Why do Muslims bury dead bodies instead of cremating them?

Dreams001

Member
Dec 6, 2008
15,966
939
0
- ElaKiri Radio -
Aiseesoft iPad Converter Suite is newly released software for iPad fans. It can rip any DVD files (DVD-Video, DVD folder and DVD IFO file) to iPad, convert all popular videos/audios to iPad formats and transfer files from PC to iPad, from iPad to PC and from iPad to iPad. It works similar to iTunes. So why do you always buy movies and songs from iTunes with extra money? It can help you make use of your resources.
The product is very easy in use. You just need download, install and run the trial version.
ipad-converter-suite.jpg


The product is multifunctional. It can trim, crop, edit video effect, merge, add text and image watermark, select audio track and subtitle, adjust video settings and snapshot.

If you are Mac user, you can choose Aiseesoft iPad Converter Suite for Mac.
ipad-converter-suite-for-mac.jpg
There is a forum calls "Downloads" Better u present there.:yes::yes:
 

Wal Bada

Well-known member
  • Economical

    It is expensive to cremate a dead body when tons of wood have to be burned. Annually there is a loss of crores of rupees, only because dead bodies are cremated in India. Burying dead bodies is very cheap. It hardly costs any money.
    Who ever written this crap is bling to the fact that Indians don't use wood to cremate the bodies. They use dried cow-dung for that Only very rich can afford fire wood in India, because it is so rare in India
     
    Jul 20, 2010
    7
    0
    0
    @dilshan_n
    Woah Woah Dude u r points are baseless and doesn't make any sense!!

    If u say that Muslims are terrorist and argue adamantly that there is no sinhala terroorist group then turn our history pages and check out wut u guys did to the TAMILS from 1970 onwards! U CREATED THE WAR and BLAMED THE TAMIL! SO wut do u argue on this point! THIS IS POLITICS but which religion do politicians follow: Mostly Buddhist!

    I think u r arguments are not seeded properly since it is circular reasonining! Let me quote what u posted before!

    Why do we only see terroists killing while holding the Qu'ran? but not the Bible, Tripitaka etc?
    ".its ok in Buddhism to kill innocent ppl at a concert coz they are "enjoying themselves" when on a date a random Buddhist monk died" Its not ok in Buddhism to kill people, how pathetic again you are arguing even without knowing the basics


    Answer


    The reason why u see terrorist holding Quran and not the other holy books is becoz to tarnish the image of Islam! U KNOW WUT! OSAMA BIN LADEN is a guy from the CIA and his real name is TIM OSMAM! The US wanted this guy to hit the twin towers to attack the Muslim world to rob the wealth of the land! 1 in three American believe that the attack was an insider job! Another reason why they wanted people all around the world to believe that Muslims are terrorist is to slowly implement their satanic plot: THE NEW WORLD ORDER: This is done to make human believe that they themselves are god!


    And i would consider Hindu women suiciding in Sati pujaa is better than Muhammad sleeping with a 6 year old baby girl, ayesha


    Answer
    :

    <<<<<<During the time of prophet Muhammad (Peace and blessing be with him), Women in the Arab land were killed, tortured and used as slaves. They were ill treated and captured for sexual satisfaction! Another practice that was common during that time is to marry female children, who are orphan, so that their wealth can be enjoyed by the person who married them! This was the practice of the Arab during that time>>>>

    After prophet Muhammad became famous as the messenger of Allah (The Great Lord), people started to accept Islam in large numbers. They performed whatever Prophet Muhammad (SAL) told them to do and they practiced wut Prophet (SAL) used to do! Due to the climate of ARABS, girls mature in their early ages (i.e. from the age of 6)! AYESHA (Ral) turned out to be a woman at the age of 9 years! U shud understand that women in the ancient Arab turned out to be grown-up woman in the early ages. They understand life better than MAN!
    Muhammad (SAL) married Ayesha(RAL) at the age of 9 however she was brought into Muhammad (SAL) house at the age of 11.

