I’ve been sitting with your piece…it’s powerful, and I really feel the care and depth you’ve brought to it. I admire how clearly you hold a vision for a more compassionate world, and I’m grateful we can explore these edges together with mutual respect.
What stands out to me most is your invitation to examine our deep-seated assumptions, especially around the use of animals. It’s true…so many of the systems we’re part of are built on inherited conditioning. And in that light, continuing to question the narratives we’ve accepted as normal is not just valuable…it’s essential.
At the same time, I find myself drawn into a different kind of inquiry, one grounded in a non-dual perspective that’s been opening up in my own experience. From that space, the lines between predator and prey, dominance and submission, start to blur. What once looked like violence begins to reveal itself as participation…life feeding life, in a vast field of interdependence, without a moral overlay.
This doesn’t mean turning a blind eye to suffering or refusing to evolve. It’s more like… stepping outside of the framework that sees nature itself as flawed, or in need of fixing according to human standards. I don’t know that the goal is to eliminate predation, but perhaps to awaken to how we relate to it…with awareness, humility, and maybe even reverence.
The truth is, there’s likely more to see here…and also more to unknow. Which is what makes this so rich. Your vision invites me to stretch, to feel, to slow down. And while we may be tracking slightly different expressions of the same movement, I think we’re both circling the same fire.
I’m grateful for this dialogue, and for your willingness to hold it in such an open, generous way. Looking forward to more.
You bring up a great point, one that I would agree with. From the absolute (non-dual) perspective it's all already in perfect balance. Everything is an expression of the cosmos unfolding; nothing is truly a flaw in nature. Even the way we choose to exploit entirely for personal gain - even that - is part of the grand tapestry.
But to your point, what occurs in nature - animals preying on one another - could be argued not to fall into the category of "violence". Violence somewhat implies an intention to do harm for its own sake, whereas a wolf hunting a lamb is simply acting out its natural instinct for survival. We as souls have all come here to participate, even if that means participating in the role of a victim. It's all God making those choices.
It is a vast field of interdependence, and there is no inherent moral overlay - morality, after all, is a human, subjective mental construct. None of what I am pointing to here is deemed by me to be immoral in any way. I am not intending to speak to morality, but to what's possible and what works.
I am not seeing any of what I am speaking to from the viewpoint of seeing nature as flawed, or in need of fixing. The goal would not necessarily be to eliminate predation, it would be a natural consequence of our continued conscious and spiritual evolution. In the next essay I am writing on this, I address how an important step in this evolution involves first witnessing our current relationship with animals, and seeing how we can relate to them with awareness, humility, and reverence.
It's almost as if I am playing a part in taking this stance, to make a point that could use more awareness on it. Ultimately, I am being a voice for the things less spoken, not to claim moral virtue, but to share a viewpoint that would benefit from our attention.
That is part of the evolution. Yet knowing what is possible - that there can be a world without sentient beings having to kill one another for survival - we can naturally move toward that by simply becoming conscious of it. Why not facilitate the emergence of a world where predation is no longer necessary? The question becomes do we think we can.
I really appreciate the way you hold this topic…with openness, curiosity, and a deep sense of reverence. I feel that too. There’s something powerful about recognizing that even our most unconscious behaviors, even suffering and exploitation, are still part of the vast unfolding. Nothing is left out. It’s all the dance.
I really liked what you said about the difference between instinct and violence. That landed. A wolf isn’t tryjng to be violent…it’s just doing what wolves do, responding to life as it arises. It’s only when we bring in human concepts like “harm for harm’s sake” that it becomes something else in our minds.
That said, I found myself noticing some of the language in your original piece…words like subjugation, dominion, sovereignty, and false notion. They’re strong, evocative terms, and I know they’re meant to shine a light where it’s needed. But they also seem to carry a bit of that dualistic charge…implying a right and wrong, a victim and an oppressor. And while those dynamics are definitely part of our relative human experience, from a non-dual view, they’re still arising inside the illusion of separation.
It brings up this paradox I keep sitting with: that there’s nothing to fix…and at the same time, we’re drawn toward softer, more conscious ways of being. That pull doesn’t have to be a rejection of what is. Maybe it’s actually part of it. Maybe the longing for less harm, less suffering, is just awareness waking up to itself through us.
I love that you’re not coming from a place of moral judgment, but more from the heart…sharing what isn’t often said, and inviting more reflection. It doesn’t feel like you’re trying to convince anyone…just creating space for something deeper to emerge. And that’s where transformation really starts…I think.
Maybe the evolution you’re speaking to isn’t about eliminating predation but about seeing more clearly. About recognizing that wolf, lamb, and the one who watches…all of it is the same field of being…moving as one.
