[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Polity, law and society](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity) › [The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985) › c12.9 # The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c12.9 The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c12.9 - **Language:** English ### [c12.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c12.9) So it seems that when we start from the sacrality of kingship, the different pieces fall into a consistent pattern. The king is thus primarily a religious figure: divinity as well as chief celebrant. Even his power of punishment is not a purely secular one, for, as Robert Lingat argues, the king when inflicting punishment equally fulfills the priestly function of purifying the evildoer.²¹ We may even tie in the legendary Vena, who not unlike the sacrificial king par excellence, Soma, is ritually immolated by the holy men. In this way, we could construct a complete sacral complex where the king—like Prajāpati, the Lord of the Universe—is a sacrificer, victim, and divine recipient of the sacrifice all in one.²² - [Previous: c12.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c12.8) - [Next: c12.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c12.10) - [Up: c12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c12) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c12.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c12.9) · Pramāṇa