Dear Joan, just a few hours ago, this morning (I'm In Italy) I felt just like you describe, totally lost, miserable, empty, useless. I'm recovering from Covid and after one week of having to give up any contact with others and all my usual activities, this morning I woke up feeling deeply depressed and desperate for some kind of escape from my mind and feelings. Forty years ago I too would have lit a cigarette. Instead I grabbed my phone and searched Insight Timer for a guided miracle meditation (didn't find one with the right voice), then my Podcast list and YouTube to find some comforting guru ,then my Waking Up App for a practice and on and on until I just broke down in tears and surrendered to the whole catastrophe. Then it lifted. Don't know how or why, but it all just changed. I didn't make it happen, as much as I had tried. Grace, presence, awareness,God, whatever we call it, is always just waiting for us to let go, to give up trying to fix or run away. Knowing that I'm not alone in this and that even someone I consider far more ahead then me on this journey towards wholeness can feel just like I feel is truly comforting and I thank you for writing about it. Can I tell you I love you?
Ah, Joan. I love how you're able to express your experience in words that (however inadequate they necessarily are) convey beautifully the deep truths of free existence. I appreciate your openness, honesty, and profound explorations. THANK YOU for sharing your discoveries with us. I am always served and opened by reading your posts.
I really appreciate your honesty. Admitting that suffering, change and emptiness are the nature of the mind rather than a curable condition sure has helped me to relax with it all.
Yes, knowing that we are okay just as we are, and that nothing could be other than it is in this moment, is enormously relieving and freeing.
And yes, the nature of experiencing and of what appears is thorough-going impermanence. The word “emptiness” is used in many ways to mean many very different things, but I think you’re using it here in the sense of an emotionally painful sense of desolation such as I was describing at the beginning of my post? And if so, that kind of emptiness is a mix of thoughts and sensations--those thoughts can be seen through, and the sensations can be felt and allowed to be as they are, and the suffering can vanish.
So to be clear, what I was trying to say is that, while pain and painful circumstances are an unavoidable part of life, suffering (as I use the word—i.e. the mental overlay on top of that—the thoughts about it, the resistance, etc.) CAN fall away. It vanishes in the light of awareness, in simple awake presence here and now.
But it's true that, while certain particular forms of suffering may end permanently, for most of us, suffering in some form does tend to reappear. But then, once again, whenever it does, there is the possibility of waking up now, which is the end of suffering and confusion (not forever after, for there is actually no such time, but always only now).
So I wasn’t exactly saying there is no cure. But paradoxically, the cure seems to arise in the willingness to be completely incurable. And that willingness to be completely incurable is about an immediate surrender or letting go. It doesn’t mean not getting help if we are experiencing addiction, panic attacks, serious depression, or any other problem. And it doesn’t mean abandoning our spiritual quest from a place of discouragement or resignation, having decided it’s all bullshit.
And, of course, many forms of suffering can also be reduced or ended through psychotherapy and many other approaches, as I have experienced. But again, it seems to ultimately boil down to being okay with how we are. Perfectionism and idealism are suffering-inducing thought-patterns.
What I mean by emptiness is without substance. I certainly experience feelings of desolation that seem anything but empty but they pass. One of the comments on this thread referenced extreme emotions that, when passively observed, fall suddenly away. It’s always something of a welcome surprise for me when that happens. I’m reminded of a dialogue Toni had with someone who found it challenging to see the Holocaust as empty. The current tragedy in Israel is between two historically oppressed people with dueling and compelling narratives of dispossession. Thanks for your reply.
