Is it ethical to give money to beggars?

Zero

@Lonely_Traveller - thank you for sharing that - your story is an inspirational triumph.
I'm also grateful to you for highlighting the frontline UK based organisations that were there when you were ready - lots of ways to lend a hand.

nenkohai

For me, giving is always the right thing to do. I can not be responsible for the receivers karma.

That said, I've yet to put a plan in place for such giving... I've meant to... and that's led to suffering of my own, which is my lesson to learn, of course.

I think I'll start putting money in a plain envelope and keeping that in the car. Then, when I see a needful person, hand them the envelope.

And a meditation point for me... MY karma is not the point at all.

Citta

Its unethical NOT to give to beggars..imo.
There but for fortune...

vinlyn

Citta said:

Its unethical NOT to give to beggars..imo.
There but for fortune...

I don't think the discussion has really been about whether or not it is ethical to give money to beggars, instead it seemed to boil down to in what situations was it ethical and wise.

Citta

I dont think we should be cerebral about it. If you have it...give it. No questions.
Its not our universe...

Citta

SpinyNorman said:

MaryAnne said:

As far as not knowing the best way to go about helping- that is a cop out.

Not atall. In Buddhism there is the idea of skillful means, or compassion informed by wisdom. The world is such that there will always be a great deal of unmet need, we all have to make difficult decisions about who and how we can help. For example people chose to support particular charities, are you also condemning them for being judgemental and wanting control?
Anyway, for me subsiding an alchoholic's continued drinking doesn't feel like skillful means. Obviously if it does to you, that's fine, but please don't impose your simplistic ideas on the rest of us.

We are talking about opening our hearts. Simple is good.
Generosity filtered by the rational mind is cold stuff indeed.

vinlyn

Citta said:

I dont think we should be cerebral about it. If you have it...give it. No questions.
Its not our universe...

Nor is it his (the beggar's).

vinlyn

Citta said:

SpinyNorman said:

MaryAnne said:

As far as not knowing the best way to go about helping- that is a cop out.

Not atall. In Buddhism there is the idea of skillful means, or compassion informed by wisdom. The world is such that there will always be a great deal of unmet need, we all have to make difficult decisions about who and how we can help. For example people chose to support particular charities, are you also condemning them for being judgemental and wanting control?
Anyway, for me subsiding an alchoholic's continued drinking doesn't feel like skillful means. Obviously if it does to you, that's fine, but please don't impose your simplistic ideas on the rest of us.

We are talking about opening our hearts. Simple is good.
Generosity filtered by the rational mind is cold stuff indeed.

You can't help everyone. Who needs help the most? Who is most desperate? When will it really help?

Jeffrey

One problem is the economics of employment. If everyone is employed then there is nobody to hire should someone expand. The result would be higher (much) wages because it would be a 'sellers' market (if the one seeking workers is a 'buyer' of employees).

So the result is that the costs are too high to expand and hire more workers.

The second problem is that if you have been on the street or on welfare your skills deteriorate. And that assumes you even had skills to begin with. The supply of jobs does not meet the cost of hiring a less efficient worker (or incompetent).

MaryAnne

The OP:

gracelee said:

Is giving money encouraging them to stay on the street?

Is giving them money increasing or decreasing the quality of there lives?

What is the general motivation for giving money? Is it to make them feel better or appease our own guilt?

If the individual doesn't get money through begging they may turn to crime? Or go and get a job?

difficult isn't it?????

I would love to hear your views!

Grace

Obviously, as we have seen so far, there are several ways to look at this 'dilemma' both practically and ethically.
But, since it's being asked on a Buddhist forum, it's not surprising to see most take that particular viewpoint -- which is, as paraphrased:

"Give without judgement, give with compassion".

Those who want to quantify and qualify those beggars you give to, and how they respond to (use) your 'gift', be it money or food or material things- you are simply not looking at this through the lens of Buddhist teachings.

