Sati Pratha.

Hinduism is targeted by many who claim that Sati was an important part of Hinduism and it was forced upon women, they try to show that Sati was a very common practice. But is it true? Let's see...

Vedas do not mention Sati anywhere, nor does Brahmanas, Aryanakas, Griha sutras. Griha Sutras do have many rituals and Samaskaras but the ancient texts do not mention Sati Pratha anywhere.

Even Manusmriti which have so many Interpolations do not mention Sati Pratha anywhere

Rishi Manu said

धर्मं जिज्ञासमानानां प्रमाणं परमं श्रुतिः (2.13) meaning those who want to know Dharma shruti texts are foremost Evidence for them.( source of knowledge)

He also said -

वेदोऽखिलो धर्ममूलं (2.6) Vedas are the source of "ALL" Dharma.

Hence as Sati is not mentioned anywhere in Vedas etc, how can we call it an "Integral part" of Dharma? Of course, it is a later practice. But what about some texts where it is mentioned? Let's see....

The most famous mention of Sati is in Mahabharata Story of Madri, but the story is very strange. Let me show how.

Madri sat on the Funeral Pyre of Pandu and it was ignited, and antim sanskara of Pandu was completed.

But then in the very next chapter, it is written that Rishis went to hand over Kunti, Pandavas, and "Two dead bodies" (शरीरे), but dah sanskara was done how they had two dead bodies? Can it be अस्थियां? Let's see...

In the next chapter Dhrishtra says - "Cover Madri in such a way that neither sun nor air can see her(come in contact with her)"

Further, it says they all went to do Dah sanskara of Pandu, but 2 chapters ago it said Dah sanskara already happened, antim sanskara do not happen twice.

Further, it is mentioned that body of Pandu was covered with Sandalwood paste and covered in white clothes, and he was looking as if alive. Clearly, they are talking about ded bodies.

It is a clear contradiction if Madri ascended Pandu's Pyre and Antim sanskara was done there and then how come their dead bodies were carried and how they were covered etc? This means this part has been interpolated later, I believe Sati of Madri was not part of the original Mahabharata but added later removing some original shlokas and this is based on my above analysis. Even in texts like Parashar Smriti where Sati is mentioned, Sati is one of the options and it is clearly Interpolated, Even modern-day scholars believe that it is interpolation as just a verse above women is allowed to remarry.

Medhatithi in his commentary on Manusmriti 5.157 says killing self is against shastras(Vedas) hence Sati is prohibited even when it is mentioned in Smriti texts like Angirasmriti.

And rightly so, because Yajurveda 40.3 prohibits suicide.

असुर्या नाम ते लोका अन्धेन तमसावृताः । ताँस्ते प्रेत्यापि गच्छन्ति ये के चात्महनो जनाः ।।

But even if someone believes that these are not Interpolations (although enough evidence provided) still they have no basis to attack Hinduism as it's one of the options as mentioned in Paradhar smriti and not a compulsion. Even when the British arrived Sati was not Prevalent in society, in Poona dominion of Peshwa annual average was 12 for 1800-1812, Sati pratha was practiced mostly in Bengal and see that in comparison to the Population at that time.

Hence targeting Hinduism in name of Sati is wrong because ancient texts do not mention Santi at and some texts which mention it are interpolated later as they do not fit in the context. Sati is NOT a part of Hinduism and is a later practice.

नमो नारायणाय।।