Thanks Joan. Right on the mark. I'm 73. I belatedly stumbled into Zen 25 years ago through Joko Beck. I knew almost nothing about Zen but my seemingly successful life was punishing to me and for those around me. I thought there had to be a better way to live. Joko seemed to be pointing to something important. I thought that would be life of serenity and certainty. Huh! Wrong. I drifted from formal Zen after awhile, not because of anything it did, but I saw what I was doing with it; that I was becoming a Zen Student! of Joco Beck! While I'm older now and some triggers have worn out, new ones arise and they tend to be more basic. I looked at your post this morning because unexpectedly last night thought-Hell was ignited by some silly thing, and I reached for escape in 'spiritual' teaching. Thank you for your reminder that no such place exists. You are appreciated. Bob
Hi Bob. Thanks for your comment. As you may or may not know, Joko was one of my most important teachers, although (like you), I left formal Zen behind. Joko and I worked together mostly by phone during the 1980s and 90s, but we were in touch until her death, and I did several sesshins with her in Oakland at Diane Rizzetto’s home, before Diane was a teacher herself—those must have been in the late 80s. So I guess it was before you were with her. And yes, Joko was great at disabusing people of spiritual fantasies.
As I said in my response to Mack Paul above, I’m never saying there is no such thing as liberation, and it might even be triggered by reading something. But it can also be noticed how we reach for it in addictive ways, as you describe, and how we make spirituality into an identity in various ways, as you also alluded to (“Zen student,” “teacher,” “awakened one,” “hopeless case,” “Buddhist,” “nondualist,” “the only real nondualist,” etc). Perhaps all of that is an inevitable part of the process, but in any true spiritual path (whether formal or informal), it all gets exposed. That exposure was certainly at the heart of Joko’s teaching—and Toni Packer’s as well. I’m deeply grateful to them both.
This post brought to mind a quote from Mike Kewley's book "The Treasure House," which you recommended: "The world does not need teachers who have never felt the depths of despair, but people who have sat with their suffering and found the light." I know you understand suffering and have found liberation from it, and I am so grateful you are willing to share your journey and understanding with all of us.
Dear Joan, There is always so much in your writing that compels reply. I think it is because your thoughts are offered so lightly and are so well considered, and well meant. Almost always there's an angle to "spiritual" writing, more sales pitch than offering. Yours is the latter, and I enjoy that a lot. If there is a bias, it is to help people think clearly, as I hear it, and that is rare. Thank you!
Having read many of your recent posts, a similar thought occurs to me each time, and I'd like to share it with you by responding to a particular section of this article. You said,
"Awareness illuminates, reveals and dissolves the thought-constructed prisons we seem to be in along with the thought-constructed self who seems to be trapped in them."
I have found this to be a false notion (very common in the spiritual world of course) that was for me at the heart of a fear and desire driven life, aka a life of suffering. If it were true that awareness "reveals and dissolves the thought constructed prisons" we seem to find ourselves in, you and I and anyone else that had discovered awareness as our nature would be free, liberated, whole and complete, content, and completely without remaining existential questions. After all, as you eloquently said, awareness is upstream (prior) to experience. It's a lovely idea, but on inspection it doesn't hold water. 
The only other conclusion I can see that one could draw if they thought they discovered that awareness is my "true nature" and that it is "always right here and at zero distance," to paraphrase you, is that they had NOT actually experienced that or somehow needed to experience it more. Doubt becomes inevitable. Otherwise, what would stand in the way of knowing myself as limitless, boundless, unchanging being itself? It must be doubt in the form of ideas I am holding that prevent  this knowledge from liberating me.
The implication of this being inaccurate - if that is the case - is that if indeed limitless "freedom" is possible for human beings (which must be the assumption if this conversation has any meaning), there must be some way to "get there" and reap the benefits of that fact. Since, unfortunately, hearing or knowing "I am that which has no other" apparently wasn't enough. This is where for me, and countless others for thousands of years, Vedanta stepped in. Not Neo Advaita silliness or half baked "this is it" teachings, which do point accurately to non-dual no other-ness, but traditional Vedanta which includes/explains the person/world scientifically and comprehensively in order to address what incomplete versions fail to: once non dual vision is recognized as true and as me, what the heck do I make of and how do I deal with the "apparent" person I still am and the circumstances (world) around me?
