Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. In this 109-minute teaching, Venerable Jampa Ignyen introduces the Three Principal Aspects of the Path from Tsongkhapa’s commentary, focusing on the first principle: renunciation. After an opening breath meditation, he establishes why enlightenment is possible despite our deep addiction to seeking happiness within saṃsāra. He explores the nature of contaminated versus pure happiness, examining how attachment locks us into cyclic existence, and explains why renunciation requires genuine recognition of saṃsāra’s faults rather than world-rejection. Throughout, he emphasizes the lineage from Atisha through Tsongkhapa, the necessity of rigorous examination and doubt as tools for understanding, and our complete dependence on other beings. Pitched at serious practitioners ready to engage with the path’s foundational difficulties.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 2012 07 14.mp3
UUID: 5ab0b9be-f2c1-4e76-8fd9-b3ecb2c1a56b
Teacher: Ven Jampa Ignyen
Collection: Karma (Ven Jampa Ignyen)
Date: 2012-07-14
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 109.2 minutes
Words: ~10,515
So we’ll just start with just a prayer in Tibetan. I think it’s in the prayer book if anyone has, but just the refuge and bodhicitta prayer. So we’ll just start with a little meditation. So what we’re doing is just examining the breath. Examining the breath, mindfulness of the breath is one of the four types of mindfulness.
And why we practice it is simply to relax the mind, just be able to step back from a normal thinking process and allow the mind to put down the concerns really that we involve the mind with. So there’s a lot of concerns that just arise in everyday life. And at times we’re aware of them, at times we’re not. In fact, within the mind there are those things which are manifest and those things which are unmanifest but still exist there. And we don’t become aware of them unless the mind becomes quieter.
And then it’s possible to we become aware of them, we notice them. So it’s good that we’re aware of what thoughts we have, what thoughts we’ve generated that still continue to exist. And why is that useful to us? Because various types of mind that we generate are not very helpful to us. They don’t benefit us.
And so, just watching the breath, being mindful of the breath, allows us to, in a way, step back from the thinking process so that we become more aware of what we have been thinking about. And then as we become aware of this, then we’re in a way able to let those thoughts go so that they’re not impacting us. It gives us some space, gives some clarity. Okay, so what we’re doing is we’re just focusing on the breath. Really part of the mind is watching the breath, another part is observing what the mind is doing.
But we’re focusing on the breath so that we can relax the mind, let go of the thinking process. So we’ll just practice this for a couple of minutes. Also in the beginning good to be physically relaxed, just body to be comfortable but not slouching one way or the other. In a way what we’re trying to achieve in the mind is similar to the body. So what we want with the mind is a simple, straightforward, relaxed mind.
So we our body should represent that as well, not too hunched. If we’re hunched, twisted one way or the other, it’s probably indicative of our state of mind. But if we relax physically, straighten our body so that it’s alert but not tense, then the mind itself will be positively affected. So the topic we’re dealing with is the three principal aspects of the path. So this is a pith instruction it’s like condensation of many different teachings into a like a core message And The Three Principal Aspects was composed by Je Tsongkhapa, who was who lived in the fourteenth century, fourteenth and the beginning of the fifteenth century in Tibet.
And he’s writing a commentary on a work called the Bodhipathapradīpa, the lamp of the path, that was composed about three hundred years earlier by an Indian monk called Atisha who went to Tibet and taught for maybe twenty or thirty years in Tibet. And what Atisha composed was just a very brief summary of the path to enlightenment. And the path to enlightenment talked about the path of enlightenment as presented by Atisha talked about the three types of being, the three scopes, three types of being who seek to attain enlightenment. It was really the three types of enlightenment that can be achieved. And then later Tsongkhapa, he wrote the three principal aspects of the path which took a slightly different tack.
And instead of talking about the three types of being, he talked about the three principal elements that one requires in order to become enlightened. So in brief, what are these three? The first is renunciation and the second is compassion great compassion and the third is really emptiness. So these three together are like the essential ingredients that a person requires in order to become enlightened. And often these are depicted, you know, in paintings.
The lotus represents renunciation, the moon represents great compassion. The sun represents the wisdom, understanding, emptiness. So we have these three symbols and often they’re in a painting you see the lotus like the Buddha is seated on a lotus and on that lotus there is a moon disc and on the moon disc there is a sun disc. So the three principal aspects are there and on that sits the Buddha. So what that means is that the Buddha arises from renunciation, Buddha arises from great compassion, bodhicitta, and the Buddha arises from the wisdom, understanding, emptiness.
For the Buddha is depicted as sitting on these three. So in a way that’s the entire path. Okay. True. The trick is of course understanding these three things.
And they’re extremely difficult for us to understand because the most difficult thing that we can do is attain enlightenment. It’s not impossible but difficult. It doesn’t come about through just sitting back or relaxing. Actually it’s the most difficult thing we can achieve it comes about through a lot of hard work. Anyone that achieves enlightenment does it through a lot of practice, a lot of self improvement.
In fact in the perfection vehicle it takes three countless eons of practicing renunciation, great compassion and wisdom. Three countless eons. Each countless eons is eighty great eons, each of the eighty great eons has various subsections and so forth. Without going into all of that it takes a long time. Why does it take a long time?
Because the mind itself needs to be purified. And purifying the mind takes a long time. And we can see this actually. We know how difficult it is to deal with the afflictive emotions. Attaining enlightenment means getting completely rid of the afflictive emotions.
So this takes time. Right, so we’re looking then at this text that was composed, this work composed by Jetsongkhapa called The Three Principal Aspects of the Path. And he composed it because one of the local governors living in Tibet at that time requested Tsongkhapa to write something simple for ordinary people to be able to follow because otherwise the instructions on how to practice are so complicated, so vast, it’s difficult for us ordinary people to get an idea. And if we don’t have an idea of what the practice is, there’s not much hope for us to progress. So we need something in simple terms that we can relate to, that we can that makes sense to us, that penetrates, that gives us that thought that: Oh, well maybe even I could do that.
