SATI TO ABORTION

“When I think of the hundreds of widows who are sacrificed annually, and that my wife and daughters might be in the same state, I feel most forcibly for the wretched victims of this diabolical custom.” – William Carey.

INTRODUCTION

As the country prepares to make critical decisions on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, it’s worth looking back at history for lessons that could inform our present.

The BBC’s October 18, 2024, article, “Why fight for justice isn’t over in India’s ‘horrific’ widow-burning case, 37 years on,” serves as a timely reminder that the fight for women’s autonomy and justice remains a global issue.

Understanding these historical struggles may help shape modern perspectives on life and choice.

In today’s political debates on abortion, what lessons can be drawn from the abolition of “Sati,” a once-prevalent practice of widow burning in India?

What parallels can we draw with today’s debates on women’s rights, life, and choice?

Image Source: BBC October 18, 2024, Article – Roop Kanwar was burned to death on her husband’s funeral pyre.

Thirty-seven years have passed since one of India’s most chilling cases of widow burning, and yet the fight for justice remains unresolved. The horrific practice, rooted in the ancient tradition of Sati, was officially abolished in 1829.

However, the tragic incident that unfolded in 1987 in Deorala, Rajasthan, where a widow named Roop Kanwar was reportedly forced to commit Sati, shook the nation to its core.

Despite a loud outcry and landmark legal reforms, the pursuit of justice for Kanwar has been long and elusive. Why, even after nearly four decades, does justice remain out of reach?

Kanwar’s death underscores a deep cultural dilemma where the line between oppressive traditions and individual rights remains blurred.

Despite legal reforms, the glorification of Sati in parts of rural India signals a troubling disconnect between law and cultural beliefs.

Can the legal framework alone be a remedy when societal transformation lags?

UNDERSTANDING SATI: A Historical Practice with Modern Relevance

Exploring the story of Sati is not just a journey through history but also a reflection on how cultural practices can evolve, how societies can learn from their past, and how the fight for human rights remains a relevant struggle across generations.

By understanding where we come from, we can better navigate the debates on life, choice, and justice that continue to shape our modern world.

Sati (or Suttee) was an ancient Hindu custom where a widow would immolate herself on her husband’s funeral pyre.

A pyre is a structure, usually made of wood, used for burning a body as part of a funeral rite or ceremony.

In traditional practices, such as in Hinduism, a deceased person’s body is placed on the pyre and set on fire as a form of cremation.

Its origins are complex, evolving over centuries from ancient Hindu traditions, social norms, and patriarchal customs.

Though the practice is now outlawed, understanding its history can illuminate the ongoing struggle for women’s rights and social reform.

• Religious and Mythological Roots: The term “Sati” comes from the Hindu goddess Sati, the wife of Lord Shiva, who, according to mythology, sacrificed herself to protest the disrespect shown to her husband by her father.

This act, however, was symbolic and never meant to prescribe widow burning as a ritual. Exploring such stories shows how cultural practices can be shaped and misinterpreted over time.

• Mentions in Ancient Texts: References to practices resembling Sati appear in Indian epics like the Mahabharata and Ramayana, where some accounts depict wives following their deceased husbands into death.

These stories were exceptions rather than established norms, highlighting that not all customs in historical texts translate to widespread cultural practices.

• Historical Accounts: The earliest documented instances of Sati in India come from Greek accounts during the campaigns of Alexander the Great in the 4th century Before the Common Era or Before Christian Era (BCE).

These records, including those by historian Diodorus Siculus, describe isolated cases of widow burning. Such accounts provide a glimpse into how outsiders perceived Indian customs, but they may not reflect common practices across the region.

MORAL CONCERNS AND SOCIAL REFORMS

By the early 19th century, British officials in India were becoming increasingly aware of Sati and the public outcry generated in England.

Missionaries, travelers, and colonial administrators provided reports on the practice, and reform-minded individuals in Britain began raising concerns about its morality and the British Empire’s responsibility toward Indian society.

When Lord William Bentinck assumed office as Governor-General in 1828, he was determined to put an end to the practice.

Bentinck was a reform-minded administrator who saw the practice of Sati as inhumane and inconsistent with British principles.

