The Gandhi-King Community

For Global Peace with Social Justice in a Sustainable Environment

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Senior Gandhian Scholar

Gandhi Research Foundation, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail- dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net;

dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com

Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India

 

 

Sati, its Pratha and Mahatma Gandhi

 

 

Sati was a social funeral practice among some brave communities of India. In which recently widow women would immolate her on her husband funeral pyre. Mahatma Gandhi had taken interest in this custom. He mentioned it in his speeches, letters and articles. Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “There is no gainsaying the fact that a nation’s rise or fall depends upon its great men. The people who produce good men cannot but be influenced by them. The main reason for the special distinction that we find in Bengal is that many great men were born there during the last century. Beginning with Rammohan Roy, one heroic figure after another has raised Bengal to a position higher than that of the other provinces. A great social and religious reformer, founder of the Brahmo Samaj, supported abolition of Sati and worked hard for the spread of education.” 1 Mahatma Gandhi spoke, “Our Shastras say that God is incarnate in the person of a pure Woman a sati. You should legitimately occupy the position of queens in your homes. But that will only be when you have rescued you men-folk from the drink habit.” 2

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “A woman should pray for freedom from passion although her name may be Sita. That is why Sita is one of the seven Satis. Sati does not merely mean one faithful to her husband. Sati signifies freedom from passion. Sita had two children. This need not be regarded as wrong on her part, because it is mentioned in this context that Rama and Sita came together out of a desire for progeny. It is not so today.  Young India, 31-10-1929 Ravana was a monster but Mandodari was a sati. In my opinion these instances go to prove that Tulsidasji was no reviler of women by conviction. On the contrary, so far as his convictions went, he had only reverence for them So much for Tulsidasji attitude towards women.” 3 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I ask the ladies in particular to help in this. They should visit the homes of those who drink and plead with them. I have seen women of the Salvation Army do this. Why should not the women of India do the same? Are they the Hindu, Muslim and Parsi women less capable of doing well? Are not those who are caught in the vice their own brothers? If I go and reason with them, they will quarrel with me as they will with other men. They will not, however, be disrespectful or insulting to any woman. They are not such beasts that they will not understand you. As soon as they come in contact with you they will be awakened, they will step back and, seeing the love and affection pouring from your eyes, they will conclude that it is some sati or yogini confronting them and ashamed of themselves they will give up liquor.” 4

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I I hope that the incident as reported in the Press is not true and that the lady in question died through illness or through accident, not by suicide. A sati has been described by our ancients, and the description holds good today, as one who ever fixed in her love and devotion to her husband signalizes herself by her selfless service during her husband’s lifetime as well as after, and remains absolutely chaste in thought, word and deed. Self-immolation at the death of the husband is not a sign of enlightenment but of gross ignorance as to the nature of the soul. The soul is immortal, unchangeable and immanent. It does not perish with the physical body but journeys on from one mortal frame to another till it completely emancipated itself from earthly bondage. The truth of it has been attested to by the experience of countless sages and seers and can be realized by anyone who may wish to even today. How can suicide be then justified in the light of these facts? Again true marriage means not merely union of bodies. It connotes the union of the souls too. If marriage meant no more than a physical relationship the bereaved wife shouls be satisfied with a portrait or a waxen image of her husband. But self-destruction is worse than futile.

It cannot help to restore the dead to life; on the contrary it only takes away one more from the world of the living. The ideal that marriage aims at is that of spiritual union through the physical. The human love that it incarnates in intended to serve as a stepping-stone to the divine or universal love. That is why immortal Mira sang: “God alone is my husband none else.” It follows from this that a sati would regard marriage not as a means of satisfying the animal appetite but as a means of realizing the ideal of selfless and self-effacing service by completely merging her individuality in her husband’s. She would prove her sati hood not by mounting the funeral pyre at her husband’s death but she would prove it with every breath that she breathes from the moment that she plighted her troth to him at the saptapadi ceremony, by her renunciation, sacrifice, self-abnegation and dedication to the service of her husband, his family and the country. She would shun creature comforts and delights of the senses. She would refuse to be enslaved by the narrow domestic cares and interests of the family, but would utilize every opportunity to add to her stock of knowledge and increase her capacity for service by more and more cultivating renunciation and self-discipline, and by completely identifying herself with her husband, learn to identify herself with the whole world. Such a sati would refuse to give way to wild grief at the death of her husband but would ever strive to make her late husband’s ideals and virtues live again in her actions and thereby win for him the crown [of] immortality. Knowing that the soul of him whom she married is not dead but still lives she will never think of remarrying.

