bodhi svaha. So the first refers to the first path of accumulation. The second gate refers to the path of preparation. The third paragate refers to the path of seeing. The fourth parasamgate refers to the path of meditation, and the bodhi svaha for the achieving of Buddhahood. So we can’t get past the first gate if we don’t have an understanding of emptiness. That’s from the perspective of the Heart Sūtra.
What this means is if we don’t have an understanding of emptiness even though we are able to enter the different paths whether it be through renunciation or bodhicitta then we can’t finish the path. We can’t become an arhat. We can’t become a Buddha unless we have this understanding of emptiness. So in order for us to become an arhat or achieve Buddhahood, then we need to have both method and wisdom. Method and wisdom are the two legs that we need in order to be able to walk. So a person who has one leg is unable to walk, and likewise, a bird with only one wing can’t fly. So in the same way, if we are to achieve arhatship, to achieve Buddhahood, then we need both of these things, both method and wisdom.
If we put to the side the teachings on the Hīnayāna or the lower vehicle for the moment, when we’re practicing the Mahāyāna path, we need both these things, method and wisdom. Method with regards to the Mahāyāna is said to be the practice of bodhicitta and compassion. What this means is in order for us to attain Buddhahood, we need both bodhicitta and compassion and wisdom. And in fact, these two things help each other along the path. So the compassion and bodhicitta help the wisdom and the wisdom helps the bodhicitta. These two things work together until we have reached the final outcome. What this means is if we have wisdom understanding emptiness but we don’t have bodhicitta, we can achieve liberation but we can’t achieve Buddhahood. If we have bodhicitta but we don’t have wisdom understanding emptiness, then we can’t stop saṃsāra. We can’t cut saṃsāra at the root. So therefore, we need these two things working together, kind of helping each other in sequence, the two things, in order to have both aspects to walk towards, to work towards Buddhahood.
As explained, the reason that we need both method and wisdom is that in the resultant Buddha body, the resultant Buddha body has these two aspects. It has what’s called the dharmakaya or the wisdom body and the rupakaya or the form body. The Buddha’s body is the rupakaya or the form body, and the mind of the Buddha is the dharmakaya or the wisdom body. Now in order for us to achieve that result, we need to do these two practices of method and wisdom. Now what method entails is the practice of bodhicitta and compassion. From bodhicitta and compassion, then we create merit. Wisdom understanding emptiness is the wisdom aspect. With regards to wisdom, this means wisdom understanding emptiness.
Now the result of the merit that’s accumulated through bodhicitta and compassion, the result of that is the rupakaya or the form body of the Buddha. And the result of the wisdom, the collection of wisdom understanding emptiness, the result of that is the wisdom body of the Buddha or the dharmakaya. So we need these two accumulations. Accumulation of merit, accumulation of wisdom—accumulation of merit being bodhicitta leads to the form body, the accumulation of wisdom being wisdom understanding emptiness leads to the wisdom body.
So we already talked about previously the method aspect in talking about bodhicitta and now we’re going to talk about the wisdom aspect of this path, which is the view. Now usually when people say the view, they’re talking about the view understanding emptiness and also getting rid of wrong views. And there are many different types of wrong views. There are wrong views that say that things inherently exist. There are wrong views that say that things are permanent. There are people who think that this body that we have or these collections that we have, these aggregates we have, one of those is permanent, that won’t go away. And there are those that say that when we die, we just turn into nothing, like a butter lamp being exhausted, that there’s nothing left. So there are all these different types of wrong views that we can have with regards to the view. So there are wrong views that we can have, whether they are nihilistic or eternalist—all these different types of views that we can have.
Now there are many different types of these views. There’s also what’s called the right view about something. Now the right view with regards to, or the correct view, is something that ordinary beings can have. Ordinary beings, both the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, all of them. This view is what presents this idea that if we do something positive, then we will get a positive result. And if we do something negative, then we will get a negative result. This is what this view is about. We need to know that by doing something positive, the result will be positive, and by doing something unvirtuous or negative, then we’re going to have negative results from that. So this is what’s called the correct view or the worldly view. So this worldly view is a view of ordinary beings, but it’s also a correct view because it stops them from doing negativities and gets them to practice positivities because it’s understanding what the results of these will be.
