Acharya Prashant responds to a question about his transition from a corporate job to his current path. He clarifies that he never intended to pursue a corporate job, even while studying management. He had no inclination towards corporations or the goal of shareholder profit maximization. He recalls that on his first day at IIM Ahmedabad, he cried, questioning his presence there. After the first trimester, he had already decided to leave. He started visiting the Gandhi Ashram and an NGO, where he began teaching children. This led to expenses, which he covered by starting to teach, and that's how his journey began. In his second year, he started directing plays. He emphasizes that he never did an MBA for a corporate job. When asked how he endured his corporate years, he uses analogies: "How does the tongue spend its time between 32 teeth?" and "How does Vibhishana live in Lanka?" He explains that he was always aware that the corporate world was not the right place for him and was constantly looking for an opportunity to do something else, though the exact path was not yet clear. He advises that clarity comes from moving forward; one must not wait for the entire path to be revealed before taking the first step. He acknowledges the initial hesitation and the practical need to earn a living but stresses the importance of starting to move in the direction where one has some clarity. Addressing a question about working in a corrupt system, Acharya Prashant refutes the logic that "if I don't do it, someone else will." He calls this a terrible argument, akin to saying, "If I don't eat meat, the goat will be slaughtered anyway, so I might as well eat it." He advises thinking for oneself: if doing wrong work harms you, then don't do it. The decision depends on the degree of wrongness. If the work is gravely unethical, one should leave immediately. If it's merely a matter of disinterest, one can tolerate it for a few months to gather resources. He further explains that the question is about values. Feeling pain upon seeing something valuable in others that you lack is not bad; what is bad is valuing worthless things. He urges the questioner to value knowledge. If you feel bad about your ignorance when you see knowledge in others, it's a good thing as it will motivate you to learn. He criticizes the glamour society attaches to brands and material success, stating that only Truth should be considered glamorous. He redefines all virtues and natural tendencies in relation to one's fundamental identity as an unfulfilled consciousness. Therefore, the right definition of love is the attraction towards that which can bring fulfillment. All natural tendencies, including jealousy and attachment, should be dedicated to the right cause. He concludes by stating that one cannot escape going through fire in life. It is better to go through the fire of life while living, for a worthy cause, rather than as a corpse. This is how one truly comes alive.