In this article, I'm going to examine certain portions of Savarkar's book, 'Six Glorious Epochs of Indian History', which allegedly have contents endorsing rape of Muslim women as a political tool. How true are these claims? Did Savarkar really say something erroneous? It can be understood only after examining the text.
From inaugurating the Patita Pavana Mandir at Ratnagiri to being an active Hindutva leader who'd unify the Hindus and ask them to rise above their castes — Savarkar was everything.
Sati was not at all a dominant societal custom in the Vedic era, nor did it originate from the Vedas. Other major Hindu texts, like the Dharmashastric corpus, which are post-Vedic texts, don't remotely promote Sati.