Suttee is an ancient Indian funeral practice in which the widow was immolated alive on her husband’s funeral pyre. The act was supposed to be voluntary on the widow's part, and was deemed an act of peerless piety. The act of Suttee supposedly purged the couple of all accumulated sin, guaranteed their salvation and ensured their reunion in the afterlife. The term "Sati" is also extended to refer to the widow herself. Though supposed to be voluntary, suttee is believed to have been often forced on the widow by various social pressures, and even by the use of drugs.
Provanance and Prevalance
The custom of the immolation of a widow (or other close relatives and slaves) is not unique to India; it was also practiced by the Scythians, the ancient peoples of Scythia, Egypt, Scandinavia and China. Indeed, some accounts indicate that the practise of suttee was introduced into India from central Asia by the Scythians, from whom the Rajputs of the state of Rajasthan in India are believed to be descended.
The practice of Suttee was never pervasive in India. Not only was it restricted to certain castes and communities, such as the Rajput's, but it was also limited to certain geographic regions, such as Rajasthan, Bengal and parts of the Gangetic plain. Suttee was an extremely rare event elsewhere; the practise was entirely unknown in some parts of India, notably in the north-east and in south India. Many Indian communities, such as the sikhs, Jains and Buddhists, expressly forbade suttee. In Hinduism itself, the Tantras strictly condemn the practice of suttee. Even at its worst, no more than a few hundred deaths by suttee were recorded across India in any decade.
Alleged Scriptural Endorsement
There is not one single word in all of Hindu scripture that enjoins suttee upon the widowed woman; indeed, remarkably few instances of suttee are recorded in the hindu epics, which are actually replete with instances of influential widows. Virtually all instances of suttee recorded in the epics are prompted by reasons other than the mere demise of the husband.
"Sati" is incidentally the first name of a much-revered puranic Goddess, also known as Dakshayani. This has led many people to infer that her legend is one that endorses the practise of suttee. This is completly erroneous, because the said Goddess was never even widowed. For a detailing of this legend, please read the entry on Dakshayani.
In the Ramayana, after the death of Dasharatha, none of his three wives commit suttee, not even Kaushalya, the mother of Rama and an exemplar of virtue. On the other hand, Mandodari, virtuous widow of the villianous Ravana, does commit suttee, an act interpreted in some versions as an attempt on her part to expiate the hideous sins of her husband. Again, Tara, wife of Vali, does commit suttee, a decision prompted by the fear of falling into the hands of the victorious Sugreeva, her husband's fratricidal brother, who had once coveted her, and had now caused her husband to be murdered.
In the Mahabharata, neither Satyavati, the wife of Shantanu, nor Ambika and Ambalika, the wives of Vichitraveerya, nor a legion of other widows who feature in this longest of Indian epics, perform suttee. Indeed, the Mahabharata assigns a place of honour to the polyandrous Draupadi, concurrent wife of five brothers. Of the two wives of Pandu, only Madri, the junior wife, commits suttee; Kunti, the senior wife, does not. Madri commits suttee since she holds herself responsible for the death of her husband. Pandu had been cursed with death in case he ever had intercourse, and he died while performing the forbidden act with Madri, who blamed herself (correctly, many hold) for not having rejected his advances although she was well aware of the curse.
There is thus no scriptural imperative for suttee, though the practise is repeatedly lauded as exemplary in pious women.
Abolition and continuing incidence
Following social reformer Raja Rammohun Roy's relentless efforts in the form of petitions, writings and the organizing of vigilance committees, the practice was abolished by law in British India in 1829. It was rumored to have still existed in rural areas well into the 20th century.
Suttee was banned in the Bengal Presidency on December 4, 1829, and in other "company"-ruled lands shortly after, but remained legal in some princely states even thereafter. The last princely state to permit it, Jaipur, banned this practise in 1846. Instances however continue to occur occasionally to the present day. Various measures against it now include efforts to stop the 'glorification' of the dead women. This prohibition includes the erection of shrines to the dead, the encouragement of pilgrimages to the site of the pyre, and the derivation of any income from such sites and pilgrims. The Indian law that declared suttee a crime makes no distinction between passive observers to an act of suttee and active promoters of the event; all are equally culpable.
In 1988, a childless 19-year old housewife by name Roop Kanwar was immolated, purportedly voluntarity, on the pyre of her husband in Rajasthan's Deorala village. The event quickly turned into a national case of outrage, pitting a modern Indian ideology against a traditional one. A much-publicised investigation led to the arrest of a large number of people from Deorala, said to have been present in the ceremony, or participants therein. Eventually, 11 people were charged with the crime. On January 31, 2004, a special court in Jaipur acquitted all of the 11 accused in the case observing that the prosecution had failed to prove charges that they glorified sati.
In the medieval period, due to widespread foreign invasion and ensuing rampage, the immolation of vulnerable women was resorted to to protect them from marauding armies. The womenfolk of men who had challenged the victorious invaders were vulnerable to rape and sexual abuse by the victorious armies. Immolation was not confined to widows; it was committed en masse by all the womenfolk confined in a beleagured fortress, generally in anticipation of a final rout on the field. Such instances were termed Jauhar; all recorded instances of Jauhar have featured a defensive and vulnerable Hindu fortress beleagured by an invading muslim army.
See also
- Jauhar
- Sati (with more religious detail)
- self-immolation