Why did the Gita only mention the sacrifice of wealth as the highest when it could have mentioned both service and sacrifice?

[An online spiritual discussion was conducted on October 31, 2020, in which several devotees participated. Some of the questions of devotees answered by Swāmi are given below.]

[Śrī Ganesh asked: In Gītā, it is told that karma phala tyāga is the highest (Tyāgāt śāntiranantaram…). In the verse, it is said that knowledge is better than blind practice (ābhyāsa), devotion (dhyānam) is better than knowledge (jñānam) and the sacrifice of the fruit of work is better than devotion. Beyond that, there is no higher state. The three steps in the spiritual path are knowledge, devotion and practice. The third and final step, which is practice is called karma yoga, which consists of both the sacrifice of one’s work (service) and the sacrifice of the fruit of one’s work (donation). Why did the Gītā not mention the sacrifice of work (service) in this context?]

Swāmi replied: You are correct in your doubt that karma yoga should have been mentioned as the next step above devotion. But instead of karma yoga, karma phala tyāga was mentioned, which is only one of the two parts of karma yoga. Your doubt is that karma phala tyāga cannot represent the total karma yoga, which also includes karma saṃnyāsa. The resolution of the doubt is that once karma phala tyāga is mentioned, karma saṃnyāsa is also automatically included since householders doing the sacrifice of the fruit of their work must also necessarily do the sacrifice of work (service). By this, you might think that the verse only concerns householders and that it neglects saints, who can only do the sacrifice of work. But it is not so because since karma saṃnyāsa is automatically included with karma phala tyāga, the saints doing karma saṃnyāsa alone are also naturally included. Instead of karma phala tyāga, if karma saṃnyāsa alone had been mentioned, then karma phala tyāga would not have been automatically been included with it. In that case, the word karma saṃnyāsa would have only been relevant to the minority of saints while the majority of householders would have been excluded.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★