Ok I got an answer. You don't necessarily have to believe in the good thing, just use it. Sorry to drone on, I'm just thinking out loud.
--- In [email protected], "aztjbailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was initiated in '71 or 72, in high school, and eventually settled > into regular practice for several years. A few years ago I took > Abrams' "First Sphere" course and have been working with it. > > There is a concept brought forward in the course that is similar to > this "which form of god are you in love with" thing, except he > doesn't use the word "god", more like, "We want to choose a name > that means our highest conception of the Universal force for Good - - > that force that is responsible for our own progress and that of > everyone else". > > Abrams most likely must have concocted his approach from this Guru > Dev idea (the mythology of him getting it from a secret tribe, > living in the himalayas for 2K years is too much for me, given > Abrams voluminous fiction writing which is highly imaginative, if > not talented). > > I remember lying in bed after the instructional weekend, reviewing > it all, finding it humorous that he renamed some of the TM material, > but at the same time he managed to create something that also had a > uniqueness to it. Of course there is always the fun of socializing > and meeting new people, and the remarkable way women just blossom in > these enviroments, radiating natural, beautiful, feminine love. I > had seen that in TM also. > > I'm thinking about all this, I'm saying to myself it could be > learned by anyone, less Hindu oriented material than TM, and so > forth and then my thought processes are just stopped in their > tracks! > > This would not be acceptable to an atheist! > > Actually I don't know any staunch, committed atheists, but what > would they say to the idea of it? They probably would refuse the > existence of a force for good or whatever you want to call it. The > teacher would have to give them their checks back. It would be > interesting to know if, wording the definition right, an atheist > would accept it. > > > --- In [email protected], "aztjbailey" <aztjbailey@> > wrote: > > > > From Paul Mason's material on Guru Dev, and how he instructed > people > > in meditation: > > > > A glimpse of Guru Dev's teaching style is provided by another of > his > > disciples, Swami Swaroopanand Saraswati, Shankaracharya of Dwarka:- > > > > 'Shankaracharya Brahmananda Saraswati Ji Maharaj strictly adhered > to > > the varna (caste) and ashram (four stages of life) systems. He > > believed in one's varna by birth. Whosoever came to him to become > a > > disciple, he used to ask him which form of God he was in love > with. > > Whichever form the new disciple had an interest in, that form he > > would explain to the new disciple. [Guru Dev] used to explain, > either > > you should depend on your own inclination or else, he, after > > understanding your previous life and which form of God you > worshipped > > then, would instruct the initiate accordingly. > > > > Without having an ishtadevata (a personal form of God), no one > could > > have a mantra from him.' 19 > > > > Interesting, no? > > >
