The Metaphysics of Animal Sacrifice

reply to post by cloudyday


Quick answer:

Humans are defined in the Talmud (in a concealed way) by various terms, each level representing a more advanced or unified form.

HaAdam (The Adam). "The", which is a definite article, is the objective biological classification of a human being. Thus, anyone with the body and form of a human, is a human being.

Bnei Adam (children of Adam), This represents a higher level, where one is the 'son' of Adam, being of his form and of his nature. This means the person possesses the spiritual qualities of the original (or primordial) man.

Adam. This is the highest term which the Talmud reserves for the Jewish people alone. This name has no definite article before it, indicating a more internal and essential nature. This refers to a unified human collective, unified by belief and experience of the divine. During Talmudic times, when the Jewish people, at least in its diasporic condition, were united, they were called Adam. This term only applies to a unified human consciousness, and thus, it would apply to mankind only when there is a likeness of form (of spirit) between each other, without the hate and conflict which has typified man for so long.

Remember, the Talmud isn't say non-Jews are animals, since it refers to them both as HaAdam, and as Bnei Adam. What the Talmudic Rabbis felt, however, was that, due to their pagan teachings and exploitative political systems (which were a reflection of their theological beliefs), they prevented all mankind from being "Adam", even though at root, all of us derive from Him.

In my opinion, today, the Jewish people are as much removed from Adam as everyone else. We have a lot of work to do to reach that pristine state again.

reply to post by dontreally


God is energy. Blood is the life force or energy provider of the body. Taking blood from an animal would seem to be a way to balance out negative or low energy, since energy is more denser or less denser in different places.

I would think that killing the animal or human would not necessarily have to happen if enough blood was offered to balance the energy.

Some desert people nick their animals, collect the blood, add it to milk and let it ferment (sp?) and drink it. Was this drink originally created for the gods?

reply to post by dontreally

You're confusing cheap demons who demand blood - the life force - with the essence of creation.

No - it is you who are surrounding what is base 'magic' with ridiculous bullcrap and grandiose religiosity.

The god of the OT is a transparent laughable fraud!

reply to post by JohhnyBGood

No - it is you who are surrounding what is base 'magic' with ridiculous bullcrap and grandiose religiosity.

Believe what you want. This is what Judaism teaches.

The god of the OT is a transparent laughable fraud!

Good. It's nice to know where some Christians (and if I remember correctly, a supporter of Israel?) Stand.

I've always understood that the so-called "new testament" had absolutely nothing whatsoever, at all, to do with the Hebrew Bible.

Hey, man. Come play with us over here.

Blood Magic- Real or Sympathetic Neurology?

Well in Hindu/Buddhism

Doing a animal sacrifice ritual is doing good deed. WHY? Because in Hindu/Buddhist they believe when a person commit bad deeds, he/she will reborn in one of the lower realm; Animal realm, Ghost realm, and Hell realm in their next life.

Becoming a animal in your next life is consider a act of bad deed.

So when one is perfrom a animal sacrificing ritual, what they are doing is saving that animal soul to be reborn as a HUMAN in that animal next life.

Being born as a Human again is consider a act of good deeds, Heaven is the next higher realm according to Hindu beliefs.

Originally posted by PoorGrammar
Well in Hindu/Buddhism
So when one is perfrom a animal sacrificing ritual, what they are doing is saving that animal soul to be reborn as a HUMAN in that animal next life.

Being born as a Human again is consider a act of good deeds, Heaven is the next higher realm according to Hindu beliefs.

That is incorrect totally false and an misrepresentation.

Please show me the Evidence to back up the claims you make about this Buddhist belief.

The Buddha argued against the Fire Worshipers, the Caste System and animal sacrifice.

The above with the non belief in an seperate "I" or "Atman" is what evolved Buddhas teachings from Hinduism into Buddhism.

In Buddhism to kill an amimal as an sacrifce will lead you to hell or as an low rebirth.

Unless you are enlightened or such like it is impossible, to say where the reincarnation will be, and only very few would have the transference of consciousness ability to do it.

The same as Jesus Evolved the Jewish faith, stopping stonings, and the animal sacrifices of the old pagan ways. "He who is clean throw the first stone" and all that.

What you say might be found in Tenets of Hinduism, though you will never find it in any true Buddhist.

DontReally I am not ignoring your response, thank you for it, though I do not agree with your beliefs it is your right to them and you are a man of "faith" as such, I do respect that, before I reply I am doing a bit of research myself.

