328 Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead

comforts of the citizens that he was to see that there was not even
excessive heat or cold. Although there was no fault on the part of the king,
the brahmana whose child had died immediately went to the palace door
and began to accuse the king as follows.

“The present King, Ugrasena, is envious of the brahmanas!” The exact
word used in this connection is brahma-dvisah. One who is envious of the
Vedas or one who is envious of a qualified brahmana or the brahmana
caste is called brahma-dvit. So the King was accused of being brahma-dvit.
He was also accused of being satha-dhi, falsely intelligent. The executive
head of a state must be very intelligent to see to the comforts of the citi-
zens, but, according to the brahmana the king was not at all intelligent,
although he was occupying the royal throne. Therefore he also called him
lubdha, which means greedy. In other words, aking or an executive head of
state should not occupy the exalted post of presidency or kingship if he is
greedy and self-interested. But it is natural that an executive head becomes
self-interested when he is attached to material enjoyment. Therefore,
another word used here is visayatmanah.

The brahmana also accused the king of being ksatra-bandhu, which
refers to a person born in the family of ksatriyas or the royal order who is
without the qualifications of a royal personality. A king should protect
brahminical culture and should be very alert to the welfare of his citizens;
he should not be greedy due to attachment to material enjoyment. If a
person with no qualifications represents himself as a ksatriya of the royal
order, he is not called a ksatriya, but a ksatra-bandhu. Similarly, if a person
is born of a brahmana father but has no brahminical qualification, he is
called brahma-bandhu, or dvija-bandhu. This means that a brahmana or a
ksatriya is not accepted simply by birth. One has to qualify himself for
the particular position; only then is he accepted as a brahmana or a ksatriya.

Thus the brahmana accused the King that his newly born baby was dead
due to the disqualifications of the king. The brahmana took it most
unnaturally, and therefore he held the king to be responsible. We also find
in Vedic history that if a ksatriya king were irresponsible, sometimes a
consulting board of brahmanas maintained by the monarchy would de-
throne him. Considering all these points, it appears that the post of
monarch in the Vedic civilization is a very responsible one.

The brahmana therefore said, ““No one should offer respects or worship
to a king whose only business is envy. Such a king spends his time either
hunting and killing animals in the forest or killing citizens for criminal acts
He has no self-control and possesses bad character. If such a king is wor-
shiped or honored by the citizens, the citizens will never be happy. They
will always remain poor, full of anxieties and aggrievement, and always
