Why did Buddha beg alms from the public? Did Buddha himself explain his rationality for doing this?

[Vinayaka]

Well; I don't see any merit in the above.

Of course. You're a Muslim. You're not supposed to understand Buddhism. Many people here have stated why Buddha lived on alms, and yet for some reason, you are unable to fathom why this is the history that is believed by 97% of the population, I figure. I take it Islam does not allow for the renunciate life.

 

[crossfire]

Agnostics say Buddha was one of them; do they beg alms like Buddha or they support Buddha for begging alms?

Buddha was a young man when he is stated to left home; he could have worked for a living. I don't buy that a wise man like Buddha would opt for begging alms instead.

He was a prince. When he saw the suffering of the people (which his father worked hard to shield him from seeing,) he was so moved by compassion that he was determined to find a means to end suffering.

 

[nameless]

In dharmic traditions, it is the giver who gains the merit actually. The monks accepts alms not because they are lazy or anything else, they wants to share the merits they gained through monastic life to the common people, it is out of their generosity that they accept alms.

More you can find here - Alms(Buddism) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[paarsurrey]

namaskaram :namaste



if you look at buddhas actions from the perspective of sanatana dharma you will see that buddha supported exactly the same moral principles . it is simply that buddha went against some of the practices of the corrupt brahmin preisthood of his day .
and through the practices he introduced he re-established perfect sanatana dharma .

I agree and appreciate that Buddha's intention was to re-establish the "eternal law" or the truthful religion but begging of alms is not an eternal law or sanatana dharma. If a whole community indulges in it; there were be nobody to give alms. I don't think Buddha could do or teach such an unreasonable thing.

One of our friends here referred to a Sutra which mentions, if I have understood it correctly:

"Far better for him to swallow
A fiery hot iron ball
Than that immoral and uncontrolled
He should eat the country’s alms."

Buddha did not like that one should eat the country's alms; it is as good as to swallow a fiery hot iron ball.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks

 

[paarsurrey]

In dharmic traditions, it is the giver who gains the merit actually. The monks accepts alms not because they are lazy or anything else, they wants to share the merits they gained through monastic life to the common people, it is out of their generosity that they accept alms.

More you can find here - Alms(Buddism) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for directing me to the Wikipedia article; it concentrates more on giving alms rather than seeking or begging alms.

It is charitable that if a needy come; one should respect him and give him food and drink.

Thanks

 

[crossfire]

I agree and appreciate that Buddha's intention was to re-establish the "eternal law" or the truthful religion but begging of alms is not an eternal law or sanatana dharma. If a whole community indulges in it; there were be nobody to give alms. I don't think Buddha could do or teach such an unreasonable thing.

One of our friends here referred to a Sutra which mentions, if I have understood it correctly:

"Far better for him to swallow
A fiery hot iron ball
Than that immoral and uncontrolled
He should eat the country’s alms."

Buddha did not like that one should eat the country's alms; it is as good as to swallow a fiery hot iron ball.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks

Actually, it is saying that being immoral and uncontrolled is like swallowing a fiery hot iron ball. This would be especially true if you were to ask for alms in such an uncontrolled and immoral state.

 

[nameless]

Thanks for directing me to the Wikipedia article; it concentrates more on giving alms rather than seeking or begging alms.

The Buddha taught that kindness and compassion would help to reach nirvana, so it was also an opportunity for the monks to develop their compassion by sharing their gained merits with common people.

 

[crossfire]

If you want more information about what hellfire means to a Buddhist (in regards to the quote about being immoral and uncontrolled is like swallowing a fiery hot iron ball,) see this sutta:

The Fire Sermon

 

[paarsurrey]

Buddha taught a Middle-way; the cult of begging alms cannot be called a middle way, in my opinion.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Buddha taught a Middle-way; the cult of begging alms cannot be called a middle way, in my opinion.

What is mid-way between begging and refusing food?

 

[paarsurrey]

What is mid-way between begging and refusing food?

Middle way is between the two extremes;or the best of it. One engages in the life fully and yet does not crave for the worldly to achieve the purpose of life.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram :namaste

I agree and appreciate that Buddha's intention was to re-establish the "eternal law" or the truthful religion but begging of alms is not an eternal law or sanatana dharma. If a whole community indulges in it; there were be nobody to give alms. I don't think Buddha could do or teach such an unreasonable thing.

it is not so much a case of 'begging' alms but accepting the support of ones family and comunity .

this is a very important distinction .

in vedic culture it is customary to share with others particularly visiting or traveling strangers .
simmilarly it is accepted in vedic culture that one goes through four stages of life , four ashrama's , ......
brahmacharia , the students life .
grihastha , maried or family life .
vanaprastha , retired life .
sannyasa , complete renunciation .

it is customary that in vanaprastha ones family support the retiree who usualy in turn takes another role in the family nurturing and taking care of the children whilst the grihastha fullfills his dutys , ....but should one wish to take on the commitment of full sannyasa and renounce all possesions , home and family ties , the comunity as a whole offers support to that person out of respect he does not need to beg , he is looked after by others out of respect for his ashram in life .

this is the way of sanatana dharma .

