[92] However, if the síyid has a mḳáddem, or regular attendant, the petitioner often hands the animal over to him alive, so that he may himself kill it “in the name of God,” and thus make it eatable. Then the descendants of the saint, if he has any, and the mḳáddem himself, have no hesitation in eating the animal, bismillâh being a holy word which removes the curse or evil energy inherent in l-ʿâr.
[93] When I have asked how it is that a saint, although invoked with l-ʿâr, does not always grant the request made to him, the answer has been that he can, but that he is not all-powerful and the failure is due to the fact that God does not listen to his prayer. But it also occurs that a person who has in vain made ʿâr upon a saint goes to another síyid to complain of him. There is a general belief that saints do not help unless ʿâr is made on them—an idea which is not very flattering to their character.
There are obvious indications that the ʿâr-sacrifice of the Moors is not unique of its kind, but has its counterpart among certain other peoples. In ancient religions sacrifice is often supposed to exercise a constraining influence on the god to whom it is offered. We meet with this idea in Zoroastrianism,[94] in many of the Vedic hymns,[95] and especially in Brahmanism. “Here,” says Barth, “the rites of religion are the real deities, or at any rate they constitute together a sort of independent and superior power, before which the divine personalities disappear, and which almost holds the place allotted to destiny in other systems. The ancient belief, which is already prominent in the Hymns, that sacrifice conditionates the regular course of things, is met with here in the rank of a commonplace, and is at times accompanied with incredible details.”[96] Now, there can be little doubt that this ascription of a magic power to the sacrifice, by means of which it could control the actions of the gods, was due to the idea that it served as a conductor of imprecations; for it was invariably accompanied by a formula which was considered to possess irresistible force. In the invocation lies the hidden energy which gives the efficacy to the sacrifice; without Brahmaṇaspati, the lord of prayer, sacrifice does not succeed.[97] The Greeks actually offered anathemata, or curses, to their gods.[98] The ancient Arabs, again, after killing the sacrificial animal, threw its hair on a holy tree as a curse.[99] But so little has the true import of such sacrifices been understood even by eminent scholars, that they have been represented as votive offerings or gifts to the deity.[100]
[94] Darmesteter, Ormazd et Ahriman, p. 330.
[95] Rig-Veda, iii. 45. 1; iv. 15. 5; vi. 51. 8; viii. 2. 6. Oldenberg, Religion des Veda, p. 311 sq.
[96] Barth, Religions of India, p. 47 sq.
[97] Rig-Veda, i. 18. 7.
[98] Rouse, Greek Votive Offerings, p. 337 sqq.
[99] Wellhausen, Reste arabischen Heidentums, p. 124.
[100] Rouse, op. cit. p. 337. Wellhausen, op. cit. p. 124.