Sati-History & Now

SATI -
HISTORY &
NOW
This Booklet contains articles related to Sati contributed
to Indiafacts.org by various scholars.
© Copyright belongs to respective authors.

CONTENTS :-
1. Revisiting Sati: Understanding the practice from a
Dharmic perspective by Nithin Sridhar
2. Voluntary death in Sanatana Dharma by Dr Sammod

Acharya
3. The Battle over Historical Narratives of Chittor

by Sreejit Datta
4. Jauhar-Shaka: When The Enemy Was At The Gate

by Sahana Singh
5. Book Review: Sati by Abhinav Agarwal
6. Sati: Re-examining the Historical Evidence from

1900BCE to 1900CE by Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay
7. Missionaries and the debate on Sati in Colonial India

by Meenakshi Jain
8. Sati and Atrocity Narrative for the Civilizing Mission

by Sankrant Sanu
Revisiting Sati: Understanding the practice from a Dharmic
perspective
indiafacts.org /sati-dharmic-perspective/
Sati or “Widow-burning” as it is pejoratively called in the Colonial and Post-Colonial media and literature, has
remained one of the most controversial issues even today, though historically the practice had always been very
rare and sporadic. It has been routinely described as “ regressive” and violent practice. When the case of 18-year
old Roop Kanwar committing Sati in Deorala village had come to light in 1987, a team of Women and Media
Committee that had visited the site described the practice as the “most violent of patriarchal practices[1]” and had
held the “union of religion, commerce, and patriarchy[2]” as the cause behind the incident. Sati has also been used
as a convenient tool by inimical forces to dismantle various Hindu practices. While during the Colonial period, “the
sati issue was the most forceful created by the Evangelical-Utilitarian alliance to validate British rule in India[3]”,
even after independence, reformists and feminists, especially those leaning to the left have used Sati and Sati
reforms as a parallel in their own fights against what they perceive as “regressive practices” still prevalent in
Hinduism (Ex: Made Snana, Bettale Seve).
To this politicization of the practice of Sati, except for the excellent study by Meenakshi Jain, the Hindu response
has been feeble. Jain provides an authentic account of the historical practice of Sati and shows how the
missionary-British nexus inflated the number of incidents to horrific levels, while the recorded incidents on the
ground throughout the history has been rare and uncommon. But, her work does not examine the merits and
demerits of the practice itself or about its place or relevance in Hinduism. On this front, the Hindu response has
been varied, but weak, marred in confusion. While some confuse and conflate Sati with Jauhar, others argue that
Sati is not sanctioned in Hinduism. Many modern commentators also triumphantly note how Hindus have reformed
their religion and got rid of regressive practices.
What is missing in the contemporary narrative about Sati is an examination of the tenets of the practice (and not
just the historical context) on its own basis. To do this, we must first locate the place of Sati in the Dharmic
worldview and then analyze the practice and its validity from a Dharmic perspective. Since, “Dharmo viśvasya
jagataḥ pratiṣṭhā[4]” has served as the foundational principle of Hindu worldview and Dharma itself has been
conceived as facilitating each individual to his/her material welfare and spiritual fulfillment[5], it is imperative to
examine Sati, a practice which arose in the Hindu Dharmic tradition, in relation to Dharma, so as to arrive at a
correct understanding of the practice that is dispassionate and free from prejudice. In this article, one such attempt
1/22
is being made by examining how the Dharmashastra tradition has handled the subject of Sati.
Sati, an incorrect name

The Colonial, as well as contemporary literature refers to the practice of a widow mounting the funeral pyre of her
dead husband and burning with him as either widow-burning or as Sati (Suttee, is also used). There are serious
issues with the usage of both these terms.
While the term “widow-burning” carries a lot of colonial baggage and clearly an underlying insinuation that widows
were coerced or forcibly burned by others (relatives and community people), an assumption that is neither attested
by history[6] nor by tradition; the term “Sati” is not without its own issues either.
Devi Sati. Source: hindupad.com
Sati derives from the word “Sat” which has a variety of meanings, including truth, goodness, and virtue. The term,
which originally referred to Goddess Sati, the wife of Bhagavan Shiva, who immolated herself in the Yajna as a
protest against the insult of her husband by her father Daksha, has been used throughout the tradition as a
reference to women who are very loving and devoted to their husbands. Sati has also been understood as a
synonym of Pativrata- women who consider husbands as Guru and devotion to their husband (by way of helping
and walking side by side with him) as a Tapasya (spiritual austerity). For Satis, then their husbands represented
the means to attain Sat- Ultimate Truth or Moksha. As Manu Smriti (2.67) notes for wives, serving husbands is itself
staying and serving the Guru and household activities are themselves Yajnas, i.e. women who are homemakers
derive the same spiritual benefit from doing their work as the men derive from performing Yajna, etc. In other
words, Sati does not refer to any ritual or rite, but simply to women who have chosen devotion to husband and the
responsibilities of Grihasta-ashrama as the means for spiritual emancipation. For this reason, we do not find any
Dharmashastras referring to the ritual of self-immolation by devoted widows as Sati.
Instead, the Dharmashastras use a number of terms to refer to the ritual: “anugamana” (‘going after’),
2/22
“sahagamana” (‘going with’), “anumarana” (‘dying after), “sahamarana” (‘dying with’), and “anvarohana” (‘mounting
after). Even in popular usages, when the ritual is referred to as “satidaha”, “satipratha” or “sativrata”, the term Sati
refers to the devoted wife, while the suffix describes the ritual aspect. Arvind Sharma notes that while Sahamarana
(and hence Sahagamana) refers to the case of concremation, Anumarana (and hence Anugamana) refers to
immolation of the widow after the dead husband’s cremation[7]. PV Kane writes: “The burning of a widow on the
death of her husband is called sahamarana or sahagamana or anvarohana (when she ascends the funeral pyre of
her husband and is burnt along with his corpse), but anumarana occurs when, after her husband is cremated
elsewhere and she learns of his death, the widow resolves upon death and is burnt with the husband’s ashes or
his padukas (sandals) or even without any memento of his if none be available[8].”
Keeping with the spirit of this article as well as the correct usage in mind, from here onwards, while we have
completely avoided the usage of terms like Sati or Widow-burning, the term “anugamana” have been used
throughout as a single term to refer to both concremation and immolation after husband’s cremation, for the sake
of easy understanding (except where such a difference is necessary to be pointed).
Anugamana as a Dharmically legitimate practice

Hindu tradition posits Moksha or liberation from the bondage of karmic cycle of birth and death as the ultimate goal
of life. Though Moksha is the ultimate goal, Hindu tradition recognizes that not all have the ability to attain Moksha
in a particular life. This is so because, to attain Moksha, one must first have attained dispassion and a condition of
desirelessness towards worldly pleasures. Since, most people are under the influence of all kinds of worldly
desires, which could be broadly divided into Artha (material prosperity) and Kama (material pleasures), the Hindu
texts posit Dharma as another Purushartha, which, while facilitating one to fulfill Artha and Kama in a measured
restrained manner, also helps one to slowly move from a state of desire to a state of dispassion i.e. towards
Moksha. These two paths, the path of dispassion and the path of measured action are respectively called as
Nivritti and Pravritti path.
While the path of Nivritti is the path of Sannyasa or renunciation, the path of Pravritti is the path of Grihasta or the
householder into which men and women enter through marriage so as to fulfill their worldly desires through
Dharmic action. Vivaha is a Samskara, a purification ritual which makes a couple fit to enter Grihasta Ashrama to
pursue Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha together as one. It is a sacred bond, a commitment to pursue righteous
desires so as to slowly walk towards Moksha. It is in the context of this all important Grihasta stage and the
aftermath when one of the spouse pass away, that we must locate and understand the practice of Anugamana.
Passing away of a spouse implies that the living spouse can no longer practice his Grihasta Dharma to attain
Purusharthas. This means, one becomes Anashrami i.e. one without an ashrama, which is unhelpful to a person,
since, Vishesha Dharma, or the righteous duties as contextualized to a specific individual is always defined with
reference to varna and ashrama, and without an ashrama, one is unable to perform Dharma and hence will neither
attain material welfare nor gain spiritual merit. It is for this reason, the state of “anashrama” is condemned in the
Dharmashastras[9]. To remedy this, then the living spouse must adopt one of the ashramas and come out of the
state of Anashrama. Dharmashastras provide a number of ways this could be accomplished.
For a widower, at least four different options are suggested in the Dharmashastras. While Yajnavalkya Smriti (1.89)
suggests the widower to take another wife without delay and rekindle a new fire (for religious Yajnas), texts like
Baudhayana Dharmasutra (2.17.4) suggests one to renounce the world and become a Sannyasi. He may also
rekindle the fire with a ‘substitute wife[10]’ made of gold or Kusha grass (Aitereya Brahmana 32.8;
Trikandamandana 2.8) and thus enter Grihasta Ashrama symbolically and continue his duties, or he may rekindle
the fire alone for himself[11] (Trikandamandana 3.128) and taking Shraddha (faith/conviction) as his ‘substitute
wife’ may perform agnihotra etc. similar to those who remain unmarried (Naishtika Brahmachari). Thus, the four
options for the widower are: remarriage, renunciation, taking a substitute wife in the form of statue made of gold or
kusha grass for ritual purposes, staying as Apatnika by rekindling the sacrificial fire for oneself alone.
While a widower enters Sannyasa ashrama by renouncing his desires and attachment to the worldly objects, he
enters Grihasta Ashrama in case of a remarriage or rekindling of fire with a substitute wife made of Kusha grass or
gold. He enters an ashrama similar to Naishtika Brahmachari by rekindling the fire for himself alone. This path
could be understood as a widower counterpart of Vidwavrata or practices associated with widowhood prescribed
3/22
for widows. Also important to note is that while by entering Sannyasa or by remarrying a new woman, a widower
cuts off his Karmic connections[12] to his dead wife, he retains this connection and even reinforces it, in case he
chooses the other two options.
For a widow, on the other hand, Dharmashastras prescribe three different paths: Anugamana, Vidwavrata, and
Punar-vivaaha[13]. While texts like Parashara Smriti (4.28-30) mention all the three paths, other texts mention only
one or two options. For example, while Manu Smriti (5.165-168) makes elaborate discussion about importance of
Vidwavrata and Daksha Smriti (4.18-19) notes about the glory of Sahagamana, Vyasa Smriti (2.52) mentions both
Anugamana and Vidwavrata. Apart from Parashara Smriti, Daksha Smriti and Vyasa Smriti, we have a number of
other texts which also make explicit mention about Anugamana. Vishnu Dharmasutra (25.14) says a widow should
either practice brahmacharyam or ascend the pyre. Stridharmapaddhatti of Tryambakayajvan cites two verses,
one from Sankha Smriti and one from Skanda Purana (3.2.7.52). Sankha Smriti notes that a widow who opts for
Anugamana is glorified in heaven as one who is equal to Arundhati. Skanda Purana gives a sloka which blesses a
woman saying may she accompany her husband in life and death and Tryambakayajvan opines that this must be
recited during the marriage ceremony. There are a number of other verses either in the available Smritis or
Itihasas-Puranas[14] or as citations by later day authors of Dharmashastras, which speak of Anugamana as a
Dharmically legitimate practice.
While remarriage is the common path suggested for both widows and widowers, Anugamana and rekindling the
Grihasta fire with a substitute wife made of gold or Kusha grass are exclusively prescribed for widow and widower
respectively. The path of Vidwavrata suggested for a widow shares elements with both Sannyasa and Apatnikas,
who rekindle the fire for themselves alone. Anugamana, in fact, can be understood as the female counterpart of
the male practice of using a substitute wife[15]. To understand this, we must return back to the basic tenets of
Grihasta-ashrama.
Vivaha, as noted before, is a sacred bond, a relationship into which the husband and wife enter so as to pursue
the Purusharthas together. Though the goal pursued is same, the roles played by each person in the couple are
different. While the man plays the role of husband and a father, the woman plays the role of a wife and a mother.
While the husband takes the role of Yajamana, the conductor of the rituals and other Dharmic duties, the wife takes
up the role of Saha-dharmacharini, one who accompanies the husband in fulfillment of Dharmic duties. A virtuous
wife is, in fact, identified with the sacred fires of the house itself[16]. That is, the role played by the wife is like that
of the sacred fire: the role of a facilitator. She facilitates her husband to fulfill his Dharmic duties and hence
described as “saha-dharmacharini” and without whom a Grihasta man cannot perform any Dharmic rituals or
duties. That is, the husband is the performer of the Dharmic duties using Yajnas, etc. with the support, help and
company of his wife. On the other hand, for the wife, facilitating the husband in the accomplishment of the Dharmic
duties is itself the Dharmic duty and a means for her overall emancipation. It is for this reason, the texts note how
the half of Dharmic merit of all the actions of the husband automatically becomes transferred to the wife. That is,
the husband himself becomes the direct means for accomplishing all the purusharthas for women. In other words,
while for the husband a number of Grihastaashrama duties have been prescribed based on his location, condition,
varna, etc., as a means for attaining purusharthas; for the wife, facilitating the husband in pursuit of these
purusharthas itself is the duty or dharma prescribed and in this way, both attain all the purusharthas together.
4/22
Procession of a Suttee Woman. Source: Wikipedia
With this background, let us look into Anugamana prescribed for widows and the substitute wife made of
gold/Kusha grass prescribed for widowers. Since, for performing his Grihasta duties, a man requires a wife by his
side, a widower has been advised to create a wife in gold or Kusha grass to not only act as a substitute for the
departed wife, but also act as a representation or an image of the departed wife in the physical world. Just as
Rama kept a golden idol of Sita not only as a substitute for the real Sita, who was in the forest (after being sent
away there by Rama), but also as the very image or a representation of the Sita herself. Thus, by choosing this
path, a widower will continue to perform his Grihasta duties as if his wife was still alive and as a result, both he
and his departed wife will get the full merit of all Dharmic actions performed by the widower. On the other hand, a
widow is not given this option to rekindle the fire with a substitute husband, because performing the Yajnas and
other such Dharmic duties were never her Dharmic duty and to expect her to suddenly do it is not only unfair to her
but is also impractical. She is instead given the option to choose Anugamana, by which she can continue to stay
with her husband in heaven (Parashara Smriti 4.28-30) and then return back to physical life with the same husband
and/or attain Moksha. By opting for Anugamana, she would continue to be with her husband and accompany him
in all his actions, thereby fulfilling her own Dharmic duties. Anugamana, thus forms the widow counterpart of
widower’s path of using substitute wife made of gold or Kusha grass, since both these paths facilitate the
performers to reinforce the sacred bond with their spouses and continue to practice their Grihasta duties.
Vidhwavrata, on the other hand, takes on elements from both Sannyasa and Apatnika paths of the widowers.
Apatnikas are those who do not have dispassion and hence cannot take Sannyasa, but because of their love and
attachment to their departed wives, they cannot even remarry. Either due to sorrow at the loss of the wife or due to
desire to enter a Vanaprasta-like stage, the widower chooses the Apatnika path and practices Agnihotra etc. and
lives a highly restrained life by cherishing the memory of the departed wife. Similarly, widows undertaking the vows
of widowhood or Vidwavrata, lead a celibate life cherishing the memory of the departed husband. As Manu Smriti
(5.160) notes widows who opt for vows of widowhood, even if without sons would attend heaven just like the
5/22
Brahmacharis. Widowhood also involves withdrawal from sensory-gratifications like in Sannyasa. Manu Smriti
(5.157-158) notes that they should practice austerity by sustaining on only flowers, fruits and roots. They should be
self-controlled and chaste.
Thus, though four options for widowers and only three options for widows are mentioned in the Shastras, we can
see how the three itself sufficiently plays the role of four with respect to widows. But, it is important to note that the
entire discussion, though usually applied to all women or all wives, their specific audience is actually the women
who are called Sadyovadhu. Shastras broadly divide women based on their inner temperaments into
Brahmavadinis and Sadyovadhu[17]. Brahmavadinis refer to those with intense desire and a competency for Vedic
learning. They undergo Upanayana and are entitled to study of Vedas and the performance of Vaidika Karmas, or
even take up Sannyasa, just like the menfolk. Sadyovadhu, on the other hand, do not have the desire or aptitude
for Vedic learning. They are more worldly-oriented with a focus on arts, science, family, career, etc. For them,
marriage itself plays the role of Upanayana and supporting and facilitating the husband in his Dharmic duties itself
forms the Dharmic duty. As Manu Smriti (2.67) notes, for such women, “The nuptial ceremony is stated to be the
Vedic sacrament… serving the husband (equivalent to) the residence in (the house of the) teacher, and the
household duties (the same) as the (daily) worship of the sacred fire.” That is, in the case of Sadyovadhu, the
husband and wife also share a relationship of the Guru-Shishya. This also explains why for such Sadyovadhu,
Pati-vrata-dharma or Sati-dharma i.e. dedication to one’s husband (i.e. husband himself) is prescribed as the
means for overall welfare. Just as for Brahmachari boys, it is taught that the Guru is the guide and Gurubhakti is
the means for attaining Moksha, with husband donning the role of Guru in the case of Sadyovadhu, Pativratya
dharma becomes the means for attaining Moksha.
It is, thus, important to note that the entire discussion in the Dharmashastras about the life-paths that could be
chosen by women and the enunciation of the three Dharmically legitimate path, including Anugamana, is a
discussion specifically applicable to Sadyovadini women. But, since, the number of women who were
Brahmavadinis were always very minuscule compared to Sadyovadhus, and this is especially so in Kaliyuga, most
of the Dharmashastras while making a reference to Streedharma almost always speaks about Sadyovadhu, as if it
is applicable to all women.
Eligibility for performing Anugamana

As noted in the previous section, Anugamana is prescribed only for a Pativrata Stree[18], since she alone has
chosen a lifestyle where the husband is the Guru and the means for overall wellbeing — material and spiritual.
Harita, in fact, says: “A woman should be known as a pativrata, if she is pained when her husband is pained,
rejoices when he’s happy, becomes wretched and emaciated when he’s gone abroad, and dies when he dies[19].”
Though, it may appear as if Harita is defining Pativrata as one who undergoes Anugamana or that Anugamana is
mandatory, Madanaparijata, which quotes this verse enters into a detailed discussion clarifying how these two
conclusions are wrong. Madanaparijata notes that since, Manu and others give alternate options like Vidwavrata
for a Patrivrata widow, saying Anugamana is mandatory is incorrect. Madanaparijata then quotes Manu Smriti
(5.160), which says: “A virtuous wife (Sadhvi) who after the death of her husband constantly remains chaste,
reaches heaven, though she have no son, just like those chaste men” and Mahabharata (12.144.9-10), which
says: “The pativrata entered the blazing fire. There she followed her husband, who wore colorful arm-bracelets ”,
showing how “Patrivrata” alone is eligible for either Vidwavrata or Anugamana. Hence, Harita’s opinion must only
be understood as eulogization of the qualities of Patrivrata Stree.
In any case, not all Pativrata Stree’s are eligible for Anugamana either. Vijnanesvara, the author of Mitakshara, the
famous commentary on Yajnavalkya smriti notes: “And all of this constitutes the universal Law for all women right
down to Candalas, provided that they are not pregnant and do not have young children (Mitakshara 1.86)[20].”
Similarly, Madhavacharya in his commentary on Parashara Smriti (4.31), cites two scriptural authorities[21]: “A
woman who has young children should not depart, thereby forsaking raising her young children; nor should a
woman who is menstruating or has just given birth; and a pregnant woman should protect her fetus”; and “O
beautiful princess, women do not ascend the funeral pyre when they have young children, when they are pregnant,
when their menses have failed to appear at the regular time, and while they are menstruating.”
That is, devoted wives, who are pregnant, who are menstruating, and who did not menstruate on their expected
date (indicating a possibility of a pregnancy) and those who have young children that need to be taken care of are
6/22
not eligible for Anugamana. Madhavacharya, though, qualifies the last of the criteria by saying that if the mother
can make arrangement for proper guardians to take care of the young children, then they can opt for Anugamana.
It is interesting to note that this was what Maadri did in Mahabharata and it was Kunti who took care of all the
children including two of Maadri’s sons.
A Hindu widow performing Sati. Depiction by William Frederick Martyn, from The Geographical Magazine. Source: Wikipedia
Then, there are a number of verses, which apparently prohibit the practice for the Brahmana widows. The two
popular verses cited are ascribed to Paithinasi and Angirasa. Paithinasi notes: “Due to Vedic injunction a Brahmin
woman should not follow her husband in death, but for the other social classes tradition holds this to be the
supreme dharma of Women[22]”. Angirasa notes: “ When a woman of Brahmin caste follows her husband in death,
by killing herself she leads neither herself nor her husband to heaven[23].” But, what is interesting to note is, while
Paithanasi refers to the practice by the “mrtanugamana”, Angirasa calls it “patim anuvrajet”—both meaning she
who commits self-immolation after her dead husband’s body has been burned on the pyre. Thus, the
Dharmashastra writers starting from Vijnaneshwara to Aparaarka and Madanapala, all have taken the verse to
mean a prohibition of only the Anugamana (immolation of the widow on a separate pyre after the husband has
been cremated) and not a prohibition of Sahagamana, wherein the widow is immolated together with her husband.
To substantiate this stand, they even quote another smriti text by Ushanas, which notes: “A Brahmin woman ought
not to depart by ascending a separate pyre, yet for other women tradition holds this to be the supreme dharma of
Women[24]”. In short, while non-Brahmana Pativrata women are eligible for both Anugamana and Sahagamana,
Brahmana women are eligible only for Sahagamana[25].
Nirnayasindhu of Kamalakara Bhatta and Dharmasindhu by Kashinath Upadhyaya, two important digests on
Dharma composed during the medieval period, further note that the wives of husbands who died either for the sake
7/22
of penance or were Dharmically fallen, should not perform Anugamana[26]. Dharmasindhu also notes that women
who have committed adultery, who have been negatively disposed towards their husbands while they were alive
do not have eligibility for this practice[27].
To summarize, the eligibility criteria for performing Anugamana includes:
1. The widow must be a Patrivrata

2. Such Pativrata widow must neither be pregnant, nor have young children, nor is menstruating at the time,
nor have missed their most recent monthly period.
3. The husband must not have been an Adharmic and hence fallen person, nor must he have died for the sake
of penance for his Adharmas.
4. Wives who have been negatively disposed towards husbands when they were alive are also ineligible to
undertake the practice.
5. While all are entitled for Sahagamana, Brahmana widows are not entitled for Anugamana (except under
certain circumstances. Refer Endnote: 25)
Anugamana as an optional practice, an expression of love and commitment

If there is one element regarding Anugamana on which all Dharmashastra writers agree, then it is that it is an
optional practice. In Hindu tradition, Dharmic actions are divided into three categories: Nitya, Naimittika, and
Kamya. Nitya refers to those activities, which ought to be performed daily. Naimittika refers to those that must be
performed on particular occasions. Kamya, on the other hand, are those actions that are performed out of desire to
attain the particular fruits that result from those actions. By definition, then, Nitya and Naimittika are obligatory
Dharmic duties, while Kamya is an optional practice, performed only by those desiring a particular fruit. Starting
from Aparaarka, the commentator on Yajnavalkya Smriti, who explicitly mentions “anvarohanam ca kamyatvad
anityam” i.e. “Since, anvarohana is optional, it is not obligatory[28]” to later day commentators and writers of
Dharmashastra up to as recent as Tryambakayajvan, who lived in 17th-18 th century, all have clearly noted how the
practice is optional. Dharmasindhu, further, notes that Anugamana can be done either as a Sakaama practice or
as a Nishkaama practice[29]. In fact, the non-obligatory nature could be seen in the Smritis themselves, which
advice, different options available for a widow.
If it be asked, why Anugamana has been made optional, it is because the act involves so much courage and
sacrifice that only a truly dedicated wife who feels she cannot remain separated from her husband even for a
moment, can undertake such a ritual. A verse from Brahma Purana quoted by Aparaarka, one of the commentator
on Yajnavalkya Smriti, states: “There is no other recourse (than sahagamana) for a good woman when her
husband dies, (for) there is no other way to extinguish the burning pain of being separated from her husband[30].”
Anugamana, thus, is an expression of extreme love and commitment of the women towards their husbands. It is for
this reason that Parashara Smriti (4.29-31) notes that such women will dwell in heaven with their husbands for
“three and a half crores (in years) or however many hairs are on a human body—for that long a time (in years)”.
This is not to suggest that widows who choose Vidwavrata, the other option available for pativratas, are less
dedicated to their husbands, for Parashara notes that even they attain heaven; but the courage and commitment
required to voluntarily embrace death by burning is so huge that they attain superior result as far as being together
with the husbands in heaven is considered.
Thus, the correct way to understand Anugamana is that it is a Dharmically legitimate optional practice, voluntarily
entered by women as an expression of their love and dedication towards their departed husbands. It is, in fact, an
exertion of freewill by women who display extreme courage, commitment and sacrifice by choosing this path.
The Ritual Procedure of Anugamana

