Acharya Prashant explains the distinction between duty and righteousness by stating that duty is intended for those who are not in direct contact with the truth, such as Shri Krishna, Brahman, or the Self. He describes duty as a code of responsibility given to those who lack wisdom or understanding, serving as a better alternative to living by animalistic whims and natural urges. However, he emphasizes that duty becomes an obstruction once an individual seeks a direct connection with the truth. Using the example of Arjuna, he illustrates how moral duties towards family and society can conflict with the higher call of righteousness. He clarifies that righteousness is the ultimate responsibility towards the truth, which he characterizes more as love than a mere obligation. While duties towards the state, family, or society are valid at a certain level of mind, they are inferior to righteousness. Acharya Prashant argues that one's love for the truth must be the primary guide that determines all other miscellaneous responsibilities. He concludes that the great problem arises when individuals allow social or moral duties to block the path to righteousness, asserting that the truth must always be prioritized over any other competing responsibility.