CRIS Current Research Information System
IRIS è la soluzione IT che facilita la raccolta e la gestione dei dati relativi alle attività e ai prodotti della ricerca. Fornisce a ricercatori, amministratori e valutatori gli strumenti per monitorare i risultati della ricerca, aumentarne la visibilità e allocare in modo efficace le risorse disponibili.
EnglishThe present contribution deals with a number of technical and theoretical problems connected with the animal sacrifice in the Avestan sources and, more in general, in the Mazdean tradition. Usually and theoretically the sacrifice included the killing of a sacrificial animal, but it was also possible to substitute the victim with the of¬fering of a piece of meat taken from an animal sacrificed during a previous ritual session. These two alternatives were not in contrast, but their different realization answered a number of technical reasons, and gave the possibility to put down animals only when necessary. In fact, it would be peculiar to postulate that every ritual session would have compellingly prescribed the presence of one or more sacrificial victims; furthermore, the possibility of such a substitution is registered by the ritual sources. The sacrifice that, in these two modalities, represented one of the essential moments of the Mazdean ceremonies, in particular during the solemn liturgies, was also accompanied by the offering of the priest’s uruuan-, according to a doctrine, which, as already suggested by the author, presents certain characters comparable with the Later Vedic ātmayajña-. While morning and daily sacrifices were normal practices, nocturnal ceremonies including slaughtering, although surely known in the Iranian tradition, have been discussed and carefully analysed. Textual evidences show that libations (zaoθrās) and sacrifices (yasnas) should have been forbidden after sunset (hū frāšmō.dāiti-), i.e. in the gāh or “watch” dedicated to the first part of night, although some statements preserved by the Nērangestān appear contradictory on this mat-ter. This gāh, even in its denomination (aiβisrūθrima- aibigaiia-“[the time of] chan¬ting characterized by attentive listening, as explained by A. Hintze), seems in any case to have been dedicated more to speculative and oral activities than to long and demanding liturgical performances. Many Avestan sources actually emphasize the negative aspects of certain nocturnal rituals and their risky conditions; furthermore, we observe that animal sacrifices overnight were in general a borderline, if not demonic, practice in many Indo-European cultures. The Vedic nocturnal celebrations, as the Atirātra, specifically dedicated to Indra, e.g. conirm the strong connections with many warlike and violent characters, appearing more dan¬gerous if comparatively considered with respect to Zoroastrianism. The interdiction of nocturnal ceremonies for Anāhitā, in particular those connected with waters, result in open contrast with the Vedic sacrifice over-night of a goat to Sarasvatī. The second part of the night, ušahina-, was considered the one preparing and announcing the appearance of “dawn” (ušah-). For this reason, it was chosen to host among others in particular the Widēwdād ceremony, which was a sort of ritual attack against the daēuuas, i.e. the forces of disorder and darkness trying to block or delay sunrise and, consequently, the due course of time. In this respect, ušahina- concerns the recurring wait for the sun and the victory over the darkness; in other words, it contributed to guarantee the regular order of nature. The occurrence of animal sacrifices during the ušahina- gāh is certainly registered for the Hōm Drōn, whose performance must be placed at the beginning of the “auroral” watch, an evidence that emphasizes the no more strictly nocturnal character of this session. Furthermore, the timing of the Widēwdād pre¬sents, in its turn, some inte¬res¬ting aspects, which still deserve to be investigated. In particular, as some solemn ceremonies, it includes the double recitation of the Y. 35-42, i.e. of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti, which was the right time for the animal sacrifice. This article insists on the remarkable meaning to be attributed to this double recitation, which presents us with the potential presence of two following sacrifices, once just before the first recitation of Y. 35-42, and a second time during its repetition. This question is discussed after some interpretative hypotheses in connection with the scheduled timing of the Widēwdād ceremony, and the same subject is later analysed at the light of the directions attested in N. 28, 1-12, and after some observations concerning the timing adopted for this auroral liturgy still preserved in the Persian Rivāyats. While already the first and, in origin, complete sacrifice occurred after the call of the cock, under the protection of Sraoša, the present study investigates the pos¬sibility that even a second sacrificial moment, rea¬sonably without animal slaugh¬tering, was performed in the light of the rising sun. Such a performance suggested a strong sym¬bo¬lism, which reminds the one of the fu¬ture cosmic celebration to be finally performed, as stated in the Pahlavi sources, by Ohrmazd and the third Sō¬šāns, the first as the zōt of a divine priestly college, the second as the leader of the human one. In fact, in this long ritual session, co¬vering the whole day, the sa¬crifice celebrated during the ušahin gāh will be the one definitively conferring immortality upon hu¬ma¬nity. In any case, the increasing importance attributed to the symbolic force of the sacrifice and its progressive re¬duc¬tion to a simple offering of meat, a praxis which was in itself regular under certain conditions (as stated even in the Nērangestān), favoured the progressive reduction (even the elimination, for some extents) of the animal sacrifice. This long and complex process might have been supported by the parallel example of the ceremony performed during the se¬cond recitation of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti, if it was originally connected with a ritual offering (with or without sacrifice), as it is suggested here, because its links with such a sacrificial dimension were obliterated and consequently its symbolic meaning so reduced. These facts might have deeply contributed to a radical change into the conception of the sacrifice in the framework of the Mazdean communities, and a new consideration of their importance could offer an explanation of the modern ritual tradition, so different with respect to the past, without the need of stressing, as a main reason, the overwhelming impact of foreign religious cultures.
