Sati is perhaps the biggest humbug used to beat Hinduism. Very conveniently employed in different modes to discredit Hindu practices.
If they want to compare a Hindu practice with something and say look it is as evil as that, there is Sati. 1/n
If they want to compare a Hindu practice with something and say look it is as evil as that, there is Sati. 1/n
If they want to show how Hinduism is progressive and undergoes reform by getting rid of evil religious practices, there is Sati. 2/n
And finally they want to show how Hindu society is full of evil practices but these are not essential Hindu practices so they must be discarded, then there is Sati. 3/n
In short, whenever you want to dismantle a Hindu practice, point towards Sati. No matter what your argument is, Sati is the precedence. One in common though is the narrative that Sati is inherently evil. 4/n
It is one thing to say Sati like all practices & institutions are open for abuse and there could be instances of such misuse. However it is definitely another thing to say that Sati is inherently & by design is an evil practice. 5/n
While scholars like Meenakshi Jain have done excellent work to bust many myths around Sati. I have not come across any work except mine which addresses the elephant in the room: Is Sati inherently & by design evil? 6/n
The answer is a clear no as I show in this essay- indiafacts.org.in/archives/sati-…
It is neither a defense of Sati, nor an argument that it should be practiced today. I merely & dispassionately examine the Hindu conception of Sati as conceived in Dharmashastra tradition. 7/7
It is neither a defense of Sati, nor an argument that it should be practiced today. I merely & dispassionately examine the Hindu conception of Sati as conceived in Dharmashastra tradition. 7/7
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
