In the absence
of protection by the king, diverse kinds of weapons would fall upon those
that are righteous in their practices, and unrighteousness would be
adopted by all. In the absence of royal protection men would disregard or
even injure their very mothers and fathers if aged, their very preceptors
and guests and seniors. If the king did not protect, all persons
possessed of wealth would have to encounter death, confinement, and
persecution, and the very idea of property would disappear. If the king
did not protect, everything would be exterminated prematurely, and every
part of the country would be overrun by robbers, and everybody would fall
into terrible hell. If the king did not protect, all restrictions about
marriage and intercourse (due to consanguinity and other kinds of
relationship) would cease; all affairs relating to agricultures and trade
would fall into confusion, morality would sink and be lost; and the three
Vedas would disappear. Sacrifices, duly completed with presents according
to the ordinance, would no longer be performed; no marriage would take
place; society itself would cease to exist, if the king did not exercise
the duty of protection. The very bulls would not cover cows and milk-jars
would not be churned, and men living by rearing kine would meet with
destruction, if the king did not exercise the duty of protection. In the
absence of royal protection, all things, inspired with fear and anxiety
and becoming senseless and uttering cries of woe, would meet with
destruction in no time.
Pages:
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290