Maybe I can’t do it straight away, but, you know eventually it’s possible I could apply that. It’s going to be difficult. Generating renunciation is difficult. But it’s possible. If we don’t have an idea that enlightenment is possible then we give up.
But we sit back and think: Oh, Too hard! Very difficult! Ah!’ We talk about the perfection vehicle in three countless eons to become an enlightened being. We can’t imagine even one countless eon or a great eon which has the eighty of those that make up a countless eon and so forth. We can’t imagine these vast lengths, vast periods of time.
Anyway, that’s not important. Enlightenment is possible. Enlightenment is possible why? Because the mind is impermanent. Because the mind is impermanent, because the afflictive emotions are impermanent means that they have a cause.
Since they have a cause it means that the cause can be eliminated. Anything which is impermanent can be changed and the negative elements can be removed. It’s said that the mind is like water. At present the water of our mind is a little bit clouded by the afflictive emotions, by ignorance and anger and hatred and jealousy and pride and so forth. All of these things, they the cloud, the pure water of the mind.
In its original state the mind is perfectly clear. And that clarity allows wisdom to arise. But now our wisdom is quite weak because our minds are a little bit sullied by the afflictive emotions. afflictive emotions, they disturb the mind, cloud the mind. But just as water can be purified from the mud and dirt and clay and anything else that pollutes it, so too the mind can be purified.
Now actually dealing with that point, is enlightenment possible? Really requires a lot of contemplation. Thinking about what enlightenment is, can it actually be achieved, what are the reasons to establish enlightenment being possible. All of these things require contemplation from our side. Gradually, by applying correct reasoning we can come to understand what enlightenment is and that it is possible.
True? It’s not easy. Understanding enlightenment for us is very difficult. But what we’re doing here is we’re looking at the three elements that, when they come together produce enlightenment. It’s a bit like the flame.
What are the three elements that we bring them together to produce flame? Like the fire of enlightenment. Oxygen we need. Something to burn the fuel anyway, what’s the third one? Ignition temperature.
Yeah, those three things. If we have those, then we’re probably going to get a flame. Similarly, renunciation, great compassion and the wisdom, the fire of wisdom, wisdom itself, the ignition, the fire of wisdom generate enlightenment. So here we’re looking in this okay what we’re looking at here is the possibility how we get these do these three produce enlightenment? If so how do they do it?
Right. Now, what I’m doing is I’m basing this on a commentary by Pänchen Rinpoche, another Tibetan who lived much after Tsongkhapa who composed the text. But he gives a very inspired commentary. And often he talks about the history of the Kadampa who lived who were the followers of Atisha who wrote the original text that the three principal aspects of the path is really a commentary too. So anyway, also what I think is maybe useful if there’s any issues that come up as we go along, me, please bring them up.
Because the material is not easy. Right. Now initially the beginning of the text is I pay homage to the venerable gurus, venerable teachers. Now, why Jetsongkhapa mentions this in the beginning is that where does these instructions, where do they come from? It comes from other beings.
And also, for us to develop an understanding, we need to understand the process of how this teaching is handed down from one generation to another. And so in the beginning, that is stated: pay my respect to those that have preserved this lineage of teaching from the time of the Buddha, because without that it wouldn’t certainly survive to the present. Now the text here goes into a long discussion about what Gurus are. Now I’m not sure how relevant this may be for us here. Gurus may have a connotation, you know, that we don’t isn’t that relevant to us.
But Guru has many or many potential derivations from the Sanskrit such as a dispeller of darkness and so on. So what it’s doing is when the first line of the text says, I pay homage to the superior or to prior teachers in the lineage or prior gurus, is simply to state that there is a lineage and it’s through the kindness of other beings that this type of instruction passes down to us. But in order to really understand that, we have to understand the value of the work itself. And this we don’t really understand yet, so we don’t have to go too much into this. If there’s value in the work, it’ll become evident later on.
Right, so I’ll skip that section. But I’ll just note that at one stage the author, he does quote another text called the Sutralamkara, and he says that a spiritual friend he talks about the qualities of a spiritual friend. And the qualities of a spiritual friend are someone who is tamed, pacified, fully pacified, possessing good qualities, has exertion, understands the text and properly has insight into their meaning, possesses skill in speech, has altruism or compassion, who is contented, etc, etc. So these are qualities possessed by those that hold the lineage of this teaching. So anyway, we’ll skip ahead on that section.
Right. Now, in the beginning of the text, really, we’re looking at The first part is like a eulogy, if we could put it that way. Okay, and the first verse is: The heart meaning of all the discourses of the conquerors or the Buddhas. The path praised by the pure sons of the Buddhas, the pure sons or daughters of the Buddhas. That ford for the fortunate beings who desire freedom, I will explain in whatever way I can.
So Jetsongkhapa is just saying that the essential meaning of what the Buddha’s, what Śākyamūni Buddha taught, that is praised by those male and female followers of those teachings. And that bridge across the ocean of Samsāra to freedom that is praised by many, I will try and explain that in whatever way I can. So, the reason for getting this at this point is to say that this text is trying to encapsulate the essential meaning of what the Buddha’s talked about. What is the meaning of what the Buddha’s taught about? It’s fundamentally the four truths.
Now a Buddha is someone who, at a time when the four truths are not understood, is a being or they’re not available on the planet, is someone that teaches the four noble truths. So that’s really what a Buddha does. Buddha means awakened being. And on awakened being, their main job is to teach. And what are they going to teach?
They just teach these four truths. What are the four truths? The truth of suffering, the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the path leading to the cessation of suffering. So that’s what a Buddha does. Okay, then, although that’s the essential teaching, in order to because so many beings exist and they have different predispositions, different interests, different inclinations and so on, that teaching needs to be presented in many different ways in order to help beings.
