Mbh 3.131.1a

“The hawk said, ‘All the kings of the earth represent thee as a pious ruler. Wherefore, O prince, has thou then stopped to perpetrate a deed not sanctioned by the ordinance? I have been sore afflicted with hunger. Do thou not withhold from me that which hath been appointed by the Deity for my food,--under the impression that thereby thou servest the interests of virtue, whereas in reality, thou wilt forsake it, (by committing thyself to this act). Thereupon, the king said, ‘O best of the feathered race, afflicted with fear of thee, and desirous of escaping from thy hands, this bird, all in a hurry, hath come up to me asking for life. When this pigeon hath in such a manner sought my protection, why dost thou not see that the highest merit is even in my not surrendering it unto thee? And it is trembling with fear, and is agitated, and is seeking its life from me. It is therefore certainly blameworthy to forsake it. He that slayeth a Brahmana, he that slaughtered a cow--the common mother of all the worlds--and he that forsaketh one seeking for protection are equally sinful.’ Thereat the hawk replied, ‘O lord of earth, it is from food that all beings derive their life, and it is food also that nourisheth and sustaineth them. A man can live long even after forsaking what is dearest to him, but he cannot do so, after abstaining from food. Being deprived of food, my life, O ruler of men, will surely leave this body, and will attain to regions unknown to such troubles. But at my death, O pious king, my wife and children will surely perish, and by protecting this single pigeon. O prince, thou dost not protect many lives. The virtue that standeth in the way of another virtue, is certainly no virtue at all, but in reality is unrighteousness. But O king, whose prowess consisteth in truth, that virtue is worthy of the name, which is not conflicting.