Narendra Modi tweets about Gujarat riots that he Was wracked with pain

For the record, here is the full tweet, courtesy Forward Post:

My dear sisters and brothers, The law of nature is that Truth alone triumphs – Satyameva Jayate. Our judiciary having spoken, I felt it important to share my inner thoughts and feelings with the nation at large.

The end brings back memories of the beginning. The devastating earthquake of 2001 had plunged Gujarat into the gloom of death, destruction and sheer helplessness. Hundreds of lives were lost. Lakhs were rendered homeless. Entire livelihoods were destroyed. In such traumatic times of unimaginable suffering, I was given the responsibility to soothe and rebuild. And we had whole heartedly plunged ourselves into the challenge at hand.

Within a mere five months however, the mindless violence of 2002 had dealt us another unexpected blow. Innocents were killed. Families rendered helpless. Property built through years of toil destroyed. Still struggling to get back on its feet from the natural devastation, this was a crippling blow to an already shattered and hurting Gujarat.

I was shaken to the core. ‘Grief’, ‘Sadness’, ‘Misery’, ‘Pain’, ‘Anguish’, ‘Agony’ – mere words could not capture the absolute emptiness one felt on witnessing such inhumanity.

On one side was the pain of the victims of the earthquake, and on the other the pain of the victims of the riots. In decisively confronting this great turmoil, I had to single-mindedly focus all the strength given to me by the almighty, on the task of peace, justice and rehabilitation; burying the pain and agony I was personally wracked with.

During those challenging times, I often recollected the wisdom in our scriptures; explaining how those seating in positions of power did not have the right to share their own pain and anguish. They had to suffer it in solitude. I lived through the same,experiencing this anguish in searingly sharp intensity. In fact, whenever I remember those agonizing days, I have only one earnest prayer to God. That never again should such cruelly unfortunate days come in the lives of any other person, society, state or nation.

This is the first time I am sharing the harrowing ordeal I had gone through in those days at a personal level.

However, it was from these very built up emotions that I had appealed to the people of Gujarat on the day of the Godhra train burning itself; fervently urging for peace and restraint to ensure lives of innocents were not put at risk. I had repeatedly reiterated the same principles in my daily interactions with the media in those fateful days of February-March 2002 as well; publically underlining the political will as well as moral responsibility of the government to ensure peace, deliver justice and punish all guilty of violence. You will also find these deep emotions in my recent words at my Sadbhavana fasts, where I had emphasized how such deplorable incidents did not behove a civilized society and had pained me deeply.

In fact, my emphasis has always been on developing and emphasizing a spirit of unity; with the now widely used concept of ‘my 5 crore Gujarati brothers and sisters’ having crystallised right at the beginning of my tenure as CM itself from this very space.

However, as if all the suffering was not enough, I was also accused of the death and misery of my own loved ones, my Gujarati brothers and sisters. Can you imagine the inner turmoil and shock of being blamed for the very events that have shattered you!

For so many years, they incessantly kept up their attack, leaving no stone unturned. What pained even more was that in their overzealousness to hit at me for their narrow personal and political ends, they ended up maligning my entire state and country. This heartlessly kept reopening the wounds that we were sincerely trying to heal. It ironically also delayed the very justice that these people claimed to be fighting for. Maybe they did not realize how much suffering they were adding to an already pained people.

Gujarat however had decided its own path. We chose peace over violence. We chose unity over divisiveness. We chose goodwill over hatred. This was not easy, but we were determined to commit for the long haul. From a life of daily uncertainty and fear; my Gujarat transformed into one of Shanti, Ekta and Sadbhavana. I stand a satisfied and reassured man today. And for this, I credit each and every Gujarati.

The Gujarat Government had responded to the violence more swiftly and decisively than ever done before in any previous riots in the country. Yesterday’s judgement culminated a process of unprecedented scrutiny closely monitored by the highest court of the land, the Honourable Supreme Court of India. Gujarat’s 12 years of trial by the fire have finally drawn to an end. I feel liberated and at peace.