PV Kane in his History of Dharmashastras notes the procedure involved in the ritual of Anugamana, as mentioned
in the medieval text Shuddhitattva of Raghunanda, thus: “The Suddhitattva sets out the procedure of widow
burning. The widow bathes and puts on two white garments, takes kusha blades in her hands, faces the east or
north, performs acamana (sipping water); when the brahmanas say ‘om, tat sat’ she remembers the God Narayana
8/22
and refers to the time (month, fortnight, tithi) and then makes the samkalpa (declaration of resolve) set out below.
She then calls upon the eight lokapalas (guardians of the quarters), the sun, the moon, the fire &c. to become
witnesses to her act of following her husband on the funeral pyre, she then goes round the fire thrice, then the
brahmaṇa recites the Vedic verse ‘ima narlr'(Rg.X.18.7) and a Purana verse ‘may these very good and holy
women who are devoted to their husbands enter fire together with the body of the husband’, the woman utters
‘namo namah’ and ascends the kindled pyre.”
Slightly different procedures can be seen in texts like Dharmasindhu and Nirnayasindhu. However, if the widow,
after thus ascending the pyre, becomes afraid or loses her resolve to continue or simply does not wish to continue
with the ritual, the texts note that one of her relatives must make her to get up and come down from the pyre.
Aparaarka (1.87), for example, notes: “However, they say that if a woman (who is to perform anugamana) has a
desire for sons or for the world of the living, her husband’s younger brother or the like should cause her to get up
(from her husband’s pyre)[31].” Similarly, Dharmasindhu notes: “(if) the woman (who is to perform anugamana)
becomes afraid, either her husband’s younger brother or one of his students should cause her to get up (from the
pyre) with the two verses beginning, ‘Rise…’ (RV 10.18.8-9)[32].” Apastamba, in fact, prescribes a Prajapatya
penance for a widow who after deciding to perform anugamana and making a Sankalpa towards this, turns back
from it at the last moment[33]. That anugamana is an optional nature of the practice, with the entire decision-
making to whether to perform this ritual or not being in the hands of the women clearly comes out in the ritual
procedure itself, which gives an option for the widows involves to opt out until the last moment.
Suttee by James Atkinson, 1831, in the India Office Collection of the British Library (c)
British Library Board 2009. Source: kashgar.com.au
Opposition to Anugamana and its refutation in Dharmashastra tradition

While the contemporary narrative on Anugamana assumes that the Hindu tradition had a monolithic straightjacket
view of the practice, an examination of the Dharmashastra tradition, however, reveals that there was a lively
discussion throughout history among pandits, vidwans, authors, and commentators of Dharmashastras with both
pros and cons of Anugamana being examined in minute detail. As David Brick rightly notes: “Dharmasastric
9/22
writings… provide clear testimony of a long, intricate, and pan-Indian debate on its very validity[34].”
One of the strongest voices within the Dharmashastra tradition who has put forward a number of objections to
Anugamana is Medhatithi, the famous commentator on Manu Smriti who probably lived around 9th-10 th century CE
in Kashmir. In his commentary on the verse 5.155, he raises following objections to anugamana[35]:
1. That it is a form of Suicide and suicide is prohibited for both men and women.
2. That it goes against the Sruti statements like “Therefore, one should not depart before one’s natural
lifespan” (Shatapatha Brahmana 10.2.6.7), which prohibit suicide.
3. As a corollary from above, it is implied, though not explicitly stated by Medhatithi, that Anugamana has no
sanction (owing to no positive mention) in Sruti.
4. That the Smriti prescriptions regarding Anugamana must be taken to be of the same category as those
regarding Syena Sacrifice, wherein it is simply a statement about the fruits begotten from its performance
and not a prescription about the Dharmic status of the performance. In fact, like Syena Sacrifice, whose end
result is death of the enemies and hence considered Adharma, Anugamana is Adharma.
Anugamana vs. Syena Sacrifice
Let us first look at the last of these arguments regarding the comparison of Anugamana with Syena sacrifice.
Explaining the arguments put forward by Medhatithi, David Brick writes: “First, he argues that the practice is
adharmic, because it is analogous to the syena sacrifice, a Vedic ritual whose explicit result is the death of the
sacrificer’s enemies. According to the traditional interpretation given by Sahara in his commentary on
Purvamimamsa Sutra 1.1.2, the performance of the syena sacrifice is not in conformity with dharma, since there is
a general prohibition against violence. The Veda simply states that if a person wants to kill his enemies, the syena
sacrifice is one means of accomplishing his goal. It does not, however, enjoin the killing of one’s enemies, so there
is no specific injunction that would override the general prohibition against violence. Using the analogy of this
sacrifice, Medhatithi argues that smrtis like that of Angiras do not actually enjoin sahagamana, because they
explicitly mention its result, namely, heaven. They only state that if a widow wants to be reborn in heaven,
sahagamana is one possible means. Thus, as in the case of the syena sacrifice, the general prohibition against
violence still applies[36].”
But, this equation of Anugamana with Syena Sacrifice was severely criticized by Vijnaneshwara, the famous
commentator on Yajnavalkya Smriti, who lived in 12th century CE. He instead provided two different refutations of
Medhatithi’s position showing how Anugamana is dissimilar to Syena Sacrifice, on the one hand, and how it is
instead quite similar to Agnisomiya rite involving animal sacrifice, which is a Dharmic activity, on the other.
Summarizing the first argument forwarded by Vijnaneshwara, Brick writes: “In outline, the first argument he
presents goes as follows: A) There is a general prohibition against violence. B) The syena sacrifice involves
violence, since its outcome is the death of one’s enemies. C) Only a specific injunction stating that one should kill
one’s enemies could override the general prohibition, but no such injunction exists. Therefore, D) the syena
sacrifice is prohibited by the sastras. Vijnanesvara holds that part C) of this argument does not apply in the case of
sahagamana, since this practice is actually enjoined in the sastra. He points out that unlike the syena sacrifice,
which results in violence, a prohibited outcome, sahagamana results in heavenly rebirth, a permissible outcome.
The syena sacrifice is prohibited, because its violence is its result and its result is not enjoined. In other words, it is
prohibited because the sastras never state that a person should kill his enemies and this is the violent part of the
sacrifice. By contrast, the violence of the sahagamana rite (i.e., the widow’s suicide) is enjoined, as a means to
rebirth in heaven, and although the sastras may not specifically enjoin rebirth in heaven, they certainly do not
prohibit it. Vijnanesvara adds that sahagamana should instead be treated like the agnisomiya rite, which both
involves violence to living beings (animals) and leads to a permissible outcome. Since the agnisomiya rite is
permitted, sahagamana should be as well[37].”
The second argument forwarded by Vijnaneshwara was even more thorough, though more complex as well, and
hence beyond the scope of this article. It is suffice to say that Vijnaneshwara’s refutation of Medhatithi and his
establishing of the dissimilarity between Anugamana and Syena sacrifice was so thorough that Vijnaneshwara’s
word became the last word[38] on this issue in the Dharmashastra tradition.
10/22
Is Anugamana against Sruti?
Now let us take Medhatithi’s argument that Anugamana is analogous to Suicide and hence prohibited by the
statement in Shatapatha Brahmana (10.2.6.7): “Therefore, one should not depart before one’s natural lifespan”.
Regarding this, Aparaarka, another famous 12 th century CE commentator on Yajnavalkya Smriti, writes thus: “ And
it should not be objected that the smrti passages that enjoin sahagamana are in conflict with the following sruti
passage: ‘Therefore, one who desires heaven should not depart before one’s lifespan.’ The reason for this is that
they have different spheres of applicability: sruti prohibits dying by one’s own desire in general, but smrti enjoins
the particular method of dying that is entering the fire when one’s husband has died. Hence, there is no conflict, for
they have different spheres of applicability. Likewise, there is no conflict with (other) sruti passages that have
general spheres of applicability, such as ‘Desiring heaven, one should sacrifice’ and ‘One should perform the
Agnihotra rite as long as one lives’[39].” Madhavacharya, the celebrated commentator on Parashara Smriti, puts
forward a similar argument and notes how “the smrti enjoining sahagamana is of greater force, as these Vedic
texts do not apply here. Instead, the Vedic texts that prohibit suicide apply only to people other than women that
desire heaven[40].”
The gist of the argument forwarded by Aparaarka, Madhavacharya and others is that since the Sruti passage cited
by Medhatithi is of general application and the smriti passage gives a specific instruction, the latter overrides the
former in that specific case, as per the hermeneutic principles of Mimamsa. An example that can clearly illustrate
this is the case of Ahimsa. Ahimsa or non-injury is upheld as highest Dharma. It is one of the Samanya Dharma or
common duties of all people. Yet, Kshatriyas, who have the duty to protect the people and the nation are allowed
by Vishesha Dharma-special duties to use force and violence in the form of punishment and war to fulfill their
obligations to the society. Similarly, though suicide in general is prohibited by the Shatapatha Brahmana and similar
texts, their fields of applicability are general. There are no specific prohibitions in the Sruti or Smriti regarding
Anugamana. Instead, Smriti texts enjoin Anugamana as a Dharmic activity, one that imparts heaven. Hence, the
Smritis which impart special duties enjoining anugamana takes precedence over the Shruti text which imparts
general prohibition against suicide.
A corollary of the above argument by Medhatithi is that Anugamana has no sanction of the Vedas. Though,
Medhatithi himself has not explicitly mentioned this, many scholars, especially in recent times have highlighted this.
PV Kane, for example, notes: “There is no Vedic passage which can be cited as incontrovertibly referring to widow-
burning as then current, nor is there any mantra which could be said to have been repeated in very ancient times
at such burning nor do the ancient grhyasutras contain any direction prescribing the procedure of widow
burning[41].”
Yet, the writers in the Dharmashastra tradition, at least from the time of Aparaarka, have quoted the Rigvedic verse
10.18.7, as well as a verse from Brahma Purana[42], which quotes Rigveda as a positive evidence that prove the
sanction of Sruti for Anugamana. The Rigvedic verse in question states: “Let these unwidowed dames with noble
husbands adorn themselves with fragrant balm and unguent. Decked with fair jewels, tearless, free from sorrow,
first let the dames go up to where he lieth[43].” The very next verse (i.e. Rigveda 10.18.8) states: “Rise, come unto
the world of life, O woman: come, he is lifeless by whose side thou liest. Wifehood with this thy husband was thy
portion, who took thy hand and wooed thee as a lover[44].” Kane notes that the verse 10.18.7 was not “addressed
to widows at all, but to ladies of the deceased man’s household whose husbands were living and the grhyasutra of
Asv. made use of it with that meaning.” Similarly, traditional commentators on the Vedas like Sayana also do not
consider the verse a reference to Anugamana. Instead, verses 10.18.8 & 10.18.9[45] have been held as a
reference to either Niyoga or remarriage.
But, what is clear is that at least, a few of the traditional commentators and digest writers like Aparaarka,
Kashinatha Upadhyaya, etc. have interpreted 10.18.7 as a reference to Anugamana, while 10.18.8 has been taken
as a reference to the widow’s family urging her to get up from the pyre and not continue with Anugamana. One
text, Sahamaranavidhi, in fact, goes to the extent of saying that the verse 10.18.8 was only to test the resolution of
the widow and “induce her to retire if she be not sufficiently firm in her purpose.” The usage of these verses in the
Anugamana ritual, at least since, medieval times have already been noted in the previous section. Even Kane,
notes: “The two verses ‘iyam nari’ and Rg. X. 18. 8 are employed by the Baudhayana-Pitrmedhasutra in the
11/22
funeral rites, the first to be repeated when the wife is made to sit near the corpse and the next for making her rise.
It is to be noted that Baud. directs that the corpse is placed on the funeral pile after the wife is made to rise from
the vicinity of the corpse; while the Brhad-devata appears to suggest that the wife ascends the funeral pile after the
corpse is placed thereon and then the younger brother forbids her with the verse udirsva[46]” This is very
significant, since firstly, it shows that the said verses were utilized in funeral rites. Second, the different ways in
which the widow is suggested to sit near the husband’s body points towards the possibility that while Baud. was
referring to widows who would not commit Anugamana but only symbolically sit in front of the pyre, the procedure
in Brhad-devata was actually directed at widows who had decided to perform anugamana. Though, Kane notes:
“But the Brhad-devata does not mean that the wife burns herself on the funeral pyre and the brother-in-law
contents himself with only repeating a verse to dissuade her[47]”, even he had to concede that “The Rgvidhana (III.
8. 4) says that the brother-in-law should call back the wife of his sonless brother when she is about to ascend the
funeral pyre for procreating a son on her with Rg. X. 18. 8. It appears that the verse Rg X. 18. 8 symbolically
describes what even in the days of the Rgveda was probably only a tradition viz, that in hoary antiquity a wife burnt
herself with her husband[48].”
The very possibility that the Rigvedic verses could have referred to the practice of Anugamana, even if it was only
in the hoary antiquity and not during ‘Rigvedic’ times, is enough to give credence to the Anugamana ritual put
together during the medieval period that utilizes these verses in the context of Anugamana. In any case, we also
have two verses (18.3.1-2) from Atharvaveda, which are clearer than the Rigvedic verses in their meaning and
implication. The verses in question state: “Choosing her husband’s world, O man, this woman lays herself down
beside thy lifeless body. Preserving faithfully the ancient custom. Bestow upon here both wealth and offspring
(18.3.1). Rise, come unto the world of life, O woman: come, he is lifeless by whose side thou liest. Wifehood with
this thy husband was thy portion who took thy hand and wooed thee as a lover (18.3.2)[49].” The first verse above
notes without any ambiguity that the widow would lie beside her husband’s body choosing her “husband’s world”,
i.e. choosing to go with him to heaven. The second verse, is of course, the urging of the family and the priests to
the widow to rise up from the pyre and not to go ahead with Anugamana. Aravind Sharma writes that even Sayana
notes how with the first verse, the widow is made to lie beside her dead husband on the funeral pyre and that the
reference to progeny and property is a reference to having those in the next life[50]. Thus, to state that there is no
sanction of Sruti for Anugamana would be incorrect. Nor is it correct to conclude that the urging of the widow to
arise in the second verse makes Anugamana portrayed in the first verse redundant. Instead, as Sahamaranavidhi,
quoted before rightly notes (though in the context of the Rigvedic verse), while the first verse speaks about
Anugamana, the second speaks about the alternative. That both alternatives have been given together in the Sruti
and was also later incorporated into the Anugamana ritual procedure itself, only establishes that Anugamana was
an optional practice from which the widow could withdraw herself till the very last moment.
Even if, we were to discard the verses from Rigveda and sideline those from Atharvaveda that are currently
available as being insufficient for positively assuming Anugamana as being sanctioned by the Sruti, even then, as
Aparaarka notes, the Smriti evidence alone is enough in this case to attain the sanction of the Sruti. Aparaarka
(1.87) writes: “Moreover, it should not be objected that when a smrti text is contradicted by a sruti text that has a
general sphere of applicability, it becomes unauthoritative, because there is really no contradiction between them,
as these texts have different spheres of applicability: one is general and one is specific. For contradiction exists
only when there is no difference between spheres of applicability, but not when there is a difference between
specific spheres of applicability. And therefore, from a smrti text that has a specific sphere of applicability, one can
infer a sruti text that has its same specific sphere of applicability and that it is the basis of it. And that sruti text
carries greater weight than a sruti text with a general sphere of applicability and, hence, causes it to be
restricted[51].”
To understand what Aparaarka is saying, we must first understand the Pramanas or the means of valid knowledge
in the case of Dharma. Manu Smriti (2.12) notes: Veda, Smriti, Sadachara and Atmatrupti as the four means for
having correct knowledge about Dharma. Of these, Vedas alone are considered as the very source of Dharma
(2.6). That is, while the Sruti is the direct and foundational pramana for Dharma, Smriti and others derive from
Sruti. The other Pramanas are, in fact, successive stages of contextualization of the Dharmic teachings available
in Sruti to practical life. Hence, though we have lost a large number of branches of Vedas and have no longer
access to these texts, from the guidelines on a particular theme that are present in the available Smritis, we can
infer that such guidelines would have been present in the Sruti texts as well, though it may be absent in the
12/22
currently available Sruti texts.
In other words, since, we only have a general prohibition against Suicide and not a specific prohibition against
Anugamana in the Sruti; and since, on the other hand, we have a specific guideline proposing Anugamana as a
Dharmically legitimate path in the Smriti texts; we have to infer that there must be a specific Sruti injunction
considering Anugamana as a Dharmically legitimate path, though such a Sruti text is no longer available to us
having been lost over the course of the time. That this is a legitimate hermeneutics process accepted in the
Dharmashastra tradition can also be known from the fact that Kulluka Bhatta in his commentary on Manu Smriti
verse 1.3 notes that “vedas” refers to both available Srutis and those which can be inferred from Smritis and other
texts like Puranas[52]. Thus, the assertion that Anugamana has no sanction of Sruti or that it is against Sruti has
no basis.
An 18th-century painting depicting sati. Source: Wikipedia
Is Anugamana same as Suicide?
Interesting, no Dharmashastra author appears to have provided a direct refutation of the objection that Anugamana
is analogous to suicide. But, before proceeding, it is worth noting that the term used by Medhatithi is “Atmatyaga”
or “renunciation of the self, i.e. body” which has a wider and generally more neutral connotation to it than the term
“suicide”, which carries a baggage of negative connotation to it. It is in this context, then we must understand the
Dharmashastra writer’s assertion that though there is a general prohibition against “Atmatyaga” (renouncing the
body) before its naturally stipulated time, it does not apply to the specific case of Anugamana.
Nevertheless, it is worth examining whether Anugamana is analogous to how we understand suicide today. For the
purpose of the article, we would adopt the definition of suicide provided by American Psychological Association :
“Suicide is the act of killing yourself, most often as a result of depression or other mental illness.” Then, the
question which must be asked are: Whether Anugamana is an outcome of depression? Whether Anugamana is an
outcome of mental illness or some personality disorder? We can straight away discard the notion that those who
performed Anugamana did so out of some mental illness or personality disorder. That means, we are left with only
one question: Whether Anugamana was performed due to depression?
13/22
Though, a superficial reading of the practice of Anugamana, especially some of its descriptions like those in
Brahma Purana, quoted previously which states: “There is no other recourse (than sahagamana) for a good
woman when her husband dies, (for) there is no other way to extinguish the burning pain of being separated from
her husband”, may suggest that the widow indeed opts for Anugamana as a result of shock and depression, a
careful reading of the intricacies involved in the Anugamana ritual as well as the nuances put forward in the
Dharmashastras give us an opposite picture.
For one, if the widow does indeed wants to simply commit suicide unable to bear the pain and out of depression
due to the loss of the husband, she can as well do so by other means: drowning in the river, hanging herself, etc.
Why would she take the trouble to ascend the pyre and become burned alive? Why would she voluntarily choose a
more painful path? The fact that the widow consciously makes a decision to follow the husband to the funeral pyre
and burn herself with her husband’s dead body with a strong resolve to unite with him after discarding her body,
shows that her performance of Anugamana is anything but a rash or rushed decision taken in depression.
Second, a careful look at the ritual procedure involved in Anugamana– the Sankalpa, the giving of clothes,
kumkum, turmeric, etc. to other married women, the prayer to Agni, the Ahutis, etc.– reveal that the ritual requires a
lot of poise and self-control on the part of the widow. Only an extremely self-controlled and courageous widow can
undergo the entire ritual.
Third, a look at other exceptions to the general prohibition against Atma-tyaga will reveal these cases have no
resemblance to Suicides. Other exceptions include, ascetics who discard their bodies at holy places in order to
attain heaven[53], heroic warriors who deliberately embrace death in the battle[54], Prayopravesha or embracing
death by fasting of persons who are aged or no longer have worldly responsibilities[55]. All these are Dharmically
legitimate ways of ending one’s life and interestingly all of them require enormous courage, detachment, and self-
control. Something which is missing in those who commit suicides due to depression and under the influence of
other internal passions. Dalpat Singh Baya, in his study on Sallekhana, the Jain counterpart of Prayopravesha,
notes how it is different from suicide. Prominent among the differences he notes include[56]:
1. Sallekhana is not suicide because here the practitioner leaves the body through ritual practice and not by
coming under the influence of internal passions and adopting lethal means as done in suicide.
2. Psychologically, a suicidal person have conflicting desires to live and to die simultaneously. These desires
may be conscious or subconscious in nature. On the other hand, the practitioner of Sallekhana, has no such
desires.
3. There is a feeling of hopelessness and helplessness in a suicidal person, whereas no such feelings exist in
spiritual practitioner. The spiritual practitioner is dispassionate, self-controlled and practices Sallekhana for
spiritual merit.
These observations are more or less true about Anugamana as well. The widow leaves her body through ritual
action. She does not have a conflicting desires regarding to live or die and if she does, then she always has the
choice to not to proceed with Anugamana until the last moment. Like spiritual practitioners, even a widow willing to
perform Anugamana is full of poise, self-control, and courage. Of course, the widow is full of sorrow for the loss of
her husband, which actually impels her to choose Anugamana. But, this sorrow also creates dispassion towards
the body and the worldly life, which drives her to embrace Anugamana. The desire to be with her husband in
heaven is yet another factor. Hence, though, Anugamana is different from other practices like Prayopravesha in a
significant way, it is also different from suicide. From the above discussion, it is clear that Anugamana has no
resemblance to suicide. It is instead a Dharmic way of choosing to end one’s life for attaining Preyas and
Sreyas[57].
The lengthy discussion in the previous paragraphs show how the Dharmashastra tradition is not monolithic and
instead discussed and debated on all aspects of Anugamana. Though many did raise various objections against
the practice from time to time, these objections were answered and refuted as well by others from time to time.
Dharmashastra commentators like Vijnaneshwara, Aparaarka, Madhavacharya and others have clearly
established Anugamana as a Dharmically legitimate practice, though an optional practice that widows with
exceptional love, courage, detachment and self-control chose to perform.
14/22
Anugamana vs. Vidwavrata vs. Punarvivaha: A comparison of the fruits accrued
We already dealt in some depth about the three Dharmically legitimate life paths that are available to the widows.
But, what we did not touch upon before was the Karmic fruits i.e. the merits accrued by following each of the paths
and a comparison of these fruits.
First, let us take Anugamana and Vidwavrata, since both of them are specially prescribed for Pativratas who are
fully in love and are committed to their husbands. Parashara Smriti is one among the many Smriti and
Dharmashastra texts which provide such an enunciation of merits obtained by the widows. Comparing the merits
obtained by following Vidwavrata and Anugamana, Parashara Smriti (4.29-31) notes: “If a woman adheres to a
vow of ascetic celibacy (brahmacarya) after her husband has died, then when she dies, she obtains heaven, just
like those who were celibate. Further, three and a half crores or however many hairs are on a human body—for
that long a time (in years) a woman who follows her husband (in death) shall dwell in heaven. And just as a snake-
catcher forcefully lifts up a snake out of its hole, so does this woman lift up her husband and then rejoices together
with him[58].” Tryambakayajvan in his Stridharmapaddhati (47[2] r.5-7) notes that widows who follow Vidwavrata
attains three fold fruits: “She is both happy and auspicious (shubha) in this life; she obtains the pleasures of the
heaven (svargabhogan), or indeed the same heaven as her husband (patilokam); and she marries the same
husband in next life[59].” Regarding widows who choose Anugamana, he highlights a number of great rewards
accrued: Women who follow their husbands to the cremation ground will attain with every step the rewards of
Ashwamedha sacrifice; such women will attain their husbands in heaven and enjoy there for three and a half
crores of years; women can purify themselves as well as their husbands and become free of many of the
Adharmas committed while alive[60]; and, in short, Anugamana confers great blessings to both the wife and the
husband. Tryambakayajvan, in fact, notes that Anugamana is a commendable path for widows (45r.5).
Dharmasindhu of Kashinatha Upadhyaya notes that those who follow Vidhwavrata, will attain same husband and
enjoy with him in heaven[61]; and those who follow Anugamana may attain heaven and other fruits, if it was done
in Sakaama way (i.e. with desires) or may even attain Moksha, if done in Nishkaama way (without desires)[62].
Vijnaneshwara in his Mitaakshara (1.86), on the other hand, believes Vidhwavrata could be considered superior to
Anugamana in one aspect: While alive a widow following Vidhwavrata still has the ability and possibility to attain
Jivanmukti, the widow who follows her husband through Anugamana only attains heaven with him.
To summarize, Anugamana imparts following merits:
1. When performed in Sakaama way, widows can go to heaven with their husbands and enjoy there for a very
long time, in fact for as many years as there are hairs on a human body. And presumably, they will be
together with their husbands in their next human lives they will take after enjoying in heaven.
2. When performed in Sakaama way, the widows will also attain the merits accrued by performing a large
number of Ashwamedha yajnas.
3. When performed in Nishkaama way, widows can attain Moksha or final liberation. Perhaps, she will attain
the heaven with her husband first, and then instead of returning back to human body, she will attain Jnana
and Moksha.
4. Secondary fruits includes purifying oneself and the husbands of some of the Adharmic actions committed
while alive.
Vidhwavrata, on the other hand, imparts following fruits:
1. When done in Sakaama way with attachment to their departed husbands, the widow, after their deaths, will
join their husbands in heaven and will be with the same husbands in their next lives as well.
2. When done in Nishkaama way, like the Brahmacharis, the widow will still attain heaven. But, perhaps, she
may not be united with the husband, if she has sufficiently become dispassionate towards him.
3. The widow will have an opportunity to gain complete Vairagya (dispassion) while alive and perhaps even
attain Jivanmukti (Liberation even while alive in body).
Contrary to the above two life-paths, if a widow chooses to remarry, she would be cutting of her connection, with
her departed husband, at least in the ritual/Dharmic context, and she will be establishing a newer connection with
15/22
her new husband. In this case, she will of course not be uniting with her departed husband in the heaven, nor she
may have him as her husband in the next life. (Though, she and the departed husband may still be destined to be
coupled in some future lives, if the Karmic bond or rina-bandha between them remains unexhausted completely).
She may still attain heaven and a better future birth, if she lives a Dharmic life and perhaps follows Patrivrata
dharma with her new husband. It is just like the case with widowers who rekindle a new fire with a new wife and
start journey afresh.
At this juncture, it is important to note that despite Parashara Smriti (4.28) clearly allowing remarriage for women
under five circumstances for Kaliyuga— if husband is missing, dead, has renounced the world, is impotent, or if he
commits severe Adharmic actions— which pretty much covers all legitimate grounds; except for Ishwar Chandra
Vidyasagar, no Dharmashastra writer or commentator has written much about widow remarriage. They have either
maintained silence or have criticized it. One possibility for this could be the importance of Pativrata as the means
for women’s overall wellbeing. Since, the husband himself was considered the means to both heaven and
liberation, love and dedication to one’s husband were upheld by the Dharmashastra authors. Vidhwavrata and
Anugamana received all the attention, since they alone strengthen and reinforce the widow’s connection to their
departed husbands and provides a way for her to fulfill her spiritual sadhana of Pativrata despite the husband’s
death. In any case, despite the silent treatment or occasional opposition to Punar-vivaha, it is also a Dharmically
legitimate path as attested in Parashara Smriti and a number of other texts.
The fruits accrued from Punar-vivaha can be summarized thus:
1. A chance to restart her life with a new husband and hence take up the Dharmic duty of saha-dharmacharini
with a new husband.
2. Attaining heaven and other benefits by following the Pativrata duties with the new husband.
3. The only drawback, if it can be called a drawback, is that marrying someone else after the death of one’s
husband, leads to severing (or at least straining) of the Karmic relationships with the departed husband.
Anugamana vs. Jauhar: A comparison

