Talk:Animal sacrifice

What does ' first offering' mean?

I have traslated the article into Chinese wiki, but I am still very confused about the noun " first offering" in the chapter of Scythians. The article says that the Scythians didn't make any first offerings from the victims, so I guess if a priest had made a first offering from a victim, it means the priest would have got something like blood or fur from the victim's body before he or she killed it. Is that right? //杏子雨 2021-07-26 UTC-14:20

Islam and Judaism

Why there is no explicit mention of islam and zionism? These two ancient religions are premier animal sacrificers. Especially muslims cut sheeps to this day in large numbers.

RedHouse18 (talk)RedHouse18 20:40, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

So does every culture except for vegitarians. // Liftarn

This brings up a very important point: is animal sacrifice distinguishable in any way from animal slaughter for food? Is/was its function purely gestural - a means of redistributing wealth - or something more? Is there significance in the fact that only domesticated species were ever involved in animal sacrifices? Is there evidence of wild animals being involved? How old is the practice (for different cultures)? It would be great if someone knowledgeable on this subject would address any of these topics.

Zionism was a nationalistic movement wherein European Jews believed that they should immigrate (or aliyah) to Palestine. It is not an ancient religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1970:4C17:B00:CB9:BF41:B85F:E49 (talk) 23:29, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Abrahamic Traditions

Hello, I was hoping to find more information on religious animal sacrifice throughout the history of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. If somebody would like to write this story here that would be great. Thanks!

This is one of the best entries on the subject on the web, it gives a detailed account of sacrifices in many religions. Richard001 21:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Islam

It's rather strange not to mention Islam's continuing practice of animal sacrifice, especially at the two annual Eid festivals (Eid ul-Adha and Eid ul-Fitr). CarlFink 19:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

China, et al

Anyone know about animal sacrifices in ancient China, Japan, and other East Asian cultures? Leadwind (talk) 04:34, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I watched a chicken get sacrificed in Ceylon about 1956 or so. Does that count? 01:30, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: I had editted the 'East Asian traditions' yesterday(2021-07-21). I added some informations about the ancient China and the folk religions. 杏子雨 (talk)

Meat consumed?

The article fails to address how the meat of the animal is used in any culture except Islam, where it notes that the meat is typically consumed ... distributed to the poor.

Is the meat used? Is it wasted?

Well, Ancient Greek animal sacrifice was roughly equivalent to a church barbecue. There was a religious ceremony, certain parts of the animal were burned, but most of it was roasted on spits and eaten. Also they would drink wine, pouring some of it as libations. AFAIK other ancient pagan animal sacrifices worked in much the same way.

The altar could be a blessed Butcher_block

It seems to be in part a way of distributing food. Perhaps also a way to overcome any guilt about killing the animal as well (pure speculation here.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.75.233.253 (talk) 06:41, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Strangites ARE Latter Day Saints

There seems to be some ongoing confusion about usage of the term "Latter Day Saints" in regard to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite)--the official name of James Strang's organization. The usage of "Latter Day Saints" is appropriate, as this term is used encyclopedically in a general sense to describe all persons who believe in Joseph Smith's "restoration" and in the Book of Mormon, regardless of how they may otherwise disagree in doctrine, leadership and/or practice. The LDS church in Utah is not the only one with a right to use "Latter Day Saints" to describe itself (or to be described by others, in the most general sense); this term is equally appropriate for usage with or by the Community of Christ, Church of Christ (Temple Lot), Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite), and Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerite), just to name a few. This section makes very clear that the Strangite organization is not the Utah church, but a separate organization altogether. Hence, the term "Latter Day Saints" should remain as the title for this section, not "Strangite." - Ecjmartin (talk) 01:55, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Is the use of Firstfruits rather than First Fruits in the Strangite section how it is spelled in their scripture? If not, I would think changing it to the more common spelling would be appropriate. --VikÞor | Talk 00:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Looks like that's already been done. You are correct; I failed to notice than when I was composing that section. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!! - Ecjmartin (talk) 02:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: Bali Sacrifice Proposed Merger

If Bali is the same as Sechita and Dabiha, so I am open to opinions as to whether it should be merged with this article. The problem I foresee is that Bali can take the form of vegetable food offerings as part of Yajna.Thanks--Sikh-History 12:16, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Merger with Animal sacrifice in Hinduism proposed