I am truly grateful to all those who stood by me in these trying times; seeing through the facade of lies and deceit. With this cloud of misinformation firmly dispelled, I will now also hope that the many others out there trying to understand and connect with the real Narendra Modi would feel more empowered to do so.

Those who derive satisfaction by perpetuating pain in others will probably not stop their tirade against me. I do not expect them to. But, I pray in all humility, that they at least now stop irresponsibly maligning the 6 crore people of Gujarat.

Emerging from this journey of pain and agony; I pray to God that no bitterness seeps into my heart. I sincerely do not see this judgement as a personal victory or defeat, and urge all – my friends and especially my opponents – to not do so as well. I was driven by this same principle at the time of the Honourable Supreme Court’s 2011 judgement on this matter. I fasted 37 days for Sadbhavana, choosing to translate the positive judgement into constructive action, reinforcing Unity and Sadbhavana in society at large.

I am deeply convinced that the future of any society, state or country lies in harmony. This is the only foundation on which progress and prosperity can be built. Therefore, I urge one and all to join hands in working towards the same, ensuring smiles on each and every face. Once again, Satyameva Jayate! Vande Mataram!

[May check, Gujarat riots 2002: Was wracked with pain, says Narendra Modi, by FP Staff Dec 27, 2013.

http://www.firstpost.com/politics/gujarat-riots-2002-was-wracked-with-pain-says-narendra-modi-1309895.html]

I think, political scientists might analyze this tweet for a good length of time to decide whether it is a true confession or a classic piece of a clever politician's pseudo remorse. As they will focus more attention on the contemporary situation and the impending general elections, they might not bother much about Mr. Modi's antecedent actions and utterances. But, historians might take a different view and try to assess him as a politician in toto. 

For a mere nobody in Indian politics, like me, who only follows it as an existential engagement, a time-pass, and never as a stake-holder, the question is rather of only academic interest. But it is a real question all the same: 

Is the tweet proof of a changed Mr. Modi? Or, an yet another instance of a politician's double speak? The jury is still out. Let us not rush it. 

Whatever the verdict, Mr. Modi is likely to go down in history as the most successful Indian demagogue ever, perhaps next only to Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan. Those who follow history might see a pattern in the career of demagogues. Be that as it is. I take solace in the fairly familiar adage; Sambhavami yuge yuge ....

Historians are mightier than God!

Not even God can change the Past. But historians can! Because, they are the Creators of the past!

A post and a response. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 9:15 PM, Drmaruthur <drmaruthur@gmail.com> wrote: My Life Life is a dream. We don't know where we came from except some may say, we are born into the world. Only beings who say. we are born, are the beings already in the dream. Then we go on in a dream-living as though it is real.  In this dream we feel things as real because of our 'senses'  which includes the brain. We really cannot explain how senses and brain do their THINGS. Then we dream during the day and night. The day dreams are persistent and appreciated by all the brings in their own dream. ( a group dream) Then we disappear and only the beings in their dream feel we are dead ( disappeared). The person who died dies not know it. Anyway our individual dreams has ended. In our night dream we don't know we fall asleep and dream another set of life events which are as real as the 'real' life while you are sleeping. Then we wake up to our 'waking dreams' to live another day. The beings  include the whole universe. We try to explain our dreams with thoughts (dreams), words, numbers, concepts and ideas. We have written books using dream words based in dream thoughts. And a lot of theories, theory of this and that in the physical realm.  But they are also dreams. If we deeply dream about it, we have no real existence. In the metaphysical level we have religious scriptures which we have created by men. Nobody has any real life ideas yet, but may have dreamy hallucinations about our birth, death and creations. (Including God and gods and done people no god, etc) I have no idea how that explains life. But I don't get it. This is how I ( me- this dreamer) feel about it. I wish I could fall into everybody's dream and enjoy life better. Sent from my iPhone	8:17 PM (9 hours ago)

My response:

On Dec 24, 2013, at 12:00 AM, "Sudhakaran P.P." <sudhakaranpp@gmail.com> wrote:

Just a random response, as vacuous as a response can ever be!

