Acharya Prashant addresses the issue of people being entangled in wrong relationships and disputes, particularly those concerning land. He refutes the idea that one is merely 'stuck' in such situations, asserting instead that there is always a vested interest involved. Using the example of two brothers fighting over a piece of land, he explains that they are not stuck in the lawsuit but are pursuing it because they are aware of the land's quantifiable market value. The core problem, he points out, is our 'thick intellect' and 'thick eyes' that only recognize and value what is material and has a price tag. We can easily state the price of a t-shirt or a phone, but we cannot assign a monetary value to our own life, and thus we treat it as worthless. This flawed perspective leads us to prioritize tangible gains while ignoring immense, non-quantifiable losses. Acharya Prashant employs economic terms like 'booked loss' versus 'opportunity loss' to explain this. We see the immediate, material loss of giving up a claim, but we fail to see the opportunity cost—the years of life, peace, and well-being wasted in conflict. He extends this logic to relationships, questioning the pride in India's low divorce rate while ignoring the high number of failed marriages. He argues that a failed marriage is a greater hell than a divorce, yet people endure it for tangible benefits, blind to the destruction of their lives. He emphasizes that freedom is invaluable, and realizing its worth makes it easier to break free from any bondage. The speaker clarifies that the war in the Gita was fought for Dharma (righteousness), not for land like Hastinapur. Had it been merely for land, Shri Krishna would have advised letting it go. This establishes a principle for action: if a matter involves only personal loss, it is better to forgive and choose peace. One should not sell their peace for every small thing. However, if an individual's actions are causing harm to the larger collective, it becomes a righteous duty to fight and not back down. The decision to engage in conflict should be based on whether the issue is a personal matter or a matter of Dharma.