“Mr. Kingsland: I think you might look at it in this light; by analogy, it is exactly the same as the way in which we require to postulate for the descending scale of manifestation – first the manifesting spirit, then the first Logos, and then the second. Isn’t it the same?
Mr. Old: Who is your first Logos in this case?
Mr. Kingsland: It is Buddhi, and the second is Manas.
Mr. Old: A short time ago I ventured the remark that Buddhi was the Logos, and I was told that I was incorrect.
Mr. B. Keightley: You spoke of an individual Logos.
Mr. Old: Of an individual ray – because Atma has to radiate in order to function any particular –
Mme. Blavatsky: Atma has to radiate! It cannot radiate anything. Atma, if you take it of the third Logos, then yes, but not Atma in the universal sense of Parabrahm.
Mr. Old: We are not teaching Parabrahm here. If we entered Parabrahm, or if we entered into the consideration of Parabrahm, here would come in that intuition which I speak of.
Mme. Blavatsky: I thought I knew pretty well the philosophy, and I don’t think I know it. I never said that Atma or Parabrahm could radiate. If you take it in the sense of the third Logos, then I admit it radiates.
Mr. Kingsland: Correspondentially, Atma is Parabrahm.”
H. P. Blavatsky
The Mark Of God: Understanding Your "I AM Presence" 