So the view that’s usually presented as a completely correct view is the view of emptiness. Now what is it that is empty? What is something empty of? The thing that we’re talking about being empty or the lack of something we’re talking about here is the lack of true existence or the lack of inherent existence. This isn’t the way that we perceive things, however. We think that things truly exist. Now this grasping at true existence is the thing that is not realizing the way things actually are—not realizing the emptiness of true existence. So this grasping, thinking that something truly does exist when there is no true existence, this mind is an incorrect view, it’s a mistaken view, it’s a wrong view. It is the view that sees things as being truly existent which isn’t the actual case. So the reason that we have wrong view is because we perceive things as being truly existent when that’s not in fact the case. They’re empty of true existence.
The ignorance that we have, the root ignorance that we have is the view of the transitory collections, that is taking the transitory collections to be truly existing or truly established. Because we have this grasping of the transitory collections being truly established, we have grasping at true existence. So if we want to know what emptiness is referring to, we say emptiness but we don’t know what it is that we’re saying something is empty of. What we’re saying is empty of is this lack of inherent existence, that when we say I am I, that’s grasping at true existence and we have to see that emptiness is the lack of that true existence.
Things aren’t inherently existent. At the same time as not being inherently existent, they’re not truly established and they’re not established by way of their characteristics. If we say that something is truly established then we have to say that it is inherently existent and we have to say that it’s established by way of its characteristics. We can’t say it’s established one way and not established the other way. And in the Heart Sūtra, it says that things aren’t truly established or they don’t exist from their own side. It says that they’re not truly established. What it’s talking about is it says that the five aggregates are not truly established. The five collections are not truly established. The five aggregates being the first aggregate, the aggregate of form or the collection of forms. Then the second one being the aggregate of feelings. The third one being the aggregate of discrimination. Feeling is that which involves suffering and happiness. The next one being the aggregate of compounded things and then the last one being the aggregate of consciousness. So all of these are collections of something or aggregates of something and they’re not said to be inherently existent.
Now in the three principal aspects, Lama Tsongkhapa says that if we do not possess the wisdom comprehending the mode of abidance, even if we have renunciation and bodhicitta and so forth we can’t cut through the root of existence. Now another way of saying the mode of abidance is to say dependent arising. If we don’t understand dependent arising then he says that we can’t understand emptiness and so he presents the idea that to understand emptiness first you need to understand dependent arising and once you’ve understood dependent arising then the understanding of emptiness comes along, because there are different ways of saying the same thing. So he says first to understand dependent arising. He says that if somebody, whether someone who has become ordained, has left their household life, or whether they’re male or female, whoever it is, if they understand dependent origination then they will understand emptiness and therefore they can achieve Buddhahood.
What is this dependent origination? We need to establish what this dependent origination is. Now, there are three main ways of describing dependent origination. They’re said to be the rough or the gross form of dependent origination, the subtler form of dependent origination and the very subtle form or presentation of dependent origination. Now within the tenet schools, the Vaibhāṣika school in particular, their presentation is that things arise dependent on a cause. So that’s their definition of dependent origination. Now in the autonomous school or the Svatāntrika school they present dependent origination as something arising by means of its parts or components. So that’s their presentation and that is the subtle presentation of dependent origination. In the Prāsaṇgika school or the consequentialist school which is also Madhyamaka, the same as the Svatāntrika or autonomous school—in Madhyamaka Prāsaṇgika or Middle Way Consequentialist School, the presentation of dependent origination is that something arises in dependence on labels and terminology.
In this instance when Lama Tsongkhapa is talking about dependent origination, he’s talking about the grossest form of dependent origination that is a coming about in reliance on cause, so cause leading to result, a cause generating result. So this presentation isn’t that difficult for us to understand. The presentation of dependent origination saying that if we have a cause then we have a result. This isn’t that difficult for us to understand because for instance if we put a seed in the ground then we know that that seed can act as a cause for a sprout, it can act as a cause for leaves, it can act as a cause for fruit, and we can understand this concept of cause and effect.
Now in terms of how cause and effect works within us or in an internal way, then we would say that if we do something positive then we will experience happiness, if we do something negative then we will experience suffering. The reason that we call this an internal way of existing is because it’s in comparison to an external way in that if something is an internal way that means that there is a feeling involved with that process. If it’s external it means there is no feeling involved with that process. Therefore if something is internal there is an experience of either suffering or happiness. If it’s external there is none. For example if we hit a rock or if something hits a rock then that rock doesn’t experience suffering. Therefore it’s an external event. But if we hit our finger or we hurt our finger, cut our finger then that is something that would cause pain. Therefore, that’s related to the internal concept of cause and effect and dependent origination.
