The so-called practice of burning the wife to death in the same pyre with the dead husband, which was common in medieval India, is known to us from history as "Sati " But was Sati really practiced in ancient India? The practice of Sati is not mentioned in the Vedas, especially in the ancient texts Rigveda.

Even in the later Puranic period, the Ramayana and Mahabharata, there are no examples of Sati The remarriage of a widow after the death of her husband is mentioned in the Atharva Veda For example, the Young Woman Phatthokong Vrnashanit Upatya Mrtya Pretam Dharma Puranamu Palayanti Tasm Prajang Drabinang Cheh Dhehi.

--- Atharva Veda 18/3/1 means, O human being, after the death of her husband, this woman has come to you with a desire to remarry She can enjoy children by observing the Sanatan Dharma.

Another mantra is, udivarsha narashyavi jivlokang gatasumetumupesha ehi Hastagrabhasya didishostvedanga patyurjanitamavi sambhava Atharvaveda 18/3/2 means, O woman, what is the use of being immobilized in the grief of a dead husband? Come back to real life Your wifehood will be formed with a husband who takes water again This mantra is also in the Rigveda (10/18/8).

The commentator of the Vedas, Sainacharya, says the same in his Taittiriya Aranyaka commentary So, where widows are mentioned to be remarried, there is no mention of the Sati system And there is no mention of the Sati system The Ramayana shows that after the death of King Dasharatha, none of his three queens - Kausalya, Kaikeyi and Sumitra - were burnt alive.

In the Mahabharata, too, it is seen that after King Shantanu's death, his wife Satyavati was not burnt alive on her husband's pyre and became "Sati " After Shantanu's death, his eldest son Bhishma did not ascend the throne of Hastinapur as promised Satyavati and Bhishma continued to rule Hastinapur until his grandson Pandu was crowned.

Later Pandu left the palace and Dhritarashtra, who was blind at the time, was named acting king Satyavati was then humiliated by Dhritarashtra and became a Banavasini and spent the rest of her life in an ashram there Later, she died a natural death, some years before the Kurukshetra War.

However, the bodies of Pandu and his second wife Madri were cremated together, but this is also not an example of Sati Because Madri died in mourning for her husband Pandu This can be called a stroke of the present day However, the two deaths occurred separately But both were cremated together.

Madri did not consensually go to the cremation ground with her husband So this is not an example of Sati Also, Pandu's other wife Kunti was not sent to her husband's funeral pyre Kunti was alive even after the Kurukshetra war So, Sati was not practiced even in the Mahabharata era.

In fact, Sati was practiced in the Middle Ages.

Soon after the defeat of Sindhuraj Dahir Sen in battle with Muhammad bin Qasim in 712, the women of the palace of Andarmahal were seen immolating themselves by jumping into the fire and performing Jaharbrata The practice of Jaharbrata involved both poisoning and immolation However, even after committing suicide by poisoning, there was a risk of physical immolation at the hands of the infidels.

Hence, the women of King Dahir's palace sacrificed their lives on that day in the midst of the all-consuming fire to preserve the sanctity of the body Since then, "Sati" became common among Hindu women to protect their husbands and the nobility after their husbands'death, and it became a part of Hindu society.

However, the Moroccan traveller Ibn Battuta, who visited India during the reign of Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluq, states that this was an optional practice Ibn Battuta writes that the cremation of a living wife with her husband after her death was considered a praiseworthy act among them, but not obligatory.

She was not forced to burn herself Ibn Battuta saw three women in the town of Amjhera voluntarily go to her husband's side The husbands of those three women were killed in battle As witnessed by Ibn Battuta, Sati was a voluntary practice, while Sati was seen to be on the rise during the Muslim period.

The Akbarnama, written by Abul Fazl Allami, reveals that Mughal emperor Akbar tried to stop the burning alive of a reluctant woman, but without success However, the extent of the attempt is questionable in the work of an able administrator like Akbar However, Raja Rammohun Roy was deeply pained to see his daughter-in-law committing Sati as a child.

He tried his best to stop the practice He finally succeeded Rammohun's tireless efforts led to the passing of the Sati Act on 4 December 1829, with the help of Lord William Bentinck, the then British Viceroy of India.

A lawsuit was filed in the Privy Council in London challenging this order But in 1832, the Privy Council upheld the 1829 order of the Bengal Governor, Lord William Bentinck Raja Rammohun Roy proved to the court that there was no such thing as Sati in the traditional religion But what Rammohun could do, the mighty Emperor Akbar could not do! Mughal Emperors Humayun, Akbar and Shah Jahan tried.

But none of them succeeded Why?.

References: Ibn Battutah: Travels in Asia and Africa by HAR Gibb, D K Publishers, New Delhi, 2004, Page - 191-192.