What do Hindus believe? Who do they follow? What do they follow?
If you’re part of the Hindu community, you know that clarifying the answers to such questions isn’t exactly a walk in the park. Like a game of whack-a-mole, in fact, it feels as though countless misperceptions continue to arise, despite great efforts over the years to dispel them.
For those of us who are in the business of whacking these moles, we can continue doing so, hoping something will click one day, enabling the public to better grasp our explanations. But as the saying goes, “Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the mark of insanity.” So if we hope to make progress, it’s time we put the mallet down and start taking a different approach, one that has less to do with how the Hindu Dharmas are viewed, and more with the lense through which they’re being presented: the language of Christian colonialism.
Just as the picture of a tiger can never accurately convey the likeness of a lion, the vernacular of one religious tradition can never accurately convey the essence of another. In an attempt to address this issue, we at the Hindu American Foundation are exploring the background of certain English translations of Sanskrit words commonly used when talking about or explaining the Hindu Dharmas. Words that were but approximations by colonizers who were motivated to distort them, and thus fail to serve as definitional equivalents while also staying true to their intended concepts.
Today’s word is “gods”.” Check it out.
Where does the word “sacrifice” originate from?
The word “sacrifice” carries several meanings, and though dictionaries generally agree on this fact, not all of them foreground the same definition.
Britannica Dictionary, for example, provides a sort of virtuous description, defining it as “the act of giving up something you want to keep, especially in order to get or do something else or to help someone.” Cambridge Dictionary, on the other hand, gives one most commonly associated with Hindus, namely “the act of killing an animal or person and offering them to a god or gods, or the animal, etc. that is offered.”
Why the variance? Well, the history is a little complex.
Though “sacrifice” has Latin roots, it had no usage in Roman times, appearing later in the middle ages during European Christendom. Used then as a translation for the Hebrew qorban, a biblical word that meant “bringing near to the altar for offering,” it referred to the rituals performed at the temple of Jerusalem. Because there was no greater offering, according to Christian teachings, than that of Jesus’ death for the spiritual benefit of humanity, the term took on a secondary meaning, fueled by an ethos of selflessness and surrender.
Beyond the literal act it signifies, “sacrifice” exists as a moral concept. But only in the Abrahamic sense, as similar acts performed in other traditions to so-called “false” gods were seen as satanic, pagan, heathen, uncivilized, or superstitious. And particularly when it came to Hindu practices, accounts of which were exaggerated with stories of blood and filth by colonists deeply incentivized to marginalize them.
Why should we avoid using “sacrifice” as a translation for Hindu concepts?
To start, Hindus don’t perform ritual sacrifice — at least not in the vein in which they have been historically accused. It’s important to understand this, as it was the singular indictment used by Arab, Turkish, Central Asian, and European invaders of Ancient India and Asia over the last couple millenia to justify the loot, destruction, rape, slavery, murder, and subjugation of non-Muslims and non-Christians in various empires.
In the Vedic Dharma, rather, devotees present gifts — transmuted through fire or placed on a sacred platform — in dedication to the Supreme Being or other illumined beings before enjoying that gift themselves. Described as yajna or puja, it’s a way of showing honor for all we subsist on.
Just as a child’s gift to a parent is more about the thought that went into it than the gift itself, devotees’ gifts to sacred icons are also about the thought and ethos it fosters. Take, for example, food. Instead of mechanically making meals to merely satiate our hunger and satisfy our senses, when we prepare them as a selfless offering in love and gratitude, our consciousness can rise to a more mindful state of being.
Putting meticulous care into the planning, shopping, prepping, cooking, and presenting of the meal, we become increasingly aware of the energy, processes, and resources that go into its production. Thereby appreciating those who contribute to the nourishment of the world, we feel closer to all, and particularly to the Divine source that sustains all.
And though some lineages sanction the use of meat in such offerings, there’s no actual proof Hindus ever killed humans as a part of any ceremony. Many traditions, in fact, recommend a vegetarian diet, centered around the ideal of ahimsa, or the reduction of harm to others. Even then, the taking of life, albeit with plants, is still unavoidable.
Recognizing this reality, we do all we can to cultivate a culture of conscious living, conducting every act in a venerable mood of humility, purpose, and diligent attention.
What’s an alternative word we can use and why should we use it instead?
Again, the accusation that Hindus sacrifice people in any capacity is obtusely false, and especially ironic considering Christianity’s own history of atrocities, including the tens of thousands executed (many by burning) during the centuries-long witch hunts leading up to the era of Enlightenment.
Plagued as we are by such claims, it’s best we stick with a rational linguistic definition, keeping things as plain and simple as possible to avoid the perpetuation of further misconceptions.
In terms of the actual thing being dedicated, let’s use “symbolic gift” or “token.” And for the custom itself: “ceremony of gratitude” or “ceremonial veneration.”
