The infinitesimally small distance between I and me

The infinitesimally small distance between "I" and "Me" I is an "amness " that is  pure awareness. No one ever uses this term to address me except me. It is a first person singular. It is how I address myself.  It is always  a singularity , that is self indulgent. It's existence is virtuoso,  an a priori state.  "Me" is a personal pronoun I use when duality , or a second person perspective enters . It  helps distinguish "I" and the non "I",a relativity , between "I " and the universe. It defines a locus, a distinct margin between "I" and the world around "me". Is there any fundamental difference between "I" and "me" ? "Me" is an image I construct of myself. Me is the clothes that drape the naked "I".  Me brings along dual constructs  called my and mine, the ego that unleashes this desire to possess, to indulge, to flaunt. This "me" also brings along a spectrum of emotions, that are an inevitable  consequence of attachment. "I"  when left alone doesn't really need anything. I is purely existentialist without the angst that tags along with "me".  Life is the gradual transition from "I" to  "me". Life is a journey of " I "want to become ........., a seemingly endless journey with no destination. A purposefully  purposeless indulgence ,an emotional roller coaster ride of this apparition "I" call "Me".  The "me" keeps convincing the "I" , that "I " will be happy when I become "Me" "I" then embark on a never ending endeavour to become a "Me" that "I" know "I" can never become. This "Me" can never be satisfied by just being. The illusory "Me" has no end point that can be ever be  reached. It has to engage in a meaningful  deception  of "becoming" . But this "I"  enjoys this deception despite  subconsciously knowing  that "I" is not equal to "Me" . The nakedness of "I" is  a faceless formless abstraction. Like looking into a mirror and having an emptiness  staring  back.   All "my" achievements, accomplishments are efforts at cosmetic enhancement  to appear more aesthetically appealing when "me" preens itself in the societal mirror that discriminates on basis of appearances. I is all about being, whilst "Me" is about becoming. Becoming is merely a manifestation of "being".  The awareness " cloaked differently that wants to marvel at its multifarious spellbinding reflections it has conjured up of itself, by itself ,for itself.  I " relentlessly keep asking "Me" for reasons, for answers, for explanations. But "I" fail to understand that an apparition can never provide answers to its creator.  It should ideally be the other way round. The "Me" should be asking "I" why  "I" created "me" The metamorphosis from " me " to "I" is what spiritual evolution  is all about.  From  the  relative  me to the absolute I. Disrobing the apparel of " me". This divesting process is very difficult and at times painful.Realisation is  the knife that slices the tangibility of  "me " to leave an intangible  residue called "I" It is a process of reduction, that reduces becoming to being.  It is about travelling that infinitesimally small illusory distance between "I" and "Me". Paradoxically, " I" keep trying to search for myself in "me", when "me" is just a virtual image of "I". "Me" is virtual and "I" the reality, and  life is an endlessly eternal virtual reality. Dr Deepak M Ranade