SATISFACTION (IN ETHNOLOGY). — I. — Among primitive peoples, particularly among those ethnologically most ancient, there exists a moral ideal to which every person and society itself must always conform. They feel themselves responsible before God for observing this moral ideal. Every action that does not conform to this ideal is a sin (v. CONFESSIONE). The holy and just God wills only good and hates evil; indeed, according to the ordinary manner of expression of primitive peoples, he becomes angry at man’s sin and punishes him with death, illness, great natural disasters, or by depriving him of the means of subsistence or of those dear to him, because God is Lord of all and of everyone. The primitive peoples’ beliefs concerning God’s attitude toward sin can be seen most clearly and vividly in their legends concerning the earliest times of humanity, legends called “of paradise and the fall into sin,” and in those concerning the flood—legends that are extremely widespread, indeed one might say universal.
The former, studied broadly and deeply by Feldmann both among primitive peoples and among those of high civilization, are summarized by him in four points: 1) in the beginning, the ancestors of humanity lived with God, their creator, in a familiar relationship, and shared a happy life with him, free from hardship and suffering. 2) This happy state came to an end through an evil action against God, committed by human beings or by their representatives, which among some peoples is reduced to some act of carelessness or to a misunderstanding. 3) A malignant power, hostile to God and man, took part in this evil action, to which the loss of the original blessings is linked; this power is fought and defeated, but not annihilated. 4) God, angered by the evil action of his creatures, withdraws from humanity; from this there also arose, not infrequently, the concrete idea that God drove human beings out of heaven or even from the earth. From then on, arduous labor and daily food, sickness and death weigh upon every inhabitant of the earth. It is easy to see that this also answers the anguished questions of how evil entered the world and brought disorder and confusion into it, and how happiness and peace were lost—namely, because of sin.
While these legends thus show the first parents punished for a personal sin of their own, the flood legends instead show God punishing the entire unrepentant human race with death, saving only a few innocent people, from whom the human race, by God’s will, begins once more to multiply. These beliefs concerning sin influence the daily life of primitive peoples, even—let it be noted—among those in whom belief in God has become obscured and belief in spirits has greatly developed: beliefs, that is, which place the origin of physical evils and of death itself directly or indirectly in moral evil.
According to primitive peoples, God is not only holy and just, but also good and merciful. After withdrawing because of the sin of the first parents, he did not abandon humanity, but, like a good father, provides for its needs and watches over the observance of his law, from which no violation escapes him. On the other hand, although primitive peoples feel obliged before God to live according to the moral ideal, they are not angels. As Fr. Schmidt rightly observes, they too have their failings, especially an extreme impulsiveness and excitability in their powerful emotions, as a result of which they thoughtlessly and unconsciously fall short of this moral ideal now in one respect, now in another, even openly rebelling against the supreme lawgiver himself. They do know, however, that God forgives the repentant sinner; indeed, the African Pygmies of Gabun and the Andamanese believe that God forgives sins even after death (provided that in this life they have correspondingly been the object of penance), in a place that is neither “heaven” for the good nor “hell” for the wicked, but something intermediate and provisional, a kind of “purgatory.” Thus the terror of God’s wrath, which according to primitive beliefs manifests itself in many ways—with thunder, lightning, the rainbow, and so forth—and the desire and necessity of remaining at peace with him impel primitive man to do penance for his sin. Indeed, once the moment of excitement has passed, thanks to calm reflection he repents and is ashamed of his sin, disapproves of it, and gives it a moral s. Many cases in which this has been observed exist, but the question of sin and expiation ought to be studied more deeply among primitive peoples, and fully deserves such study, because through it one penetrates into the innermost depths of man. Judging from primitive peoples as a whole, and setting aside actions that are not expiatory in the strictly religious sense, one may say that expiation for sin is made through prayer, which often accompanies every other expiatory act, confession (v.), through sacrifice, therefore called expiatory sacrifice, through fasting, and through numerous other penitential practices involving simple recollection and silence, mortification, and painful and bloody acts; all this is performed either personally or through others, for the sin or sins of one person or of an entire community, by one person or by an entire social group.
2. Individual prayer to ask God’s forgiveness is an entirely interior act, often without any fixed form; it can be known externally only if it is expressed. Among the Pygmies of Gabun, in Africa, when the rainbow appears, it is customary to address a prayer to it which is, in substance, a request for God’s forgiveness. Every Pygmy—or the village chief, if they are all gathered together—addressing the rainbow, says to it, among other things: “O rainbow, give him (that is, God) thanks for us. — Tell him not to be angry. — Tell him not to be irritated. — Tell him not to kill us. — For we are greatly afraid. — O rainbow, tell him.”
The Pygmies believe that God punishes every crime by causing human beings to die, even through lightning. They fear the rainbow because, believed to be a divine manifestation, it is associated with God’s vengeance. They relate, in fact, that four men who attempted to take their father’s life were surprised and annihilated in the forest by a violent storm; then the rainbow appeared. It is therefore feared, and this explains why that prayer is expiatory. Among these same Pygmies of Gabun and among the Semang of the Malay Peninsula, there exists expiatory sacrifice made with one’s own blood. Offering this sacrifice is obligatory, and failure to fulfill such a duty would result in the flood, not only for one tribe but for all humanity. When thunder rumbles, sinners offer their own blood in sacrifice, while the innocent light a fire to signify their innocence to God.
