Quote:
Originally Posted by StanT
Dllish is our resident expert; but I believe Islam prefers a quick burial. Burial at sea prevents any site from becoming a shrine as would have been the case with Saudi Arabia.
|
you're right. islam does prefer a quick burial, but burial at sea is only if you dont have the option of burying on land. An example is if a sailor dies on the high sea, and you cant store the body, then it would be permissible to do a sea burial. so for the americans to use the guise that it was done under islamic customs is utter bull.
as far as osamas site becoming a shrine in saudi, i think you're wayyy wrong on that one. islam (in particular sunni islam) forbids the building of shrines. it is so expressly forbidden that you will never see pictures of Muhammed, god, and other prophets in the mosques or anywhere else for that matter. the saudis ( the sunni wahabi sect of islam) in particular are extremely paranoid about shrines and idolitry, so much so that they do not let people pray at the site of the prophet Muhammed himself in Mecca so that his site does not become a shrine.
the shia's on the other hand permit the shrines for their holy imams and other leaders, but thats a totally new topic altogether.
im with noodle, im thinnking that his body may have been badly treated that they needed to dump it to avoid a media disaster. but dumping it at sea would suffice to the masses in the west who may not know the rituals of burial, but who are they trying to fool here?