On the merits of animal sacrifice

[Kapalika]

Many accept industry mass farming, so why not a little bit of animal sacrifice?

Is it really so bad to kill an animal in the name of religion? What if you eat it? What if you don't and instead cremate it? What separates killing and eating a pig from killing and eating a cat or dog?

What separates sacrificing something like a goat or sheep from sacrificing a horse or a dog? Either consumed or not? If all is done humanely as possible and legally what's the big deal?

Can meat eaters unhypocritically condemn ritual sacrifice either with or without eating meat afterwards?

I've been debating the merits of animal sacrifice for a while now. It's been practiced for thousands of years and only recently have we had issues with it as the Christians were afraid of it as it seemed to "pagan" to them but hey even the Jews did it too, and I think parts of Islam do as well. But I'd think we would be past these hang ups since we as a society are largely okay with mass animal farming.

So what's the big deal? What's wrong with a little bit of animal sacrifice? Surely it isn't nearly as bad as our meat industries and could actually be a more humane way of handling it as many raise what they kill and eat. And even if they don't, individual care is often better than mass care.

 

[Tumah]

I don't see the problem with it. Although Jews are forbidden to sacrifice animals outside the Temple, non-Jews don't have this prohibition. So in Judaism, animal sacrifice for non-Jews is a permitted expression of worshiping G-d.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

I don't do it myself but I've no objection. Remember that sacrificed meat is generally eaten so from the animals' point of view what's the difference between being sacrificed or being killed in a slaughter-house?

It's still practiced by African pagans, Muslims, Samaritans, and a minority of Chinese, Hindus, Heathens, and even Christians.

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

As long as the animal is eaten (rather than the body being physically wasted) and there is no torture or excessive pain, it is far more respectful than factory farming.

 

[Riverwolf]

I don't do it myself but I've no objection. Remember that sacrificed meat is generally eaten so from the animals' point of view what's the difference between being sacrificed or being killed in a slaughter-house?

As long as the animal is eaten (rather than the body being physically wasted) and there is no torture or excessive pain, it is far more respectful than factory farming.

Pretty much my thoughts exactly.

A few things to note:

What separates killing and eating a pig from killing and eating a cat or dog?

What separates sacrificing something like a goat or sheep from sacrificing a horse or a dog? Either consumed or not? If all is done humanely as possible and legally what's the big deal?

In Western culture, cats and dogs are far more socially close to us than our usual staples of pigs, cows, and chickens. That's why we're okay with eating the latter three but not the former two; I'd be willing to bet that our brains consider eating cats and dogs to be on the same level as eating other humans. That's what separates them.

When it comes to horses, I've heard that there's a reason from pre-Christian European religions, but I don't remember what it was off the top of my head.

Incidentally, I've heard that pigs have been demonstrated to have humanlike sentience, so I'd be okay with cutting back over time from eating them for that reason, if nothing else.

 

[Jabar]

Many accept industry mass farming, so why not a little bit of animal sacrifice?

Is it really so bad to kill an animal in the name of religion? What if you eat it? What if you don't and instead cremate it? What separates killing and eating a pig from killing and eating a cat or dog?

What separates sacrificing something like a goat or sheep from sacrificing a horse or a dog? Either consumed or not? If all is done humanely as possible and legally what's the big deal?

Can meat eaters unhypocritically condemn ritual sacrifice either with or without eating meat afterwards?

I've been debating the merits of animal sacrifice for a while now. It's been practiced for thousands of years and only recently have we had issues with it as the Christians were afraid of it as it seemed to "pagan" to them but hey even the Jews did it too, and I think parts of Islam do as well. But I'd think we would be past these hang ups since we as a society are largely okay with mass animal farming.

So what's the big deal? What's wrong with a little bit of animal sacrifice? Surely it isn't nearly as bad as our meat industries and could actually be a more humane way of handling it as many raise what they kill and eat. And even if they don't, individual care is often better than mass care.

