Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

Together We Rise

I was thinking today about the difference between ambition and service. Because I have noticed how this matrix celebrates personal success, status, and material growth, and it’s really easy to get caught up in goals and desires that revolve solely around the self. But if we look at the Law of One teachings, there’s a clear emphasis on living life in a way that uplifts others, not just ourselves. Our evolution and growth comes from being in service, from connection, from compassion, and from co-creation. When we talk about “success,” do we ever stop and ask who it actually serves? Is it for the good of the collective, or is it just to build a castle around our own little world?

I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with ambition. The desire to create, grow, and expand is natural. But it all comes down to our intentions. Is our ambition in harmony with others? Does it contribute something meaningful to the collective? Or is it rooted in fear, lack, or the need to prove something to ourself or the world? Service to others doesn’t mean self-neglect either. It means recognising that the self and the other are not truly separate, and that what we build, how we live, and who we become has a ripple effect. When we grow from a place of unity, our success becomes something shared and deeply healing.

The illusion of separation keeps us busy chasing things for the self, thinking it will bring fulfillment. But real fulfillment comes when we remember we’re not actually separate, and what we do for others, we do for ourselves too. I think that being of service to others can be as simple as how we listen, how we show up, or how we choose love in small moments. I don’t think we need less ambition in the world, but rather, more aligned ambition. One that dreams not just for the self, but for the world we all share.

I really don’t think it matters what we “build”…

I think what matters is who we BECOME in the building process, and whether that becoming remembers that there is no ‘other.’

Leave a comment

0.0/5