On the Ignorance of the Learned

Translator's Introduction

When Jigme Tenpe Nyima wrote the text that I am calling (with apologies to William Hazlitt) “On the Ignorance of the Learned,”[1] he was not making a strikingly original point. There was nothing new about the view that intellectualism can be a pitfall on the path, and warnings of its dangers are commonplace throughout Tibetan literature. Indeed, the notion that book learning is merely superficial, while it is meditation that brings about genuine and lasting wisdom, is an ancient one. In Tibetan literature, this dichotomy takes dramatic form in the familiar trope of the scholarly geshe being outwitted (and possibly humiliated) by a simple yogi—best exemplified in Milarepa’s encounters with the arrogant, scheming Geshe Tsakpuwa.

Yet, if there was a change in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, it was that schools such as the Nyingma and Kagyü, which had traditionally been associated with tantric adepts and meditating hermits like Milarepa, began to accommodate large-scale scholasticism. These schools had produced their own great scholars in the past, but widespread monastic education of the kind introduced through the establishment of study colleges was something new. And it meant that what had long been a characteristic of other traditions—memorization of treatises, formal debate, and so on—was increasingly a feature within their own traditions as well.[2]

Jigme Tenpe Nyima studied Buddhist philosophical topics, including the Middle Way, transcendent perfection of wisdom (prajñāpāramitā), and Abhidharma, with khenpos trained in the Geluk system. He was even taught by Mipham’s erstwhile opponent, Alak Dongak Gyatso. The form of education he received emphasizes logic and debate. And, in the long term, this training seemingly stood him in good stead, for his writings demonstrate remarkable clarity and precision, even when the topic is tantra or Dzogchen. Still, the colophon to “On the Ignorance of the Learned” tells us that he wrote the text from personal experience. This might mean that he initially fell victim to the kind of unhealthy intellectualism he describes, which Patrul Rinpoche calls “the demon of excessive learning.”[3] Or, if he was not subject to this himself—and he does also claim, somewhat unconvincingly, that his own education was minimal—he might at least have witnessed it in others.

In addition to listing the dangers of intellectualism, Jigme Tenpe Nyima’s text also offers definitions of what it means to be truly learned or wise from a Buddhist perspective. Unsurprisingly, genuine learning turns out to be more a matter of integrating and embodying the instructions than collecting or even memorizing them. As a well-known saying puts it, “The sign of true learning is a peaceful temperament. The mark of meditation is a reduction in the mental afflictions.” The kind of intellectual Jigme Tenpe Nyima describes has a mind that is far from peaceful, as it restlessly rehearses arguments and frantically searches for faults in everything. Such a scholar is an example of what Tibetans call a togewa, a sophist or logician who cannot transcend the intellectual realm—who is, we might almost say, incurably pedantic.

It has no title in the original Tibetan. ↩
Longchen Rabjam, it should be noted, studied in his youth at Sangpu Neutok, a Kadampa monastery famed for its scholarly tradition. His own writings also warn of the limitations of scholasticism, as when in A Mirror Revealing the Crucial Points: Advice on the Ultimate Meaning, he states, “If realization does not dawn from within, dry explanations and theoretical understanding will not bring the fruit of awakening.” During his lifetime, however, the Nyingma did not have a well-developed scholastic tradition of its own. ↩
shes gnyen yon tan gyi bdud. The term occurs in Patrul Rinpoche’s Total Victory over the Māras: An Instruction on How to Diagnose the Causes of Demonic Influence and Overcome Them (bdud kyi rgyu brtags te spong tshul gyi man ngag bdud las rnam rgyal). My translation of the term is based on Ringu Tulku Rinpoche’s oral explanation. ↩

Hide

On the Ignorance of the Learned

by Dodrupchen Jikmé Tenpé Nyima

The precious teaching collections of the Omniscient Guide are Dharma teachings that we should learn; they are the fundamental scriptures with which we should become acquainted. For bodhisattvas, studying these texts brings with it an increase in the causes of all-seeing wisdom and mastery of the methods for bringing those of diverse inclinations to spiritual maturity.

