We like to think we can easily distinguish between what's part of us and what is not, but attachment gets in the way. What I am attached to, or, what I identify with, is not-me (by definition of 'attachment'/'identification') but it taken (cognitively or otherwise) as part-of-me.
If we consider the distinction meaningful at all, we ignore the process with which we encounter the not-me (the totally other.) You don't need to be Heisenberg to see that your form of contact with the not-me (e.g. perception) blurs the boundary. Sometimes this is described as mediation, interpretation, or preconception. Can this me-ness be removed from the equation? Could you clap one hand without the other?
When looking for meaning, the meaning must be part of you. Otherwise, why is it meaningful? But if it's part of you, why are you looking outside for it?
