Seven-year-old sacrificed to the gods for good harvest in India

[cleanhippie]

A seven-year-old girl was ritually murdered and her liver offered to the gods in return for a good agricultural harvest in the central state of Chhattisgarh, India, police said on Sunday.

According to Narayan Das, police chief of Bijapur district, in a telephone conversation with AFP: "A seven-year-old girl was sacrificed by two persons superstitiously believing that the act would give a better harvest."

Police arrested two men in connection with the murder of Lalita Tati after her body was found in October. Her family had reported her missing. According to the police, the men confessed to the crime.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/317075#ixzz1iJatzvgs

------------------------------------------------------------------


Shouldn't we be respecting peoples deeply held religious beliefs? No? Just the good ones then, right?

[skepticscott]

1. And hey, what's the harm

in believing in things that aren't real? This may not have meaning to us, but it does to them, so who are we to bash their sacred beliefs and traditions?

[MarkCharles]

2. A perfect example of how religions of the world contribute so much..

to the justification for anything and every heinous action imaginable.

There's really nothing like religion when it comes to enabling a sound mind to get all twisted up.

[rrneck]

3. That's just plain flat slap fucked up. nt

[LeftishBrit]

4. How horrible. The poor child!

As regards your last comment: 'People's deeply held religious beliefs', just like their other deeply held beliefs, deserve respect, so long as they don't lead to harm to others. When they are used to justify murder and other forms of violence and cruelty, respect and toleration end.

[cleanhippie]

5. Well then, by that measure we should end our respect and tolerance

For religion altogether, because it has been used to do just that for thousands of years.

[LeftishBrit]

15. So have many things, depending on circumstances

You could say that nationality should be abolished because it sometimes leads to war and violence. Some would say just that; others would say it's unrealistic and that one should campaign against war, rather than against nationhood. I'd be in the latter camp (in my view, nationalism is a bad thing, until it's compared with its two main current alternatives: imperialism and tribalism). Some would say that family loyalties are a bad thing, because they have often led to feuds or to discrimination. Etc.

To seek to abolish all religion on the ground that it is sometimes used in the cause of violence, discrimination, or murder reminds me a bit of Prohibition: the desire to abolish all use of alcohol, because its misuse can lead to addiction, crime, domestic violence, etc. Prohibition of alcohol is neither justifiable nor, as it turned out, practically possible. Prohibition of religion is IMO still less justifiable or possible. (I am not equating religion with alcohol! But I am equating attempts at wholesale prohibition of an activity, when one should really be focusing on the misuse.)

Also, how do you define 'religion' at this point? Any strongly held ideology may be used in the cause of violence. Should we consider Communism, or devotion to the free market, or adulation of a monarch or political leader, as a religion? All of these have been used to justify wars and persecutions.

[humblebum]

16. Tell me. Have more people been murdered under the guise of religion than

than were murdered for other pretenses?

[cleanhippie]

18. Yawn.

Get a new act.

[humblebum]

21. I would tell you the same thing.

Broad brushing religion is nothing new.

[cleanhippie]

22. Zzzzzzzzzz

[humblebum]

23. IOW, You'll say just about anything and you really couldn't

care less about accuracy, nor what others have to say about it. Check.

[cleanhippie]

24. Zzzzzzzzzzz

[dmallind]

38. Does anybody suggest totalitarian tyranny deserves respect or accommodation?

Nobody I have ever seen on DU suggests that Stalin or Pot (both of whom saw religion as a potential political threat rather than simply silly superstition believed by idiots) should be treated with respect or lack of criticism. Religion claims that privilege constantly, so do you really want to be held to the same standard?

[humblebum]

39. Why answer a question with a question that has little to do with the subject at hand?

Last edited Tue Jan 3, 2012, 04:48 PM - Edit history (1)

About the two you referenced, "both of whom saw religion as a potential political threat rather than simply silly superstition believed by idiots) Yes, indeed they did see religion as a "silly superstition believed by idiots", and went to extremes to emphasize the fact, in addition to considering it a political threat.

