Back to Bhagavad Gita
Chapter 1 • Verse 37

Arjuna Vishada Yoga

अर्जुन विषाद योग

Speaker: Arjuna (अर्जुन)

Timeless Wisdom
Millions of Followers
Ancient Text

The Verse

श्लोक

तस्मान्नार्हा वयं हन्तुं धार्तराष्ट्रान्स्वबान्धवान् | स्वजनं हि कथं हत्वा सुखिनः स्याम माधव ||३७||
tasmān nārhā vayaṁ hantuṁ dhārtarāṣṭrān svabāndhavān | svajanaṁ hi kathaṁ hatvā sukhinaḥ syāma mādhava ||37||

Translation

अनुवाद

English

Therefore, it is not proper for us to kill the sons of Dhritarashtra, our own relatives. How can we be happy by killing our own kinsmen, O Madhava?

हिंदी

इसलिए हे माधव! अपने ही बन्धुओं धृतराष्ट्र के पुत्रों को मारना हमें उचित नहीं है। अपने स्वजनों को मारकर हम कैसे सुखी हो सकते हैं?

Deep Reflection

गहन चिंतन

Arjuna now draws his conclusion:

"It is not proper for us. How could we possibly be happy afterward?"

He's moved from feeling to argument to conclusion. The verdict: we should not fight.

The Psychology of Identity-Based Ethics

"Na arhāḥ"—not befitting, not proper, not worthy of us. This is about identity, not just ethics.

Some actions are beneath who we are.

Arjuna isn't just saying "killing is wrong." He's saying "this isn't who we are—this isn't what people like us do."

Identity shapes ethics. What you believe you are determines what you think you should do.

The Happiness Test

"Sukhinaḥ syāma"—will we become happy? Again, Arjuna uses future happiness as a test.

Can you imagine being at peace with this choice?

This is practical moral philosophy. Not "what do the rules say?" but "can I live with myself?"

If you can't imagine future peace, reconsider present action.

Relatives, Not Enemies

"Svabāndhavān"—our own relatives. "Svajanam"—our own people. Arjuna emphasizes the relationship.

The same people can be both enemy and family.

The Kauravas are aggressors AND relatives. Both are true. Arjuna argues that the relationship outweighs the aggression.

In conflicts with people we're connected to, which identity do we prioritize—their role as opponent or their role as relation?

Collective Decision

"Vayam"—we. Not "I should not kill" but "we should not kill." Arjuna speaks for all Pandavas.

Moral decisions sometimes need to be collective.

He's not making this choice alone. He's proposing a shared position for his brothers. The moral weight would be shared, so the moral decision should be too.

Why Complete Arguments Invite Complete Teaching

This is Arjuna's final position before Krishna speaks: we cannot kill our family and be happy. It's wrong, it's not who we are, and it leads nowhere good.

Strong conclusions invite strong responses.

Krishna is about to spend seventeen chapters addressing this. Arjuna's certainty creates the need for Krishna's teaching.

Sometimes you need to articulate your position fully before you can hear why it might be incomplete.

What This Means for You

व्यावहारिक ज्ञान

Consider who you are, not just what you're doing. "Is this worthy of me?" is a valid ethical question.

Imagine future peace. If you can't picture being at peace with a choice, that's significant information.

Recognize dual identities. People can be opponents AND family. Which frame you emphasize changes your options.

Make collective decisions collectively. When a choice affects your group, involve your group.

Live With It

इस श्लोक को जिएं

The "Mirror Test."

Arjuna asks: "How can we be happy?" He's projecting himself into the future, looking back at this moment.

He realizes: "I cannot look at myself in the mirror if I do this."

We often make decisions based on immediate pressure or anger. Arjuna suggests making decisions based on future integration.

Will the "Future You" be able to live with this? Will you be able to tell this story to your children without shame? Will you be able to sleep?

If the answer is no, then it is "not proper" (na arhah).

Don't just ask if an action is effective. Ask if it is livable.

A Question to Sit With

चिंतन के लिए प्रश्न

"What action have you avoided because it felt "beneath you"—even if you could have gotten away with it?"