In contemporary discourse, Anugamana and Jauhar are often used synonymously. But, it is important to note that
while the former is a well-established ritual procedure in Hindu tradition, the latter evolved in a particular politically
charged historical context. It is not that both of the practices are entirely distinct from each other, since they do
share a number of common elements, most prominent among them being that in both practices the women ascend
the pyre and become “sati” by burning themselves. Yet, Jauhar is also significantly different from Anugamana in a
number of ways, the most important distinction being the motive.
Arvind Sharma notes how while the primary motive behind Jauhar was a desire to avoid being captured by the
invading Muslim armies, Anugamana was performed by devoted widow[63]. Writing about the political context
behind the evolution of Jauhar, Kaushik Roy notes how Jauhar was only practiced during Hindu-Muslim wars[64].
That is, Jauhar was practiced by Rajput women in order to avoid being captured, raped, and enslaved in the face
of imminent defeat in the battle.
What is generally referred to as Jauhar, in fact, has two elements: Jauhar-immolation by the womenfolk and Shaka
ritual by the menfolk wherein they entered the final battle, fighting till they fell dead on the battlefield. As Lindsey
Harlan notes: ‘”The jauhar sati dies before and while her husband fights what appears to be an unwinnable battle.
By dying, she frees him from worry about her welfare and saves herself from the possible shame of rape by
triumphant enemy forces[65].” That is, Jauhar served as the female counterpart of the male Shaka ritual, with both
of them attaining Veer-gati i.e. attaining heaven due to heroic death.
Thus, while Anugamana was a ritual practice available for pativrata widows, facilitating them to attain overall
wellbeing, Jauhar ritual, in addition to having elements of Anugamana, also had the Kshatra element of granting
Veera-gati on the performer and acted as the female counterpart of men going out on their final battles. But, the
greatest significance of Jauhar in the historical context was its ability to save Hindu women from capture, rape, and
slavery, which they would have been subjected to, had they been captured alive by the marauding armies of Islam.
16/22
Conclusion
The contemporary discourse on Anugamana or Sati suffers from a lot of misrepresentation and disinformation
about the practice. As a result, both the history and the practice have gained a lot of negative traction in media and
literature, thus creating a very negative image about the practice. While the historical aspect of the issue has been
dealt extensively by others, this article sheds light on the practice itself.
The article examined the place of Anugamana among the various Dharmic options available for widows and
compared the same with the Dharmic options available for widowers. It was then noted how the practice was
voluntary in nature and love, commitment and courage were the essential elements of the practice. Various
eligibility criteria and the ritual procedure were also briefly examined. The Dharmashastric debate on Anugamana
with its various arguments made against Anugamana as well as their refutations were examined as well. And
finally we looked into the relative merits accrued to widows by choosing Anugamana vs. Vidhwavrata vs.
Punarvivaha.
From the above discussion, we can conclude that Anugamana was [66] a Dharmically legitimate ritual practice and
a life choice that imparted great merits to the widow as well as to her dead husband. It was, indeed, in many a
sense, an ultimate symbol of love, commitment, courage and sacrifice. Nevertheless, it was only one among the
three Dharmically legitimate life-choices available for widows (the other being widowhood and remarriage), with
each of these three life-choices having their own importance and imparting their own merits on the widow. It was
ultimately up to the widow to choose what was best for her and this availability of choice for the widow, made
Anugamana an expression of freewill, a sacred yajna in itself. The kind of love, courage and dispassion that takes
to perform Anugamana meant that the practice was always extraordinary, not ordinary. And the historical evidence
shows that the widows only rarely and sporadically chose Anugamana.
Notes
[1] Meena Menon, Geeta Seshu, Sujata Anandan. 1987. Trial By Fire: A Report on Roop Kanwar’s Death , Bombay
Union of Journalists. Cited from Jain, Meenakshi (2016). Sati. Preface X. Delhi: Aryan Books International
[2] Jain, Meenakshi (2016). Sati. Preface X. Delhi: Aryan Books International
[3] Ibid. 179
[4] Mahānārāyaṇa Upaniṣad (79.7)
[5] Preyah and Śreyah, material wellbeing and spiritual fulfillment are proposed as two-fold goals of life in
Kaṭhopaniṣad (1.2.1-2)
[6] We have many examples from history wherein the widow committed Sati, despite severe opposition and
attempts to convince the widow against committing Sati by the immediate relatives. In 606 AD, for example, Queen
Yasomati, the mother of King Harsha, committed Sati, despite Harsha’s attempts to convince her to not commit
sati. Similarly, a Belaturu inscription of Saka 979, refers to a Sati committed by a Sudra woman at Dekabbe,
despite severe opposition from her parents. Further, epigraphic evidences show that relatives often tried to
discourage women from performing Sati. Even Brahmins in the community tried to prevent women from committing
Sati. For more details, See: Jain, Meenakshi (2016). Sati. Delhi: Aryan Books International
[7] Sharma, A. Sati: Historical and Phenomenological Essays. Retrieved November 2017 from
https://books.google.co.in/books?
id=UJmWgz2mv5oC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
[8] Kane, PV. History of Dharmashastras. Vol 2. Part 1 (628). Retrieved November 2017 from
https://archive.org/details/HistoryOfDharmasastraancientAndMediaevalReligiousAndCivilLawV.2.1
[9] Daksha Smriti (1.9), for example, advices a Dvija to not spend even a moment in the state of anashrami and
notes one who stays without an ashrama must perform prayashchitta. Piovano, I. (2002). Daksha Smriti:
Introduction, Critical Edition, Translation and Appendices. Botto, O (Ed). Corpus Juris Sanscriticum. 1. Turin:
17/22
Comitato ‘Corpus Juris Sanscriticum’.
[10] A symbolic wife who acts as a substitution for the real wife and in case of men whose wives have died or have
separated or disappeared, these symbolic image acts as the representation of the dead or separated wife itself. A
good example of this is how in Ramayana, Sri Rama creates a golden idol of Sita to perform Yajnas after he
becomes separated her.
[11] The Aitereya Brahmana discusses whether a man without a wife can perform Agnihotra and concludes that he
can and should since otherwise it would make him an “anaddhapurusha” or man of falsehood owing to his failure to
perform sacrifices. The term “Apatnika” or a man without a wife refers to both those who never married and those
whose wives have either died or are missing for a long time. See: Leslie, Julia (1995) The Perfect Wife
(Stridharmapaddhati). By Tryambakayajvan. (114-115) New Delhi: Penguin Books India.
[12] Karmic connection or Rinabandha which was created when the couple bonded with each other through Vivaha
and then reinforced it every day through their love, commitment, and pursuance of all Purusharthas together.
[13] Texts which mention remarriage for widows includes: Narada Samhita, Agni Purana, Garuda Purana, among
others. For a detailed discussion on the validity of remarriage as a Dharmic option for a widow, See:
Ishvarchandra Vidyasagar, Hindu Widow Remarriage, trans. Brian A. Hatcher. (2012). New York: Columbia
University Press.
[14] PV Kane notes of some of the instances of Sati In Itihasa-Puranas: “Madrl, the favourite wife of
Pandu, burnt herself with her husband’s body. In the Virata-parva Sairandhri is ordered to be burnt with Kicaka,
just as in ancient times it is said there was a custom to bury a slave or slaves along with the deceased ruler. The
Mausalaparva (7. 18) says that four wives of Vasudeva, viz. Devaki, BhadrS,RohinI and Madira burnt themselves
with him and (chap.7. 73-74) that RukminI, Gandhftrl, Saibya, Haimavati, Jambavati among the consorts of Krsna
burnt themselves along with his body and other queens like Satyabhama went to a forest for tapas. The
Visnupurana also says that eight queens of Krsna, EukminI and others, entered fire on the death of Krsna. The
Santiparva (chap. 148) describes how a kapotl (female pigeon) entered fire on the death of her husband the bird…
In the Ramayana, (Uttarakanda 17. 15) there is a reference to the self-immolation of a brahmana woman… The
Bhagavatapurana I. 13. 57 speaks of Gandhari’s burning herself on the death of her husband, Dhritarastra.” [Kane,
PV. History of Dharmashastras. Vol 2. Part 1 (626-628). Retrieved November 2017 from
https://archive.org/details/HistoryOfDharmasastraancientAndMediaevalReligiousAndCivilLawV.2.1]
[15] It may be asked why Anugamana has not been suggested for men. It is only because of the different nature of
Grihasta duties of the husband and wife. While the wife is saha-dharmaharini for the husband, husband himself is
the means for attaining purusharthas for the wife. Hence, anugamana has not been suggested as a Dharmically
fruitful activity for men. However, there is no explicit prohibition against it as well. Thus, while men may not attain
any spiritual merit, they may still do it out of love and for the sake of being together with their departed wives. While
some may consider this to be a suicide, especially with respect to men and this needs to be debated (anugamana
is not suicide with respect to women), even if this is accepted at face value, the fact that men are doing it for the
sake of love and uniting with departed wives, will result in their realizing this desire, despite also incurring paapam
associated with suicide. Because being a Kamya karma, one performed out of desire, it reinforces the love and
rina-bandha/karmic bond between the couple. Also, as the Shastras note, the next life of a person depends upon
the final thought he has just before death. This being the case, even a man who commits anugamana for the sake
of wife will attain his wife. It is for this reason perhaps, the Shastras do not explicitly prohibit anugamana for men,
despite not giving it as a Dharmically suitable option.
[16] Leslie, Julia (1995). The Perfect Wife (Stridharmapaddhati). By Tryambakayajvan. (141) New Delhi: Penguin
Books India
[17] PV Kane writes: “Haritadharmasutra as quoted in the Sm. C. and other digests says ‘there are two sorts of
women, those that are brahmavadinis (i. e. students of sacred lore) and those that are sadyovadhus (i.e. who
straightway marry). Out of these brahmavadinis have to go through upanayana, keeping fire, vedic study
18/22
and begging in one’s house (i e. under the parental roof); but in the case of sadyovadhus when their marriage is
drawing near, the mere ceremony of upanayana should somehow be performed and then their marriage should be
celebrated’.” [Kane, PV. History of Dharmashastras. Vol 2. Part 1 (294). Retrieved November 2017 from
https://archive.org/details/HistoryOfDharmasastraancientAndMediaevalReligiousAndCivilLawV.2.1]
[18] Sharma, S (tr) (2012). Dharmasindhu. By Kashinatha Upadhyaya. (540) Dharwad: Samaja Pustakalaya
[19] Quoted in Madanaparijata of Madanapala. Cited from Brick, D. (2010). The Dharmaśāstric Debate on Widow-
Burning. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 130(2), 203-223. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/23044515
[20] Cited from Brick, D. (2010). The Dharmaśāstric Debate on Widow-Burning. Journal of the American Oriental
Society, 130(2), 203-223. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23044515
[21] ibid
[22] ibid
[23] ibid
[24] ibid
[25] Niryana Sindhu qualifies even this requirement and notes in case Brahmana widow who wanted to perform
Sahagamana, but was unable to for some reason, she can use her husband’s bones or a piece of Palasha wood
and self-immolate herself with them. Doing so removes the paapam of dying on a separate pyre. Cited from ibid.
[26] Brick, D. (2010). The Dharmaśāstric Debate on Widow-Burning. Journal of the American Oriental Society,
130(2), 203-223. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23044515
[27] Dharmasindhu clearly note that the statements in Dharmashastras enunciating how even women who have
been wicked towards her husband can purify herself by anugamana must be understood only as “arthavada”, i.e.
statements made only eulogize anugamana; since women who are negatively disposed towards their husbands do
not have eligibility to perform anugamana. [Sharma, S (tr) (2012). Dharmasindhu. By Kashinatha Upadhyaya.
(540) Dharwad: Samaja Pustakalaya]. It is also to be noted that doing marananthaka-prayashchitta i.e. penance
wherein the performer dies at the end of the performance is prohibited in Kaliyuga [Kane, PV. History of
Dharmashastras. Vol 3 (926-968). This is also perhaps another reason, why Dharmasindhu consider the
statements which eulogize anugamana even for widows who have been wicked and bitter towards husband as
mere “arthavada” not to be practiced. This view is expressed even by Madanapala in the context of Anugamana
purifying even the husband of his heinous paapams
[32] ibid
130(2), 203-223. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23044515
19/22
[35] Medhatithi’s arguments have been summarized from the verses cited in Brick, D. (2010). The Dharmaśāstric
Debate on Widow-Burning. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 130(2), 203-223. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/23044515
130(2), 203-223. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23044515ibid
[37] Ibid.
[38] Brick notes: “Significantly, this refutation appears to have been quite effective, as not one of the later
commentators within the dharma tradition, so far as I am aware, takes up this line of argumentation against the
custom.” [ibid]
[40] ibid
[42] The verse from Brahma Purana quoted by Apararka and others says:” There is no other recourse (than
sahagamana) for a good woman when her husband dies, (for) there is no other way to extinguish the burning pain
of being separated from her husband. And when he dies in a distant place, a virtuous woman should place a pair
of his sandals on her chest and, purified, enter fire. Due to the statement of the Rgveda, such a virtuous woman
does not commit suicide. And when the three days’ impurity has ceased, she eternally obtains the sraddha
offering.” Cited from Brick, D. (2010). The Dharmaśāstric Debate on Widow-Burning. Journal of the American
Oriental Society, 130(2), 203-223. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23044515
[43] Translation from Ralph T.H. Griffith. Retrieved November 2017 from http://www.sacred-
texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv10018.htm. This translation has been used only because of it being conveniently available.
[44] ibid
[45] Rigveda 10.18.9 reads: “From his dead hand I take the bow be carried, that it may be our power and might and
glory. There art thou, there; and here with noble heroes may we o’ercome all hosts that fight against us.” [ibid]
[47] ibid
[48] Ibid (618-619)
[49] Translation from Ralph T.H. Griffith. Retrieved November 2017 from http://www.sacred-
texts.com/hin/av/av18003.htm
[50] Sharma, A (1988). Sati: Historical and Phenomenological Essays. (37). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
[52] In verse 3 of chapter 1 of Manu Smriti, the rishis who had asked the questions about Dharma to Manu outlines
the competency of Manu Smriti as a teacher suitable for teaching about all Dharma. In this context, the verse
describes how Manu is knower of all Vedas with the words “asya sarvasya vidhanasya”. While commenting on this,
Kulluka Bhatta notes that while the term “Vidhana” refers to “Veda”, the usage of the term “sarvasya” or “all” refers
to the entirety of Vedas, which includes both “Pratyaksha Sruti” or directly available Sruti and “Smruti-aadi-
anumeyasya” or those Srutis that are to be inferred from Smruti and other texts on Dharma like the Itihasas and
Puranas.
20/22
[53] Yathidharmaprakasha 17.1-32
[54] Attaining Veer-gati
[55] Compare with Jain practice of Sallekhana. Sridhar, N (2015). Is the Jain practice of Sallekhana really suicide?
Retrieved November 2017 from https://www.newsgram.com/sallekhana-is-the-jain-practice-of-sallekhana-really-
suicide/
[56] Baya, DS. Death with Equanimity. Retrieved November 2019 from http://www.prakritbharati.net/books-
online/death-with-equanimity/002-table-of-contents/#Table. The summarized account of Baya’s observations have
been quoted from Sridhar, N (2015). Is the Jain practice of Sallekhana really suicide? Retrieved November 2017
from https://www.newsgram.com/sallekhana-is-the-jain-practice-of-sallekhana-really-suicide/
[57] Preyas in the form of being with husband in heaven when Anugamana is performed in Sakaama way and
Sreyas in the form of Moksha when Anugamana is performed in Nishkaama way.
[58] Translation cited from Brick, D. (2010). The Dharmaśāstric Debate on Widow-Burning. Journal of the American
Oriental Society, 130(2), 203-223. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23044515
[59] Leslie, Julia (1995) The Perfect Wife (Stridharmapaddhati). By Tryambakayajvan. (303) New Delhi: Penguin
Books India.
[60] As noted earlier, while some Dharmashastra writers consider this “Prayashchitta” aspect of Anugamana only
as eulogy or Arthavada for glorifying Anugamana, others point out that penances leading to death are prohibited in
kaliyuga. In fact, women who are negatively disposed towards their husbands or if the husbands had performed
deeply Adharmic actions, such widows are not eligible to perform Anugamana.
[62] Ibid (538)
[63] Sharma, A. Sati: Historical and Phenomenological Essays. Retrieved November 2017 from
[64] Kaushik Roy (2012), Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present.
Retrieved November 2018 from Wikipedia.
[65] Harlan, L (1992). Religion and Rajput Women: The Ethic of Protection in Contemporary Narratives . Retrieved
from https://books.google.co.in/books?
id=7HLrPYOe38gC&pg=PA160&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Jauhar&f=false
[66] The past tense used in the paragraph, as well as elsewhere in the article is only to reflect the ground reality
that Sati is a legally prohibited practice even in the Independent India. Also, the instances of Sati in independent
India have been too minuscule. While the past tense have been used to reflect this ground reality regarding legality
of the practice, this must not be misconstrued as saying that the practice has ceased to be Dharmically legitimate
as well. As we have elaborated in the article, Parashara Smriti, whose Smriti is specifically applicable to Kaliyuga
considers Anugamana as a Dharmically legitimate practice. Therefore, Dharmically speaking, Anugamana
continues to be a legitimate practice even today, despite the legal prohibition.
Bibliography:
Acharya, RS. (ed.) (2004). Atharvaveda Samhita (with Hindi translation). Mathura: Yug Nirman Yojana. Retrieved
November 2017 from https://vedpuran.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/atharva-ved.pdf
Baya, DS. Death with Equanimity. Retrieved November 2019 from http://www.prakritbharati.net/books-
online/death-with-equanimity/002-table-of-contents/#Table
Brick, D. (2010). The Dharmaśāstric Debate on Widow-Burning. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 130(2),
21/22
203-223. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23044515
Griffith, RTH. (tr.) (1896). The Hymns of Atharvaveda . Retrieved November 2017 from http://www.sacred-
texts.com/hin/av/index.htm
Griffith, RTH. (tr.) (1896). The Rig Veda. Retrieved November 2017 from http://www.sacred-
texts.com/hin/rigveda/index.htm
Harlan, L (1992). Religion and Rajput Women: The Ethic of Protection in Contemporary Narratives. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.in/books?id=7HLrPYOe38gC&pg=PA160&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Jauhar&f=false
Ishvarchandra Vidyasagar, Hindu Widow Remarriage, trans. Brian A. Hatcher. (2012). New York: Columbia
University Press
Kaundinnyayana, S. (tr.) (2013). Manusmriti. Delhi: Chowkambha Sanskrit Pratishthan
Kane, PV. History of Dharmashastras . Vol 2. Part 1 (628). Retrieved November 2017 from
Leslie, Julia (tr.) (1995). The Perfect Wife (Stridharmapaddhati). By Tryambakayajvan. New Delhi: Penguin Books
India.
Jain, Meenakshi (2016). Sati. Delhi: Aryan Books International
Piovano, I. (2002). Daksha Smriti: Introduction, Critical Edition, Translation and Appendices . Botto, O (Ed). Corpus
Juris Sanscriticum. 1. Turin: Comitato ‘Corpus Juris Sanscriticum’.
Rg-Veda Samhita (with Sayana’s Commentary) Part 4 . Vaidik Samshodhan Mandala: Pune. Retrieved November
2017 from https://archive.org/details/RgVedaWithSayanasCommentaryPart4
Saducharanprasad, B. (ed.) (1994). Dharmashastrasangraha. Bombay: Khemaraj Srikrishnadas Prakashan
Somayaji, DKN. (ed.) (2006). Yajnavalkya Smriti. 1. Bengaluru: Kalpatharu Research Academy Publication.
Sharma, A. Sati: Historical and Phenomenological Essays. Retrieved November 2017 from
Sharma, S (tr) (2012). Dharmasindhu. By Kashinatha Upadhyaya. (540) Dharwad: Samaja Pustakalaya
Sridhar, N (2015). Is the Jain practice of Sallekhana really suicide? Retrieved November 2017 from
https://www.newsgram.com/sallekhana-is-the-jain-practice-of-sallekhana-really-suicide/
Featured Image: vanamaliashram.org
Disclaimer: The facts and opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author.
IndiaFacts does not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or
validity of any information in this article.
Nithin Sridhar
With a degree in civil engineering, and having worked in construction field, Nithin Sridhar
passionately writes about various issues from development, politics, and social issues, to religion,
spirituality and ecology. He is based in Mysore, India. His latest book “Musings On Hinduism”
provides an overview of various aspects of Hindu philosophy and society. Tweets at @nkgrock
22/22
Voluntary death in Sanatana Dharma
indiafacts.org/voluntary-death-sanatana-dharma/
Dr Sammod Acharya December 2, 2017
Death is considered a very frightening and unwanted event because it ends the visible
existence of a living being. Since realms other than the physical are unknown or not
accepted, death implies total cessation of existence. A big fraction of humanity which
believes only in material science as science, tries to avoid the discussion on death itself.
Materialistic science, by its inherent limitation, has no capacity to examine anything other
than the physical, and thus it is not expected to know or verify the other realms in
existence. Given that it cannot find out the source of life sustaining energy that enters the
embryo or fetus when a new living being starts to exist physically, and leaves the body at
the time of death, it is irrelevant how sophisticated material science is in the context of
having to deal with anything beyond our five senses. All the machines or methods, whether
for visualizing details of the brain or for detecting brain physiology (brain waves), suffer from
this limitation of being restricted to the physical realm only.
Despite thousands of cases of Near Death Experiences (NDEs) and reincarnations being
recorded around the globe, physical science tries to deny the existence of life beyond the
visible realm. This is utterly futile as the very nature of physical science makes it unable to
perceive and analyze such phenomena. Though many physicians and scientists have
accepted and tried to disseminate the reality for the benefit of humanity, these findings are
usually not considered “mainstream science” and largely excluded from medical science
curricula. The result is that most of the physicians who have to deal with dying patients,
have no broad insight into the phenomena of death. They are simply unable to discuss the
matter with patients or their family in appropriate way making the process of death
uncomfortable to all the involved partners.
Inability to discuss about impending death with dying patient and the family in appropriate
way is problematic for the physician too. In the name of prolonging life, artificially with
1/5
machines even when the condition is very much untreatable physicians do not serve the
interest of the patients or family mostly making the treatment unavailable for those who may
get benefitted from the treatment (as machines like ventilator are almost always have
limited availability).
If we look at our Vedic tradition, where life is known to be continuous by nature with
repetitions of birth and death, till one becomes one with Paramatma, death is discussed in
great detail. We find descriptions of the events that take place during the process of dying
after leaving the body in great detail in the Vedas (mainly Upanishad part) themselves.
Entire Kathopanishad is based on the dialogue with Yama, a personal representation of
death. In this article, we shall discuss the view of Sanatana Dharmic tradition on voluntary
death.
Ishavasyopanishad (Part of Yajurveda) says one has to desire living for hundred years
doing prescribed duty. कु व नेवेह कमािण िजजीवीषे छतं समा:। ( ShuklaYajurveda 40/2 )
There is a statement in Shatapatha Brahmana – यो वा शतं वषािण जीवित स हैवैतदमत ृ मा नोित त मा े