    Can I ask u sumtin bro! Ayesha (Ral) and her parents were happy of her marriage with Muhammad (Sal) so wuts bothering u in this matter>>> Is it b'coz u r religion is not permitting u to marry more than one lady!!

    TOOOooooo Bad amigo, u gotta understand this point too. A person can marry more than one lady only if the person has the ability to do so or else he should consider only one WIFE!!

    U argued that Islam maltreats non-Muslims! There can be humans who do that but Islam has neva informed its believers to maltreat the other co-habitants in the planet earth...... U have got it all wrong.... Humans are of two kinds: Evil and GOOD! U shud be with good Muslim people to understand the truth and promise of Islam! To u r bad.. u have been associating with the bad guys and u want to categories all the other followers in the Islamic sector to be BAD ONES! U r wrong : I have got a number of Buddhist friends who are my best pals and on the other hand I have some who are evil minded! It doesn't mean that all those people who follow Buddhism are wrong or evil minded people, there are some who are bad while there are good ones still existing.....

    There are many things taking place around the world check out on them and identify one sign that has been prophesied in u r religion (that is really approving and takin me inside ur thought and ideas), WALLAHI (A strong promise) I will embrace u r religion! MY RELIGION Is true and U cant fight me on that! YOUTUBE is a beautiful website where u can learn more of our religion do visit it to understand more of ISLAM!


    If u r still going to post baseless views and thoughts and wanna be addressed as an ILLITERATE Sri-Lankan (A dumb ass) then do post! or else if u can argue with some strong viewpoints and ideas then show up intelligently! U r thoughts were all crooked b'coz u want to put out the negative ideas only.. I am not critizing u but feeling sorry for u r ignorance and stupidity!

    If u still like to involve me in this cowardly cyber fight take me on !! My reply will be the following:

    May Allah guide u and peace be with u!
     
    Last edited:

    AncientGlory

    Member
    Jan 18, 2010
    1,131
    67
    0
    Australia
    Sorry about the late reply.

    OK.now your 6 or 7 alleged verses reduced to one word,
    Come on, you know better than that brother. What I meant to express was it can be 6,7 verses, but the important part for this discussion is in one single word.

    ok.even if we take that part of the verse, before the next sentence start, "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter.

    have you not noted it is talking abt persecution, so it is against persecutors..Of course against oppressors, persecutors you will fight wherever......won't you do so.
    To answer your question, NO. I wouldn't fight them wherever I find them. I clearly distinguish between, defending when attacked and then going after the enemy and killing wherever I find them. It does not matter whether they are persecutors or not. Many nations in the world had been rivals at one time or another in the history. Germany alone invaded closer to 20 countries. So according to quran, those country men should kill german's wherever they find them?

    I can see a clear difference between defensive and offensive violence here. In my opinion, there's no need to continue the discussion as you agreed to my point by saying, against persecutors, you should fight wherever you find them. No wonder that muslims go to USA and conduct suicide bombings. Against persecutors they should fight wherever right?


    see brother, you won't find any single mistake in the Quran,
    I have found many mistakes in quran, but this is not the thread to discuss those right?

    if you try to do so, you will end up in loosing side as it has been happening to you.
    Are you sure about that? Apparently to me it seems that I have once again established my point concretely.

    .But still I prefer you to bring some more verses so i will be ready to answer you,Inshallah atleast at one point of time you have to accept quran dont promote violence and it is a misconception.
    There are many more versus that I can bring forward. Some are even more clear about promoting violence than the above verse. (Ex: Raiding caravans). But there's no need since, you yourself said against persecutors you should fight wherever. That just crystallize my argument.
     
    Last edited:
    Oct 19, 2009
    709
    14
    0
    Just because you are under the impression that I end up in the loosing side, here are two other threads that you stopped responding for some reason.

    http://www.elakiri.com/forum/showthread.php?t=735864

    http://www.elakiri.com/forum/showthread.php?t=659883&page=4

    I have not missed out intentionally, I feel at a time only one subject is preferred, as I need to concentrate on one subject to convince you and to do my other personal activities also some time to be reserved. anyway,assure whenever i am free I will answer you to the all unanswered queries.
     