Your question…”Can we?”…is such a beautiful one. I don’t know the answer. But maybe the point isn’t to answer it at all. Maybe it’s about being willing to sit in that question with open eyes, open hearts, and a deep love for the mystery of it all.
With gratitude for the richness of this conversation,
You're right about the language I chose, though it wasn't necessarily chosen TO evoke response, but it was meant to be accurate and create the potential to reveal something in the reader. Also, it was primarily referring to subjugation and the exploitation that occurs in the industrial factory farm setting.
Siddharth, Eric, and I were having a conversation around ritualistic hunting practices of some indigenous groups (how they pray to the spirit of the animal and ask for its body to be offered to their tribe) and Siddharth asked, "what is their concept of enlightenment?" and like a reflex it came out of me, "perfect balance with nature". In the context of ceremonial and holy relationship with the animals they hunt, there is no subjugation, there is an energetic agreement.
These words I chose are intended to reveal where we may be defensive about our eating habits because on some level we might hold some guilt or shame about the way we have internalized the Judeo-Christian belief - that humans are superior to animals and God has gifted us dominion over them. I do believe that to be a false notion, given that no one is superior to anyone else, all is one, and that what we've really been granted as more consciously aware beings is not dominion, but stewardship, custodianship, or guardianship. It is our duty to honour the less self-aware and foster their evolution.
In response to the point on the words holding a dualistic charge of "right" or "wrong", it somewhat alludes to the paradox that you mentioned afterward. From the Grand perspective, all is in perfect balance and order, and there is nothing wrong in all of creation. However, from our limited perspective as evolving souls, there are relative rights and wrongs.
When it is revealed to us that the mechanics of reality imply that, by ignoring the plight or suffering of another or a group of others, we'd incur that ignorance as suffering upon ourselves, it becomes reasonable to consider willful subjugation and exploitation as "wrong" - if what we seek is peace or harmony in any way.
In other words, subjugation is part of the whole in the grand scheme of things; yet, in the human realm where we strive for harmony and balance, it would be wrong to cause willful harm and subjugation. This is not a moral judgment, but an assessment of utility. If we wish to drive to Victoria, it would be "right" to take the highway south and "wrong" to go north.
This is the paradox, both can be true. All actual truth requires the holding of paradox.
"It brings up this paradox I keep sitting with: that there’s nothing to fix…and at the same time, we’re drawn toward softer, more conscious ways of being. That pull doesn’t have to be a rejection of what is. Maybe it’s actually part of it. Maybe the longing for less harm, less suffering, is just awareness waking up to itself through us."
-YES, this is it! So beautifully worded. I especially love that last sentence.
I am very grateful that you see my intention is to open, not to convince.
I could say more about your words, because I loved it all! But I'll leave it there. Thank you for bringing this forth. You've given me even more great material for the upcoming essay! Blessings to you, sweet Sarah! God Bless. <3
Your reflections on indigenous practices…particularly the idea of “perfect balance with nature” and the sacred reciprocity within ceremonial hunting…really resonated with me. They affirm commitments Eli and I made a few years back.
As you know, Eli is Indigenous, and learning from him has been a profound gift, allowing us to weave traditional ways into our family life. One expression of this is our relationship with fish. We decided that if we were to consume them, it should be done consciously…honoring each being’s life and the goodness it provides. In that spirit, we began volunteering at our local fish and game club’s hatchery. Helping to repopulate a once-decimated river feels like an act of reciprocity, stepping into that sacred relationship you described…where taking is balanced by care and giving back.
Since this realization, I’ve also chosen not to hunt animals with my bow. I still love to practice…the meditative presence in the skill and precision is fulfilling…but I’ve yet to take a life, and I don’t feel called to unless there is true need. That said, if circumstances changed and I needed to provide for my family, I know I could do so with reverence and gratitude, honoring the life taken and the gift it would be.
To me, this is how the paradox lives in the body: there’s nothing to fix, yet we are drawn toward softer, more connected, more awake ways of being. Your words and this dialogue are such a gift…thank you for engaging with such depth and tenderness.
I love you and value these conversations more than I can say. They open something in me every time. And I’m patiently awaiting your second essay to follow…your insights always bring new light.
Just finished writing a piece to post tomorrow and saw this - we were apparently on a similar wavelength re conscious creation - though not the point you are making here it's a wider, simpler version. Thanks for your seed planting!
I just read it! Concise and beautiful. All of our wavelengths and syncing up more and more all the time. It’s remarkable no matter how many times I understand it to be the way it works.