चैति दुय च न लो या शतायुते येवाहु त मादु ह न पुराऽऽयुषः वकामी पेयादलो यं ह । (10.2.6.7) “Therefore,
whether they know it, or whether they do not, they say that the life of a hundred years is
conducive for immortality( heaven) Hence one must not leave the body by one’s own desire
before the full extent of life, because doing so one misses the opportunity for attaining
immortality”.
Such statements are understood as general rule for individuals in Grihasthashrama except
when done in prescribed way. This cannot be taken as absolute norm as within the Veda
we have Yajna specifically recommended for one who wants to die voluntarily. This Yajna
known as Sarvasvara (सव वार) or Shunaskarnastoma (शुन कण तोम. In
Tandyamahabrahmana (Brahmana belonging to Samaveda) this Ekaha (Yajna finished in
one day) has been specifically mentioned to be done by one who wants to die by entering
to the fire of the Yajna.
ि वदृ ि न टोम: स सव वारो य: कामयेताऽनामयताऽमुं लोकिमयािमित स एतेन यजेत। ( 17.12.1 ) “This threefold
Agnistoma called Sarvasvara is to be done by one who wants to leave the body for heaven
with peace”.
Though details of the Yajna vary slightly in different Shrautasutras (texts under Kalpa which
are second among Vedangas and give details of for Shrauta Yajna for respective Shakha
of Vedas), this Yajna is described in most of the Shrautasutras. Generally the Yajna
consists of Yajamana entering the Yajna fire towards the end of the Yajna ending his
physical existence. This is clear evidence that Vedic tradition though strongly against
haphazard suicide, recognizes that one may decide to die voluntarily in very much dignified
way and entry to fire is the method that has been recommended by the Vedas themselves.
In some of the Upanishads including Jabalopanishad, different ways of voluntary death

including entry to fire have been mentioned.
वीरा वाने वाऽनाशके वाऽपां पवेशे वाऽि नपवेशे वा महाप थाने वा। -जाबालोपिनषद् 5 “(This rite also applies ) in
dying by going in front of war, fasting, entering to water (drowning), entering fire or
Mahaprasthana (Walking to north till one dies)”
2/5
In Mahabharata there are several instances where voluntary death has been talked or
exemplified. The vivid description of how Dhritarastra, Gandhari and Pritha (Kunti) chose to
die in the fire of the forest is found in 37th Adhyaya of Ashramavasika Parva (45th in
Satavalekar Edition and 39th in some editions) where Narada describes this to King
Yudhishthira.
Narada narrates – “Then king (Dhritarastra) seeing the great fire reaching him, told Sanjaya
to walk away to safer place beyond the reach of fire. He told that they (with Gandhari and
Kunti) will go to Sadgati burnt by the fire. Very much worried Sanjaya told him “Your
majesty, this type of death by forest fire is inauspicious for you but I do not see any way to
escape from the fire, so you should order me whatever I should do”. Hearing this
Dhritarastra again says “This type of death is not at all inauspicious for us who have left our
homes (have become Vanaprastha i.e. forest dwellers) because dying with water, fire, wind
or fasting are all very much auspicious for those doing penance. So you should leave us
here and move away immediately. Having said this King sat in mediation facing east
together with Gandhari and Kunti. Seeing this Sanjaya did Pradakshina (going around in
respect) asking him to be in deep union with self. Following his advice the king controlled
his breath and become just like lifeless wooden log. Thus your father (father’s brother),
Gandhari and your mother Kunti were engulfed by the huge fire.”
“ततः स नपृ ितदृ वा वि माया तमि तकात्।
इदमाह ततः सूतं स जयं जयतां वरः।।२२।।
ग छ स जय य ाि नन वां दहित किहिचत्।
वयम ाि नना यु ता गिम यामः परां गितम्।।२३।।
तमुवाच िकलोि नः स जयो वदतां वरः।
राजन् म ृ युरिन टोऽयं भिवता ते वथ

ृ ाऽि नना।।२४।।
न चोपायं पप यािम मो णे जातवेदसः।
यद ान तरं काय त वा व तुमहित।।२५।।
इ यु तः स जयेनेदं पुनराह स पािथवः
नैष म ृ युरिन टो नो िनःसत

ृ ानां गहृ ा वयम्।।२६।।
जलमि नस् तथा वायुरथवाऽिप िवकषणम्।
तापसानां पश य ते ग छ स जय मा िचरम् ।।२७।।
इ यु वा स जयं राजा समाधाय मन तथा।
पा मुखः सह गा धाया कु या चोपािवश दा।।२८।।
स जय तं तथा दृ वा पदि णमथाकरोत्।
उवाच चैनं मेधावी यु वा मानिमित पभो।।२९।।
ऋिषपु ो मनीषी स राजा च े ऽ य त चः।

3/5
सि न येि दयगाममासी का ठोपम तदा।।३०।।
ृ ा तव।
गा धारी च महाभागा जननी च पथ
दावाि नना समायु ते स च राजा िपता तव।।३१।।” (महाभारत,आ मवािसकपव अ याय ३७)
In Vanaparva, there is mention of place called Plakshavatarana in Yamuna river where

people used to come for voluntary death entering to Yamuna river: “Those who leave body
here go to heaven, thousands of people who want to die come here.”
“इह म यास् तनूस ् य वा वग ग छि त भारत। मतुकामा नरा राजि नहायाि त सह श:।।” वनपव 130/1
Various Puranas have also recommended voluntary death in specific situations by different
ways including entering fire or water. In Skanda Purana, Kashikhanda –“Who leaves the
corpse (body) afflicted by old age and diseases with patience (without fear) enters into
ृ वत् य वा पिवशेदमरावतीम्।। क दपुराण,काशीख ड
heaven” जरारोगािभप नं तु कु णपं जा वी जले। धैयण तण
28/113
Vishnudharmottara Purana- “Who enters fire gets into desired Loka and who enters water
to leave the body goes to the Varuna Loka” वि पवेशाि नयतम् अभी टं लोकम नुते। वा णं लोकमा नोित
य वा भिस तनुं नर: ।। िव णुधमो रपुराण 3/237/45
Skanda Purana Avantyakhanda- “One who is suffering from incurable disease, old age of
handicapped can attain to Sadgati if gets into fire with proper rites”. यािधगहगहृ ीतो वा वृ ो वा
िवकलेि दय:। आ मानं दाहिय वाऽ नौ िविधना स गितं लभेत ् ।। क दपुराण ,आव यख ड 3/43/15
Fasting till death referred as Prayopaveshana or just Anashaka/Anashana or Nirashana, is

relatively less drastic measure for voluntary death. We have seen it mentioned in
Jabalopanishad too as a method of voluntary death. In Manavashrautasutra, Mahabharata
and various Puranas we find fasting till death as one of the esteemed method for voluntary
death.
Garuda Purana says –“Even at home if one dies doing fasting, he travels to Devaloka
alone leaving behind the lineage” वतं िनरशनं कृ वा वगहृ ेऽिप मत
ृ ो यिद। वकु लािन पिर य य एकाकी िवचरेद ्
िदिव।। ग डपुराण 2/36/15)
Fasting as method of voluntary death has also been widely practiced and unlike other
methods some of which e.g. Mahaprasthana, have been considered Kalivarjya (not to be
followed in Kaliyuga) by some authorities or texts has not been considered so. Fasting is
considered purifier of the body and those who have finished their worldly duty or suffering
from incurable diseases who fast till death are considered very pious.
Mahakavi Kalidasa in his very famous epic Raghuvamsha (8/94) describes voluntary
fasting by King Aja (Father of Dasharatha) as he wanted to abandon his diseased body
when he was confident on well trained prince Dasharatha that he will govern with ease,
directing him to protect the people with all effort.
“स यि वनीतमथवमहरं कु मारमािद य र णिवधौ िविधवत् पजानाम्।
रोगोपस ृ टतनुदवु सितं मुम ु :ु पायोपवेशनमितनपितबभू

ृ व।।” रघुवंशम् ८/९४
4/5
Thus the tradition of taking one lifetime as a step in continuous way towards Moksha
without neglecting Artha and Kama (Prosperity and physical enjoyment) as applicable in
various stages of life (Ashramas) is in perfect alignment with tradition of voluntary death in
specific situations. This is mostly applicable for Vanaprastha and Sannyasi. But as
exemplified by Sarvasvara Yajna, even a householder who has finished his worldly duty or
suffering from incurable diseases is eligible for it.
Featured Image: Trimurti Ellora (Wikipedia)
Disclaimer: The facts and opinions expressed within this article are the personal
opinions of the author. IndiaFacts does not assume any responsibility or liability for
the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information in this article.
Dr Sammod Acharya
Sammod Acharya (Sammodavardhana Kaundinnyayana) is trained
traditionally in Madhyandineeya Shakha of Shukla-Yajurveda. His areas of
special interest are Grihyasutras, Vyakarana and Jyotisha among the
Vedangas and Ayurveda among the Upavedas and life enriching education in
general. He is formally trained as a physician with specialization on clinical
pharmacology.He tweets at @sammodacharya
5/5
Works Cited
indiafacts.org/battle-historical-narratives-chittor/
Sreejit Datta November 28, 2017
Apparently it has become become utterly “regressive”, “backward”, and “reactionary” to be

proud of narrating a version of history from the Hindu perspective – the perspective of the
side which lost the battle. The history just referred to here relates to events that transpired
in 1303 AD (Chandra 2007) in Chittor, located in the south-eastern parts of modern-day
Rajasthan. Chittor happened to be the second most powerful princely state of the time after
Ranthambhor, according to the historical accounts of “medieval India” written by the
celebrated leftist historian Satish Chnadra. The same historian notes that the jauhar
ceremony, which is central to the controversies irked by champions of feminism like
Devdutt Pattnaik in his latest series of tweets on the ongoing Padmavati row, was for the
first time recorded in Persian by Alauddin Khalji’s court poet Amir Khusrau. This is an
important observation, because by this statement the historian has drawn our attention to
the distinction of a ritualistic ceremony being described by oral sources and the same being
described by a written source.
Anyway, coming back to the controversy kindled by Pattnaik, the first thing we note is that
Pattnaik is a self-proclaimed “mythologist”. Going by the books he has penned and the TV
shows where he frequently appears, one understands that what he really refers to as
“mythology” is a well-defined category in the Hindu culture – itihāsa-purāṇa. The strategy
involved in appropriating the itihāsa-purāṇa genre is a time-tested one, and it consists in
erasure of the indigenous point of view in favour of the invader/coloniser’s cultural
standpoint, thus legitimising the narrative of the invader/coloniser. It effectively reduces the
worldview, philosophy, understanding and centuries of lived experiences of the indigenous
to a child’s fantasies and story-mongering wherein the child’s accounts of ‘what things are’
or ‘how things happen’ are condescendingly looked upon by an adult. In short, this
approach, invented by the British in their colonising enterprises undertaken in various parts
of the world: in the Americas, in the African continent and in the Indian Subcontinent, is
1/5
equivalent to the infantilising attitudes taken by the world of the adult. Thanks to the father
of Marxism, we have a very precise summary of this attitude or approach: “they cannot
represent themselves; they must be represented” (Marx 2005). Although Marx made this
statement in the context of the French peasantry and the possibility of they forming a
coherent class in economic and political terms in order to represent their “class interest” in
the face of a “hostile opposition”, the aforementioned condescending attitude of the
orientalist and the colonialist shines through Marx’s statement as he considers the French
agriculturists to be nothing more than a collection of economic units bereft of a sense of
and desire for nationhood. This is comparable to the approach of the British colonialist
historians like V.A. Smith, who in their loyalty to the British Empire and its “civilising”
mission in the colonies of Asia and Africa repeatedly represented the colonies as infantile,
fragmented and prone to despotism. Another leftist historian R.S. Sharma observes that
“the Western scholars stressed that Indians had experienced neither a sense of nationhood
nor any form of self-government” while discussing the case of the colonialist, pro-British
imperialist history of India (Sharma 2005). Like Marx’s ignoring of the sense of community
of the French peasantry as well as their reverence for and faith in a French nation under the
leadership of Napoleon, Smith too dismisses the pre-colonial Indian sense of nationhood,
cultural unity and geographical mapping of territories. Sharma notes: “India was
represented as a land of despotism which had not experienced political unity until the
establishment of the British rule…British interpretations of Indian history served to
denigrate the Indian character and achievements, and justify colonial rule.” (Sharma 2005)
Thus, in ignoring how the Indian tradition itself has categorised some of its important
literary and historical genres, Pattnaik displays his complicity in the Western exercises of
orientalising, dubbed by Edward W. Said as Orientalism in the following terms: “there is in
addition the hegemony of European ideas about the Orient, themselves reiterating
European superiority over Oriental backwardness, usually overriding the possibility that a
more independent, or more sceptical, thinker might have had different views on the
matter.” (Said 2001) The Indian category of itihāsa-purāṇa, as opposed to the Western,
Hellenic-origin genre of ‘mythology’ (the Greek ‘mythos’ denotes legend/myth; while ‘logos’
denotes speech/spoken word), is such an example of independent thinking, if not a
sceptical one; a different way of systematising knowledge of the lived, embodied Indian
experience; and certainly a more sophisticated understanding history and conception of
time than what the Western academia had made of mythology and the discipline of history
till as late as late twentieth century. It is only very recently that the Western academia has
started to take oral accounts, memory and storytelling practices of the indigenous as
serious sources of preserving and acquiring historical knowledge. But these
epistemological advancements have already been achieved by traditional Indian knowledge
systems way before the birth of Christ! What is more, the ancient Indians had been able to
refine these modes of preserving knowledge and turned them into marvellous devices of
recording memory so that they can not only be recalled easily, but reproduced and
performed in the exact same manner as they used to be millennia ago. Case in point: the
surviving śākhā-s of the Vedas.
The sleight of hand played by Pattnaik and other postmodernists is as follows: replace the
very issue of erasing one version of history in favour of the other one that rejects it, trumps
it, deletes it – giving the matter, a feminist deconstructivist twist. According to this reading,
2/5
Jauhar is a ‘patriarchal’ custom which “denigrates” women as it encourages them to resort
to honour killing (by committing suicide) instead of braving the trials of a rape survivor’s life.
Outrageous as it may sound, Pattnaik’s musings fail to attract any serious engagement with
them as they completely de-contextualise the events from the mores and ethical framework
within which the concerned community (Rajputs) functioned at the time when the events
took place. Surely the codes of chivalry and honour have faced a paradigm change
between that time and our time, but it will be irrational to expect that people, and especially
the people of the Rajput community (as well as people from the Hindu community in
general) – who have the highest stake in this battle for historical narrative – would judge the
course of action that Rani Padmavati and her fellow royal women adopted from the
(evolved) ethical framework of our times. The Rajputana of Rani Padmavati and Rana
Ratan Singh is not today’s State of Rajasthan, their time is also far removed from ours. But
oral history, as much as written history, maintains a bridge between that chronotope (time
and space) and this chronotope. History serves exactly that purpose through the device of
narrative. Therefore, the key to controlling history lies in the narrative – and the Hindu-
Rajput narrative over Rani Padmavati’s history is seriously jeopardised by what the
upcoming Sanjay Leela Bhansali promises to depict, as well as by the deconstruction -
cum- (wishful) reconstruction that Pattnaik et al are trying to spin around it. This is even
more disagreeable for the reason that such a deconstructive reading tends to portray
Alauddin Khalji’s regime only as a benign, benevolent, unifying, properly administered and
welfare state-like entity. That may appear true only from the perspective of ideologues and
zealots who harbour the ambition of establishing a worldwide theocracy under the flag of a
single religious symbol someday; otherwise his reign would be remembered as a time of
chaos, religious persecution, desecration, destruction, genocide, destitution, despondency
and trauma – which is how the Hindus, Jains and Buddhists remember Khalji’s reign, and
legitimately so.
The problem with such one-sided narratives is that these totally ignore and thus erase the
immense destruction and violence caused to non-Muslims out of human memory. Such
erasure has been seen as a sort of violence – ‘epistemological violence’ to be precise – by
the French Jesuit scholar Michel de Certeau. (Highmore 2006) Epistemological, because
such approaches cause great harm to one or more means of acquiring knowledge, and as
a result cause certain forms of knowledge – often indigenous – to go into oblivion. Orality
has come to be recognised as a potent source of historical knowledge, scholars in the
academia are increasingly concentrating on oral resources such as oral epics, lores,
legends, folk songs and that trend is nowhere more apparent than in the corridors of the
Western academia. No doubt such trends have arisen in the postcolonial era as the
decolonising process gained momentum after the Second World War, and as more and
more students and scholars from erstwhile colonies started to flock the universities in their
former colonisers’ land in the West. Starting from Africa and the East European countries,
oral traditions and various oral sources came to be recognised as valid sources of historical
knowledge. Thus we got pioneer works in the field by Ruth H. Finnegan (1977), Walter J.
Ong (1982), John Miles Foley (2012), again Finnegan (2012) and many more.
The present author had the chance to enrol himself in a course in oral history offered by a
prominent Italian oral historian named Alessandro Portelli in late 2016, which was jointly
organised by Government of India’s Global Initiative for Academic Networks (GIAN) and
3/5
Jadavpur University. During that course, Professor Portelli, who teaches at the University of
Rome – La Sapienza, emphasised with illustrations from his own research on American
history and its oral sources that carefully listening to the various accounts of members of a
community (whose history concerns the historian) is central to eliciting historical information
– so carefully that even minute changes in the register of the orator’s/speaker’s voice may
give rarely available insights into the events of the past and its impact on the members of
the community. Professor Portelli informed the class that he has lived and worked among
the working classes of Italian and American towns for a long period, and he was quite frank
in confessing his sympathy for the cause of the labour unions and local leftist political
parties in both countries. So clearly leftist intellectuals and academics are recognising oral
accounts and reception of historical events by the community whose history they wish to
narrate and construct (academically). In this, they have shifted their stance from the
Marxian obsession with ‘scientific objectivity’ to ‘subjectivity of a community experience’.
This appears to be consistent with the changes brought into leftist politics and scholarship
by the Frankfurt School and postmodernism, which helped the New Left keep its original
Marxian worldview of hostile binaries intact even after the classical Marxist binary
associated with class struggle became invalid with growing irrelevance of the economic
stereotypes created by Marx. Instead of bourgeois vs proletariat, humanity came to be
seen as consisting of group binaries such as men vs women, hetero- vs homosexuals,
white vs black, Christian vs Muslim etc. The basic Marxian structure of oppressor vs
oppressed thus survived in the new binaries relevant in the new world.
However, the question remains, why ignore one community’s orality (in this case, of
Rajputs and Hindus in general) while recognising that of others? Is that because their
narrative is in direct contradiction with the narrative of the left’s predetermined “oppressed
class”, so much so that the roles of oppressor-oppressed get reversed in this case?
Because India is still a country where Hindus are in majority, the left and its intellectual
framework will rather treat their narrative of being oppressed at the hand of the invader
Khalji as invalid, falsified, or worse – made up with an eye for the next electoral
calculations? Isn’t the left and its intellectual class playing an essentially electoral game,
according to its own set rules, in order to secure its usual minority vote-bank? Isn’t the
leftist academic giving up on her academic commitment and integrity (assuming, for the
sake of the argument, they cared for such things) in appeasing one group and shunning
another by denying their legitimate right to narrate its own history from its own experiential
perspective? For one group of oppressed, the leftist academics and public intellectuals
have “mindful listening” in offer, while for another, they condescendingly deny the bare
minimum – a hearing, a chance to narrate the community’s own experience, its own
historical narrative. What remains of that history – which is denied the scope to be narrated
by the community that had to bear its brunt first-hand – other than a bunch of fictitious
accounts made up by postmodernist artists, filmmakers, myth-makers and ‘critiques’?
While signing off this article, the author came across a remark, made by a friend on a social
media platform already inflamed by heated discussions over the same topic, which seemed
to precisely summarise the double standards in applying today’s ethical and social norms
on events of the past, and events that reaches us through legends, storytelling, songs and
such other sources of oral history. The remark brought Rani Padmavati’s ethical code of
honour and that of Sansa Stark – a fictional character from the popular TV series Game of
4/5
Thrones – under comparison. The remark read: “ironically, the same people cheer when
Sansa in GoT says “if we lose tomorrow, I’m not going back there alive”.” This observation
lingered on, kept hanging in the air, constantly raising questions and highlighting the
hypocrisy of Devdutt Pattnaik’s wilfully interpreted, deconstructive myth-making exercises.
Chandra, Satish. History of Medieval India. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan , 2007.
Highmore, Ben. Michel de Certeau: Analysing Culture. London: Continuum, 2006.
Marx, Karl. Karl Marx: The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. New York: Mondial,
2005.
Said, Edward W. Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. New Delhi: Penguin
Books India, 2001.
Sharma, R.S. India’s Ancient Past. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Featured Image: www.thedawntraders.wordpress.com
Sreejit Datta
5/5
Jauhar-Shaka: When The Enemy Was At The Gate
indiafacts.org/jauhar-shaka-enemy-gate/
Sahana Singh November 27, 2017
When the enemy was at the fort gates, when rations ran out, and when defeat was certain,
Rajput kingdoms, especially in northwestern India followed a code of honour that inspires
awe and dread to this day. All the women within the fort led by queens dressed in their
wedding fineries and jewellery, along with children would step into a large fire and turn to
ashes in a ceremony called Jauhar before the enemy set upon them. While the women
burned, the Rajput men performed the Shaka or the last fight from which there was no
return. The fort gates would be thrown open and the men, dressed in kesariya or saffron,
the Hindu colour of renunciation, with tulsi leaves in their mouths would charge into the
enemy with the aim of killing as many as possible before breathing their last.
Rajput women who performed Jauhar were regarded as brave pativratas, or exemplars of
such deep devotion for their husbands that they would prefer to join them in their next birth
rather than live a life of separation and dishonour. The men who rode out to perform Shaka
(or Saka) were also highly respected for performing the most fearsome of sacrifices. It was
in keeping with the courage and integrity that Rajputs were known for.
The Jauhars of Chittorgarh