I have recommened the article Bali (sacrifice) to be merged with Animal sacrifice. The reason is that there is already a general article on the theme to which Hindu and Sikh animal sacrifices can be added as sub topics. I think this new article needlessly duplicates a topic. What is next? Are we going to have separate articles for animal sacrifice in each tradition? There are thousands of creeds which practiced animals sacrifice with various theological inspirations. To dedicate a separate article for each is bit of an overkill, imho. Kindly weigh in with your opinions. Thanks.--History Sleuth

It's now Animal sacrifice in Hinduism, by conception a valid WP:SS sub-article to this one. THere were indeed "thousands of creeds which practiced animals sacrifice with various theological inspirations" -- and it makes sense to group them by common categories used in religious studies, e.g. "Hinduism", which is an umbrella term of probably a couple of hundred such traditions. --dab (𒁳) 13:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

As it stands at the moment I agree there is no need for a separate article as the section on Hinduism within Animal Sacrifice is longer than the separate article. However it looks as if there are proposals to expand the Animal sacrifice in Hinduism. I think that the best course would be to wait a while and see whether this article becomes complete enough to warrant a separate entry. If it does we could probably trim down the Hinduism section here a little and keep a separate article. If it does not expand much then I would support a merger in future. -- Q Chris (talk) 15:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I understand your point. As you can see at Talk:Animal sacrifice in Hinduism, the situation at the moment is rather chaotic. It is only pragmatic to keep this Hinduism-specific debate off the main "animal sacrifice" talkpage for now. Once the situation becomes stable, we can still see whether there is enough material for a sub-article, or whether the remaining stable material can just be merged back. --dab (𒁳) 09:23, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Q Chris and dab, we should wait a little to check if the article can be expanded further as a valid SS article or should it merged it here as a sub-section as its current content is small. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:40, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

The Article's list omits allot.

- Ancient Europe: - Ancient Greeks. - Polynesia. - Africa. - Americas: Sacrificing llamas. - Voodoo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaccuratesource (talk • contribs) 01:54, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

New section on Buddhism

I've given Buddhism its own section, but it needs more info added. Steve (talk) 19:10, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Added additional infos, refs

At Traditional African religion, Hinduism. OccultZone (talk) 17:20, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Animal sacrifice in Hinduism

I don't think that it is contradicted with ashvamdedha. Ashvamedha seems to be vedic sacrifice with no importance for this age. You cannot add "many holy texts" or "many scriptures", unless there is some scripture that promoted or allowed animal sacrifice. OccultZone (Talk) 17:51, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Ashwamedha does not mean horse-sacrifice. Ashwa - Nation, Kingdom + Medha - Intelligent act = Patriotic act done intelligently for the sake of nation. agniveer.com/no-beef-in-vedas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arhan_Arya (talk • contribs)

For someone who claims not to be religions, you seem pretty zealous in sticking to amateur religious sources instead of academic sources. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

The Yajurveda mentions animal sacrifice. Also saying "Hinduism forbids animal sacrfice" is a sweeping sentence that is totally divorced from the reality of thousands of animals sacrificed across India in temples of Kali, Bhavani, Ekvira etc. If you say the Vaishnavism, the largest sect of Hinduism forbids it then I can understand. I hope it is clear what I am trying to say. Let us carry on this dialogue on Talk page of the article itself so others can take part. thanksJonathansammy (talk) 18:57, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry but Yajurveda's first mantra itself has said not to kill animals ! So what are you talking about ?

Surely, 'Hinduism' is wide term including various cults, traditions, philosophies, etc. But to specify, it is Vedic religion which prohibits animal sacrifices or even meat consumption. Here is the authentic source of yajurveda http://www.onlineved.com/yajur-ved/?language=2&commentrator=all .

You say "Ashvamedha seems to be vedic sacrifice with no importance for this age" But in "this age" or even today, probably thousands of animals may have been slaughtered by the devotees of various Devis. Also the reference you quote is so from the 1890s. Please include a more recent reference to make your point. (Jonathansammy (talk) 19:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

It is not up to the people, what they do. It is up to the scripture to decide what is allowed and what isn't. We have added about the sacrifices, that they took place. Source included that 'Ashvamedha' is forbidden rite for this age, similar thing can be also found in the book from Rosen, which is recent. I am talking about Holy Cow: The Hare Krishna Contribution to Vegetarianism and Animal Rights, check. OccultZone (Talk) 19:47, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

