Sacrifice-> Mercy-> Love (Omnilateral)

"'For I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'" Hosea 6:6

A realm full of individual wills is a realm full of impasses, and a realm full of potentially irreconcilable differences. If one desires mercy and another does not, the one must remove the other's ability to exercise their will in that situation, or the other removes the one's outcome of mercy. If either party with greater power acts and removes the other's choice, is it truly a realm with individual wills or a charade, a solipsistic masquerade amidst those acting as if they possessed will?

"'"Truly, I do not know you."'" Matthew 25:12

This, I feel, is representative of a sacrifice. It is the sacrifice of the memory of another, the representation of an impasse responded to by the parting of ways. Each party keeps their will, but only because one does so in ignorance of the other, with the impasse of wills bypassed by it never being fully resolved. At least in this scenario each party retains their sovereignty, but they do so in the absence of the other.

"'"For I desire mercy, not sacrifice."'" Matthew 9:13

This represents a truly perfect outcome, the needle's eye, the singularly narrow gate. This is where the one with power desires mercy, and stays judgement and stays sacrifice, holding everything together until everyone else necessary (presumably for the equation of all, all) comes to the understanding of the internalized desire for mercy on their own. Their choice is not removed, but it is shifted, and  the actors shift it in themselves in the presence of a real choice to not shift it throughout the narrative, albeit a choice representing a road ultimately not taken.

This is a hard solution to picture, with something like the appearance of choice acting as something like choice in the outcome realized. As the one in power you will ultimately be in a position where you must make unpopular, unilateral decisions, except in the most perfectly singular instance(s) where an omnilateral decision can be reached. An omnilateral decision would necessitate no positions, perceived by those occupying them, as undesirable- no "victims," no "sacrifices" on a fundamental level. This narrows the field of decisions that can potentially be unilateral to love. If love cannot be achieved, then may one's unpopular decision be mercy, for ultimately while one can conceivably forget everyone else through the parting of ways, effectively sacrificing all, can one forget one's own self and still remain one's own self? As such, from a timeless perspective, identity persists until identity is realized, in the singular establishment of something truly new in an infinite field: omnilateral love.