Why Kanak WAS Wrong and Why Maasi IS Wrong

We often hear that the means justifies the end. But, does it? If so why did we all condemn Kanak for her chhal against Uma and his family? They wronged her, so why could she not trick them? Her intent was good - she wanted to get back her family property that her grandmother was defrauded out of? Kanak was wrong as her means/method was wrong.

This is the same mistake that Maasisa will be making. Her intent to protect Uma is admirable. Her methods - giving beedi to shiv, giving hopes to Palomi, etc. is immoral. There was a scene last week where she slammed close the religious text she was reading - at that moment she negated what she was reading about not letting anger override one's thinking. If she is confident in Uma's dharma and what she has taught him then why is she herself walking away from her teachings and resorting to tricks and manipulations? Means matter. That is what Kanak realized and why she feels guilty. It is what she will have to show Maasi because the story is not just about enlightening Uma, but his foundation and family including Maasi. Kanak is needed by his family not just him.

I agree with you, means do matter. And Maasisa turning all negative like this, I don't like it but I know that it's because Kanak needs to change them all. Slowly and steadily.

You are right. Sometimes the means does not justify the end. Maasisa needs to get the whole story from Kanak. She is inherently fair and might absolve Kanak. But this being a soap, they will not do that