Can anybody help me!

[sefroth77 0]

What is Sutee. Does it means when a husband dies the wife will have to walk herself into the Fire and thus killing her too. Was this mention in the Vedas. Does a Widow have to do this. Looks cruel, can anybody explain on this thanks. I'm trying to answer this to my Christian Friend.

[Guest guest]

Manu Smrti have been corrupted - the British/Christian missionaries wanted to make it out that Vedas condones all this wife-burning...

 

The actual quote just says the widow has to put ghee on herself as some sort of ritual...In fact, the REAL manu-smrti says the widow can eventually remarry, if not she should be respected and looked after in the home of her passed away husband....

 

Actually, the manu-smrti also says the widow should inherit all husband's riches, so far from asking her to burn herself, she is entitled to the property of her husband...

[barney 0]

SUTEE OR SATI---Widows jumping into funeral pyre of the fallen husbands originated from Greek. According to Hindu theologians sacrifices similar to Sati was prevalent among some Greek tribes, Germans and Slavs. Many believe that Sati came to India, when Kushans, a central Asian tribe attacked India in 1 A.D.

 

Sutee has its roots in Greece. Pyre

services similar to Sutee were prevalent among Germans, Slavs and other races besides Greeks. It was RAJPUTS a warrior tribe who were descendants of KUSHANS and who were very fanatic Hindus and who were extremely monogamous who practiced SUTEE.

 

Rajputs were in constant wars within themselves and were also at war with Moslems. So there were thousands of young widows and they feared that it is dangerous to have thousands of young, extremely beautiful widows running around and they went to extreme measure of eliminating them. MOSLEMS had the same problem and they solved that by POLYGAMY, having four wives.

 

In 1829, British government in India, outlawed SUTEE as a criminal offense. Sutee was never ever practiced in South India. Copycats appear now and then, but vast majority of people have nothing to do with SUTEEE.

 

Rajputs lived in the Northwestern parts of India. Rajputs were very fanatical Hindu tribes who practiced VERY STRICT MONOGAMY and at the same time in constant wars with Moslems. Rajputs lost many young men in wars and they had a big population of very young widows.

 

Moslems were also in the same plight and to take care of the problem of young widows running around the country, prophet Mohemmad encouraged POLYGAMY. That code of allowing men to marry four wives at the same time is not in the Koran but the hadis. Unluckily, Hindu codes did not address that issue. So, Rajputs took an easy route of disposing very attractive very young widows.

 

 

Sutee is the most heinous act of forcing widows to kill themselves by jumping into funeral pyre of their dead husbands, Sutee is never mention in the vedas or puranas. In fact the Rig Veda clearly says a young widow is allowed to remarry after her husbands demise.

[maadhav 0]

<< MOSLEMS had the same problem and they solved that by POLYGAMY, having four wives. >>

 

no.

islam recommends to produce a lot of muslims polulation.

children born are forced to accept islam.

wives are the personal properlty of husbands,

and women cannot go to heaven per islam.

 

<< So, Rajputs took an easy route of disposing very attractive very young widows. >>

 

this is misrepresentation of the truth.

 

a hindu woman loves her husband so much that she prefers to not live if he dies. also, she does not want to be a victim of any other person and so she willingly chooses to be sati.

any incidence of forcible sati is adharma.

sati was a social practice.

it is not prescribed by any vedic scripture.

 

anti hindus over an over bring these past malpractices and try to divert our attention from the main issues.

 

some times a gang of anti hindus come and one innocently asks such question, and another answers posing as a hindu and then misrepresents hinduism.

 

never fall in such a trap.

krishna has killed many asuras who came in disguise.

 

also, to say "rajputs are fanatical hindus" is wrong.

they are kshatriyas. some may be imperfect.

none went to forcibly convert any one.

 

they fought the fanatical invaders.

so did the sikhs.