    AncientGlory

    Member
    Jan 18, 2010
    1,131
    67
    0
    Australia
    I have not missed out intentionally, I feel at a time only one subject is preferred, as I need to concentrate on one subject to convince you and to do my other personal activities also some time to be reserved. anyway,assure whenever i am free I will answer you to the all unanswered queries.

    No worries man. Of course we need to prioritize things, otherwise we don't know what we will end up loosing. Personal life should of course come up first. Don't worry about it.
     
    Oct 19, 2009
    709
    14
    0
    Come on, you know better than that brother. What I meant to express was it can be 6,7 verses, but the important part for this discussion is in one single word.

    Then why it cannot be this single point "persecution" is important.apart from the context of the verse in which it was revealed.

    To answer your question, NO. I wouldn't fight them wherever I find them. I clearly distinguish between, defending when attacked and then going after the enemy and killing wherever I find them. It does not matter whether they are persecutors or not. Many nations in the world had been rivals at one time or another in the history. Germany alone invaded closer to 20 countries. So according to quran, those country men should kill german's wherever they find them?

    come on man! to win the argument don't talk like this, be fair man and tell me, when some one oppress you , you are not even allowed to stay in your own place,at least to go to the sacred place..more over when a peace pact is being broken, then you are not going to run away from your enemy, of course you will strive and fight with them in order to go to your own place once in a while at least.. i dont think neither you will allow LTTE to take your coutry, and you get out of your country.come on man! be practical!

    I can see a clear difference between defensive and offensive violence here. In my opinion, there's no need to continue the discussion as you agreed to my point by saying, against persecutors, you should fight wherever you find them. No wonder that muslims go to USA and conduct suicide bombings. Against persecutors they should fight wherever right?


    here have you forgotten this part in order to win the argument"drive them out of the places whence they drove you out"[/COLOR]

    Of course you r right, fight against persecutors,only when they come to fight with you, dont always forget abt context ok. again you r wrong abt suicide bombing , suicide is not allowed in Islam. dont talk whatever you get in your mind..at least good that you are accepting US is persecutors.





    I have found many mistakes in quran, but this is not the thread to discuss those right?


    I answered you, for one of your thread.many more so called errors are welcome, for more help please approach some Christian missionary website.even you said once Christianity is better than islam. so i hope whatever they say you will accept it as correct

    Are you sure about that? Apparently to me it seems that I have once again established my point concretely.

    you have not..if so,either i would have run away or have struggled to answer this.remember truth always will prevail.

    [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]
    There are many more versus that I can bring forward. Some are even more clear about promoting violence than the above verse. (Ex: Raiding caravans). But there's no need since, you yourself said against persecutors you should fight wherever. That just crystallize my argument.[/QUOTE]

    hha!!.once i remember you have accepted you will give a big kick to a mischief who come to rape ur mother or sister, here now you r contradicting as though im only telling you should fight against persecutors..so far i replied to all the versus, if you have more verses you can bring it up.
     
    Last edited:

    AncientGlory

    Member
    Jan 18, 2010
    1,131
    67
    0
    Australia
    This is what you say now.


    Of course you r right, fight against persecutors,only when they come to fight with you,

    This is what you said earlier.


    have you not noted it is talking abt persecution, so it is against persecutors..Of course against oppressors, persecutors you will fight wherever......won't you do so.

    You are just saying whatever you find suitable for the occasion, you didn't realize you contradicted yourself. This happens when you follow a book that has no rational base.


    hha!!.once i remember you have accepted you will give a big kick to a mischief who come to rape ur mother or sister, here now you r contradicting as though im only telling you should fight against persecutors..so far i replied to all the versus, if you have more verses you can bring it up.
    What is the contradiction? I agreed that on a sociological view, one may need to fight to defend himself. We passed that point. I'm surprised that you can't understand that. We are now talking about offensive fighting. I will defend my mother, but I will not follow the attacker back to his country and kill his family.
     
    Last edited:
    Oct 19, 2009
    709
    14
    0
    This is what you say now.