And it appears that if one looks at the entire like here we have the collected works of the Buddha translated into Tibetan, all those texts that are there. Now, very little has been translated into English. But if we had to go through all of those texts in order to distill the essential meaning, it would be difficult for us. So Tsongkhapa here is saying that all of that, if we condense it down, then it’s condensed into these three fundamental principles. Alright.
So he says he’s trying, in the best way that he can, he’s trying to do this. So the heart meaning is here, put into a very simple Now, again, the meaning of the essential meaning of what the Buddha taught is also expressed within the perfection of wisdom sutras. So within the perfection of wisdom sutras we have the Prajñāpāramitā Sutras we have the fundamental path to enlightenment set out. And the path to enlightenment depends on perfecting wisdom. There’s no other way to attain enlightenment than generating wisdom.
As it’s said, that a Buddha cannot wash away the negativities with water. They cannot raise beings to the level of enlightenment, you know, lift them by their hand to the level of enlightenment. The only way that an enlightened being or a Buddha can assist other beings is by setting forward the path and urging other people, urging people to practice the path. Because the path is internal. There’s no external.
Enlightenment doesn’t exist in some far off place. Enlightenment exists just here where the mind is. It’s established where our mind is. That’s And the path that leads to that enlightenment begins here with where our mind is in the present moment. Right?
We haven’t actually entered the path at present. Entering the path is renunciation. When we generate renunciation, we enter the path. When we generate great compassion and bodhicitta, we enter the path at that point. But at present we haven’t generated those so.
So we have work to do. But understanding where we are in the present is very important because then we begin to get an idea, we begin to develop a map of what we need to do in order to find the gateway to the path. At present we’re not sure where the gateway is. Has anyone read Pilgrim’s Progress? That has some interesting well actually the Buddhist presentation is quite what is it?
The slough of despond. Ah, the slow of despond. Actually in the Abhidharma literature there’s the mire of saṃsāra and the mire of saṃsāra is like this swamp. Right? Oh, I read it many years ago, but the slough of despond is a bit like the mire of saṃsāra.
And in the Abhidharma our current situation is likened to being stuck in this mire, this swamp of saṃsāra. And it’s sticky and it’s hard we can’t get across by ourselves, we try and walk forward and we get stuck, you know, our feet go into the sticky mire of saṃsāra itself. What is the stickiness? The stickiness is the attachment we have for the world around us. Our attachment is just so overwhelming that we’re completely stuck in saṃsāra.
And not only that the mire of saṃsāra is, you know, there’s water on the surface that is rippled by the winds so it’s hard for us to see into the mire so that we can see what’s there and how to get out of it. And in fact it’s difficult for us to get out of the mire of saṃsāra without the assistance of someone else. If there’s not someone to help us get out of it, very difficult. Because it’s not something that we understand naturally from our own side. Unless there’s someone there to point out you’re stuck.
We are stuck in the mire of saṃsāra, we’re stuck in the prison of saṃsāra, we don’t see it. Not as if we’re born in a prison and we just accept that as a given and someone comes up to us and says, oh you’re in a prison.’ I say, what do you mean? It’s fine. But you’re stuck in this small cell. Oh, well, there’s nothing beyond the self.
There’s no better place than this, is there? We’re a bit like that. Again it’s said that like we’re stuck in the jungle of saṃsāra. Samsāra has many descriptions. We’re stuck in like the deep dense jungle of saṃsāra.
We’re surrounded by the twenty peaks of wrong view. And it’s full of danger. There’s all sorts of, you know, man eating tigers and lions and snakes and various other dangers that we have to confront. And we can’t we don’t know the path to get out of this saṃsāra. It’s hard because it’s dark and we occasionally come across someone who says, the path is probably over there, or The path is over here.
Or There is no path. This is just how it is. There’s no know, what do you mean saṃsāra? There’s no such thing as saṃsāra. And so on.
Without someone indicating that this is saṃsāra and we’re immersed in saṃsāra, we don’t understand ourselves. This is where renunciation cannot arise unless we have an idea of the prison of saṃsāra. What renunciation is, is coming to an understanding of the faults of our current existence. But it’s hard for us to step back and see the faults. Very, very difficult.
Although we’re aware that, you know, we experience unhappiness and we can’t fully understand the causes. And other people around us are also suffering. And some people are suffering a great deal. They’re sick, there’s sickness and relationship problems and you know, all sorts of problems arise. And we also have a very short life.
We’re born and we may live twenty years, thirty, fifty, one hundred years, no more. And then it’s over. And we, you know, we wonder why, what is this life about, what is the meaning? This is all part of saṃsāra. So we need to investigate our situation.
There is, absolutely, we don’t want to. Although it does. In this regard the Dalai Lama, once I remember him saying that a person committing suicide is not mistaken in relation to the actual situation. It’s just that they’re mistaken to the means that they’re employing. Yes, yes.
Our situation is not good. That’s saṃsāra. Samsāra just means well saṃsāra is even broader than that. Samsāra is talking about life after life taking continued rebirth in this sort of a situation without end. But sorry.
It does. Yeah. Exactly. Right. Yeah, need to be able to stand back and look at our situation clearly.
Now what we need here are the facts. We don’t need to impose anything really more on our situation. But in order to actually begin to think about the entire process that is our life, having these seed ideas can be very useful: renunciation, great compassion, wisdom, understanding, emptiness. It doesn’t mean to say that we need to say that that’s exactly how it is, because we’re still unsure of these things. But initially what we’re looking at is just what our situation is and testing it.
Is our situation really saṃsāra? Actually it’s so important for us to find this out too because our welfare is at stake. Need to understand the problem in order to resolve it and the deeper we understand the problem then the more chance we have of resolving it. But true it’s a it’s a difficult problem. A bit of avoidance is okay.
That’s not have a cup of tea, sit there and relax a little bit. You know, situation is difficult, but we need to be a little bit relaxed about it at the same time. Yeah, because the calmer the mind is, the more settled the mind is, then the more effective our responses are. And in a sense, the best thing we can do is to be relaxed, you know, and observe, be as aware as we can of our own emotions and what emotions are problematic and what needs to be avoided. Because in this we need to generate wisdom about our situation.