The point is, and why I used the example quote from your article to respond to, that the overlooked and unrecognized resolution to the paradox lies in knowledge. That is a big Debbie downer for spiritual people and in my own experience, since knowledge is much maligned as "merely" intellectual and - god forbid - not a "feeling based" knowing. The problem as I corroborated for myself, is that that is a big huge lie. Not a purposefully propagated one, but a lie nonetheless.
It makes all the sense in the world that there is/must be a "feeling" benefit (for lack of a better description) to self knowledge, but what isn't true - which any decade long, tired sincere seeker can attest to - is that you can't feel or "just be" your way to freedom. If that was possible, all of us that have done/felt that would be free! That's the "lie." It does not work that way. Instead, while there is lots of wisdom out there and many deeply realized beautiful people, there is a tremendous dearth of real knowledge. 
No one seems to be able to tell knowledge from helpful (or not) ideas and opinions, which is why there are lots of beautiful shiny paths supposedly leading to a common goal, at the same time as there is no obvious common "spiritual" understanding. Why wouldn't there be? Or if there is, do we secretly fear it is irrelevant since no one seems to truly "achieve" it or even know what that actually means? It is as if we have collectively accepted the lowest common denominator rather than probing just a little bit deeper to the (potentially) obvious fact that there is no logic whatsoever to "flavors" of self realization or self actualization.
Of course, there would still be infinite flavors of creativity and personality, but the core craving we all have is to be perfectly OK in this crazy fleeting world, and that particular "achievement" (if indeed we believe it's actually possible)  can't possibly be anything other than impersonal, ordinary and not one bit different at its essence for anyone. If that were true, it would have to be true that each of us has our own unique particular awareness and even existence, within which we must find a solution to this conundrum we find ourselves in.
And, on one level that is even true, making it all the more difficult to see through, but at the level of conscious being itself there are not two of us. No matter how hard one tries, there is absolutely no way to distinguish the factor of "self" or "conscious being" in oneself from that "in another." The reason is because that "experience" can't actually be objectified. It is known and felt as "me," in the same exact way by everyone. The reason is obvious, though really difficult (impossible, effectively) to even begin to accept the implications of for one still attached to the "me-identified thinking mind," as you call it. That's the "me" that has a story of course, not the "me" of non-dual conscious being. 
So having rambled on, the point is that the genuine knowledge is knowledge which results in the known and felt certainty of being absolutely ordinary and perfectly Ok as we are. Not just bearing life a little or a lotbetter, or getting by (which are fantastic and satisfying goals if that's what one is interested in), but actually free, boundary-less in our experience as self, and unaffected by discrete experiences.
That requires not only the knowledge you express often, which is "I am that which does not change" (you use different words sometimes, but frequently and eloquently point to that), but also the corresponding removal of all the false notions we have about life that keep us suffering needlessly IF our conscious desire is to end that particular form of suffering. If one is content as they are, then either they know this or it doesn't apply because they are already satisfied and happy. The question becomes, how do those ideas get removed, and how do we know which ideas to let go of and which to assimilate?

The first answer I would give if asked that, is only those ideas that make every bit of sense to us to either let go of or assimilate. No one decides but you. Getting advice from someone, a friend or spiritual teacher, could make sense if that is your inclination, but never ever surrender even the smallest bit of autonomy in terms of deciding what is best for you. Of course, if one is not ruthlessly honest with oneself then delusion is probable, but that is infinitely better than playing the victim and ascribing blame to someone or something else for a decision that you alone made. 
To my tremendous surprise and gratitude, I found that Vedanta can deliver this knowledge. Not that it has any exclusive capacity to do so, it definitely does not, but rather that it is perfectly in line with the scientific, logical, and experiential recognition and analysis of what it actually is to be a conscious being and how seeming personhood and the world relate to that (what I am).