So we absolutely need to develop this understanding of emptiness, the wisdom understanding emptiness. Now the reason we need to develop this wisdom understanding emptiness is if we don’t develop this wisdom then there is no way for us to achieve liberation or for us to achieve Buddhahood. We need this wisdom in order to achieve both of these things. This is the reason that we need to develop this wisdom or this view understanding emptiness. So in order for us to develop this wisdom understanding emptiness then we have to apply a lot of different logical reasonings. If we don’t apply different logical reasonings then there’s no way that we can understand emptiness. We need to put effort into processing through logical means different arguments or different presentations in order to develop this understanding of emptiness. If we just sit there and just say ‘aah’ and meditate then we’re not going to develop an understanding of emptiness. We need to use logic, we need to use reasoning in order to develop this understanding of emptiness.
Now Lama Tsongkhapa talks about two different types of meditation. He talks about placement meditation and analytical meditation. We need both these types of meditation in order to develop this understanding of emptiness. Analytical meditation in that we need to apply all these different types of reasoning to develop this understanding of emptiness and then we need to have placement meditation fixed on these understandings. So the main thing we need to do however is this processing, the analytical meditation. Hence what we need to do for ourselves, this practice we need to do in order to understand emptiness.
Now there are five main reasonings that are associated with emptiness. In fact there are many different reasonings that are presented in order to establish emptiness but they say that there are five main ones amongst the host. Amongst these five then dependent origination is said to be the king. It’s the one that the Buddha liked, was very, very happy about, was very pleased with and is said to be the king or the most important of these different presentations or the different logical paths towards understanding emptiness.
So we were talking about the way to develop this understanding of dependent origination. Now in the Three Principal Aspects of the Path Lama Tsongkhapa says, “When we see the cause and results of all dharmas of saṃsāra and nirvana are never deceptive and comprehend that all focal objects of certainty are destroyed, that is the entry to the path pleasing to the Buddhas.” So when it says here saṃsāra and nirvana, all the dharmas, all the phenomena of saṃsāra and nirvana. Now what saṃsāra is referring to, saṃsāra is referring to all phenomena that have as their cause, afflictive emotions and the accumulation of negative karma because of grasping at true existence. So everything that comes into effect by these causes is included within saṃsāra. The five aggregates, the experiences, these things are included within saṃsāra.
If something comes about through the understanding of emptiness, if something comes about through seeing the lack of inherent existence of phenomena, these things fall into the realm of nirvana. They are the result of an understanding as opposed to a wrong view which is what saṃsāra is, the result of a wrong view. So nirvana and Buddhahood, achieving arhatship, achieving the direct comprehension of emptiness, all of these things come about as a result of a correct view, the view of the lack of true existence or of inherent existence. So these two things are in fact opposites. We can’t have one where there is the other one. If you have something that comes from a cause of ignorance it’s saṃsāra. If the cause for something is an understanding of the lack of inherent existence, then this is the cause for nirvana.
So this is the cause for people to progress through the three vehicles, the paths of the three vehicles. Through the paths of the lower vehicle to becoming an arhat, through the paths of the Mahāyāna, the five paths and the ten grounds of a bodhisattva and finally to achieve enlightenment. This comes about because of this understanding of the lack of inherent existence and it’s included within nirvana. So this explains nirvana and saṃsāra being all of those phenomena coming about as a result of a cause. From understanding the lack of inherent existence we’re able to develop all these things, progress through the paths and grounds, and eventually become a Buddha, and then we will be very happy.
In terms of presenting the argument for establishing the lack of inherent existence on the basis of dependent origination, then you would say take for example all the phenomena of saṃsāra and nirvana. Now these are not inherently existent because they are established as the result of a cause. This verse in the three principal aspects of the path can be set up as a proposition in debate form. All of the phenomena of saṃsāra and nirvana are said to be not inherently existent because they are results of causes. So the way that people present an argument would be: take all the phenomena of saṃsāra and nirvana. They are not inherently existent because of being the result of cause and effect.
For example if we take a flower, a flower is said to be not inherently existent. The reason that it is not inherently existent is because it comes about because of dependent origination which is that it comes about as a result from a cause. So if we take, for example, the flower, now the flower isn’t inherently existent because it comes about because of causes. So for example, with the flower, in order for the flower to come about, we need a seed, we need water, we need sunshine, we need the other elements that bring the flower into existence. Because the flower comes about on the basis of all of these causes, all of these conditions then we have to say that the flower is not inherently existent because it arises through dependent origination. The argument says that take a flower which is not inherently existent because it arises through dependent origination.