So we need all the causes and conditions that generate wisdom. We have to, you know, try and put together, always. And those conditions that lead away from wisdom, like anger and hatred and resentment and pride and arrogance and so forth, all of these, we need to lessen because we need clarity, as much clarity as we can generate on our situation. I tend to agree with that. I think there’s two types of fear, there’s a positive or the negative fear.
And negative fear is, you know, the fear that we have of just, say, the fear of the unknown or fear of the dark or and so on. But it’s just unnamed fears that don’t really benefit us in any way. But fear of something that, you know, is going to harm us, for instance, is quite beneficial. We fear generating hatred and anger. Very good.
At present we don’t have we’re fearless. We’re fearless when it comes to anger and hatred. We are like, Yeah, it’s my right, you know, I can I’m fearlessly going to generate hatred to countless beings. And it’s my right to do so, and it’s a proper response. We’re driving along, yeah, you cut me off.
I’ll get that person. But we should fear those things that will harm us and also fear those things that harm others. Like when we cross a road, we have fear that we’re going get run over, so we look, you know, carefully so that we don’t get run over. So too, anything not just now, but we should fear anything that might come back as a negative consequence for us. Like in the Wheel of Sharp Weapons has anyone studied that text?
The Wheel of Sharp Weapons. We should fear anything that may potentially come back to us. Like all our negative thoughts can come back and harm us. It’s like the Wheel of Sharp Weapons, it’s like firing off arrows that eventually may land back on us. So a fear of that, a fear of the consequences of our current actions can be very positive.
Yeah. Oh, then that’s not good. That’s not good. Then that’s a type of negative fear. Yeah, I think in that case if a positive fear is actually protecting us.
But when it becomes just sort of, you know, we’re just afraid of whatever it may be, you know, for no good reason or, you know, that doesn’t benefit us, then we need to apply countermeasures to that. And there are many different things we can practice in that regard, and we need to investigate what’s beneficial for ourselves. At times the mind is just unworkable, know, different unworkable fears may arise. At that time, you know, may be useful to practice like Tonglen, you know, giving and taking. Practicing love and compassion for others.
Just, you know, trying to mix the mind in the present with something positive. Practicing, you know, breath meditation can be useful. Just reflecting on the impermanence of the mind also, impermanence of fear. All of these things can be helpful. Right.
So here we’re looking at this first verse, and Jetsongkhapa has distilled the essential teachings of the Buddha in these fourteen verses of the three principal aspects of the path. And okay, so in this what we’re trying to do is distill the facts about our existence and take these essential points that are going to be useful to us, that are going to improve us and generate a deeper level of calm and fortitude within us. We need to become more and more relaxed and comfortable within ourselves stronger within ourselves. As it said, we must contemplate and practice Dharma. Now what is Dharma?
We must practice Dharma. Now this term comes up all the time. Does anyone know what the meaning of Dharma is? Yes. Right.
Does. Right. Dharma is. Well, actually, Dharma has up to ten different meanings. It’s a Sanskrit word, but actually Sanskrit is related to English.
There are a number of words in common between Sanskrit and English. Right? Even the word ignition we were talking about ignition before. Right? Ignition is related to this Sanskrit word Agni.
Has anyone heard of Agni? The God of fire. Yeah. Agni, ignition. Geshe-la, Prajñāpāramitā, the word Prajñāpāramitā you’ve heard.
Prajñā means wisdom. Prajñā is made up of Pra and Gna, these two words that go together. Gna is related to the English word ‘know’, K N O W. So, to know. Anyway, there’s interesting parallels there.
But dharma dharma means it comes from the Sanskrit word dhri meaning to hold. And dharma is something which holds its nature. So dharma itself in the broader sense just means anything which holds its nature, retains its nature. So it really refers to anything that exists is Dharma. Right?
Anything which exists is really Dharma. But if we take a narrower meaning of Dharma, Dharma also means that which we need to practice, that which we need to take hold of. And what is that? That’s virtue. Anything positive.
Anything that’s going to bring happiness. Because virtue happiness comes from virtue or happiness comes from ethics is really. Tshul khrims kyi bde ba, tshul khrims kyi Bliss or happiness comes from ethics. The Buddha said at one stage: long chod sbyinpa’i de, tshul khrims kyi de or wealth comes from generosity happiness comes from ethics. Which is actually very profound, that statement.
Any wealth that arises comes from generosity. Any happiness that we experience comes from ethics, our own ethics. So even a moment’s happiness that we experience is just coming from our past ethics. And what is ethics? Ethics in Tibetan is defined as ‘sdig pa spong ba’i sems pa’ the mind that guards.
The mind that guards against harming others or ourselves. That’s ethics. So all our happiness comes from not harming other beings. Okay, so dharma here really means holding on to, say, ethics, holding to virtue, what is important. And by doing, by holding on to virtue one is able to purify the mind in a coarse way.
Right? Actually the good qualities we see in any other being around us are coming from ethics. That’s valuable, that’s the value in existence, wherever we see value it’s coming from ethics, in other beings. What’s attractive? Like their patience, the patience of other beings is giving rise to their beauty.
When we look at another being and we see, are they got pleasant features? That’s coming from their practice of patience. Also coming from their practice of ethics. So this is Dharma here refers to, like ethics. But on a deeper, more profound level, Dharma is referring to emptiness, which is the ultimate mode of abidance of anything.
So Dharma has different levels of meaning. But for us Dharma, the most approachable meaning, is probably ethics or virtue. So here it says we must contemplate and practice Dharma and train in the unmistaken path that allows us to get beyond the jungle of saṃsāra. For it is inappropriate to act indiscriminately like a dog eating its meal. So here Pänchen is saying that what we need in order to address our current situation is an unmistaken path that allows us to get beyond the problematic nature of existence.
