A young actress, Ulka Gupta, asks Acharya Prashant about feminism and the portrayal of women in the film industry. She explains that she has always tried to choose roles that depict strong, bold women, such as in her serials 'Saat Phere' (which dealt with colorism), 'Jhansi Ki Rani' (portraying a historical warrior queen who was never made to feel inferior to men), and 'Shaktipith Ke Bhairav' (playing Goddess Parvati). She feels a responsibility, both for her own satisfaction and for the message she sends to her audience, to select roles that promote women's empowerment. She asks Acharya Prashant what more she can do to send a strong, positive message to society. Acharya Prashant responds by referencing the oldest story of humanity: our journey out of the jungle. He explains that we did not leave the jungle due to a lack of food, as no animal starves there, but for a higher purpose—to find peace and express our inner creativity. All our developments, from villages to cities and industries, were for this peace. However, he notes that while we have physically left the jungle, we have not left our inner jungle; instead, we have created dirty jungles. He points out that natural jungles are clean despite being full of animals, whereas our cities and beaches are filthy. He argues that we have become worse than animals. He then critiques the notion that "films are a mirror of society," calling it a lie. He states that society has many positive aspects, citing figures like Swami Vivekananda and Kabir Saheb, who are rarely depicted in films. Instead, filmmakers often choose to show the most rotten aspects of society because it is profitable. He advises that it is a choice to focus on the filth, like showing a toilet instead of a place of worship when asked to show one's home. He addresses the concern that audiences do not support good content by stating that every person is thirsty for the ultimate truth. If a good film fails, it is because it could not quench this fundamental thirst of the heart, not because it lacked sensationalism. He encourages making more attempts in the right direction, citing his own work as proof that one can do meaningful work and succeed. He uses the example of the vegan movement to illustrate his point, calling it the "classic vegan fallacy" to believe one can be kind to animals while remaining unchanged internally. He asserts that true non-violence (Ahimsa) is not an ideology but a byproduct of self-knowledge (Atmagyan). Without self-knowledge, any proclaimed veganism is false, as one's life choices, driven by consumerism and unexamined desires, will still cause violence. He concludes that spirituality means living the right way in this world, and the right ambition is needed, even in the material domain.