Dear Roberta,

What animals don’t have though is self-awareness. You said it yourself

Is that really true?

You’re right Roberta, there are animals with very high intelligence, such as dolphins, elephants, horses, whales… And also there are many domesticated animals, such as dogs, even cats, who commune (and have loyalty and feelings) for people who care for them.

What you’ve shared is a very heart-warming story:

I have seen cat come & say goodbye to each member of our meditation group & he also visited others in the area that had looked after him at one time or another. our stories matched up on how he acted with each of us & this was just days before he died & yet he had not visited me in the previous year.

So perhaps animals, or some animals, do have a soul. Perhaps even some form of self-awareness, I don’t know. But I believe we have a different kind of self-awareness, the kind which allows us to observe ourselves, self-reflect and transcend our limitations. I don’t think that’s comparable to animals.

Anyway, my point was not in degrading animals and elevating humans, but just in saying that human mind is not necessarily the source of evil, even though it could be, if we get stuck in selfish, ego ways.

Dear Anita,

sure, I was actually thinking the same – that it would be better to take the conversation to your thread… see you there, gladly! ❤️

Dear James,

Humans are virus meaning is not as body, but as who thinks they are separate then other things.

I agree with this, James. If we think we’re separate from other beings and from mother nature, that leads to huge problems, such as exploitation, destruction of the habitats, pollution… nowadays we’re experiencing the consequences of climate change more and more. And as Roberta said, the Western man has the infamous history of colonization, looking down at and exterminating indigenous populations, pillaging their resources… all very painful points for our “civilization”.

So I agree, there can be great darkness in humans, great cruelty and lack of understanding. At the same time there can be great light too…

Moreover, doctor can save a pet yet and kill it at the same time, like animals. Such as, cat can Save a kid from attack of dog, yet crocodile or shark can kill a human being.

Yes, the animal kingdom has its own rules. Sometimes the animal that is weaker or wounded is the one that gets eaten by a predator. Sometimes nature can be cruel, even as it can be magnificent and soothing. But it is all well, it is according to the laws of nature.

However, we humans should show more mercy, much more mercy towards our fellow human beings, as well as animals and plants too. There’s a saying “Homo homini lupus”. We shouldn’t behave like predators to each other. But unfortunately, we know examples from history and even the present day when this is not the case… where people do behave like predators to each other. And that to me is horrifying 🙁

That’s why realization is important, body and mind are one with universe. İf there is no water, body dies, if there is no air body dies, etc…

I agree – we’re one with the universe. We depend on Mother Earth’s resources for our sustenance. We depend on the Sun too, without which everything on Earth would die. We are so fragile, so small under the stars… and yet, our hearts can be huge and full of love… if we understand, if we connect to who we really are ❤️

P.S. I’d also argue that the moment a thought arises and gets translated into language, we’re already judging, measuring, dividing, labeling. So again, you’re right: it’s not possible not to judge. That’s why it’s so important to be conscious of what we think and say… and to keep training that puppy.

Hi Anita

On a side note, I judge wisdom traditions for not being clear and straightforward. If they were clear and straightforward, they wouldn’t be so easy to misinterpret..

I don’t disagree, however the inner monk wants me to point out that one the teaching are realized they are straightforward. ‘We work for which no work is required’.

Wisdom traditions carry the challenge of using language to speak about what ultimately can’t be named. They point beyond concepts toward direct experience. That’s tricky, because the moment we use words, we enter the realm of duality, this vs. that, subject vs. object.

From childhood, we learn to use words to survive and belong, a development rooted in the lower chakras (1–3), which focus on navigating the external world (includes religious training). Language is essential, but it replaces direct experience with symbols. Over time, we forget what we once knew before words: that life is a single, continuous unfolding, not a set of opposites.

In Jungian psychology, the final stage of individuation is to come to terms with the problem of opposites, the tension of duality. Jung emphasized the heart chakra as the heart’s way of knowing doesn’t speak in definitions, but in images, stories, and felt experience. The heart holds paradox rather than resolving it allowing our judgments to loosen.

When wisdom traditions become institutions, they often forget that the path is not the destination. Hence those provocative sayings: “If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him,” or “One must lose God to find G_d.” Such teachings are reminders that clinging to the form of wisdom can obscure its living truth.

At their best, when we hold language lightly, wisdom traditions invite us into a different way of seeing one that can’t be reduced to a formula. That’s why they often speak in metaphor, myth, and paradox: not to confuse, but to awaken us to the experience itself.

Beyond institutional constructs, these teachings don’t actually ask for belief, they invite participation. They’re not doctrines to accept, but mirrors reflecting us back into direct awareness.

For fun: find the simplicity with the Ask that we “love God completely and to love your neighbor as yourself” and merge it to Buddhist teachings. Play with the word ‘God’ as a noun, and then as a symbol/verb and notice how everything changes.

Hi Anita

Thank you for your beautiful question and for the affection woven into it.

Yes, you are included.

When I speak of warmth and openness, it’s not a distant gaze. It’s the kind that softens when I read your words, that feels the gentle tug of affection when you share your heart. It’s spacious, but not in a way that excludes the personal. It’s spacious because it can hold the personal without clinging.

I’ve hesitated to use the word “love” because of its many layer, some tender, some tangled. But what I feel when I read your message is something like love. Not the kind that possesses or defines, but the kind that listens, smiles, and stays.

You’re not missing the point of wisdom or non-duality. When you reach out to others with compassion your living it. When the living truth meets a face, a name, a smile, words on a screen… it doesn’t dissolve them. It embraces them, gently, without grasping.

Hi Peter:

Your message is beautiful. For me, it’s perfect: not too long/ abstract, and easy for me to understand. I want to process it in my mind and heart, to allow it to sink in:

“Thank you for your beautiful question and for the affection woven into it.”- my affection has been acknowledged and received. It feels nice.

“Yes, you are included.”- I like being included. Other people also like to be included.

“When I speak of warmth and openness… It’s spacious… because it can hold the personal without clinging… without grasping”- The term “no strings attached” come to mind, in the sense that something is being offered or done without expectations, obligations, or hidden conditions.

So, I accept your affection, Peter, whenever offered, with no expectations, clinging, or grasping.

“I’ve hesitated to use the word ‘love’ because of its many layer, some tender, some tangled. But what I feel when I read your message is something like love. Not the kind that possesses or defines, but the kind that listens, smiles, and stays.”-

This is the kind of love I want to feel and express to others: the kind that listens, smiles and stays.

In the past, I felt the kind of “love” that possesses or wants to possess, the kind that defines how the “loved one” should or shouldn’t be. It wasn’t really Love, it was Fear holding on to the idea of imagined (illusionary) safety.

As in, if only this or that person felt this way, thought that way, acted this or that way.. then I won’t be afraid anymore.

“You’re not missing the point of wisdom or non-duality. When you reach out to others with compassion you’re living it. When the living truth meets a face, a name, a smile, words on a screen.. it doesn’t dissolve them. It embraces them, gently, without grasping.”- thank you, beautifully said.

Gently embracing (Love)- not tightly grasping (Fear).

🫶🌷🌙💫🍃 Anita