Palo Mayombe believer sacrifices birds - shop closed

[Marble]

source
I think they should let him sacrifice the birds .
The article is right, they suffer much less than those factory farming chickens and if ritual animal sacrifice is part of that religion, why not?

 

[Noaidi]

...if ritual animal sacrifice is part of that religion, why not?

Killing in the name of a belief system isn't justified, IMO. If a religion advocated ritual slaughter of dogs, say, would we think it is okay? Why should be it okay for birds?

 

[Songbird]

No dissassemble!

 

[Marble]

Killing in the name of a belief system isn't justified, IMO. If a religion advocated ritual slaughter of dogs, say, would we think it is okay? Why should be it okay for birds?

Birds are not mammals, dogs are.
Cows are mammals too and they are slaughtered for burgers en masse.
I would prefer a culture that slaughters 10 dogs a year in a ritual way in a public temple for spiritual reasons to one that slaughters 1 000 a minute in for economic reasons.

 

[Sylvan]

I think they should let him sacrifice the birds.

Agreed!
While most details will remain unknown by non-initiates Palo is a beautiful religion.
Anyone wanting to know more should check Todd Ochoa's Society of the Dead.

It certainly has a terrible public relations problem, however, starting with 80's serial killer/"satanic cult leader" Adolfo de Jesus Constanzo perverting and manipulating Palo teachings, ultimately resulting in the murder of an unknown number of people.

I have come to know people involved with this religion, both online and "IRL", and am convinced behind its dark veneer it is a beautiful thing and a representative of one of the most ancient unbroken lines of spirit religions in the world today. The complexities of its practice couldn't be contained in a news article or wiki. I will link here to a post by a knowledgeable Tata, which should illustrate the complexities involved. Check all the posts on that sub-forum, actually.

 

[Noaidi]

Birds are not mammals, dogs are.

That's right.

Cows are mammals too and they are slaughtered for burgers en masse.

As a vegetarian, I'm not in favour of this level of killing either.

I would prefer a culture that slaughters 10 dogs a year in a ritual way in a public temple for spiritual reasons to one that slaughters 1 000 a minute in for economic reasons.

You make it sound as though it is obligatory to have ritual killing. Animals don't need to be killed ritualistically. Apart from some apparent psychological 'benefit' to the practitioner through the letting of blood, the act is senseless.

 

[Sylvan]

You make it sound as though it is obligatory to have ritual killing. Animals don't need to be killed ritualistically. Apart from some apparent psychological 'benefit' to the practitioner through the letting of blood, the act is senseless.

These spirits require the blood of food offerings because that is what they ask for. It is what has traditionally been given to them for centuries as byproduct of the fact that many, perhaps a majority, of humans are omnivores. And for most of that history we didn't buy that meat at a grocery store but slaughtered it in our own backyards. Often sharing the blood and certain other parts with our ancestral deities and so forth. Not for some psychological benefit to the persons, but because these spirits literally exist and they want blood to give them the "force" to do the things being asked of them. In most cases the animals are eaten in delicious Cuban fashion as well and are likely treated to a much better life than on any factory farm so I don't really see what the problem is.

How a vegetarian is even commenting on the various moralities of animal husbandry is beyond me.. I mean its all bad to you right?

How is this any worse then the spirit of Abrahamic religions, iterations of which appear to inspire their followers to slaughter each other wholesale in order to appease their own lust for blood?

 

[TheKnight]

source
I think they should let him sacrifice the birds .
The article is right, they suffer much less than those factory farming chickens and if ritual animal sacrifice is part of that religion, why not?

As a believer in a religion which has sacrifices being integral to it, I see no reason why this person should be prohibited the opportunity to make sacrifices.

 

[Marble]

You make it sound as though it is obligatory to have ritual killing. Animals don't need to be killed ritualistically. Apart from some apparent psychological 'benefit' to the practitioner through the letting of blood, the act is senseless.

As long as animals suffer terribly during transport to their place of dead, the Dutch banishment on religious slaughter is hypocritical.
As long as mammals are slaughtered for consumption, closing that shop because its owner sacrifices birds is hypocritical.

 

[Sylvan]

Palo also has really cool music.
[youtube]HPSeRGVUdb0[/youtube]
Palo Mayombe 2ª parte - YouTube
[youtube]fyXjxF-zSc0[/youtube]
Fiesta de Palo - YouTube

As you can hear this is in origin African music. Held in a living tradition, along with these spirits, in the hearts of the people who were brought to the new world in slavery and preserved in secret for centuries. These are traditions which deserve respect.

 

[Noaidi]

These spirits require the blood of food offerings because that is what they ask for.....Not for some psychological benefit to the persons, but because these spirits literally exist and they want blood to give them the "force" to do the things being asked of them.

