Belief in God has nothing to do with either Ramayana or Mahabharata. Bhagvad Geeta is a part of Mahabharta Book 6, Bhishma Parva. It contains no mention of Sati. Regarding Manusmriti, I haven't read the complete text. But I hear it's the most abused ancient text and a favourite among Hindu bashers. Also, Manusmriti isn't the only smriti. Padma Purana mentions 36 smritis, half of them being major ones. Each one is said to be applicable in different Yugas. I don't think any of those smritis prescribe Sati. Moreover, it's notable that neither Buddha nor Mahavira talked about Sati.Originally posted by: Charaiveti
I do think it was not in any of the ancient scriptures. Mind my ignorance as an atheist I am not very well read about this but I don't think Geeta or manusmriti had sati in them? Though I do have other problems with manusmriti as a woman, sati isn't there right?
But I do think religion gets interpreted n evolves, sometimes for good sometimes for bad. Stuff keeps getting added. An example, in Christian wedding , there's the removing garter ceremony that's very objectifying the woman n voyeuristic to many. But people still do due to it being a traditin. But in reality it was not even a tradition,but in midieval age people would often follow the bride groom to their room to see them consummate cz people were meddling,thus the groom started showing the garter as a proof of we did it to avoid those people coming in.
Thus traditions get added to culture, which might not trace back to totally ancient scriptures. But it was something the hindus did, maybe only in the eastern region if u say so I won't argue cz I don't know much about other regions history with sati. Also when stopped,the backlash from Hindu Bengalis was immense. Thus it is connected to Hinduism,cz it's such a vast religion, always evolving, always different at every part of India.
I know social evils get attributed to religion, but I believe it's important to separate evil and outdated social practises from Hindu/Sanatana Dharma to have a clearer view.
Lastly, I'd like to add that Dharma and religion are not the same thing. A religion is supposed to have an origin, a founder, and a common book allegedly approved by a common God to follow. Dharma, on the other hand, is universal and not restrained to a specific community. It is something that's meant to be learned, followed and practised. It's an inherent duty, a role you're supposed to play...unlike religion which is all about forcing duties and owes its existence to human beings.
comment:
p_commentcount