Devanagari
बन्धुर्वधार्हदोषोऽपि न बन्धोर्वधमर्हति ।
त्याज्य: स्वेनैव दोषेण हत: किं हन्यते पुन: ॥ ३९ ॥
Verse text
bandhur vadhārha-doṣo ’pi
na bandhor vadham arhati
tyājyaḥ svenaiva doṣeṇa
hataḥ kiṁ hanyate punaḥ
Synonyms
bandhuḥ
—
a relative
;
vadha
—
being killed
;
arha
—
which merits
;
doṣaḥ
—
whose wrong-doing
;
api
—
even though
;
na
—
not
;
bandhoḥ
—
from a relative
;
vadham
—
being killed
;
arhati
—
deserves
;
tyājyaḥ
—
to be cast out
;
svena eva
—
by his own
;
doṣeṇa
—
fault
;
hataḥ
—
killed
;
kim
—
why
;
hanyate
—
is to be killed
;
punaḥ
—
again .
Translation
[Again addressing Kṛṣṇa, Balarāma said:] A relative should not be killed even if his wrongdoing warrants capital punishment. Rather, he should be thrown out of the family. Since he has already been killed by his own sin, why kill him again?
Translation (Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura)
[Again addressing Kṛṣṇa, Balarāma said:] A relative should not be killed even if his wrongdoing warrants capital punishment. Rather, he should be thrown out of the family. Since he has already been killed by his own sin, why kill him again?
KB 10.54.39
Lord Balarāma again turned toward Kṛṣṇa and said, “My dear Kṛṣṇa, a relative, even though he commits such a blunder and deserves to be killed, should be excused. For when such a relative is conscious of his own fault, that consciousness itself is like death. Therefore, there is no need to kill him.”
Purport
To further encourage Lady Rukmiṇī, Balarāma again emphasizes that Kṛṣṇa should not humiliate Rukmī.
Purport (Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura)
Balarama speaks this verse to Krsna, giving him moral instructions, in order to satisfy Rukmini. A relative should not be killed by a relative. A brother in law should not killed by the sister’s husband.
Purport (Jiva Goswami)
Seeing her still in grief, Balarāma then scolded Kṛṣṇa in order to remove her grief. The relative should not be killed by a friend (bandhoḥ). He should be rejected. This shows that he should be disrespected but cannot be killed. “But if someone kills another person who should not be killed, not killing him is a fault.” He is killed by his own fault. What is the use of again killing this person who is killed by rejection of society, which is the equivalent of death? It serves no purpose. By giving Rukmiṇī to another person he has been ostracized. Disfiguring him is death since it causes more grief than death itself.