It’s easy for us to do this with a flower perhaps, but then we have to do it with ourselves as well. So the same way that we did it with the flower, then we do it for ourselves. So we are not inherently existent. I am not inherently existent because I arise or my origin is dependent on something else and that origin that we’re dependent on in this case is our parents. So in actual fact if we think about our body and our mind, our body and our mind have come into existence because of negative emotions and because of the accumulation of karma. This is what we would call the subtler explanation of our origins in this dependent origination. On a grosser level then we could say that our origin or our cause was our parents but that’s on the gross level. On a subtle level then we say that we are a result of our negative emotions, our karma and kleshas and the karma that we have accumulated. Because we are a result of that karma and those negative emotions, then we have to say that we don’t inherently exist because if we inherently existed we wouldn’t have a cause. Because we have causes then we have to understand that we aren’t inherently existent or we aren’t truly established. That’s because we are a dependent origination. So if you’re a dependent origination you can’t be a truly established thing.
So if this flower was truly established, if it was inherently existent, then that would mean that it didn’t arise in dependence on causes and conditions. So that would mean that it didn’t arise as a combination of water and heat and soil and so forth. It would mean that it arose by itself, that it was inherently existent by itself, not in dependence on any of those things. But we know that it took all of these things to bring this thing into existence, so therefore we can say that it isn’t inherently existing. It needed all these different elements for it to come into being. It didn’t exist by itself without these elements. By saying something is dependent, its origin is dependent then we have to say that it is not truly established. So all of the phenomena in saṃsāra and nirvana have to be not truly established and have to be dependent originations. So this means in terms of nirvana that Buddhas, arhats, realizations, blessings, etc., all of those different things as well as all the phenomena that are saṃsāra, all of them are of dependent origination and are not truly established.
If we take a seed for example, if a seed was truly established and wasn’t a dependent origination then that would mean that that seed couldn’t sprout and because that seed couldn’t sprout then that seed would not be able to grow a lotus. Therefore the seed cannot be truly established otherwise the sprout couldn’t come about and the lotus couldn’t come about. So because that is a dependent origination then we have to say that it’s not truly established. Also if we weren’t dependent originations and we were truly established that means that we wouldn’t grow old and that could be kind of good. If human beings were truly established, then that means that human beings wouldn’t age.
If anyone has any questions—do we have time for questions? The first one is analyzing by seeing things as neither one nor many. The second one analyzing by cause. The third one analyzing by result. The fourth one analyzing by cause and result. And the fifth one, the king of reasonings, which is dependent origination. For the cause and effect reasoning, then you’re putting it by—it’s saying whether there are four different ways that they can use this. That is one and not the other, the other and not the one, both or neither.
If there are any more questions. Yes?
In Western philosophy they don’t talk so much about true existence or truly established. What they talk about are essences. Essences are established by necessary and sufficient conditions. That means that something exists because it has a necessary condition and a sufficient condition. Can we get that?
If when they say this essence, if they’re saying this essence is existing or as a nonexistent, is it saying it’s established or not? They would say that it’s established. And they use the idea of necessity and the idea of sufficiency to establish something as an essence that basically comes from its own side. The only way I could think of translating is if you can use it. And so if you can use it, then it’s something that’s designated as such. And if you can’t use it, it’s something that’s not designated as such. So that’s like the terminological designation. So you’re saying that if you’re saying that something’s usable or has that essence in it and they’re not talking about it being truly established or not, then it sounds like they’re talking about it in terms of terminology. In terms of—we said not inherently existent for the terminological instance. So what it really suits is the thing that we’re trying to negate is the inherent existence. So in order to negate the inherent existence, you have to say that things don’t inherently exist. That’s the thing that we’re trying to establish and the negation itself is the lack of inherent existence. So on the basis of the lack of inherent existence, there is a very subtle self. So the lack of—there’s a basis, from the lack of inherent existence, there is a subtle labeled self. Subtle cause and effect. It’s a very subtle one. So unless we understand the dependent arising, then we can’t understand that subtle self. The subtle cause and effect that brings the self into being. So we need to understand the lack of inherent existence to be able to perceive that self.