The Limits of Rationalizing Empirical Buddhist Wisdom

When ancient empirical teachings of Buddha, Tsongkhapa, and Milarepa are subjected to logical systematization, their primal depth begins to lose the personal and transcendent experience that is so difficult to convey in words. In its attempt to give Buddhism a clear philosophical form, Lamaism falls into the trap of artificial intellectualization, whereby aspects that are truly beyond discourse become casualties of rationalization. This tendency contradicts the very nature of the Buddhist path, which has always relied on direct experience and inner transformation rather than on dry dogmas or systematized schemes. Historical context shows that the Tibetan traditions, still at the crossroads with shamanism, were influenced by preachers who asserted the nonexistence of God. Such an approach only deepened the contradictions and muddled spiritual development, leaving the immeasurable energy of psychic experience lost in conceptual frameworks. In the end, attempting to transform an empirical, living practice into a strict philosophical system inevitably leads to the distortion of the original essence, where every logical explanation becomes a barrier on the path to directly understanding truth.

Why are Lamaism followers unable to correctly interpret the teachings of Buddha, Tsongkhapa, and Milarepa?

The primary reason is that they attempt to endow the teachings with a logically systematized philosophical structure, while the essential nature of Buddhist teachings—as well as the teachings of figures like Buddha, Tsongkhapa, and Milarepa—always remained on an empirical level, free from discursive description. Thus, when they try to “intellectualize” and define that which by its very nature defies verbal formulation, they inevitably distort its original meaning.

As noted in one source:
"That void, into which a person’s soul must completely dissolve, represents the coveted goal of Lamaism adherents. Lamaism attempts to philosophically understand Buddhism, yet Buddhism never tried to comprehend or define nirvana—in its view, defining nirvana in words would destroy nirvana itself. Buddhism halted at the level of the empirical, placing the human psyche in an unnatural state of artificially suppressed mental processes. Buddhism is indifferent to the Deity, the soul, the metaphysical world, or the beginning and end of the cosmos. For it, existence itself is identified with the concept of evil; it is a dissonance that constantly torments mankind." (source: 11_53.txt)

Another important point lies in the cultural and historical context. The Tibetan peoples had not yet completely transitioned from shamanism, and the arrival of Buddhist preachers was accompanied by the claim that there is no God, leaving room for myriad interpretations in which various forms of being gave way to psychic energy. This is expressed as follows:
"One of such isolated regions is the world of Lamaism. The substratum that 'froze' Tibet, stalling its spiritual development in the pre-biblical era, was Buddhism. The fact is that in Buddhism there is no idea of God... According to the logic of religious development, after some time they could have accepted the idea of a Unified Deity and embarked on a universal path of human development... But Buddhist preachers came along and said that there is no God." (source: 1082_5405.txt)

Thus, the attempt to convert an empirical experience and inner transformation into a strict philosophical system results in the loss of the profound, indescribable aspects of the teachings of Buddha, Tsongkhapa, and Milarepa. Proper understanding of these teachings requires recognizing that truth cannot be fully comprehended by logic or captured through discursive thought, which ultimately becomes the core problem in their interpretation by Lamaism followers.