I am not particularly inclined towards anyone nor do I have any aversion towards any one. Having stated His attitude of equal treatment of all in the 29th verse, the Lord is continuing to elucidate the same equality of behaviour till this verse. There, first he stated 'na me dvesyo asti', for this reason in the 30th, 31st and 32nd verses he has brought up the issue of the elevation of the men of the utmost evil conduct and those of sinful birth. He has used the words 'na priyah' in the context of virtuous Brahmins and royal sages. The issue of elevation is the same for all. Upliftment will automatically ensue from devotion towards the Lord and seeking His refuge. Anybody can attain this state of upliftment; from this point of view all are equal to the Lord.

The Brahmin may be virtuous. It may be his very nature to do good deeds and making others do so and he may be a devotee too. His life may also have devotion to the Lord! Similarly, if such a Kshatriya (warrior class) becomes the king and is also endowed with the nature of a sage, then he is a man of discrimination and discipline and ensures that others too maintain such a conduct and is also the doer of righteous deeds. The spirit of sacrifice has been tradition of sages in India. The kings too were called royal sages only when they gave up their own selfish ends, pleasures and habit of hoardings and reigned in the spirit of working for the welfare of his subjects and also for all else. The word 'bhakta' is right and proper for both the Brahmin and the Kshatriya.

Find the hidden warning along with the inspiration in this particular inspiration from the Gita. That the Brahmin should not be confined to becoming one in accordance with just birth and name; he should have the habit of engaging in virtuous deeds and his main support of life should be of devotion! Similarly, The kshatriya and with particular reference to the person handling administrative power should observe and evaluate and should give effect to the glorious Indian tradition of the royal sage through the medium of this verse! The devotion towards divine should be made part of life because:

Anityam sukham lokmimam prapya bhajasva mam.

The world is transient, is without happiness and for this reason refuge should be sought of devotion towards the divine.

There is nothing permanent in this world. Neither the body nor the relations of the body nor sensual objects which are related to the body. They are sans happiness as the happiness is contingent on their being favourable. As they are transient, they are bound not to be suitable for all times. On their becoming adverse, the happiness will end and again sorrow will begin! The real happiness is that which is everlasting and eternal. The world itself is transitory. That it can give permanent happiness is impossible. What should be done? Should one give up and just get dejected? No not all-'bhajasva mam'. The Lord says. Become devoted to Me? The Lord is eternal that is why his remembrance is permanent too and gives eternal happiness.

The issue is totally logical. The body which is acquired and the world in which it is acquired they are impermanent; this can be seen clearly; even then remaining attached and entangled in it, is to what extent right? Transact in the world and while the body remains here make it a tool for devotion and ultimately for the attainment of the Lord.

What is the nature of this devotion? What is the type of devotion which becomes the basis for the attainment of the Lord; the concluding verse of this chapter carries this distinctive inspiration.