The reader wills here be perhaps tempted to ask, “The sati that you have pictured is a being untouched by passion or animal appetite. She can have no desire for offspring. Why should she marry at all?” The reply is that in our present-day Hindu society, marriage, in a vast majority of cases, is not a matter of choice. Again, there are some who believe that in our ramshackle age marriage is necessary as a shield to virtue and as an aid to self-restraint. And as a matter of fact, I personally know several instances of persons who, though at the time of the marriage, were not free from animal passion later on became imbued with the ideal of absolute chastity and found in their married life a powerful means for realizing their ideal. I have cited these instances to show that the ideal of sati that I have depicted is not merely a counsel of perfection that has no place outside the world of theory but something that has to be lived up to and realized in this very matter of fact world of ours. But I readily concede that the average wife who strives to attain the ideal of sati will be a mother too. She must therefore add to her various other qualities mentioned above knowledge of rearing and bringing up children so that they might live to be true servants of their country. All that I have said about the wife applies equally to the husband. If the wife has to prove her loyalty and undivided devotion to her husband so has the husband to prove his allegiance and devotion to his wife. You cannot have one set of weights and measures for the one and a different one for the other. Yet we have never heard of a husband mounting the funeral pyre of his deceased wife. It may therefore be taken for granted that the practice of the widow immolating herself at the death of her husband had its origin in superstitious ignorance and the blind egotism of man. Even if it could be proved that at one time the practice had a meaning, it can only be regarded as barbarous in the present age. The wife is not the slave of the husband but his comrade, otherwise known as his better half, his colleague and friend. She is a co-sharer with him of equal rights and of equal duties. Their obligations towards each other and towards the world must, therefore, be the same and reciprocal. I therefore regard the alleged self-immolation of this sister as vain. It certainly cannot be set up as an example to be copied. Don’t I appreciate at least her courage to die? I may perhaps be asked. My reply is ‘no’ in all conscience. Have we not seen even evil-doers display this sort of courage? Yet no one has ever thought of complimenting them on it. Why should I take upon me the sin of even unconsciously leading astray some ignorant sister by my injudicious praise of suicide? Sati hood is the acme of purity. This purity cannot be attained or realized by dying. It can be attained only through constant striving, constant immolation of the spirit from day to day.” 5 

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Commenting on the article entitled “A Twentieth-Century Sati (?)4”, Shri Mathuradas Devram writes as follows: 5 I have published this letter for the sake of fairness. My opinion remains unaltered even after having known all these facts. The facts as they were published have been corroborated and so my grief is all the greater and my opinion has been strengthened. This is an example not of love but of strong emotion. What does man not do when overcome by emotion? If that very woman had survived, she could have perpetuated her husband’s memory by her dedicated life. Having died, she did not accompany her husband. It is an error to believe that the relationship ends as soon as the body perishes. But even if that were at all true, she could not preserve that relationship. Just as her husband’s body was reduced to ashes, hers too was reduced to ashes; hence along with the departure of the one, the other too followed suit. In this pathetic incident, I find nothing at all praise-worthy. I hope that even this woman’s relatives do not consider this suicide as the act of a sati. Rather than teach women to love their husbands blindly, we should liberate them and show them through our conduct that the soul in a woman has equal rights with the soul in a man. Now about Shri Mathuradas last question. In the sentence “A woman who is a sati will participate in the function of procreation within limits,” the phrase ‘a woman who is a sati’ has been used to denote a woman of good character whose husband is alive. My ideal is to make husbands and wives practice total celibacy. If that is not possible, my purpose was to say that both should, within limits, participate in the function of procreation. That is to say, sexual union between the two should be permitted only for the sake of this function and that too for the limited number of children that both desire. This, in my opinion, is limited self-restraint.” 6