The land of Chittorgarh in the Mewar region located in the state currently known as
Rajasthan has witnessed at least three instances of Jauhar in 1303, 1535 and 1568. It is
the first place that comes to mind when talking of the ritual and Rani Padmini is associated
with its most famous Jauhar. It is believed that the Muslim despot Allauddin Khalji was so
besotted with the beauty of the Rani for which she was acclaimed throughout the land that
he decided to capture the Fort of Chittor. The Rani, however, followed the code of honour
and did not fall into his hands. While many historians believe that the story of Padmini as
told in the ballad Padmawat is a figment of the imagination, there is literary evidence that a
Jauhar took place when Khalji mounted his attack on Chittor in 1303. Khalji’s rapacious
1/9
attacks led to many such immolations of Rajput queens which were recorded by historians
in his time and later.
The second instance of Jauhar in Chittor was during the attack of another Muslim ruler
Bahadur Shah of Gujarat when Rani Karnavati was ruling in the name of her son. Rana
Sanga, her husband had been defeated by Mughal king Babur in the Battle of Khanua and
had later died of his wounds. It must be noted that the Rani had not committed Sati (the
voluntary practice of self-immolation of a wife on the death of her husband) but chosen to
manage the affairs of her husband’s kingdom. Unfortunately, she could not ward off the
onslaught of the latest invader Bahadur Shah, and when Mughal king Humayun, to whom
she had sent a rakhi did not reach her on time, she decided it was time for the Jauhar-
Shaka ritual. Locking herself in a vault with 13,000 other women and children, she ordered
for gunpowder to be used to create the agni needed for burning. Pannadai, the Rani’s maid
was entrusted with the princes in order to continue the bloodline and she managed to take
them away to safety. The men of the fort wore saffron and poured out to fight to the finish.
However, at a later point in time, the kingdom of Mewar including the fort of Chittor was
restored to the Sisodiya Rajputs and was ruled by Vikramaditya and Udai Singh II one after
the other – both of them being the princes who had been whisked away to safety during the
siege and Jauhar-Shaka of 1535.
The ignominy of precipitating the third and final documented instance of Jauhar-Shaka in
Chittor Fort can be attributed to Mughal king Akbar. At the helm of Mewar was Rana Udai
Singh II, the fourth son of Rana Sanga and Rani Karnavati. Many Rajput rulers submitted to
Akbar but Mewar refused to bend. Rana Udai Singh II had decided to strategically set up
his temporary capital in Gogunda, leaving Chittor in the hands of his loyal chieftains Rao
Jaimal and Patta. Akbar’s siege of Chittor in 1567 was a brutal one. He employed over
5,000 expert builders, carpenters and stonemasons to dig mines and sap the walls of the
fort but hundreds of them died due to the continual firing by Rajputs. Enraged by this,
Akbar ordered a general massacre following four months of siege.
“Rising pillars of smoke soon signalled the rite of Jauhar as the Rajputs killed their families
and prepared to die in a supreme sacrifice,” says John F Richards in “The Mughal Empire”.
2/9
3/9
AccordingThetoJauhar of Rajput
historian women
Satish at Chittorgarh
Chandra, in as shown into
addition Akbarnama,
the menV&A Museum,
who camePublic
out Domain.
of the fort to
die fighting, there were 8,000 more Rajput men inside the fort who died defending their
temple. About 30,000 people were killed, including peasants who were aiding the Rajput
soldiers.
In his biography of Akbar, Abul Fazal wrote about the Chittor massacre:
“On this memorable day although there was not in the place a house or street or passage
of any kind that did not exhibit heaps of slaughtered bodies, there were three points in
particular at which the number of slain were surprisingly great; one of these was at the
palace of the Rana, into which the Rajputs had thrown themselves in considerable
numbers; from whence they successively sallied upon the imperialists in small parties, of
two and three together, until the whole had nobly perished sword in hand. The other was
the temple of Mahadeo, their principal place of worship, where another considerable body
of the besieged gave themselves up to the sword. Thirdly, was the gate of Rampurah,
where these devoted men gave their bodies to the winds in appalling numbers.”
Other documented instances of Jauhar-Shaka

Jaisalmer in Rajasthan was the site of two horrific instances of Jauhar. The first was in
1298 when Allauddin Khalji’s troops attacked the Bhatis to avenge their raids on a caravan,
which was transporting valuables. 24,000 women voluntarily gave themselves up to fire
and 3,800 Bhati men committed Shaka. The fort was abandoned for some time but the
surviving Bhatis reoccupied it. About a hundred years later, when one of the Jaisalmer
princes stole a steed from Sultan Firoze Shah Tughlaq, another tyrant who ruled from
Delhi, the latter mounted an attack on the desert fort and the entire saga was repeated.
This time 16,000 women immolated themselves to avoid dishonour.
Further episodes of Jauhar-Shaka were recorded in Ranthambhore in 1301 (during

Allauddin Khalji’s attack on the kingdom of Hammiradeva); Chanderi in 1528 (during
Babur’s attack on the kingdom of Medini Rao); Raisen in 1532 (during Bahadur Shah’s
attack on the kingdom of Silhadi); and again in 1543 (during Sher Shah’s attack on the
kingdom of Puran Malla).
The infamous Aurangzeb’s assault on the Bundelas in 1634 also led to a Jauhar in which
those ladies who could not complete the ritual were dragged into the Mughal harem while
two princes were converted to Islam and the third who refused to convert was put to death.
Even in southern India, there is one documented incident of Jauhar in 1327 when
Muhammad bin Tughlaq attacked the kingdom of Kampili, which was established by an
erstwhile Hoysala commander Singeya Nayaka III. The women consigned themselves to
flames and the ruling king’s head was sent to Tughlaq by his general as a sign of victory.
The Vijayanagara Empire came up on the ruins of this very Kampili kingdom.
Hammira Mahakavya, a Sanskrit epic written in the 15th century gives some detail about
Alauddin Khalji’s massive attack on Chahamana king Hammira of Ranthambhore. It
describes how Khalji made Hammira’s brother defect to his side, how he demanded a
heavy tribute and the hand of Hammira’s daughter. As the granary ran out of food grains,
Hammira’s queens and even his dejected daughter ask him to give her up to the enemy
4/9
and save the fort. The epic portrays Hammira as saying that giving his daughter away to an
unclean mlechcha was as loathsome as prolonging existence by living on his own flesh. A
Jauhar is conducted by all the womenfolk and Hammira is described as throwing himself on
the Muslim army. Amir Khushro has also written in Persian about this Jauhar in
Ranthambhore.
One Rajput Vaghela queen Kamala Devi who could not commit Jauhar fell into the hands of
Allauddin Khalji. She was captured and married forcibly to Khalji. When her daughter, the
ravishingly beautiful Deval Devi grew older, she was married to Khalji’s son Khizr Khan and
one by one, two brothers of Khizr Khan captured and married Deval Devi after a series of
brutal wars.
Flourishing slave markets in the Muslim world

Ostensibly, the main reason for Jauhar-Shaka was to avoid rape, dishonour and
enslavement, perhaps even necrophilia by the invading Muslim armies. The horrific
accounts of the Arab invasion of Sindh in the eighth century might have been well-known.
The Arabs were the first invaders of India who removed large numbers of its native
inhabitants as enslaved captives, according to André Wink in “Al Hind The Making of the
Indo-Islamic World”. Referring to the Sind invasion, he also says:
“…invariably numerous women and children were enslaved. The sources insist that now, in
dutiful conformity to religious law, ‘the one-fifth of the slaves and spoils’ were set apart for
the caliph’s treasury and despatched to Iraq and Syria. The remainder was scattered
among the army of Islam. At Rūr, a random 60,000 captives were reduced to slavery. At
Brahamanabad 30,000 slaves were allegedly taken. At Multan 6,000. Slave raids continued
to be made throughout the late Umayyad period in Sindh, but also much further into Hind,
as far as Ujjain and Malwa. The Abbasid governors raided Punjab, where many prisoners
and slaves were taken.”
In the 11th century, Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni made a series of plundering attacks on India
in which there was mass slaughter and destruction of temples as well as enslavement.
Chronicler al Utbi said (about Mahmud’s attack on Raja Jaipal’s kingdom): “God bestowed
upon his friends such amount of booty as was beyond all bounds and all calculation,
including five hundred thousand slaves, men and women.’ Among the captives were Raja
Jaipal, his children, grandchildren, nephews and other relatives who were all driven to the
slave markets of Ghazni for selling.
Further, with reference to Mahmud’s attack of Ninduna (Punjab) in 1014, al-Utbi said:
“Slaves were so plentiful that they became very cheap; men of respectability in their native
land were degraded by becoming slaves of common shopkeepers (in Ghazni).” After
Mahmud’s assault on Thanesar (Haryana), the Muslim army ‘brought 200,000 captives so
that the capital appeared like an Indian city; every soldier of the army had several slaves
and slave girls,’ testifies chronicler Ferishtah (“qarib do sit hazaar banda”).
The gruesome saga of slave-capturing continued throughout the Muslim rule in India,
including the period of Mughals, as recorded by the Muslim historians themselves.
Sometimes, the numbers of prisoners were mentioned, at other times they were not, but
5/9
many sources record with glee that slaves were becoming cheap and plentiful. If Allauddin
Khalji had 50,000 slave boys in his service, then Firoz Shah Tughlaq was noted to have
180,000 of them. Amir Khushrau, the Persian composer said the Turks could seize, buy or
sell a Hindu whenever they pleased. Female slaves were seen as a means of increasing
the Muslim population of the world. Fresh batches of slaves kept arriving in the slave
markets of Delhi. There were trading communities like Ghakkars in Punjab, which
specialized in bartering slaves from India in exchange for horses from Central Asia. Hindu
slaves were transported in thousands to the slave markets in Central Asia via the
Hindukush (meaning ‘Hindu-slayer’ in Persian) mountains in the Himalayas; many perished
due to the intense cold, which gave the name to the mountains. According to Scott C. Levi,
Hindus were especially in demand in the early modern Central Asian slave markets
because of their identification in Muslim societies as kafirs or non-believers. He also notes
that skilled artisans and attractive females were much sought after:
“Demand was especially high for skilled slaves, and India’s comparatively larger and more
advanced textile industry and agricultural production, and its magnificent imperial
architecture, demonstrated to its neighbours that skilled labour was abundant in the
subcontinent. This accounted for the common practice of rival political powers enslaving
and relocating large numbers of artisans following successful invasions. For example,
during Timur’s late fourteenth-century sack of Delhi, several thousand skilled artisans were
enslaved and taken to Central Asia. Timur presented many of these slaves to his
subordinate elite, although he reserved the masons for use in the construction of the Bibi
Khanum mosque, located in his flourishing capital of Samarqand. It is perhaps not
surprising that attractive, young female slaves commonly demanded an even higher market
price than those skilled at construction engineering.”
— Scott C. Levi, Hindus beyond the Hindu Kush: Indians in the Central Asian Slave Trade
Akbar decreed twice that enslavement of women and children during wars should be
stopped. It was not taken seriously even by his own generals and subsidiary rulers; besides
Akbar himself disregarded ethics when he ordered the siege of Chittor and called for no
one to be spared, not even women. During his reign, children were kidnapped and traded,
a practice, which his son Jahangir also mentioned in his memoir. Foreign travellers such as
Manrique and Bernier have noted that during the reign of Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb,
peasants along with their wives and children were carried away by tax collectors if they
could not pay their dues, and were sold in various markets and fairs.
India was a rich land in every sense of the word – in material riches, in human resources, in
artistic talent – but what completed the picture of irresistibility to the Muslim invaders was
that it was a land of kafirs. There was much Islamic virtue to be gained by converting or
killing the Hindu “idol worshippers” of India.
Rajput women set the standards of valour

Given that the enslavement of human beings and their buying and selling became a thriving
business in Muslim-ruled India, it should not at all come as a surprise that so many Rajput
clans resorted to Jauhar-Shaka when defeat was unavoidable. Since cremation is the
6/9
sacred Hindu rite for releasing the Atman, it made sense that the women chose fire over
poison or any other means of dying.
Many social studies researchers have looked at Jauhar as a practice that objectified Hindu
women and rendered them helpless victims of a patriarchal society. Such a perspective
shows ignorance of not only Hinduism, but the conditions that existed in Indian society
when it was overrun by medieval Muslim rulers steeped in religious intolerance and violent
ideologies. It also overlooks the fact that the Rajput women of the time themselves
expected their men to conform to norms of courage and honour. Traditionally, it was the
queen who handed the sword to her king before every battle. Rajput folklore includes
numerous tales of Ranis who did not take kindly to any hint of cowardice in their menfolk
and shamed them into doing the right thing. This is exactly why the men who set out on
Shaka were forbidden from returning alive.
Take the story of Hadi Rani, the Rajput princess who compelled her newly-married
husband Rao Ratan Singh to heed the call of his father, the king of Mewar to stop the
march of Aurangzeb’s army even though he was reluctant to leave her side. When Rao ji
sent back a sentry to get a memento from his wife to carry to the battle, she cut off her
head, which was duly delivered to her husband. Her message was clear – nothing was to
come in the way of a Kshatriya’s Dharma. Rao ji fought and won the battle; however,
according to legend, he killed himself in order to unite with his wife in death.
There is also the example of Rani Durgavati, the Queen of the Gonds who effectively
administered the kingdom for 15 years after her husband died. She often fought battles
herself and even defeated the Mughals in some of them. In the last battle she fought with
the forces of Akbar, when defeat was imminent after severe wounds, she stabbed herself
rather than fall into the hands of the Mughal army.
Conclusion
Eventually, only a small section of Rajputs such as the Sisodiyas was able to hold out
against the Muslim despots; most Rajput kings formed alliances with the Muslims. The
Marathas emerged as a dominant power eclipsing the waning Mughals and Rajputs. Later,
the Rajputs formed partnerships with the East India Company and in independent India,
their kingdoms were integrated into the state of Rajasthan.
Some historians have held that the lack of effective war strategies, disunity amongst clans
and an extreme sense of honour and ethics prevented the Rajputs from successfully
thwarting the invaders that poured into India.
According to Wilhelm von Pochhammer:
“They let the fleeing enemy escape without molestation, they set free the enemy leaders
taken prisoner without demanding equal treatment for their own captured leaders, on the
wrong assumption that the semi-barbaric steppe people would reciprocate such refined
rules of war. They did not understand that it was not a knights’ tournament they were
engaged in, but that they were locked in a naked and hard struggle for survival, as the
invaders not only wanted to destroy Hindu culture but also send the bearers of the culture
to hell. Even the Jauhar, the voluntary immolation of all women and the last sally of soldiers
7/9
determined to fight till the last breath, were from the point of view of bravery, no doubt very
exalted acts but from the political point of view, it was just the goal the enemy had set for
himself, namely that of destroying the largest number of non-believers.”
The days of Jauhar-Shaka are gone. The bard traditions are dead. The forts and palaces of
Rajasthan are thronged by hordes of selfie-taking tourists, while moviemakers are
producing their own glamorized versions of histories. Academic papers on gender,
violence, sexuality and freedom have included Jauhar in the list of perverse practices of a
medieval era.
But, once upon a time, a ballad immortalized a queen Samyukta (also known as Sanyogita)
who wrote to her king Prithviraj Chauhan:
“Sun of the Chauhans…Is life immortal? Therefore draw your sword, smite down the foes
of Hindustan; think not of self – the garment of this life is frayed and worn. Think not of me
– we two shall be one. Hereafter and forever – go, my King!”
Bibliography:
1. Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present,
Kaushik Roy (2012) Cambridge University Press,
2. The Mughals of India, Harbans Mukhia, Blackwell Publishing (2004)
3. Indian Castles 1206–1526: The Rise and Fall of the Delhi Sultanate, Konstantin S
Nossov, Konstantin Nossov, Osprey Publishing
4. Religion and Rajput Women: The Ethic of Protection in Contemporary Narratives,
Lindsey Harlan (1992), University of California Press
5. Women of India – Their Status since the Vedic Times, Arun R Kumbhare (2009),
iUniverse Inc.
6. Naukar, Rajput and Sepoy – The ethnohistory of the military labour market in
Hindustan – 1450-1850, Dirk H A Kolff (1990), Cambridge University Press
7. The Muslim Diaspora (Volume 2, 1500-1799): A Comprehensive Chronology of the
Spread of Islam in Asia, Africa, Europe and the Americas, Everett Jenkins, Jr. (2000),
McFarland.
8. Medieval India: From Sultanat to the Mughals Part – II, Satish Chandra (2005), Har-
Anand Publications.
9. The Ethics of Suicide: Historical Sources, Margaret Pabst Battin (2015), Oxford
University Press
10. A Comprehensive History of Medieval India, PN Chopra, BN Puri, MN Das (2003),
Sterling Publishers
11. Mughal Empire in India: A Systematic Study Including Source Material. S.R. Sharma
(1999), Atlantic Publishers
12. Head and Heart: Valour and Self-Sacrifice in the Art of India, Mary Storm
(2015), Taylor & Francis.
13. Epic and Counter-Epic in Medieval India, Aziz Ahmad (1963), Journal of the
American Oriental Society
14. Rajasthan: Land of Kings, Roloff Beny and Sylvia Matheson (1984), Frederic Muller
Ltd
8/9
15. Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery, M.A. Khan
(2009)
16. Al-Hind: the Making of the Indo-Islamic World, vol. 1, Andre Wink (1991), Brill
Academic (Leiden)
17. Hindus beyond the Hindu Kush: Indians in the Central Asian Slave Trade, Scott C.
Levi (2002), Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Third Series, Vol. 12, No. 3 (Nov.
2002), Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great
Britain and Ireland
18. India’s Road to Nationhood: A Political History of the Subcontinent, Wilhelm von
Pochhammer (1981), Allied
19. Women in India: A Social and Cultural History, Sita Anantha Raman (2009), Praeger
Featured Image: Chittorgarh Fort. Courtesy: Santosh Namby
Sahana Singh
Sahana Singh writes on environmental (water) issues, current affairs and
Indian history. She is a member of Indian History Awareness and Research
(IHAR), and has recently authored “The Educational Heritage of Ancient India
– How An Ecosystem of Learning Was Laid to Waste”.
9/9
Book Review: Sati by Meenakshi Jain
indiafacts.org/book-review-sati-meenakshi-jain/
Abhinav Agarwal October 6, 2016
Sati: Evangelicals, Baptist Missionaries, and the Changing Colonial Discourse by

Meenakshi Jain (Amazon India, Amazon)
In many ways this book documents the birth of atrocity literature and its first application in
India on Hindus. The successful template of manufacturing atrocities, hyping them, and
then using the resulting public opinion to further an evangelical agenda may appear new,
but it is one that was honed more than two centuries ago. This is yet another stunning book
from Meenakshi Jain, coming after her 2013 tour-de-force, “Rama and Ayodhya.”
What was the evidence and prevalence of Sati in ancient and medieval India? Did it have
religious sanction? Was it mandatory? Was there coercion? Was it confined to certain
regions and castes or widespread? Did it change over time? Did it increase or reduce over
time? Did the English or the East India Company ban it? Did they want to ban it? What
were their motivations in banning it? Were they driven by the need to put a stop to a
widespread evil? How did Indians react to the ban? When talking of Sati, these are some of
the questions that should spring to mind. These are the questions that the book asks, and
answers.
All but abandoned morals

It is instructional to visit the state of English society in the eighteenth century, for both the
entertainment value as well as to get a glimpse into the kind of people, who came down to
India and began their mission of civilizing the brown man. While “most prominent public
figures were ‘distinguished for the grossness and immorality of their lives’“, “at the other end
of the social scale, the masses were ‘ignorant and brutal’ to an extent difficult to visualize.’”
The English clergy was not far behind, and “was among the most inactive in Europe… The
archbishops, bishops and their subordinates had all but abandoned celibacy.”
1/7
English morals, if they could be called that, were the subject of much debate and lament in
England in the eighteenth century. In the decades following the Battle of Plassey in 1757,
that threw open trade in Bengal to the English, fortunes were made on a scale perhaps
never seen before, or after. “In the twelve years between 1757 and 1769, it was virtually
guaranteed that a Company servant in Bengal would return home with a fortune.” With such
easy money came easy morals.
“A favourite after-dinner toast changed the traditional lament, ‘Alas and alack-a-day,’ into ‘A
lass and a lakh a day.'”
“Young civilians were told on their arrival that among their first duties was to ‘stock a
zenana’ and that the mistress was the best moonshee (accountant) in the country.”
Fifteen-course meals were not uncommon, and a visitor to Calcutta in 1761 remarked that
“it is become a saying that they live like Englishmen and die like rotten sheep. Of 84 rank
and file, which our company consisted of on our arrival, we had but 34 remaining in three
months.”
Robert Clive had amassed a personal fortune of more than 400,000 pounds through his
thievery in Bengal. According to this site, £401,102 in 1767 would be approximately
worth £63 billion in 2016. In his own words, given the wealth in Bengal that was there to be
looted, he felt he was “astonished at my own moderation.”
If the soldiers and officers of the Company were ‘honourable’ men, the men of the cloth
were not far behind. Here is one incident concerning the army chaplain, Mr. Blunt:
“This incomprehensible young man got abominably drunk and in that disgraceful condition
exposed himself to both soldiers and sailors, running out stark naked into the midst of
them, talking all sorts of bawdy and ribaldry, and singing scraps of the most blackguard and
indecent songs….”
Religion, i.e., Christianity, was “at a low ebb” not only in Calcutta but also “throughout
England.” The Rev. Long lamented that let alone religion, “there was not even common
morality in high quarters. … These were days when we find a Colonel submit to be
circumcised in order to get possession of a Mussalmani who would not on other terms
submit to be his mistress.”
This then was the state of England, Englishmen, their morals, and their ethics in the
eighteenth century. As the pendulum swung to the other extreme, there was a concerted
effort to divert attention from the scandals of the colonizers to the perceived scandals of the
colonized. Where none could be found, some had to be conjured. Imperial dominance in
India had to justified on not only economic but also on moral terms. To do that, it would not
do to describe the Hindus of India as gentle people. The palette had to change. The Hindus
had to become degenerates, immoral, evil people in desperate need of the civilizing light of
the Englishman and his religion. The Englishmen had to justify their ‘white man’s burden.’
“Sati would become a major validation of the civilizing

mission.”
2/7
But, before we get into that, an important question to be asked, and answered, would, and
should be – how prevalent was the practice of Sati in India. How had it changed from
ancient times to the eighteenth century? Was there an increase or decrease in its practice?
How did its religious and social outlook change over time?
Manu considered them “worthy to be worshipped

and the lamp that lights up the household.” What
about their married life and thereafter? The Laws
of Manu (Manusmriti) stated that “they were to
receive the protection of the father in childhood,
the husband after marriage, and the son on the
death of the husband.” No word or advice on sati.
Yajnavalkya “viewed wives as gifts of the gods

who should be respected and valued.” Nothing
about self-immolation.
None of Dashratha’s wives commited sati after

his death.
The Mahabharata has only scattered references

to sati – one being Madri, the other being of
Sati, by Nandlal Bose
Vasudeva and Krishna’s wives committing sati
after the death of their husbands. But there are
countless examples of wives of fallen warriors offering them funeral oblations. After all, a
billion soldiers perished in the war (according to one shloka in the Mahabharata). But no
sati for their wives.
It is only towards the seventh century AD that “some writers had begun to commend
immolation for widows.” While there are scattered references to the nobility of sati, by
Angira for example, many other writers expressed their reservation about sati. So if an
eighteenth century guide on the religious duties of women commended sati, it also took
care to stress its voluntary nature.
There are some inscriptions that record incidences of sati. For example, despite “strong
opposition of her parents,” Dekabbe, a Sudra woman, immolated herself after her “husband
had been killed in battle against a Ganga king.” This is from the times of Rajendra Chola.
Regionally speaking, the incidence of sati seems to have been the highest in Rajasthan –
unsurprising, since defiance to the Islamic invaders was the fiercest in this region. In
Bengal, on the other hand, no “sati inscriptions from that period have so far been
discovered.”
There seem to have been some cases of unwilling sati, including that of two queens of
Kashmir, and some accounts by foreign travellers who wrote of both unwilling immolations
as well as cases where the women displayed a marked “aversion to intervention.” Many
foreign narratives and accounts however have been dismissed as “highly exaggerated“,
“formulaic“, and “replete with generalizations.”
3/7
Which brings us to the third, and most pertinent set
of questions – what caused the English to ban it?
Who were the main actors in the campaign to ban
Sati? What were the motivations?
Sati stone of Sodha Rajputs, Sindh,