But we should act with discrimination, we should test, you know, what we need to do and what we need to find. We shouldn’t just eat up everything without discrimination. This is not a statement against dogs, by the way. This is not something but we shouldn’t act, you know, if you give food to a dog, the dog will gulp it down, right? We know what a dog is.
We shouldn’t be like that, we should be discriminating because what we generate in the mind has an effect. So what we want is happiness. So what we do practice should have the mark of virtue, the mark of ethics, because that will produce happiness. And as Sakya Pandita stated, those who trade in small amounts of horses, jewels and so on query, investigate and analyze everything. Like if we’re a trader, if we’ve got a business, if we’re a horse trader, we go and we analyze the horses, you know, what is their what do they look like, what’s their health like, what’s their coat, how big, and so forth.
We analyze everything very carefully because we want to get value. Therefore even the minor actions of this life are seen to give rise to a lot of exertion to make sure that we get it right. But since life’s eternal aspirations rely on dharma, rely on the facts as they are that are pure, we should never treat dharma like dog’s food, for a dog does not separate its food into good or bad, but values everything it gets. Okay, so here we’re just looking at the meaning of what dharma is. Okay, the text goes on to various other examples similar to this, but what it is recommending that we do is just analyze and check everything, test it.
We don’t accept, you know, things on face value. And as the Buddha said, you know, just as you test gold by burning, scratching and rubbing it, so to test what I say, don’t accept it merely out of respect. Because then it doesn’t help. We have to test everything to see if there’s value there, see if it’s going to produce what we seek. Now, and as Pänchen then goes on to say: If the Dharma or if the instructions that we’re examining lacks an authentic source, if they’re not coming from, you know, a basic authentic level of realization, then if we try and practice those instructions, even for thousands of years not even a scintilla of authentic realization will arise.
It would be like churning water with a desire for producing butter. Thus the Dharma you should practice should be investigated very clearly and to see what the source is, to see if it is in error and so forth. Does this make sense? Is this sort of instruction useful for us? Okay.
You may think this is obvious and we shouldn’t need to go into this sort of an analysis. I studied in a Tibetan monastery for maybe fifteen years and a lot of the time we were debating these texts. Even though it’s a balance, you know, you take the texts on face value and you say, ‘Okay, I generally accept what’s being said, but let’s look at the detail’. And the more you go into it in detail, the more you realize that actually everything needs to be investigated because we’ve got so many doubts about things and the doubts are not clear to us and it’s unless we’re asked about this or unless this point comes up or the other point or whatever comes up we just we have a tendency to sit back and think oh yeah that sounds reasonable, oh that sounds reasonable. But it doesn’t penetrate, it doesn’t actually sink in.
And we don’t really understand that we don’t understand. So examining these things and raising objections: no, that’s not my experience, no, I don’t like that, I don’t think that’s true, is very important for our own understanding because what’s stopping our understanding is our doubts. And even more deeply seated are misconceptions about how things are. And in fact it could take years of debate to even clarify that we have a doubt about something. Raise a little bit of a doubt about these issues.
Doubt is a very positivewell, there’s three types of doubt: there’s positive, neutral and negative doubt. You could say, or doubt tending to the fact, doubt tending away from the fact. From the point of view of epistemology, of how we generate knowledge of anything, right? Generally we start with a misconception about something, right? Say we have the misconception that there is no enlightenment, right?
We just have a conception: enlightenment is impossible there’s no such thing, right? Now, to overcome or even examine that conception, we don’t have much of an opportunity in society. It’s not being debated at the local milk shop. People on the street are not there saying to us, Have you thought about enlightenment today? Have you contemplated enlightenment?
That it may be possible? That actually it would be in your interest to find out whether it was possible? Because your long term benefit is associated with whether there is enlightenment or not. And we just don’t hear this. Actually we need to contemplate it.
If we had the thought that there is no enlightenment, then it’s hard for us to even generate a doubt about that in our society as it is these days. True? Right? But we need to. We need to overcome the misconception that enlightenment doesn’t exist.
How can we do that? At present we may not even have a doubt tending away from the fact that there might possibly be enlightenment, but probably not. Actually we may have the thought that, oh I probably have a little bit of doubt there somewhere, but actually that doubt hasn’t really touched us. Right? It’s sort of so weak that, you know, we more or less think that there’s really no enlightenment.
Right? But then when we get to the point of generating even a beginning of a doubt that’s a great breakthrough, It may be possible to attain it. I may be able to attain enlightenment. Enlightenment does exist. I in fact may be able to attain it.
I’m not sure. Not even sure what it might be. Maybe out there, or maybe possibly in here, I’m not sure. Where would it be if it did exist? And so on.
So just generating, thinking about these issues and using right? Yes. Yeah. Now that’s true, we do need to take some things on faith. Believe that they do Yeah, yeah.
That’s right. And then we begin to examine and look for reasons to establish and so on. So that’s true. And that may come about that a certain degree of confidence or faith that enlightenment does exist may depend on in a scene like for instance the Dalai Lama, you know, listening to him on TV or going to or someone else similar to that. And then just thinking, oh, like the Dalai Lama has good qualities and he says it exists, know, maybe maybe it does exist.
And so then we have a foothold for examining further what enlightenment may be. So at that point we probably have some doubt then about enlightenment, but maybe doubt tending to the fact and so then we look at that and we examine reasons. In fact for us how we develop is all through conception at present and it’s through applying correct reasons. Correct reasoning is just common sense. But applying correct reasons to establish enlightenment.
In the Tibetan Gelugpa monasteries, you know, debating all the time is the process of trying to establish correct reasons, find correct reasons to establish the existence of, say, enlightenment. And correct reasons do exist. Sorry? Yes. Yes.
It’s a gradual process, but we use it ourselves all the time, but most of our reasoning and so forth is applied to mundane things. But we know how to reason, we know what a logical statement is. But we’re not so familiar with applying it to something beyond this life, to establish karma and rebirth and so on. But in a sense, these are the issues that are of, you know, fundamental importance to us. And there’s a tendency for us to put aside these basic issues of life, you know, like what is our ultimate?
