The Buddha opposed Sacrifice.

[rockyysdt]

It was interesting to read that the Buddha opposed Sacrifice (yanna).

When I see the word sacrifice all sorts of images come to mind such as the slaughter of animals or even humans as offerings to appease a deity or supreme being.

Kind of barbaric and an insight into the kind of supreme being involved.

I also see sacrifice as giving up something for the benefit of others.

Sacrificing my pleasures to help another less fortunate.

Did the Buddha oppose this kind of sacrifice or is it that he opposed the mental state one who sacrifices might enter?

In other words, for what reason does one sacrifice for others, and is this Buddhism?

A side note:

In the Samannaphala Sutta of the Pali Canon appears a doctrine:

" practice of dhamma conducive to freedom of sins and attainment of the pinnacle of sublime life, as he has done so, he is considered to have reached Atman".

[Brucenkhamen]

Yanna (Yajna skt) refers to ritualistic offerings and sacrifice ceremonies conducted by the Brahmins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yajna

It was not necessarily of animals, it could be food etc.

I don't see the other meaning of sacrifice that you mention "sacrifice as giving up something for the benefit of others" as being relevant. Did you read somewhere that the Buddha opposed this? Possibly he would have regarded this as nekkhamma (renunciation).

[rockyysdt]

Yanna (Yajna skt) refers to ritualistic offerings and sacrifice ceremonies conducted by the Brahmins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yajna

It was not necessarily of animals, it could be food etc.

I don't see the other meaning of sacrifice that you mention "sacrifice as giving up something for the benefit of others" as being relevant. Did you read somewhere that the Buddha opposed this? Possibly he would have regarded this as nekkhamma (renunciation).

The second meaning of sacrifice was an extension of thought on my part but worth exploring.

I've heard of both positive and negative motivations are equally detrimental to the diminishing of Ego.

The clue is in what motivates you.

[camerata]

In the Samannaphala Sutta of the Pali Canon appears a doctrine:

" practice of dhamma conducive to freedom of sins and attainment of the pinnacle of sublime life, as he has done so, he is considered to have reached Atman".

I can't find this in any translation of the sutta. It only appears in a book by Buddhadasa as an example of non-Buddhist views:

eliminating dhammas, and attainment of the pinnacle of sublime life through the sin-eliminating dhammas. As he has done so, he is considered to have been reached atman, completed his practice, reached immortality and eternality.

This view has rivaled Buddhism from the beginning up to the present. If we read a history book or take a look from the historical aspects with neutral, unbiased presentation, and not just read Buddhist books on the commentary level, we will find that this doctrine had as many followers as, or even more followers than, Buddhism. In the Buddha’s time, such high-class people as kings esteemed both doctrines equally. Our own commentaries, in spite of their tendency to belittle other doctrines intentionally and overly, indicate in some places that there were more followers and disciples of this heretical doctrine in some towns than there were those of Buddhism.

[rockyysdt]

Yes.

Buddhadasa claimed to extract it from the Pali Canon in his booklet titled Anatta.

Is this a reflection of the validity of his works?

[camerata]

I think what happened is that the view of the Jains - the "fourfold restraint" - is briefly mentioned in the sutta and Buddhadasa has filled it out from the Commentaries. In any case, it is given as one of six examples of incorrect view - according to the Pali Cannon. So, no surprise there.

[fvw53]

animal sacrifices were part of the rituals based on the believe that "God' or "the Gods" lived somewhere above the clouds and meddled constantly in the life of the humans a little bit lower.