sinwei, giving alms to Jains is not the same as remaining a practising Jain nor does it make one a Jain.
When I was in Sarnath, after I finished my rounds at the Buddhist shrine areas, I visited the Jain temple which is just near by the Dhamekh Stupa and donated to their charity, am I a Jain? I give to non Buddhist charities as well, some are religious organisations who help the marginalised in society but am I their follower? Don't forget this as well...the actual Sutta account of Upali...
‘Householder since long your clan has been a welling spring to the nigantas. I think morsel food should be offered to those that come.’ ‘Venerable sir, I am very much pleased with these words of the Blessed One. Householder, since long your clan has been a welling spring to the nigantas. I think morsel food should be offered to them that come’.
‘Venerable sir, I have heard this said about you. Offerings should be given to me only, not to others. Offerings should be, to my disciples not to the disciples of other sects. Offerings made to my disciples are of great fruit, but not the offerings made to others. Here, the Blessed One advises me to make offerings to the nigantas. We would know the time to do it.
Now I take refuge in the Blessed One, the Teaching and the Community of bhikkhus for the third time. May I be remembered as a lay disciple who has taken refuge from today until life lasts.’
Then the householder Upali delighted and pleased hearing the words of the Blessed One got up from his seat, worshipped and circumambulated the Blessed One and went home. He addressed his gate- keeper:
‘Friend, gate -keeper, from today the door is closed to the nigantas and nigantis. It is open to the Blessed One, the bhikkhus, bhikkhunis, lay disciples male and female. If any nigantas come, you should tell them: Wait sirs, do not enter. From today the householder Upali has gone to the discipleship of the recluse Gotama. The door is closed to nigantas and nigantis. The door is open to the bhikkhus, bhikkhunis, lay disciples, male and female of the Blessed One. If sirs, you want morsel food stand here. It will be brought here.’The gate-keeper agreed.
And read further from the above link on how Upali dealt with Nigantha Nataputta in one 'showdown'...
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
"Endowed with these five qualities, a lay follower is a jewel of a lay follower, a lotus of a lay follower, a fine flower of a lay follower. Which five?
He/she has conviction; is virtuous; is not eager for protective charms & ceremonies; trusts kamma, not protective charms & ceremonies; does not search for recipients of his/her offerings outside [of the Sangha], and gives offerings here first.
Endowed with these five qualities, a lay follower is a jewel of a lay follower, a lotus of a lay follower, a fine flower of a lay follower."
So is the Buddha contradicting Himself or is it suggesting that one should know and remember what are one's priorities first as a committed lay person rather than getting distracted with what others are doing or not doing?
And this passage from the Medicine Buddha Sutra?
"Moreover, Manjusri, there may be good men and women of pure faith who, all their lives, do not worship other gods, but single-mindedly take refuge with the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha.
They accept and uphold precepts, such as the five precepts, the ten precepts, the four hundred precepts of a Bodhisattva, the two hundred and fifty precepts of a Bhikshu, or the five hundred precepts of a Bhikshuni.
And btw, how would you know that just because that girl is described as a Brahman that it means she's a 'Hindu'?
That term is mostly just denoting either one of great righteous conduct/purity or one belonging to the highest caste in their society. Not all of them from the highest caste are necessarily followers of the Vedic religion... and one who attains the fruition of Arhatship, who would have already broken all the fetters, can that Arhat still remain a 'Hindu' with their variety of subtle and gross postulations of atman and other incompatible stuff?
plwk, u do have a point.
yes, even if u give to non "Buddhist" , u are still a "Buddhist", not by name from the outside, but from inside, a follower
"Jain", 'Hindu', Brahman are just external name, what matter most is the substance. i perfer a real follower
instead of mere naming.
Brahman could be more like chinese, malay, indian. even thought they are different in skin color, but if they practice the right buddhism, they are real buddha's follower. but it does not change their skin color. what Buddha did was also adapted Hinduism terms (like karma) and "corrected" it into a more toward the meaning of ulimated truth.
the idea i am saying is that Buddha never force people to follow him by force, but by compassion and wisdom. same goes with HHDL in the following link about Christianity and Buddhism.http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlquotes2.html
Q: Do you think it is possible to be both Christian and Buddhist at the same time?
A: I ... [previoiusly--see later] replied to this question indirectly when I said that belief in a Creator could be associated with the understanding of emptiness. I believe it is possible to progress along a spiritual path and reconcile Christianity with Buddhism. But once a certain degree of realization has been reached, a choice between the two paths will become necessary. I recently gave a series of teachings in the United States and one of these teachings was about patience and tolerance. At the end there was a ceremony for taking the Bodhisattva Vows. A Christian priest who was in the audience wanted to take these vows. I asked him if he had the right to, and he replied that yes, of course, he could take these vows and still remain a Christian.
i also saw this
Diamond Sutra talk by Venerable Hyon Gak Sunim (seated beside Zen Master Seung Sahn, his master)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_f9864b ... ed&search=
it was touching to see a muslim going to listen to him and seek enlightenment. what Venerable Hyon Gak Sunim did was simply hitting the table and the muslim just broke into tears!
i think what matter most is real substance."Those who teach a Dhamma for the abandoning of passion, for the abandoning of aversion, for the abandoning of delusion — their Dhamma is well-taught."
---AN 3.72 - Ajivaka Sutta
that said, i would say, the "Dharma" does not belong to Buddha Shakyamuni, it belongs to Buddhas.