Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00392)

Darrin:

Thanks for responding to my wish that advocates of the doctrine
of Universal Brotherhood attempt to spell out with some
detail and substance how they understand the doctrine.

>I'm not anti the doctrine but the following extract from the
>Notebooks of Paul Brunton rang with me when I first read it:
>Notebook Seven (Healing of the Self/The Negatives)

Good ... we're talking about what the doctrine might mean,
rather than repeating it mindlessly like a political slogan.

(I could picture a group of people picketing a theosophical
convention, with signs reading "Universal Brotherhood Now!",
marching back and forth outside the hall doors, chanting
"We want brotherhood now!" I might ask one of them what it
meant, and what exactly they wanted. The man might sputter,
"Well, you know, it, er, means what it says -- brotherhood."
I'd smile and say, "Well, that's fine," and go inside the
hall, looking forward to something with a bit more substance
to dwell on. <grin>)

>"... In the heart's deepest place, where the burden
>of ego is dropped and the mystery of soul is penetrated,
>a man finds the consciousness there not different in any
>way from what all other men may find."

Yes, it is this part of ourselves where we realize the
heart of brotherhood. But even as we drop lower, and leave
this realization behind, we find that inter-dependence is
an essential rule of life. Even when we lose our awareness
of our essential unity, we find that we cannot exist except
in cooperation and interaction (and hopefully harmony!)
with other living beings.

>"The mutuality of the human race is thus revealed as
>existing only on a plane where its humanness is transcended."

I might put this differently. One of the ways that our
mind currently works creates the illusion of a separate,
distinct personality, with its own private needs and desires.
When our mind functions in this mode, we tend to be
selfish and unbrotherly. When this functioning of the mind
ceases, personal considerations simply don't occur to us;
we see value in everyone's needs, and consider things and
make choices based upon the greatest good. This is
practical brotherhood. It's not based upon someone's
political agenda, it's simply the living of a higher mode
of consciousness.

>"This is why all attempts to express it in political and
>economic terms, no less than the theosophic attempts to form
>a universal brotherhood, being premature, must also be
>artificial. This is why they failed..."

Brotherhood is more than an attitude towards others. It is
the experience of life from a particular standpoint where
the ugly and dark cloud of selfish concerns no longer blinds
one to the true face of life. It is measured in intangibles,
in modes of consciousness, not in the artificial terms of
someone else's definition of what would be good for people
to do.

>The next one  (from Notebook 11) I also found incisive.

>"...The term 'universal brotherhood' is idealistic but vague,
>pleasant sounding -- but windy. An attempt to form a society
>whose main object was to become the nucleus of a universal
>brotherhood was made by the Theosophists, and by less known
>cults."

The way that I've often seen Universal Brotherhood described,
I'd also find it "idealistic but vague, pleasant sounding --
but windy." This is why I'd like to see it given the same
degree of attention and respect that the other theosophical
doctrines are accorded.

>"Moreover, they added constant talk about 'the service of
>humanity' to their other prattle."

Again, we have but an empty slogan if it's just a phrase
that people parrot without really thinking about it.

>"Not only did all such groups end in failure to actualize
>their ideal and in inability to influence the remainder
>of mankind, but most ended in bitter disputes, harsh quarrels,
>and internal fission."

This may be partly due to a narrowness of mind that fails
to accept and live in mutual tolerance with people of
other views. It also shows a lack of depth to the insight
and spirituality of the people involved. The spiritual
is actualized *by internal awakening*, not by pious observation
of the politically correct, of the socially correct, and of
the religiously correct platforms -- other people's agendas
to change people according to their ideas of what makes
better people. If we don't change ourselves first, we have
nothing to offer to others.

>"There are several different factors behind such failures.
>The two which concern us here are first, lack of any
>practical workable method to implement the ideal,"

Here, organizations can do good if they limit themselves
to providing resources to members to discover and work towards
their individual approaches to bettering the world.

>"and second, belief in the delusion that a group can do
>better what only an individual can do for himself."

A group, per se, can do nothing. But there can be specific
projects to do good in the world, and some people may find
a group useful in working for a particular project. That
choice to work with a group, though, is individual, and it's
neither good nor bad to work independently. What is good is
to work *according to one's inner dictates*, and what is bad
is to ignore what one feels is right, and remain inactive.
We have the phrase that says that inactivity in an act of
charity is an activity in a deadly sin, and I'd agree with it.

>"This is where philosophy shows its superiority. In reference to
>the first of these two factors, it teaches us exactly what we
>can do with our bodies, our feelings, our thoughts, and our
>intuitions to bridge the wide gap between ideals and their
>actualization."

Yes, one of our first steps towards actualizing brotherhood
is to clean up ourselves, to make ourselves nobler people,
to open up our minds and hearts and become better able to
express the unseen beauties of life.

>"In reference to the second factor, it proves that to
>practice individualism, self-reliance, is essential to
>real progress....."

And this is to neither be motionless in acts of mercy, devoid
of pity for others in sad situations, inexpressive of
compression, nor is it to be like the leaf in the wind, blown
about by every passing gust, a passive expression of external
forces. What it does refer to is the state where we're
becoming a positive force for good in the world, a channel
of new impulses for intelligence, beauty, compassion -- all
the higher qualities.

The quote that you gave is useful to the discussion on
Universal Brotherhood, but it's also good to try to put
some of the ideas in your own words. For myself, when I
put things in my own words, I understand the subject much
better, and find that there are many new things that I
learn; it's a valuable experience. There's always the
risk, though, that someone on the list won't like what
you say, and trounce upon your views. That's also, though,
a useful learning experience, helping one learn to deal
with attacks upon one's ideas and pointing out where in
one's writings a clearer reexpression is needed.

A playful name for this list is "theos-hell", as there seem
to always be other people willing to play "demon" and
come after one. <grin> When that happens, we have at
least three options. We can oppose them, testing our
hand-to-hand combat. We can practice avoidance, like a
prey being stalked by a monster, a clever prey that gets
away. Or we can practice magic, and term demons into
princes and nobility!

(Disclaimer. For those unable to detect that the previous
paragraph was intended *to be funny*, I'll state the
obvious and say so. I'm not thinking of any particular
person on the list, and don't need the question "Did you
mean *ME* when you wrote that awful stuff about monsters!!!!")

Best wishes and greetings to the Blavatsky lodge,

Eldon