    This is what you said earlier.

    I am not saying anything wrongly with out of context..

    You are just saying whatever you find suitable for the occasion, you didn't realize you contradicted yourself. This happens when you follow a book that has no rational base.

    Looks like you also have become like other non Muslims brothers who blame Quran ultimately, when they run out of answers and on the edge of the lose.I didn't treat you so right from the start.


    What is the contradiction? I agreed that on a sociological view, one may need to fight to defend himself. We passed that point. I'm surprised that you can't understand that. We are now talking about offensive fighting. I will defend my mother, but I will not follow the attacker back to his country and kill his family.

    this is nothing but somehow you are trying to prove your defensive is the defensive, our defensive is the offensive.I had asked you a fair reply from you keeping aside your ego.
    there is no offensive at all, as you defend your mother, even prophet and the muslims protected their family from the mischief, as you defend your mother when same mischief come to kill you, you are not just going to look at him when you dont have any option..further when you and your family were chased away from your own home and place, you r not going to allow them.how can it become an offensive? come on brother, we are here to accept on some points whichever is correct irrespective of who is winning the argument here..

    further, I am so happy that buddhist Gov't also did the same thing in order to defeat the LTTE. if they had done as you say thinking that fighting to protect us and fighting with LTTE is an offensive, then we will be no where and by this time LTTE will be ruling the Srilanka.
    Brother, earlier you told me you will accept whatever is proved correctly,and you said you agreed on manythings with islam, why not this time brother.
     
    Last edited:

    AncientGlory

    Member
    Jan 18, 2010
    1,131
    67
    0
    Australia
    I am not saying anything wrongly with out of context..

    Now hold on right there brother.

    (1) First you said you should fight persecutors wherever you find them.
    (2) Then you said you should only fight them when they come and attack you.

    Are you saying there's nothing wrong with the above two statements? Are you saying those two statements do not contradict?


    Looks like you also have become like other non Muslims brothers who blame Quran ultimately,
    Hmm ok, here's how I see it.

    We were having a discussion. Then you made two statements completely opposite to each other. There's no denying in that, everyone can see it.
    Now there is a problem because you making these contradictory statements, in fact brings a doubt whether quran that you believe in might be erroneous or not. You are trying to divert the attention by blaming me being disrespectful and by repeating the same thing, and using a word game. But it will not help because you just contradicted yourself and everyone can see it.


    this is nothing but somehow you are trying to prove your defensive is the defensive, our defensive is the offensive.I had asked you a fair reply from you keeping aside your ego.
    A word game. Irrelevant. Address the point in hand.

    there is no offensive at all, as you defend your mother, even prophet and the muslims protected their family from the mischief, as you defend your mother when same mischief come to kill you, you are not just going to look at him when you dont have any option..further when you and your family were chased away from your own home and place, you r not going to allow them.how can it become an offensive?
    Care to elaborate your point?

    come on brother, we are here to accept on some points whichever is correct irrespective of who is winning the argument here..
    Of course. That is why I already agreed defensive acts may not be considered as violence. You are repeating that again and again. I already agreed to that.

    further, I am so happy that buddhist Gov't also did the same thing in order to defeat the LTTE. if they had done as you say thinking that fighting to protect us and fighting with LTTE is an offensive, then we will be no where and by this time LTTE will be ruling the Srilanka.
    Brother, earlier you told me you will accept whatever is proved correctly,and you said you agreed on manythings with islam, why not this time brother.
    Again, same thing over and over. Common lets move forward. I already agreed defensive act can be considered as non violence. Ex: Sri Lankan Army fight with LTTE.

    Now lets stop repeating. Answer the questions in hand. You just contradicted yourself, comment on that.
     
    Last edited:
    Oct 19, 2009
    709
    14
    0

    Now hold on right there brother.

    (1) First you said you should fight persecutors wherever you find them.
    (2) Then you said you should only fight them when they come and attack you.

