should we get cremated?

[save the frogs]

not sure if this has been discussed on here.

there's a thread now with complications connected to burial.

 

why do buddhists believe in cremation?

https://rfhr.com/buddhist-death-rituals-and-funeral-rites/#:~:text=Buddhists typically favor cremation because,donation of organs and autopsies.

Buddhists typically favor cremation because they believe it is an important way to release the soul from the physical form. Buddha himself was cremated, so his followers often follow his lead.

 

also due to beliefs in reincarnation.

https://www.funeralpartners.co.uk/help-advice/arranging-a-funeral/types-of-funerals/buddhist-funerals/

Due to their belief in reincarnation, cremation is seen as the preferred choice when a loved one dies. The physical body holds little significance to the Buddhist faith, it is merely a vessel for holding the soul. 

 

but even without the belief system, is it more practical? 

 

[proton]

Only if you are dead!

[Sheryl]

"Buddhists typically favor cremation because they believe it is an important way to release the soul from the physical form" is incorrect.

 

That is a Hindu, not Buddhist,  belief.

 

Buddhism does not believe in the existence of an immortal soul, period. In fact that is a central tenet.

 

 

 

 

[Lacessit]

It's a personal choice, I prefer cremation. Taking up space in a cemetery with a headstone is not for me.

Who will remember most of us three generations from now?

I would much rather my ashes are employed for something useful, such as fertilizing a golf course.

[rocketboy2]

5 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Taking up space in a cemetery with a headstone is not for me.

Who will remember most of us three generations from now?

More like 3 days here. 

[2baht]

6 hours ago, Sheryl said:

Buddhism does not believe in the existence of an immortal soul, period. In fact that is a central tenet.

Ahh, but Thai Buddhism is unique to Thailand! Merit for sale! 

[BE88]

6 hours ago, Sheryl said:

"Buddhists typically favor cremation because they believe it is an important way to release the soul from the physical form" is incorrect.

 

That is a Hindu, not Buddhist,  belief.

 

Buddhism does not believe in the existence of an immortal soul, period. In fact that is a central tenet.

 

 

 

 

Still a nice contradiction if they all want to go to heaven with lavish donations to Buddhist temples from the very rich.

 

[save the frogs]

6 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I would much rather my ashes are employed for something useful, such as fertilizing a golf course.

do ashes actually fertilize anything? 

[soi3eddie]

Does it really matter? When we are dead, we are dead. For me, no thoughts of reincarnation. 

Just visited 3 days ago a churchyard on a hillside in Devon, England. 4 grandparents, stepmother, her widower husband and many other people from the surrounding villages that I knew in childhood. Some cremated, and interrred, some buried. I have long thought that I really don't want to be on that bleak place in the winter. OK maybe being close to loved ones has it's draw. 

Last year, a friend of mine came to Pattaya and we (he, his GF, other friends and me) took a speedboat out into the bay and scattered the ashes of his deceased father in the waters. A nice simple ceremony with flowers, thoughts and a beer. I see that as a far better place to be. Especially if being nearby was happy times for the deceased.

 

[sammieuk1]

I have chosen to be pickled in a Vat 69 barrel but no one is listening to me ???? 

[JayClay]

33 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

do ashes actually fertilize anything? 

That was my question, too. I can't imagine there being any nutrients in chared body ash.

 

For me the obvious way to give back to the earth would seem to be being burried straight into the ground without any kind of casket.

[Lacessit]

58 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

do ashes actually fertilize anything? 

Thai rice farmers seem to think they do, judging by the burnoffs every year. Minerals such as calcium, phosphorus, possibly magnesium.

[Lacessit]

27 minutes ago, JayClay said:

That was my question, too. I can't imagine there being any nutrients in chared body ash.

 

For me the obvious way to give back to the earth would seem to be being burried straight into the ground without any kind of casket.

If the person died of a communicable disease, not such a good idea.

[JayClay]

1 minute ago, Lacessit said:

If the person died of a communicable disease, not such a good idea.

Okay

[tandor]

On 8/21/2023 at 12:19 AM, Lacessit said:

It's a personal choice, I prefer cremation. Taking up space in a cemetery with a headstone is not for me.

Who will remember most of us three generations from now?

I would much rather my ashes are employed for something useful, such as fertilizing a golf course.

GUR

[save the frogs]

23 hours ago, JayClay said:

That was my question, too. I can't imagine there being any nutrients in chared body ash.

 

For me the obvious way to give back to the earth would seem to be being burried straight into the ground without any kind of casket.

I believe the bugs get into those caskets after 1-2 years. 

