Sep 5, 2020. Updated: May 26, 2023.

Part of "Natural Living" series

Life

The thumb rule is to treat life as life and not as a commodity; and allow all organism to live their natural life in their natural habitat, enjoying every privilege nature has ushered on them.

Many think that human life is the most important life in the ecology. An order of importance cannot be established based on what each species thinks about itself, because every life rushes into overvaluing itself over others, driven by survival instinct of their genes. Yielding to this nature and believing that human life is the most important of all lives, if humans act in ways that result in the destruction of ecology and other organisms, there is no more significance of human intelligence.

Nor does nature keep an order of importance as every species is an integral part of nature and has a role to play. However, to understand the indispensability of each species, construct a thought experiment. What would happen if a particular species go extinct? If cows disappear, humans would suffer; if birds disappear, a whole lot of vegetation will perish, leading to severe climate consequences including human destruction; if wild animals disappear, plants and soil will suffer; but if humans disappear, it is a positive change to the ecology and other lives — the animals are safer and free, plants will thrive, ground water reserves will increase, and air and water get gradually cleaner. Therefore, it can be established that ecologically, humans are one of the most dispensable species. Thus, any sense of superiority or indispensability that humans feel is unfounded.

Speaking of letting others live, humans must kill for food. Unlike plants who produce their own food using sunlight, water and nutrients in the soil, species from the animal kingdom have to take another life or cut parts of it for food¹. With non-vegetarianism, one has to kill the animal since it is more humane to kill it than cut off its meaty parts and leave it alive. With vegetarianism, some food can be plucked instead of killing the whole plant, while others can be obtained only after killing the plant. If one can survive alone on food that is plucked — thus not killing an animal or a plant — it is indeed the ultimate way of life. But such a food habit is impractical as there are only few food — like fruits and leaves — that can be practically sourced by plucking; and humans cannot survive on these alone. Grains are the staple food to almost all humanity which cannot be practically sourced by plucking each grain from the plant.

Such killings done for survival are justified and remain a harmonic part of the ecology. These killings should never be justifications and encouragements to carry out atrocities against other lives and their liberties. Killing for survival cannot be equated with killing for fun, sport, convenience, religion, satisfaction or other reasons. Every life, whether plant or animal, serves a purpose in the ecology and must be respected.

Buying or selling animals and plants is against the principles of natural living. Life must not be treated as a commodity. You give or donate, and bring or adopt animals and plants, following which, you let them to live their natural life in their natural habitat. Given the current state of commercialised food production, it is impossible to put this thought into practice in farming both plants and animals. But, it is possible to practice this thought in the pet world, whether for animals or plants.

Domestication of wild animals is against the principles of natural living. Domestic animals have a close affinity towards human life and in most cases prefer living with them making the surroundings of their owners their natural habitat. Therefore, the already domesticated animals ought to remain domesticated unless their wild behaviour is rekindled. But wild animals do not have this said affinity and instead have a deep affinity towards natural habitat. Many mistake their friendliness for liking captivity, but one must understand that animals are humans' next to kin and the wildest of the wild will exhibit some level of friendliness and playfulness with humans, which must not be mistaken.

Petting wild animals is against the principles of natural living. Wild animals are to enjoy liberty but is enslaved. They are to enjoy the abundance of their natural habitat, but are limited to only what is fed to them, most of which are artificially made. They are to enjoy the circle of their herd and roam wherever they wish in their natural habitat, but they are forced to spend their time alone confined to their cages. Liberty is not right reserved for humans alone, but to all life, each having as much right to live in their natural habitat as humans have.

Fishes in aquariums are against the principle of natural living. Fishes evolved swimming in freshwater, seas and oceans, hunting with its school. A fish has the right to live with its natural community, swim and explore its natural habitat as much as its natural limits allow, and eat whatever it feels is right and safe. Putting them in aquariums for good luck, beauty, positive energy or any other reason with the best of artificial food are violations of natural living principles.

Some say that fishes bring good luck. But moral tenets cannot be established based on faith, presumptions and correlations. So they must prove the belief by causation, not correlation. Even assuming that fish do bring good luck, would it be alright for a new superior species to keep humans in captivity simply because it brings them good luck? If not, then humans are not to hold fishes captive in the name of good luck? If yes, let them prove it by staying in wilful captivity of another person for a year.

Many aquarium and bird owners argue that setting their captives free will kill them since they have lost their abilities to survive: to forage food, to build their homes and to recognise hostile elements and defend themselves. This is true, but they must realise that it is the very practice of petting that made these organisms lose their survival abilities. Feeding them have rusted their ability to forage food and, caging them have killed their ability to identify their predators out in the wild, build their nests, mingle with others or understand their environment. One cannot pet animals, weaken their natural instincts and use that as an excuse to pet them further or act as their protector. What needs to be done here is to transfer such animals (or even plants) to an sanctuaries, where they can rehabilitate and learn survival skills and eventually be either set free or allowed to live until death. The fact the natural instincts are present in the genes of each organism gives hope for rehabilitation.

Zoos are against the principle of natural living because they deprive animals of their natural habitat and natural life. Zoos are tools of visual gratifications and does not accord to the principle of natural living. In fact, zoo animals must be freed either by putting them back in the wild or moving them to sanctuaries.

Castration of animals is against the principle of natural living because it deprives them of the right to reproduce, which is a natural process. Their reproduction is their prerogative and no individual or organisation has the right to take away an this privileges and right. Those problems for which castration is performed can be resolved by other means.

The cultivation of plants in pots is against the principles of natural living because it deprives them of a natural habitat. Pots compartmentalise soil cutting it off from the natural ecological processes present in the natural soil, which is why you water the pot, nourish it using manure and change the soil. Plants evolved growing in large plots of land, depending on and contributing to the intricate ecosystem flourishing in such large plots. Despite watering and nourishing pots, a plant will never have a natural life in it. This is why most potted plants die.

Plucking flowers for decorations and bouquets is against the principles of natural living. There is no need to decorate one's life by creating unpleasant moments to other lives. Nor will God approve the mistreatment or slaughter of his creation for religious needs: whether plucking flowers for decoration, beautification, keeping animals in captivity or sacrificing them. The only circumstance where the use of flowers is justified is when only a small portion of the fallen flowers is used; small portion, because fallen flowers too has their purpose in the ecology.

Mistreating animals in the name of tradition is against the principle of natural living. Such cultures lack education and are yet to grow intellectually. Treat animals and other life as you would want to be treated by a superior species.