Any philosophical discourse, which is what your posts really are, can be from a personal or from a universal stand point. "Life is a dream", "We do not know" and the like, incidentally, have the form of universal statements. That is the attraction many may find in your posts.

The other is the personal viewpoint. 

All universal statements, if in a public domain, are liable to be ignored, endorsed, challenged or disputed. Critical readers generally challenge or dispute. That is why one wisecrack is alleged to have said, 'For every philosopher there shall be an equal and opposite philosopher!' 

Personal beliefs and convictions, on the other hand, are usually left alone. They are invariably just untested opinions floated for responses, or left in a limbo for no better options. By convention they are qualified explicitly or implicitly with an 'I think' or 'I believe'. 

Readers follow personal opinions for different reasons. Some read out of curiosity about the person behind the posts. Some, who are generally serious, read looking for ideas resonating with their own. 

But, when a personal opinion is presented from a universal standpoint, there are bound to be problems. Of course, for the readers! These problems are compounded when the ideas expressed are abstract. 

A good example for an abstract idea is dream. It may be true that we dream, but what we dream or think we dreamt are not real. Needless to say, one cannot dream another's dream, that is, unless one is in Alice's Wonderland. The dreamer himself cannot be sure about whether he dreamt or what he dreamt. Such a terribly personal, virtual, fleeting and little understood experience can never be a universal denominator. If I say, 'Life is a dream', it will convey precious little by way of meaning. The question is not whether you are right or I am right or anyone is right. 

Not that you do not know these. Still, I thought I would just respond to this post of yours.

Wish you a warrm, happy Christmas

His Response:
Your response is more dreamy than my post on life   That is good. I have put your response on FB without mentioning ur name.

Sent from my iPhone

  

  

Want to test your psychopathic nature or potential? You MAY take this test, courtesy an Oxford Professor:
 http://psychopath.channel4.com/quizzes.html#test2

I could score only 6%! Clever me!

How To Fix Your PC0 the Right Way Gizmodo

Most of the common problems of a PC can be solved at the user level following this GIZMODO compilation. Keep it, preferably outside your PC. And beware the spectre of Murphy's Law!
Please go to http://gizmodo.com/how-to-fix-your-pc-the-right-way-1468221892  

Historians are angry with Narendra Modi

Narendra Modi’s history bloomers became news obviously because he is trying to sell himself as an invincible super-politician. As it is election season, his detractors gleefully lampooned him. They made it appear that he would recklessly bluff about things he did not know.

But, the grievance of a historian would be different. History has only very few facts to hold on to, namely, dates of events and names of people and places. That is the stuff largely of elementary class history. Everything else in its vast corpus is interpretation or perception; just gas that is usually dealt with at higher levels. Here, Modi has failed in elementary history! That is unpardonable in an aspiring PM of India.

Tired of your intrusive net accounts, like the Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin and Google+? Here is help, thanks to Andrew Tarantola on Gizmodo:
http://www.gizmodo.in/news/How-to-Erase-Yourself-From-the-Internet/articleshow/25140190.cms

Aadhaar and the cobwebs

The Editorial, “Voluntarily mandatory” (The Hindu, Sept. 30, 2013), explaining what is voluntary and what is mandatory in the Aadhaar programme was very helpful. This is a point that was generally missed in public discussions of the programme.

         Instead of keeping the mandatory National Population Registration and the voluntary Unique ID Numbering separate, the UIDAI confused the people with the overt and covert support of a number of government agencies that they were a single programme. Many obviously believed that without the Aadhaar number they would miss various subsidies and services; that they would lose even their citizenship even if they possessed other identity proofs. The long queues in front of Aadhaar registration centres were formed by those who were evidently anxious about this threat. After the Supreme Court clearing the air and after spending thousands of crores of rupees, what the UIDAI will do next is worth watching.

NOTA, Mr. L.K.Advani and compulsory voting

A Letter to the Editor

NOTA and compulsory voting

Sir,

         In seeking to relate NOTA to compulsory voting as a “meaningful” requirement, Mr. Advani’s blog has completely missed its meaning. By allowing the right to reject, the Supreme Court has actually enlarged the choice of the voter. Mr. Advani wants to restrict it, ignoring the fact that democracy is all about voluntariness in political choices. Right to vote is an inalienable right vested in the voter, which includes also the right not to vote. Making it mandatory would give the establishment an opportunity to coerce the voters and punish the defaulters.