With the support of British and Indian reformers, he gathered enough political and social backing to proceed with a more comprehensive ban in 1829.

CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES KEY ROLE

The missionaries played a critical role not only in spreading awareness about Sati but also in creating public opinion in Britain that put pressure on the colonial administration. They contributed to the social reform efforts that ultimately led to the ban in 1829.

William Carey, Joshua Marshman, William Ward,  Claudius Buchanan, and Alexander Duff were among the main figures advocating against the practice.

William Carey:

William Carey (1761–1834) was a British Christian missionary, a social reformer, and a linguist, often referred to as the “Father of Modern Missions.” He played a pioneering role in missionary work in India and was instrumental in educational, social, and linguistic reforms during British colonial rule.

William Carey was born on August 17, 1761, in Northamptonshire, England. He came from a humble background and initially worked as a cobbler. Despite limited formal education, Carey was an avid reader and self-taught himself various subjects, including languages.

Carey was deeply influenced by the Protestant Reformation and the evangelical movement in England. His famous sermon, “Expect Great Things from God; Attempt Great Things for God,” in 1792, led to the founding of the Baptist Missionary Society. He felt a strong sense of purpose in spreading Christianity overseas and advocated for missionary work in non-Christian regions.

In 1793, Carey arrived in India as a missionary under the auspices of the Baptist Missionary Society. Despite many challenges, including financial difficulties, climate, and language barriers, he settled in Serampore (near Calcutta) in the Bengal region. Along with Joshua Marshman and William Ward (known as the Serampore Trio), Carey established the Serampore Mission.

Carey was a gifted linguist and made substantial contributions to language study and translation. He translated the Bible into Bengali, Sanskrit, Hindi, Oriya, Assamese, and other Indian languages.

Carey also contributed to the development of dictionaries and grammar books in several Indian languages, which helped in standardizing them.

In 1818, Carey and his colleagues founded Serampore College, the first institution in Asia to grant degrees. The college aimed at providing education in Western and Eastern disciplines to both Indians and Europeans.

Carey was a strong advocate against social evils like Sati (widow-burning), infanticide, and caste-based discrimination. He documented numerous cases of Sati and advocated for its abolition through awareness and moral persuasion. His writings and lobbying were instrumental in influencing the British authorities and the public’s opinion in England.

Carey’s advocacy, along with that of other missionaries and Indian reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy, contributed to the ban on Sati in 1829 under Governor-General Lord William Bentinck. When the ban was finally enacted, Carey, in his role as a government-appointed translator, had the honor of translating Regulation XVII into Bengali.

Carey was passionate about botany and introduced the cultivation of cash crops like indigo and sugarcane. He was involved in the Agricultural and Horticultural Society of India and contributed to scientific research and agricultural improvements.

William Carey’s contributions in the fields of education, social reform, and linguistics left a lasting legacy in India. He is remembered as a key figure in the early stages of India’s modern missionary movement and as a reformer who pushed for positive changes in Indian society.

LESSONS FROM THE PAST

What can the abolition of Sati teach us about today’s political and social battles over bodily autonomy and women’s rights?

As we approach Election Day, it’s crucial to examine how cultural practices can shape laws, values, and public debates.

Sati was a religious and cultural practice in 19th-century India where widows were often compelled or pressured to self-immolate on their husband’s funeral pyre. It was embedded in tradition, with roots in ritualistic interpretations, yet its enforcement was socially coercive.

The Abolition of Sati was aimed at protecting the lives of widows who were either coerced or pressured into self-immolation, often against their will.

The practice was seen as a direct violation of the woman’s autonomy, dignity, and basic human right to life.

Abolishing Sati saved individuals from an imminent, often violent death, which was enforced through cultural and social coercion.

Abortion, in contrast, is a medical procedure allowing individuals to terminate a pregnancy. While embedded in contemporary legal, political, and ethical debates, it fundamentally revolves around bodily autonomy and reproductive rights.

In Sati, choice was largely absent. Women faced immense religious, social, and familial pressure, and many were not in positions to consent freely. The abolition of Sati was justified on the grounds of protecting vulnerable individuals from coercion and violence.