 

[Guest guest]

Suttee has nothing to do with Hinduism. To say “Suttee” is part of Hinduism, is exactly like saying “Salem witch hunt” and “ Spanish killing of Mayans” and “bloody inquisitions” have something to do with the teachings of Jesus Christ.

I am forced to write about this subject since the evangelists like Pat Robertson and his 700 club are still harping on this subject to put down Hindus and Hinduism through out the world.

We cannot ignore these matters. Unless we stand up and explain facts, lies about Hinduism will treated as truth by millions.

One autumn morning in 1939 in Frankfurt, when a small pebble hit one of the glass windows of a beautiful crystal synagogue, every Jew thought it was just a childish prank.

Little the Jews knew then, that the broken glass was the beginning of the eradication of 6 million Jews few months later. Dr Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Propaganda Minister said: “Repeat a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth ...” .

 

So, if lies are not answered, people will treat those lies as truth.

 

SATI or SUTTEE is the most horrendous act of widows killing themselves jumping into the funeral pyre of their dead husbands, sometimes willfully and sometimes forcefully by others. Sati is described as a “Hindu custom in India ” in which the widow was burnt to ashes on her dead husband's pyre.

The heart-rending sight of his sister-in- law’s ‘Suttee’ made the great Hindu reformer Raja Ram Mohan Roy to search every Hindu scripture to see whether there is any statement regarding SUTTEE. He could not find one. That made him fight this injustice to women in some parts of North India.

 

There is not even one scriptural statement concerning Suttee in the four Vedas or in 108 Upanishads, or in 18 major Puranas, or in two epics Ramayana or in Mahabharata .

On the contrary, according to the funeral hymns in RIGVEDA, there is a ceremony of widow sleeping next to the corpse of the dead husband and then being allowed to marry anyone she pleases.

 

1 SUTTEE has nothing to do with the suicidal act of SATI, the consort of Lord Siva. She gave up her life only because of her father King Daksha [one of the 12 Prajapathi's---one of the 12 sons of Lord Brahma--born out of the thumb of Lord Brahma ] did not invite her and her husband Lord Siva for the YAGA [the ritualistic ceremony] and when she went "uninvited" her beloved father King Daksha refused to recognize her.

King Daksha had 100 daughters and SATI was the youngest one. All other daughters married Rishis, whereas SATI married Lord Siva against the wishes of her father.

So it was a “family feud” that resulted in the untimely demise of SATI than the actual act of Suttee.

 

2 RAMAYANA----In the epic Ramayana, after Lord Rama's father king Dasaratha died, none of his three wives [ Kausalya, Sumitra and Kaikeyi ] practiced SUTTEE. In Ramayana, when the monkey-king BALI died, his wife TARA married his brother SUGREEVA. When the demon king RAVANA got killed, his wife MANDODHARI did not kill herself....The act of SUTTEE is seen nowhere in the epic Ramayana.

3 MAHABHARATA---There is not even one act of SUTTEE in the whole epic poem of Mahabharata in which thousands of men got killed in the great battle of Mahabharata. None of the 100 wives of the Kaurava warriors committed Suttee. I challenge every one to show me one incident of SUTTEE or SUTTEE in Hindu scriptures.

 

4 Queen Madri’s death [ King Pandu’s second wife in Mahabharata epic] has nothing to do with Suttee. According to the Mahabharata epic, King Pandu had two wives. The first was Kunti [ Pritha ] and second was Madri.

 

Once king Pandu was hunting in the forest along with MADRI and he saw two antelopes mating. Pandu with an arrow shot the male antelope. Little did Pandu know that those antelopes were actually a saint and his wife. The dying male transformed himself to a saint [ RISHI ] and cursed King Pandu for slaying him during making love. Rishi cursed Pandu that he will die just like him , if he ever make love to his wife.

From that time onwards, King Pandu lived in strict continence like a celibate [ BRAHMACHARI]. But one day, Pandu lost his mind and chased Madri , who fought him from making love. But finally she gave in.

