Arjuna's characterization of Duryodhana as 'durbuddhi' — evil-minded — reveals that he still sees the conflict through moral clarity at this point. The Advaita tradition notes the irony: Arjuna can judge Duryodhana's mind clearly but will soon lose clarity about his own duty. Ramanujacharya observes that those who serve an unrighteous master share in his adharma — the company we keep and causes we serve define us. Madhvacharya reads 'priyachikirshu' — those wishing to please Duryodhana — as souls whose judgment is warped by proximity to corrupt power. The Bhakti tradition sees the contrast between those who serve Duryodhana's pleasure and those who serve Krishna's purpose. Abhinavagupta notes that 'durbuddhi' is not merely moral judgment but a description of consciousness contracted by mala — the impurity that makes one unable to see the whole. Vallabhacharya observes that these warriors have chosen to serve ego (Duryodhana) rather than grace (Krishna), and this choice determines their destiny. Tilak reads the verse as Arjuna's clear-headed analysis of the political situation — his opponents serve a tyrant, and this is precisely why the battle is justified. Vivekananda would caution that moral clarity about others must be matched by clarity about oneself — a test Arjuna is about to fail.