Amish Tripathi and Kunal Kamra Debate the Historical Context of Sati
"If Words Are Polite...": Amish Tripathi vs Kunal Kamra Over Sati Practice 🔗
Amish Tripathi and Kunal Kamra recently engaged in a heated debate on Twitter regarding the practice of Sati, a former custom of widow immolation in India. This discussion was sparked by Bhavish Aggarwal's praise for Tripathi's podcast on Sati, which led Kamra to remind him of the historical context and the reform efforts against Sati, notably by Raja Ram Mohan Roy. Tripathi countered Kamra's comments by inviting him to read the 1829 Sati Abolishment Act, highlighting that the act deemed Sati as neither mandated by Hinduism nor widely practiced. The exchange also touched on the importance of civility in discussions, with Tripathi suggesting that polite dialogue is more effective.
- Amish Tripathi criticized Kunal Kamra's remarks about Sati.
- Kamra emphasized the historical struggle against Sati and its last documented case in 1987.
- Tripathi referred to the 1829 Sati Abolishment Act to clarify misconceptions about the practice.
- Both acknowledged the importance of respectful communication in debates.
What triggered the Twitter debate between Amish Tripathi and Kunal Kamra?
The debate started when Bhavish Aggarwal praised Tripathi's podcast on Sati, prompting Kamra to respond with historical context regarding the practice and its abolition.
What was Kunal Kamra's main argument in the debate?
Kamra argued that while Sati was once a prevalent practice, it was fought against by reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy, and he highlighted that the last documented case occurred in 1987.
How did Amish Tripathi respond to Kamra's comments?
Tripathi invited Kamra to read the 1829 Sati Abolishment Act, noting that the act stated Sati was not a religious obligation and that it is considered unlawful by Hindus. He also emphasized the importance of polite discourse in debates.