During the intercourse, King Pandu died. Madri felt she was the reason why Pandu lost his life. Out of that guilt & remorse, Madri, jumped into the funeral pyre of her fallen husband. So Madri’s sucide has nothing to do with SUTTEE, since Kunti did not follow Madri and kill herself.

 

5 SUICIDE OF KRISHNA'S 16000 WIVES has nothing to with SUTTEE. All of them were Devatas [ celestial beings ] who came for the exclusive purpose of assisting Lord Krishna to get rid of demons like KAMSA, SISUPALA, DURYODHANA, JARASANDHA etc. They left their bodies as soon as Lord Krishna left his EARTHLY BODY. So too Krishna's brother Balarama who was actually Ananthan - the 1000 headed Serpent bed of Lord Vishnu.

Nobody will say Balarama's death is part of SATI. If so, why they have to state suicide of Krishna's 16000 wives is part of SATI???

 

6 Queen Mandothiri, Ravana's wife did not kill herself when Ravana was killed in the Ramayana epic. Queen Tara, wife of monkey king BALI, did not kill herself when Bali was killed by Lord Rama. Instead she married, Bali’s brother monkey king Sugreeva after the death of Bali.

7 From where did the practice of Suttee come from? Suttee has its roots in Greece. Pyre services similar to Suttee were prevalent among Germans, Slavs and other races besides Greeks. The practice of SUTTEE came to India through KUSHANS in 1 A.D.

 

Columbia Encyclopedia states “ This strange practice of killing a favorite wife on her husband’s grave has been found in many parts of the world; it was followed by such peoples as the Thracians, the Scythians, the ancient Egyptians, the Scandinavians, the Chinese, and peoples of Oceania and Africa.”

 

8 Who practiced Suttee in India ?

It was RAJPUTS, a warrior tribe who were descendants of KUSHANS and who were very fanatic Hindus and who were extremely monogamous who practiced SUTTEE.

 

10 Why did they practice Suttee?

Rajputs were in constant wars within themselves and were also war with Moslems. So there were thousands of young widows and they feared that it is dangerous to have thousands of young, extremely beautiful widows running around and they went were the extreme measure of eliminating them. MOSLEMS had the same problem and they solved that by POLYGAMY, having four wives.

 

11 What happened to the practice of Suttee?

During 1829, British government in India, outlawed SUTTEE as a criminal offense. Suttee was never ever practiced in South India. Copycats appear now and then, but believe me vast majority of people have nothing to do with SUTTEEE.

 

12 Even though Rajputs are Aryans, they only represent a small section of Aryans. Rajputs lived and still live in the Northwestern parts of India. Once upon a time, Rajputs was a very fanatical Hindu tribes who practiced very strict monogamy and at the same time in constant wars with Moslems. Rajputs lost many young men in wars and they had a big population of very young widows.

 

13 Like Rajuputs, Moslems were also in the same plight and to take care of the problem of young widows running around the country, prophet Mohammad encouraged POLYGAMY, in fact FOUR MARRIAGES. That code of allowing men to marry four wives is part of Koran. Unluckily, Hindu codes did not address that issue. So, Rajputs took an easy route of disposing very attractive very young widows.

 

14 According to Hindu theologians sacrifices similar to Suttee was prevalent among some Greek tribes, Germans and Slavs. Many believe that Suttee came to India, when Kushans, a central Asian tribe attacked India in 1 A.D.

 

15 As far as I know, Suttee was never practiced in South India. You may still hear occasional reports of Suttee, that are "copy-cats" trying to bring up that ancient custom for their own personal material needs.