Kind Regards,

Elf

reply to post by MischeviousElf

"He who is clean throw the first stone" and all that

So then, following that logic, all capital punishment would be forbidden, because all people are to some degree "with fault".

Even the 4 Biblically prescribed forms of human execution (for a plethora of different crimes) have their basis in Kabbalistic logic.

Thus, 'stoning' someone, would be doing to him what will happen to him regardless when he enters the next world. The 'stoning' is just the physical analogy of the metaphysical punishment (and as all traditions, one is 'punished', so to speak, by the evil of his thoughts, deeds and actions, immediately following death..The Hebrew word for sin can cast some light on what is meant by the Hebraic concept. Chet - sin - also means, "to miss the mark", as when someone shoots an arrow and misses the mark. In the dynamic of an arrow shot, the place from where it starts - the bow of the shooter, corresponds to the essence or will of the creator, whereas the target would correspond to the creators will effected in practice. When one acts 'out of order', and out of tune with the natural laws of creation, he 'misses the mark') he would receive in the nether world.

The same for burning, decapitation and strangulation (via hanging). All these sound like very horrible punishments, but in reality, they are the physical converse of a spiritual punishment. They effect the same thing.

It's actually considered, according to kabbalistic logic, a mercy, that God allows man to amend spiritual faults through suffering here, because at least in this realm we have a spiritual flexibility i.e. the ego, to recognize fault and put ourselves on a new and better course, whereas when one dies, the ego dissipates and all that is left is a consciousness that experiences the forms it created while alive.

Originally posted by dontreally
It's actually considered, according to kabbalistic logic, a mercy, that God allows man to amend spiritual faults through suffering here, because at least in this realm we have a spiritual flexibility i.e. the ego, to recognize fault and put ourselves on a new and better course, whereas when one dies, the ego dissipates and all that is left is a consciousness that experiences the forms it created while alive.

I read somewhere that early Jews did not have a firm view on life after death. There have been times when I woke up sweating because I felt like I understood what death is like. My fear is that it will be a dream with no physical laws to make it rational. (I think "the law of the Lord" is physics.) What you're describing for life after death sounds grim, but maybe I'm not getting it.

reply to post by cloudyday

I read somewhere that early Jews did not have a firm view on life after death.

People often make this mistake about Judaism because it seems to be so focused on this world. This is what Blavatasky (either ignorantly, or with the intent to mislead), Bailey and most gnostic writers say about Judaism; that it's "this world oriented". Some even went so far as to flat out lie and say Judaism denied the afterlife.

That is the whole point. Judaism doesn't deny the existence of the afterlife; the midrashim (homiletical writings) abound with such discussions (albeit, in a 'homiletical' type fashion).

The entire Torah is regarded as the metaphysical prototype of creation; Creation, is seen as the manifestation of the Torah. This means everything in creation is rooted in the metaphysical concepts elucidated (via the oral tradition, in particular) in the various narratives (i.e.dynamics) of the Torah, which comes from the root 'Horah" - to instruct.

In this sense, this world is the matrix of mans purpose in creation, whereas in Christianity, or in Eastern religions, mans purpose is to ESCAPE and transcend the world, to transcend it's 'dualistic' structure, and 'separation', between the masculine and feminine powers and it multitudinous derivations. Hebraism conversely takes a complete opposite approach; it stresses the RELEVANCE of the divisions and manifestation of the ONE (God) in the multiple (creation), hence, it's manifold laws and strictures, which unlike what is usually promoted, isn't meant to be followed "mindlessly", but rather, to be understood Kabbalistically, and engaged in mindfully, and with a elevated spiritual intention.

What you're describing for life after death sounds grim, but maybe I'm not getting it.

Both my intuition and my understanding of metaphysics (and i have a very deep interest in metaphysics, my library is full of such books) leads me to agree with the popular opinion that death is the dissolution of the personal ego. Although I do believe some degree of self awareness subsists after death, this awareness is much more spiritual, and aware of ones own spiritual self, then of one's former existence in this world.

In the general Kabbalistic process of death, the deceased individual suffers as long as it takes for his body to decompose (which is thought be at most 12 months), at which time his 'physicality', or the material aspects of himself, those parts of his spiritual self which are tainted by the various vices he engaged in and cultivated within His soul, are purged, in a spiritual 'cleansing' that parallels the physical decomposition of the body.

