Can there be service when there is not peace? Many will object to that statement. You will see that in some countries they say that when you are in the military and fighting a war for your country, you are serving your country. They even say that losing your life in a war is the ultimate service, or the ultimate sacrifice. This, of course, is an understandable feeling given current conditions on earth. But certainly the more aware people will recognize that serving in the military is not natural. There is a condition on earth where it is necessary to have a military.
Take note that it is necessary to have a military. But this is necessary only because so many people are in the dualistic state of consciousness. A large group of nations in the world have risen to a level of humanity, have risen to a level of truth, where they could not even conceive of attacking each other. It is clear that in a defensive alliance such as NATO, it is implicit in the entire purpose of the alliance that the nations do not attack each other. Otherwise what would be the purpose of the alliance if there was not that trust that those who have entered into an alliance will not attack each other? In a sense you could say that amongst the nations of NATO or even of the modern democratic world, there is no need for a military. They do not need the military to defend themselves against each other. So why is a military still necessary? Well, obviously because there are some nations that have not risen to that level of humanity, that level of honesty, that level of trustworthiness.
A self-centered service
We can also look at this from a different perspective. The current dualistic mindset on earth springs from the consciousness of separation, where people have come to see themselves as separate beings. This has created various groupings of people that see themselves as separate from other groups of people, whether it be nations, races, the sexes or whatever groupings you have, numerous such groupings throughout history and even today. When you are separate people, when you see yourselves as separate people, what is your concept of service? Well, primarily it is self-service.
You are serving yourself as an individual trying to get the best possible advantage for yourself that you can get. This is the basis for corruption. Those who have a position in society are taking advantage of that position, regardless of how it affects other people or society as a whole, for they feel no responsibility for other people or for society. In some cases you can have a nation or group of people that are in this state of separation, but they can still fathom that there is something, some whole such as the state, and they can see a need to serve the state.
Of course, they themselves are not defining what it means to serve the state. Those who are in charge of the state are defining this, and they are defining it based on self-service, what they see as being in their own best interests, often short-term interests. In some cases there can be a long-term interest, in the sense that they are seeking to promote the superiority of their religion, as the Catholics and Muslims during the Crusades, or their ideology or some other epic cause. In a sense you could say that you have the ultimate self-service that you saw in previous ages where there were no organized societies. It was dog-eat-dog, everybody against everybody, trying to get an advantage for themselves.
Even if you go back to these societies, you actually see that it was not really complete self-service. Many of these hunter-gatherer cultures, they lived in groups, whether they called them tribes or something else. They lived in small groups because they realized that no man is an island, that in a hunter-gatherer culture an individual cannot survive alone. There needs to be cooperation. There needs to be a service towards the group, where the individual serves the group.
There were actually many of these what you often in the modern world call primitive societies that had quite a high level of humanity and dedication to service, true service, where you are serving the whole. Now you can say it was not the ultimate altruistic service because they still were serving the tribe as a way to secure their own survival. Still there were some people who had a higher level of service than what you saw in earlier societies, where you had, for example, the barbarian invasions of Europe, Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan and so on, where they were out to plunder by killing other people, destroying cities and so on.
This was an example of people who saw themselves as completely separate from those who were not in their group, but they still had this dedication to serving the group, following the leader, but it was very much a self-centered service. They knew that by risking their lives, they would also get the opportunity to plunder and take something home with them.
Progression in people’s ability to serve
When you look at history, you see that there has been a very gradual, very slow progression in terms of service, people’s ability to serve. You could say that the lowest level of service is when you are only looking out for yourself as an individual. This is the lowest level of consciousness among the levels possible on earth. You gradually climb to higher levels of service. The tribal consciousness was a higher level of service than the lowest level of service. The barbarians could be said to be a very low level of service too, but later civilizations, where people were serving the state or some religion, had still a less self-centered level of service than the lowest level. You could say that even in the Soviet Union at least some people had some level of service that was beyond strictly self-centered. Even though there have been certain groupings, certain nations, certain religions, that have been very self-serving and willing to force others, there has been a slow progression in people’s ability to serve something beyond their selves. They have been able to look beyond their own minds and look for something outside their own minds and dedicate themselves to serving that, sometimes reluctantly. Yet the mind can become a closed system, and as you descend towards the lowest level of consciousness possible on earth, your mind becomes more and more closed.