 

Ed Viswanathan www.amiahindu.com

[ajit12 0]

Custom of Widow Burning : Max Muller gives references to the custom of widow burning among Greeks and Sythians. In the book of Peter Mundy, instance has been given of the burning of a widow at Surat in 1630 with a sketch of the burning widow having on her lap the head of her deceased husband. Similarly Barbosa, a Portugese traveller, described the burning of a sati in the Vijay Nagar kingdom. The practice of sati can be derived from ancient Greeks, Germans and other races but confined to princely castes. There is no Vedic passage which can be cited as incontrovertibly referring to widow burning as then current, nor there is any mantra which could be said to have been repeated in very ancient times at such burning nor do the ancient Grihasutras contain any direction prescribing the procedure of widow burning. It appears that the practice started in Brahmanical India a few centuries before Christ. None of the Dharmsastras except Vishnu contain any reference to sati. The Manusmriti is entirely silent about it. It is stated in Strabo (XV.T. 30 and 62 ) that the Greeks under Alexander found sati practised among the Cathaei in Punjab. The Mahabharata is also very sparing in its reference to widow burning. Madri, the favourite wife of Pandu, burnt herself with her husband's body. In the Virataparva, Sairandhri was ordered to be burnt with Kicaka. The Mansala Parva (7.18) says that four wives of Vasudeva, viz Devaki, Bhadra, Rohini and Madira burnt themselves with him and that Rukmini, Gandhari, Saibya, Haimavati, Jambavati among the consorts of Krishna burnt themselves along with his body and other queens like Satyabhama went to a forest for tapa. The Vishnupurana also says that eight queens of Krishna, Rukmini and others, entered into fire on the death of Krishna. It appears that originally this practice was confined to Royal families and great warriors and even in India the cases of widow burning were rare. The text of Usanas says that a brahmana widow should not follow her husband on a separate funeral pyre. In the Ramayana (Uttarakhanda) there is reference to the self immolation of a brahmana woman (the wife of a Brahmarsi and mother of Vedavati, who when molested by Ravana burnt herself in fire). The Mahabharata on the other hand describes Kripi, the wife of Drona, the brahmana commander-in-chief of the Kauravas, appeared with dishevelled hair on the battlefield on the death of her husband, but does not say that she burnt herself. In the Kumarasambhavam (IV. 34) of Kalidasa, Rati, the wife of Kama who was burnt by Shiva, speaks of throwing herself into fire, but was held back by a heavenly voice. The Harsacharita describes how Yasomati, the chief queen of king PrabhakaraVardhana and mother of Harsha, consigned herself to fire when the king was dying. But this is not a proper case of sati, as she burnt herself before her husband died. The Bhagavatpurana (1, 13.57) speaks of Gandhari burning herself on the death of her husband, Dhritrashtra. The Rajatarangini cites at several places (Vol. VI, 107, 195; Vol. VII-103, 478) examples of sati.

 

In various epigraphic records reference is made to the practice of sati among the earliest is the one in 191 of the Gupta-era (510 AD). Even posthumous stone pillar inscription of Goparaja says that his wife accompanied him on the funeral pyre, when he was killed in the battle. There is Nepal inscription of 705 AD, where Rajyavati, widow of Dharmadeva, bids her son Mahadeva to take the reins of government that she may follow her husband; the Belatula inscription of saka 979 says of a sudra woman Dekabbe burnt herself on hearing of her husband's death inspite of strong opposition of her parents who then erected a stone monument of her; a grant was made in saka 1103 to a temple by Sinda Mahamandalesvara Racamalla on a request by two satis, widows of his general Beciraja Cedi; Samvat 919 refers to three queens becoming sati; the Tamara gets inscription of saka 1246 speaking of Manikyadevi as sati on the death of her husband Amana who was an officer of the king Harischandra; Mistra Deoli inscription in Jodhpur say of two queens of Gohila Rana becoming satis; there are records of sati during the period saka 1362 and 1365. Among the well known examples of sati is that of Ramabai wife of Peshwa Madhavrao 1, in 1772 A.D. The Jauhar practised by the Rajput ladies of Chittor and other unspeakable atrocities at the hands of the victorious Muslims are too well known. The Rajatarangini VII 481 narrates how when the queen of king Ananta became a sati on her husband's death. Sati was not imposed, somehow grew and it is absolutely incorrect to say that it was imposed by men on women.