From what I've read of NDE, particularly those which deal with a traumatic near death experience, each 'vice' takes an objective presence, and becomes 'personified' as an 'angel of destruction'. In one particular case I read, an angel of gluttony was present and with him were the various earthly actions as his retinue; each action creating a corresponding spiritual 'force', i.e. desire, which now exacts it's tribute from its creator (YOU). So when we act for the sake of ourselves, and not for the sake of the Absolute (God), we suffer the consequences of that when we die. The vitality/energy of the force created by our action in thought/speech/deed terrorizes the soul. And this continues through each archetypal vice, from sexual lust, to anger, greed, etc, following a type of chthonic heirarchy.

After the soul is properly rectified, she is able to experience the good of his earthly life, and this being what is called 'heaven'.

Night precedes day, as in the creation episode, "it was night, and it was day". Just as the bitter precedes the sweet, or the husk, or shell, envelops the fruit.

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by cloudyday

 

I read somewhere that early Jews did not have a firm view on life after death.

People often make this mistake about Judaism because it seems to be so focused on this world. This is what Blavatasky (either ignorantly, or with the intent to mislead), Bailey and most gnostic writers say about Judaism; that it's "this world oriented". Some even went so far as to flat out lie and say Judaism denied the afterlife.

That is the whole point. Judaism doesn't deny the existence of the afterlife; the midrashim (homiletical writings) abound with such discussions (albeit, in a 'homiletical' type fashion).

The entire Torah is regarded as the metaphysical prototype of creation; Creation, is seen as the manifestation of the Torah. This means everything in creation is rooted in the metaphysical concepts elucidated (via the oral tradition, in particular) in the various narratives (i.e.dynamics) of the Torah, which comes from the root 'Horah" - to instruct.

In this sense, this world is the matrix of mans purpose in creation, whereas in Christianity, or in Eastern religions, mans purpose is to ESCAPE and transcend the world, to transcend it's 'dualistic' structure, and 'separation', between the masculine and feminine powers and it multitudinous derivations. Hebraism conversely takes a complete opposite approach; it stresses the RELEVANCE of the divisions and manifestation of the ONE (God) in the multiple (creation), hence, it's manifold laws and strictures, which unlike what is usually promoted, isn't meant to be followed "mindlessly", but rather, to be understood Kabbalistically, and engaged in mindfully, and with a elevated spiritual intention.

What you're describing for life after death sounds grim, but maybe I'm not getting it.

Both my intuition and my understanding of metaphysics (and i have a very deep interest in metaphysics, my library is full of such books) leads me to agree with the popular opinion that death is the dissolution of the personal ego. Although I do believe some degree of self awareness subsists after death, this awareness is much more spiritual, and aware of ones own spiritual self, then of one's former existence in this world.

In the general Kabbalistic process of death, the deceased individual suffers as long as it takes for his body to decompose (which is thought be at most 12 months), at which time his 'physicality', or the material aspects of himself, those parts of his spiritual self which are tainted by the various vices he engaged in and cultivated within His soul, are purged, in a spiritual 'cleansing' that parallels the physical decomposition of the body.

From what I've read of NDE, particularly those which deal with a traumatic near death experience, each 'vice' takes an objective presence, and becomes 'personified' as an 'angel of destruction'. In one particular case I read, an angel of gluttony was present and with him were the various earthly actions as his retinue; each action creating a corresponding spiritual 'force', i.e. desire, which now exacts it's tribute from its creator (YOU). So when we act for the sake of ourselves, and not for the sake of the Absolute (God), we suffer the consequences of that when we die. The vitality/energy of the force created by our action in thought/speech/deed terrorizes the soul. And this continues through each archetypal vice, from sexual lust, to anger, greed, etc, following a type of chthonic heirarchy.

After the soul is properly rectified, she is able to experience the good of his earthly life, and this being what is called 'heaven'.

Night precedes day, as in the creation episode, "it was night, and it was day". Just as the bitter precedes the sweet, or the husk, or shell, envelops the fruit.

edit on 7-1-2012 by dontreally because: (no reason given)

Thanks for that explanation. I keep noticing similarities between Judaism and Orthodox Christianity. For example, some Orthodox teach that after death people pass through toll houses guarded by demons personifying various sins. Also, I think Orthodox Christians tend to think everything (people and objects) has a presence both physically and spiritually. So physical rituals have spiritual consequences because everything is simultaneously in both domains. It's almost like they imagine the physical world as an icon of the spiritual world - at least that was how it seemed to me.

