Acharya Prashant addresses a question about the paradox of parenting outcomes. The questioner observes that some irresponsible parents have very capable children who take good care of them, while some very responsible parents, who even sacrifice their careers, have children who are not as successful and from whom they are unhappy. The questioner asks if the irresponsible parents are at a double advantage and the responsible ones at a double loss. Acharya Prashant explains that in the right action, one does not look at the fruit of the action. If one is very concerned about the fruit of the action, then the action itself is not right. If you have given a good upbringing to your child, you have completed your work. You have no scope left to worry about the outcome because you have already done the maximum you could. You have invested all the labor, money, time, attention, love, and all internal and external resources you could. Now, whatever the result is, you have no space left to experience it as good or bad. Similarly, those who have been careless and have not given their children proper values, love, or attention should not be considered to be in a double-win situation if their children turn out well. The pleasure they were having while being careless towards their children is not a real pleasure; it is a punishment in itself. They did not get the first benefit, so how can they get the second? Even if their children turn out to be good due to some grace, the parents lack the capacity to benefit from their children's goodness. He further clarifies that the right action is not dependent on the outcome because it is not done with the outcome in mind. The fruit of a good deed is the good deed itself, and the fruit is immediate. The right feeling one gets while doing the right thing is its own reward. He dismisses the idea that rituals, such as a crow touching a rice ball offering, are necessary for liberation, stating that this is not written in any Upanishad. He asserts that such beliefs are not part of Hindu Dharma, which is essentially Vedic Dharma or Vedanta. He calls these practices pollution or smoke mixed with the pure air of religion. He gives the example of Kabir Saheb, who chose to die in Maghar, a place believed to lead to hell, to prove that liberation comes from living with Ram (Truth), not from dying in a specific place like Kashi. He concludes by advising that the only way to solve the world's problems is through knowledge, as all problems arise from ignorance.