Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: JimSEA

"This mystical tradition arouses curiosity among those who are not Tibetan. However, Tibetans strongly object to visits by the merely curious. Only the funeral party will be present at the ritual. Photography is strictly forbidden. Tibetans believe that photographing the ritual might negatively affect the ascent of the soul.

In other words, the Tibetans don't want the world to know of their savage rituals.


16 posted on 09/11/2006 9:40:41 PM PDT by stultorum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: stultorum
In other words, the Tibetans don't want the world to know of their savage rituals.

I must have missed the savage part, but it sounds more natural to me than pumping the body full of preservatives and sealing it in an airtight box.

17 posted on 09/11/2006 9:49:11 PM PDT by cryptical (Wretched excess is just barely enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: stultorum
In other words, the Tibetans don't want the world to know of their savage rituals.

And just what makes this "savage"? No cruelty, torture, or violence takes place. The idea is that the spirit has discarded it bodily host and the nourishment form the body should go back to nature. Some Christians refuse cremation and are buried instead. Not very practical or sanitary in comparison. Savage folks?

The problem in India is the lack of vultures. In the sparsely settled areas of Tibet, there doesn't seem to be a problem except the opinions of outsiders. The idea of the uninvited photographing someone's funeral seems impolite, to say the least.

21 posted on 09/11/2006 11:37:36 PM PDT by JimSEA ( "The purpose of diplomacy is to prolong a crisis." Spock)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: stultorum

"In other words, the Tibetans don't want the world to know of their savage rituals.
"

Interesting choice of words, there. What is savage about this ritual? The person is dead, and cannot be harmed any further. Allowing the natural scavengers of this planet to perform their natural function seems to me to be a reasonable way to dispose of the dead.

For myself, my instructions are that I be cremated. My wife or other survivor will dispose of my ashes by dumping them in the Mississippi river from the Saint Paul, MN bridge leading to my favorite fishing spot. I figure that some portion of my ashes may even eventually reach the mouth of the Mississippi.


22 posted on 09/12/2006 6:53:11 AM PDT by MineralMan (Non-evangelical Atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: stultorum

"In other words, the Tibetans don't want the world to know of their savage rituals."

I don't think it is any more savage than letting a body rot or body burned to ashes. If you put a camera inside a casket and broadcast the footage, I'm sure the slow rot and maggots forming all over it would be seen by people as savage and disrespecting. Cremation wouldn't be any eye pleasing either with body fluids boiling, flesh burning and skull popping.

Death is savage, so is body decomposition. Personally, I would want to be cremated. Don't want nobody excavating my skulls or bones in the future, or parts of my body become bird dinner.


24 posted on 09/12/2006 5:01:23 PM PDT by sagar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: stultorum

Who are you to judge?

Every culture is different.

There are some things that are wrong across all cultures.

Method of burial is not. Why don't you object to burning bodies?


28 posted on 09/13/2006 10:45:33 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson