Why the Theosophical Movement Should
Not
Exaggerate in Social Courtesy
and Good Manners
Carlos Cardoso Aveline
Carlos Cardoso Aveline
“It
is the duty of esoteric students to unmask
error
and hypocrisy, to face lie with truth, not
as personal
criticisms but as facts against
mis-statements.
(.....) The custodians of the Truth
voice
it in the face of lie, ignorance and error, and
take
every opportunity possible to correct erroneous
impressions.
Theosophy is in the world for that purpose.”
[Robert
Crosbie]
What
are the differences between brotherhood and courtesy?
There must be some, for the Masters and H.P. Blavatsky promote
brotherhood while denouncing any exaggeration of social courtesy and good
manners.
Brotherhood is connected to the heart. Courtesy is a “social
skill”. Brotherhood belongs to the world
of Reality. Courtesy is an ability used in the world of appearances.
Brotherhood is sincere and spontaneous; but courtesy - although not
necessarily insincere - is often calculated. Brotherhood is an expression of
Theosophy and the Doctrine of the Heart.
As to courtesy, as long as it
becomes such a priority that it blocks true sincerity, it is an expression of
pseudo-theosophy and the Doctrine of the Eye.
The more one’s true feelings are suffocated in the name of courtesy and
good manners, the more they get “unkind” in appearance. Then, they need an
ever-growing amount of control, and ever
deeper layers of “courtesy”. From this process emerges hypocrisy. And hypocrisy
produces deeply destructive feelings, which will be, on their turn,
severely suffocated. But this will only provoke
further “emotional explosions”.
Wherever sincerity is not allowed, good will tends to disappear. From this, come hatred and enmity, which are
the precise opposites of brotherhood. These unbrotherly feelings, of course,
work in disguised form.
On the other hand, it is important to say that self-control is not the
same as renouncing frankness. It does not imply practicing any excessive amount
of “courtesy”. It is by allowing people
to be frank - and by being frank
ourselves - that we preserve the very substance of brotherhood, which is
sincerity. Self-control cannot be
separated from love for truth.
Direct talk must be combined with a sense of impersonal brotherhood and
a psychological ahimsa
(non-violence) which emerges from a respect for all beings. These feelings are
intimately connected to the foundations of the lasting victory needed - and
deserved - by the theosophical movement in the present century.
A direct and confident dialogue on the difficulties and challenges of
the movement is an inevitable task in the years and decades ahead.
Dead bodies do not renew themselves, but the movement is alive, and just
as every living organism, it needs to renew itself at each new step. The first
half of the present century is, of course, no exception.
In order for the movement to constantly renew itself, its wounds must be in direct contact
with fresh air, so that they can heal. A frank debate must then be
stimulated, allowing truth to emerge
from under any undesirable layers of diplomacy and good manners that may
exist.
H. P. Blavatsky’s blunt style of telling things in a direct way has been
widely misinterpreted by some. Her exaggerated frankness has been classified
as a mistake, and as something coming
from her lower self. This is only part of the truth. She was far from perfect, of course, but her
Master, who was her model, happened to have the same style, and His frankness
also shocked Western lay disciples.
Is this issue a matter of mere personalities, then? Or is there a
higher principle at stake? There
seems to be a deeper lesson in it, for students to watch and learn.
In one of the Letters, an
Adept-Teacher examines what is - from the Theosophical viewpoint - the
challenge of BEING TRUTHFUL, instead of just trying to look like a kind
and spiritualized being to the eyes of the others.
Using most simple words in an attempt to be understood by his lay chela, the Master says:
“... You have to remember that our Eastern ideas about ‘motives’ and
‘truthfulness’ and ‘honesty’ differ considerably from your ideas in the West.
Both we believe that it is moral to tell the truth and immoral to lie; but here
every analogy stops and our notions diverge in a very remarkable degree. For
instance it would be a most difficult thing for you to tell me, how it is that
your civilized Western Society, Church and State, politics and commerce have
ever come to assume a virtue that it is quite impossible for either a man of
education, a statesman, a trader, or anyone else living in the world - to
practice in an unrestricted sense? Can
any one of the above mentioned classes
- the flower of England’s
chivalry, her proudest peers and most distinguished commoners, her most
virtuous and truth speaking ladies
- can any of them speak the truth, I
ask, whether at home, or in Society, during their public functions or in the
family circle? What would you think of a gentleman, or a lady, whose affable
politeness of manner and suavity of language would cover no falsehood; who, in
meeting you would tell you plainly and abruptly what he thinks of you, or of
anyone else? And where can you find that pearl of honest tradesmen or that
god-fearing patriot, or politician, or a simple casual visitor of yours, but conceals his thoughts the whole
while, and is obliged under the penalty
of being regarded as a brute, a
madman - to lie deliberately, and
with a bold face, no sooner he is forced to tell you what he thinks of you;
unless for a wonder his real feelings demand no concealment? All is
lie, all falsehood, around and in us, my brother; and that is why you
seemed so surprised, if not affected,
whenever you find a person, who will tell you bluntly truth to your face; and also why it seems impossible for
you to realize that a man may have no
ill feelings against you, nay even like and respect you for some things, and
yet tell you to your face what he honestly and sincerely thinks of you.”[1]
These words seem to be clear enough.
As to H.P.B., she was an Eastern disciple, and she explained the matter
thus:
“No ‘cultured’ man or woman will ever show anger in Society. To check
and restrain every sign of annoyance shows good manners, certainly, but also
considerable achievement in hypocrisy and dissimulation. There is an occult
side to this rule of good breeding expressed in an Eastern proverb: ‘Trust not
the face which never shows signs of anger nor the dog that never barks.’ Cold-blooded animals are the most venomous.” [2]
Truth and truthfulness sometimes burn people, or rather they burn their lack of wisdom, their outer shell
of self-importance, with which they so often identify themselves. We should
therefore get rid of any tendency to exaggerate the importance of courtesy in
our theosophical lives. Robert Crosbie
shared the same viewpoint, and he wrote:
“It is the duty of esoteric students to unmask error and hypocrisy, to
face lie with truth, not as personal criticisms but as facts against
mis-statements (…..) The custodians of the Truth voice it in the face of lie,
ignorance and error, and take every opportunity possible to correct erroneous
impressions. Theosophy is in the world for that purpose.”[3]
Elsewhere, the founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists said:
“Yes, it is war; but not against persons. War for the Truth - the
eternal ideas, the eternal thought in the Eternal Mind; war against error,
cant, and hypocrisy.”[4]
As long we remember these basic and fundamental statements, we can
effectively TRY to live up to the motto of the movement.
For, indeed, although harmlessness in intention is important, there
must be no religion - or courtesy,
diplomacy or good manners - higher than truth.
NOTES:
[1] “The Mahatma Letters
to A. P. Sinnett”, Transcribed by A. T. Barker, facsimile edition, Theosophical
University Press, Pasadena, California, 1992, Letter XXX, p. 232.
[2] “From the Note
Book of an Unpopular Philosopher”, by H.P.
Blavatsky, in “Collected Writings”, TPH, 1960, vol. VIII, p. 137. Published for the first
time in the “Lucifer” magazine, October
1887. The text is also available at our associated websites.
[3] “A Book of
Quotations”, by Robert Crosbie, Theosophy Company, Mumbai, India, p. 34. The
book is also available in PDF at our associated websites.
[4] “A Book of
Quotations”, p. 57.
000
On the role of the esoteric movement in
the ethical awakening of mankind during the 21st century, see the book “The Fire and Light of Theosophical
Literature”, by Carlos Cardoso Aveline.
Published in
2013 by The Aquarian Theosophist,
the volume has 255 pages and can be obtained through Amazon Books.
000
