Perhaps this is just a bit strange. Perhaps you should be warned about my strangeness...
This is my first public blog about me. I kept a blog on a local server to play around with the format a few years ago, but I've never put anything out into the world until now.
I used to post a lot in a few forums, back in the days when they were all the rage. i really enjoyed visiting the Divorce Support forum at about.com. I really liked helping people there.
When I compare the me of now and the me of then I see differences. Perhaps that's the first difference between me and I. But I'm getting ahead of myself.
Duality is the nature of our existence. We have a machine mind that thinks for itself and believes that it exists. That's "me." At the same time there is an awareness which transcends thought. To describe it furthur would be more disrespectful than "me" cares to be. That awareness is called, "I".
The old expression quoted by New Agers "I am that I am," refers to the fact that we can identify with I by saying "I am that I am."
I've spent a large portion of my imagination time over the last few years trying to grok duality. I've come to one conclusion: if you can wrap your mind around something in yourself, then you are looking at "me" if you can't wrap your mind around it, can't classify, comprehend or box it up in any way, chances are its "I."
Ego is "me." This body is "me." The universe itself is incomprehensible to "me" so it is more "I" than "me." These persons I love, this wife, this daughter, this son, this mother, this father I can comprehend, I can understand so they are "me."
The concept of God or should I say a concept of God that I can understand is also "me." God himself is beyond conception (Shiva) and is therefore "I." See the difference?
Do you see where I'm going with this?
If we imagine that there are only two things in our dual-istic reality: "I" and "me," then we can carefully separate "I" from "me" and begin to see where "I" exists.
Perhaps that's fruitless, but it helped me understand me's place in the universe.
But now that I know me, how can I know I?
I mean that's the point of spirituality, right to know myself? That is to say to know: I.
Me spends a lot of time contemplating these things. Me quite enjoys it. I don't mind what me does as long as I accomplish what I'm here to accomplish. So I allow me to have hobbies, such as thinking about the way things are.
Why do I let me think about these things? Because I have the task of building a bridge between I and me, and if me understands bridge building, then me can accomplish this task with I.
I'm in it because I'm in it: most mes are in it for me. I want what's best for everyone: most mes want what's best only for me. I love everything: Me only loves me. I accept reality as it is and I'm thankful for the experience: me hates change and me wants to control it and change reality. I love unconditionally: me loves for profit or a high ROI.
See how duality works? We separate I from me and assign the giving qualities to I and the selfish qualities to me.
This post is attempting to lay the groundwork for my uses of the words "I" and "me."
Of corse any description I make of "I" falls flat and any description of "me" is obvious...
Causes Brian McKee Supports
I support the cause of peace via peaceful means.