Nevertheless, there are some these days who pursue study and yet the more they learn, the more arrogant they become. They think, “Now I have studied widely. I know the scriptural approach. I am learned in the various collections.” And when they see others who have not amassed comparable learning, they regard them with contempt, thinking: “These people are fools, dullards, simpletons, befuddled, uneducated.” Even when reading texts by fellow scholars, they lack due reverence and devotion for the sacred Dharma. No sooner have they opened the covers of the book than they are wondering, “What have we here? How is this written?” As unstable in their understanding, as if their intelligence were laid out on a bed of reeds, they point their fingers accusingly and gesticulate like drunkards. Encountering a particular claim, they think, “This doesn’t accord with the Pramāṇa texts on logic and epistemology.” Confronted with another assertion, they say to themselves, “This does not fit with what is taught in the Abhidharma.” Reading of some further proposition, they decide, “Oh, this can be refuted by such and such a line of thinking.” Critiquing in such a way, they reach the end with no clear idea of what it contains or maintains, no notion of what it asserts or posits.

Such scholars think, “When others debate with my own system, they will say such and such, so I must reply as follows… But then the opponent might counter with such and such a response, so what would be the best reply?” Constantly preoccupied with such thoughts, they feel no pleasure during the day, while sleep evades them at night. Even if sleep should come, as they are consumed by these matters even in their dreams, their minds will be perturbed from the very first moment of waking. Dismissing the works of the profound path, such as the progressive stages of meditation on bodhicitta and compassion, as too easy to understand, they prefer works of sophistry. And whenever they come across such books they think, “Oh, now this I must study!” Opening up a volume, they immediately muster all their intellect and ask such questions as “What is the meaning of this? Now this is a mere illustration. Is this a refutation? Is this a valid proof? Does this follow logically from the premise? Is there a logical contradiction here?” Scribbling notations about hair-splitting points, they pass the best part of the afternoon, their pulse racing, their breath uneven.

From the very moment that you focus on such topics as the "conceptual isolate" (ldog pa) of the Buddha or the "substance universal" (rdzas spyi) of sentient beings, all faith and renunciation diminish and disappear. Eventually, at the time of death, all that you have studied will be exposed as nothing more than dry, empty words; all your analysis and research amounting to nothing more than hollow ideas; and all that you have read garnering little more than false suppositions—all based on squandered opportunities. It is then plainly apparent that all this analysis and categorising into matter, consciousness and anomalous factors is nothing more than casting stones in the dark.

If you think about it, you will see that the path of logic is intended to dispel incorrect patterns of thought. Yet once such patterns have been dispelled, it is necessary to set out upon the genuine path, and, having set out upon this path, to make manifest the wisdom of perfect liberation.

To be learned in the Dharma does not mean merely to have heard a lot of teachings. “The one who, because of learning, feels disenchantment for the three realms—such a person is truly learned,” says the Abhidharma. One ought, therefore, to examine any pretensions of learning based on knowing a few facts about this or that. The Sūtra Requested by Bhadramāyākāra teaches that the essence of being learned is to practise whatever Dharma you have heard and to benefit others by explaining it to them well. So we must be wary of presuming to uphold the lifestyle of the learned while pursuing only a limited, superficial approach to logical reasoning bereft of such meaningful objectives.

Although my own education resembles nothing more than the watery traces of a silkworm upon a lotus, I have some experience in these matters, and so I, the crazy beggar Jigme, offer this mad talk for those who might be in a similar position.

| Translated by Adam Pearcey, 2014. With many thanks to Alak Zenkar Rinpoche, who kindly explained some difficult phrases.

Bibliography

Tibetan Edition

'jigs med bstan pa'i nyi ma. rDo grub chen ’jigs med bstan pa’i nyi ma’i gsung ’bum. 7 vols. Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2003. BDRC: W25007, vol. 1: 351–354

Secondary Sources

Pearcey, Adam. Beyond the Ordinary Mind: Dzogchen, Rimé, and the Path of Perfect Wisdom. Boulder: Snow Lion, 2018.

Version: 2.0-20250224

On the Ignorance of the Learned

Translator's Introduction

On the Ignorance of the Learned

Bibliography

Tibetan Edition

Secondary Sources

Further information:

Download this text:

DONATIONS

Quick Links

Tools

Other Sites

Social

LICENSE