How do you rise to higher levels? Well, below a certain level you rise by gradually coming to see the limitations of being completely self-focused. You begin to see some advantage to having some loyalty to other people, to your family, to a group, and therefore being able to serve something beyond your narrow self-interest. Even if you look at a society such as the Soviet Union, there were still people who managed to progress in their ability to serve. This was by far not everyone. Most people were so reluctant that they actually sank deeper into this self-focus, which is what is characteristic for many among the Russian people today. But you can see that any organized effort that causes people to serve a goal that is beyond their own personal interests can help them grow in their ability to serve.
Military service in the democratic world
Many of these groupings have been led by manipulators who were at the very lowest level of consciousness. These leaders have defined the interest of the group based on their own self-interest, which is often to achieve ultimate power or recognition on earth. Sometimes it has been a completely irrational goal, where their minds were so taken over unaware beings that they were only seeking chaos and destruction. As you have people who are in this level of consciousness, this level of separation, you need to have a military because you cannot have a democratic world that is beyond this level of consciousness if it cannot defend itself against those who are still below it.
Now this, of course, does not mean that being in the military and going out killing other people is a higher level of service from a higher awareness perspective. It is a necessity, and there can be times where that which is not ideal from a higher perspective is still in alignment with the higher awareness because it can bring a necessary change, or it can prevent a worse situation. Being in the military is a form of service, but it is, of course, not the highest form of service that people can rise to. In these nations that have risen to become democracies, to form these economic alliances, defensive alliances, they have created a state of internal peace.
Now, many of these nations thought that after the Second World War and especially after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, they also had external peace, but you see that they still maintained their militaries. The point is that these nations have achieved a state of internal peace, and this means that the collective consciousness has been raised so that more and more people grasp the need to serve the whole, however they see it. Often it is not the state. Often it is other people or society or the common good or the collective. However they see it, they see that there is a need to serve. What does that mean? Well, the lowest level of service is this self-service that is only focused on itself. You can say that at the lower levels people are saying: “If I give a service, I want something in return. I’m giving a service in order to get something in return.”
Higher forms of service
This, of course, is not really giving a service. What is a higher form of service? Well, it is what Jesus demonstrated and talked about 2000 years ago. You could say that the essence of the message of Christ is service. You can say that many other things are also the essence of Christ, but we will focus on service. What did Jesus say? Well, he called people to step up to a higher level of consciousness. In an outer sense he taught the multitudes in parables because he knew they were not ready for the highest level of service, but they could at least step beyond the lowest forms of self-service.
By heeding his call to do unto others, love your enemies, do good to those that hate you and so forth, they could step up to basic humanity, which allows you to give a service. It is not a strictly self-centered service, but it is still focused on the recognition that: “By treating other people better, by not forcing other people, they will not seek to force me, so therefore we all prosper, and this is actually in my own best interest.”
There is, of course, a higher level of service, which is how Jesus expounded all things to his disciples and also in veiled form in the fragmentary accounts of his sayings. The parable about the servants who multiplied the talents is a veiled form of this, where the one servant who did not multiply the talent was only focused on himself and his narrow self-interest. He did not want to take a risk. But the others multiplied the talents by giving selfless service. You could also say that what Jesus taught to his disciples and again in veiled form in his parables was that by giving a certain kind of service here on earth, you receive a reward from a higher source, or in a higher realm after your life on earth. He gave the parable about those who have their reward here on earth because that is what they want and those who want their reward in heaven. What he really called for was for people to walk the path of higher awareness, which is the ultimate form of service you can give on this planet.
Now this does not mean that people can do this only by being Christians and by using the same terminology, calling it Christhood. It is really a path to a higher state of consciousness, a higher state of awareness, where you escape the illusion of separation, the dualistic state of consciousness, that causes you to be focused on yourself as a separate individual. Instead you step up. It is not a matter of forcing yourself to do this. This is what has been one of the downfalls of the Christian religion to this day.