There is nothing wrong with sacrificing animals unless done inhumanely. They should be slaughtered humanely and eaten as food.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

When it comes to horses, I've heard that there's a reason from pre-Christian European religions, but I don't remember what it was off the top of my head.

Because horses were a symbol of nobility, were very expensive to own because you needed the right facilities & people to care for them, as well as the money to pay for all that, and if you did sacrifice one, it was a HUGELY powerful offering because of how valuable horses were?

 

[Riverwolf]

Because horses were a symbol of nobility, were very expensive to own because you needed the right facilities & people to care for them, as well as the money to pay for all that, and if you did sacrifice one, it was a HUGELY powerful offering because of how valuable horses were?

Sounds right.

 

[Subhankar Zac]

My experience with animal sacrifice began n ended when I was very young. My parents took me to see the Navami sacrifice where a buffalo was to be beheaded to Durga.
Seeing the buffalo tied up in ropes and just confused and the sword hanging over its head brings that old scene back.
It was blood everywhere after the head was chopped off n though conch n trumpets were bring sounded after it, I was hysterical.
I guess I imagine humans or even myself where the animal is. I think of myself as being tied in ropes and a sword hanging over my head.
As a Hindu n even a buddhist animal sacrifice, halal, kosher n meat making without stunning is something I'll never be comfortable with.

 

[Riverwolf]

My experience with animal sacrifice began n ended when I was very young. My parents took me to see the Navami sacrifice where a buffalo was to be beheaded to Durga.
Seeing the buffalo tied up in ropes and just confused and the sword hanging over its head brings that old scene back.
It was blood everywhere after the head was chopped off n though conch n trumpets were bring sounded after it, I was hysterical.
I guess I imagine humans or even myself where the animal is. I think of myself as being tied in ropes and a sword hanging over my head.
As a Hindu n even a buddhist animal sacrifice, halal, kosher n meat making without stunning is something I'll never be comfortable with.

I think that's fine. It means your empathy is working.

I don't think animal sacrifice was ever something we were supposed to be "comfortable" with.

 

[crossfire]

I think that's fine. It means your empathy is working.

I don't think animal sacrifice was ever something we were supposed to be "comfortable" with.

Yeah, the only reason i can see for it in a ritual setting is to freak yourself out. (Your mileage may vary.)

 

[Riverwolf]

Yeah, the only reason i can see for it in a ritual setting is to freak yourself out. (Your mileage may vary.)

I generally think it's a way to acknowledge that "this being we're going to east soon is a living, breathing being and should be treated with due respect."

I'm sure in practice that didn't happen terribly often, but that might have been the theory.

 

[crossfire]

I generally think it's a way to acknowledge that "this being we're going to east soon is a living, breathing being and should be treated with due respect."

I'm sure in practice that didn't happen terribly often, but that might have been the theory.

What do you think about the "whole burnt offerings" or as the OP mentioned,

<...>
What if you eat it? What if you don't and instead cremate it? <...>

 

[Chakra]

You may think that it's humane and painless, but if the animal disagrees, then it's really not humane.

 

[Riverwolf]

What do you think about the "whole burnt offerings" or as the OP mentioned,

Not a fan, personally.

I think if you're going to kill an animal, for sacrifice or not, you should eat it. Or at least use the body for study (in a modern context).

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I much prefer solemn animal sacrifice over industrialized slaughter. Their life should be honored and respected on an individual basis. We really need to go back to that. But then, a ton of things about society need to be undone and change.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Many accept industry mass farming, so why not a little bit of animal sacrifice?

Is it really so bad to kill an animal in the name of religion? What if you eat it? What if you don't and instead cremate it? What separates killing and eating a pig from killing and eating a cat or dog?

What separates sacrificing something like a goat or sheep from sacrificing a horse or a dog? Either consumed or not? If all is done humanely as possible and legally what's the big deal?

Can meat eaters unhypocritically condemn ritual sacrifice either with or without eating meat afterwards?

