Animal sacrifice is a feature of many world religions and understanding it requires engaging with scores of questions – involving religion, folk psychology, mythology, metaphysics, esoterism, anthropology. One of the measures of the depth of our engagement with the tradition of Islam is how we treat Qurbani as an institution. And how careless is our attitude towards complexities in the issue is evident by considering absence of the ethical in practice and FAQs or legal manuals on it. Consideration is welfare would question the current practice of choosing sacrificial animal from market. The author of Animal Welfare in Islam Al-Hafiz Basheer Ahmad Masri says “If animals have been subjected to cruelties in their breeding, transport, slaughter, or in their general welfare, meat from them is considered impure and unlawful to eat (Haram). And we know that industrial farming fails to observe welfare in general, especially in our conditions. Before discussing more esoteric and philosophical questions, a brief overview of legal positions is in order to emphasize the complexity, breadth and open-ended nature of Islamic legal tradition. There is no debate regarding obligation of Qurbani for hajj/umrah pilgrims. There is debate regarding wajib and sunnah status and thus warrant for occasional skipping of it for no reason. It is also debatable if each and every individual who can sacrifice should or it suffices if family head does it. And some extend this family to larger groups. Consideration of public interest (both environment and economy) and such juristic devices as isthisan (juristic preference) extend scope of modern arguments for more rational structuring of the institution especially individual/family as a unit of determining qurbani obligation/recommendation, factoring in cost of environmental impact and welfare index while declaring a qurbani valid and ensuring distribution of meat to the needy for an extended period. Given the narratives regarding major companions including Abu Bakr, Umar and Bilal (RA), for instance, stating they later desisted from qurbani and the last mentioned was critical of zeal for it turning it into a status symbol, we become further circumspect. And given ambivalence in the very foundational verse stating that to God doesn’t reach blood and flesh but our piety, literalism of Muslim community as a whole is more rooted in respective socio-economic and cultural profiles than in the canon. However, given such factors as perception of qurbani amongst shaiair al-llah and something corresponding to it in most religions, the institution will survive all secularist demythologizing critique as redemptive use of sacrifice is deeply rooted in psycho-spiritual makeup of mankind. Sufis are reported to have said that if animal blood isn’t given to the earth, human blood will have to be avenged for. There is a deep psychological and spiritual truth hinted here as it is well known that life, as Nietzsche underscored, is essentially appropriation and injury and we find in the Quran a very profound articulation of a different but convergent point in the verse “Verily in revenge is life.” Humans share with animals life and parts of evolutionary history and if we could use a term from another tradition, karmic burden. Animals are thus believed to be fortunate to be assimilated into human constitution though humans in turn ned tobe humble and recognize they are nor lords but shepherds of creation and animals have, in a special sense, exalted status compared to humans as Ibn Arabi would argue that “dumb beasts possess an exalted knowledge and understanding from God,” and he concludes that “anyone who considers himself superior to the beasts is ignorant of his own situation.” However, we need to meditate on the deeper truth that life is one and all the word for animal – haywan – is etymologically of life as well. Qurbani doesn’t involve spending money if we think as a community and Islam emphasizes to think as a community. Let us reflect on the credit and debit side of Qurbani to put in perspective those critiques that wish to substitute it by some welfarist stratagem. Those who assume men have dominated animals need to note it is basically a tribute to a greater value represented by manifestations of intelligence and other goods cultures come up with that institutions such as animal sacrifice survive We all need protein and what we get from animals sacrificed, usually at reasonable price, is animal protein. Given there is a provision to store meat for long period and we can store it, we don’t need to fear protein overload. When we get animals at reasonable rate we get our money’s worth of animal protein that we need to supply in any case. As a community we are protein deficient and need more reasons for sacrificing animals. Pakistan’s better record against Covid19 may be attributed to several factors including food habits involving animal protein supply which in turn is vital for immunity. Whether we distribute or hoard meet, the supply of protein we get is hardly affected as we get in turn from others what we distribute, roughly of similar quality and quantity or even more. We need to get from market in piece meals what we get at one go from Qurbani. When we sacrifice animal at home we get a sense of festivity that is to be treasured. And if people refuse to buy others will refuse to rear and grasses will not be consumed in pastures etc. and we on the whole are losers as a community. One can go on listing myriad health, social and economic benefits associated with the institution of Qurbani though its primary purpose is individuation and redemption and has more mystical objectives and not economic or physical and social health objectives. The Sufis have been mistakenly assumed to shun animal sacrifice. Major Sufis have been using sacrificial logic for faith healing and many other routine functions. Sufis are especially prompt in making sacrifices not only on Qurbani days but on other dates as well. I would suggest every three months a niyaz for which a ram is sacrificed. We can as a community determine how many sheep can be grown organically with little stress on environment and it would be a net profit to individual and to community in terms of maintaining ecological balance. The argument that animal slaughter should ideally not exists as it involves violence is specious on many grounds. We share one life with animals. Violence is part of both biological and psychological cycle. Domestication has arguably been a trade off in which animals are on the whole better off with humans as they are getting freedom from anxiety to protect themselves from predators and erratic food supply. Industrial farming does need a lot to be improvement and that is why I here emphasize on both environmental and ethical grounds natural conditions for animal farming. Those who assume men have dominated animals need to note it is basically a tribute to a greater value represented by manifestations of intelligence and other goods cultures come up with that institutions such as animal sacrifice survive. A Deobandi scholar had rightly challenged that let none do Qurbani for a particular year and we would have less number of animals next year. Although simple mathematics may show argument to be erroneous but when we factor in necessary percentage of animals that have to be culled /slaughtered every year, we see anyway animals have to be slaughtered for either the table of a particular class or the community. Choice is ours. Choosing sacrifice is choosing community. The author is a columnist and author who has widely published on Islamic thought