 

 

[Muhendis]

23 hours ago, save the frogs said:

do ashes actually fertilize anything? 

Yep.

Carbon is good.

Ban burning 'cause of climate change.

[Muhendis]

23 hours ago, JayClay said:

That was my question, too. I can't imagine there being any nutrients in chared body ash.

 

For me the obvious way to give back to the earth would seem to be being burried straight into the ground without any kind of casket.

Yeah, but 6' down does nothing for top soil.

[jcmj]

It’s not like the old days when everyone lived in the same place and would visit cemeteries. Sure there are some, but for me and my family living all over the world, cremation is the best route. Everyone who wants a bit of your ashes can have some and they can honor you in the best way they know how, or remember you. I’d just want to be put out to sea like I did for my mother. You can always plant a tree with your ashes in it these days. No reason, in my opinion, to waste money and land on a dead body, but I guess religion will determine some burials. 

[save the frogs]

3 minutes ago, Muhendis said:

Yep.

Carbon is good.

Ban burning 'cause of climate change.

I did a bit of research on that ... 

both are bad for the environment it seems, so they're coming up with new ways. 

 

there is actually a "green funeral company" in the UK. 

https://www.thegreenfuneralcompany.co.uk

 

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/jul/09/greener-way-to-go-eco-friendly-way-dispose-of-body-burial-cremation

 

Burial uses too much land; cremation releases too much CO₂. So what about composting our loved ones – or even dissolving them?

 

 

[klauskunkel]

Quote

should we get cremated?

Who is included in the "we"? I think it should be an individual choice, not a collective one.

[save the frogs]

2 minutes ago, klauskunkel said:

Who is included in the "we"? I think it should be an individual choice, not a collective one.

yeah just wanted people's opinions because i haven't decided yet.

 

thanks to everyone for their comments. 

[1FinickyOne]

Saves the fear of being a dead ringer... as one poster had raised... 

[crazykopite]

I was up in Kanchanaburi a few years back came across a building that housed the remains of Chinese people was told that some of these bodies had been stored for years waiting for burial apparently burial in Thailand is beyond most peoples wealth unless your one of the elites . When my time comes it will be in a ball of fire with my bones cast into the sea I did this for my friend last year everything included was no more than 25,000 baht it could of been cheaper but I decided to give him a good send off 

[Tropposurfer]

On 8/21/2023 at 9:33 AM, save the frogs said:

do ashes actually fertilize anything? 

Yes, if incorporated into the soil.

 

Chemical composition of human ashes:

• Phosphate 47.5%
• Calcium 25.3%
• Sulfate (Sulphate) 11.00%
• Potassium 3.69%
• Sodium 1.12%
• Chloride 1.00%
• Silica 0.9%
• Aluminum Oxide 0.72%

[brianthainess]

On 8/21/2023 at 6:33 AM, save the frogs said:

do ashes actually fertilize anything? 

Pot ash is good for lawns apparently.

[wwest5829]

On 8/21/2023 at 12:19 AM, Lacessit said:

It's a personal choice, I prefer cremation. Taking up space in a cemetery with a headstone is not for me.

Who will remember most of us three generations from now?

I would much rather my ashes are employed for something useful, such as fertilizing a golf course.

Agree. I suppose, having been raised on the East US Coast had something to do with my outlook. I saw two cemeteries, with some graves dating back to the founding of the country “moved” in order to use the space for businesses. That and the “ashes to ashes, dust to dust” thingy. Add in my inclination toward Buddhist teachings and that is the way I go. Not important … if later genealogy work by family? My life is well recorded in the records kept on us in our time period.

Edited August 22, 2023 by wwest5829

[wwest5829]

2 hours ago, klauskunkel said:

Who is included in the "we"? I think it should be an individual choice, not a collective one.

Perhaps using the “imperial we”? Tongue in cheek …

[Muhendis]

34 minutes ago, Tropposurfer said:

Yes, if incorporated into the soil.

 

Chemical composition of human ashes:

• Phosphate 47.5%
• Calcium 25.3%
• Sulfate (Sulphate) 11.00%
• Potassium 3.69%
• Sodium 1.12%
• Chloride 1.00%
• Silica 0.9%
• Aluminum Oxide 0.72%

Interesting post.

What is your source of information please.

 

This from Wiki

Cremated remains are mostly dry calcium phosphates with some minor minerals, such as salts of sodium and potassium. Sulfur and most carbon are driven off as oxidized gases during the process, although about 1–4% of carbon remains[63] as carbonate.

[mania]

There is precious little enough and as it is.

Land should be for the living to use not for planting people in wooden boxes

So for that reason I'm going with cremation