What is our enlightenment? What why are we here? Where are we going? What is death? What is the process of death?
Why do I experience what I’m experiencing in the present? All of these issues we tend to put off and think, well, I’ll deal with those if I ever get the chance when I’m retired. Sort them out at that point. But of course, that approach is not necessarily the best approach, because these issues are so profound. They require contemplation of one’s entire life, even if one lives a long time, let alone, you know, ten years in retirement or whatever.
We have a back to front in our society. We’re too concerned about getting our money and career and family and so forth all sorted out before we actually address the more important issues, which are the whole issue of enlightenment. This life is very short. If we have another ten thousand lifetimes after this or many more than that, then this lifetime is very, very short. We spend a lot of time worried about this one short life.
And before we know it, it’s over and we’re thrown into another life. And we get so involved in that next life. It’s hard for us to step back and understand the process. Okay, so here we’re looking at Dharma. So we’re just dealing with the first verse.
Okay, we’ll skip ahead to the second verse. Now the first verse is just talking about this as the quintessential instruction of the Buddha, or all the Buddhas, not just Śākyamūni Buddha, but any Buddha that’s ever existed or will exist. Now the second verse: Those whose minds are not attached to the pleasures of existence, who strive to make this life with leisure and endowment meaningful, are fortunate students, are fortunate with confidence in the Dharma, who listen with a clear mind to the path pleasing to the Buddha’s. Right. So this instruction, this verse is trying to in this verse Tsongkhapa is saying we should now listen to what’s being said because it’s in it’s to the benefit of you to listen to this because this is talking about your welfare, is talking about your benefit.
Not only the temporary benefit but the long term ultimate benefit that we have to address. If we don’t address it, we’re unhappy. And one of the reasons why we have this lingering sense of not being fulfilled is because this fundamental issue of our deeper issue of our life is not being addressed. He’s recommending listen to what’s being said. As it said, one who then one who is impartial, intelligent, who seeks the meaning in things is said to the one who is the vessel, a correct vessel, for listening to this instruction.
What’s a correct vessel? Again, this is a traditional idea that a vessel is like this and a vessel to which the instruction can be placed and that instruction is then valued and put into action. Otherwise, are three types of vessel. The vessel which has a crack in it leaks so that the instruction when it’s put in gradually leaks away and is forgotten. We’re a bit like that.
All the time we’re getting good instructions from others but we forget them, it’s like we’ve got a crack in the vessel. Or we’re a vessel with something remnant in the bottom of it that is, you know, like a poison or something. And so the instruction that we get, we mix it with afflictive emotions so that it loses its effect Or we’re like an upside down vessel that no matter how much instruction is poured into it just doesn’t really it’s not retained. So here Jetsongkhapa is saying we should not be like that. We should examine the instruction very carefully, the words, and get the words straight.
And then when we have the words straight, contemplate the meaning. Contemplate, contemplate until the meaning becomes clear. And then test it to see if it’s true or not. Is it going to benefit me? Is it actually going to be something that improves my mind?
Can I apply it to my mind and by applying it to my mind does my mind become happier? Does my mind become more settled? Do I become a better person? And so we test it. Right.
So then the third verse is the beginning of the first of the three principles, that is renunciation. Do we need renunciation? We do need renunciation. This is something we have to examine. No sense in just sorry?
What are we going to renounce? Yes. Is it going be a problem for me to renounce something here? There might be something that I’m attached to that I might have to renounce, and I won’t like that. I’m not going to like it if I have to give up something that I’m attached to.
We’re going to lose out. We’re going to miss something. Ah, the attachment. The attachment is like our old friend. We’re almost never separated from attachment.
It’s there when we wake up, there when we go to bed at night. It’s just a question of which attachment it is. Otherwise we’re pretty much attached to everything. Even some small thing is taken away from us and where is it? Who took that?
We are hopelessly addicted to attachment. It’s like we’re heroin addicts on attachment. We’ve been mainlining on attachment from beginningless time and anyone interferes with our object of attachment beware. Anyone that takes something of ours will get angry, will hate them, will resent them. Take away an opportunity, take away something we like.
Our attachment is like something that we’ve mastered, we’ve perfected. Everyone around us is similar, they’ve got an ocean of attachment that’s that’s detachment when that happens. When something someone takes it from us or it misses it and we don’t miss it, we’re detached, we don’t have attachment to that. But if it’s gone and we miss it, right, there’s a sign of attachment to it. If you can just allow that to happen and, you know, there’s no unhappiness that arises, then it’s a sign one’s not attached to that object, which is very good.
Like a person, if that person leaves, goes away, and, you know, we don’t miss the person, or, you know, negative feelings and so forth don’t arise at that point, then there’s a sign that we don’t have attachment, which is good, that’s in our interest not to be attached. But we do tend to be attached to things, have a strong tendency. Overcoming that attachment is really comes in this third verse, the verse on renunciation. Oh, that’s that’s yeah. No, we’re dependent on food.
We’re dependent on oxygen. We’re dependent on the earth remaining relatively stable. And we’re dependent on drinking water, having shelter, all these things. And we often get attached to those things. We tend to be attached to our the house where we live.
We’re attached to the body we have, which is the basis of our mind, physical basis. We’re attached to the body. Someone comes and well, of course, one someone wants to take away a bit of our body, we’d be no, you can’t have that. Not going to give away a finger, I’m not going to give my ear away. That’s part of me, no.
Or if they try and take money out of our bank account, no, you can’t do that. Take away our car, take away our food. We tend to be attached to all these things. So having a balance there isn’t, you know, we have to find a balance. But we do have attachment.
Recognizing it is not so easy. And recognizing the fault of the attachment very difficult. Often we don’t think that attachment has a fault, is detrimental to us. You know, we often think that being attached is a good thing. There’s some debate that being attached to the welfare of others is although it’s attachment, it’s not a negative thing.