[dmallind]

40. You raised the irrelevant issue. I can't answer it?

[humblebum]

41. How is it irrelevant? When it is being implied that religion is responsible for so

many atrocities, it needs to be pointed out that more has happened without religion than by religion.

[laconicsax]

42. That makes no sense.

When it's being implied that the * administration is was responsible for thousands of American deaths, does it need to be pointed out than many more died in previous administrations?

[humblebum]

43. Now that makes no sense. When certain atheists or anti-religious people attack religion frequently

as the source of so much trouble, the point needs to be made that there have been more non-religious causes. And that point will always be made as long as the issue is brought up.

[laconicsax]

44. IOW: You will always try to change the subject. Got it.

[humblebum]

46. Exposing the real problem is hardly changing the subject.

The problem is not religion in general. That is a ridiculous broad brush attack. The problem is human actions as is evidenced by pointing out the absence of religious impetus in the majority of such deeds throughout history.

[laconicsax]

47. Changing the subject is changing the subect. n/t

[humblebum]

48. Kinda like saying the Dalai Lama blew up the WTC. Things

like that need to be corrected. One cannot change the same subject.

[Iggo]

54. Like you just did?

[humblebum]

55. Yep. It made the point didn't it? That was my point. It's a non-answer.nt

[immoderate]

6. And if the harvest doesn't improve -- ritual facepalms all around!

--imm

[Mosby]

7. I can't seem to find the name of the religion that encourages these practices

Anyone know?

[cleanhippie]

8. Is that important?

It's a system of beliefs based on irrational claims of the supernatural. that pretty much covers every religion out there. Is the specific name important for some reason?

[MarkCharles]

9. ....Only to those of the "no true Scotsman" religions.

Which, again, is just about "every religion out there".

[Mosby]

10. I don't know

but the last paragraph caught my eye:


Superstition that human sacrifices are the most potent for warding off certain categories of danger persists in remote rural parts of India where the people are illiterate and superstitious. Sanal Edamaruku, president of the Indian Rationalist Association, said: "Modern India is home to hundreds of millions who can't read or write, but who often seek refuge from life's realities through astrology or the magical arts of shamans. Unfortunately these people focus their horrific attention on society's weaker members, mainly women and children who are easier to handle and kidnap."

That sound like Shamanism to me, is that a religion?

Are superstitions and astrology a religion?

Isn't Shamanism more like a proto-religion?

[MarkCharles]

11. Care to point out the differenced between what you define as a religion and

those you mentioned?

What tremendous force enables a group of people to kill a child in sacrifice? How is that force NOT a religion?

Article title: "...sacrificed to the gods"

[cbayer]

13. I would agree that it is much more like a proto-religion. It does not appear to

be monotheistic and based more on magic and astrology.

[cleanhippie]

19. Based on magic and astrology, huh?

Persons magically rising from the dead, a person magically parting the Red Sea, a person magically turning water into wine and healing the sick, a star marking the birth of a god-child....


Wait, are we talking about some obscure religion in India or Christianity?

[ZombieHorde]

14. Shaminism is a religion.

Astrology is simply inaccurate information, similar to homeopathy.

Religion is supernatural answers to life's philosophical questions; e.g., where did we come from, what is the meaning of life, what is real, how should we live our lives, etc.

[Mosby]

27. This dude with a phd said astrology is a religion

If astrology is a tightrope walk between religion and scientific astronomy, then we already have a first definition. First of all: insofar as it views cosmos, humans, and nature as being reigned over and guided by powers and forces from beyond, astrology is religion. All the events in the cosmos and on earth are linked together by an invisible magic bond. Only on the basis of this mysterious magical connection can astrology assume that the stars have something to do with the course of our lives, with our talents and weaknesses.

http://www.esoteric.msu.edu/VolumeIV/astrology.htm

[ZombieHorde]

31. A phd in what?

Astrology?