I'll let these unsupported claims pass for the moment.

How a vegetarian is even commenting on the various moralities of animal husbandry is beyond me.. I mean its all bad to you right?

It's an open forum. If you didn't want a response from a vegetarian, you should have put a disclaimer on your first post.:sarcastic

How is this any worse then the spirit of Abrahamic religions, iterations of which appear to inspire their followers to slaughter each other wholesale in order to appease their own lust for blood?

It's not any better or worse, IMO. Killing in the name of a belief system is rather sick.

 

[gnomon]

The article states that he eats the animals he offers up for sacrifice. If that is the case, I don't see why there should be a problem.

But I agree with Noaidi. Just because a practice is wrapped up in religious tradition doesn't make it deserving of respect.

 

[Sylvan]

It's an open forum. If you didn't want a response from a vegetarian, you should have put a disclaimer on your first post.:sarcastic

Just saying man. Do as you will, and this isn't my thread. But as I would disqualify myself from participating in a debate between members of AR's due to my lack of belief in the divine provenance of those ridiculous books, I don't understand why a vegetarian wouldn't disqualify themselves from discussions of the finer morality of animal husbandry, since all animal killings are immoral in their eyes. No room for nuance there.

Much like a debate about whether magic or spirits exist or not. Pointless.

Activist vegetarians would do better, in my opinion, to wait until they have managed to change the standards at factory farms to at least the level of comfort available in the average 3rd world backyard before getting all high and mighty about people killing their own meat in the manner they choose to. It's not like they are selling any of it for public consumption.

The debate here shouldn't be about vegetarianism, but the "letter and spirit" of public health law and the way that relates to differences in cultural attitudes about food animals in the U.S. and other countries. And whether religious practices should have any bearing on what certain people are or are not allowed to do in regards to those laws.

 

[Sylvan]

But I agree with Noaidi. Just because a practice is wrapped up in religious tradition doesn't make it deserving of respect.

I would agree with this with some reservations. I cannot for instance accept the practice of female genital mutilation under the guise of circumcision in certain African cultures. Due to my respect and love for the human body I cannot accept the pain and disability it causes. This does not mean that I do not weep for whatever ritual structure will now disappear in the aftermath, in many cases preserving tribal traditions in a largely Islamic culture. This will mean old spirits being forgotten, and that is regrettable.

Comparing the small-scale ritual killing of animals for food and the large-scale slaughtering of scores of fellow humans and their environments in events like the Crusades (or more modern events I shall avoid mentioning to prevent a s-storm) seems like a leap to me though. Is that fair?

 

[Noaidi]

Just saying man.

Yes, I know. Sorry.

Activist vegetarians would do better, in my opinion, to wait until they have managed to change the standards at factory farms to at least the level of comfort available in the average 3rd world backyard before getting all high and mighty about people killing their own meat in manner they choose to.

I agree. Many activist vegetarians are working towards this.

The debate here shouldn't be about vegetarianism,

Again, I agree. It was Marble, in her second post, who brought up animals used for food.

but .... whether religious practices should have any bearing on what certain people are or are not allowed to do in regards to those laws.

And this goes back to my original point. I'm happy to leave aside the issue of animals as food in this discussion, but I will challenge the notion that it is acceptable to kill for occult reasons, simply because it's 'the culture' or 'the religion'.

Here we are in 2011, chopping the heads off animals to predict the weather or the future (or whatever). Is that really where we're at?

 

[Sylvan]

Here we are in 2011, chopping the heads off animals to predict the weather or the future (or whatever). Is that really where we're at?

Ok, this is a good place to start. But, for clarity's sake, this isn't exactly what's going on in a Palo or Santeria ceremony, so let me tell you how I'm looking at it and see what you think. They actually don't practice extispicy that I know of. Divination in these traditions is usually through shell tosses or dream interpretation. It is just a way they have always honored these spirits: through song and dance, the adulation of talismanic objects, and the preparation of food. During the preparation of this food the spirits want to participate. It feeds them. They sometimes possess the body of the priest holding the knife so they can do it themselves, as a blessing to their children. It is part of what makes the food holy, just like any piece of the preparation of kosher meat. While I can see your point I feel a reintroduction of the sacred into meat preparation is simultaneously a reclamation of something very ancient we have lost in commercial meat production, and points a way forward to a future in which we eat less meat. Perhaps only in particular settings or situations.

In full disclosure sacrifices in these traditions are not always about food. Most of the time they are. Sometimes, however, pigeons are raised and killed in ceremonies intended to remove crossed conditions, their bodies deposited at crossroads in the woods and such kind of as scapegoats. This is rare but it happens and is what it is. Same with eggs used in spiritual cleansings and later tossed into rivers and so forth.