         That Mr. Advani has endorsed Mr. Modi’s idea is not surprising, for, both are products of an organization that upholds discipline, regimentation and uniformity in matter even of culture as virtues. There could be one more reason. The inspiration for launching the BJP in 1980 was the hope that the Hindus, being the majority community, would put the Party in power in perpetuity. Mr. Advani, perhaps, hopes now that at least when driven into the polling booths, a sufficiently large number of Hindus might always choose the ‘Hindutva’ party.

Who owns the alphabet?

Who owns the alphabet, of any language for that matter, but now, of English? Here is an interesting case.

Recently, Exxon Mobile filed a lawsuit Tuesday, 1 October, in the U.S. District Court in Houston, challenging the 21st Century Fox’s trademark registration and seeking an injunction against using the logo FXX. It also sought triple damages for the harm it suffered from the resulting confusion in the 'market'.

It complained that FXX, when contacted directly, refused either to stop using or to remove the interlocking FXX design. Hence the petition.

Among other things, it argued that it was likely to “cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive customers and potential customers.” It feared that, if not constrained, FXX might be mistaken for an affiliate of Exxon. In support, it cited some posts on the web, like "That FXX logo has to go, that is awful on a plate. Also, Exxon is going to be pissed.” A spokesman for ExxonMobil claimed that the “public associates the interlocking Xs with ‘Exxon’ and ‘ExxonMobil,’ and they represent a valuable part of our branding. ExxonMobil has protected its interlocking-X designs with numerous trademark registrations, and has been using its interlocking Xs both alone and as part of ExxonMobil’s distinctive family of ‘Exxon’ and ‘ExxonMobil’ marks for decades.”

FXX is an American TV network doing entertainment business, a David when compared.to the Goliath Exxon, which is world's richest oil company. A spokesperson of FXX asked whether a consumer ever approach FXX for oil or Exxon for a TV serial?

As David Sirota (a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, magazine journalist and the author of the books "Hostile Takeover," "The Uprising" and "Back to Our Future" E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com,), would put it: "Apparently if you are the world’s richest oil company used to making $104 million in profit every day, no lawsuit is too frivolous, expensive or downright hilarious when you are the plaintiff."

In essence, Exxon wants exclusive world rights to put two Xs next to each other. Lone X does not belong to it, Three or more Xs also are no problem, for now at least. Whether its lawsuit covers also the Xs in all other non-Latin alphabets, the mathematical symbol for multiplication or any symbol in any other script resembling X,  is not clear.

There already are logos containing double X, like that of Dos Equisll. As Sirota asks: 'what about the XX chromosome, and the roman numeral for 20, and any clothing companies that make T-shirts marked double extra large'.

According to Sirota, 'ExxonMobil’s suit instantly makes it a candidate for the list of the most famous intellectual property claims of all time.' Among instances he quotes are:

"- Spike Lee claiming exclusive ownership rights of his first name in a suit against Viacom’s Spike TV.

- Fox News being laughed out of court after claiming exclusive ownership of the phrase “fair and balanced.”

- Warner/Chappell Music arguing in court that the 120-year-old “Happy Birthday” song is its exclusive property.

- Huey Lewis suing Ray Parker Jr. over allegations that the latter’s “Ghostbusters” anthem resembled the former’s “I Want a New Drug.”

- Larrikin Music suing Men at Work for damages, based on the company’s claims that the music group’s flute in the song “Down Under” derives from a 75-year-old children’s song called “Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree.” The music company claiming the rights to the Kookaburra song didn’t file suit until 28 years after Men at Work’s hit was released. That’s when a television quiz show in Australia claimed there was a resemblance between the two tunes."