[Mosby]

32. I don't speak the language

http://www.ithrw.uni-hannover.de/person_ithrw.html?&no_cache=1&tx_tkt3hislsf_pi2[perid]=27832

So you tell me.

[ZombieHorde]

34. That is his office hours.

The German word "Religion" may have nuances not included in the American English word "religion," so his vocabulary may not contradict my own.

[tama]

51. Shamanhood

and "spiritual experience" has been known to devolve into religions and cults. In that sense, "proto-religion" makes some sense.

[cbayer]

12. It looks to be a cultish sect of Hinduism practised only in the very rural, most poor and illiterate

parts of the country.

It is sometimes described as a form of tantrism, although legitimate Tantriks describe this specific sect as "insane".

It is repeatedly described as based on superstition, fear, belief in the occult and prejudice and driven by overwhelming poverty and despair.

It is quite a stretch to compare this in any way to most organized religions or to use it as an example of how religion goes wrong, although I am sure that some will make that argument.

It is clearly way out there on the fringes.

[skepticscott]

17. So what exactly would you say IS an example

of how religion goes wrong? Wouldn't it be a case of people doing something terrible because they are firmly convinced that their religion or belief or "faith" requires it of them, despite the fact that they would never consider doing it otherwise? How would it be significantly different from what happened here?

I know you hate to admit that this murder was directly motivated by religious belief, but how else would you characterize it? And please, don't weary our ears with the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

[cbayer]

20. It would be rather redundant for me to do that, as it is done every day

here using both current and historical examples.

What I am pointing out is that the arguments that use an event like this to universally condemn religion are fallacious at best. Using fringe groups or people as models of behavior or thought for the whole just doesn't work very well. It would not be dissimilar to holding up the Stalinist or Pol Pot regimes as examples of atheism being evil, an argument which is repeatedly (and justifiably) shot down here.

Bad, ignorant, desperate people do bad, ignorant and desperate things. Sometimes they use religion to justify or explain things and sometimes they don't do that at all.

Honestly, Scott, you don't know what I may or may not hate to admit. These people are disturbed and are doing disturbing things. They may be driven by "religious belief", if that term is to be applied pretty broadly, but it can't be legitimately said that they represent anything typical or acceptable about religious believers.

[skepticscott]

25. No, that's NOT what you were pointing out

Your exact words: "It is quite a stretch to compare this in any way to most organized religions or to use it as an example of how religion goes wrong" (my emphasis)

That's a completely different thing than using "an event like this to universally condemn religion", wouldn't you agree? No one here did that, and it's nothing but a straw man that you invented to deflect from the real issue. (my emphasis)

I'll ask again...how is this NOT "an example of how religion goes wrong"? (my emphasis) How can this not be attributed to the fact that these people were religious? If they were "bad", "ignorant", "desperate" atheists, would they still have sacrificed their child to the gods to get a better harvest? And frankly, it's pretty condescending of you to dismiss their form of belief and their expression of it as not typical (Would you put yours in that category?). Not every legitimate form of religion involves sitting in pews in a nice comfy sanctuary on Sunday mornings and singing hymns and taking communion. (Knew you could't resist NTS). You yourself pointed out that similar examples are posted here every day. And the fact that what they did is not acceptable is exactly the point.

BTW, what Stalin and Pol Pot did was not dictated by or done in the name of atheism, so these examples are actually quite dissimilar. That's the argument which has been repeatedly and justifiably shot down here, so I'm not sure why you're still resorting to it.

[cbayer]

26. These subthreads that focus mainly on the exact words used and not the

intent are tedious and really unproductive.

I choose not to engage with you right now. Please feel free to see that as a "win" for you, a "loss" for me and as cowardice or lack of substantial argument on my part or however else you wish to interpret it.

The bottom line is that I really don't want to debate with someone who uses your tactics.

[cleanhippie]

28. Well now, THAT'S a familiar argument, isn't it.

Damn those "vicious bullies" for insisting that people take responsibility for their words. DAMN them.

