1.36. By killing these sons of Dhritarashtra, what pleasure can be ours, O Janardana? Only sin will accrue to us from killing these felons.

1.35 1.44 Nihatya etc. upto anususruma. Sin alone is the agent in the act of slaying these desperadoes. Therefore here the idea is this : These ememies of ours have been slain, i.e., have been take possession of, by sin. Sin would come to us also after slaying them. Sin in this context is the disregard, on account of greed etc., to the injurious conseences like the ruination of the family and the like. That is why Arjuna makes a specific mention of the [ruin of the] family etc., and of its duties in the passage 'How by slaying my own kinsmen etc'. The act of slaying, undertaken with an individualizing idea about its result, and with a particularizing idea about the person to be slain, is a great sin. To say this very thing precisely and to indicate the intensity of his own agony, Arjuna says only to himself [see next sloka]:

1.36 O Janardana! What pleasure shall we find in slaying these sons of Dhritarashtra? By killing these aggressors, only sin will accrue to us. Commentary: "By slaying the sons of Dhritarashtra... by killing these aggressors"—What happiness shall we attain by gaining victory after killing all the sons of Dhritarashtra and their allied soldiers? Even if, driven by the force of anger or greed, we do kill them, once that force subsides we shall only have to weep—that is, we shall have to repent, thinking, "What grievous wrong have we committed in our anger and greed?" The remembrance of our kinsmen will repeatedly sting us with their absence. The grief of their death will torment our mind incessantly. In such a state, can we ever be happy? The implication is that by killing them, as long as we live in this world, our mind will never find happiness; and the sin incurred by killing them will cause us terrible suffering in the afterlife. Aggressors are of six types: one who sets fire, one who administers poison, one who raises a weapon to kill, one who plunders wealth, one who seizes land (kingdom), and one who abducts a wife (see note p. 25). All six of these characteristics were present in Duryodhana and others. They attempted to kill the Pandavas by setting fire to the lacquer house. They poisoned Bhimasena and threw him into the water. They were indeed ready with weapons in hand to kill the Pandavas. Through deceit in the game of dice, they robbed the Pandavas of their wealth and kingdom. In the full assembly, Duryodhana greatly insulted Draupadi with words such as, "I have won you, you have become my slave," and incited by Duryodhana and others, Jayadratha abducted Draupadi. According to scriptural injunctions, no blame (sin) whatsoever attaches to the killer for slaying an aggressor—"There is no sin for the slayer in killing an aggressor" (Manusmriti 8.351). However, even though killing an aggressor is justified, the act of killing is not good. The scriptures also state that one should never commit violence against any being—"One should not injure all creatures." Non-violence is the supreme dharma—"Ahimsa is the highest dharma" (see note p. 26). Therefore, why should we, overpowered by anger and greed, commit the act of killing our own kinsmen? Although these aggressors, Duryodhana and others, are worthy of being killed due to being aggressors, yet because they are our own kinsmen, killing them will only bring us sin, for the scriptures declare that one who destroys his own family becomes exceedingly sinful—"He is the most sinful who causes the destruction of his family." Therefore, how can those aggressors who are our close relatives be slain? It is proper to sever our relationship with them, to become separate from them, but it is not proper to kill them. For instance, if one's own son becomes an aggressor, one can disassociate from him, but he certainly cannot be killed. Connection: Having explained the evil consequences of war in the previous verse, Arjuna now states the complete inappropriateness of engaging in battle.