Theos-Talk Archives (January 1998 Message tt00085)

>The Theosophical view is that the Monad in it's upper triad
>(Atma-Buddhi-Manas)is considered as the Reincarnating Ego only when it
>is established in residence in the Causal Body.

According to my understanding, the Atma-Buddhi-Manas is a "ray"
of the divine Monad, but not the Monad itself. I agree that the
Atma-Buddhi-Manas is the Reincarnating Ego. The idea of a
causal body comes from CWL/AB, but I agree with it.


>That this Causal Body,
>once formed (at Individualization), lasts for the rest of the duration
>of the manvantara is a little like saying it's "eternal" (relatively) as
>far as it's human personalities are concerned, although technically it
>is not so (not absolutely eternal).

Yes, this is what is said to "grow" and "progress" and "evolve"
while the Monad itself needs none of that.


>Neither is the idea of any
>individual Monad, upper triad, or any manifested Being anywhere for that
>matter, since they are all products of Maya.  Can I also ask you what
>Buddhist schools teach this view and in what terms?
>
>
As far as I know, all Buddhist schools teach anatma or the doctrine
that the atma-buddhi-manas is conventional truth and not absolute
truth.


>Theosophically speaking, the Monad, on its own plane is both divine and
>self-conscious. The "ray" it puts forth at Individualization via
>Atma-Buddhi-Manas is in total ignorance as far as awareness and
>functionality in the newley formed Causal Body on the arupa sub-planes
>of Manas is concerned. It has to learn, by personal experience in
>incarnations on planes even below that, to develop consciousness and
>self-awareness as an Ego on it's own Causal plane.
>
>
Yes.  I think that this is what HPB was saying.


>
>It's important to understand that there are many schools of Buddhism and
>that they hold divergent views.
>

Sadly, yes. A lot like Christianity.


I think we are agreeing on most of this.

Jerry S.