Half baked Paki web-sites

by **Rock-bottom Remainder** » Sun Nov 23, 2003 11:52 pm

This is not meant to polarise ppl on Hindu Muslim lines, but I came across this piece on a Pak website(psjg.bizcue.com/Woman%20Honor.htm):
 
 Similarly, till today, it is not accepted whole-heartedly that woman has a right to demand divorce if she does not want to live with her husband. Against the teaching of Islam, hundreds of women are killed because they demanded divorce from their cruel or sexually impotent husbands. When males kill women following the terrible tradition they hardly realize that they follow the orthodox and obsolete Hindu tradition of Setti in which females were burnt alive along with the dead body of their husbands.
 
 Does the meaning of Sati (as we know it) come through in the above para?

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:29 am

I think it does. Draconian traditions like \'sati\' deserved to die, and luckily they have, but for some fundemental pockets in Rajasthan, where they\'re still kept alive by zealots (no secret about their identities here).

by **Rock-bottom Remainder** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:13 pm

I totally endorse the opinion that a practice like Sati, should have been put an end to even before it began.
 However, thats not the point.
 
 The 2nd sentence in the post states that \"hundreds of women are killed because they demanded divorce from their cruel or sexually impotent husbands\". \"When males kill women.....they follow the orthodox and obsolete tradition of Setti in which females were burnt alive along with the dead body of their husbands\".
 
 Sati was practiced by women (to a large extent it was by their own will, atleast during the princely times) to escape dishonour at the hands of the Foreign invaders.
 
 The Paki author of the article is suggesting that when males kill women (if they demand for a divorce) they are following Sati. Where\'s the connection?

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:48 pm

Remainder, if women, on their own will, jumped into burning flames (temperature - 500 degrees), why are they not doing it now? Is it because they dont miss their husbands like they used to in the olden days? Let me ask you this - will YOU, on your own will, jump into a burning pyre, if you lose your spouse or a loved one? Maybe, if you are an exception. Remember, sati was practised as a rule and not as an exception.
 
 I visited that link and found no other reference to Hinduism, and even what you quoted was not really objectionable. It is a fact that sati was practised, and it is a fact that it is obsolete now, which is what was stated. The page in fact was quite liberal in the sense it condemned the \'honor killings\' that are taking place these days in Pakistan, as unislamic. Barbarism has to be condemned wherever it is practised, and that is precisely what that page had done.

by **jammer** » Tue Nov 25, 2003 12:18 am

hey guys, let me fill in some sound info here. whatever you have seen on the paki site is not true at all. women have equal rights in islam and they can take divorce called \'qulaa\' from their husband, there is absolutely no problem. qulaa is equivalent to talaaq. btw, pls see site/links by maryam jameela on the topics \'women in islam\'

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Tue Nov 25, 2003 11:09 am

Jammer, this discussion is not about women\'s rights in Islam but whether the subject website (of Pakistani origin) represents the concept of sati (an obselete, orthodox - and barbaric if I may add, Hindu practise) in a fair manner. I think it does.
 
 You may check that site too - it appears to be a site dedicated to promoting Social Justice in Paksitan. Social Justice is what is lacking in the sub-continent, and every initiative aimed at promoting it, needs support. Especially against half-baked attempts to discredit such initiatives.

by **Rock-bottom Remainder** » Tue Nov 25, 2003 7:18 pm

The Tradition of Sati in India
 Sati (Su-thi , a.k.a. suttee) is the traditional Hindu practice of a widow immolating herself on her husband\'s funeral pyre.
 
 \"Sati\" means a virtuous woman. A woman who dies burning herself on her husbands funeral fire was considered most virtuous, and was believed to directly go to heaven, redeeming all the forefathers rotting in hell, by this \"meritorious\" act. The woman who committed Sati was worshipped as a Goddess, and temples were built in her memory.
 
 Sati was prevalent among certain sects of the society in ancient India, who either took the vow or deemed it a great honor to die on the funeral pyres of their husbands. Ibn Batuta (1333 A.D.) has observed that Sati was considered praiseworthy by the Hindus, without however being obligatory. The Agni Purana declares that the woman who commits sahagamana goes to heaven. However, Medhatiti pronounced that Sati was like suicide and was against the Shastras, the Hindu code of conduct. It is believed that they were not coerced, although several wives committed Sati. The majority of the widows did not undergo Sati.
 
 
 This is from indianchild.com,
 
 I. What is Sati?
 Hindu custom in India in which the widow was burnt to death on her husband\'s pyre.
 Can be a voluntary choice or force upon a woman by her in-laws.
 
