Acharya Prashant addresses a question regarding the apparent contradiction in supporting sages who wear minimal clothes while critiquing women who do the same. He clarifies that the core issue is not the act (karma) itself, but the intention (niyat) of the doer. The same act performed with two different intentions is not the same. There are two levels to understand this. The first is the action, and the second, more important level, is the doer behind the action. The doer is identified by their intention. He explains that when sages or saints, like Digambara Jain monks, wear minimal or no clothes, it is because they no longer have any concern for the body. They have understood a profound existential truth and are no longer identified with the body. For them, the body is just a garment that will eventually fall, so they don't bother putting more clothes on it. This is a state of indifference towards the body. He gives the example of Lord Mahavir, whose clothes got stuck in thorny bushes and he simply walked on, not bothering to retrieve them. This is a state of being beyond the body. In contrast, when a modern person, whether male or female, wears revealing clothes, the intention is often rooted in deep body-consciousness. The purpose is to attract others, to appear 'sexy', and to gain validation. This is not indifference but a very calculated use of the body to create a stir in the minds of others, which he terms an act of aggression. He clarifies this is not a gender-specific issue, citing examples of men who build muscular bodies to show them off. The intention is to use the body to entice others. He also mentions revered female saints like Lalleshwari and Akka Mahadevi, who were also naked, to emphasize that his point is about the intention, not the gender. Their nakedness was to conquer the self, whereas the worldly nakedness is to conquer others, which he calls a lowly act stemming from an inferiority complex. Ultimately, Acharya Prashant states that there are two types of nakedness: one that comes from conquering the self (the way of the sage), which is a very high state, and another that is used to conquer others, which is a debased act. He says that if someone wears clothes purely for their own comfort and ease, it is perfectly fine and no one should object. However, if the intention is to seek external validation and attract others, then it is a wrong act, regardless of ideologies like liberalism or feminism. This is because such actions stem from a mind dependent on others' approval, which is a state of bondage.