| Titolo: | aêtase. tê âtare zaothrå. On the Mazdean Animal and Symbolic Sacrifices: Their Problems, Timing and Restrictions | |
| Autore/i: | Antonio Panaino | |
| Autore/i Unibo: | ||
| Anno: | 2020 | |
| Titolo del libro: | Aux sources des liturgies indo-iraniennes. | |
| Pagina iniziale: | 119 | |
| Pagina finale: | 163 | |
| Abstract: | The present contribution deals with a number of technical and theoretical problems connected with the animal sacrifice in the Avestan sources and, more in general, in the Mazdean tradition. Usually and theoretically the sacrifice included the killing of a sacrificial animal, but it was also possible to substitute the victim with the of¬fering of a piece of meat taken from an animal sacrificed during a previous ritual session. These two alternatives were not in contrast, but their different realization answered a number of technical reasons, and gave the possibility to put down animals only when necessary. In fact, it would be peculiar to postulate that every ritual session would have compellingly prescribed the presence of one or more sacrificial victims; furthermore, the possibility of such a substitution is registered by the ritual sources. The sacrifice that, in these two modalities, represented one of the essential moments of the Mazdean ceremonies, in particular during the solemn liturgies, was also accompanied by the offering of the priest’s uruuan-, according to a doctrine, which, as already suggested by the author, presents certain characters comparable with the Later Vedic ātmayajña-. While morning and daily sacrifices were normal practices, nocturnal ceremonies including slaughtering, although surely known in the Iranian tradition, have been discussed and carefully analysed. Textual evidences show that libations (zaoθrās) and sacrifices (yasnas) should have been forbidden after sunset (hū frāšmō.dāiti-), i.e. in the gāh or “watch” dedicated to the first part of night, although some statements preserved by the Nērangestān appear contradictory on this mat-ter. This gāh, even in its denomination (aiβisrūθrima- aibigaiia-“[the time of] chan¬ting characterized by attentive listening, as explained by A. Hintze), seems in any case to have been dedicated more to speculative and oral activities than to long and demanding liturgical performances. Many Avestan sources actually emphasize the negative aspects of certain nocturnal rituals and their risky conditions; furthermore, we observe that animal sacrifices overnight were in general a borderline, if not demonic, practice in many Indo-European cultures. The Vedic nocturnal celebrations, as the Atirātra, specifically dedicated to Indra, e.g. conirm the strong connections with many warlike and violent characters, appearing more dan¬gerous if comparatively considered with respect to Zoroastrianism. The interdiction of nocturnal ceremonies for Anāhitā, in particular those connected with waters, result in open contrast with the Vedic sacrifice over-night of a goat to Sarasvatī. The second part of the night, ušahina-, was considered the one preparing and announcing the appearance of “dawn” (ušah-). For this reason, it was chosen to host among others in particular the Widēwdād ceremony, which was a sort of ritual attack against the daēuuas, i.e. the forces of disorder and darkness trying to block or delay sunrise and, consequently, the due course of time. In this respect, ušahina- concerns the recurring wait for the sun and the victory over the darkness; in other words, it contributed to guarantee the regular order of nature. The occurrence of animal sacrifices during the ušahina- gāh is certainly registered for the Hōm Drōn, whose performance must be placed at the beginning of the “auroral” watch, an evidence that emphasizes the no more strictly nocturnal character of this session. Furthermore, the timing of the Widēwdād pre¬sents, in its turn, some inte¬res¬ting aspects, which still deserve to be investigated. In particular, as some solemn ceremonies, it includes the double recitation of the Y. 35-42, i.e. of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti, which was the right time for the animal sacrifice. This article insists on the remarkable meaning to be attributed to this double recitation, which presents us with the potential presence of two following sacrifices, once just before the first recitation of Y. 35-42, and a second time during its repetition. This question is discussed after some interpretative hypotheses in connection with the scheduled timing of the Widēwdād ceremony, and the