Shepherd cum Lord

The state of moksha can never be separated from the act of nishkama karma. The one who practises nishkama karma has to be with people in and around his context. Naturally, sanyasa can never be an act of a person who lives in a dense forest totally cut off from the problems of human beings living in a society. He must always be with the people and within the range of the problems of such people. The best example is Lord Krishna himself (Mahabharatha). Lord Krishna was always within the context of innumerable problems. He was with his people who were traditionally shepherds. At the same time, he acted as the driver of a chariot, danced in tune with the whims and fancies of gopikas, gone as a messenger to avoid a great war and he also acted as the savior of the destitute of every time. This shows a very simple fact that Lord Krishna could not find any sort of difference between one form of karma and the other. As a great warrior, he lead battles and wars against fierce demons and danced with the romantic tunes of his lovers. He never thought that advising Gita is greater than playing a messenger or driving a chariot. This fact has often been forgotten by the so called experts of Indian Systems of Thought, because they think that advising Gita is greater when comparing with shepherding. But Lord Krishna was establishing that discrimination of any karma is an act against Advaita Systems of Thought. The origin of the cast ridden society in the Indian context is closely linked with the intellectual amnesia of the Indian pundits who thought of being separated and kept in isolated shells from the rest is the best way to establish superiority over the other. Hence, Indian society has been segmented into rigid cast prisons. This segmentisation is totally inconsistent with the advaitic logic and practise. But unfortunately, cast system was justified in the name of Bhagavat Gita and its advaitic interpretations.