 

9. Practice of Sati : Then circumstances were different, the situations were different and there might be reasons also. The Sati practice might have been because of some sentiments, totally different suited to the circumstances then. It was confined to kings and warriors, because the wives of conquered kings and warriors were most miserable, which applied not only to India but also to the kingdom in other countries too. Vengeance for the truculence of their husbands was wrecked on the wives by carrying them as captives and making them to work as slaves. When queen Yasomati narrates to her son Harsha, the great honour and glory that was during the reign of her husband, king Prabhakaravardhana. There, apart the honour that the wives of the kings and the warriors were having during the lifetime of their husbands, would not have continued after the death of their husbands, even in their own kingdom. From kings the practice spread among brahmanas and others. Though several Smritikaras disapproved such a practice, but once it took the root, the learned commentators and digest writers were found to support it with arguments of heavenly abode, devotion to her husband to be praised by heavenly damsels, that as long as a woman does not burn herself in fire on the death of her husband she is never free from being born as a woman. Harita says, "that woman who follows her husband in death purifies three families, viz, of her mother, of her father and of her husband". The Mit after quoting the above, adds that this duty of anvarothana is common to the woman of all castes from the brahmans to the chandala, provided they are not pregnant or they have no young children at the time of death of her husband. Medhatiti on Manu 157, is there amongst who opposed to such a practice and termed it as suicide and was forbidden for woman. Vedas, Jamini, Angris, Mit and Yas said that such a practice to be adharma and opposed to Vedic text. Those who supported their idea, say the purposes and objects which were different. They were concerned about well being of a woman after the death of the husband, where there was none to look after her. Only to make the women to accept it, religious sanction was given by some of the Smiritkaras.

 

Apastamba verse prescribes the Prajapatya penance for a woman who having first resolved to burn herself on the funeral pyre turns back from it at the last moment. The Rajatarangini (VI 196) refers to a queen who having pretended to have resolved on becoming sati ultimately regretted the step and turned back.

 

From the accounts of travellers and others it appears that widow burning prevailed more in Bengal during the centuries immediately preceding its abolition than anywhere else in India. Even in Bengal the number of satis must never have been very large. Cole Brooke wrote in 1795 A.D., that the martyr of this superstition have never been numerous. The people also were never keen on observing the practice nor had they any deep seated conviction about its absolute religious necessity. But in some parts of Rajasthan it is still in vogue. There are who express admiration and reverence for the so called courage of women in becoming sati or performing the jauhar for cherishing their ideals of womanly conduct. But such admiration is false which in reality is the instance of subjugation of women by the men.

 

A woman who commits sati is traditionally glorified and immortalised. Temples are constructed as memorials and the "Sati Mata" is worshipped as a deity. She is supposed to have the powers of a goddess. The "Sati-sthal" or the place where a woman was supposed to have immortalised herself as a "sati" attracts a large number of "devotees" every year. It is said, there are still around 130 Sati temples in India and nearly half of them are in Rajasthan. It is not true that only from amongst the poor rural class, women are forced or allured or made to surrender to become Sati. The Deorala incident proves that even women with awareness and alternative life chances can be driven to this act. Roop Kanwar belonged to a comparatively educated family and many of the supporters happened to be from literate section. There apart, its politicisation and commercial vibrants attached to it, has overtaken its religious significance so propagated, which is the danger-signal to the social order. Commercial and political interests have over-shadowed whatever religious belief if at all was there. It will not be too much to say that such are the person, and interests intentionally giving it a deep colour of religion. The law prohibiting Sati was promulgated 150 years ago, but the recent Deorala incident giving nation-wide publicity to it, have put even the law makers and protectors of law to suspect. It is an assault on the dignity of women.