Acharya Prashant responds to a question about why he teaches by first addressing the questioner's stated reason for attending, which is to be with like-minded people. He explains that the questioner is not truly looking for like-minded people, just as another person in the gathering was not really searching for a novel. He suggests that what one is truly looking for is often difficult to confess. To understand why anything happens in the universe, including why the speaker teaches, one must first understand what one truly wants. Without knowing who you are and what you are looking for, you cannot know anything else. Acharya Prashant elaborates that he is a person in the questioner's eyes, and unless the questioner knows what his own eyes are, he cannot know the speaker. He is not an objective entity that exists without the questioner's perception. Using an analogy, he compares the questioner to a machine that takes in information and converts it into a code. To understand the code, one must first understand the machine. Therefore, the questioner must understand himself first. When the questioner finds this line of reasoning "too deep," Acharya Prashant clarifies that "too deep" is always in relation to the ego, meaning it is too deep for the ego to handle, which is precisely his intention. Addressing the questioner's desire to strike a relationship and verify the speaker, Acharya Prashant points out that a relationship of listening already exists. The human condition is to want what one already has; being in a relationship, one wants to *try* to strike a relationship. He explains that real, natural relationships do not wait for approval or consent; they simply are. The attempt to formalize, name, or verify a relationship is an egoic tendency to keep things within a mental domain, which spoils the authenticity. Any attempt at verification, whether the result is positive or negative, ultimately proves that the verifier—the ego—is supreme, as the trust is placed in one's own verification process. Finally, Acharya Prashant explains the utility of a true teacher like Kabir Saheb. He states that one needs to read Kabir only because one has already been influenced by ten thousand other false teachers, such as society, media, parents, and religion. In the context of all this other "rubbish," Kabir acts as a cleansing agent, an antidote. He concludes that if one had no false teachers, one would require no teacher at all. A teacher is needed only because we are displaced from our natural state by conditioning.