 II. Reasons for Sati
 A widow\'s status was looked upon as an unwanted burden that prevented her from participating in the household work. Her touch, her voice, her very appearance was considered unholy, impure and something that was to be shunned and abhorred.
 A woman was considered pure if she committed Sati.
 
 III. The History Behind Sati
 Sati, the wife of Daksha, was so overcome at the demise of her husband that she immolated herself on his funeral pyre.
 Sati was the consort of Lord Shiva. She burnt herself in fire as protest against her father, Daksha did not give her consort Shiva the respect she thought he deserved.
 
 IV. Theories of Origin
 Even though Sati is considered an Indian custom or a Hindu custom it was not practiced all over India by all Hindus but only among certain communities of India.
 Sacrificing the widow in her dead husband\'s funeral or pyre was not unique only to India. This custom was prevalent among Egyptians, Greek, Goths, and others.
 Ramayana- Sita walks through fire to prove her purity.
 Mahabharata- Madri throws herself on her husband, Pandu’s fire.
 
 V. Outside Views Impact
 A few rulers of India like the Mughals, tried to ban this custom.
 Italian Traveler Pietro Della Valle (1586-1652) has documented the Sati ritual that he witnessed in the town of Ikkeri in November of 1623.
 Colonel William. H. Sleeman (1809 - 1856 A.D.) served as the collector of Jabalpur.
 
 VI. Sati in the Modern times
 In general, before this custom was outlawed in 1829, there were a few hundred officially recorded incidences each year.
 The efforts of Raja Rammohan Roy and other Hindu reformers greatly impacted the movement to outlaw this practice.
 Even after the custom was outlawed, this custom did not vanish completely. It took few decades before this custom almost vanished
 
 
 JustaLittleUnwell, women are not jumping into pyres now, bcoz they are educated and have come a long way since their counterparts from the olden days.
 
 And if u read what I\'ve downloaded, we\'ll have reason to believe that there were women who committed Sati willingly.
 
 I was of the impression that the \'setti\' issue in the article was out of context to what the Paki author was saying and unless someone (who has all the time in the world) explains it to me, I\'ll continue to see it in the same light (PS Plz see my post on Nov 24, ....Where\'s the connection? )
 
 And this is not a cheap, half baked attempt to discourage initiatives such as Social Justice. The Paki author has been very rational in his article \"Enmity with India\" and kudos to ppl who view things objectively, without getting ensnared in Jingoism.
 
 Peace!

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Tue Nov 25, 2003 9:31 pm

Reminder, I don\'t have all the time in this world - but I do think the two barbaric situations (that of sati and honor killings) are closely interlinked, and the author is justified in referencing one, to condemn the other. Both are organized crimes on womanhood - both deserve to be condemned, which is precisely what the author has done.
 
 Btw, no one in their right senses will jump into a burning flame (not even my uneducated dog) - it is an insult to those women and their intelligence, to claim that they did so willingly. I wish I had all the time in this world to correct your belief on this one

by **Rock-bottom Remainder** » Wed Nov 26, 2003 8:09 pm

Heck! I\'m wondering why I\'m crying myself hoarse on this one but nevertheless,
 I reiterate, the author has condemned Sati but the context in which he has mentioned the practice is misplaced.
 
 This is from csuchico.edu
 
 For many traditionalists, this Hindu practice symbolizes the epitome of wifely devotion, especially among the Rajput caste of Northern India (Harlan 1995: 80). In addition, some Hindus believe the act of self-immolation by a widow facilitates the attainment of spiritual salvation for her dead husband. The woman who commits sati is also revered as a goddess (81). On the other hand, feminists, political leaders, and many of India’s rural people and elite contend that the glorification of sati is a national disgrace and an immoral act. Understandably, the differing points of view have created strong division among India’s people, especially among women.
 Comprehending why a woman would choose to commit sati, however, requires the removal of our “western lenses.” The act of self-immolation of widows on their husband’s funeral pyre may be construed as a horrific act by the Westerner but in India cases of sati have been documented in their culture for hundreds of years (Oldenburg 1994: 165). More important, the symbolic significance of sati is intricately intertwined in the Hindu belief system and reveals something about the status of women.
 