Service based on force
Many Christians have started to grasp that Jesus had some higher message and that he called them to a higher level of service. But they are sitting there reading the Bible and thinking: “How can I do what Jesus told me to do?” Then they force themselves to go out and do, for example, some kind of charity or some kind of missionary work. But what Jesus really called his disciples to do, those who were at a high enough level to grasp his inner teachings, was to go through that transformation of consciousness. You are not giving this service because you are forcing yourself. When you are forcing yourself, you are still looking at: “What is my advantage? What do I get out of this?” There are even those who are looking at: “If I do all of these good things on earth, if I am a good Christian, if I am a Christian minister, if I do all this missionary work, surely God is going to reward me in heaven, and that is what I want.” This is still self-centered service.
The higher level of service that Jesus called people to rise to is where you overcome the sense of separation. Therefore you see the underlying truth that is the essence of the Christ discernment, that all life is one and that the only way to raise up others is to raise up the whole: “The only way to raise up myself is to raise up others, thereby raising the whole.” This is a shift in consciousness. It is not something you take on as you take on a religious conviction or an ideology. Christianity, as it is defined by the Catholic church even to this day and by many Lutheran or fundamentalist churches to this day, is an ideology. It is a thought system that people take on, as you take on an overcoat. They force themselves to follow the system, thinking they will get some advantage. Communism was an ideology that people took on. Sure, there were people who believed in communism, who were converted to communism as some people are converted to Christianity. But it was still something that was based on force. They took it on and forced themselves to think this way, believe this way, act this way.
What has happened in the modern democracies is that there has been a shift in consciousness. This shift in consciousness is fundamental. It is a shift towards a higher form of service that is beyond oneself. But it can also be described in another way. It is a shift away from force and towards unity. What is the opposite of peace? Many will say it is war. But really the opposite of peace is force. Why are there nations that are at peace with each other? Because they know and they trust that: “This other nation is not going to force us.” The Swedes can trust that even though a thousand years ago Denmark had half of Sweden under the Danish king, the Danes are not going to invade Sweden and try to take it back. They have peace internally.
What you see in the modern world, which Putin calls the West, is this transcendence of the illusion that force is necessary, where you believe that the only way to get what you want is through force. You could look at world history and see that for the greater part of known history the world was dominated by force. There were groups, there were empires, that attempted to take by force from others. You have had examples of groups of people, even entire civilizations, that were not based on force. In some cases they have survived for some time. In other cases they have been taken over by those who were willing to use force. You have, of course, even more examples of two civilizations that both were willing to use force and clashed, often leading to one destroying the other or conquering the other or even both being destroyed.
Service based on unity
Democracy is the inevitable outcome of the historical process, the evolutionary process of earth, because it is based on a raising of consciousness. Likewise, the willingness to use force has retreated. The historical necessity, if you will, has been a move away from force and towards a non-force-based approach to life. Why would Germany and France need to force each other when they have realized that they can achieve much more for both of them by cooperating voluntarily?
There is force and there is voluntary effort. The modern world (not saying the West because there are nations that have risen to this level in other parts of the world as well), the modern world has transcended force and has voluntarily entered into this unwritten agreement based on a willingness to serve something that is beyond self-interest as separate individuals or groups of people. Ideally the European Union would become a group of nations that did not see themselves as separate nations anymore but simply saw themselves as part of a greater whole that transcends all of them. This is also ideally what would happen in the United States, even though, in the last decade especially, there has been a trend that some states have started to separate themselves from the union in their minds, in their rhetoric, in their political convictions.
People trapped in a force-based mindset
If you look at history, it is clear that regardless of what it may seem, the world is moving away from force and towards peace and cooperation. There are certainly people in embodiment who also see this. If you did not see it, how could you have had the growth in abundance and cooperation that you have seen over these last several decades? If people did not trust that the world is moving away from force, how could they feel secure enough, peaceful enough, to cooperate? Naturally you see that Putin and Russia have not risen to that level. They are still trapped in a force-based mindset. They still believe that, despite all of the wealth, all of the natural resources of Russia, this is not enough. They need to take by force. They need to get something from other people, they believe, but the only way to get it that they can see is to take it by force. But will it be possible for Russia to take what they want by force? You can say physically the invasion of Ukraine was an attempt to take by force. But how has it worked out? Not so well, certainly not as planned. Beyond this Russia and especially Putin want something else. In a sense you can say that the Russian power elite, Putin and those who enable him, they want certain advantages. They think that the only way to get those advantages from the West, as they call it, is to force the West to give it to them.