And that’s a possible debate that we could have. If we’re attached to the welfare of others, we see other beings and we see them suffering, and we cannot tolerate that. We’ve got to do something. That’s a good thing. But Ah, yeah, we can have commitment without attachment.
Absolutely. Commitment to the welfare of others without attachment is excellent. In a sense commitment associated with love and love is different from attachment is excellent. Commitment with attachment then is not very stable. And if we’re committed to helping others but we’re attached to other beings, those beings that we’re committed to help, then that commitment is unstable.
Because as soon as they do something we don’t like, we may give up the commitment to them. This is, you know, very pervasive for us. Our interaction with others is often determined by our attachment to them. And so therefore it’s fickle. There for a while and then they do something we don’t like and, ah, that’s it.
We relinquish our commitment. Okay. Now generating renunciation. Renunciation, the reason for the need to generate renunciation. Now the third verse: Without pure renunciation there is no means to pacify the mind that searches for resultant pleasure within this ocean of existence.
For the reason that embodied beings are completely bound by longing for existence, I must first seek renunciation. Does everyone have a copy of the Oh, we will print these out for next week. It’s just a front and a back page. Yep. So without pure renunciation there is no means to pacify the mind that searches for resultant or for pleasure within the ocean of existence or the ocean of saṃsāra.
So at present we’re engaged in this pursuit of happiness or pleasure within the ocean of saṃsāra. So while we’re fully committed to that, we’re completely locked up or bound by the longing for continued existence. Renunciation is the opposite of that. Actually it seems when we say that, that well if that doesn’t exist, nothing exists. Our existence only comes about through longing to exist within the ocean of Samsāra.
And true, actually the way we define our life at present is how it is in this imperfect existence. So renunciation is giving that up. Giving up finding any pleasure within saṃsāra. And even when we start to think about that it sounds like You want to renounce renunciation, that’s it. That’s what it is, I don’t want it.
I want is just complete happiness. Of course, that’s what no there isn’t, but that’s what we’re seeking because of our attachment. We still entertain the thought that I can get some measure of happiness out of this existence, you know, no matter how many ways we look at it, we think, yes, okay, if I don’t do it that way, but if I do it that way I’ll get a little bit of happiness. Or otherwise if I do this I’ll get some measure of happiness. But the happiness that we seek is a little bit different from what we actually get.
What we’re seeking is pure happiness, right? We never put effort into, well actually, we don’t think about these things very clearly, but what we seek is a type of happiness that is uncontaminated, It’s really pure, that satisfies, isn’t it? That’s what How can we not sit in that happiness? I just want to stay there. Yeah, no, no, no, that’s it that is exactly our situation is just that.
And this is the difference between, you know, the aspiration to enlightenment. The aspiration to enlightenment is really for the pure happiness. That’s the real, the underlying essential desire that we have. We want that pure uncontaminated happiness that completely satisfies. At the same time, we’re living in the middle of saṃsāra, and we get this contaminated form of happiness all the time.
But we need the contaminated form of happiness survive day to day. But we keep on mistaking that for the real thing. And and it’s very frustrating, you know, we’re putting this energy, but why aren’t I satisfied? And then I keep on having to changing what I want and then trying something new and getting bored with this and no matter how I approach this situation, no matter how big I have the screen at home is, no matter how many movies I’ve got lined up, you know, to watch, no matter what sort of car I’ve got and so on, all of these things, okay, it’s a sort of it’s a sort of contaminated happiness I’m getting back from all of this. But actually we look into it: Oh, it doesn’t really satisfy, doesn’t really produce the goods.
And there’s a danger that we begin to think well it’s just totally impossible that, you know, we ever get anything really, you know, meaningful and then you think that well, you know, this life is miserable, better to die early or you can’t really get anything out of it. In fact that attitude is quite true. We can’t extract from this life, from saṃsāra, pure happiness. So, right, we can’t no matter but this we have to examine is yep? In a sense, yes.
The pure happiness yes, yes. It’s still impermanent. Uncontaminated happiness, pure happiness is impermanent. But once we first generate it, then from then on we can we continue to be able to generate it until it becomes continuous. We have to break through to that sort of happiness.
That sort of happiness will only come about through wisdom that understands the fact of saṃsāra. But weaning ourselves off this, developing renunciation incredibly difficult. It’s like again we’re mainlining on attachment to the pleasures of the world around us. And even the name renunciation seems to be denying us of the pleasure that we deserve or the happiness we deserve. So what we have to do in a sense is examine, you know, our experience and begin to look at the fault of that type of happiness.
Now the happiness we experience is defined as the suffering of change. It’s defined actually as suffering from a Buddhist point of view. The negative feeling is the suffering of suffering. Positive feeling is the suffering of change. Why is it called the suffering of change?
Because it changes into it’s a contaminated happiness that changes again into the feeling of suffering. So even our happiness is defined as suffering, the suffering of change. For this reason the Buddhists are regarded as very pessimistic. But what we need is the pure type of happiness that continues without end. That is what we have to establish.
And it’s only then will we be fully able to relax and not only fully be able to relax, but then we once we achieve that level of uncontaminated happiness, we, along with that, generate the wisdom that understands our situation at the deepest level. And at that point we really become stable beings, able to help others. Yes. Yeah. Yeah, our happiness we experience often is associated with things we like, doing things we like, like going on a holiday, going to a nice place, by the beach.
Yeah, and it’s sunny and a nice summer breeze, the water is warm, good waves, nice food and so on. But it’s all the suffering of change. It’s all right, the good weather’s not going to last. And even if the good weather lasts for a long time, we get a bit tired of it, bored with it after a while anyway. This is an indication that it’s generating the contaminated happiness.
And so then we have to distract ourselves to other objects. Like if we’re down on the beach and we start getting bored, okay, we’ll watch a bit of TV. That’s okay for a while. We’ll just start getting bored with the TV. We’ll go out and do something else.
So it’s an indication that these activities are themselves not the answer. Well, the main issue there is whether it’s contaminated or pure or not. So our pleasure pleasure can be pure happiness can be pure. I don’t think pleasure has to be hedonistic or something like that. Pleasure is simply a positive feeling.
