A holistic healer is asked a question that practitioners usually answer with a method: what is your favorite tool for client transformation? In a clip of barely ninety seconds, the guest, identified in the video title as Koya, skips the modalities and says God. She is not describing a technique that happens to involve faith. She is saying the most important lever in healing is a person's felt connection to the divine, and the belief that their potential has no ceiling. From there she makes a sharper claim: if that channel is blocked, the work stalls, so healing the relationship with God, the divine, and the universe comes before anything else gets built. The host, LeNaya Smith Crawford of The Holistic Therapist, frames the exchange as a reminder that whole-person healing talks often name the mind, the body, the nervous system and energy, and quietly leave spirit out.
The clip has no preamble. The question arrives on its own: "What is your favorite tool for client transformation?" The guest answers in about four seconds. "I think my favorite tool for client transformation is God." A short "Mhm" follows, and the exchange moves quickly. The brevity is part of what makes it work. Most conversations about healing tools unfold over an hour of qualifications. Here the answer comes first and the reasoning follows, and the reasoning is where the substance lives.
It is worth noticing what the answer does to the question. A "tool" in holistic practice usually means something you can pick up and use: breathwork, somatic release, a journaling prompt, a protocol for the nervous system. The guest accepts the word and then changes what it refers to. The tool is not an exercise. It is a state of relationship, one the client either has access to or does not.
This is the most generous moment in the clip, and it is easy to skim past. The guest anticipates the objection that "God" is a loaded word and says so directly:
"They don't have to call this higher power God. They could call it nature, Jah, a tree, water, a crystal, you know, but what people need more than anything is a connection to the divine." (Koya, in the video published October 24, 2026, at 0:09)
Look at the list. Nature, a tree, water, a crystal: these are not religious categories in the usual sense. Jah is a name for God within Rastafari, and it sits in the same sentence as the material world. The list is deliberately wide. The point is not which noun a person chooses. The point is whether the person can locate themselves inside something larger than their own problem. A client who experiences water as sacred and a client who prays to a personal God are, in her framing, doing the same essential thing: orienting toward a source.
That distinction matters in practice. A practitioner who hears "God" as a tool may worry about imposing belief. The guest's language suggests a way through: the practitioner does not need to supply the name. They need to ask whether the client has a sense of connection, and let the client supply the vocabulary.
The central logic of the clip is about possibility. The guest says what people "need to understand": that their potential is infinite. Then she names the consequence of its absence. "If someone does not is not able to believe in their infinite potential, it's going to be hard for us to reach goals."
This is an upstream argument. Much coaching and therapy starts with goals: what do you want, what will you do, how will you measure it. The guest is pointing at what sits underneath the goal. A person who does not believe their potential is open-ended will set smaller goals, abandon larger ones, or interpret setbacks as proof of a fixed limit. Changing the goal list does not touch that belief. Changing the belief changes what the goals feel like to pursue.
She draws the contrast directly: someone who believes in their infinite potential, who believes in "the connection to God or all that is," finds that "then it makes work so much easier." The word "easier" is doing real work here. She is not claiming that faith removes difficulty. She is claiming that a person who feels held by something larger than their circumstances carries the same difficulty with less friction.
The guest's language shifts into the vocabulary of frequency and channel, and it is worth reading carefully because it is her own metaphor and she uses it as a working model. "You got to know that you are connected to every single thing in the world, and once you match that frequency, we can start calling it in." The sequence she describes runs like this: first recognize the connection, then align with it, then bring desired things into being. She adds that "from there, we can get a lot of things done."
Then the clip turns on a conditional. "But if that channel is blocked, that's why in my book I start with spiritual well-being." The argument is that technique cannot compensate for a blocked channel. You can teach a client to set intentions, but if the channel is closed, the intentions do not connect to anything. For this reason, she says, spiritual well-being is the starting point rather than a later chapter.
The clip is brief enough that she never fully unpacks how a practitioner would recognize or repair a blocked channel. That is an honest limit of the material, and a reader who wants a method will need to look elsewhere. What the clip does offer is a diagnostic priority: before asking what a client should do differently, ask about the relationship they have with whatever they consider sacred.
The clip's final turn is the one most worth carrying into practice. Spiritual well-being, she says, "is healing your relationship with God, healing your relationship with divine, healing your relationship with the universe. Y'all are working together." She names three relationships in a single breath and treats them as one. Whether a person speaks of God, the divine, or the universe, the work is the same: repair the connection to the source.
She then ties this to desire. "You don't want to be working outside of the highest frequency of everything you desire is at this frequency, so that's where things start." The phrasing is compressed, but the intent is clear. What a client wants is, in her view, already located at a higher frequency, and the work is to get in tune with it rather than to force it through effort alone. She closes by calling this her "number one."
For readers who do not share her cosmology, the useful takeaway is structural rather than doctrinal. Many approaches to change assume that the self is the only agent. Her clip assumes that the self is in relationship, and that the quality of that relationship shapes what effort can accomplish. You can disagree with the metaphysics and still take seriously the question she is asking: is this person's sense of their own possibility connected to anything larger, or is it entirely self-contained?
The host's framing, written alongside the clip, makes the connection explicit and carefully bounded. "Sometimes even in holistic spaces, we talk about the mind. The body. The nervous system. Energy. And somehow still leave out spirit." The post then lists the dimensions that a whole-person approach might include: physical, energetic, mental and emotional, spiritual, and communal. It adds a qualification that is easy to miss: "That doesn't mean imposing our beliefs onto anyone else."
That qualification is the discipline the clip requires. The guest's own answer is intensely personal, and the host's response is not to adopt it wholesale but to insist that spirit belongs on the list at all. Inclusion and imposition are different acts. A practitioner can make room for the spiritual dimension of a client's life, ask about meaning and connection, and respect a client who answers in a language that is not theirs. A practitioner who treats their own theology as the client's required tool has crossed a line the host is explicitly warning against.
The post closes with three words: "Whole means whole." It is a tidy phrase, and it does real work. If healing is meant to address the whole person, then leaving out one dimension because it is uncomfortable or unfamiliar is an incomplete method, however sophisticated the rest of it is.
The clip runs about ninety-four seconds and is a fragment of a longer conversation, so it is best read as an opening rather than a finished argument. Three steps follow naturally from it.
- Watch the full clip on The Holistic Therapist channel, where LeNaya Smith Crawford posted it on October 24, 2026. The short version rewards a second listen, particularly the exact phrasing at 0:52 and 1:09, where the guest moves from belief to channel to relationship.
- Look for the book the guest refers to when she says she starts with spiritual well-being. The clip does not give its title, so readers should confirm it through the host's channel before searching.
- Ask the question of your own practice. Before the next goal-setting session, with yourself or with a client, consider the guest's order: does this person believe their potential is open-ended, and do they feel connected to something larger than their problem? If the answer is unclear, the goals may be the wrong place to start.
The clip is short, but its argument is specific. A favorite tool, in this telling, is not a practice you perform. It is a relationship you tend, and the work of transformation begins there.
