Strictly speaking, from a point of view of purposes, secular spirituality and profound ecology sink their existence into consciousness. Man has questioned himself about the forces of nature and about life and this questioning has produced spirituality, profound ecology is a deepening in a material sense of this research. Both approaches start from the existing, from the way of perceiving ourselves and the reality that surrounds us, the first is an approach in a metaphysical sense while the second examines the physical but there is no difference between the two aspects except in the descriptive way.

In deep ecology, as in natural spirituality, there is an implied 'something' that impregnates the plots of life. This 'quid' has been described as the source of all things, regardless of whether we call it 'spirit' or 'life force'. From the initial questioning we have come to all the Gnostic philosophies, to the religions of the East as well as to the great monotheistic religions in which, albeit from different angles, the great mystery of life is praised, this is also the requirement of ecology that always takes into account the delicate balance of all vital manifestations. I have often found myself describing man's need for spiritual expression as the birth of the first virtualization. Through thought and intellectual speculation virtuality, imagining, assuming true on the basis of a thought (of a belief) has arisen and this projection, a specific human 'vis', is perhaps also present in the rest of the living, maybe? For example, in the theories of karma, the individual life of beings is described as an evolutionary path that starts from a spark of intelligence which then differs into myriads of forms, sometimes opposed, which are however closely linked to each other. and in continuous ascent towards the same purpose. This unity that has never failed even during the so-called "karmic path" but due to illusion, or the virtuality of thought, appears disjointed and imperfect (and therefore perfectible?). From the material point of view, profound ecology is an aid to understanding that there is no back or forth in the general context of life that is not strictly consequential, that does not share the same basic substance and therefore is impossible to separate, on pain of the extinction of life itself.

And now a question: how would we live on this Earth if we all decided to retire as a hermitage, to return to earth as they say in the jargon, without immediately upsetting, definitively destroying, the already precarious balance of this planet? The Earth is now home to several billion people, mostly gathered in urban areas, it is true that several animal species are in sharp decline but on the other hand many of those domesticated by man (essentially for purposes of pleasure or emotional deficiency) exceed in number the humans themselves and like humans living in cities they too are concentrated in large farms. If each of us were to go to live in the countryside, imagining an egalitarian society, we would perhaps have no more than two hundred meters of land available each without counting the desert areas, glaciers, high mountains, if we also wanted to bring with us our "pets" we should share that small space with dogs and cats, then if we wanted to eat meat we should further divide our house with sheep, cows, rabbits, pigs, etc. It is easy to imagine the throng that would be created in our two hundred square meters of land, not only but how could we produce enough food in that small garden for all the members of our personal rural community? It goes without saying that this type of choice is unthinkable for the masses as well as, for other even more serious reasons, it is unthinkable that life can continue for a long time on the planet if we continue to exploit resources to meet the paroxysmal consumption needs of large urban agglomerations.

The lemmings, that people of rodents that in case of overcrowding periodically emigrate en masse, have already embarked on their final journey (which, as we all know, ends up in the icy waters of the North Sea) to rebalance nature. In part, such self-destructive behavior is also taking place in our society, with the increase in wars, suicides, perversions, and stupidity. But it is still not enough to find that natural balance of survival and this is because man has the arrogance to consider himself a being "superior" to other species and therefore every solution must include the continuation of the game currently in the program and that is the fixity of our species as dominant.

But at this point I re-insert the concept of "natural or secular spirituality". To tell the truth, this spirituality cannot at all resemble the previous religious spirituality but must necessarily take into account the vital context in itself, that is, ecology. An ecological spirituality in which imaginary purposes are not pursued (paradises, hells, etc.) but in which one deals exclusively with the present state of existence. An 'individual' awareness of how it is possible to rebalance the context of life without believing that ours is a function of control, domination (or subjection to a hypothetical divinity other). Each of us should from now on face his personal survival course knowing that everything we steal today will surely have to be paid tomorrow, this in the case of the surplus, while if our breathing, eating, living is part of the whole of living, breathing, eating every other living being we could finally enjoy life, without having sins to atone, without having to abandon our urbanized and highly social way of life which - obviously - except for the famous rebalancing we have mentioned, has contributed to the flowering of this beautiful species of ours.

In this phase of man's millennial history, we have privileged the secondary, the superfluous, to the detriment of the primary, namely food, water, air. It is important for us integrated human beings to analyze the reasons for this diversion. A misdirection that was undoubtedly necessary to discover the value of abstract theses such as art, writing, aesthetics, ethics, but which cannot continue to occupy all the possible space of our existence. For example, we must be aware of the effort and the profound meaning inherent in the research and production of our daily food.