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “We can all imaging Janakidevi’s agony. She had almost gone mad. She said she wanted to commit sati; she could not live without him. I said to her, “Don’t think that people will worship you if you committed sati. On the contrary, they will criticize you. But neither I nor anyone else will restrain you, if you kindle the fire of yoga and consign yourself to its flames. But this is not possible. That is why I say you can now prove yourself a devoted wife only by becoming a yogi, i.e., by pursuing his ideals. You can become a true sati by renouncing your all for the sake of his work.” Ghanshyamdasji who was present said, “We have a custom of taking a pious vow on such occasions. Advise Janakidevi to take one.” Janakidevi spontaneously said, “Here is my vow: I dedicate for his ideals everything that he has left me.” She showed me her accounts also. The amount was more than two lacs. All this she has devoted to Goseva and vowed to bury herself in the work at Gopuri. In this way she became the sati. But who can say whether all this is a result of pure renunciation or of momentary impulse? She herself wondered if God would grant her the strength to do all this. Vinoba who was present there told her that if there was a pious wish God was sure to give the strength to realize it. This reminds me of Queen Victoria. She was just nineteen when she succeeded to the throne. When the elderly Prime Minister came to pay her his obeisance as the Queen she left the throne and came down to bow to him. When it was announced that she was to be the Queen she simply said: “I will be good.” That was all. It was a pious pledge and was fulfilled with the help of her ministers and others. We were under her rule. It is not that we never suffered during her reign but history stands testimony to the fact that she did mean to serve her subjects when she took the solemn vow. Janakidevi can achieve complete success in keeping her vow, as Queen Victoria did, by taking up the task of Goseva.  No one can really be heartless on such occasions, but I may have seemed so, for instead of sorrowing with Janakidevi I pleaded with her to renounce her all and carry on Jamnalalji’s work and be a living sati in the place of burning herself on the funeral pyre as she wanted to. It has been my wont throughout life to throw burdens on people and get the most from them. Janakidevi hesitated a bit and said she had not the ability. I said, if she had the desire, Vinoba would tell her that God would give her the ability and strength. She rose to the occasion. She has renounced not only all her material possessions about 2 lakhs but has dedicated all her time to the work of the Goseva Sangh.” 7

 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “You have become President of the Kasturba Memorial Fund Trust. Mahadev renounced everything for your sake and even laid down his life for you. He died at a much younger age than Kasturba and yet how much he achieved in that relatively short space of time! Kasturba was verily a sati, but while India has produced many Satis, all will admit that it has produced only one Mahadev. If he had not chosen to throw in his lot with you, he might have been living today. His talents would have enabled him to achieve front rank distinction as a savant and man of letters. He might have even been rich, brought up his family in all material comfort and provided his son with the highest education. Instead, he chose to merge himself in you. You regarded him as your son. May I ask what you have done for him?” 8

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I shall be glad if Jaisukhlal and you come. If both of you can live happily away from me and you get educated and become wise there is nothing special to be gained by coming to me. If there has been any misunderstanding the fire of time will melt it away provided we let it do so. From your doings there which you describe it seems that you are spending your time well. By goondas you seem to mean the bad boys you have to come across. Your way of dealing with them may be said to resemble partly of Draupadi. The method worth emulating is that of Sita. Though, of course, both have been counted among the five Satis. It is worth thinking over why Draupadi, though she had five husbands, was and is regarded as a sati. But I leave that question aside.” 9

Mahatma Gandhi answered, “Q. In Harijanbandhu of 14-4-’46, you have said, “God is the Law and the Law-giver.” I do not understand it. Laws are made by man and they keep on changing with time. For instance, Draupadi had five husbands and yet she was considered a sati.

 A woman who does that today will be considered immoral. A. Law here means the law of God. Man interprets that law according to his understanding. We can therefore say that with the gaining of more knowledge he finds the previous assumption wrong. For instance, the rotation of the earth is a law of nature. We are convinced of its correctness today. Yet before Galileo, astronomers believed differently. As for Draupadi, the Mahabharata in my opinion is an allegory and not history. Draupadi means the soul wedded to the five senses.” 10

 

References:

 

  1. Indian Opinion, 16-9-1905
  2. SPEECH AT WOMEN’S MEETING, PADIDAN, February 13, 1929
  3. LETTER TO MANILAL AND SUSHILA GANDHI, May 19, 1929
  4.   Navajivan, 13-4-1930
  5. Young India, 21-5-1931
  6. Navajivan, 17-5-1931
  7.   Harijan Sevak, 8-3-1942 and 15-3-1942
  8. TRIBUTE TO MAHADEV DESAI, August 10, 1944
  9. LETTER TO MANU GANDHI, June 6, 1946
  10. Harijanbandhu of 14-4-’46

 

 

Views: 2010

Comment

You need to be a member of The Gandhi-King Community to add comments!

Join The Gandhi-King Community

Notes

How to Learn Nonviolent Resistance As King Did

Created by Shara Lili Esbenshade Feb 14, 2012 at 11:48am. Last updated by Shara Lili Esbenshade Feb 14, 2012.

Two Types of Demands?

Created by Shara Lili Esbenshade Jan 9, 2012 at 10:16pm. Last updated by Shara Lili Esbenshade Jan 11, 2012.

Why gender matters for building peace

Created by Shara Lili Esbenshade Dec 5, 2011 at 6:51am. Last updated by Shara Lili Esbenshade Jan 9, 2012.

Gene Sharp & the History of Nonviolent Action

Created by Shara Lili Esbenshade Oct 10, 2011 at 5:30pm. Last updated by Shara Lili Esbenshade Dec 31, 2011.

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

The GandhiTopia & the Gandhi-King Community are Partners

© 2024   Created by Clayborne Carson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service