Among the other ethnologically most ancient peoples, expiatory sacrifice has not been observed. It exists among many peoples of more recent civilization and also among peoples of advanced civilization. There are peoples who offer expiatory sacrifice only in particular circumstances or for certain more serious sins and crimes. Thus, among the Nuer, a particular illness is regarded as divine punishment for incest; therefore, anyone suffering from it is considered unquestionably guilty and must offer a bull as an expiatory sacrifice in order to avert misfortune. Among the Dinka (Raik), it is believed that an incestuous girl will be punished with infertility in her future marriage; she is therefore obliged to confess her guilt and perform the sacrifice. If, before the sacrifice,
sacrifice she or one of her relatives should die, her seducer would incur the penalty of blood and would have to pay a bull and a sheep for the sacrifice to be performed, as well as from one to three head of cattle, including a cow for the girl’s father or guardian. Among the Banyoro, sacrifices are offered after the seduced girl gives birth. Among the ancient Mexicans, a human sacrifice was offered after each member of the community had confessed his sins over the victim (v. CONFESSIONE). The spirit of penance that animated the sinner emerges from the following prayer, which the priest recited before individual confession, quite different from the communal one: “You, Lord, who are the father and mother of the gods and the most ancient divinity, know that your vassal, your servant, comes here; weeping, he approaches in great sadness, immersed in his contrition, because he recognizes that he has fallen into error... Our merciful Lord, who are the support and defender of all, receive your servant and vassal in penance and hear him in his anguish.”
Among the Yaoze in China there is a feast of penance, celebrated every ten years to obtain the remission of sins. During the three days of the feast, the commandments and laws of the Supreme Being are read to the people and the priests. The priests and the people do penance for the sins of the past years, praying, weeping, and fasting. Among the Lolo of southwestern China, at the beginning of the new year a sacrifice is made for the entire village. The sacrificers must be three, chosen from among the people of the village who had suffered no deaths in their families during the year. In some Lolote tribes, this sacrifice may be compared to that of the scapegoat at the solemn Jewish feast of expiation: instead of being killed, the goat is driven into the forests. The Lolo also celebrate a particular feast, held by one village, to which all the neighboring villages are invited; during it, a sacred struggle is performed to obtain from the Supreme Being the cessation of an epidemic or famine, a sacred struggle compared to the “pardons” of France.
3. With regard to the origin of the sacrifice of expiation, three hypotheses have been devised: a) that it derives from rites of purification. W. Wundt maintained that it arose from the need to purify oneself from the stain incurred through the transgression of totemistic taboos, and was therefore known in totemistic civilization; but this is an error. It is now demonstrated that in the civilization of the gatherers, which ethnologically is older than that of the totemists, there already exists a moral ideal, for whose observance, as has been said, man and society feel themselves responsible before God. One might rather think that the rites of purification, especially when blood is used, originated, through a natural symbolism, from the sacrifice of expiation, or are in some way closely connected with II. b) That it originated from the simple offering of a gift, in the sense that, just as it is natural to please a person and make oneself his friend by means of a gift, so it is likewise natural by means of a gift to become once again the friend of one who has been offended by sin. c) That it derives from the idea of punishment for the transgression of a moral law. Indeed, this idea is found developed in the civilization that is ethnologically the oldest. The free acceptance of a punishment already established by the Supreme Being would have the character of an expiatory sacrifice. Thus Westermarck rightly observes that fasting may in some cases be a remnant of such a sacrifice. “The offering of food,” he says, “made to the divinity, is transformed into a sacrifice consisting in man’s abstention from food.” The same might apply to certain forms of asceticism. Hence the idea arose that every sacrifice necessarily entails mortification, so that in ordinary language “sacrifice” and “privation” have often become synonyms. This seems to be precisely the idea of the sacrifice of expiation as it appears among the Pygmies of Gabun. Father Trilles relates that during an elephant hunt, a third of the men in the camp were trampled by the enraged elephant. Then the leader of the expedition, himself wounded but having escaped death, offered his own blood in sacrifice. This, he explained, had to be offered to the angry Creator in order to
“renew the covenant” (rête). It is further noted that among these same Pygmies, when two persons wish to unite in fraternal friendship, it is customary to mix their blood. Now, Father Schmidt rightly observes that the said sacrifice to appease God’s anger and renew the covenant with him was offered after it had been established that the preceding sacrifice of the animal had not achieved its effect. Therefore, in the Pygmy’s mind, the sacrifice of the animal represented that of human blood; and it had been performed only as a trial sacrifice, in order to spare the sacrifice of his own blood, which was what was properly required. Indeed, even in this sacrifice of the animal, blood is used as such. When sacrifice is made to the rainbow, too, a few drops of human blood, drawn from the arm, are mixed with the blood of the beast.
Thus, the principal idea of the sacrifice of expiation would be this: through his sin, man makes himself deserving of death; the sinner acknowledges this before God by performing the sacrifice of expiation, in which the animal takes his place, and returns to peace with him, believing that he has thereby satisfied divine justice.