Gain is not worth inner contamination.

Arjuna's moral intuition here is not without substance — it shows a refined conscience. He is unwilling to purchase victory and prosperity at the price of the blood of his teachers. This reflects a genuine ethical sensitivity: can one truly enjoy the fruits of an action whose means were deeply corrupting? The image of 'bhogān rudhira-pradigdhān' — pleasures smeared with blood — is poetic and morally vivid.

Yet Arjuna's error is still one of incomplete analysis. He is applying the ethics of personal relationship to a context that requires the ethics of dharmic duty. Moreover, he presupposes that his non-action is 'clean' — but as Krishna will show later, inaction on the battlefield has its own consequences, its own 'blood.' Every choice, including non-choice, generates karmic fruit.

The deeper teaching being set up here is the concept of nishkama karma — action without selfish desire for fruit. If Arjuna acts not for personal enjoyment of victory but as fulfillment of dharma, the moral equation changes entirely. The modern parallel is clear: when we are faced with difficult decisions that require us to act against personal attachment, the question is not 'what will I gain?' but 'what does right action demand of me here?'