Now, that's all well and good, have it your way, you are not obligated to live your life according to all the teachings all the time - even if you identify as Buddhist, sorta Buddhist, half-Buddhist, whatever.

But through that same Buddhist lens it appears you are looking for excuses NOT to give, instead of giving without judgment. I think there is a distinct difference from the Buddhist point of view.

Jeffrey

Giving is one of the paramitas that trains the mind. If I give a bum two dollars and then the next bum 1 dollar and then the next 50 cents. If I do that then I have simply given up on controlling. The gift the giver and the recipient are all fluxional. Two days from now I won't remember the beggar and the beggar has already spent the money. But despite the fluxionality during the giving you may have a warm heart. Or maybe it will lift the burden of a clenched fist of wariness and fear and you will have more peace.

The paramitas I think work in tandem. So there is a giving in ethics. You give the gift of your ethics to all beings. And there is a giving in prajna. That may be the non-idiot compassion but all of the paramitas interact so you are giving the gift of rationality to help those who can benefit. My lama says that a teacher spends more time with those who are dedicated. So from that standpoint there is something called 'smart compassion'.

Giving is especially related to the karmic realm of pride/heaven. In heaven the suffering 'lepers' are expelled from the realm so as not to pollute it. I think of this also metaphorically to describe all humans. Some are in the heaven realm and they just want to get rid of all upsetting people... to bleach the world and not see the four sites Buddha saw in setting out on the path: a sick person, an old person, a monk, and a death.

By giving we reverse that and take the homeless undesirable person into our sphere of kindness and love.

Citta

vinlyn said:

Citta said:

SpinyNorman said:

MaryAnne said:

As far as not knowing the best way to go about helping- that is a cop out.

Not atall. In Buddhism there is the idea of skillful means, or compassion informed by wisdom. The world is such that there will always be a great deal of unmet need, we all have to make difficult decisions about who and how we can help. For example people chose to support particular charities, are you also condemning them for being judgemental and wanting control?
Anyway, for me subsiding an alchoholic's continued drinking doesn't feel like skillful means. Obviously if it does to you, that's fine, but please don't impose your simplistic ideas on the rest of us.

We are talking about opening our hearts. Simple is good.
Generosity filtered by the rational mind is cold stuff indeed.

You can't help everyone. Who needs help the most? Who is most desperate? When will it really help?

I'm not smart enough to know that.
I just know that if someone says they are in need I will try to respond.
I am not going to labour over it or overthink it.
You are of course free to respond in your way.

Citta

vinlyn said:

Citta said:

I dont think we should be cerebral about it. If you have it...give it. No questions.
Its not our universe...

Nor is it his (the beggar's).

I am not responsible for his view of his relationship to the cosmos.
I am responsible for mine. And its not my universe.

vinlyn

I've been tempted to ask -- but I am not asking -- how much some of these "give to everyone without concern" folks actually do give. I have this idea that there's a lot of talk but not walk here. Again, I'm not asking...just thinking.

Citta

As you ask ,I tithe my income.
A proportion of that tithe I keep in folding money. The rest of the tithe is in the form of Standing Orders to charities..
As you ask.

Jason

vinlyn said:

I've been tempted to ask -- but I am not asking -- how much some of these "give to everyone without concern" folks actually do give. I have this idea that there's a lot of talk but not walk here. Again, I'm not asking...just thinking.

In my case, not as much as I'd like since I was unemployed for over a year and only work part-time for minimum wage at the moment. But the last time I gave money to someone, it was $5 to guy sitting outside of a Starbucks while on the way to work (which was all I had); the last time I bought someone something, it was a $10 breakfast I bought for a guy standing outside of McDonald's while on the way to work; and the last time I donated stuff to the rescue mission, it was about $20 worth of stuff I gave when I went with Ajahn Fathai to drop off some food he made, mostly canned goods and toiletries. The bulk of my giving has been to my family, however, i.e., to my sister for her college classes and to my parents, who have been hit by some really, really hard times financially, medically, etc. (just sent them $500).

vinlyn

I was not asking, just thinking. But I am pleased to see you are a man of your word.

