The Urantia Book

Settings

Reading
Theme
Text size
Line spacing

Typeface

Width
Alignment
Show
Listening

Kept in this browser only.

Paper 89

Sin, Sacrifice, and Atonement

Brilliant Evening Star

5. Sacrifices and Cannibalism

89:5.1Mod­ern ideas of early can­ni­bal­ism are en­tirely wrong; it was a part of the mores of early so­ci­ety. While can­ni­bal­ism is tra­di­tion­ally hor­ri­ble to mod­ern civ­i­liza­tion, it was a part of the so­cial and re­li­gious struc­ture of prim­i­tive so­ci­ety. Group in­ter­ests dic­tated the prac­tice of can­ni­bal­ism. It grew up through the urge of ne­ces­sity and per­sisted be­cause of the slav­ery of su­per­sti­tion and ig­no­rance. It was a so­cial, eco­nomic, re­li­gious, and mil­i­tary cus­tom.

89:5.2Early man was a can­ni­bal; he en­joyed hu­man flesh, and there­fore he of­fered it as a food gift to the spir­its and his prim­i­tive gods. Since ghost spir­its were merely mod­i­fied men, and since food was man’s great­est need, then food must like­wise be a spirit’s great­est need.

89:5.3Can­ni­bal­ism was once well-nigh uni­ver­sal among the evolv­ing races. The San­giks were all can­ni­bal­is­tic, but orig­i­nally the An­don­ites were not, nor were the Nod­ites and Adamites; nei­ther were the And­ites un­til af­ter they had be­come grossly ad­mixed with the evo­lu­tion­ary races.

89:5.4The taste for hu­man flesh grows. Hav­ing been started through hunger, friend­ship, re­venge, or re­li­gious rit­ual, the eat­ing of hu­man flesh goes on to ha­bit­ual can­ni­bal­ism. Man-eat­ing has arisen through food scarcity, though this has sel­dom been the un­der­ly­ing rea­son. The Es­ki­mos and early An­don­ites, how­ever, sel­dom were can­ni­bal­is­tic ex­cept in times of famine. The red men, es­pe­cially in Cen­tral Amer­ica, were can­ni­bals. It was once a gen­eral prac­tice for prim­i­tive moth­ers to kill and eat their own chil­dren in or­der to re­new the strength lost in child­bear­ing, and in Queens­land the first child is still fre­quently thus killed and de­voured. In re­cent times can­ni­bal­ism has been de­lib­er­ately re­sorted to by many African tribes as a war mea­sure, a sort of fright­ful­ness with which to ter­ror­ize their neigh­bors.

89:5.5Some can­ni­bal­ism re­sulted from the de­gen­er­a­tion of once su­pe­rior stocks, but it was mostly preva­lent among the evo­lu­tion­ary races. Man-eat­ing came on at a time when men ex­pe­ri­enced in­tense and bit­ter emo­tions re­gard­ing their en­e­mies. Eat­ing hu­man flesh be­came part of a solemn cer­e­mony of re­venge; it was be­lieved that an en­emy’s ghost could, in this way, be de­stroyed or fused with that of the eater. It was once a wide­spread be­lief that wiz­ards at­tained their pow­ers by eat­ing hu­man flesh.

89:5.6Cer­tain groups of man-eaters would con­sume only mem­bers of their own tribes, a pseu­dospir­i­tual in­breed­ing which was sup­posed to ac­cen­tu­ate tribal sol­i­dar­ity. But they also ate en­e­mies for re­venge with the idea of ap­pro­pri­at­ing their strength. It was con­sid­ered an honor to the soul of a friend or fel­low tribesman if his body were eaten, while it was no more than just pun­ish­ment to an en­emy thus to de­vour him. The sav­age mind made no pre­ten­sions to be­ing con­sis­tent.

89:5.7Among some tribes aged par­ents would seek to be eaten by their chil­dren; among oth­ers it was cus­tom­ary to re­frain from eat­ing near re­la­tions; their bod­ies were sold or ex­changed for those of strangers. There was con­sid­er­able com­merce in women and chil­dren who had been fat­tened for slaugh­ter. When dis­ease or war failed to con­trol pop­u­la­tion, the sur­plus was un­cer­e­mo­ni­ously eaten.

89:5.8Can­ni­bal­ism has been grad­u­ally dis­ap­pear­ing be­cause of the fol­low­ing in­flu­ences:

89:5.91. It some­times be­came a com­mu­nal cer­e­mony, the as­sump­tion of col­lec­tive re­spon­si­bil­ity for in­flict­ing the death penalty upon a fel­low tribesman. The blood guilt ceases to be a crime when par­tic­i­pated in by all, by so­ci­ety. The last of can­ni­bal­ism in Asia was this eat­ing of ex­e­cuted crim­i­nals.

89:5.102. It very early be­came a re­li­gious rit­ual, but the growth of ghost fear did not al­ways op­er­ate to re­duce man-eat­ing.

89:5.113. Even­tu­ally it pro­gressed to the point where only cer­tain parts or or­gans of the body were eaten, those parts sup­posed to con­tain the soul or por­tions of the spirit. Blood drink­ing be­came com­mon, and it was cus­tom­ary to mix the “ed­i­ble” parts of the body with medicines.

89:5.124. It be­came lim­ited to men; women were for­bid­den to eat hu­man flesh.

89:5.135. It was next lim­ited to the chiefs, priests, and shamans.

89:5.146. Then it be­came taboo among the higher tribes. The taboo on man-eat­ing orig­i­nated in Dala­ma­tia and slowly spread over the world. The Nod­ites en­cour­aged cre­ma­tion as a means of com­bat­ing can­ni­bal­ism since it was once a com­mon prac­tice to dig up buried bod­ies and eat them.

89:5.157. Hu­man sac­ri­fice sounded the death knell of can­ni­bal­ism. Hu­man flesh hav­ing be­come the food of su­pe­rior men, the chiefs, it was even­tu­ally re­served for the still more su­pe­rior spir­its; and thus the of­fer­ing of hu­man sac­ri­fices ef­fec­tively put a stop to can­ni­bal­ism, ex­cept among the low­est tribes. When hu­man sac­ri­fice was fully es­tab­lished, man-eat­ing be­came taboo; hu­man flesh was food only for the gods; man could eat only a small cer­e­mo­nial bit, a sacra­ment.

89:5.16Fi­nally an­i­mal sub­sti­tutes came into gen­eral use for sac­ri­fi­cial pur­poses, and even among the more back­ward tribes dog-eat­ing greatly re­duced man-eat­ing. The dog was the first do­mes­ti­cated an­i­mal and was held in high es­teem both as such and as food.