London Court Rules Against Open Air Cremation
Hindu Community Alleges Religious Discrimination
May 9, 2009
The Anglo Asian Friendship Society, headed by Davender Ghai, was denied permission by the Newcastle City Council to establish an open air cremation site.
Ghai challenged the decision and was allowed a judicial review. However, in the review, his case was turned down.
Arguments in Favor of Open Air Cremation
The main argument put forward by Ghai is that open air cremation is the practice specified in the Hindu scriptures.
He said that denial of this fundamental ritual “will enslave his soul in endless earthly entrapment.”
Ghai says that he dreads the prospect of his body being burnt in a local crematorium.
The second argument being put forward is that denial of an open air cremation site constitutes religious discrimination.
Ghai said that separate burial grounds are provided for Muslims and Jews. They are also given the facility of out-of-hours registration and immediate or weekend burials. Why then should Hindus be denied equivalent facilities? The Hindus in the UK are believed to number one million and are the third largest religious community.
It has been argued that the 1902 Act regulates what happens inside a crematorium. The act has nothing to do with open air pyres. It has also been argued that the open air pyres would not be a public nuisance, as claimed, because they would be in a secluded place.
Arguments Against Open Air Cremation
The court was of the opinion that the majority of the Hindus in the UK do not consider an open air pyre essential for their salvation. Jay Lakhani, of the Hindu Academy, said that this practice was prevalent in India only because of a lack of crematoriums. In actuality, many Hindus in Indian cities are using electric crematoriums.
The court also opined that according to the Act of 1902 no human bodies could be burnt outside crematoriums. Therefore, it ruled that open air cremation sites were illegal.
The charge of discrimination was also struck down. It was argued that grounds of public health and welfare supersede the requirements of religious practices.
The British Government, which also named as an interested party, said that the practice of open air cremations would cause offence to the public at large. Arguments were also presented that the practice was environmentally undesirable.
A Rational Viewpoint
If one looks at Hindu philosophy, then it should be apparent that salvation depends upon the deeds performed and not on the rituals practiced.
Over 6000 years ago when the Vedic culture began there was no electricity and there were plenty of trees. Open air pyres were a natural way of disposing of the dead. It should also be borne in mind that Hinduism has evolved continuously, rejecting obsolete practices for contemporarily relevant ones. Hence the view that unless an open air cremation is performed then salvation will not be attained is untenable.
Having said that, however, it must be added that if there is nothing wrong with open air cremation then to disallow it is unfair. The argument that it is abhorrent to civil society is a prejudiced one. If open air cremations are performed in seclusion then there is no public nuisance involved. The argument that it is environmentally unsound because of the destruction of trees involved is debatable.
It can also be argued that the production of electricity is environmentally unsound. It can also be claimed that burials are environmentally detrimental compared to electric cremations. Would then civil society be willing to give up the practice of burials that is prevalent in Christianity and Islam?
The issue of discrimination has also come to light as a result of the debate over open air cremations. Of late, the Hindu community has started taking a stand that if other religions are allowed certain facilities and freedoms then Hindus should be allowed equivalent facilities and freedoms.
This is a dangerous trend that's seemingly inevitable since certain other communities are able to extract favors from governments on the basis of their numerical strength. In the case under consideration, if quicker registration of deaths is offered for Jews and Muslims, then it's widely believed that the same should apply for Hindus as well.
