Even if the other party is a heinous perpetrator, does the crime of killing an entire family disappear?

The Duryodhana group has repeatedly committed acts that, according to ancient law, define them as Atatarein – heinous perpetrators. These actions include setting fire to homes, poisoning people, and seizing property and kingdoms. The Manusmriti states that there is no crime in killing such perpetrators who attack in this manner.

However, another moral principle states that those who destroy one's own clan and family are the greatest sinners. Arjuna weighs these two principles against each other, giving more weight to the latter. He worries that even if the enemy is bad, killing relatives will bring sin upon themselves. This passage does not encourage violence for modern individuals; rather, it shows the legal and ethical conflict that Arjuna faced within the original text.

Japanese Translation from the Geeta Press Edition - Chapter 1, Section 36: "Even if He is a Heinous Offender"

How can there be love for those who are the enemies of Dhritarashtra? These people, by taking refuge in sin, have killed them. || 36 ||

Vocabulary

nihatya means "kill."

"dhārtarāṣṭrān" means "the sons of Dhritarashtra."

"What kind of joy could there be?"

"Janardana" is a name for Krishna, and it means "the one who is called upon by everyone."

"pāpam eva āśrayet asmān" means, "Only sin will cling to us."

hatvā etān ātatāyinaḥ is, "Even if they are Ātātayinas, that is, malicious perpetrators, if we kill them."

Translation

"Janardana, What joy is there for us in killing the sons of Dhritarashtra?

Even if they are heinous perpetrators, if we kill them, only guilt will fall upon us."

Annotative Translation

Here, Arjuna is saying that even if he kills the sons of Dhritarashtra and their companions who are in the enemy army, it will not bring any good, either in this world or in the next.

If it does not produce a desirable result, it cannot bring joy or pleasure in any form.

Therefore, Arjuna does not want to kill them from any point of view.

In the Manu, a famous legal code, it clearly states: "A violent assailant should be killed without hesitation. There is no sin in killing a violent assailant."

Furthermore, the Vasistha Smriti defines a heinous perpetrator as one who has committed the following six types of crimes.

A person who sets fire to a house.

A person who poisons someone's food or drink.

A person who tries to attack by wielding a weapon.

A person who steals property.

A person who takes land from its rightful owner.

A person who kidnaps women.

Duryodhana and his companions exhibited all of these characteristics of those malicious perpetrators.

They set fire to a house made of wax, trying to take the lives of the Pandavas.

Beemaseena was poisoned in his food.

And now, they are holding weapons in their hands, and they are preparing to kill the Pandavas on the battlefield.

In the gambling arena, they stripped the Pandavas of all their possessions, and even seized the kingdom itself.

Draupadi was dragged out in public, and subjected to barbaric insults.

Furthermore, Jayadratha even attempted to kidnap her.

From these circumstances, the idea that killing Duryodhana and his companions would create sin should not have weighed heavily on Arjuna's mind.

However, in another tradition, there is a saying that goes something like: "The person who destroys their own family and lineage is the greatest sinner."

Arjuna thought that this command was much heavier and stronger than ordinary commands.

Therefore, he expressed such an idea.

He will continue to support and explain this position until the end of this chapter.