Whether intellectual property is protectable is a moot question. Even if we concede that stealing intellectual property is a serious crime, Sirota says that 'many of the aforementioned suits — including ExxonMobil’s — seem more than a bit absurd.' He reminds us that the U.S. Supreme Court has recently ratified the right of companies to claim patent protections for DNA. May be, as he says, in the brave new world of intellectual property, “absurd” is apparently in the eye of the beholder!

To put it mildly, the intellectual property right issue is a bit bizarre. If I buy a house, I can do whatever I want with it, but not if it is a book. I can buy a kidney, and it will become my exclusive property. Neither its donor nor the surgeon who transplanted it has no right over it. But, in the case of a book, even its printer/ publisher can own its intellectual property rights. An original work of art can be bought and owned exclusively, but not a book. One can understand the claim of IPR for the original manuscript as long it is not sold, but even after it is printed in thousands and sold, each of the copies also carry copy right! In that case, should not the author himself and the printer/publisher be sued first for forging copies of an original work?

Dr. Kumar wrote:
There is no opposite to any thing that is truly real ....

What is the opposite of love, many will say is hate. But that is at mind level. 
But at the no-mind level, say heart level, there is no opposite to love.

LOVE IS JUST LOVE.
LIFE IS JUST LIFE.
BEAUTY IS JUST BEAUTY.
GOODNESS IS JUST GOODNESS.

No opposite unless we start using our all very 'useful utilitarian' MIND.

I responded:
Please leave this dead horse alone! Emotions, like tastes, why, even genders, are not in binary opposite relationships. Assuming first that they are, and then flogging the very same assumption was a pastime for the Sophists. It is a verbal labyrinth, a trap. No one will dispute that 'life is life', and if one wants to stay put at that level, quite fine for her or him. But, why grudge somebody who thinks life has various attributes and tries to understand and explain them? Further, how will one ever use a word without knowing what it means. Definitions, explanations, synonyms and antonyms - knowing what a word means or does not mean - are integral to understanding anything. Dismissing all that as the delusion of the mind is a pointless denial. There is one character in the VKN novel, 'One Week', one Electric Thoma, whose vocabulary in English was limited to less than a hundred words. For anything he did not know the proper word for, he would use 'that corner'! Think of a physician who tells all and every patient of his with running temperature - 'a fever is only a fever, take aspirin'! Such thinking is usually called 'reductio ad absurdum'. Indian philosophy for ages, starting with Upanishads, also has held this 'funnel' vision of the world. In human affairs, there are no perfect antonyms or synonyms. So, let us stop flogging a dead horse!

Dr. Kumar quoted Jiddu:
Life and death? 

Why do we regard death as something apart from life? Why are we afraid of death? And why have so many books been written about death? Why is there this line of demarcation between life and death? And that separation real, or merely arbitrary, a thing of the mind? When we talk about life, we mean living as a process of continuity in which there is identification. Me and my house, me and my wife, me and my bank account, me and my past experiences—that is what we mean by life, is it not? Living is a process of continuity in memory, conscious as well as unconscious, with its various struggles, quarrels, incidents, experiences and so on. All that is what we call life; in opposition to that there is death, which is putting an end to all that. Having created the opposite, which is death, and being afraid of it, we proceed to look for the relationship between life and death; if we can bridge the gap with some explanation, with belief in continuity, in the hereafter, we are satisfied. We believe in reincarnation or in some other form of continuity of thought and then we try to establish a relationship between the known and the unknown. We try to bridge the known and the unknown and thereby try to find the relationship between the past and the future. That is what we are doing, is it not?, when we inquire if there is any relationship between life and death. We want to know how to bridge the living and the ending—that is our fundamental desire. Now, can the end, which is death, be known while living? If we can know what death is while we are living, then we shall have no problem. It is because we cannot experience the unknown while we are living that we are afraid of it. Our struggle is to establish a relationship between ourselves, which is the result of the known, and the unknown which we call death. Can there be a relationship between the past and something which the mind cannot conceive, which we call death? Why do we separate the two? Is it not because our mind can function only within the field of the known, within the field of the continuous? One only knows oneself as a thinker, as an actor with certain memories of misery, of pleasure, of love, affection, of various kinds of experience; one only knows oneself as being continuous—otherwise one would have no recollection of oneself as being something. Now when that something comes to the end, which we call death, there is fear of the unknown; so we want to draw the unknown into the known and our whole effort is to give continuity to the unknown. That is, we do not want to know life, which includes death, but we want to know how to continue and not come to an end. We do not want to know life and death, we only want to know how to continue without ending. That which continues has no renewal. There can be nothing new, there can be nothing creative, in that which has continuance—which is fairly obvious. It is only when continuity ends that there is a possibility of that which is ever new. But it is this ending that we dread and we don’t see that only in ending can there be renewal, the creative, the unknown—not in carrying over from day to day our experiences, our memories and misfortunes. It is only when we die each day to all that is old that there can be the new. The new cannot be where there is continuity—the new being the creative, the unknown, the eternal, God or what you will. The person, the continuous entity, who seeks the unknown, the real, the eternal, will never find it, because he can find only that which he projects out of himself and that which he projects is not the real. Only in ending, in dying, can the new be known; and the man who seeks to find a relationship between life and death, to bridge the continuous with that which he thinks is beyond, is living in a fictitious, unreal world, which is a projection of himself. Now is it possible, while living, to die—which means coming to an end, being as nothing? Is it possible, while living in this world where everything is becoming more and... •