Could this ever be achieved? Well, you could say that in Putin’s mind he has achieved quite a lot over the last 20 years by intimidating the West into not standing up to him. He has interpreted this as a weakness, but this was because the West gave Putin some slack, some benefit of the doubt that he and Russia could eventually rise to the same level of non-separation, non-force-based society, as the West. But if the West really felt threatened by Russia, if they felt that their way of life and their way of cooperation was threatened by this external force, what would happen? You see that what Putin sees as weakness from the West is really an expression of humanity. Because when you rise to a higher level of peaceful, non-force-based society, you are not instantly throwing back to others what they throw at you. You are turning the other cheek. You are saying: “Yeah, we see there is force from Russia, but this is not a matter of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. So we will just take it easy here, give them another opportunity to come to their senses and so forth.” Putin has gained some advantages by playing this game, but what would happen if he went too far? If he got to the point where the West, as he calls it, realized that: “We cannot continue to be passive. We need to say stop.“ The result would be that all of these nations would respond in unity to stop Russia. Since they have a greater population and certainly greater prosperity, higher awareness, higher organization, there is nothing Russia could do about it. Certainly nothing that would secure the future of Russia or get what they wanted.
Using force against people who have risen above force
Putin has been playing a certain game with the West, but there is a limit to how far this can go. With the invasion of Ukraine he took it too far. Exactly how this plays out remains to be seen, but he has burst the bubble of tolerance from the West. What he saw as weakness was tolerance, and he has now expended his allotted quantity of tolerance. Russia has been trying to use force against nations that have risen above force. It cannot work. In the long run it cannot work. Partly because of the law of karma, the second law of thermodynamics, but also because those who are in a force-based state of mind cannot force those who have transcended that state of mind.
Is that not what Jesus demonstrated 2000 years ago? There were groups in Israel who were militant, who were armed, who were trained and who wanted to create a violent uprising against the Romans, and they wanted Jesus to lead it. Jesus could have made himself a leader of these groups and thereby prevented himself from being arrested and tortured and crucified. But he went through the crucifixion in order to demonstrate something very simple: When you have risen above the consciousness of force, those who are still in a force-based consciousness have no power over you. Yes, they may imprison and torture and crucify your physical body. But did they have any power over the mindset of Jesus, the mind of Jesus? None whatsoever. You see here that the West, of course, is not at the level of consciousness of Jesus. They still have armies and weapons. Putin cannot force them to go backwards into a force-based state of consciousness. What he is doing is completely impossible. Can he see this? Of course not. But some among the Russian people can see it.
Giving selfless service
It is important that those who are able to grasp this in Ukraine begin to think about this, talk about this, write about this, the need for Ukraine to transcend this force-based state of consciousness that has been there lingering from the Soviet Union and even before. You have seen fistfights in the Ukrainian parliament. Is that not an expression of force? You supposedly have a democratically elected parliament that you would expect was dedicated to democracy, which is peaceful conflict resolution. Yet instead of being able to resolve things through debate, they had to resort to a fistfight. You see there is still a need in Ukraine to transcend this force-based mindset. There is even a need in the armed forces, which many among the armed forces have risen to, that you fight, but you are not driven by hatred. You fight because it is necessary, but you do not hate the enemy. You are not being inhumane towards the enemy.
What this really comes down to is that in order to secure the best possible future for Ukraine, there needs to be a critical mass of people who rise to that level where they can give service. They can give service to the state, to rebuilding the country. And it is a service that even though they might get some advantage out of it, is not really based on getting advantage for themselves, but because they see the need to raise the whole, to rebuild the country. To rebuild it better than it was before.
This also has ties to corruption, which is one of the big problems in Ukrainian society. Corruption is anti-service. It does not serve the whole, it detracts from the whole. In a country like Ukraine corruption is so ingrained that it will take a major effort to reduce it to a manageable level. Who can do this? Who can spearhead this effort? Only people who have risen to that level of consciousness where they can give selfless service. This is one of the central problems with corruption: what do you do about corrupt officials? Who can expose and dethrone a corrupt official? Well, only an official, a public official. But if all public officials rise to positions in order to enrich themselves, who is going to fight corruption?