I now describe the historical excursus on our evolution. The history of man is very simple and reflects the four fundamental changes in life. Man in his evolutionary race makes four seasonal leaps. At the beginning he sucks the milk, at the base of the milk there are vegetables and meat and this becomes his food, then still beyond there is the earth and here is the man who devours it but beyond the earth there is the spirit and man feeding on "spirit" completes another cycle of spiral in the ladder of evolution. This symbology can be translated as follows: milk represents the moment in which humanity places itself reverent towards the nurse, nature, who takes care of it and supports it in its womb (we could say that it corresponds to the moment of "earthly paradise"); then takes over the ability to self-sustain and to resort to appropriate technologies to derive nourishment from oneself (corresponds to the moment of the patriarchal foundation); therefore, here is the moment of maximum technological and social development in which man tends to devour, to consume, even the earth that supports him (the moment of consumerist decadence and of scientific religious idolatry); finally, the moment of undifferentiated consciousness comes, man is touched by the "spirit", penetrates it and finds his primal unity (corresponds to the original quid, to self-awareness), the cycle is repeated step by step. It is evident that this historical moment is marked by a great leap between the height of ideological or religious materialism and that of a return to non-dual awareness.

How can we deal with apparently diametrically opposed conditions or contingencies? First of all there is one thing to consider: the evolutionary drive in man is not induced by mass ideologies, mass thought serves only to maintain the psychophysical compactness of the species, the index of change is always and only represented by forms thought, pseudopodia, which radiate towards possible evolutionary outlets, these pseudopodia represent only a very small percentage of the mass, they are minorities ... .. The two minorities currently in antithesis, in the "program" of development of human intelligence, are represented on the one hand by the individual centralization of power (self-foraging ideological and economic lobbies) and on the other by a sneaky network of small people who emanate thought forms connected to the whole (a sort of universal syncretism). they manifest at the same time both in the span of a single individual life and in seasons or historical waves, cosmic eras. It seems to me that this moment of transition, between one human condition and another, is dedicated to the destructive aspect of every superstructure of thought, a zeroing of pre-established canons. In fact, today as never before, the drive to get out of the established patterns causes a seismic state of mind (psychic shocks) to the body-mass of humanity. It would be enough to know that, as happens in the self-realization process, every single cell of the human social body must be touched and must be able to individually perceive the real evolutionary possibility in progress. And while the egocentric tendency acts on the mass with mechanisms of forced aggregation (see information standardization), on the contrary, the "increase" of consciousness takes place on individual emotional levels. We must be aware of this when, as precursors, we propose a bioregional approach that certainly cannot use the counterpart's means but must nevertheless understand them organically and evolve from there. Only in this way can the sense of difference dissolve and consciousness can re-find its space. The inside of man is still a whole world to explore but also the outside is just as infinite and unknowable. For this reason, the middle way is always proposed, moderation, as the only possible way for the continuity of the species. Integral non-dual awareness does not divide. It is for this reason that in the ecology of the depths and in secular spirituality the return to the Earth is told, listening to its message, thus reaching that integration with it. Enjoying the silent joy of life, here and now. A joy that has no construct, no cause, no mechanism to satisfy, no possession, only it is…. It is called existence.
But beware ... this vision does not hypothesize a return to primitivism but rather identifies the opportunity for a rebalancing in the current conditions of advanced society. The continuity of our society, as a human species, requires an evolutionary key, a global understanding, through which to open our mind to the awareness of sharing with the entire planet (perhaps it would be better to say with the universe) the experience life. This is the science of the inseparability of life. It follows that even the human economy can and must take this vision into account in order to initiate a technological progress that is not opposed but is in tune with life processes. Science and technology in every field of application will have to answer the question: "Is this ecologically and spiritually compatible?" The machinery, the energy sources, the disposal of by-products, as well as the sociability and culture, must be made in terms of sustainability. If this stimulus manifests itself in the human mind, then a rapid process of industrial and agricultural reconversion and requalification will be required, which in itself will be able to support the economy. In fact, the "ecological reconversion" alone will favor the overcoming of the current state of "enpasse", giving a great boost to economic and social development. A great revolution including our making peace with the planet and with the living beings that inhabit it.

Paolo D’Arpini
Italian Bioregional Network - bioregionalismo.treia@gmail.com