 THE DEBATE OVER SATI
 
 Historically, sati is not unique to India. In the north Indian state of Rajasthan, it came to be associated with the people of the warrior Rajput caste, who viewed sati as the extreme expression of marital valor (Harlan 1994: 80). Although the practice of sati has been virtually non-existent elsewhere in India after the British banned it in 1829, about forty cases have taken place since India’s independence in 1947. Twenty-eight of these cases have occurred in Rajasthan, mainly around the Sikar district (Oldenburg 1994: 191).
 As stated earlier, Roop Kanwar’s sati appears to have launched a fierce debate in India between sati supporters and sati opponents. As surprising as it may seem, shortly after Kanwar’s death, women demonstrators organized in various parts of the country to demand that women be permitted to commit sati (Kumar 1995: 76). Pro-sati demonstrators demanded, as Hindus and women, the right to commit, worship, and propagate sati. In addition, their endeavors were also supported by Rajput men. For example, shortly after Kanwar’s sati, the Sati Dharma Raksha Samti (the “Committee for the Defense of the Religion of Sati”) was formed (Hawley 1994: 9). This group was run by educated Rajput men in their twenties and thirties who claimed that sati was a “fundamental part of their traditions; a refusal to legitimize sati, they said, was a deliberate attempt to marginalize the Rajputs” (Kumar 1995: 81).
 In sharp contrast, Indian feminists argued that sati was a deplorable act. It was viewed as a crime against women. They contended that sati as an issue had been settled in 1829 when it was officially abolished by the British (Oldenburg 1994: 101). Feminists rejected the glorification that followed Roop Kanwar’s sati. In addition, they countered the propaganda produced by the media which represented Roop Kanwar as a symbol of the ideal Hindu women. That is, as a result of Kanwar’s sati, she symbolized the chaste and devoted wife who was able to sacrifice her life for her husband. For Indian feminists, this ideology exemplified the oppressive status of women. In addition, the glorification of a woman’s self-immolation confirmed to feminists that many women believed “their strength lied in the act of sacrifice and the endurance of untold pain” (Oldenburg 1994: 105). As one can see, the attitudes regarding the significance of sati are controversial. However, to discern the cultural relevance of this “tradition,” one must be cognizant of the role of women in Hindu society, and acknowledge the myths which venerate sati as well as the origin of this practice. In this way, a better comprehension as to why one would commit such an act will be attained.
 
 VIRTUOUS WOMAN THROUGH SELF-SACRIFICE
 
 Ironically, the Hindu term for sati literally means “a good woman,” a woman who has become capable of self-immolation (Harlan 1994: 79). In addition, among the Rajput caste, sati is as a person one becomes, gradually through good behavior. Dying as a sati demonstrates to all concerned that the woman has developed appropriate and admirable behavior (80). As Sushil Kumari, a fifty-four-year-old Rajput woman shared with Elisabeth Bumiller, “it is a tradition that has been instilled in us since childhood.” “It is very, very ingrained in the Rajput psyche.” In addition, “it is glamorized, eulogized, it is drilled into us, whether we are educated or not, that the husband is a god figure” (1990: 69). Furthermore, according to Kumari, committing sati guarantees that a woman, her husband and seven generations of the family after her will have a direct passport to heaven. Through her sacrifice, she releases herself and family members from the “painful cycle of birth and rebirth” (70). In this way, one can see the responsibility appropriated to women for not only the salvation of her husband but his family as well. It is through her suicide that all others can be freed from the painful cycle of reincarnation.
 Having discussed the significance of this selfless act, one can see the reasons why a Rajput woman would consider sati. This ritual is believed to be an act of purity, self-sacrifice and dignity. In fact, after the death of Roop Kanwar, a majority of the men of Deorala admitted to being proud of what Kanwar had done. As one man said “our Rajput women are very valorous.” “ What she (Roop Kanwar) did has made the whole village respect her and the whole of Rajasthan respect the village” (Dalrymple 1997: 17).
 
 I know its beyond rational understanding as to why a woman would fling herself on to her husband\'s pyre. The very thought of jumping into a funeral pyre gives goose pimples to all of us but we can\'t really explain the collective psyche of the ladies of those days, now can we? And to top it all, we still have some rural folk who support it.

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:39 pm

Remainder, (since the other threads are too boring, and with nothing else to do.......)
 
 Even I wonder why you are crying hoarse, since sati was anyway a condemnable practise even according to you - is it because the author is not entitled to condemn, since he is a Paki?
 
 I believe the discussion would be better served by posting thoughts and opinions rather than googling around the net for favorable pieces of essays. Still, I\'ll try to understand what you have conveyed by all that downloaded wisdom - is it that the women in question who jumped into the pyre were the only responsible ones for their acts? That there was no force (physical & mental), centuries of brainwashing, setting of high standards of expectation, etc etc by the makers and interpreters of the law / religion and all people who surrounded those women (the near and dear ones)? In other words, the society had no responsibility in the enactment of such a cruelty? Please dont download more info. Sati was an organized crime against women and every individual on this planet has the right to cite it so that his/her society learns from the mistakes - just like we learn from the cruelty of Hitler, not to repeat such mistakes.

Who is online