Hey Michael! 🥰
I’ve been sitting with your piece…it’s powerful, and I really feel the care and depth you’ve brought to it. I admire how clearly you hold a vision for a more compassionate world, and I’m grateful we can explore these edges together with mutual respect.
What stands out to me most is your invitation to examine our deep-seated assumptions, especially around the use of animals. It’s true…so many of the systems we’re part of are built on inherited conditioning. And in that light, continuing to question the narratives we’ve accepted as normal is not just valuable…it’s essential.
At the same time, I find myself drawn into a different kind of inquiry, one grounded in a non-dual perspective that’s been opening up in my own experience. From that space, the lines between predator and prey, dominance and submission, start to blur. What once looked like violence begins to reveal itself as participation…life feeding life, in a vast field of interdependence, without a moral overlay.
This doesn’t mean turning a blind eye to suffering or refusing to evolve. It’s more like… stepping outside of the framework that sees nature itself as flawed, or in need of fixing according to human standards. I don’t know that the goal is to eliminate predation, but perhaps to awaken to how we relate to it…with awareness, humility, and maybe even reverence.
The truth is, there’s likely more to see here…and also more to unknow. Which is what makes this so rich. Your vision invites me to stretch, to feel, to slow down. And while we may be tracking slightly different expressions of the same movement, I think we’re both circling the same fire.
I’m grateful for this dialogue, and for your willingness to hold it in such an open, generous way. Looking forward to more.
All in Love
Sarah 💙
Thank you for your reflections, Sarah!
You bring up a great point, one that I would agree with. From the absolute (non-dual) perspective it's all already in perfect balance. Everything is an expression of the cosmos unfolding; nothing is truly a flaw in nature. Even the way we choose to exploit entirely for personal gain - even that - is part of the grand tapestry.
But to your point, what occurs in nature - animals preying on one another - could be argued not to fall into the category of "violence". Violence somewhat implies an intention to do harm for its own sake, whereas a wolf hunting a lamb is simply acting out its natural instinct for survival. We as souls have all come here to participate, even if that means participating in the role of a victim. It's all God making those choices.
It is a vast field of interdependence, and there is no inherent moral overlay - morality, after all, is a human, subjective mental construct. None of what I am pointing to here is deemed by me to be immoral in any way. I am not intending to speak to morality, but to what's possible and what works.
I am not seeing any of what I am speaking to from the viewpoint of seeing nature as flawed, or in need of fixing. The goal would not necessarily be to eliminate predation, it would be a natural consequence of our continued conscious and spiritual evolution. In the next essay I am writing on this, I address how an important step in this evolution involves first witnessing our current relationship with animals, and seeing how we can relate to them with awareness, humility, and reverence.
It's almost as if I am playing a part in taking this stance, to make a point that could use more awareness on it. Ultimately, I am being a voice for the things less spoken, not to claim moral virtue, but to share a viewpoint that would benefit from our attention.
That is part of the evolution. Yet knowing what is possible - that there can be a world without sentient beings having to kill one another for survival - we can naturally move toward that by simply becoming conscious of it. Why not facilitate the emergence of a world where predation is no longer necessary? The question becomes do we think we can.
I really appreciate the way you hold this topic…with openness, curiosity, and a deep sense of reverence. I feel that too. There’s something powerful about recognizing that even our most unconscious behaviors, even suffering and exploitation, are still part of the vast unfolding. Nothing is left out. It’s all the dance.
I really liked what you said about the difference between instinct and violence. That landed. A wolf isn’t tryjng to be violent…it’s just doing what wolves do, responding to life as it arises. It’s only when we bring in human concepts like “harm for harm’s sake” that it becomes something else in our minds.
That said, I found myself noticing some of the language in your original piece…words like subjugation, dominion, sovereignty, and false notion. They’re strong, evocative terms, and I know they’re meant to shine a light where it’s needed. But they also seem to carry a bit of that dualistic charge…implying a right and wrong, a victim and an oppressor. And while those dynamics are definitely part of our relative human experience, from a non-dual view, they’re still arising inside the illusion of separation.
It brings up this paradox I keep sitting with: that there’s nothing to fix…and at the same time, we’re drawn toward softer, more conscious ways of being. That pull doesn’t have to be a rejection of what is. Maybe it’s actually part of it. Maybe the longing for less harm, less suffering, is just awareness waking up to itself through us.
I love that you’re not coming from a place of moral judgment, but more from the heart…sharing what isn’t often said, and inviting more reflection. It doesn’t feel like you’re trying to convince anyone…just creating space for something deeper to emerge. And that’s where transformation really starts…I think.
Maybe the evolution you’re speaking to isn’t about eliminating predation but about seeing more clearly. About recognizing that wolf, lamb, and the one who watches…all of it is the same field of being…moving as one.