    Are you saying there's nothing wrong with the above two statements? Are you saying those two statements do not contradict?


    first of all I am sorry for replying late,coz only after 1week i will be free as im on a trip now. anyway i would like to reply to this now, if possible i will try to reply you other your questions also before during this week, otherwise i will reply after 1week inshallah.
    with regard to your question, it is not contradicting at all, but both of them are there in that particular verse,but what you did was you omitted second part and argued with me in order to win the argument only with a word "slay them wherever you find"..if you remember well, I still said for the sake of argument I will still go ahead with the argument based on what you quoted from the 1st part.
    "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter" and tried to prove you , it is talking abt persecutors. NOTE THAT THERE IS NO FULL STOP IN BETWEEN THAT WORDS..so don't argue purposely to malign islam with out of context..if you loose the debate accept it so.without dragging things up and play with words.

    Hmm ok, here's how I see it.

    We were having a discussion. Then you made two statements completely opposite to each other. There's no denying in that, everyone can see it.
    Now there is a problem because you making these contradictory statements, in fact brings a doubt whether quran that you believe in might be erroneous or not. You are trying to divert the attention by blaming me being disrespectful and by repeating the same thing, and using a word game. But it will not help because you just contradicted yourself and everyone can see it.


    hmm!! you are like the dog which bark will not bite..you are not impressive as you thought.hha! really im using word game?, I am not the one who quote versus from out of context, really it may suite you well... i was abt to say you are playing with words picking up the out of context versus from quran..anyway you reminded me to say this to you. contradiction is no where, it is your lack of understanding and ego in accepting quran is correct.


    A word game. Irrelevant. Address the point in hand.


    Care to elaborate your point?
    I repeated same thing here, if u cant reply tell me...nothing to elaborate on this further.
    there is no offensive at all, as you defend your mother, even prophet and the muslims protected their family from the mischief, as you defend your mother when same mischief come to kill you, you are not just going to look at him when you dont have any option..further when you and your family were chased away from your own home and place, you r not going to allow them.how can it become an offensive?

    Of course. That is why I already agreed defensive acts may not be considered as violence. You are repeating that again and again. I already agreed to that.


    Im repeating again and again here, how do you say you are defending and we were offending though it is for the same cause. when LTTE drive out your family and you kill them IT IS DEFENSE, when non believers drive out the muslims from their place and they fight against them is OFFENSIVE..mm!! It seems like you are one of the Britisher who called our freedom fighters as a terrorist.


    Again, same thing over and over. Common lets move forward. I already agreed defensive act can be considered as non violence. Ex: Sri Lankan Army fight with LTTE.

    Now lets stop repeating. Answer the questions in hand. You just contradicted yourself, comment on that.

    you are repeating again , as though ur fight only defensive, and whatever muslims did was ofensive...I already answered. You have to accept the fact without any hesiatation.coz then only we can move ahead with other question.otherwise we are in the same street still.
     

    AncientGlory

    Member
    Jan 18, 2010
    1,131
    67
    0
    Australia

    first of all I am sorry for replying late,coz only after 1week i will be free as im on a trip now. anyway i would like to reply to this now, if possible i will try to reply you other your questions also before during this week, otherwise i will reply after 1week inshallah.


    No worries.

    with regard to your question, it is not contradicting at all, but both of them are there in that particular verse,but what you did was you omitted second part and argued with me in order to win the argument only with a word "slay them wherever you find"..if you remember well, I still said for the sake of argument I will still go ahead with the argument based on what you quoted from the 1st part.
    "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter" and tried to prove you , it is talking abt persecutors. NOTE THAT THERE IS NO FULL STOP IN BETWEEN THAT WORDS..so don't argue purposely to malign islam with out of context..if you loose the debate accept it so.without dragging things up and play with words.


    Alright so now you are not accepting the fact that you made two contradictory statements? You are somehow saying I'm responsible for that?

    Here are the two posts for everyone to see.


    Of course you r right, fight against persecutors,only when they come to fight with you,
    have you not noted it is talking abt persecution, so it is against persecutors..Of course against oppressors, persecutors you will fight wherever......won't you do so.
    Notice the green word? Subject is same. Notice the red parts?, two contradictory statements.

