NKT and Restaurants

[DharmaSpace]

Source
http://dailylamrim.com/2011/08/06/why-the-new-kadampa-tradition-is-like-a-restaurant-and-should-you-eat-there/

Why the New Kadampa Tradition is like a Restaurant, and should you eat there?
Imagine you are hungry – hungry for some truly nourishing food. Now let’s suppose there is a restaurant nearby that you haven’t tried yet. If you are anything like me, you will check out the reviews on the internet beforehand.

The official website looks good – very polished and professional. It says that the head Chef trained in a country a long way away, and has brought all the special ingredients with him. He has put together a menu using these traditional ingredients, but the presentation is Western and modern, rather than the culturally appropriate presentation you would find in his home country.

It turns out that there are many websites talking about this restaurant. In fact, it seems to be very popular and there are over 1100 across the world, which have sprung up in the last 20 years or so. In fact there is an awful lot of very positive comment about the restaurant, and especially the food, which seems to be very acceptable to modern western people.

In addition to the positive comments, there are also plenty of reviews which are less favourable. Who is writing these reviews and what are they saying?

Some people have left extremely critical reviews of the restaurant. They say that the food is absolutely terrible. They say that everything on the menu is poisonous, and the people who run the restaurants are fools, or worse, liars and peddlers of dangerous food. In fact, some go so far as to criticise every single aspect of the restaurant, from the food to how the restaurant was started and how it is run. It does not look like they eat there though.

When I see reviews like this, I think ‘for a chain of over 1100 restaurants to be running across the world, this review does not ring true – if it were so bad, people would not eat there – people are not all stupid!’ The longer these restaurants stay open (and more are opening all the time) the less valid these supercritical reviews seem to be. In fact, when I look closely, many of the most critical reviews are written by the same three or four people. They even run forums for people who have had bad experiences at the restaurant, and refuse to allow any positive comments to be made. It is their forum, so it is fair enough that they make the rules, but it certainly gives a distorted view of the restaurant, and not one I would rely on!

For others, the main problem is this popularity. They contend that for food to be really special, it must be difficult to obtain. It should only be enjoyed by a select few, who should undergo many hardships, forsake their normal lives, and seek out a chef who can show them how to cook in a remote location. For them, it is just wrong for such special food to be available to everyone.

To these people, I would say – we are all have our own preferences, and just because some food is widely available and easy to obtain does not mean it is any less nourishing.

Some reviews ignore the food altogether, and focus on the Chef. They say that he is not a real Chef, and is not qualified. They spend huge amounts of time researching his training and qualifications, asking many people (some of whom dislike the Chef) what they think, and then drawing their conclusions.

To these people I would say – yes, we need to be very careful about the qualifications of the Chef, but to use an English saying, ‘the proof of the pudding is in the eating’. There are more important qualities to be checked than just a Certificate – do thousands and thousands of people regularly eat at his restaurants, and come back for more week after week? Is he recognised by other famous Chefs as being one of the best? Is he regarded as highly knowledgeable in his field, and has he personally cooked every meal to perfection?  Do his books (more than 20 highly acclaimed books explained in detail how his recipes work, and how to cook them) earn positive reviews from independent reviewers? Are these books based on the works of great Chefs of the past, and do they present a completely coherent and correct corpus of information? The answer to all these questions is yes.

Other reviews have been left by people who prefer different restaurants. Some of them do not like restaurant which are similar to theirs. They think that all the restaurants which serve this kind of food should come under the same banner.

I see no need for this, and if the restaurant is popular, why should it change.

The owners of other restaurants also seem to dislike it. They feel like they should be able to tell this restaurant what food it can and cannot serve.

But these restaurants are completely different enterprises, although the food they serve is largely the same. The Chef of this restaurant is on record as saying that all restaurants have their own special qualities, and they should respect each other, rather than criticise each other.

Some people write negative reviews because they have had bad experiences at the restaurants. No doubt, this is true. Like any large organisation, mistakes are made. The restaurant itself states that it is ‘basically sound with room for improvement’.  Sometimes the service is bad and sometimes the managers and staff make bad decisions.  Sometimes the food simply does not agree with the customer. Other times, the customer may have an expectation that the food should look a certain way, and take objection when the cook insists that it should be served in accordance with the recipe. Still other customers come to the restaurant after having eaten in other places, and find the food difficult to eat, given the strength of the flavour still in their mouths.