I think, but we can define it as we like. Yeah. Oh no, that’s happiness. That’s ordinary happiness that comes. We do something good for someone else and we feel good.
Why? Because it’s a type of ethics we’re practicing. A higher level of ethics, helping someone else. Ordinary ethics is not harming others, the higher level of ethics is helping others. Through that practicing that type of higher ethics we become happy.
But that happiness we experience is not pure, because it’s based on ignorance, on a very deep level of ignorance that we have. But still it’s okay and it’s something that we need to generate in the interim. That we need. But is that in itself our goal? No, it’s still impure.
It doesn’t fully satisfy even, you know, when we help someone and they’re very we can see that we’ve helped them and they thank us and we feel good about it. Even like a mother, a mother does for a child, a father does for a child. The child, you know, is very grateful for that and they thank their parent, the parent feels good, the child feels good, still that good feeling, that happiness is not the final goal. Even when that arises and we think about it, we’re experiencing it. Oh, I’m feeling happy, I’m having fun.
So when we think about it at that point we realize, oh, it’s still not exactly what I’m seeking. So will we actually know what we’re seeking? We We realize that? For us at present because we haven’t experienced pure happiness, it’s outside of our field of experience. So we haven’t but it’s said that one knows it when one experiences it.
It’s self evidently pure and outside of saṃsāra, of the contaminated experience that we normally have. But to achieve it is incredibly difficult because it relies on renouncing the entire contaminated universe as we understand it. Yeah, that’s sort of in that direction, that’s right. It’s sort of relaxing the mind from the concerns of this life. So it’s sort of it’s starting to head in that direction, in the direction of dharma or virtue.
But our virtue at present is contaminated by ignorance. In fact, everything we experience that we think, everything is utterly contaminated. It’s like, you know, the salt pervades the ocean. At present, everything we do is fully contaminated by ignorance. And because of that then we don’t have the experience of something pure.
So here Tsongkhapa is saying the first thing, the first of the three is renunciation. So at present we’re completely bound by longing to exist within this level of existence. So that that in itself locks us into this continued unsatisfactory experience. But while we still hold the hope that we can get something pure out of the world as we understand it, as long as we’re attached, as long as we think we still can get something out of it, then there’s no possibility of attaining enlightenment. It’s like, you know, a drug addict.
They can’t really function effectively, they’ve got to be able to sober up before they can even begin to, you know, really function at a normal level. So here Tsongkhapa is talking about renunciation. So as he says: Without pure renunciation we do not stop the mind that searches for some sort of resultant pleasure within existence as we know it. Here longing is a word for craving and all embodied beings are bound by the mind that craves and longs for the pleasures of existence or the happiness of existence. But until we see the fault in saṃsāra, then there’s no way we can give it up.
So therefore we need to it comes back to us again to examine, to really look at our existence in a sober light, to work out what is the fact. And we all have a degree of understanding of this. We understand that the happiness that we’ve achieved so far is unsatisfactory. Even if it’s just a little bit unsatisfactory, it’s we have an idea of this. But we probably still have, you know, hope that we can manipulate our existence in some way to extract some of the happiness that we’re really seeking from it.
So this first one is very difficult, renunciation, having to renounce saṃsāra. But again, a lot of what we understand or a lot of our impressions of our existence is based on ignorance. We don’t really have a very clear idea of our own existence. We don’t even have a clear idea of what saṃsāra is. What is saṃsāra?
In one sense what saṃsāra is, is just our mind and body of the present moment. This is saṃsāra. Our mind body as it continues moment to moment to moment. This is what saṃsāra is. It’s not really the external world about us, but our mind and body.
But the mind and body that we have at present is contaminated. When we say it’s contaminated, it just means that it’s generated from ignorance. Anyway, so these topics can be heavy. But for our own well-being we need to investigate them because that at the forefront, the very center of this whole discussion is really what is in our benefit. What will be a benefit to us in the short term, medium term, long term.
So are there any other issues? The Tao, sorry. Existence is Oh, it is! Other beings die for us to live. Oh, other human beings Yeah, we depend on other beings for everything.
Absolutely, other human beings, other non human beings. We’re a complete expression of the law of causation. Everything is coming from other beings. Our physical body is coming from our parents. Our current mind, feelings and so forth, all of these are coming from within the stream, a continuum that goes back into our past life and the life before that.
Everything we eat is really coming about from the work of other beings who have planted it and processed it, packaged it. And within that process countless beings have died, insects have died for us to have food. Same with the water. Just the water that we drink is coming from reservoirs and so forth, and, you know, beings, many beings have died in the process of building those reservoirs and so on. No matter where we look, our existence is continues, we continue to exist through other beings.
We appear to be independent, but actually our life itself is due to other beings. We continue to live due to others. So other beings are incredibly kind. You know, meat we eat is coming from slaughterhouses, and those beings have died for us so that we can eat. They often had no choice in it, were slaughtered.
They were cows that were just slaughtered. And we benefit from that, But we often don’t reflect on the suffering that other beings have gone through, like that being died so that now I eat. They gave up the most precious thing for them in their life, was their very life itself, and so on. Yes, causation is pervasive. We depend on others.
Right. Okay. It’s getting a bit late, we should stop there. Sorry. Oh, okay.
Anyway, we didn’t get as far into renunciation as I’d hoped we would have gotten, but that’s alright. We will next week we’ll go into the ten inner jewels of the Kadampa. The inner jewels, the ten. Anyway, we’ll just quickly dedicate any merit to the benefit of other beings, so that all other beings find the path to pure happiness, so that we ourselves generate understanding of that state and are able to enter the path leading to that state. Certainly once we attain liberation, it doesn’t mean to say we’re finished, that’s when the work begins.
One is then able to live like our current life in an undiluted way, in an enlightened way, and really be able to help other beings. Like one who is outside of the samsaric process, only a being like that is really able to help other beings.