    I
    rest my case there, I cannot move forward because you deny the obvious. I cannot argue with someone who decides to go irrational when things are going bad. You know everyone can see it, so they will make a judgment.
     
    Oct 19, 2009
    709
    14
    0
    Here are the two posts for everyone to see.[/SIZE][/FONT]

    Notice the green word? Subject is same. Notice the red parts?, two contradictory statements.

    I
    rest my case there, I cannot move forward because you deny the obvious. I cannot argue with someone who decides to go irrational when things are going bad. You know everyone can see it, so they will make a judgment.
    [/QUOTE]


    I am very much surprised to see your gladness just by misinterpreting my words which was answered to you in different context, for your query. Not only that even you went on to misguide the people who don’t know context of the conversation by putting a poll as well. I doubt that you divert the subject in order to cover your loss on the subject of quran is promoting violence? As I remember this has been argued between us for long time, and whatever versus that you have posted was answered by me, and you were on the edge of loss and frustration, so no wonder that u came up with the new idea.
    Don’t expect me to run away, I still want to reply to your allegation. My answers was in two different context according to your questions.

    One of your question (1) asking abt partial word “wherever” I gave you reply of course wherever we will fight against persecutors.

    Your Question
    Originally Posted by AncientGlory

    Not always. A sentence may carry its own meaning when, it is not linked to the previous or next sentences.

    Slay them wherever you find them.. How is this talking about defense? I'm talking about the the word 'wherever'.

    My answer

    OK.now your 6 or 7 alleged verses reduced to one word, ok.even if we take that part of the verse, before the next sentence start, "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter.

    have you not noted it is talking abt persecution, so it is against persecutors..Of course against oppressors, persecutors you will fight wherever......won't you do so.

    see brother, you won't find any single mistake in the Quran, if you try to do so, you will end up in loosing side as it has been happening to you..But still I prefer you to bring some more verses so i will be ready to answer you,Inshallah atleast at one point of time you have to accept quran dont promote violence and it is a misconception.




    For your another post in different time, I replied with the context of the full verse, also I mentioned there “always don’t forget abt context” have you gone blind to see my words there? Your purpose is so clear, nothing but to malign Islam, though everything was given in crystal clear. Finally your opted to the word game which also not worked for you. Further I challenge you, you can’t bring even a single verse to prove quran is violence, you have no way but to accept with me to say quran is not promoting violence.

    Your question

    I can see a clear difference between defensive and offensive violence here. In my opinion, there's no need to continue the discussion as you agreed to my point by saying, against persecutors, you should fight wherever you find them. No wonder that muslims go to USA and conduct suicide bombings. Against persecutors they should fight wherever right?

    My answer

    here have you forgotten this part in order to win the argument"drive them out of the places whence they drove you out"[/COLOR]

    Of course you r right, fight against persecutors,only when they come to fight with you, dont always forget abt context ok. again you r wrong abt suicide bombing , suicide is not allowed in Islam. dont talk whatever you get in your mind..at least good that you are accepting US is persecutors.

    this is the verse for reference
    And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.
     
    Last edited:
    Oct 19, 2009
    709
    14
    0

    Who cares your poll,except dilankandy and some anti islamist guys who used to clap for your comments, without even reading what you said there.
    this even remind me the modern political leaders who go on to the people and give false promise to the innocent and get the vote bank.

    this is nothing but a consolation prize for you, as you have already lost Gold, Silver and Bronze prizes.Congratulations!!
     

    AncientGlory

    Member
    Jan 18, 2010
    1,131
    67
    0
    Australia
    Who cares your poll,except dilankandy and some anti islamist guys who used to clap for your comments, without even reading what you said there.
    this even remind me the modern political leaders who go on to the people and give false promise to the innocent and get the vote bank.

    this is nothing but a consolation prize for you, as you have already lost Gold, Silver and Bronze prizes.Congratulations!!

    thanks brother. I understand that only a rational person can understand it. So no worries, I do not expect you to make any sense of it.