These people are absolutely entitled to write whatever they want, and from their point of view what they say is true and justified. But the fact is that I am a different person from them, and I need to make my own decision.

Believe it or not, some of the reviews which criticise the restaurant are written by people who don’t eat at all! They are very clever and very honourable.  They have studied many different types of food, and researched the history of the ingredients and the recipes. They have written books on how different restaurants have been set up, and who wrote the recipes.  They even teach others how to study restaurants and food.  But, perhaps because they have studied so many different types of food, all purporting to have their own special qualities, they have come to believe that there is no truly nourishing food. Or perhaps it is the academic side of the subject that interests them most.

Although what they do is fascinating and absorbing, and their work is thorough and not ill intended, to me the point of restaurants is to find something I like and eat it – not visit them all and observe.

Finally, some people not only review the restaurant, but spend huge amounts of time debating restaurant on internet forums. Regardless of whatever the managers of the restaurants offer in the way of answers, these people seem to never be satisfied. There is always another question to ask, another allegation to make.

In fact, we could spend our whole life arguing about the pros and cons of the restaurant. And it is important that we read the reviews to the extent that we can establish at least the general situation, from balancing all the reviews that are available.

But what are we to do? We are still hungry!


At some point, if we have hunger, we need to find appropriate nutritious food. In the end, the only way to tell if the food is any good is to go to the restaurant and eat some.

I thought I share it with everyone, some of the points I got out of this, is that if Dorje Shugden is a spirit then as a spirit they will corrupt the Buddha Dharma, but why are more learned masters coming up through the reliance of Dorje Shugden.

Many more people feel peace and happiness reciting the mantra, doing the practise and see their lives becoming better and better. If I was a spirit I would cause more monks and practitioners to not study, do more practise and to forget our spriritual practise. But it would seem more peopel are becoming more determined to do spiritual practise after they start practicing Dorje Shugden.

[beggar]

You've brought up a good point DharmaSpace: how DS only ever promotes the Dharma, Tsongkhapa's teaching. This is also what he says when in trance through oracles. Always, he teaches Dharma - in the first place, he arose specifically to protect the teachings of Nagarjuna's middle way, as taught by Tsongkhapa. He "exists" as a Dharma Protector with the main purpose of protecting... THE DHARMA

It was Nechung, in fact, who requested him to arise for this very purpose. And now, apparently, it was Nechung who "advised" the Dalai Lama that Dorje Shugden is harmful and a spirit? Something is very wrong here. (in the first place, why is the Dalai Lama, the highest lama in the land, taking advice from an unenlightened spirit?)

[DharmaDefender]

Nice post DharmaSpace, and interesting analogy! It points to a trait Ive noticed amongst people who wish to avoid their practice. (And I say this with the deepest respect) Ive noticed that they tend to overanalyse and intellectualise everything, to the point where theyre so distracted by the reasons why they cannot or shouldnt practice, that they never get any practice done at all. Or theyre so busy debating and talking about the insignificant parts that they totally miss the point of the practice. Case in point - the people who argue about the validity of the Heart Sutra. Does it teach nihilism or emptiness? Jesus. To me, its just self-created excuses to not practice.

One last thing - "I see no need for this, and if the restaurant is popular, why should it change." - I think this is the confidence that I admire so much in NKT. Theyve hit their formula for success and they dont need to worry if what theyre doing is correct. Like the post points out, the gripes seem to be coming from the same one or two people...sour grapes!

[jeremyg]

Thankyou DharmaSpace for sharing this. It really put a really literal twist on the ban. If everyone can read this and apply it to the ban, maybe we can see how insignificant or useless what some people are doing. Nice to put a literal representation of the ban, it lets others understand more. Thanks again

[harrynephew]

You've brought up a good point DharmaSpace: how DS only ever promotes the Dharma, Tsongkhapa's teaching. This is also what he says when in trance through oracles. Always, he teaches Dharma - in the first place, he arose specifically to protect the teachings of Nagarjuna's middle way, as taught by Tsongkhapa. He "exists" as a Dharma Protector with the main purpose of protecting... THE DHARMA

It was Nechung, in fact, who requested him to arise for this very purpose. And now, apparently, it was Nechung who "advised" the Dalai Lama that Dorje Shugden is harmful and a spirit? Something is very wrong here. (in the first place, why is the Dalai Lama, the highest lama in the land, taking advice from an unenlightened spirit?)