I've been debating the merits of animal sacrifice for a while now. It's been practiced for thousands of years and only recently have we had issues with it as the Christians were afraid of it as it seemed to "pagan" to them but hey even the Jews did it too, and I think parts of Islam do as well. But I'd think we would be past these hang ups since we as a society are largely okay with mass animal farming.

So what's the big deal? What's wrong with a little bit of animal sacrifice? Surely it isn't nearly as bad as our meat industries and could actually be a more humane way of handling it as many raise what they kill and eat. And even if they don't, individual care is often better than mass care.

This maybe unorthodox than all the opinions here; and, I don't agree with animal sacrifice for religious purposes.

To compare. When we think of pigs etc in a slaughter house, do we associate this with our religious beliefs? Is it helping our spiritual well-being? (Not the eating of it but the actual slaughter) Some parts of the world, as not to generalize, just see animals as food. However, I see animals as life. So, to eat an animal is to eat a sacred being's life. I always say we (humans) are not special; we're not. We kill to survive. That is the purpose of the slaughter.

Religion and religious acts are not "just to slaughter." It isn't impersonal. These are personal actions and beliefs that a person affiliates him or herself with. So when that person slaughters a chicken, they are slaughtering it to obtain the life force from it (or however described) and in other religions a physical display of sacrifice. Whether or not it is ate later is not the point. "That's like saying, well. It's alright to kill Joe because he's going to the death house anyway" type of thing.

Religious acts of animal sacrifice isn't done for survival. People can actually live without sacrificing animals. So, I can't excuse "Joe" just because he will be killed anyway.

I see it as, if I were to slaughter an animal for religious purposes, I am taking the life from that animal and I am making it personal. I am joining my morals to that act of killing. That is wrong. It is no longer survival as in nourishment. I can live without meat. It's making that act of killing a part of who I am. That, in my view, is wrong.

There is a difference.

I'd never work in a slaughter house. It's just against all my principles of killing. Animals kill to survive. We package meat. Add preservatives. Try to make things taste delicious to gather more money rather than exchange food as money among a community to sustain each other without needing "collateral" as you can see it becomes greed.



I understand the need to slaughter animals for people to eat. I agree, it wouldn't make a difference if it were a pig or a dog regardless of how we culturally relate to them. I don't care for killing; and, I understand why in this case.

I do see the difference because we do not personalize the pigs we slaughter for food. So, it is seen as "alright" in many people's books. Like dogs as social animals, religions that have animal sacrifice have a different way of seeing the pigs and chickens they kill.

Killing for religious purposes becomes a moral combination between killing; and, that I disagree with whether or not the community eats the food afterward. This I disagree with.

That is why there is a difference between one and another. It's a big difference.

 

[psychoslice]

For Christ sake, leave the animals alone, sacrifice yourself.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What do you think about the "whole burnt offerings" or as the OP mentioned,

I would say that's acceptable if, for example, if the animal is very sick and if you euthanize it beforehand.

 

[Valjean]

Is it really so bad to kill an animal in the name of religion? What if you eat it? What if you don't and instead cremate it? What separates killing and eating a pig from killing and eating a cat or dog?

What separates sacrificing something like a goat or sheep from sacrificing a horse or a dog? Either consumed or not? If all is done humanely as possible and legally what's the big deal?

What separates sacrificing a horse or dog from sacrificing a human -- as long as it's done humanely?

There is nothing wrong with sacrificing animals unless done inhumanely. They should be slaughtered humanely and eaten as food.

I see a worrisome devaluation of life here; living creatures as commodities, ours to use as we see fit.

Because horses were a symbol of nobility, were very expensive to own because you needed the right facilities & people to care for them, as well as the money to pay for all that, and if you did sacrifice one, it was a HUGELY powerful offering because of how valuable horses were?

Good point. I suspect the practice arose as a demonstration, to some invisible power, of commitment; or to impress others in the community.
The more costly the sacrifice the more impressed the power being importuned will be, and the more likely it will be to act favorably toward you, or, alternately, the more your community will be impressed and the greater your status will be.