Theos-Talk Archives (January 1998 Message tt00088)

>But it is not an immortal pilgrim at all. Only its "ray" is. Thus while
>Atma may evolve, the Monad does not. The Buddhist anatma doctrine
>suggests that the Atma is illusion or conventional, while only the
>Monad is permanent and unchanging. This is the biggest difference,
>probably, between Buddhism and Hinduism.

Semantics don't separate manvantara from pralaya very well. No scientist
even accepts as truth that there is pralaya. It's a nice thought! If it is
possible to push further than we ever have before within our forms, then is
that the monad or atma? Well, both really! But Monad singularly, without
vehicles and in pralaya, would not have a form or a globe to push forward.
Are you sure that your reading wasn't implying that Monad, existing
immortally, soaks up mental vibrations of a kind we are unfamiliar with. We
shall see if any of those solar thoughts make it into progress through
manifested qualities, senses, centers, or greater form capacity.