same subject is later analysed at the light of the directions attested in N. 28, 1-12, and after some observations concerning the timing adopted for this auroral liturgy still preserved in the Persian Rivāyats. While already the first and, in origin, complete sacrifice occurred after the call of the cock, under the protection of Sraoša, the present study investigates the pos¬sibility that even a second sacrificial moment, rea¬sonably without animal slaugh¬tering, was performed in the light of the rising sun. Such a performance suggested a strong sym¬bo¬lism, which reminds the one of the fu¬ture cosmic celebration to be finally performed, as stated in the Pahlavi sources, by Ohrmazd and the third Sō¬šāns, the first as the zōt of a divine priestly college, the second as the leader of the human one. In fact, in this long ritual session, co¬vering the whole day, the sa¬crifice celebrated during the ušahin gāh will be the one definitively conferring immortality upon hu¬ma¬nity. In any case, the increasing importance attributed to the symbolic force of the sacrifice and its progressive re¬duc¬tion to a simple offering of meat, a praxis which was in itself regular under certain conditions (as stated even in the Nērangestān), favoured the progressive reduction (even the elimination, for some extents) of the animal sacrifice. This long and complex process might have been supported by the parallel example of the ceremony performed during the se¬cond recitation of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti, if it was originally connected with a ritual offering (with or without sacrifice), as it is suggested here, because its links with such a sacrificial dimension were obliterated and consequently its symbolic meaning so reduced. These facts might have deeply contributed to a radical change into the conception of the sacrifice in the framework of the Mazdean communities, and a new consideration of their importance could offer an explanation of the modern ritual tradition, so different with respect to the past, without the need of stressing, as a main reason, the overwhelming impact of foreign religious cultures. | |
| Abstract: | Cette contribution traite une série de problèmes techniques et théoriques en relation étroite avec la doctrine du sacrifice dans les sources avestiques et, plus en général, dans la tradition mazdéenne. Habituellement et théoriquement, le sacrifice incluait l’abattage d’un animal sacrificiel, mais il était aussi possible de substituer la victime par une offrande carnée prise d’un animal sacrifié durant une session rituelle précédente. Ces deux alternatives n’étaient pas en opposition, mais elles répondent à des nécessités différentes d’ordre pratique, et offraient la possibilité d’abattre l’animal seulement lorsque c’était nécessaire. En fait, on peut pas imaginer que tous les sacrifi¬ces normaux ou solennels pratiqués dans le monde iranien ancien étaient sanglants, parce que la quantité nécessaire d’animaux pour cette hécatombe aurait été socialement insupportable ; au contraire, il faut imaginer qu’il y avait en même temps une représentation idéale du sacrifice, différente de la pratique quo¬tidienne. De plus, la possibilité d’utiliser des offrandes carnées d’un sacrifice précédent est connue dans la littérature liturgique. Le sacrifice qui, dans ces deux modalités, représentait un des moments essentiels des cérémonies mazdéennes, en particulier durant les liturgies solennelles, était aussi accompagné par l’offrande de l’uruuan- du prêtre, en accord avec la doctrine, ce qui, comme déjà suggéré par l’auteur, présente certaines caractéristiques comparables avec le védique ātmayajña-. Alors que les sacrifices du matin et quotidiens étaient des pratiques normales, les cérémonies nocturnes incluant l’abattage, même si elles sont bien connues dans la tradition iranienne, ont été discutées et analysées avec soin. Les évidences textuelles montrent que les libations (zaoθrās) et les sacrifices (yasnas) ont été interdits après le crépuscule (hū frāšmō.dāiti-), i.e. dans le gāh dédié à la première partie de la nuit, même si quelques renseignements préservés par le Nērangestān semblent contradictoires à ce sujet. Ce gāh, même dans sa dénomination (aiβisrūθrima- aibigaiia- “[le temps du] chant caractérisé par l’écoute attentive”, comme expliqué par A. Hintze), nous paraît souligner la dédicace de cette phase rituelle strictement dédiée aux activités spéculatives et non pas à la performance de rituels plus complexes. De nombreuses sources avestiques manifestent une hostilité