The reference you quote talks about Shakta brahmin eating meat check. [[User:OccultZone|OccultZone]. This by itself should invalidate the statement that "Hinduism itself forbids animal sacrifice". I recommend we change it to "except for the Shakta sect, other major sects of Hinduism such as Vaishnavism forbid animal sacrifice". Jonathansammy (talk) 21:50, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Many eat meat, but it wasn't sanctioned by religion. Article is more about animal sacrifice. Adding 'vaishnavism' and 'shakta' would be original research, because these sources are about religion, not subgroup. Statement is not surprising, because it is commonly held. OccultZone (Talk) 02:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Cannot find the citations given

I scoured two authoritative translations (Chattha Sangayana and Rahul Sankrityayana), and the specified 'Brahmana Dhammika Sutta' is not available therein. I personally find it weird that the Buddha who was so vocal against Brahminical sacrifices would attest to what is given. In any case the citations given are not of the Tripitaka entries themselves.Pokedora (talk) 07:07, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Blood as fertilizer.

Prehistoric ancestors of humans had no knowledge of fertilizer, and maybe they noticed that grass grew very rich and green where an animal (nonhuman or human) died and bled out, and maybe they thought that killing and bloodshed pleased the gods of the grasses and grains, so that this whole disgraceful tradition is rooted in ignorance of the simple facf that blood is an excellent fertilizer. Now that our foreheads are bigger than they were then, maybe all religions need to be cleansed of this confusion which regards all gods as resembling Molloch to varying degrees, and I write this as a theist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.135.3 (talk) 11:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, but Wikipedia does not use original research. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:00, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

The original poster was 100% correct to note the gaping hole in this lame article, i.e. the origin of the utter savagery that is the very topic of the article. To wave away the question on the basis that the poster only presented an unreferenced (althoughly reasonable) guess, rather than a citation, is pathetic. Fact is, the article is fundamentally flawed in its failure to offer an explanation for the bizarre behaviour being discussed, but merely lists examples of it. In addition, the article fails to discuss the reaction of civilized people to such barbarism, nor discuss why this prehistoric practice continues to this day in the face of civilixation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.118.2 (talk) 03:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Animal sacrifice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100422221750/http://www.daoist.org:80/culture/history/culture_history_005.htm to http://www.daoist.org/culture/history/culture_history_005.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:34, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Animal sacrifice/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Paul was paying for others to offer sacrifices. He was not offering the sacrifice. He knew that the Law of Moses had been fulfilled with the atonement of Christ (the Lamb).

Last edited at 20:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 07:51, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Animal sacrifice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150501033952/http://www.twtaoism.net/php/4-6show.php?teaching_id=83 to http://www.twtaoism.net/php/4-6show.php?teaching_id=83

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:21, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

make page: Covert pagan rituals

For example some Christians kill lambs after Easter; few claim they're just hungry after fasting, and other say that the lamb mustn't die immediately if it's to be Eaten after the Resurrection, but it must quiver and feel the pain of Jesus during his dying. There isn't a generic myth, but only many Covert pagan rituals in Christianity. Also other religions include older mystic traditions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4103:E800:A9F5:85ED:EE0B:1556 (talk) 20:54, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Anthropological Purpose

Should we add a section for the purposes of animal sacrifice?

The article states the purpose of animal sacrifice according to adherents of ancient religions, but it doesn't give the anthropological reasoning behind it. Why does it make sense for calorie-constrained prehistoric cultures to "waste" food sources. Perhaps we can find some research about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DenverCoder19 (talk • contribs) 23:09, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I would like to see more on this subject also. There's a brief mention at the beginning about speculation that it may have gotten started when agriculture took the place of hunting-gathering, but that's all. As one can see from the article, animal sacrifice is a near-universal practice. It almost appears to be an instinctive human need; as soon as people conceive the idea of a Deity they immediately feel it's necessary to kill something to propitiate (or communicate with) said Deity. Even Christianity (especially Christianity?) has this. --Bluejay Young (talk) 07:39, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

In Christianity, sacrifices tend to be symbolic. In the Eucharist, Christians are instructed to feast on the flesh and blood of the sacrificed Jesus. They simply use bread and wine as symbols of flesh and blood, rather than actually practicing human cannibalism. Dimadick (talk) 11:02, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Add section: 'Scientific Animal Sacrifice'

It's section needs to be added as mainstream scientists also refer to the sacrifice of animals for the purpose of science and have called for a reduction of it. Therefore the sacrificing of animals topic needs to be inclusive of scientific sacrifice of animals too. 105.4.1.228 (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Needs some work.

There are a lot of spelling mistakes and run-on sentences in the Asian section. It also includes seemingly random information with no citation every now and then. 148.77.99.42 (talk) 19:58, 3 March 2023 (UTC)