By the way, I don't have a link or anything unfortunately but apparently there is a respected Santero who has converted to veganism and specializes in making potent omieros out of certain tomatos that substitute for blood in the ceremonies he performs now. He got the formula through consultation with his spirits, which seems a perfectly valid way for change to occur naturally within the tradition.

On a personal note, my roommate and many close friends are vegan and I rarely cook meat in my own house. In Portland I am lucky enough that with a few extra bucks per burger I know exactly where most meat I consume is locally grown, which pays dividends in deliciousness. I have lovingly raised my own rabbits and slaughtered them myself in previous houses. But as long as there are factory farms I will defend peoples right to raise food animals and eat them in the manner they so choose (as long as abuse etc.. doesn't occur... obviously this is a tricky wicket).

 

[Noaidi]

Ok, this is a good place to start. But, for clarity's sake, this isn't exactly what's going on in a Palo or Santeria ceremony..

Yes. I was making a generic comment about the motives behind some ritual killing of animals, not focussing only on the OP.

While I can see your point I feel a reintroduction of the sacred into meat preparation is simultaneously a reclamation of something very ancient we have lost in commercial meat production, and points a way forward to a future in which we eat less meat. Perhaps only in particular settings or situations.

I can agree with this. I'm not against eating meat per se, and understand that it is a necessity across the world. People need sustenance and, as omnivores, meat is what many / most people eat. Like you, it is factory farming I am opposed to (but I'm hoping this thread doesn't become a vegetarian/meat-eating debate - I'm keen to focus only on ritual killing).

Sometimes, however, pigeons are raised and killed in ceremonies intended to remove crossed conditions, their bodies deposited at crossroads in the woods and such kind of as scapegoats. This is rare but it happens and is what it is.

This is what the thrust of my opposition has been about so far. The reasons for the killing are not (primarily) for food, but for appeasement of some alleged supernatural occurrence or to provide alleged spirits with a life-force. To take a real life to sustain an unproven life or to remove an alleged hex is, to me, barbaric. I understand that many people believe that this is what they are compelled to do, but I can't accept it. I doubt I can make a difference to the situation, but that's my response to marble's link.

By the way, I don't have a link or anything unfortunately but apparently there is a respected Santero who has converted to veganism and specializes in making potent omieros out of certain tomatos that substitute for blood in the ceremonies he performs now. He got the formula through consultation with his spirits, which seems a perfectly valid way for change to occur naturally within the tradition.

Interesting. I would be interested in his motives for switching to a vegan form of the ceremony, and whether his clients see it as equally valid.

You provided some interesting information Sylvan.

 

[Sylvan]

I would be interested in his motives for switching to a vegan form of the ceremony, and whether his clients see it as equally valid.

Well as I can't find the reference I am speculating about second hand information here, so keep that in mind. My memory was that he had become vegan due to a personal spiritual decision after he was already a respected priest, but continued to give animals to the Orisha until he asked them how he could do otherwise. As far as his "clients", from what I remember the people describing this were remarking how accepting people were of this, as I guess he was already well-known. I imagine after word got around many who perhaps were scared away from serving the Orisha by their own beliefs or hang-ups (as it were) were eventually drawn to him.

This in itself is not that surprising to me, as Orisha and Nkisi are spirits intimately connected with the forces of nature and in many ways are "original environmentalists". I too would like to know the whole story here.

To take a real life to sustain an unproven life or to remove an alleged hex is, to me, barbaric. I understand that many people believe that this is what they are compelled to do, but I can't accept it.

I feel you on this one. It seems pointless to me and as a magician there are plenty of substitutes which come to mind. Reading your paragraph here, however, there are a few things that I feel should be addressed. The first is that the word barbaric brings to mind the colonialist attitude toward these religions which got my hackles up in the first place. I take it you are familiar with the etymology?

The second is that these animals are bred and raised for this purpose. If they weren't, they would not exist. While the analog to slavery is obvious they are literally the property of their caretakers. We wanted to keep away from the basic animals/noanimals argument but here is an issue at its root.

The third is that these animals ultimately do serve as food. For scavengers, insects & their larvae, etc. All of which serve as a medium for the wild forest energies of these spirits. Part of an exchange which is somehow consonant to the effect desired. This may be reaching but I personally believe this is what is likely happening on a "spiritual" level, or what have you.

The fourth is regarding that phrase "unproven life". Do you think these people idiots? Why would they have spent precious resources feeding beings that didn't prove their existence to them time and time again through successful workings, over the course of generations? They have pretty sophisticated ways of testing these spirits, btw. So somehow these people are just being fooled by.. their fear of the unknown??.. what...? Again.. colonialism.