I responded:
Answering presumptive questions may fill time in an invited discourse or pages of a book commissioned by a publisher. Jiddu was good at both. Try to think out of the box he has set up. If one does not regard death as apart from life or fear death, which no one can say one should not, the whole argument will collapse. It will also prove the superfluity of Jiddu's assumptions. To counter him, one need only liken life and death to two stages of a continuous process, or metamorphosis, or change and continuity as is seen in history. It is not difficult, for, metamorphosis is a natural phenomenon. The egg, the maggot, the pupa, the fly, and again the egg - are they different stages in a continuous process, or separate episodes of sets of life and death? Answer will depend on what one wants to believe. Semitic religions believe that birth, death and after-life of each human being is a complete set. The Indian religions believe that they repeat. Both are, again, assumptions. You are free to believe the way you want to and fret the way you want to. I will leave the unknown as unknown and shut my mind on it. Further, that every one is not afraid of death is evident from the large number of suicides happening around us. Suicides prove fear of life and not fear of death. Instead of fretting over things unknown, I would rather leave such things to Jiddus, Alan Watts and the like who will make profit out of our anxieties. I prefer to leave the black cat in the dark room to mend for itself. I have better things to anticipate in life and prepare for. Cheer you!

Meditation, spiritualism and I, a dude. Some random responses

Dr. Kumar Maruthur wrote:
Reality; 
Years ago I used to go a church in my neighborhood. A person died and he was a mason. They had a funeral service at a local funeral home. They showed photos and videos i think of his life. Then some give eulogy. There were a few masons there, all dressed in black business suits. Then one of them got up and eulogized. I think he spoke in tongues. Nobody understood anything. Later I heard people saying that that is a super secret mason language. They were very impressed. I knew they spoke in tongues. The best part of it, I didn't know what they said, but that was the best eulogy I ever heard.

I responded:
 Free Masons speak to create and communicate experiences that vary from person to person, and not to create or communicate a shared idea based on conventional meanings of words. They are what we call mystic. This is what a voodoo or mantra is also expected to do. Pentecostal sermons also follow the same route. But that does not, need not and should not preclude communication through formal language. Just like saying abstract painting that leaves the viewer to see into it anything he/she can imagine is the only way to paint, saying one should speak only by producing sounds that have no formal meaning - 'incoherently' - is the only way to speak is an extreme 'black if not white' position. There are 'infinite' shades between the two 'colours'. You found the Mason utterance to be a eulogy because of the context, the funeral service in honour of the deceased. If you hear the same sound bite from a patient, you might imagine it is an account of his disease. Decease and disease! See how close they are! But, I would rather wish that a doctor and his patient should communicate with each other on a mutually understood system of sounds. Why not give a break to this stream of thought?

Dr. Kumar Maruthur Wrote:

MEDITATION:
"IT HAS NO MEANING OR PURPOSE!"
It always good to normal weight, health and physical strength. That is where YOGA comes in handy.