Abortion emphasizes individual autonomy, focusing on the pregnant person’s right to make decisions about their body and life. Restricting abortion raises questions about who gets to make these choices – society, the state, or the individual.

Sati directly involved the taking of life – specifically, the life of the widow – raising moral and ethical questions about sacrifice, coercion, and human rights violations.

Abolition of Abortion, on the other hand, involves the termination of a pregnancy, which raises ethical questions regarding the beginning of life, personhood, and the rights of the unborn versus the rights of the individual carrying the “Fetus.”

Those advocating for abolishing abortion often see it as protecting the life of an unborn child, considering the “Fetus” as a life that deserves legal protection. From this view, preserving life in the womb is as morally imperative as preventing the burning of a widow.

However, there’s a critical difference: in the case of Sati, the person whose life was at stake (the widow) was a fully autonomous individual subjected to direct physical harm and death.

In contrast, abortion involves balancing the rights and autonomy of two lives – the pregnant person and the unborn child. Laws banning or restricting abortion also affect the person carrying the fetus, potentially impinging on their bodily autonomy, health, and life choices.

Key Questions to Consider:

• Should the autonomy and health of the pregnant individual take precedence, or does the state’s duty to protect unborn life outweigh these concerns?
• How do we reconcile the rights of an individual with the potential rights of an unborn fetus?
• If “Fetus” is the development stage of a human, and scientists recognized the formation of a heartbeat around 6 weeks indicating the beginning of human life, how can one consciously and morally terminate medically a natural human being in the womb?
• Can imposing restrictions on abortion mirror the coercion that women faced in Sati?
• While the abolition of Sati was justified as saving a woman’s life from societal violence, should protecting the life of an unborn “Fetus” similarly take precedence over a pregnant individual’s choices? At what point does life deserve state protection?
• If Sati was often enforced through coercion, are restrictions on abortion imposing a form of coercion by forcing individuals to carry pregnancies against their will? How do we safeguard true freedom of choice in either case?
• Do historical lessons from Sati challenge us to reconsider the balance between freedom and responsibility in today’s abortion debate? Who bears the ultimate responsibility for deciding matters of life and choice?
• Does the evolution of society from abolishing Sati to addressing abortion suggest that laws should adapt to prioritize individual rights over collective or traditional values? Are we progressing or regressing in terms of protecting human dignity?
• In the religious context, especially, Christianity teaches that life begins at “Conception,” and how would a believer make a decision on this issue?

CONCLUSION

The abolition of Sati and contemporary debates on abortion both challenge society to consider fundamental questions about life, autonomy, and justice. At their core, these issues force us to grapple with a delicate balance between individual rights and collective values.

Are laws merely instruments of protection, or do they also shape our moral compass and cultural norms? When does society’s duty to safeguard life intersect with its obligation to uphold freedom of choice?

History shows us that moral progress is often marked by a willingness to confront entrenched beliefs and traditions. Yet, it also reminds us of the enduring complexity of ethical dilemmas.

Does prioritizing individual autonomy mean we risk neglecting our responsibilities to others, or is it the essence of a just society? In confronting these questions, we must ask ourselves: What lessons from history should guide our understanding of freedom, life, and choice in a modern context?

The journey from Sati to abortion reflects an ongoing struggle to define the boundaries of life and choice. As society evolves, so too must our understanding of justice and human dignity.

Should we preserve traditional values at the cost of personal freedoms, or is true progress found in respecting individuals while acknowledging the sanctity of life?

Perhaps the most pressing question is not only about what we choose but also about who gets to decide.

“You made all the delicate, inner parts of my body and knit me together in my mother’s womb (Psalm 139:13 NLT).”

DISCLAIMER

This article is intended to provide historical insights and draw parallels for educational purposes. It does not promote or advocate for any specific political, religious, or social stance on the issues discussed.

The aim is to encourage thoughtful reflection on historical events and their relevance to contemporary debates on autonomy, justice, and societal values.

Readers are encouraged to approach the content with an open mind and consider multiple perspectives.

The article does not provide legal advice and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any particular viewpoint.