Shloka 22
अथवा निहते पार्थे पाण्डवान्यतमं ततः । स्थापयेद् यदि वार्ष्णेयस्तस्मात्कृष्णो हि हन्यताम्,“यदि ऐसा सोचो कि अर्जुनके मारे जानेपर श्रीकृष्ण दूसरे किसी पाण्डवको युद्धके लिये खड़ा कर लेंगे तो श्रीकृष्णको ही मार डालो
athavā nihate pārthe pāṇḍavānyatamaṃ tataḥ | sthāpayet yadi vārṣṇeyas tasmāt kṛṣṇo hi hanyatām ||
Sañjaya said: “Or if you think that, once Arjuna (Pārtha) is slain, Kṛṣṇa of the Vṛṣṇis will then set up some other Pāṇḍava to carry on the fight—then, for that very reason, Kṛṣṇa himself must be killed.” The statement frames a ruthless wartime calculus: remove not only the foremost warrior but also the guiding strategist whose presence sustains the opposing side’s resolve and capacity to continue.
संजय उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse highlights how, in war, ethical boundaries can be pressured by strategic thinking: eliminating a single fighter may not end resistance if a leader can replace him. It implicitly points to Kṛṣṇa’s pivotal role as strategist and morale-anchor, while also exposing the moral peril of targeting the guiding intellect rather than only battlefield combatants.
Sañjaya reports a line of reasoning from the battlefield context: even if Arjuna is killed, Kṛṣṇa might rally another Pāṇḍava to continue the war. Therefore, the speaker argues, Kṛṣṇa should be killed to prevent the Pāṇḍavas from regrouping under his direction.