Acharya Prashant explains the difference between the suppression of desires based on morality and suppression based on understanding. He notes that earlier, suppression was driven by the fear of social judgment or rules, where one avoided 'dirty' actions to maintain a certain image. However, even with the intellectual understanding of why desires should be controlled, a person often feels the same struggle during practical implementation. He clarifies that the ego seeks liberation from desires because it feels incomplete and hollow. Desires are simply the objects—money, thoughts, or people—that the incomplete ego clings to in an attempt to feel whole. He emphasizes that merely trying to leave or suppress these objects is insufficient and often results in a different kind of pressure, such as spiritual morality replacing social morality. The root cause is not the object of desire, but the ego's inherent sense of incompleteness. He uses the analogy of a hungry child eating soil; while it is necessary to stop the child from eating soil, one must also provide actual food. If the ego is forced to give up its desires without being provided with a sense of fulfillment or 'completeness,' it will simply find new objects to cling to. Acharya Prashant concludes that suppression is not inherently bad, but 'only' suppression is ineffective. To truly overcome desires, one must provide the mind with the company of Truth or 'Satsang.' Just as the ego learned incompleteness through worldly influences and associations, it must learn completeness through the company of realized beings and scriptures. One cannot successfully leave bad company or habits until they find something more attractive and higher that makes the old desires appear trivial and pale in comparison.