If a whole community indulges in it; there were be nobody to give alms. I don't think Buddha could do or teach such an unreasonable thing.

sanatana dharma teaches a ballanced way of life for this reason there are clearly deffined stages , this provides for all in society , everyone has his place and his dharma it is not an indulgence but a duty .

in the same way buddha taught rules for the lay comunity and for monks therefore every on has their place in life and a responcibility to wards others .

even the sannyasa in the renounced order takes o the responcibility of teaching others , it is a perfect system

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Middle way is between the two extremes;or the best of it. One engages in the life fully and yet does not crave for the worldly to achieve the purpose of life.

You didn't answer me.

 

[paarsurrey]

namaskaram :namaste



it is not so much a case of 'begging' alms but accepting the suppoet of ones family and comunity .

this is a very important distinction .

in vedic culture it is customary to share with others particularly visiting or traveling strangers .
simmilarly it is accepted in vedic culture that one goes through four stages of life , four ashrama's , ......
brahmacharia , the students life .
grihastha , maried or family life .
vanaprastha , retired life .
sannyasa , complete renunciation .

it is customary that in vanaprastha ones family support the retiree who usualy in turn takes another role in the family nurturing and taking care of the children whilst the grihastha fullfills his dutys , ....but should one wish to take on the commitment of full sannyasa and renounce all possesions , home and family ties , the comunity as a whole offers support to that person out of respect he does not need to beg , he is looked after by others out of respect for his ashram in life .

this is the way of sanatana dharma .
sanatana dharma teaches a ballanced way of life for this reason there are clearly deffined stages , this provides for all in society , everyone has his place and his dharma it is not an indulgence but a duty .

in the same way buddha taught rules for the lay comunity and for monks therefore every on has their place in life and a responcibility to wards others .

even the sannyasa in the renounced order takes o the responcibility of teaching others , it is a perfect system

I agree with you that sanatana dharma or eternal law is to spend a balanced life and teach for that; Buddha could not teach against it; that is the middle path. Asceticism is on the extreme, in my opinion. One has to develop one's best faculties rather than to shun them.

 

[Vinayaka]

the comunity as a whole offers support to that person out of respect he does not need to beg , he is looked after by others out of respect for his ashram in life .

this is the way of sanatana dharma .

This is the essential point. Sannyasins are not beggars, They are sannyasins. They do not actively beg. Because of the long standing tradition that you so eloquently explained, people just come forward with alms, just as you feed your relatives if they come to visit you, and they feed you when you visit them. The sannyasin fully excepts that he may die of starvation. But of course he never does because the grihastha community just understands it so well.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Paarsurrey, many people here have pointed out why the Buddha received alms, and his words on the subject. Scripture has been quoted, which you have not understood in context. And you have placed your own views upon Buddha, and denied that which he taught, because it goes against your views.

It is nearly impossible, for someone who accepts Abrahamic philosophy as their worldview, to understand dharma. Dharma cannot simply be read about and understood, it has to be lived in order to fully understand it. So to you, the Buddha receiving alms doesn't seem like a wise thing to do for a wise person. But you're not seeing what's going on. It's not those who receive alms who receive the most, the Buddha taught that those who give alms, who support the Sangha, receive great amounts of merit and wholesome karma. It's not done only to support the sangha, but for the benefit of those who give. When the Buddha received alms, he was not begging; in his great compassion, he was assisting those people who gave a chance at something greater. But there's even more to it than this. One of the primary teachings of Buddhism is non-attachment. When you give alms to the sangha, you're learning to not be attached to the things of the world, or what you might think is 'yours. So you not only gain merit, you gain wisdom from giving alms. It's not done for the sangha to be lazy, or whatever misperception you might have, it's a chance to teach and lead the people. It's a chance for them to attain something greater.

 

[nameless]

Buddha taught a Middle-way; the cult of begging alms cannot be called a middle way, in my opinion.

did you get satisfactory answers for the questions you posted in the OP? pls confirm.

 

[Vinayaka]

I think at some point this has to be called trolling. I'm not responding any more.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

I think at some point this has to be called trolling. I'm not responding any more.

Not that big a difference between trolling and a syncretist trying to get answers from "purists" of a certain religion. Eventually the syncretist either realizes they have thrown too many things into the blender or they believe the world is wrong.

 

[Vinayaka]

Not that big a difference between trolling and a syncretist trying to get answers from "purists" of a certain religion. Eventually the syncretist either realizes they have thrown too many things into the blender or they believe the world is wrong.

Yeah I don't actually know, in this case. There is also the situation where you just don't get it.
Certainly I'm that way with some faiths other than mine. No matter how much explaining or quoting scripture or slaps upside the head, I just ain't gonna get it. But I don't go asking and asking either. From this side of the fence, it's okay to not 'get it'.