What you just mentioned resonated so much in my heart. This is so awesomely true. Dorje Shugden just wants Je Tsongkhapa's teachings to flourish and for practitioners to realize the path of the Lamrim as taught by Lama Tsongkhapa.. This is so profound and yet so simple.

Yet people add in all sorts of weird stuff in order to get things their way. Their inconceivable hang ups and agendas really spoil everything. Imagine a child who couldn't finish his/her homework and had their work book thrown out of the window. We need  disciplinarian to tame us when we are off the path and we need a person to encourage us by giving us signs when we are on the right track.

There's no other better candidate than Dorje Shugden.

He is a Buddha

[Tammy]

You've brought up a good point DharmaSpace: how DS only ever promotes the Dharma, Tsongkhapa's teaching. This is also what he says when in trance through oracles. Always, he teaches Dharma - in the first place, he arose specifically to protect the teachings of Nagarjuna's middle way, as taught by Tsongkhapa. He "exists" as a Dharma Protector with the main purpose of protecting... THE DHARMA

It was Nechung, in fact, who requested him to arise for this very purpose. And now, apparently, it was Nechung who "advised" the Dalai Lama that Dorje Shugden is harmful and a spirit? Something is very wrong here. (in the first place, why is the Dalai Lama, the highest lama in the land, taking advice from an unenlightened spirit?)

Hi Begger,

I always enjoy reading your posts, you are always concise and straight to the point! No twisting, turning and beating around the bush.. Please keep it up.

This is so true! when we know exactly what (or rather, who) Dorje Shugden is, there is NOT DOUBT that he is an enlightened dharma proctecter who's sole existence is to protect the holy dharma, hence it's practitioners. This is evidence by how DS practitioners had grown in terms of number of practitioners and centres around the world and DS temples are, in general, financially stronger than those which do not practice DS.

Let's continue the practice and the results will show.

[pgdharma]

"At some point, if we have hunger, we need to find appropriate nutritious food. In the end, the only way to tell if the food is any good is to go to the restaurant and eat some."

How true, if we need dharma we have to go to a dharma center to get all the dharma knowledge to quench out thirst for dharma. We have to learn the dharma, put it into practice then we will have the results. Just like if we were to go to a restaurant, order the food, then eat  to fill up our stomachs. It is no point arguing which is right and which is wrong, which is good or which is bad. Try it and we will see results. So as in Dorje Shugden practice, many are ignorant of the truth and simply argue or condemn the practice. If  the anti Shugdenpas were to at least try out, their will see the benefits.

Thank you, Dharmaspace, for this enlightening analogy!

[Klein]

Nice post DharmaSpace, and interesting analogy! It points to a trait Ive noticed amongst people who wish to avoid their practice. (And I say this with the deepest respect) Ive noticed that they tend to overanalyse and intellectualise everything, to the point where theyre so distracted by the reasons why they cannot or shouldnt practice, that they never get any practice done at all. Or theyre so busy debating and talking about the insignificant parts that they totally miss the point of the practice. Case in point - the people who argue about the validity of the Heart Sutra. Does it teach nihilism or emptiness? Jesus. To me, its just self-created excuses to not practice.

I agree with you, DharmaDefender. People are too busy debating on the petty issues and missing the point of the practice. If Dorje Shudgen is truly a demon and causing so much grief and suffering, why doesn't HH the Dalai Lama do a fire puja and just get rid of Dorje Shudgen? Don't tell me Avalokiteshavara can't get rid of Dorje Shugden???

Furthermore, why do the lamas who practise Dorje Shugden reincarnate back to planet Earth and continue their mission here? Why are they not in the 3 lower realms since they practice demonic worship. There's so much contradiction and yet people choose to continue to be blinded so that there can be years of intellectual discussion to cover the laziness.

Otherwise, choose another lineage, go all the way and become Enlightened ALREADY!!! Use the time to focus on one's practice and not waste time criticising. Doesn't it make more sense?

I pray that NKT double their number of centres worldwide and conquer the world with Dorje Shugden practice. 

[triesa]

Thank you DharmaSpace for this sharing. I like what you posted because it is very easy for everyone to comprehend, as all of us have eaten in restaurants.