généralisée envers les divers rituels nocturnes, dont la nature demeure très ambiguë ou proche de la dimension daēvique. En plus, il faut noter une attitude générale très hostile des cultures indo-européennes envers les sacrifices nocturnes. Les célébrations nocturnes védiques, comme les Atirātra, spécifiquement dédiés à Indra, par exemple, nous confirment la présence de certains aspects guerriers et potentiellement obscurs. L’interdiction des cérémonies nocturnes en faveur d’Anāhitā, en particulier les rituels dédiés aux eaux, s’oppose directement au sacrifice nocturne védique d’une chèvre à Sarasvatī. La seconde partie de la nuit, ušahina-, était au contraire considérée comme une préparation à l’apparition de l’“aurore” (ušah-). Pour cette raison, elle a été choisie pour accueillir en particulier la cérémonie Widēwdād, qui constitue une agression rituelle dans un espace temporel où le pouvoir des daēuuas était encore important, et surtout où les forces de la discorde et de l’obscurité pouvaient encore chercher à arrêter ou retarder l’aube et, par conséquent, le cours habituel du temps. À cet égard, ušahina- concernait l’attente cyclique du soleil et sa victoire sur les ténèbres; en d’autres termes, ce gāh contribua à garantir l’ordre régulier de la nature. La pratique d’un sacrifice animal durant le gāh ušahina- est certainement répertorié pour le Hōm Drōn, dont la performance est placée au commencement de ce même gāh, une preuve qui souligne le caractère qui n’est plus strictement nocturne de cette session, tandis que la scansion temporelle du Widēwdād présente, à son tour, des caractéristiques très intéressantes, qui méritent d’être étudiées plus en détail. En particulier, comme dans le cas des liturgies solennelles, le Widēwdād incluait la double récitation du Y. 35-42, c’est-à-dire le Yasna Haptaŋhāiti, qui correspondait au temps établi pour le sacrifice animal. Cet article insiste sur le sens remarquable attribué à cette double récitation, qui nous montre la présence potentielle de deux sacrifices successifs, l’un juste avant la première récitation du Y. 35-42, et le second durant sa répétition. Cette question est discutée après quelques hypothèses d’interprétation en connexion avec la durée prévue de la cérémonie Widēwdād, et le même sujet est analysé plus tard à la lumière des indications attestées dans le N. 28, 1-12, et d’après quelques observations concernant la durée adoptée pour cette liturgie aurorale encore préservée dans les Rivāyates persanes. Alors que le premier sacrifice (animal ou symbolique) trouvait sa place avant le chant du coq, sous la protection de Sraoša, l’article examine la possibilité qu’un second sacrifice (seulement symbolique), raisonnablement sans abattage, célébré à la lumière du soleil montant. Une telle performance suggère un symbolisme fort, qui nous rappelle la célébration future du sacrifice cosmique offert, comme attesté dans les sources pehlevies, par Ohrmazd et le troisième Sōšāns, le premier en sa qualité de zōt du collège divin sacerdotal, le second comme le chef du collège humain. En fait, dans cette longue session rituelle, couvrant la journée entière, seul le sacrifice célébré durant le gāh ušahin sera celui conférant l’immortalité à l’humanité. Dans tous les cas, l’importance croissante attribuée à la force symbolique du sacrifice et sa réduction à une simple offrande de viande (une pratique qui était en elle-même régulière sous certaines conditions, comme attesté dans le Nērangestān), a favorisé la diminution progressive jusqu’à l’élimination pratique du sacrifice animal pendant les cérémonies solennelles mazdéennes (modernes). Ce long et complexe processus pourrait être supporté par l’exemple parallèle de la cérémonie célébrée durant la seconde récitation du Yasna Haptaŋhāiti, si ce texte était originellement connecté, comme on le propose ici, avec une offrande rituelle (sanglante ou simplement symbolique), parce que ses liens avec la dimension du sacrifice étaient déjà détruits et par conséquent sa signification symbolique ainsi abandonnée. Ces faits pourraient avoir considérablement contribués à un changement radical de la conception du sacrifice mazdéen, et une nouvelle considération de leur importance pourrait nous offrir une nouvelle clé d’interprétation de la situation rituelle moderne, sans le besoin d’invoquer, comme raison principale, l’influence déterminante des religions étrangères au mazdéisme post-sassanide. | |
| Data stato definitivo: | 2-dic-2020 | |
| Appare nelle tipologie: |
File in questo prodotto:
Copyright © 2021