Pakistan
The opening of India to missionary enterprise
Religion entered the fray when, towards the end of the eighteenth century, a movement
known as Evangelicalism began in England – as a hostile reaction to the “irreligion
propagated by Voltaire.” The intent was to make the lower class of the Englishmen
religious. In this toxic brew was the Cambridge sect, from the University of Cambridge,
and a group at Clapham, a village near London. It is with some interest that we learn
that Thomas Macaulay‘s father, Zachary Macaulay, went to Clapham in 1803, and stayed
there for more than fifteen years. These “Claphamites” had two aims – the abolition of the
slave trade and “the opening of India to missionary enterprise.”
The East India Company had little interest in the religious affairs of India and the Hindus. At
least initially. For them, disturbing the natives in the practice of their religion would only
make it difficult to do commerce with them. Commerce came first for the company. In fact,
till 1813, the East India Company “did not permit missionaries to operate in its territories in
India.”
The leader and the “father” of the missionary enterprise in the Indian empire was Charles
Grant, who converted to Evangelical Christianity in 1776. It was he, who, in collaboration
with Rev. David Brown, William Chambers, and George Udny, drafted the plan for a
“Mission to Bengal” that “envisioned the division of the province [of Bengal] into eight
missionary circles, each with a clergyman of the Church of England.” This was in 1786-87.
But churches were only the second step. The first was the “idea of native schools as
prepatory to the main business of giving Christian light to this land sitting in heathen
darkness.” This description would not be out of place today, in the twenty-first century.
Nothing has changed for the soul harvesting vultures in over two centuries.
The plan was to first have “two young clergymen” come in as missionaries to Calcutta (now
Kolkata) in Bengal, and then move to “that famous seat of Hindoo learning, Benares (now
Varanasi). There they will spend about three years in study, and furnish themselves with
4/7
languages. After which they may begin their glorious work of giving light to the heathen with
every probability of success.”
After returning to England in 1790, after a twenty-year stay in India, Grant he published
“Observations“, what became a Parliamentary Paper on the eve of the Company Charter
debates of 1813 and 1833. He concluded his survey of the state of Hindu society thus –
“the moral character and condition of the native … is extremely depraved, and that the
state of society among that people is, in consequence, wretched. These evils … have been
traced to their civil and religious institutions; … in the false, corrupt, impure, extravagant,
and ridiculous principles and tenets of their religion…”
As I said before, the barrier to this evangelical fanaticism was the commercial interests of
the Company. In fact, John Shore, Governor General between 1793 and 1798, and himself
“eminently Christian“, could not but remark – “If there was any disrespect shown towards
their religious beliefs ‘the bond of attachment would soon be dissolved, and disaffection and
aversion be substituted for subordination.’”
The discussions around the renewal of the East India Company’s charter in 1793 provided
opportunity for the Evangelicals to insert their missionary clauses into the bill, but these
were removed upon protestations by the Directors of the Company who were alarmed by
these insertions. The lessons learned by the Evangelicals were to be applied twenty years
later, in 1813, to much greater success.
In this endeavor, the Evangelicals were helped by James Mill, a Utilitarian, who managed
to pen a six-volume treatise on India without having any personal experience of India! His
writings on India have become useful fodder for racists, Orientalists, communist and leftist
historians ever since: for him, the Hindus “were perfectly destitute of historical records.”
According to Mill, Hindu civilization could be categorized as representing “the rudest and
weakest state of the human mind.” James Mill’s “The History of British India” would
become a “standard work for East India Company officials, and eventually a textbook for
candidates for the Indian Civil Service.” [this is not very different from the prevailing
environment, where the work of Bipin Chandra and other communist historians is required
reading for those preparing for the Civil Services examinations in India – books replete with
distortions and omissions]
The battle moved to Bengal, with missionaries setting foot in Bengal in 1799, and shortly
thereafter the New Testament was translated into Bengali, and which was hailed as “the
first stroke of the axe leveled at the banyan-tree of India’s superstitions.” The irony in
referring to the Bible as an antidote to superstition would be difficult to miss. Then there
was the “A Memoir of the Expediency of an Ecclesiastical Establishment for British
India“, published by Claudius Buchanan, and which was dedicated to the Archbishop of
Canterbury. “In the appendix were detailed a variety of superstitions of the Hindus, to
counter the general perception of them as a mild, humane, and inoffensive people.”
However, the best efforts of the Baptists and missionaries resulted in a grand total of thirty-
one converts in their first ten years in the region. These efforts however did result in the
mutiny by Sepoys in Vellore in 1806, that saw more than a hundred officers and men being
killed. Why? Because there had been an “unpleasant feeling” among the sepoys that there
5/7
was “interference with the marks of the Hindoos… The presence of Christian missionaries
in the region strengthened their apprehension.” The net result was that there was a setback
to missionary activities in India for some time – in 1812, there “was a raid against the
missionaries in Bengal,” and in 1813, “several missionaries from different societies were
ordered to quit India without delay.”
The Brahmin – not a set of worse men in the Earth

The setbacks were temporary. What emerged with renewed clarity in the minds of the
missionaries, however, was that the status of the Brahmins had to be undermined, for it
was determined that these Brahmins were held in the greatest respect by those the
missionaries sought to convert. “A pronounced anti-Brahmin sentiment was palpable in
missionary writings.” They were helped by Wellesley, “the first Governor-General to depart
from the policy of non-interference in the religious practices of the natives.” The waters
were tested by banning the religious sacrifice of children in 1802. Even in the eyes
of H.H.Wilson, the sacrifice of infants was “neither countenanced by the religious orders
nor the people at large.” Furthermore, Wilson also remarked that the “practice of female
infanticide, too, was a ‘very limited observance, being confined to a few castes in one or
two districts.’”
As the East India Company’s charter came up for renewal in 1813, the fury with which
Hindu atrocities and their “evil practices” were manufactured reached a frenzied pace. Even
the rath yatra at the Temple of Jagannath was not spared. William Carey estimated that
every year 120,000 pilgrims perished at the rath yatra. Yes, more than one lakh people
every year! Pamphlets were published and distributed, “well-orchestrated” campaigns were
launched inside and outside Parliament. “A staggering 908 petitions bearing more than half
a million signatures were presented to Parliament.” So as to not alarm the Indians, it was
suggested to combine “religion with education, preferably via Fort William College.”
Wilberforce estimated that every year there were an estimated 10,000 “annual sacrifices of
women” (sati) in the Bengal province alone.
The missionary clauses were finally included in the Charter – “despite the opposition of the
House of Commons and many members of the Company.”
The second stage was from 1813 to 1829, when “awesome figures” were conjured to show
that sati was a raging practice. Sati, in many ways, became the single focal point to validate
British rule in India.
The learned William Ward calculated, with a breakup, the total number of people sacrificed
annually to the Hindu gods as 10,500. “However, on the very next page, he doubled the
number of satis from five to ten thousand” Not to be outdone, Rev. David Brown cited
William Chambers in estimating the number of sati incidents to be “about 50,000.” Charles
Grant hypothesized a number of 33,000. The British government started maintaining a
registry of sati cases between 1815 and 1828 in the three Presidencies of Bengal, Madras,
and Bombay. In Bengal, a region not associated with sati, these government figures
recorded 5,997 of 6,632 cases of sati – i.e., 90% of all sati cases from the three
Presidencies were recorded in Bengal – which “raises uncertainties about the reliability of
the data.” It is pertinent to note that it was Bengal where the missionaries were focusing on,
6/7
and therefore unsurprisingly, from other places, sati was almost non-existent. “The Judge
of Malabar notified that the practice was entirely absent in his area. ,,, The Judge of
Trichinopoly informed around the same time that he could trace no instance of widow
immolation for the previous ten years in the district.” But not one to let facts deter
propaganda, Baptists kept up their campaign of calumny with frenzied vigour. “In 1819,
Friend of India cited the figure of 100,000 satis per year. In 1829, the journal claimed that
the custom had claimed over one million lives in Bengal alone!”
Sati was abolished in December 1829.
“Once the ban was announced, Company officials stopped their surveillance of sati,
and the allegedly rampant practice seemed to have abruptly ceased. It was a truly
unique case of prompt universal compliance of a government diktat.”
Thus we have possibly the first instance of the manufacture of “atrocity literature.” The
fabrication of evidence, the wanton exaggeration of data, the shameless duplicity of foreign
players, rabid evangelical motivations, and the cold-blooded manipulation of public policy –
all ingredients witnessed in the eighteenth century and in the first decades of nineteenth
century, and again over two hundred years later. All except the dullest of citizens and the
most compromised of intellectuals would not fail to see the parallels with the manufacture of
“intolerance” and other controversies today. Lessons taught by history are forgotten by
those whose foremost duty it is to remember them, the lessons being inflicted a second
time on a hapless nation.
opinions of the author. IndiaFacts does not assume any responsibility or liability
for the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information in this
article.
Abhinav Agarwal
Abhinav Agarwal is a son, husband, father, technologist and an IIM-B Gold Medalist.
7/7
Sati: Re-examining the Historical Evidence from
1900BCE to 1900CE
indiafacts.org/sati-historical-evidence/
Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay November 30, 2017
Sati is a practice of self-immolation of a widow either on her husband’s pyre or separately

after her husband’s death. Polemics against Hinduism or India, always talk about sati along
with other “evils” like caste system, oppression of women and superstitious practices. Sati
is portrayed as a regressive custom which was widely prevalent throughout India. It is to be
distinguished from the practice of Jauhar in northwestern India, which grew during the 14th/
15th century, and where Hindu women preferred death by collective suicide rather than
slavery or rape they faced if captured by barbaric Islamic hordes.
The Sati Narrative

British records as well as Christian Missionary records from 1800 onwards indicate
anywhere between 10,000 to 100,000 cases of satis every year [1]. It is said that when the
British could not tolerate the injustice against women anymore, they abolished sati under
British rule in the 1829 after sustained campaigns by Christian missionaries such as William
Carey and reformers such as Ram Mohan Roy. Luke Harding of The Guardian writes [2]:
“It has its origins in Hinduism … The practice is particularly associated with the north Indian
state of Rajasthan, where the queens of the Rajput rulers would traditionally immolate
themselves en masse. But memorials to women who have committed suttee exist all over
India … There have been repeated official attempts to discourage the cult – by the reformist
Mughal emperor Akbar, for example, in the 16th century, and by the British, who banned it
in 1829.”
The government of India also enacted the Sati Prevention Act in 1988 which aims to
prevent the “the commission of sati and its glorification and for matters connected therewith
or incidental thereto”. There has been a huge amount of research and scholarly papers by
1/9
feminists, social scientists and human rights activists of different colors and hues on sati-
pratha and the plight of women in India, patriarchy, and regressive nature of Hinduism.
This essay is specifically about Sati-pratha and not Jauhar. I do not focus on the ethical,
moral, social or spiritual background of the practice. Instead, my focus in this article is to
understand the written and epigraphic evidence of actual eyewitness accounts and other
evidence of Sati like inscriptions and monuments. Given the extensive literature on Sati-
pratha, especially in modern times, and the fact that various reformers have tried to stop
the practice, and also given that there was the need to enact multiple laws over the ages to
ban this practice, it would seem to appear that sati-pratha was widely prevalent. In this
essay, we will analyze empirical data to examine this claim. We will try to understand the
degree of pervasiveness of this practice, its geographic spread and its demographic
aspects.
Evidence of Sati in Veda and Itihasa

The Rig Veda (10:18:7-8) talks about the first known instance of an aborted sati. It
describes a cremation where a widow who was lying beside her husband was not allowed
to kill herself. Scholars like Michael Witzel generally date the Rig Veda between 1900
B.C.E and 1200 B.C.E [3] [4], and thus we have only 1 recorded aborted instance of Sati in
this ~700 year period.
The Mahabharata records at least three events of self-immolation, that of Pandu’s wife
Madri, that of Vasudeva’s four wives and the self-immolation of five of Krishna’s wives after
his death. The Ramayana whose origins are more eastern (Ikshvaku clan) record no
evidence of self-immolation. The Mahabharata is generally dated by western scholars
between 1200 BCE and 400 BCE and they typically argue that the current text has many
layers incorporating different features over the ages. It is as if Mahabharata is a snapshot of
the period 1200 BCE to 400 BCE and in this ~800 years there are only 3 documented
instances of self-immolation with 10 deaths, all restricted to northern and western Indian
sub-continent. [5]
It is evident that during the Vedic period at least, Sati was an exceedingly uncommon
practice. In a span of 1500 years from 1900 BCE to 400 BCE, there are only 4 recorded
instances!
Epigraphic and Written Evidence of Sati

Below I have presented empirical data for actual instances of Sati based on eyewitness
accounts and epigraphic evidence. This data has been sourced from Meenakshi Jain’s
meticulous and exhaustive research of various primary and secondary sources [6].
The first recorded foreign account of Sati-pratha is that by Diodorus of Sicily and describes
an eyewitness account of Hieronymus of Cardia (~326 BCE) who describes the quarrel
between two widows as to who would have the honor of dying along with her husband. A
lady called Pustika, the wife of one Ayamani of Guntur region of Andhra Pradesh committed
self-immolation around 300 CE and their remains were discovered in a pot unearthed in a
village in the region.
2/9
In 464 CE, Queen Rajyavati, the widow of Dharmadeva of Nepal, decided to commit Sati
but later did not go through with it and lived a long life. In 510 CE, Goparaja, the chieftain of
king Bhanugupta died while fighting against the Maitras, and his widow committed self-
immolation in Eran, Sagar District. In Sanski, a village in Kolhapur district of Maharashtra, a
sati stone inscription dated to 550 CE was found. In 606 CE, Queen Yashomati, the mother
of Harsha and the wife of King Prabhakaravardhana committed pre-emptive Sati when it
became apparent that her husband had no chance of survival. The 842 CE Dholpur
Inscription of Rajasthan records the sati of one Kanahulla, wife of one Chandamahasena.
The Ghatiyala Inscription of Rajasthan dated to 890 CE records the sati of one
Samvaladevi wife of Ranuka.
In 955 CE, the wives of Parantaka Chola I committed self-immolation. It is said that he had
11 wives. In 973 CE, Vanavan Mahadevi, the queen of Sundara Chola (Parantaka II) self-
immolated herself on her husband’s pyre. In 1044 CE, the consorts of Rajendra Chola,
Vanavan Mahadeviar, Mukkokilan, Panchavan Mahadevi, Arindhavan Madevi and
Viramadevi who committed sati. In 1057 CE, a Sudra woman Dekabbe committed sati,
despite fierce opposition from her parents, when her husband was killed in a battle against
a Ganga king. In 1218 CE, Bhuvanamuludaiyal the wife of Kulothunga Chola III committed
Sati. In c1290 CE, the Venetian traveler, Marco Polo, reported a sati in Malabar. The
Moroccan traveler Ibn Battuta saw the self-immolation of three women in Dhar, Madhya
Pradesh. The husbands of these three women had died while fighting against the Sumras
of Sind.
Sati was rare enough that instances of it were memorialized and valorized. Based on
memorial stones raised as tribute to women who committed satis, it can be said that not
more than 100 sati incidents took place in Vijaynagar (1336 to 1646 CE). In 1606, Jesuit
missionary Roberto de Nobili reported a sati in Madurai. Till 1700 CE, there are perhaps a
few more eyewitness accounts of Sati by foreign travelers and missionaries. As per a local
tradition, eight four women in Rajasthan are said have committed sati in 1735 CE on the
death of Raja Budh Singh of Bundi.
Epigraphic evidence from Karnataka records eleven instances of Sati in southern India
between 1000 CE to 1400 CE, and 41 instances between 1400 CE to 1600 CE. In 1680,
one wife of Shivaji became a Sati and in 1700 the wife of Rajaram performed sati. In 1749,
the wife of Shivaji’s grandson Shahu committed sati. As per an estimate by Altekar, quoted
by Meenkashi Jain, from the period 1300 CE to 1800 CE, the incident of sati among royal
families of Rajasthan was as high as 10%. In Marwar, between 1562 CE to 1843 CE, over
a period of 281 years, there are 222 recorded instances of self-immolation on the death of
rulers.
Till 12th century there are no epigraphic evidence of sati-pratha in Bengal. Kulluka Bhatta
was a commentator on Manusmriti and Jimutavahana (c. 12th century) was the earliest
writer on smriti (law) from Bengal whose texts are extant. Neither of them talk about sati. In
fact Jimutavahana had a decidedly anti-sati approach and a modern outlook on widow
rights; in his seminal text Dayabhaga he recognizes the right of a widow without any male
issue to inherit the properties of her deceased husband. From 1700 CE to 1800 CE, as per
European records there were only 5 eyewitness accounts of sati in Bengal – in 1742, 1770,
1779, 1793 and 1799.
3/9
As Evangelical Christian movement started gaining more prominence in India starting from
1800, enumeration of sati incidents sky-rocketed and suddenly annual 10,000 sati incidents
were being reported from Bengal alone in 1803, a mind-boggling increase of 2000x, and
some even suggested 50,000 sati occurrences annually! According to government figures,
8134 widows performed sati in the 14 years between 1815 and 1829, of which more than
60% cases were recorded in Calcutta, a region which had almost no history of sati, thereby
casting doubt on the validity of government data.
A coloured aquatint by the caricaturist Thomas Rowlandson (1756-1827), after Quiz (John Page Mellor), from 1815.
Source: The Wellcome Institute | Source: victorianweb.org
The sudden increase in the documented rate of Sati under the British government can be
due to one of the following reasons. One, the data is unreliable and fabricated, exaggerated
to support missionary propaganda and justify the civilizing mission of the British. On the
other hand, if the data is accurate, what change of conditions during the British Raj in
Calcutta, led to this spike?
Analysis of 2500 years of data

If we add up all the Sati incidents from 1900 BCE till 1900 CE, based on actual eyewitness
accounts and epigraphic records, there are hardly more than 500 unique incidents over a
~4000 year period, or an average of 1 sati every 8 years, and nowhere near the 10,000 per
year incidents recorded by British Colonizers and Christian missionaries. Having said that,
we prefer to err on the side of conservatism and thus apply two conditions to our data set:
1. We change the starting point of our analysis from 1900 BCE to 500 BCE without
changing the total number of incidents (~500)
2. We also assume that the evidence represents only 5% of the self-immolation
incidents and that 95% incidents remained unreported.
Studies have shown that 52% of all violent crimes goes unreported [7] and thus any data is
generally normalized to reflect the under-reporting. However, following our conservative
4/9
approach we will assume that 95% of self-immolation incidents were not reported and
recorded, and we normalize our data accordingly.
Based on the above, we may make an estimate that no more than 10,000 Sati-pratha
incidents took place, assuming that the recorded ~500 incidents reflect only 5% of actual
estimated cases. Moreover, we have shaved off 1,500 years of the timeline from our
dataset and thus the period in question is now 2,500 years. Assuming that the geographic
distribution and other criteria hold good we can conclude that:
Most of the incidents were restricted to northern and northwestern part of India
The majority of the women who committed Sati belonged to Kshatriya community/
warrior or princely class
More than 90% of the incidents took place after 1400 CE
Analysis of Data for 1400 CE to 1800 CE

If we restrict ourselves to the period between 1400 CE and 1800 CE, we come across not
more than ~400 reported cases, which translates to 8,000 estimated cases of Sati. In 1400
CE, India’s population was around 98 million (9.8 Crores) and by 1800 CE, the population
increased to 189 million (18.9 Crores) [8]. The average annual population during this period
144 million (14.4 crores). With respect to the average population in those 4 centuries, how
significant is the estimated 8,000 Sati cases? Let us do a quick calculation to estimate the
significance of Sati. We will try to estimate what percentage of widows actually committed
sati.
Today, death rate in India is 7.3 out of 1000. In earlier eras, when medical science was not
as advanced as today, the average death rate was much higher. Since we don’t have data
for this, we have assumed that 4.5% (see Note 9) of the population died every year, which
translates to a death rate of 45 out of 1000. Thus the average deaths per year were 4.5%
of 144 million or 6.5 million (65 Lakhs). Of those 6.5 million, many were children, as infant
mortality was very high in those centuries. Many deaths were of unmarried people and so
on. It is assumed that 1/6th of those who died were men who left behind widows (the factor
of 1/6 is based on a British record and is discussed in Meenakshi Jain’s book). This
translates to 10 lakh widows on average per year. Of these 10 lakh widows every year,
only 20 committed self-immolation.
Death Rate 4.5% Today in India it is 0.73%
Average Deaths/ Year 6,457,500
Widows 1,076,250 Assuming that 1/6 th were widows
Sati Cases Reported 400
Unreported Cases 95%
Estimated Sati cases 8,000
Estimated Sati/ Year 20
5/9
It is obvious that even assuming 95% under-reporting, Sati-pratha was a very rare event,
and only 1 out of 50,000 widows committed Sati (1 in 53,813 to be exact) [9]. Assuming
lower death rates, the instances of Sati are still quite low as seen below:
Crude Death Rate Sati Instances
4% 1 in 45,000
3% 1 in 35,000
2% 1 in 24,000
Let us say that someone objects and says that I am not being conservative enough, even
after assuming 95% under-reporting. Therefore, for the sake of extreme conservatism, I
assume that 99% of Sati instances were unreported, or that only 1 out of 100 cases were
recorded. Even then, not more than 1 out of 10,000 widows committed Sati assuming a
CDR of 4.5% [10].
If we were to stretch this really thin and assume that the fantastic Missionary inspired
government data from 1815 to 1828 to be true (which is highly unlikely), even then not more
than 1 in 400 widows in Bengal Presidency committed Sati every year.
Implications of the Analysis

