In response to a question about whether spirituality and household life can go together, Acharya Prashant counters by asking how one can even manage them separately. He expresses curiosity about what a household life without spirituality would even look like, suggesting that one must be a person of great courage and resilience to manage such a life. He sarcastically remarks that a household without spirituality must be full of daily fireworks and great spectacles. Acharya Prashant advises that the question should be reframed to be about oneself: "Why have I endured so much sorrow in a household devoid of spirituality until now?" He emphasizes that the question should be about how one has managed to do the impossible. He uses the analogy of asking whether it's possible to drive a car and keep one's eyes open simultaneously. He points out that these are not two separate or opposing actions. He then asks the questioner, "How have you managed to drive a car without opening your eyes until now?" He explains that the household is the car, and spirituality is the eyes. These are not opposed to each other; rather, a household cannot function without spirituality. While spirituality can stand on its own, a household cannot run without it. When the questioner interjects that he is happy with his household life and is only interested in spirituality, Acharya Prashant points out the contradiction. If one is truly happy, why the need for spirituality? He suggests that the questioner's premise is flawed because he has heard that household life and spirituality cannot go together. He argues that the very question implies a perceived conflict, suggesting that spirituality is seen as liberation while the household is seen as bondage. He urges the questioner to look into his own question. If one is "more than happy" with their household life, then what would they do with spirituality? Spirituality is for those who realize something is wrong. He states that spirituality is not a hobby or an interest; it is medicine. And medicine is only for the one who is sick. He clarifies that while everyone is sick, the medicine is only for the one who is honest enough to admit their illness. He concludes that if one is truly happy, they should remain so, but the very question reveals a hidden dissatisfaction and a sense that the household is hindering spirituality.