There needs to be a certain and a larger and larger group of people who enter public service to give service. They can then start uprooting corruption. Of course, the people have a role to play also in demanding freedom from this corruption. This also requires that the people have a certain dedication to serving the whole, serving the nation, instead of thinking: “Well, what if I could get a position where I could get some bribes and enrich myself? If this is what I want, well, how can I really object to those who already have it? I just need to work with the system and get myself in a position like that.” You see, those who are in positions or those who dream of being in positions, they are not the ones who are going to fight the problem, are they?
Again, there needs to be a shift in the collective consciousness. Of course, many have already grasped it, but more need to grasp it before it reaches that critical mass and the nation shifts. The nation has started to shift because of the shock of the war, but it has not shifted yet. There are still many, many people who are sitting there in their positions thinking: “Oh, I’ll ride this out. I’ll still stay in my position, and once it is all over, it will be back to business as usual.” But it cannot be back to business as usual if Ukraine is to move forward. If the current level of corruption is maintained after the war, Ukraine will not be rebuilt, at least not in the time frame that it could be rebuilt in if corruption is reduced.
You will see how the money that is given from abroad, from the EU and other sources, will just be siphoned off by all of these corrupt officials. You will see that all of this money has gone into the country, but what the country has gotten out of it, in the form of rebuilding infrastructure and buildings and so forth, will be far less than the actual money coming in. What will that mean? Well, in a short period of time the money stream will dry up, and where will Ukraine be then? It will be with an economy that is in shambles, with a bombed-out country that has only been rebuilt to a very small extent, and it will be stuck. It will become a quagmire. It will become almost a third world country.
It is the right thing to do!
There is an absolute need here to step up to that higher level of service. If it does not happen, the consequences of the war will be far worse than they will be when the war is over. In other words, society, Ukraine as a nation, can actually go downhill after the war instead of starting to go uphill. Ukraine has an incredible opportunity to go uphill. But it requires that shift where we see that: “There is a whole here that is bigger than myself, and I am willing to serve that whole, even if I don’t get an immediate advantage out of it.”
What is it you see in the modern nations? Well, most people are not conscious of this, but there is a certain awareness, a certain dedication, in people. You might ask a person: “Well, why did you do this?” You might see that this person has done something that the person did not get any advantage out of, but the person did it anyway. You might say: “Why did you do this?” Many people will say: “Well, it was the right thing to do.”
This is the foundation for higher service: It is the right thing to do. You may be able to explain why you think it is the right thing to do, but sometimes people cannot explain it. They just feel it intuitively. They know in their hearts, they know from within: “It’s the right thing to do.“ This is, of course, because in past lives they have acquired that humanity, and when you have a certain level of humanity, you know serving others is the right thing to do.
This is well within the reach of the Ukrainian population, a critical mass of them, to step up to this. Many have already done it. Many have actually been prompted by the war to say: “This is not the time to look at myself. This is the time to serve the whole, serve other people, serve the country.” They are out there doing this because they also feel it is the right thing to do. Many more have the potential to shift, and many more need to shift for the nation, for the collective consciousness, to shift.
Too many people in Ukraine at this moment are still thinking: “Ah, it’ll be over, and we’ll be back to life as usual.” Many people in the western part of Ukraine, who are actually in some ways the more progressive people, they have not been so directly affected by the war, and they are thinking: “Ah, there will come a point where the war is over, and we’ll be back to life as usual”. But is that really what you want if you are the more progressive people? Do you want to go back to life the way it was before the war, or do you want the nation to rise to a higher level of life? Do you want more, or do you want what was before? That is the question: to be or not to be.
The fact that so many Ukrainians have left as refugees and have come to other countries is a tremendous opportunity for the country. These people, many of whom have grown up in Ukraine and have never even left Ukraine, they have now experienced what life is like in different countries. Many of those countries are ahead of Ukraine in many ways. They have an opportunity to take this back with them and therefore give that impetus: “We can do better. We need to do better. They are doing this over there. We can learn from that. This is what we need to do.”
If Ukraine can make the shift, then these people will come back. They will come back with a renewed vision and impetus to rebuild the country. But what happens if Ukraine does not make the shift? Well, many of these people will not come back. They will look for jobs in the countries where they are at. They will integrate, and what will be left to rebuild Ukraine? Again, there is a high potential, there is a low potential. You need to be aware of the low potential so that you can make that effort to manifest the high potential.