In India they sit in a easy position with legs crossed on the floor or in padmasana.. You can sit in a chair with straight,back. The position is just uncomfortable enough, you won't fall asleep.

Breathing: take a deep breath and expire as slow as possible all through meditation. Expire fully and completely and inspiration will happen spontaneously. 

If you are in the NOW where there is no division of TIME into past, present and future, you can sit in thIs position for a long time as observed by the clock time.

Then you begin chanting. It is not the meaning of the word that is important but the repetition of the chant for a long time. 

While chanting keep the slow rhythms of breathing, very important,

You might have heard the chant OHM, OHM, OHM or Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare or Rama Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare or Hare Rama Hare Rama Hare Hare or just Ram Ram, or Krishna Krishna. it is not the meaning of the word that is important , but the repetition for a long period of time like 20-40 minutes which is important. This might stop the THINKING and might give you peace of mind. Muslims do Allah Allah Allah continuously for a long period of time. Sufis do LLA LLA LLA LLA for many minutes and to hours at a time, some whirl around at the same time.

Transcendental meditation group will sell you a chant specifically designed for you for a certain amount of money. It has no meaning and are nonsensical words. 

Chinese and Japanese Buddhists use MOO MOO MOO and so on. Zen Buddhists give you koans. Some ask you to laugh loudly for a long time. Some speak in tongues for a long time. Some sing kirtans and some dance at the same time.

The purpose is to still the continuous mind chatter ir still the mind.

You can just sit and watch the colors that fall on your eyes, sound on your ears, your feelings on the skin, the smell and the taste as it were just an happenings. You may consider them as many senses or one sense, you may listen to the mind' thoughts as just noise like water fall or chirps of bugs, or tv or music or car horns or telephone rings and so on, as it were mere happenings without INTERPRETING them. 

You can sit for a long time in the NOW. MAY BE!

Past does not propel the present. The past and futures just MOVES away from the NOW like water from the wake of a boat or ship.

Gradually your mind chatter may go away and you may be in the expansive eternal NOW.
You may forget your SELF. 

Don't pay attention to your thoughts and senses. Just ignore them.

Gradually you may achieve a meditation state; all according to your own temperament. 

OR NO THING AT ALL.

The difference between ALL and VOID is just NAMES.
What happens then is everybody's PRIVATE MATTER..

BEST OF LUCK 

P.S: Pardon my English, Sanskrit, Hindi or Malayalam or Chinese and spellings. I don't care about languages words or spellings other than just an utilitarian device.

20 hours ago via mobile 

I responded:
I am weary of spiritualism as I understand it; and of all its vendors, whichever the brand be. It claims to know everything through intuition. I would rather give a go by to such claims. Intuition does not blossom in a vacuum. It springs from thought, which needs experience as its springboard. Thought is therefore empirical. It is a function of the sensory organs and the brain. I do not want to numb my thoughts and get inside a cocoon, even if it is made of the finest silk. I am aware of natural sensory illusions our neural system brooks and am ready to live with them, but I do not want to amplify them thorough self-induced hypnotism. Meditation as concentration of thought is welcome. But as auto-suggested delusion, is not. To be aware of a state of mind that is unaware of itself is, to me, a delusion. At least, it is a confusion. I will not knowingly fly anywhere near that cuckoo's nest, let alone into it!

Dr. Kumar Maruthur wrote:
My friend B is as much argumentative as you are. But nowadays he found an outlet for mental peace.
He found this NAM yoga place . He joins in their group singing chants and dancing. He gets very relaxed and happy. He says he goes into a trance. He takes a 40 minute bus trip to Santa Monica to do that, once or twice a week,
May be good thing for you too.

I responded:
I wish B all the peace he can draw from his engagements. And I wish all others too the same for their respective minds. Period. I am not against anyone's peace of mind so long as they do not prescribe it for others. To treat a malaise, there may be different systems of medicine. Choice is personal. I would rather avoid a witch doctor. And an astrologer. And a god-man. And a yogi. And, certainly the god himself!

We might follow this