In other words, whichever way we analyze the data, the conclusion is inescapable. Sati was
a very rare practice. To put things in perspective:
1 out of 50,000 widows committed Sati every year, assuming 95% under-reporting
1 out of 20,000 women commit suicide in the UK every year [11].
1 out of 10,000 US Citizens die on account of gun violence [12].
1 out of 3,500 women die from honor killings in Pakistan [13].
1 in 2,400 Indians die from cancer every year [14].
1 out of 32 children in US are exposed to domestic violence every year [15].
1 in 6 slaves from Africa died during the Atlantic Slave trade while being transported
from Africa to US and UK [16]
1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed
rape in her lifetime [17]
1 out of every 5 women in the UK has been the victim of a sexual offence or
attempted offence [18].
Conclusion
Sati was an obscure practice for all practical purposes. Yet the British colonizers and
Christian Missionaries decided to collaborate despite being sworn enemies and
sensationalize the obscure tradition by bringing it into the limelight. The fabrication of data
and the subsequent enactment of Sati prohibition helped both groups. The Colonizers
could now show a legitimate reason for ruling over India and continue their “civilizing
mission” and the Christian Missionaries could continue their program to convert the
heathens. In fact a majority of foreign writers before colonial times actually talk about how
6/9
rare the practice of self-immolation was. However, such voices were ignored when data for
suttee was being “tabulated” and fantastic numbers like 10,000 incidents per year were
being fabricated!
The data we have furnished indicates that there was a surge in the number of Sati incidents
after 12th century, when Islam became a dominant force in India and when northern India
started being ruled by various Muslim warlords. Even in Bengal, sati incidents started
getting reported only after 12th century, when eastern Bengal was taken over by Muslims.
Even then it was a rare phenomenon. Today more women die from suicides and honor
killings in the UK and Pakistan respectively than they ever did from sati. Violent crimes
against women in USA today are statistically more common than Sati ever was; for
example on an average, three women are murdered every day by a current or former male
partner [15].
Yet Sati was painted as an extraordinary abuse of unimagined proportions, requiring urgent
and immediate intervention by the British Crown. Rarer than Sati was perhaps becoming a
Prophet of an Abrahamic religion; 1 out of 50 million became Prophets [19]. Thankfully
there has been a lull for the past 1400 years, else we would have had to deal with 70 more
prophets!
An anecdote which I have heard from elders in my family is that many British men of the
East India Company in Bengal, in fact wanted the young Hindu widows as their mistresses
and hence the urgency to ban sati. They would often paint themselves as saviors and
forcefully “marry” these widows claiming that they were saving them from a plight far worse,
despite stiff opposition from the women and their families. Many say that this is in fact the
origin of many of the Anglo-Indian communities of Bengal, although I personally have not
done any research on this.
Whatever be the case, Sati has always been a rare custom since Rig Vedic times. Post-
independence, 40 odd cases of Sati have been reported of which a majority are
unsurprisingly from Rajasthan. However, starting from 1800s till date, Sati (along with
issues like caste system, Dalit oppression, Brahmin supremacy, Hindu patriarchy) has been
used as a tool of propaganda by different anti-Hindu forces like British colonizers, Christian
Evangelists and now, by social scientists and human rights activists.
The Sati that we know of today in our history and social studies textbooks, must be viewed
in a historical context for what it is – an almost forgotten obscure custom, exceedingly rare,
practiced by perhaps a handful of communities in some specific geographies, being
suddenly brought into spotlight and sensationalized so as to shame, control and convert the
Hindus.
References and Notes

[1] Book Review: Sati by Meenakshi Jain http://indiafacts.org/book-review-sati-meenakshi-
jain/
[2] The ultimate sacrifice https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/aug/23/gender.uk1
[3] Early Sanskritization. Origins and Development of the Kuru State. Michael Witzel (1995)
7/9
https://web.archive.org/web/20120220153727/http://www.ejvs.laurasianacademy.com/ejvs01
04/ejvs0104article.pdf
[4] I personally don’t agree with this date or its premise, the so-called Aryan Migration
Theory. The historic context in which the Rig Vedic hymns were composed points to much
earlier dates.
[5] The Sati Strategy. Review of Meenakshi Jain’s book Sati
http://koenraadelst.blogspot.in/2016/03/the-sati-strategy-review-of-meenakshi.html
[6] Sati. Evangelicals, Baptist Missionaries, and the Changing Colonial Discourse (Aryan
Books International, Delhi 2016) by Meenkashi Jain
[7] More than 3 Million Violent Crimes in U.S. go Unreported Every Year
http://www.allgov.com/news/top-stories/more-than-3-million-violent-crimes-in-us-go-
unreported-every-year?news=844943
[8] World Population http://www.worldhistorysite.com/population.html
[9] Earliest available Crude Death Rates (CDR) in India is between 4% and 5% in the
period 1900 to 1925. We have assumed the CDR in our analysis to be the average of
earliest available data at 4.5%, although in earlier centuries it would probably have been
higher than that.
https://image.slidesharecdn.com/populationstabilizationinindia13-140429233445-
phpapp01/95/population-stabilization-in-india-13022014-26-638.jpg?cb=1398814569
It is only in recent decades that there has been a rapid decline of CDR from 2.5% in 1950
to 0.7% today, or an average of 1.6% since independence. At 1.6% CDR, sati incidents
would still be 1 in 19,000!
[10] Even if we were to assume 99% under-reporting and lower death rates, sati would
statistically still be considered a rare phenomenon.
Crude Death Rate Instances
4% 1 in 10,000
3% 1 in 7,000
2% 1 in 5,000
[11] Samaritans Suicide Statistics Report 2017

https://www.samaritans.org/sites/default/files/kcfinder/files/Suicide_statistics_report_2017_Fi
nal%282%29.pdf
[12] On an average day 93 Americans are killed with guns
https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-by-the-numbers/
[13] In Pakistan, 1,000 women die in ‘honor killings’ annually. Why is this happening?
8/9
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/05/28/in-pakistan-honor-
killings-claim-1000-womens-lives-annually-why-is-this-still-happening
Moreover 2/3rd of domestic violence cases in western countries don’t get reported [See
http://jech.bmj.com/content/58/7/536]. Since Pakistan is nowhere close to the west in terms
of ensuring human rights, it would not be unreasonable to assume that only 5% of cases
get reported at most.
[14] http://cancerindia.org.in/statistics/
[15] 30 Shocking Domestic Violence Statistics That Remind Us It’s An Epidemic
http://www.huffingtonpost.in/entry/domestic-violence-statistics_n_5959776
[16] Trans-Atlantic slave database http://www.slavevoyages.org/assessment/estimates
[17] RAINN: Scope of the Problem: Statistics
https://www.rainn.org/statistics/scope-problem
[18] 69,000 female, 9,000 male rape victims per year: get the full data
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jan/11/male-female-rape-statistics-
graphic
[19] From 500 BCE to 600 CE, there have been three Abrahamic prophets, Moses, Jesus
and Mohammed. The population in 500 BCE was around 100 million and was around 200
million in 600 CE. Average population over this period was 150 million, and only 3 prophets
were produced during this period suggesting a probability of 1 in 50 million of becoming a
prophet.
Featured Image: Wikipedia
Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay
Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay is from a data science background and his research interest
includes history, religion and philosophy. He is the author of “The Complete Hindu’s Guide
to Islam” and “Ashoka the Ungreat”.
9/9
Missionaries and the debate on Sati in Colonial India
indiafacts.org/missionaries-sati-colonial-india/
Meenakshi Jain December 1, 2017
In the popular mind, sati was one of the ills of Hindu society that was abolished by the
colonial Government on persistent pressure from British Baptist missionaries. It is not
sufficiently recognized that sati was a rare act, performed by a very small number of Hindu
widows over the centuries. It enjoyed no religious sanction. In the nineteenth century British
Evangelicals and Baptist missionaries grossly exaggerated the occurrence of sati for two
reasons. Firstly, they wanted to secure permission of the British Parliament to proselytize in
the East India Company’s territories in India, which was denied to them till 1813. Secondly,
to justify British presence in the country, they presented remarkable accounts of what they
described as the evils of Hindu society, topmost among them widow immolation.
Surprisingly, several Left-feminist scholars seem to have adhered to the motivated

missionary representations on sati. Missionaries stand accused of profusely overstating
instances of widow immolations in Bengal, a region not traditionally associated with the rite.
Likewise, while independent India has witnessed forty-odd cases of widow-immolation, the
works of Left-feminist writers create a vision of enormity. The “feigned panic and the
hyperbole” that ensued in the wake of Roop Kanwar’s immolation in 1987, ignored the fact
that instances of sati post- independence have mostly been confined to one state, and
within it, to one region.
Missionaries presented sati as murder or suicide, and Left-feminists attribute continuance

of the practice to patriarchy and the general subordination of women. There is a common
subtext implicating Hinduism. Additionally, both missionaries and Left-feminist critics wholly
ignore pre-nineteenth century foreign accounts which typically described sati as an act of
1/11
voluntary martyrdom, though some instances of compulsion were also reported. In earlier
accounts, anguish at the physical suffering of the widow was offset by regard for her
chastity and bravery. Baptist missionaries insisted sati was almost always due to the
forcible exertions of relatives and ravenous Brahmins. Left-feminists attribute incidents of
sati to an alliance of religion, patriarchy, and commerce.
Some recorded instances of sati

The Baptist presentation of sati marked a radical departure from earlier foreign accounts of
the rite, beginning with that of Diodorus of Sicily as far back as the first century BCE. These
accounts mostly resonated with awe and incredulity and speculated on the possible
reasons for the custom. They also revealed how limited the practice actually was. Diodorus
described an incident that had occurred in 316 BCE at Gabiene in Asia following the death
of Alexander on his return journey. The commander of an Indian contingent, Ceteus
(Shashi Gupt?) was killed in the conflict. The assembled troops looked on in amazement as
his two widows argued among themselves over who had the right to immolate with the
body.
The next irrefutable evidence of sati comes several centuries later, in CE 510. The Eran
Stone Pillar Inscription in Sagar district, Madhya Pradesh, recorded that a chieftain,
Goparaja was killed while accompanying king Bhanugupta, and commemorated the self-
immolation of his widow.
About a century later, in CE 606 Queen Yasomati, the mother of Harsha and wife of King
Prabhakaravardhana of Thanesar, predeceased her sick husband by consigning herself to
flames when it became apparent that he had little chances of survival. Though Harsha
could not deter his mother, he did succeed in persuading his sister, Rajyasri, the widowed
queen of King Grahavarman of the Maukhari family, from immolating herself.
More than six centuries later, the Moroccan traveller, Ibn Battuta who visited India between
CE 1333 and 1347, observed the immolation of three women near Dhar, Madhya Pradesh,
whose husbands had died fighting the Sumras of Sind.
The Belaturu Inscription of Saka 979, of the time of Rajendra Chola, referred to the
immolation of a Sudra woman, Dekabbe, whose husband had been killed in battle against a
Ganga king. Dekabbe immolated herself despite the strong opposition of her parents.
These instances of sati, all documented, do not indicate commonness of the practice, nor
do they point to the use of force on an unwilling victim.
In the period CE 700-1100, sati became more frequent in northern India and among the
royal families of Kashmir. Kalhana in his Rajatarangini, written in CE 1148-49, referred to
cases from the tenth to twelfth centuries. Clusters of memorial stones found in various
places reveal that from the end of the first millennium CE, at least in some regions,
immolation was no longer confined to the upper castes. Some stones found between the
Narmada and Tapti dated to the thirteenth-fourteenth centuries CE, commemorated Bhil
chiefs and their satis.
2/11
Sati appeared to have originally been a Kshatriya custom; a heroic female complement to
the warrior’s death in battle. The Padmapurana explicitly prohibited it for Brahmins.
However, around CE 1000, the practice began to be observed among some Brahmins.
Sati in Vijayanagara
The number of cases of widow immolation actually witnessed by foreign travellers over the
centuries seems to have been minuscule. Three foreign visitors to Vijayanagara – Nicolo
Conti, Duarte Barbosa, and Fernao Nuniz – wrote in a general manner that hundreds
immolated on the death of a King. They appear not to have in fact witnessed any such
incident. Furthermore, three other visitors to the city, Abdur Razzak, Ludovico di Varthema,
and Domingo Paes – did not refer to sati at all in their accounts of the kingdom. The queens
of Krishnadeva Raya did not immolate themselves on his death, nor did the widows of his
successor.
Nineteenth century
Suddenly, in the opening decades of the nineteenth century, Evangelicals and Baptist
missionaries produced appalling figures of thousands of widows being burnt on the pyres of
their husbands. They also presented vivid accounts of other practices they deemed “sinful.”
Early British appreciation of Indian civilization

The Evangelical-missionary portrayal of India was a considerable departure from the views
of early officials of the East India Company, who wrote appreciatively of Indian civilization.
Among them may be mentioned John Grose (a writer in the East India Company and
author of A Voyage to the East Indies); Luke Scrafton (the Resident at Murshidabad); John
Z. Holwell (who served as temporary Governor of Bengal); Alexander Dow (Lt-Colonel in
the Company’s military service); and George Forster (a Company employee).
Under Warren Hastings, the first Governor General, individual efforts to acquire knowledge
of Indian traditions were replaced by the systematic endeavours of a number of Company
officials. Hastings wanted to create an Orientalized service elite proficient in the Indian
languages and sensitive to Indian traditions. The select group that gathered around him
included Charles Wilkins, Nathaniel Halhed, Jonathan Duncan, and William Jones.
Together with H.T. Colebrooke, H. H. Wilson, and James Prinsep, they made notable
contributions in the fields of Indian religion, philology, philosophy, archeology, and history.
But their view of India and Indian civilization was challenged by Baptist missionaries who
began arriving in India towards the close of the eighteenth century.
The Baptist missionaries

The three early Baptist missionaries – William Carey, William Ward, and Joshua Marshman
– first settled in the town of Serampore, near Calcutta. Two developments favourable to
them occurred in quick succession. In 1800, the Governor General, Lord Wellesley who
had started College of Fort William for training Company officials in India, invited William
Carey to serve as Professor of Bengali. And in 1813, the British Parliament granted
missionaries the right to proselytize in Company territory in India.
3/11
Missionaries condemn Hindu practices
From the moment of their arrival, the Baptists censured Hindu practices. William Carey’s
journal abounds with entries indicating extreme prejudice. He wrote at one place,
“I told them (the natives) that their books were like a loaf of bread, in which was a
considerable quantity of good flour, but also a little very malignant poison, which made the
whole so poisonous that whoever should eat of it would die… .”
Idolatry
Image-worship was an anathema for the missionaries. William Carey noted in his journal in
August 1794,
“…I took the opportunity of remonstrating with them upon the wickedness and folly of
idolatry, and set my face as much as possible against their making any offering at all, and
told them that I would rather lose my life than sacrifice to their idol; that God was much
displeased with them for their idolatry, and exhorted them to leave it and turn to the true
God … .”
Eustace Carey, nephew of William Carey, listed the malevolent consequences of image-
worship,
“… in all countries in which idolatry exerts its influence, it produces, in the human mind,
cruelty, lust, hatred to God and Divine things, which completely justifies the description
given us of the heathen character in the Word of God … We have begun a warfare with the
empire of Satan in this country, which we hope not to relinquish till death, nor till some
signal success shall have been granted …”
Infanticide
William Ward, in his book History, Literature, And Mythology of the Hindoos, referred to
people “frequently offer(ing) their children to the goddess Gunga,” and to a custom of
sacrificing female children. Rev. Claudius Buchanan, Vice-Provost and Professor of
Classics at Fort William College, also stated that women who had no children “vow to
sacrifice their first-born to the goddess Gunga.” William Carey urged the British government
to immediate stop the practice.
A regulation was accordingly enacted in August 1802. This was the first instance of British
intervention in the customs of the Hindus, and to the surprise of “the whole body of
Christian alarmists,” it created no rebellion. The obvious explanation would be that
incidents of child sacrifice were not routine. The issue appeared part of a missionary
campaign to impress the British public on the reforming role of a Christian state and
prepare the ground for proselytization.
The assertions of Carey and his friends were, in fact, challenged by H. H. Wilson, among
the greatest Sanskrit scholars of his time and Secretary of the Asiatic Society. In a letter to
Military Secretary to the Government, Wilson said the sacrifice of infants at Sagor was
4/11
neither countenanced by the religious orders nor the people at large. It was, moreover, “of
rare and restricted occurrence.” The practice of female infanticide, too, was a “very limited
observance, being confined to a few castes in one or two districts.”
Earlier, the Orientalist, Sir William Jones had regarded infanticide and sacrifices to Kali as
unrepresentative of Hinduism, “comparable to the claims that the Virgin Mary had appeared
in Italy in 1294, which did not invalidate Christianity.”
Deaths caused by pilgrimages

The Baptists expressed indignation at the number of deaths purportedly caused by
Hinduism. In a note to a friend in 1812, William Carey stated,
“Idolatry destroys more than the sword. The numbers who die in their long pilgrimages,
either through want, or fatigue, or from dysenteries, and fevers, caught by lying out, and
want of accommodation, is incredible.” He conservatively estimated the mortality caused by
pilgrimage to the Jagannath temple alone at an astonishing 120,000 a year.
William Ward also made a rough calculation of the number of Hindus who perished
annually as “the victims of superstition.” He claimed that those who had seen these figures
felt they fell “far below the real fact.” They nevertheless presented “a horrible view… of the
effects of superstition.” It was these few missionaries in India backed by a handful of
Evangelicals in England who orchestrated the campaign on Sati.
Missionaries and Sati

Till the year 1812, there had been little official notice of sati by Company officials in India,
except for brief reports in the years 1793, 1797, and 1805. Why did sati not figure in British
Parliamentary debates of 1793 when the renewal of the Company Charter was under
scrutiny? Was that because many of the missionaries arrived in India only after that date? If
sati was rampant, why did earlier Englishmen in Calcutta fail to condemn it? It is also
important that the first two accounts of sati by Baptist missionaries (by John Thomas in
1789 and William Carey in 1799) had stated that the incidents were voluntary, and despite
their best efforts, they could not dissuade the widows from immolating themselves.
The Evangelical-missionary campaign on sati falls into two phases — the first, from 1803 to
1813 when the case was prepared; the second, from 1813 to1829 when awesome figures
were presented to demonstrate that it was a raging practice. The sati issue was the most
forceful invented by the Evangelical-Utilitarian alliance to validate British rule in India.
The campaign against sati – first phase

In 1803, William Carey with his colleagues at Serampore and Fort William College
attempted to collect data on the frequency of sati. They employed ten people to record all
cases that occurred within 30 miles of Calcutta in the previous twelve months.
Unreliable results of missionary survey
5/11
Citing the results of the survey, Rev. Claudius Buchanan in his Christian Researches In
Asia, stated that 275 cases were recorded in 1803; between 15th April and 15th October
1804 there were 115 cases. Buchanan explained these figures,
“…no account was taken of burnings in a district to the west of Calcutta, nor further than
twenty miles in some other directions; so that the whole number of burnings within thirty
miles round Calcutta must have been considerably greater than is here stated.”
William Ward wrote, “From actual enquiry at all the villages & towns for 30 miles around
Calcutta it appears that no less than 438 widows have been burnt with their husbands in
this circuit during the last year.” This was the very area in which the Baptists lived and
preached.
Appalling figures of widow immolation presented by missionaries

By applying their figures to the entire country, the missionaries claimed that several
thousand widows were burnt every year. Claudius Buchanan in his Memoir of the
Expediency of an Ecclesiastical Establishment for British India Memoir wrote, “… it was
calculated … that the widows who perish by self-devotement in the northern provinces of
Hindostan alone, are not less than ten thousand annually.” William Carey, in 1812, cited
similar figures, “… I calculate that 10,000 women annually burn with the bodies of their
deceased husbands.”
William Ward asserted that “instances of children of eight or ten years of age thus devoting
themselves are not uncommon.” Referring to the results of Carey’s initial survey, Ward
concluded,
“If within so small a space several hundred widows were burnt alive in one year, how many
thousands of these widows must be murdered in a year — in so extensive a country as
Hindoost’han! So that, in fact, the funeral pile devours more than war itself!”
Ward calculated the total number of victims sacrificed annually to the altar of Hindu gods —
Widows burnt alive – 5000

Pilgrims perishing on the roads and at sacred places – 4000
Persons drowning themselves in the Ganges or buried or burnt alive – 500
Children immolated, including the daughters of Rajputs – 500
Sick persons whose death is hastened on the banks of the Ganges – 500
Total – 10,500
Charles Grant, in his Observations on the State of Society among the Asiatic Subjects of
Great Britain, particularly with respect to Morals; and on the means of improving it,
theoretically placed the number of widow immolations in Hindustan annually at around
33,000 and added, “… let the proportion be reduced to the lowest probable scale, the
annual immolation of human victims to a dire superstition, will appear an enormity under
which language must sink.”
The figures collected by the missionaries on satis in Bengal in 1803 and 1804 were cited by
Claudius Buchanan in his widely read Christian Researches in Asia. In 1813, he informed
the Court of Directors that on the basis of further data supplied by the Serampore
6/11
missionaries and official estimates of the population of India, he had calculated that about
10,000 satis took place annually. The figure appeared a colossal overstatement. But there
was no one sufficiently informed to contradict it, and it served to create an impression of
enormity. Further publicity was given to the Baptists’ figures in the House of Commons in
1813, when William Wilberforce included them in his speech on the renewal of the
Company Charter.
The missionaries further publicized their data through missionary publications. The
Missionary Register and the Missionary Papers circulated accounts of satis sent by
missionaries in India. The objective was to raise funds for missionary work through
consistent “exposes” of Hindu superstitions and to convince British readers of the enormity
of, and necessity for, evangelical work. Appeals were particularly directed towards women.
Fifteen per cent of the subscribers of the Baptist Missionary Society in 1800 were females.
The figure rose to seventeen per cent in 1825. In the Church Missionary Society, the
proportion was twelve per cent in 1801 and twenty-nine per cent in 1823.
Registration by the Government — 1815-1828

In 1815, the Government began to register cases of sati which continued till 1828. The
survey covered the three Presidencies of Bengal, Bombay, and Madras. The data collected
by the Government revealed a curious picture. In the ten years between 1815 and 1824,
6,632 cases were reported for the three Presidencies. Of these, an astonishing 5,997 (90.4
per cent) occurred in Bengal. In the Madras and Bombay Presidencies, during the years
1815 and 1820, the average number of satis recorded was below fifty. This raises the
question whether the allegedly high incidence of satis in Bengal was a missionary
manufacture.
Noted historian, Christopher Bayly has observed that Government figures revealed “how
limited the number of satis were.” Between 1817 and 1827, 4,323 cases were reported for
a population of about 160 million for the whole of British India. The practice was mostly
restricted to Bengal, particularly the environs of Calcutta. Yet, the British obsession with
sati “was boundless.” Thousands of pages of parliamentary papers dealt with 4,000
immolations while the death of millions from famine and starvation was mentioned “only
incidentally — sometimes only because it tended indirectly to increase the number of
widows performing the ‘horrid act’.” According to Bayly, sati was seen as an “irrefutable
justification for the continued British presence in India.”
Analysis of Government data

Age of victims
In several respects, the Government data contradicted missionary figures. Most missionary
narratives had emphasized the tender age of the widows. Government statistics, however,
claimed that almost half the satis were in the age group of 50 and above, and two-thirds 40
and above. Less than five percent of all satis between 1815 and 1829 were in the age
group of eleven to twenty. Overall, sixty per cent of the widows who immolated were over
fourty-one years of age. The Government report concluded, “…a great proportion of these
acts of self-devotion have not taken place in youth, or even in the vigor of age; but a period
7/11
when life, in the common course of nature, must have been near its close.” Between 1815
and 1820, 62 child widows (below 18 years) were immolated in the whole of Bengal, which
was less than two per cent of the total number.
Number of widows on pyre
Government numbers also revealed that of the 8,132 widows who immolated themselves in
the Bengal Presidency, 8,004, i.e., 98 per cent mounted the pyre alone. Only 128, i.e., 1.6
per cent burnt to death with one or several widows of the same man. In fifty-two cases there
were 2 women, in four cases 3, and in three cases 4. The survey did not mention a single
instance of more than four widows immolating with one man.
Here too, there was a wide gap between Government and missionary figures. William Ward
had cited several instances of a large number of widows burning with one man. He
mentioned one occasion in which 13 widows immolated with one man, another involving 37
widows of a man, another 12 widows, and yet another in which 18 widows burnt with one
man.
Claudius Buchanan in An Apology for Christianity in India referred to a case in 1799 that
was related to him, in which 22 of the 100 wives of a Kulin Brahmin immolated themselves
and the fire was kept kindled for three days! Such statements, not borne out by the
Government numbers, raise misgivings about the genuineness of missionary accounts.
Why Bengal?
Kulinism
The high incidence of sati in Bengal was linked in some accounts to kulin Brahmin
polygamy. Claudius Buchanan, in his Memoir, gave instances of kulin Brahmins who had
over a hundred wives. However, Rammohan Roy, in his A Second Conference between an
advocate for and an opponent of the practice of burning widows alive, pertinently asked,
“How many kulin Brahmins are there who marry two or fifteen wives for the sake of money,
that never see the quarter number of them after the day of marriage, and visit others only
three or four times in the course of their life?”
The geographical distribution of sati also did not substantiate the connection with kulin
polygamy. The incidence of sati was higher in West than in East Bengal (more in Calcutta
than in Dacca Division), whereas kulinism was more prevalent in East than in West
Bengal.
Dayabhaga School
The frequency of sati in Bengal was also attributed to the Dayabhaga School, associated
with Jimutavahana, a Brahmin from Radha. Dayabhaga, viewed as a reformed School of
Hindu Law as compared to the orthodox Mitaksara, allowed women greater access to their
deceased husband’s property for their maintenance.
But Jimutavahana introduced Dayabhaga to Bengal in the twelfth century, whereas

incidents of sati increased only in the decades preceding its abolition, when first the
missionaries, and then the British Government presented statistics on the extent of the
8/11
custom.
Further, the first Judge of the Calcutta Court of Circuit mentioned the significant fact that he
had no less than 57 civil suits pending involving property worth four lakh rupees, to which
Hindu women were parties. It was thus “clearly possible for widows not to follow their
husbands to the pile, to fill respectably their own positions in society, and to manage their
own affairs.”
Missionaries and the campaign against sati – second phase

