Page:The Land of the Veda.djvu/395

Rh themselves invented the law as a means of self-protection against their wives. Before its introduction, the wives were in the habit of avenging themselves on their husbands for neglect and cruelty by mixing poison with their food; and at last things came to such a height that the least matrimonial quarrel resulted in the husband's death. An easier remedy for the evil might have been found in compelling the wife to eat out of the same dish as the husband, but this would have involved too wide a departure from the customs of society; and it must be admitted that there is a peculiar refinement of cruelty in the expedient adopted, which would commend itself to the Asiatic mind. The Brahmins thus gave the matron an interest in the preservation of her lord's life, by decreeing that her ashes should mingle with his. If this were its origin, then the deepest insult was added to the most cruel wrong of which woman can be made the victim, when thus surrendered to a false religion, and into the hands of men as oppressive as their faith.

The motives which have perpetuated the rite are more easily found. So far as the priestly Brahmin is concerned, he has a direct pecuniary interest in the existence and increase of the cruel custom. Brahmins officiating at suttees are always well rewarded, both by fees and gifts; and quarrels among themselves about their earnings are no novelty. The family of the immolated woman are taught that to them belong the invisible and spiritual blessings of the suttee—that this doomed widow's agonies are to expiate the foulest sins of them and of her husband, and lift them all to heavenly bliss. The reader will remember the Puranas already quoted, where this is expressly taught. Hence the eagerness with which her consent to become a suttee is sought, and the barbarity which helps on, and even enforces, her destruction when her resolution has failed. The motives of the poor lady herself are still more manifest. There is, first of all, her obedience to her religious obligations. Her faith, like that of the Romanist, must be an unquestioning faith. Woman in India seems never to have thought of looking behind this Brahminical teaching, and demanding a “Thus saith the Lord” for the peculiar woes to which she submits.