[skepticscott]

33. You took the words right out of my mouth

Well, not the EXACT words...

[skepticscott]

30. It's been a long-used tactic among the apologists here

Last edited Tue Jan 3, 2012, 07:10 AM - Edit history (2)

to try to dismiss refutations of their arguments by responding "that's not EXACTLY what I said", or words to that effect, so I like to nip that in the bud right away. In any case, I'm not sure why you're uncomfortable having a discussion focus on what you actually said, and would rather have me and everyone else read your mind to figure out what you meant that was so much different, other than that the latter gives you an easy distraction from the actual issues involved by saying that we've misstated things. If your "intent" has been misconstrued, no one is preventing you from clarifying things, though if what you say is too often not what you meant, then how about making an effort to see that what you write more accurately reflects what you really mean? As has been explained to you previously, words mean things, and specific words are chosen to convey specific meanings. If you're going to use specific words and statements in your posts to persuade people of things, then why in the world would I focus on different words if I disagree with you?

In the end, my response was a substantial one, but to listen to you, someone would think that I'd gone on for paragraphs nit-picking that you'd used "your" instead of "you're".

And if "your tactics" means showing how your specific statements don't pass logical or factual muster, then I can understand why you'd rather not engage (btw, is that what makes someone a "vicious bully"?). But refusing to respond to refutations of your posts won't get you any more of a pass than it does your father. Not from me or from anyone else here.

[Mosby]

29. It's not an example because Shamanism is not a religion nt.

[skepticscott]

35. Sorry, it's just too tiresome to waste much time

refuting something so foolish. But anyone who cares to spend 30 seconds Googling "world religions shamanism" will discover how narrow your view is.

is it your position that if the US government tried to ban the practice of shamanism by Native Americans, that it would not be protected by the First Amendment, since (by your claim) it is not a religion?

[tama]

45. It's not shamanism

but a hindu sect. And term 'shamanism' is a rather poor expression to begin with when speaking about native peoples and their spiritual practices, though it's often used when better term is not available. "Shamanism" (like all other -isms) is an European invention and suits better to describe Neopagan/New Age (neo)shamanistic practices. Instead of -ism, professor Pentikäinen has recommended term 'shamanhood' to describe the individual and collective role of shaman.

As for relation between shamans and religions, best to quote as informant a member of a Siberian Fenno-Ugric tribe when asked about religion: "Religion? That's what Russians have, we have only our shamans."

[ZombieHorde]

49. Actually, Shaminism is a religion.

Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/shamanism

sha·man·ism
 
noun
1. the animistic religion of northern Asia, embracing a belief in powerful spirits that can be influenced only by shamans.
2. any similar religion.


Encyclopedia of Britannica http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/538200/shamanism

shamanism, Korean shamans petitioning the spirits to protect the community’s fishermen. [Credit: © Karen Sparks]religious phenomenon centred on the shaman, a person believed to achieve various powers through trance or ecstatic religious experience. Although shamans’ repertoires vary from one culture to the next, they are typically thought to have the ability to heal the sick, to communicate with the otherworld, and often to escort the souls of the dead to that otherworld.

The term shamanism comes from the Manchu-Tungus word šaman. The noun is formed from the verb ša- ‘to know’; thus, a shaman is literally “one who knows.” The shamans recorded in historical ethnographies have included women, men, and transgender individuals of ... (100 of 5649 words) <-- I have to activate my free trial to get the rest of the article.

[tama]

50. Ah, dictionary definition!

By all means, you can stick with a dictionary definition and stop with that, or you can seek better comprehension of the phenomenon. The word 'shamanism' goes back to Eliade:
"Eliade (1972) states: "A first definition of this complex phenomenon, and perhaps the least hazardous, will be: shamanism = technique of ecstasy."[3]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamanism

In modern methodology of anthropology, study of world views among human cultures, it is considered very important to not to impose one's own cultural background over the object study - as far as that is possible. So a good scholar questioning the relation between shamanhood and religions (<- a word of Latin origin) starts by questioning informants of tribal people relying on a shaman, how they see the relation between these phenomena.

