Terapanth, like all Jain paths, upholds ahiṃsā (non-violence) as the central principle. The spirit is to minimize harm to all living beings and to act with compassion and right intention.

What you described—the idea of not stopping a cat from eating a mouse because more insects or beings might suffer—is not a standard, explicit Terapanth rule. Jain ethics does not teach a blanket policy of “non-interference” in natural predation as a formal doctrine. Instead:

• Ahiṃsā is about avoiding intentional violence and reducing suffering in any action you undertake.
• Anukampa (compassion) and daya (kindness) should guide choices, including how we relate to animals and their roles in nature.
• Anekantavāda (the many-sided view) reminds us that situations have multiple aspects, and the correct response depends on context, intention, and karmic consequences.

So, it isn’t accurate to state that Terapanth prescribes a universal “non-interference in predation” rule. The proper Jain stance would be to cultivate non-violence in thought, speech, and action, and to act with compassion while recognizing the complexities of nature and karma.

If you’d like, I can share concise Jain sources or discussions from Jain philosophy that explain ahimśā, daya, and anekāntavāda in more detail.