Your question…”Can we?”…is such a beautiful one. I don’t know the answer. But maybe the point isn’t to answer it at all. Maybe it’s about being willing to sit in that question with open eyes, open hearts, and a deep love for the mystery of it all.
With gratitude for the richness of this conversation,
Sarah 🙏💙
You're right about the language I chose, though it wasn't necessarily chosen TO evoke response, but it was meant to be accurate and create the potential to reveal something in the reader. Also, it was primarily referring to subjugation and the exploitation that occurs in the industrial factory farm setting.
Siddharth, Eric, and I were having a conversation around ritualistic hunting practices of some indigenous groups (how they pray to the spirit of the animal and ask for its body to be offered to their tribe) and Siddharth asked, "what is their concept of enlightenment?" and like a reflex it came out of me, "perfect balance with nature". In the context of ceremonial and holy relationship with the animals they hunt, there is no subjugation, there is an energetic agreement.
These words I chose are intended to reveal where we may be defensive about our eating habits because on some level we might hold some guilt or shame about the way we have internalized the Judeo-Christian belief - that humans are superior to animals and God has gifted us dominion over them. I do believe that to be a false notion, given that no one is superior to anyone else, all is one, and that what we've really been granted as more consciously aware beings is not dominion, but stewardship, custodianship, or guardianship. It is our duty to honour the less self-aware and foster their evolution.
In response to the point on the words holding a dualistic charge of "right" or "wrong", it somewhat alludes to the paradox that you mentioned afterward. From the Grand perspective, all is in perfect balance and order, and there is nothing wrong in all of creation. However, from our limited perspective as evolving souls, there are relative rights and wrongs.
When it is revealed to us that the mechanics of reality imply that, by ignoring the plight or suffering of another or a group of others, we'd incur that ignorance as suffering upon ourselves, it becomes reasonable to consider willful subjugation and exploitation as "wrong" - if what we seek is peace or harmony in any way.
In other words, subjugation is part of the whole in the grand scheme of things; yet, in the human realm where we strive for harmony and balance, it would be wrong to cause willful harm and subjugation. This is not a moral judgment, but an assessment of utility. If we wish to drive to Victoria, it would be "right" to take the highway south and "wrong" to go north.
This is the paradox, both can be true. All actual truth requires the holding of paradox.
"It brings up this paradox I keep sitting with: that there’s nothing to fix…and at the same time, we’re drawn toward softer, more conscious ways of being. That pull doesn’t have to be a rejection of what is. Maybe it’s actually part of it. Maybe the longing for less harm, less suffering, is just awareness waking up to itself through us."
-YES, this is it! So beautifully worded. I especially love that last sentence.
I am very grateful that you see my intention is to open, not to convince.
I could say more about your words, because I loved it all! But I'll leave it there. Thank you for bringing this forth. You've given me even more great material for the upcoming essay! Blessings to you, sweet Sarah! God Bless. <3
Michael,
Your reflections on indigenous practices…particularly the idea of “perfect balance with nature” and the sacred reciprocity within ceremonial hunting…really resonated with me. They affirm commitments Eli and I made a few years back.
As you know, Eli is Indigenous, and learning from him has been a profound gift, allowing us to weave traditional ways into our family life. One expression of this is our relationship with fish. We decided that if we were to consume them, it should be done consciously…honoring each being’s life and the goodness it provides. In that spirit, we began volunteering at our local fish and game club’s hatchery. Helping to repopulate a once-decimated river feels like an act of reciprocity, stepping into that sacred relationship you described…where taking is balanced by care and giving back.
Since this realization, I’ve also chosen not to hunt animals with my bow. I still love to practice…the meditative presence in the skill and precision is fulfilling…but I’ve yet to take a life, and I don’t feel called to unless there is true need. That said, if circumstances changed and I needed to provide for my family, I know I could do so with reverence and gratitude, honoring the life taken and the gift it would be.
To me, this is how the paradox lives in the body: there’s nothing to fix, yet we are drawn toward softer, more connected, more awake ways of being. Your words and this dialogue are such a gift…thank you for engaging with such depth and tenderness.
I love you and value these conversations more than I can say. They open something in me every time. And I’m patiently awaiting your second essay to follow…your insights always bring new light.
With love
Sarah 🙏💙
The feeling is mutual, the love and how much I value these conversations!
Just finished writing a piece to post tomorrow and saw this - we were apparently on a similar wavelength re conscious creation - though not the point you are making here it's a wider, simpler version. Thanks for your seed planting!
I just read it! Concise and beautiful. All of our wavelengths and syncing up more and more all the time. It’s remarkable no matter how many times I understand it to be the way it works.