So, Eliade's approach has been criticized for good reasons:
"Certain anthropologists, most notably Alice Kehoe in her book Shamans and Religion: An Anthropological Exploration in Critical Thinking, are highly critical of the term. Part of this criticism involves the notion of cultural appropriation.[citation needed] This includes criticism of New Age and modern Western forms of Shamanism, which may not only misrepresent or 'dilute' genuine indigenous practices but do so in a way that, according to Kehoe, reinforces racist ideas such as the Noble Savage.
A tableau presenting figures of various cultures filling in mediator-like roles, often being termed as "shaman" in the literature. The tableau presents the diversity of this concept.

Kehoe is highly critical of Mircea Eliade's work. Eliade, being a philosopher and historian of religions rather than an anthropologist, had never done any field work or made any direct contact with 'shamans' or cultures practicing 'shamanism', though he did spend four years studying at the University of Calcutta in India where he received his doctorate based on his Yoga thesis and was acquainted with Mahatma Gandhi. According to Kehoe, Eliade's 'shamanism' is an invention synthesized from various sources unsupported by more direct research. To Kehoe, what some scholars of shamanism treat as being definitive of shamanism, most notably drumming, trance, chanting, entheogens and hallucinogenics, spirit communication and healing, are practices that

* exist outside of what is defined as shamanism and play similar roles even in non-shamanic cultures (such as the role of chanting in Judeo-Christian and Islamic rituals)
* in their expression are unique to each culture that uses them and cannot be generalized easily, accurately or usefully into a global ‘religion’ such as shamanism.

Because of this, Kehoe is also highly critical of the notion that shamanism is an ancient, unchanged, and surviving religion from the Paleolithic period.

Mihály Hoppál also discusses whether the term "shamanism" is appropriate. He recommends using the term "shamanhood"[187] or "shamanship"[188] for stressing the diversity and the specific features of the discussed cultures. This is a term used in old Russian and German ethnographic reports at the beginning of the 20th century. He believes that this term is less general and places more stress on the local variations,[49] and it emphasizes also that shamanism is not a religion of sacred dogmas, but linked to the everyday life in a practical way.[189] Following similar thoughts, he also conjectures a contemporary paradigm shift.[187] Also Piers Vitebsky mentions, that despite really astonishing similarities, there is no unity in shamanism. The various, fragmented shamanistic practices and beliefs coexist with other beliefs everywhere. There is no record of pure shamanistic societies (although, as for the past, their existence is not impossible).[190]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamanism#Criticism_of_the_term_.22shaman.22_or_.22shamanism.22

And that's just wikipedia, of course there is much much more...

[ZombieHorde]

52. That is completely ridiculous.

The constructed goal posts apply to almost every religion.

[tama]

53. Lost me there

What was your criticism? You are of course free to define word "religion" any way as you want, but it's also good to keep in mind that
1) historically in terms of cultural evolution shamanhood precedes organized 'prototypical' religions, so the distinction is meaningful and important
2) there is no generally accepted definition of 'religion' especially among academic study, only family resemblance - and in that regard shamanhood and religions certainly do share many common aspects. Which is only to be expected on basis of previous point.

"Shamanism", as I pointed, is an Western invention by Mirca Eliade, which has created much confusion. I myself would be inclined to say that shamanhood is really much wider and deeper phenomenon that (organized) religions.

[ZombieHorde]

56. I was saying shaminsim is a religion.

Saying the rebuttal was "completely ridiculous" was grumpy of me. I should have made my rebuttal without that phrase.

[tama]

57. Sure

Let's agree then that shaminsimsalabim is the only True religion and you are its prophet and pope ;P

[Vehl]

36. Tribal people

Chhattisgarh is one of the least developed of Indian States and has one of the largest % of Tribal populations in India.