Jeffrey

@vinylyn, it is possible to hold the philosophy of dhana yet not donate yourself. The reason is that you might not be ready to practice that way even though intellectually you believe in the Buddha's teachings on generosity. You might understand that should you give it is wise to just let go. You think that even though you yourself don't give. A lot of things are like that, a philosophy and then a practice.

karasti

When I lived in a city, I gave whatever I could when I ran across people, including those I knew were going to go to the casino or the bar. Sometimes, I invited them in and bought them a drink, if we were at the bar anyhow. They have really interesting life stories. Lots of learning to be done when you simply ask someone about their life. Anyhow, where I live now, we don't have homeless people. So we give to our food pantry and other things that come up, and if we happen to be in a city we will give if we are able (sometimes we'll see someone but cannot get to them because of traffic direction or whatever.)

Funny just yesterday I was reading on my teacher site, something similar to what @Jason said:
Aspiration Bodhicitta is about wishing good things for other people. It is desiring all people to be free from suffering and to have happiness. It is mostly a state of your mind does not include activities of compassion.

Application Bodhicitta is the implementation of the plan. Here you really do something and help the people that you were thinking about helping in Aspiration Bodhicitta. 
How do you practice these two types? You practice Aspiration Bodhicitta by meditating on the Four Immeasurables and you practice Application Bodhicitta by putting into action the six Transcendent Perfections.

Both have value.

vinlyn

Jeffrey said:

@vinylyn, it is possible to hold the philosophy of dhana yet not donate yourself. The reason is that you might not be ready to practice that way even though intellectually you believe in the Buddha's teachings on generosity. You might understand that should you give it is wise to just let go. You think that even though you yourself don't give. A lot of things are like that, a philosophy and then a practice.

And that is a perfect example of not walking the talk, and more and more lately I've been kinda thinking maybe there's quite a bit of that going on in various threads. You know...sorta like the Miss America contestant who wants world peace.

karasti

Of course you are going to see some of that. People can't contribute to every cause that they think or talk about. Plus, thinking and/or talking about it is more likely to continue to grow compassion within them and spur them onto action. Just like you pointed out earlier in the thread about how we all have to decide who is worthy of our dollar, we all have to decide what direction to take our acting compassion. Most of us don't have the time or ability to contribute to everything that needs help, so when we can't contribute we practice compassion for them in our minds and hearts.

Jeffrey

It's ok to play favorites also, I believe. I can not donate to cancer research but do donate to mental health initiatives just because I am touched by the latter. I say build on what you do understand rather than beat up on yourself for what you are not doing.
Traditionally dhana can only be voluntary. So those who resent paying taxes for social services don't benefit from Dhana because it is not their intention or wish to help others.

karasti

I agree. We are partial to donating to JDRF because our son is diabetic. It doesn't mean we don't care about those with cancer or AIDS or MS or everything else. It just has touched us and is personal. When other things come up, if we can, we will donate. Such as my husband's office does Relay for Life so he does that, and we help sponsor people who do runs and bike tours for certain causes. There are hundreds of thousands of causes, all of them worthy. None of us can contribute to them all.

vinlyn

Jeffrey said:

It's ok to play favorites also, I believe. I can not donate to cancer research but do donate to mental health initiatives just because I am touched by the latter. I say build on what you do understand rather than beat up on yourself for what you are not doing.
Traditionally dhana can only be voluntary. So those who resent paying taxes for social services don't benefit from Dhana because it is not their intention or wish to help others.

Good point, Jeffrey. But to your comment that "build on what you do understand rather than beat up on yourself for what you are not doing", I would add "rather than beat up on yourself or on others for what you or they are not doing".

Jeffrey

Agreed, beating is always against ahimsa.