The fact that why some people only put their effort in criticising others and neglect the good qualities is mainly due to jealousy and an addiction to seeing faults only.

McDonalds is bad for some people, but for many, it serves to offer a reasonable meal and keep them away from hunger. So is Mcdonalds bad? As long as there are patrons to Mcdonalds, then it is offering something that these people want. Different strokes for different folks.....just another anology on this one.

[DharmaSpace]

Very good piece of writing and it is very easy to digest and relate to. Fantastic analogy through this person's writing. Though a detractor may say many people who subscribe a point, does not make it right or correct . Best thing would be for people to experience the NKT centers and the people there, people can hide but through observation one can see what sort of people these are. And do not forget to check out the transformations in the people's minds. And if I am right the NKT folks do lamarim study and meditations, mind transformation for it not to happen is impossible. Experience the monks and practitioners in Shar Gaden, Serpom  they will blow your preconceptions away.

[Poonlarp]

Very good analogy!

Agree to the posts mentioned about why there are people spending time busy criticizing instead of doing something beneficial?

In the case of Dorje Shugden practice, I believe the other side who do the critics to bring down the practice is also Buddhist practitioners, the moment they do this already break the vow of avoiding divisive speech.

Our speech should not bring divorce to people but harmony and unity to people. Every words from a real Buddhist's mouth is to benefit others and not to harm, how could they do this?

Ir-regards of Shugden is a demon or spirit or not, the people who mouth divisive speech is bringing down the qualities of Buddhism.   

[icy]

Thank you Dharmaspace for this easy to understand analogy.  I would also like to put forth is the bottom line, the result of what we get out from the practice of DS - is it beneficial or not?  Those who practise DS will know what I am saying as many have experienced his beneficial blessing.  Together with this reason and with the study of DS, faith grows and spiritual nourishment ensues.  Goodness cannot be contained, it will surely spread quickly for people needs nourishment to sustainable peace and happiness.

[Tenzin K]

This is really a wonderfully sharing.

There is no way that we can bent the truth of the purpose of Lord Shugden. The practice is proven benefitted a lot of people by looking at the result as mentioned in Dharmaspace anlogy, 1100 branches of retaurants across the world. This is a great evident. Who can support to have that much of branches if there is no demand?

The prove of the benefit is not just what we seeing now but the history which stated the great master that brought the practice and pass on from one great master to another are the people that gained great attainments and recognized.

More and more people will understand  the truth of existent Lord Shugden and the benefits of the practice. What they going to find out is not just words but with supported facts and the experience of the truth.

For people that criticised, what are their solid basis?

[Positive Change]

Thank you DharmaSpace... I do love the analogy of a restaurant, chef, the food etc. A restaurant exist in part due to the creator (chef) and the patronage of its clients. The "reviews" as one puts it is merely that. Sure it could sway the opinion of the clients but inevitably the decision lies on the clients themselves to try the food so to speak.

If the restaurant is very popular but it still gets some scathing reviews one will then wonder whether or not the food critic is worth his/her salt... Then again it is merely a review and one has to try for oneself to form an opinion really!

But then again, sometimes... restaurant, especially famous or top notch ones do actually "employ" such critics to actually give a scathing review so it is not always positive. People are instantly wary when everything is good and nothing is bad especially when it comes to taste as it is so subjective. Hence these "spanner in the works" do actually help in the spread and popularity of the restaurant because it becomes more believable.

As negative publicity is publicity in the end and these days "negativity" plays a very strong role in the forming of an opinion.

Does this not sound familiar? Not in any way putting down the practice of Dorje Shudgen to a restaurant but it is interesting to note the methods used to spread the popularity.... at least, that is how i see it!

[DharmaSpace]

I think that analogy on eating came from the lamrim or was it a dharma sharing that I have also heard of it before.

Yes if we are hungry we need to eat, and no one can tell us what restaurant is good or bad, well they can tell but we dont need to take whatever they say as gospel truth. And I heard this lama said we need to practise dharma that we use our mind to think, our ears to listen to then decide for ourselves. Very excellent advice. One man's poison is another man's meat, if you dont like to eat or cannot eat do not go and criticise what others are doing as people who always stand from the outside are normally the ones who have a million and one critcisms. 

So if hungry eat!!