The Tribes and Castes of the Central Provinces of India,...

39 In following the explanation of the Passover given by Professor Robertson Smith and M. Reinach, it is necessary with great diffidence to dissent from the hypothesis of Sir J. G. Frazer that the lamb was a substitute for the previous sacrifice by the Israelites of their first-born sons.

40Orphéus, p. 272; Religion of the Semites, p. 311.

41Religion of the Semites, p. 304.

42Ibidem, pp. 305, 306.

43Religion of the Semites, pp. 296, 297.

44Golden Bough, ii. p. 313.

45 When the blood of the animal was poured out before the god as his share.

46Religion of the Semites, p. 246.

47Vide article on Dhanwār.

48 Sir G. Robertson, Kāfirs of the Hindu Kush, pp. 450, 451.

49Ibidem, p. 460.

50 Dalton, Ethnology of Bengal, p. 176.

51 Grant-Duff, History of the Marāthas, vol. i. p. 27. Mr. Hīra Lāl notes that owing to the predominance of Muhammadans in Berār the practice of slaughtering all animals by the method of halāl and the regular employment of the Mullah to pronounce the sacred text before slaughter may have grown up for their convenience. And, as in other instances, the Hindus may have simply imitated the Muhammadans in regarding this method of slaughter as necessary. This however scarcely seems to impair the force of the argument if the Hindus actually refused to eat animals not killed by halāl; they must in that case have attached some religious significance or virtue to the rite, and the most probable significance is perhaps that stated in the text. As Mr. Hīra Lāl points out, the Hindu sacred books provide an elaborate ritual for the sacrifice of animals, but this may have fallen into abeyance with the decline in the custom of eating meat.

52Vide article on Mochi.

53 V. A. Smith, Asoka, p. 56.

54Ibidem, p. 58.