OK I intend to reply in one of my longer multi posts, replies on many of the things brought up here soon, but I am still compiling it, time and all, hopefully I might add something unknown and new here, I do have some sources and info not really in the public domain, and research documents and some very very unknown books, diaries and treatise not in print or just in the hundreds or tens originally.

Due to the expertise and in depth information here though it deserves such a careful considered and double checked reply.

I do have some affinity and knowledge (though of many years ago, and thanks for bringing this op up as I have revised and re read much from many years ago when I was first on the "Path" as such and studied much Arcane and ancient practice.) It has been very interesting for me to revisit my writings and thoughts from then to compare them to know in my own understanding as such of my own development.

Just to add to the debate some basics before I do that hopefully by weekend the following:

As I pointed out in an earlier post it is against the law of the Torah or the Jewish God to murder. I wanted to explain the reason I put that there, I knew it was more than is written in the accepted Modern Bibles and translations, esp post nicea etc, so I did not have the translation at hand but after finding some old notebooks is not the following true in the original Hebrew and Torah?

Now the above is an important point the translations of the words of those who originally recorded all religious texts is the reason for most of the problems and deceptions within the messages across the board.

as in the accepted texts today

Exodus 20:13 - Deuteronomy 5:17 "Thou shalt not kill"

Is in fact an Bastardisation of the original Hebrew which is (please correct me if I am wrong) in the Torah at Exodus 20:13 - Deuteronomy 5:17

lo tirtzack

From my notes that I made some 20 odd years ago I found it meant the following from some research, and again please do show me if I was wrong I have no Hebrew skills at all.

lo

Is an general instruction for all of the commandments meaning either of the following?

Though must not

or

Though shalt not

tirtzack

Translates as in true Hebrew/Torah?

"kill any thing at all"

Which I seem from my notes to have found as the closest true meaning, with the following possibility and an ? mark after it meaning I was not sure of the source/translation

"do any type of killing at all"

Now this if true means any Animal Sacrifice is infact against the commandments of God in the true Hebrew traditions before interpretation and translation.

Also it is very clear in the first book

Genesis 1:29

And God said, Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree-yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is a living soul, I have given every green herb for food: and it was so

Now I really would prefer a proper Hebrew Translation of that from the Torah maybe you can do that?

However it is very plain what the message is.

Have you ever considered that the Eve "eating" the "Apple" after this point in the record and creating "original sin" as such, could have been the breaking of the sixth commandment, that is eating of the flesh?

Edit to add to in Isiah and again please do get provide the true Hebrew and translation if this is wrong:

Isiah 1:11

Saith the Lord: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he-goats. - When ye spread forth your hands, I will hide Mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: for your hands are full of blood

Kind Regards,

Elf

reply to post by MischeviousElf

As I pointed out in an earlier post it is against the law of the Torah or the Jewish God to murder.

First, just as a matter of logic; do you think "do not kill" implies, do not kill ever, not under any circumstances are you to kill? Not even when someone is coming to take your life....You are still not to kill? On this basis alone your contention of 'do not kill' has no relevance to animal sacrifice.

Secondly, if you read over all the commandments God gave the Israelites, they all have to do with HUMAN or DIVINE relations; not one of them has to do with animals, since it's generally understood that human sin is a consequence of human social weakness; a man will not act cruel to an animal unless he is able to be cruel to a human being.

לֹא תִרְצָח

Lo Tirzach.

Lo means 'no' or 'not', it always represents a negative in some manner.

Tirzach, is the second person, present, imperative active of "retzach" - 'murder'.

So roughly translated it means 'do not murder'.

Genesis 1:29

And this verse is modified by Genesis 9:3, which says

"Every moving thing that liveth shall be for food for you; as the green herb have I given you all. "

And genesis 9:4 adds the provision:

"Only flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. "

Evidently, after the 'fall from eden', and later on mans collective rebellion against universal morality, God permitted man - who before that was only granted the vegetables and fruits of the earth as his sustenance - to use animals as food.

The deeper idea here is obvious. Since man fell because of animalism, it required the sacrifice of his own inner animal, symbolized by the living symbol of animals of the earth (which are the externalization, or projection, of mans own inner reality, corresponding to a particular emotional potentiality)