The entire colonial debate on sati centred on figures provided by the missionaries and the
Government, each set of which suffered from serious flaws. But the figures seem to have
been seldom questioned during the course of the campaign the Evangelicals and
missionaries unleashed.
In 1815, the second edition of William Ward’s View of the History, Literature and Mythology
of the Hindoos was issued by the Serampore Press. It contained a chapter citing the
Baptists’ figures on sati in the Calcutta area and included descriptions of the most offensive
cases known to Ward.
In 1816, the first known major pamphlet on the subject, A Collection of Facts andOpinions
Relative to the Burning of Widows with the Dead Bodies of their husbands and to other
Destructive Customs Prevalent in British India, was published in England by William Johns,
a missionary expelled by the British from Serampore in 1812. Johns protested that,
“…in this country we appear to have retrograded, for whilst we have legislated to prevent
cruelty to animals, we allow a portion of the human race, nay even of our own subjects, to
have cruelties practiced upon them at which humanity shudders.”
William Ward, on a visit to England during the years 1819-1820, personally confirmed
missionary accounts of sati. In a letter to Miss Hope of Liverpool, a long-time activist of the
British and Foreign Bible Society, he claimed,
“By an official statement that I brought with me from India, it appears that every year more
than seven hundred women (more probably fourteen hundred) are burned or buried alive in
the Presidency of Bengal alone. How many in other parts of India? Your sex will not say
that in the roasting alive of four widows every day there is not blood enough shed to call
forth their exertions?”
The Baptists kept up the attack through the Samachar Darpan and Friend of India (both
started in 1818). In 1819, Friend of India cited the figure of 100,000 (10, 000?) satis per
year. In 1829, the journal claimed that the custom had claimed over one million lives in
Bengal alone! English periodicals like the Oriental Herald and Quarterly Review reproduced
large portions of the articles, as did the Bengal Hurkaru and other Calcutta periodicals. In
1828, the General Baptist missionary, James Peggs (who had returned to England in 1825
after some years of missionary work in Orissa), published a booklet, Suttee’s Cry to
Britain.
Lord William Bentinck

9/11
The appointment of William Bentinck as Governor General in 1828, gave momentum to the
campaign against sati. Bentinck was “a practicing and believing Christian,” and member of
the British and Foreign Bible Society. In December 1829, within eighteen months of his
arrival in India he abolished sati.
As sati had never been a commonly observed rite, there was little protest on its official
prohibition. Once the ban was announced, the allegedly rampant practice seemed to have
abruptly ceased. It was a truly unique case of prompt universal compliance to a government
diktat.
Sati – an infrequent occurrence

The Evangelical-missionary campaign on sati virtually silenced other voices on the issue.
Till the colonial debate commenced, most foreign travellers had declared that sati was not a
pervasive practice. The Dutch, Francisco Pelsaert writing in the time of the Mughal
Emperor Jahangir noted that “there are hundreds, or even thousands, who do not do it…”
The Italian nobleman, Pietro Della Valle who visited India in the 1630s, confirmed, “…. This
burning of Women upon the death of their Husbands is at their own choice to do it or not,
and indeed few practice it …” Francois Martin, of the French East India Company, who
arrived in India in 1669 and stayed on till his death in 1706, held that the custom was “not
very widely practiced now.”
Even officials of the East India Company, till the closing decades of the eighteenth century,
affirmed that sati was not customary. Alexander Dow, in 1770, stated that the practice had
practically ceased and it was not “reckoned a religious duty, as has been very erroneously
supposed in the West.” George Forster wrote in 1782 that “…many of the Hindoo widows,
especially in the Marhatta country, have acquired by their ability, their wealth, connection,
or intrigue, the possession of extensive power and influence.” Eliza Fay, wife of a judge of
the Supreme Court at Calcutta, in a letter from that city in September 1781, wrote that she
had “never had an opportunity of witnessing the various incidental ceremonies, not have I
ever seen any European who had been present at them.” H. T. Colebrooke, Judge and
later head of the Sadar Diwani Adalat and Professor of Hindu Law and Sanskrit at Fort
William College, who spent over three decades in Bengal, said the practice was rare. In an
article titled “On the Duties of a Faithful Hindu Widow,” he stated that, “the martyrs of this
superstition have never been numerous.”
The French Jesuit, Abbe Dubois wrote, “the country abounds with widows, especially
among the Brahmins. Among this caste shorn-heads are to be seen everywhere.”
Sir John Malcolm, who administered Central India including Malwa, noted that the custom
had been most prevalent when Rajputs had power and influence. The Marathas, however,
had “rendered this practice very rare.”
Mountstuart Elphinstone, who held several important posts including Governor of Bombay,
declared sati was “by no means universal in India… It did not occur south of the river
Kishna …”
10/11
Even Sir John Kaye, who returned to England in 1845 after serving for several years in
India, and, in 1858 succeeded James Stuart Mill as Secretary in the Political and Secret
Department at India Office, conceded,
“But for all this, it can hardly be said that widow-burning was ever a national custom. At no
time has the practice been so frequent as to constitute more than an exception to the
general rule of self-preservation. Still, even in this exceptional state, it was something very
horrible and deplorable in Christian eyes, and something to be suppressed, if suppression
were possible, by a Christian government established in a heathen land. … I have said that
this practice of Suttee has never been anything more than an exceptional abomination. It
never has been universal throughout India — never in any locality has it been general.”
The entire colonial debate on sati centred on Bengal, though Rajasthan had emerged as a
stronghold of the custom. Besides individual satis, mass jauhars had taken place at Chittor
in 1303, 1535, and 1568 and at Jaisalmer, in 1299, when large numbers of women threw
themselves into the fire as their husbands met death on the battlefield. Even today,
Rajasthan retains its association with sati. The number of sati temples in the Shekhavati
region (consisting of the Sikar and Jhunjhunu districts) is unmatched in the rest of the
country. Of the fourty-odd cases of sati recorded since independence, some twenty-eight
have occurred in Rajasthan, mainly in and around Sikar.
It is significant that in the area where sati was alleged to have been most prevalent in
British times, i.e. West Bengal, no case seems to have been reported for several
generations. While sati temples and chhatris (memorials) are found in Rajasthan and other
parts of India, not many (or none) seem to have been erected for the thousands who were
supposed to have immolated themselves in colonial Bengal. This lends credence to the
inference that incidents of widow immolation in Bengal were overplayed by Evangelicals
and missionaries firstly, to gain the right to proselytization, and subsequently, to justify their
presence and British rule in India. The amelioration of the depressed status of Hindu
women was held to be a critical component of the civilizing mission of the White Man.
Featured Image: A sati as depicted by Giulio Ferrario (Wikipedia)
Meenakshi Jain
11/11
Sati and Atrocity Narrative for the Civilizing Mission
indiafacts.org/sati-atrocity-narrative-civilizing-mission/
Sankrant Sanu December 4, 2017
Colonial accounts of Indian Society created a narrative of “oppression” and justified the
White Man’s rule as necessary for civilizing the natives. The threads of this run parallel to
the missionary narrative of “saving the souls” of the natives by converting them to
Christianity. These impulses generated atrocity literatures about Hindu society and
continue to do so today. Among the litany of ills that Hindus needed to be saved from were
“child marriage,” “female infanticide and foeticide[1],” “dowry”, “caste” and, of course “Sati.”
These memes are still used as attacks on Hindu society, not by evidence, but by the sheer
power of rhetoric, which goes like this—“How can you justify traditions? If the British hadn’t
banned Sati, Hindu widows would still be burnt on the pyre.” Facts can only be reduced to
timid whispers in the face of rhetoric such as this, “but, but ….” What we need is neither to
“justify” nor to “attack” but first to understand, on our own terms, without the burden of the
colonial gaze and agendas, the factual basis, if any, of these narratives.
For Sati, the questions are as follows. The reader is urged to guess the answers to these
questions for themselves before reading on.
1. Were all Hindu widows being burnt? Were most of them burnt? How frequent was
Sati?
2. What was the average age of women committing Sati?
3. “Being burnt” implies being Sati was a coercive act, done by others, to the widow.
Was Sati coercive or voluntary?
4. Why would anyone voluntarily be Sati? If Sati was voluntary, isn’t it “suicide” and still
immoral?
1/6
5. Does Hindu tradition allow for Sati?
IndiaFacts has put together a series of articles to answer these questions. The first and the
most important information is that, throughout Hindu history, Sati was an exceedingly rare
act. As Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay shows, even in the most aggressive estimate no more
than 1 in 400, i.e. .25% of widows committed Sati. The actual number is likely to be more
like 1 in 50,000 i.e. .002%, even assuming 95% of the cases of Sati were not recorded[2].
As one data point, more than 1 in 20,000 women committed suicide in the UK in 2015[3],
250% more than the estimated rate of Sati historically. In actual practice, Sati may have
been even rarer.
The fact that Sati was recorded and commemorated in rock inscriptions itself points to both
the rarity and honor surrounding the act. Suicide, of course, is not honorable. Why would
Sati be?
Let us ask the question another way. For a moment, let us assume that Sati was voluntary.
If (very few) women decided to be Sati, with full agency, did they have the right to let go of
their bodies?
To this, we must look at Hindu and Christian view of life itself. By Christian law, which the
British Penal Code imposed on India, suicide itself was illegal and a “sin.” Why is suicide
sinful in Christianity?
The influential Christian theologian Augustine lays out the most comprehensive
condemnation of suicide from a Christian Standpoint. In the City of God, he argues “that
Christians have no authority for committing suicide in any circumstances whatever.[4]”
This is because the commandment “thou shalt not kill” includes not killing oneself, thus
suicide goes against “God’s” commandments. Further, human beings “belong to God” and
not to themselves, thus cannot take their own life. For Augustine, taking one’s own life is
tantamount to murder.
“For if it is not, lawful to take the law into our own hands, and slay even a guilty person,
whose death no public sentence has warranted, then certainly he who kills himself is a
homicide, and so much the guiltier of his own death, as he was more innocent of that
offence for which he doomed himself to die.”[5] (em .added)
In effect, suicide is murder since it violates “God’s commandments” and human beings
don’t own their life and bodies but “God” does. Thus, taking one’s life is not warranted in
any circumstances, and is a “sin.”
It is not surprising that Sati horrified Christians, even apart from the missionary zeal to
show Hindu traditions as evil and make a case for conversions. However, the Hindu view of
taking one’s life is far more nuanced.
While suicide from a state of despair is condemned, a voluntary and conscious leaving of
the body may, under the right circumstances, be ritually undertaken like the Jain Santhara
or Sallekhana.
2/6
The colonial Indian court enforces a penal code emerging from Christian theology, which
makes suicide illegal, and further, has no understanding of suicide versus the conscious
ritual discarding of one’s body in the Indian tradition, while the Jain tradition, quoted here
from Nithin Sridhar’s article, distinguishes it from the Vedic ritual of Prayopravesha or
Sallekhana. Importantly, “there is a feeling of hopelessness and helplessness in a suicidal
person, whereas no such feelings exist in spiritual practitioner. The spiritual practitioner is
dispassionate, self-controlled and practices Sallekhana for spiritual merit…[6]”
Prayopravesha comes from dispassion, the extinguishing of desire, and is an evolved

understanding of the temporary nature of the body. It is an act of gyani and not of an
agyani. Augustine’s “God” is not involved here.
Voluntary death of a conscious being is a ritual act. In the Jain Santhara, it is a way to
discard the body in a state of awareness and meditation, in contrast with the unnatural
prolonging of life which is happening in “modern medicine” today, where people who face
imminent death in old age often die in hospitals with tubes and needles stuck into them,
away from loved ones in ICUs, and forcibly being breathed into via ventilators.
Whose life is it anyway? This is the central question which differentiates the civilizational
understanding. In one case, a human life is a precious gift for evolving consciousness, and
an evolved consciousness can even let it go with awareness. In the other view, it is “God”
which “owns” human life, evolved consciousness has no role in the decision.
Coming back to Sati, when one understands prayopravesha as a conscious willing

embrace of the death of the body, we see that ritualistically, death by fire is available to
both men and women.
As Dr. Sammod Acharya writes “within the Veda we have Yajna specifically recommended
for one who wants to die voluntarily. This Yajna known as Sarvasvara (सव वार) or
Shunaskarnastoma (शुन कण तोम. In Tandyamahabrahmana (Brahmana belonging to
Samaveda) this Ekaha (Yajna finished in one day) has been specifically mentioned to be
done by one who wants to die by entering to the fire of the Yajna…[7]”
This choice is available to both men and women. “The vivid description of how Dhritarastra,
Gandhari and Pritha (Kunti) chose to die in the fire of the forest is found in 37th Adhyaya of
Ashramavasika Parva[8].”
Sati can be regarded as a form of this Yajna, and most critically, Sati is ritually sanctioned
only when it is voluntary, and is not being done out of grief of despair, but as an act of love
and dispassion. The only role of the family, and others, is to dissuade the Sati at the
slightest hint of fear or unwillingness.
“If the widow, after thus ascending the pyre, becomes afraid or loses her resolve to
continue or simply does not wish to continue with the ritual, the texts note that one of her
relatives must make her to get up and come down from the pyre[9].”
To be a Sati is a choice and an honor. “The first recorded foreign account of Sati-pratha is
that by Diodorus of Sicily and describes an eyewitness account of Hieronymus of Cardia
(~326 BCE) who describes the quarrel between two widows as to who would have the
3/6
honor of dying along with her husband[10].”
Given all this, it is natural that Sati was very rare. How many women were at the state of
dispassion to undergo Sati as a Yajna? Historically, very few, and the rare ones who did
would become part of folklore.
When we come to British accounts of Sati we face two paradoxes. How is it that Bengal,
which had record of very few Satis, even during the early British period, showed a “mind-
boggling” increase in claims of numbers of Sati from the 1800s?
“As Evangelical Christian movement started gaining more prominence in India starting from
1800, enumeration of sati incidents sky-rocketed and suddenly annual 10,000 sati incidents
were being reported from Bengal alone in 1803, a mind-boggling increase of 2000x, and
some even suggested 50,000 sati occurrences annually! According to government figures,
8134 widows performed sati in the 14 years between 1815 and 1829, of which more than
60% cases were recorded in Calcutta, a region which had almost no history of sati, thereby
casting doubt on the validity of government data[11].”
If Sati increased 2000 times after 1800, there are two explanations. First, and the most
likely one, is that the numbers were greatly exaggerated for missionary propaganda. As
Meenakshi Jain writes,
“In the nineteenth century British Evangelicals and Baptist missionaries grossly
exaggerated the occurrence of sati for two reasons. Firstly, they wanted to secure
permission of the British Parliament to proselytize in the East India Company’s territories in
India, which was denied to them till 1813. Secondly, to justify British presence in the
country, they presented remarkable accounts of what they described as the evils of Hindu
society, topmost among them widow immolation[12].”
For a moment, let us discount the need for missionaries to create atrocity literature and
assume that Sati did increase in the British Raj after 1800 (though perhaps not to the extent
of missionary exaggeration.). Clearly then, the explanation for this dramatic increase must
be found in the particular circumstances of British rule, and not in the “Hindu tradition” in
which Sati was a very rare event for centuries.
Here we look at two other interesting factors. One is that most of the Satis, contrary to
popular depictions, were middle-aged or older women; two-thirds were over the age of
forty. Secondly in India, widows had been supported by State grants and also had the right
to inherit property.
Both of these were changed by the British. Unlike in India, British women did not have the
right to property, and the same British laws were also imposed in India where women could
not own land. (This also led to the importance of male children, since without a male heir,
people would stand to lose their lands). Secondly, there is some evidence that grants to
widows were stopped by the colonial state.
Thus, rather than “saving” Hindu widows, as colonial historiography and missionary
accounts would have us believe, the Christian colonial state was responsible for their
penury.
4/6
I will end with another image from an Eastern culture. On 11th June, 1963, Thích Quảng
Đức, a Vietnamese Buddhist monk, burnt himself to death in the middle of a busy road in
Saigon, in protest against the policies of President Ngo Dinh Diem. President Diem was a
Catholic, pushed discriminatory policies and persecution of Buddhist in Vietnam, including
in the allocation of land. Thích Quảng’s self-immolation was an act of dramatic protest
against repression by the Catholic government.
Quảng Đức during his self-immolation in 1963 at a busy Saigon road intersection | Source: giacngo.vn
Here then are the questions for future research. If there was some increase in Sati in 1800,
were some of these a form of protest against the colonial state? What policies of the British
State were leading widows in penury and decreasing their status in society? Did this
decrease in status cause some coercive cases of Sati? Did the State then turn the narrative
on its head in a blame-shift, creating atrocity literature to put “Hinduism” in the dock while
showing itself as the “savior”? To what extent did the colonial elite, of that time, and of
today internalize these fake narratives around Sati?
We started with questions and we end with questions. Colonial consciousness permeates
us—the colonizers and the colonized, the “Left” and the “Hindu right”, the “traditionalists”
and the “reformers.” To be free of it, we must first start asking the right questions.
References
[1] Jain, Meenakshi. Missionaries and the debate on Sati in Colonial India.
http://indiafacts.org/missionaries-sati-colonial-india/
[2] Mukhopadhyay, Subhodeep. Sati: Re-examining the Historical Evidence from 1900BCE
to 1900CE. http://indiafacts.org/sati-historical-evidence/
[3] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/female-women-suicide-decade-
mental-health-killing-themselves-highest-level-a7452491.html
5/6
[4] Augustine, City of God, I.20
[5] Augustine, City of God, I.17
[6] Sridhar, Nithin. Revisiting Sati: Understanding the practice from a Dharmic perspective.
http://indiafacts.org/sati-dharmic-perspective/
[7] Dr. Sammodacharya, Voluntary death in Sanatana Dharma.

http://indiafacts.org/voluntary-death-sanatana-dharma/
[8] ibid
[9] Sridhar, Nithin. Revisiting Sati: Understanding the practice from a Dharmic perspective.
http://indiafacts.org/sati-dharmic-perspective/
[10] Mukhopadhyay, Subhodeep. Sati: Re-examining the Historical Evidence from

1900BCE to 1900CE. http://indiafacts.org/sati-historical-evidence/
[11] ibid
[12] Jain, Meenakshi. Missionaries and the debate on Sati in Colonial India.
http://indiafacts.org/missionaries-sati-colonial-india/
Featured Image: twimg.com
Sankrant Sanu
Sankrant Sanu is an entrepreneur, author and researcher based in Seattle and Gurgaon.
His essays in the book “Invading the Sacred” contested Western academic writing on
Hinduism. He is a graduate of IIT Kanpur and the University of Texas and holds six
technology patents. His latest book is “The English Medium Myth.” He blogs at sankrant.org
.
6/6

Sati-History &amp; Now

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Sati-History &amp; Now

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

SATI -

© Copyright belongs to respective authors.

2. Voluntary death in Sanatana Dharma by Dr Sammod

3. The Battle over Historical Narratives of Chittor

4. Jauhar-Shaka: When The Enemy Was At The Gate

5. Book Review: Sati by Abhinav Agarwal

6. Sati: Re-examining the Historical Evidence from

7. Missionaries and the debate on Sati in Colonial India

8. Sati and Atrocity Narrative for the Civilizing Mission

Sati, an incorrect name

Devi Sati. Source: hindupad.com

Anugamana as a Dharmically legitimate practice

Eligibility for performing Anugamana

To summarize, the eligibility criteria for performing Anugamana includes:

1. The widow must be a Patrivrata

Anugamana as an optional practice, an expression of love and commitment

The Ritual Procedure of Anugamana

Opposition to Anugamana and its refutation in Dharmashastra tradition

Anugamana vs. Syena Sacrifice

An 18th-century painting depicting sati. Source: Wikipedia

Is Anugamana same as Suicide?

To summarize, Anugamana imparts following merits:

Vidhwavrata, on the other hand, imparts following fruits:

The fruits accrued from Punar-vivaha can be summarized thus:

Anugamana vs. Jauhar: A comparison

[3] Ibid. 179

[4] Mahānārāyaṇa Upaniṣad (79.7)

[48] Ibid (618-619)

[54] Attaining Veer-gati

[62] Ibid (538)

Kaundinnyayana, S. (tr.) (2013). Manusmriti. Delhi: Chowkambha Sanskrit Pratishthan

Jain, Meenakshi (2016). Sati. Delhi: Aryan Books International

Saducharanprasad, B. (ed.) (1994). Dharmashastrasangraha. Bombay: Khemaraj Srikrishnadas Prakashan

Featured Image: vanamaliashram.org

Dr Sammod Acharya December 2, 2017

There is a statement in Shatapatha Brahmana – यो वा शतं वषािण जीवित स हैवैतदमत ृ मा नोित त मा े

In some of the Upanishads including Jabalopanishad, different ways of voluntary death

“ततः स नपृ ितदृ वा वि माया तमि तकात्।

इदमाह ततः सूतं स जयं जयतां वरः।।२२।।

ग छ स जय य ाि नन वां दहित किहिचत्।

वयम ाि नना यु ता गिम यामः परां गितम्।।२३।।

तमुवाच िकलोि नः स जयो वदतां वरः।

राजन् म ृ युरिन टोऽयं भिवता ते वथ

न चोपायं पप यािम मो णे जातवेदसः।

यद ान तरं काय त वा व तुमहित।।२५।।

इ यु तः स जयेनेदं पुनराह स पािथवः

नैष म ृ युरिन टो नो िनःसत

जलमि नस् तथा वायुरथवाऽिप िवकषणम्।

तापसानां पश य ते ग छ स जय मा िचरम् ।।२७।।

इ यु वा स जयं राजा समाधाय मन तथा।

पा मुखः सह गा धाया कु या चोपािवश दा।।२८।।

स जय तं तथा दृ वा पदि णमथाकरोत्।

उवाच चैनं मेधावी यु वा मानिमित पभो।।२९।।

ऋिषपु ो मनीषी स राजा च े ऽ य त चः।

In Vanaparva, there is mention of place called Plakshavatarana in Yamuna river where

Fasting till death referred as Prayopaveshana or just Anashaka/Anashana or Nirashana, is

“स यि वनीतमथवमहरं कु मारमािद य र णिवधौ िविधवत् पजानाम्।

रोगोपस ृ टतनुदवु सितं मुम ु :ु पायोपवेशनमितनपितबभू

Featured Image: Trimurti Ellora (Wikipedia)

Sreejit Datta November 28, 2017

Apparently it has become become utterly “regressive”, “backward”, and “reactionary” to be

Chandra, Satish. History of Medieval India. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan , 2007.

Highmore, Ben. Michel de Certeau: Analysing Culture. London: Continuum, 2006.

Featured Image: www.thedawntraders.wordpress.com

Sati-History & Now

Sati-History & Now