This shloka continues Arjuna’s sorrowful argument.

Arjuna now says, etān na hantum icchāmi — “I do not want to kill these people.” These people are Bhīṣma, Droṇa, and the relatives standing before him. The word etān — “these” — points to the very people who are physically present in front of him.

Then he says, ghnataḥ api — “even if they strike us” or “even if they kill us.” This is a strong statement. Arjuna says that even if they attack, he does not want to respond by killing them. He would rather receive their arrows than raise his own bow against them.

On the surface, this may sound like great non-violence. But in this context, it is not clear ahiṁsā [non-injury guided by dharma]. It is attachment speaking. Arjuna is not refusing violence after clear dharmic discrimination. He is refusing his kṣatriya duty because his mind is bound to “my people.”

He addresses Kṛṣṇa as Madhusūdana — the destroyer of Madhu. This address is meaningful. Kṛṣṇa destroyed Madhu, a rākṣasa. Arjuna’s implied feeling is: “For you, killing Madhu was easier because he was a rākṣasa. But I am not facing rākṣasas. I am facing my own people — Bhīṣma, Droṇa, and relatives.”

But this comparison itself shows the clouding of Arjuna’s mind. The issue in dharma is not merely whether the person is emotionally close or distant. The issue is whether the action is required for dharma. Kṛṣṇa’s destruction of Madhu was not personal hatred; it was the destruction of adharma. Similarly, the Mahābhārata war was not meant to be personal revenge. It was a dharma-yuddha, a war undertaken after every peaceful method had failed.

Then Arjuna says, api trailokya-rājyasya hetoḥ — “even for the sake of the kingdom of the three worlds.” He is saying that even if he were to gain rulership of all three worlds — bhū-loka, bhuvar-loka, and suvar-loka — he would not kill them.

Finally he says, kiṁ nu mahī-kṛte — “what then for the sake of earth?” If even the three worlds cannot compensate for Bhīṣma and Droṇa, then what is the value of a mere earthly kingdom?

This is the central emotional logic of the shloka: “No gain can compensate for the loss of my people.” For Arjuna, Bhīṣma and Droṇa have become more valuable than the three worlds. He is not weighing dharma; he is weighing emotional loss.

This is still part of śokaḥ [sorrow], but it is moving toward mohaḥ [confusion or delusion]. The sorrow is now becoming an argument. The mind is saying, “Because they are my people, I should not kill them even if they attack. No kingdom, not even the three worlds, is worth it.”

The problem is not that Arjuna values Bhīṣma and Droṇa. Reverence for elders and teachers is good. The problem is that attachment is now overriding dharma. When the mind says, “Because this person is mine, normal dharma does not apply,” that is mohaḥ [confusion or delusion] beginning to speak.