The Tribes of India are communities of people who still live according to the hunter-gatherer way of life and have usually not associated themselves with the rest of the population. Many of them have shamanistic religious practices, and even practicing shamans.
I feel really sorry about the death of the little girl. Those who did this should serve life in prison without parole. The least educated segments of the society are naturally the ones who fall prey to superstitions and mumbo jumbo. This fact is evident not just in this case, but in all similar cases around the world.

Oh and btw the picture provided with the Original article is very misleading as it refers to a Hindu ceremony on a Different state of India. For those who did not check this detail and noticed the disparity, the article would have implied that the ceremony had something to do with this sacrifice. However I'm not bothered enough to complain to the original author of the essay and have him put a disclaimer.

But then again we Hindus are pretty laid back....Hindus who range from Atheists and goddess worshipers to heretics who've sought god through booze, sex, and meat, ash covered hermits, dualist and non-dualists, nihilists and hedonists, poets and singers, students and saints, children and elders.... have seen so much variety to be bothered by such an implication. Oh I should also add the Thugees who, in the 1800s used ritual sacrifice. We dont deny any of it..both good and bad, as Hinduism is an expression of humanity as a whole..both good and bad.

As a religion...nay..as a Dharma(way of life) we are probably the ONLY major religion/way of life in the world that does not claim that our way is the only way and everything else is false.One does not see Hindus running from pillar to post trying to explain away any of these actions as the work of "not true Hindus". We hold true to the maxim that was voiced millenias ago in the Indian epic, the Mahabharata, where when asked "what is the definition of hypocrisy", Dharma, a hero from that epic replies, "The setting up of religious standards for others is hypocrisy".



Some tribal people of India

[IMG][/IMG] [IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG]

A song by A.R.Rahman which shows a cross section of the hundreds of tribes that exist in India to this day

--------------------
[IMG][/IMG]

[struggle4progress]

37. Perhaps we should be using the word "allegedly" here, since details may not yet be clear

Press reports disagree on whether the alleged victim disappeared in October or in November and on whether the alleged remains were found in late October, six weeks ago (in November), or last week (in December). Such details should be relatively straightforward and non-controversial, so disparate reporting on those details might raise some doubts about the reliability of other details

"... Lalita Tati had disappeared from her hometown on October 21, 2011 and her dismembered remains were found one week later (Oct. 27) according to Bijapur district senior police officer Rajendra Narayan Das ..."
Farmers Arrested For Child Sacrifice To Appease The Gods
http://www.inquisitr.com/174996/farmers-arrested-for-child-sacrifice-to-appease-the-gods/

"... Lalita Tati disappeared in October and her dismembered remains were found last week ..."
Two held for sacrificing girl for better harvest
http://www.mumbaimirror.com/article/3/20120103201201030244232184f2a6396/Pune-cops-mistake-Anna%E2%80%99s-men-as-mischief-mongers.html

"... Police have arrested two farmers, Padam Sukku and Pignesh Kujur, in connection with Lalita Tati’s murder, nearly six weeks since she went missing and over a month since her body was found ..."
ndian Men Held in Connection with Ritual Sacrifice of Seven-Year-Old
By Amina Elahi
3 January, 2012
http://divanee.mobstac.com/2012/01/03/indian-men-held-in-connection-with-ritual-sacrifice-of-seven-year-old/?maneref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fq%3DLalita%2BTati%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DYmS%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial%26tbm%3Dnws%26tbs%3Dsbd%3A1%26sa%3DX%26ei%3D8ykDT7nsC8iG2gW8yICZAg%26ved%3D0CBsQpwUoAQ

... El cuerpo de una menor, llamada por algunos medios Lalita Tati y desaparecida desde noviembre en una zona boscosa del distrito de Bijapur, en la región de Chattisgarh (centro del país), fue hallado por un grupo de aldeanos ...
India: campesinos degüellan a niña para mejorar su cosecha Leído 7 veces
Martes, 03 de Enero de 2012 10:54
http://www.cronicaviva.com.pe/index.php/mundo/asia/33692-india-campesinos-degollaron-a-nina-para-mejorar-cosecha