Acharya Prashant advises the questioner to continue going deeper into the Upanishads. He explains that two things will then happen concurrently. Firstly, she will gain the conviction, argument, and clarity to be more convincing to others. Secondly, and more importantly, she will lose the need to be more convincing to others. The speaker senses a lot of need in the question, which he says comes from the desperation to keep the company of the Upanishads while not losing her old company. This indicates that her own study of the Upanishads is not yet deep enough. The speaker elaborates that the need to explain to others arises because she cannot afford to be without them. He defines liberation as, first and foremost, liberation from bad company. He questions what use the Upanishads have been if they could not give her the strength and conviction to reject bad company. Bad company is not merely those who abuse the Upanishads, but also those who treat them as exotic toys. The current situation is a funny combination where she is desperate to explain but not capable of doing so, which only gives the Upanishads a bad name. As her understanding deepens, a paradox will resolve: she will become more capable of explaining to others but less needful of doing so. She will then explain not out of an obligation or a need to maintain relationships, but from a position of strength. This strength will allow her to dismiss unworthy people and choose worthy listeners. He points out that people are often held captive by bonds of blood, money, or social interest, which prevents them from seeking out deserving candidates for this knowledge. Instead, they try to impress those they have selfish interests with, such as family or a boss. The first step towards the Upanishads, he suggests, is to be willing to walk away from situations and people who do not respect the Truth.