Translation by Dr. Sant Singh Khalsa
The Pandits — the religious scholars, the learned ones — they read all the sacred texts. Then they argue and debate about what they've read.
Their intellect is turned the wrong way. They don't understand — because understanding would require transformation, not just accumulation.
Through 8.4 million incarnations they wander confused. The reading doesn't save them — and neither does the debate.
This is Guru Amar Das's most direct critique of pundits — learned scholars of his time whose role was to interpret the Vedas, Upanishads, and other sacred texts. His critique is not of learning itself but of learning that accumulates without transforming.
Buddh (intellect) ulat (reversed/inverted) — their intelligence runs backward. They use the sacred texts to argue about the sacred, rather than to be transformed by it. The more they argue, the further they get from what the texts were pointing toward.
This critique is perpetually relevant: any tradition can produce scholars who know everything about the tradition and have been touched by none of it.
Have you ever read about or studied something spiritual and felt less connected to it afterward, not more? What went wrong?
Translation by Dr. Sant Singh Khalsa·How we use AI