I am you.

Bill Wiltrack · **Posted:** Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:08 am

.

I am you.

Get over it.

Encompass and ingrain the fact that we are not separate.

I am the turbo-charged you.

I am the you that you want to become.

I am the you that you will become.

I am the future you.

I am you.

........................

..........................................................................................I AM YOU

.

Arising_uk · **Joined:** Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am **Posts:** 10396

Not if you believe this you're not.

Bill Wiltrack · **Posted:** Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:21 am

.

Encompass and ingrain the fact that we are not separate.

I am the turbo-charged you.

I am the you that you want to become.

I am the you that you will become.

I am the future you.

I am you.

.

lancek4 · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 5:50 pm **Posts:** 1565

Thanks for the enigmatics.
I shall attempt to show you Bill how what you have posted breaks down into philosophical discourse, so Typist and you might see how one might propose the same and yet entertain discussion:

The end result of investigating the Subject, the individual who tries in this attempt to not leave out Itself from the World of knowable things, is that the subject comes to see that the World is really 'Its' world, that no matter how hard the subject attempts to assert itself upon the object in order to know what that object is, to 'know' the object, thus Itself, the subject finds Only itself, the subject finds that the object can only be known thru the subject's knowing of it. This part is easy when concerning objects that are not conscious objects

If this is the case, the subject then comes upon a problem: The problem that is: how is it that there may be another conscious being: this being that is "the Other".

One solution, the one that Bill is illustrating, is that the Other must also be a part of the Subject Itself. A component that in existence 'completes' the 'wholeness' that must be 'The Subject".

lancek4 · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 5:50 pm **Posts:** 1565

Arising_uk wrote:

Not if you believe this you're not.

Such a great reply.

.

Bill Wiltrack · **Posted:** Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:24 pm

.

I'm in your head.

I am the turbo-charged you.

I am the you that you want to become.

I am the you that you will become.

I am the future you.

I am you.

.

Bill Wiltrack · **Posted:** Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:18 pm

.

He who experiences the unity of life sees his own Self in all beings, and all beings in his own Self, and looks on everything with an impartial eye.
~~~ Buddha ~~~

.

Arising_uk · **Joined:** Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am **Posts:** 10396

Deep! Be donning the robes and picking-up the bowl anytime soon?

Bill Wiltrack · **Posted:** Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:48 pm

.

I'm in your head.

I am the turbo-charged you.

I am the you that you want to become.

I am the you that you will become.

I am the future you.

I am you.

.................................

.

lancek4 · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 5:50 pm **Posts:** 1565

Bill Wiltrack wrote:

.

He who experiences the unity of life sees his own Self in all beings, and all beings in his own Self, and looks on everything with an impartial eye.
~~~ Buddha ~~~

I am that I am.
I suppose Bill that you are serving a purpose of myself, and it is indeed strange and perplexing how the other of your self quotes such as here but then goes on to express such inconsistency in my own eyes.

I suppose 'you' are that which supplies my self the occasion for dealing with an 'consistent being' (your Self, Bill) who expresses itself inconsistently, and as exemplifying the 'courage of the ignorant'. (Reference: Protagoras) for my Self, the 'am' of the 'I'.

.

Arising_uk · **Joined:** Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am **Posts:** 10396

Bill Wiltrack wrote:

I'm in your head.

No, I am in my head and you are in yours. Although you appear to be having a little difficulty over in yours.

Quote:

I am the turbo-charged you.

Judging by your image its more a lardo-charged but you're old hat as I run a super-charger.

Quote:

I am the you that you want to become.

Only in our nightmares.

Quote:

I am the you that you will become.

I am the future you.

Nah! As I'm older than you I think so I'm in your future, you are the past.

Quote:

I am you.

Best work out who I am then. As so far its not you.

This how your diets working then?

lancek4 · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 5:50 pm **Posts:** 1565

If everything is a oneness ( I am you) then what explains the apparency of 'not oneness'?

How is it or for what purpose are some 'aware' of the oneness and others are not?

Would not this feature of reality imply that the 'oneness' is but just another 'not oneness' that is asserted by some the same way I might assert this statement?

What makes the 'idea of onenes' Realized any different than my saying 'we are all really trees so let me tell you why this is' ?

The significant question is: why 'oneness'? What agenda is implicit in this idea?

lancek4 · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 5:50 pm **Posts:** 1565

And I suppose if you are me then I'd better disregard everything I thot was me and get to know you better.
On second thought, I like it better if I am you because then I probly know myself pretty good and then the problem is in your hands. For if you were me you would be skeptical about this whole line of thought, which is what I am about this, but it seems you are not so evedently you are not me so I must be you, which I highly doubt since you think you are me. So since I am you and you think you are me I must be correct.

Bill Wiltrack · **Posted:** Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:12 am

.

Think - internally.

You are attaching your thoughts to outer or outward tangible things.

Think inside of you.

For instance, this moment.

We are sharing this.

I must have came from you. You are experiencing this. I am you.

You are fighting this...

I can't change your perception of self but that, philosophically, is what it would take.

.............................................

.

Arising_uk · **Joined:** Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am **Posts:** 10396

Bill Wiltrack wrote:

...
I can't change your perception of self but that, philosophically, is what it would take.

If you are me then I'd have thought this would be an easy change?

Philosophy Now Forum

I am you.

Who is online