Arjuna expresses his unwillingness to kill his relatives, even if they attack him first. He values the bonds of kinship over material gain, rejecting the idea of ruling over not only the earth but even the three worlds. This underscores his deep inner conflict between duty and compassion.

Arjuna believes that killing his enemies, even though they are the sons of Dhritarashtra, would only bring sin upon him. He questions the righteousness of such an act, seeing no real joy or fulfillment in victory gained through the deaths of his relatives. His dilemma reflects the larger ethical question of war and duty.

Arjuna questions the righteousness of killing his own family members in battle, even though they are fighting on the opposing side. He sees no way to achieve happiness after such a destructive act, emphasizing the importance of family bonds over the material or political gains that the war promises.

Arjuna reiterates the moral clarity he believes the Pandavas possess in contrast to the Kauravas, who are blinded by greed. He questions why they should not refrain from committing the same sin of destroying their family, appealing to Krishna’s wisdom in this moral dilemma.

Arjuna expresses his fear that the destruction of the family will lead to the breakdown of traditional family values and moral order. The loss of these values would lead to the rise of unrighteousness, symbolizing the larger societal and moral decay that would follow from the war’s devastation.

Arjuna fears that when unrighteousness dominates, the moral decay will start with the women of the family, leading to social disorder through the intermingling of castes. This reflects the ancient societal concern about the breakdown of traditional roles and the resulting chaos in maintaining social and religious order.