Osama Bin Laden and Islamic Burial

Onesimus

Hi. I was just wondering. They said on the news tonight that the reason they gave him a burial at sea is to respect the islamic burial ritual which is that they must be buried within 24hrs after death. But...isnt the islamic burial one that has to be in a coffin, on your side facing mecca?

Onesimus

yammycat

they put him in the sea so his burial place wouldn't become a shrine

Scrappychimow

they probably decapitated him and kicked his head into the ocean , don't believe everything in the news.

bad2dabone

He was hardly "buried" They threw his carcass off the back of a ship.

Bullseye1

He probably ended up as chum.

dead one

http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=127849

oceanclub

dead one wrote: »

http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=127849

Actually, the official Taliban response (via Jason Burke on Twitter) is rather non-commital:

RT @azelin: RT @felixkuehn: Taliban statement about death of Osama bin Laden translation http://bit.ly/c1J6za #Taliban #Afghanistan

Link with translated text shows the following:

Taliban Statement: the death of Osama bin Laden
Just because Americans have said they have killed Sheikh Osama bin Laden but they have’t shown anything to prove it yet. We don’t want to make any comments and on the other side the closest links [people] to Osama have not given a confirmation of his death so we cannot make any comment as to whether he is dead or not.

Original link here (in Pashto?):

http://alemarah-iea.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10820:2011-05-03-14-20-54&catid=1:news&Itemid=51

P.

Masked Man

Onesimus wrote: »

Hi. I was just wondering. They said on the news tonight that the reason they gave him a burial at sea is to respect the islamic burial ritual which is that they must be buried within 24hrs after death. But...isnt the islamic burial one that has to be in a coffin, on your side facing mecca?

Onesimus

I think they the Islamic burial ritual was that he had to be buried within 24 hours, the US claim they tried to get Saudi Arabia to repatriate the body but they refused. Islam allows for a burial at sea as long as the body won't be eaten too quickly.

Disclaimer: I know next to nothing about Islam, this stuff is just what I learned in the last few days.

irishconvert

Masked Man wrote: »

I think they the Islamic burial ritual was that he had to be buried within 24 hours, the US claim they tried to get Saudi Arabia to repatriate the body but they refused. Islam allows for a burial at sea as long as the body won't be eaten too quickly.

Disclaimer: I know next to nothing about Islam, this stuff is just what I learned in the last few days.

Burial at sea is only under very unusual circumstances. The US story is a load of bull. His body should have been handed over to the local mosque who would have buried it.

Sefirah

In fairness, thousands of people who burned to death and were disfigured beyond recognition on 9/11 didn't receive a 'proper burial', so why should the man who orchestrated their deaths have one? Ridiculous

enfant terrible

irishconvert wrote: »

Burial at sea is only under very unusual circumstances. The US story is a load of bull. His body should have been handed over to the local mosque who would have buried it.

Why the US don't answer to anyone.

partyatmygaff

irishconvert wrote: »

Burial at sea is only under very unusual circumstances. The US story is a load of bull. His body should have been handed over to the local mosque who would have buried it.

What mosque would have associated itself with him? If his country of birth refused to take his body then I doubt anyone else would.

dead one

A game???

http://tarpley.net/2011/05/03/alleged-death-of-pseudo-bin-laden-sets-pakistan-up-for-us-attack/

wes

irishconvert wrote: »

Burial at sea is only under very unusual circumstances. The US story is a load of bull. His body should have been handed over to the local mosque who would have buried it.

They apparently tried to hand his body over the Saudi Arabia (Bin Laden was a citizen), and they refused. Apparently Pakistan also refused (he is not a citizen, so that is understandable), and I doubt any other country would want the head ache of burying his body. So I think the circumstances were unusual enough to justify what they did.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

ultain

Im surprised they didint mount & stuff him...or maybe they did, great after dinner talking point..keep an eye out on ebay!

wes

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I doubt that would have happened actually. Salafi's like Bin Laden and his followers, are very much against any kind of shrines, as evidence by multiple attacks on Sufi shrines in Pakistan. They prefer unmarked graves.

Irish_Muslim

Hi all,

The Sheikh of the Mosque in Blanchardstown which was mentioned in the wiki leaks as one of the few voices for integration has written an article and it will be published tomorrow in the irish times. It will be the view on the death of OBL.

Coriolanus

partyatmygaff wrote: »

What mosque would have associated itself with him? If his country of birth refused to take his body then I doubt anyone else would.

Err. Plenty. Given the reaction in Karachi over the past few days I imagine there would have been several mosques only too eager.

Coriolanus

Irish_Muslim wrote: »

Hi all,

The Sheikh of the Mosque in Blanchardstown which was mentioned in the wiki leaks as one of the few voices for integration has written an article and it will be published tomorrow in the irish times. It will be the view on the death of OBL.

Had to quit reading by paragraph 3. Trying to claim that the fitna's under Mohammed were purely defensive is, well, to put it politely, either delusional or intellectually dishonest.

yammycat

Nevore wrote: »

Had to quit reading by paragraph 3. Trying to claim that the fitna's under Mohammed were purely defensive is, well, to put it politely, either delusional or intellectually dishonest.

yea i read that, major facepalm,

The massive expansion of an empire during defensive action ...