P.S. BTW-FYI I don't think these spirits actually are the physical phenomena they represent, or "creators of teh universe" or anything like this*. The forms they take when they appear to us are an epiphenomena of the noosphere, but they also partake in the chaotic movements of natural phenomena and so forth which serves in some small way to explain the undeniable effect they can have in the physical world.

*Any entity which tells you it "created the universe" is taking you for a ride. Be warned!
Those kinds of spirits don't really "talk".

 

[Noaidi]

Reading your paragraph here, however, there are a few things that I feel should be addressed. The first is that the word barbaric brings to mind the colonialist attitude toward these religions which got my hackles up in the first place. I take it you are familiar with the etymology?

Yes, I am. However, an accepted modern meaning of barbaric is ‘brutal’. Cutting into animals in order to release blood or kill them for supernatural purposes is be perceived as brutal by many, yes? Nothing to do with a ‘colonialist attitude’ (as you put it), and I would rather not go down that road, thanks.

The second is that these animals are bred and raised for this purpose. If they weren't, they would not exist. While the analog to slavery is obvious they are literally the property of their caretakers. We wanted to keep away from the basic animals/noanimals argument but here is an issue at its root.

I can see what you’re saying, but I disagree that animals should be seen as our possessions. The allusion you made to slavery is apt.

The third is that these animals ultimately do serve as food. For scavengers, insects & their larvae, etc.

OK, I get the wider ecological aspect.

The fourth is regarding that phrase "unproven life". Do you think these people idiots? [...... ] So somehow these people are just being fooled by.. their fear of the unknown??.. what...? Again.. colonialism.

As said earlier, let’s leave the colonialism accusations out of the discussion. My feelings towards these practices would be the same if they were performed by people of my ethnicity in my country.

The forms they take when they appear to us are an epiphenomena of the noosphere, but they also partake in the chaotic movements of natural phenomena and so forth which serves in some small way to explain the undeniable effect they can have in the physical world.

Regarding proving the existence of these spirits and their effects, what evidence do you or they have? Can you lay it out for me so that I can test it myself? If not, then the animals are being sacrificed by people who believe in the existence of these spirits.

In an earlier post you wrote:

…because these spirits literally exist and they want blood to give them the "force" to do the things being asked of them.

This is the crux of the matter. A blood sacrifice seems to be required. Why? There is no evidence that blood has an inherent life-force. It is the medium by which nutrients, chemicals and oxygen reach the cells. That’s all. So a blood sacrifice is symbolic, is it not? If that is the case, then the act becomes one of needless killing. As you pointed out, at least one practitioner has found alternatives.

A genuine question: why not use humans (leaving the legality aside)? Why not, as pre-Columbian South Americans are thought to have done, raise groups of humans for the blood-letting and death? Would you view that any differently?

 

[Sylvan]

A genuine question: why not use humans (leaving the legality aside)? Why not, as pre-Columbian South Americans are thought to have done, raise groups of humans for the blood-letting and death? Would you view that any differently?

I think we do things equally cruelly here in 21st century global capitalist society. The violence is simply inherent in the system and allows those in charge to passively aggressively pretend they are acting in the collective benefit.

Also, again, I would argue you are misrepresenting what actually happened in pre-Columbian South America, where the circumstances and motivations behind human sacrifice varied widely between groups. I see a direct parallel between systematically lifetime jailing members of certain minority populations and "sacrificing your slaves to your gods". Certainly the systematic massacre they were subjected to under the Spanish vastly outdid anything the Aztec's could have come up with in terms of pure imaginative sadistic cruelty. My attitudes about possible modern human sacrifice platforms can be found in this post about Torcs, and should be considered tongue-in-cheek:

The symbol denoting nobility indicated both your economic privilege and symbolic responsibility for the collective wealth, fertility, and martial success of your community. Certain families wore them to indicate their power and status over slaves, vassals, etc. However if things weren't going well someone (assumably the druids?) would determine the spirits needed to be placated and offer up one of the noble families as a sacrifice.

But I am uncertain if this is the case and may be repeating some repeated bad information or sketchy archeological speculation. I always liked the idea though. I have to say that I would personally feel much more comfortable about our system of government if say, after the financial crisis, there was a solid cultural demand for the public mass sacrifice of a certain number of the responsible bankers, officials, and financiers. They would be quickly replaced. Everyone who benefits from the situation or system in power should lose hard if they mess it up for everyone else. This I think would adequately symbolize the life-and-death power we have all allowed money and capitalist values to have over our lives, and hopefully serve as a motivation for personal responsibility. I'm sure this kind of system would see abuse too its just nice to think about.

This system of noble sacrifice seems to have also held true among the Maya, although there was some strange "mystic/sadomasochist" aspect to that as well.


To be continued...