Arjuna's argument reaches its logical culmination here: the crimes of family destroyers do not merely harm individuals but erase entire systems of inherited duty and tradition. The term 'śāśvata' (eternal) applied to jāti-dharma and kula-dharma reveals Arjuna's assumption that these social arrangements are permanent and divinely ordained — an assumption the Gita will systematically challenge in later chapters. The Advaita tradition distinguishes between relative duties (which are real within their domain but not ultimately permanent) and the absolute Dharma of Self-knowledge, which alone is truly eternal. Ramanujacharya honors the importance of community traditions as instruments of divine order while insisting that the Lord's direct command supersedes all inherited arrangements. Madhvacharya holds that true śāśvata dharma is not any particular social custom but the eternal relationship between the soul and God. The bhakti tradition, following Chaitanya's revolutionary example, regards devotion as the only truly eternal dharma — all social categories are temporary designations on the eternal soul. Abhinavagupta reads the destruction of dharma as the concealment of universal consciousness by its own creative power — a cosmic play that includes apparent destruction as part of its unfolding. Vallabhacharya trusts that Krishna's pushti-marga (path of grace) regenerates dharma from within, regardless of external destruction. Tilak identifies this as the peak of Arjuna's intellectual argument against fighting — and the point at which his reasoning, however sophisticated, reveals itself as a servant of his emotion. Vivekananda would challenge whether any dharma tied to birth category deserves the label 'eternal' — true sanātana dharma must be universal.