It's almost laughable how far away I was from even beginning to recognize "scripture" as having any application to me (anyone) in the "modern" world, but that is exactly why I have gone on and on here. It is, or most definitely can be, applicable especially when it is seen for what it actually is and isn't. What it is, and this is directly from the scripture itself, is a means of self knowledge. A tool only, meant to be discarded after use (ironically a very modern approach), diametrically opposed to an instruction manual for living some kind of imagined pious or ideal prescribed life.
So in contrast to what I praised you about, your lightly held and eloquent presentation of the ideas that you express in every article, this is obviously a biased angle. However, as my own teacher (whose presentation of traditional Vedanta is enlivened and empowered by his own application of the knowledge on himself as heard in turn from his own teacher, and so on) is fond of saying: Vedanta has a bias. It is that you are beautiful, non-dual, limitless, and unchanging. You are whole and complete exactly as you are.
The fact that this statement is not "just words," and that when properly unfolded and understood has the capacity to remove all doubt about that bias (assuming one wields the knowledge upon oneself), has never and will never cease to amaze me. Who would actually have thought it?? Not me! That's what inspires me to go on such a rant, and hopefully not to sound bonkers, though that would be fine as well and no price at all whether or not someone hears this and gets curious about an actual resolution to existential ignorance :).
Thank you again for your articles, for the inspiration they provide, and for the space to reply. Peace, peace,peace.
I'm glad you've found a path that works for you. I admit I skimmed your comment as it was very long. In my view, freedom isn't a permanent acquisition, but something that can only happen NOW. It isn't a special feeling, but a falling away or seeing through of the thought-stories that create our suffering. The word "awareness" is used in different ways, and when I said that, "Awareness illuminates, reveals and dissolves the thought-constructed prisons we seem to be in along with the thought-constructed self who seems to be trapped in them," I was referring to direct insight, and I did not mean that this kind of immediate, direct insight dissolves these things forever after. And I don't actually speak of an unchanging ground. I say ever-present, which is actually not the same. Anyway, thanks for your comment and for being here.
Yes that was really long, and I understand skimming. Thank you very much for your comment. I'm going to sit with it and see if any questions or comments emerge about the clarification you have made.
I do have one question though, if you are open to responding, which is how do you see the difference between ever-present (a term which I completely relate to) and unchanging? Note I removed "ground" because I didn't say that and I also agree that word is a disaster of opaqueness and I don't relate to it anyway :)
And one further question, would you relate what you call "ever-present" to you as you are, or does it mean something different to you?
Really appreciate the engagement. Thank you again.
I remain agnostic on the ultimate nature of reality. It seems clear to me that some degree of awareness is present even in deep sleep or under anesthesia, thus I call it ever-present. I sometimes also speak of awareness synonymously with Here-Now and thus describe it as immovable. I don't know if it is unchanging. On that, I remain agnostic. I use the word awareness in different ways...sometimes as the ever-present screen on which the movie plays, the Here-Now timeless immediacy, the common factor in every different experience, and sometimes I use it to mean the light of attention that reveals things, sees thoughts as thoughts, and so on--in that sense, it is something that can be cultivated, and someone can be said to be more or less aware in that sense of the word. My background is more in Zen than it is in Advaita, although I've been with a number of Advaita teachers (Jean Klein, etc), and I've read I AM THAT many times, and other Advaita classics and scriptures. My own approach and perspective is a mix of Zen and Advaita and other things that have influenced me as well (e.g. Christianity, Sufism, Taoism, radical nonduality). My main teacher, Toni Packer, was a former Zen teacher who had a great affinity with J. Krishnamuti, so that's in my background as well. I don't feel that there is only one correct spiritual path or perspective. I say, go with what resonates and works for you.
Thank you for the encouraging words❤️
Dear Joan, just a few hours ago, this morning (I'm In Italy) I felt just like you describe, totally lost, miserable, empty, useless. I'm recovering from Covid and after one week of having to give up any contact with others and all my usual activities, this morning I woke up feeling deeply depressed and desperate for some kind of escape from my mind and feelings. Forty years ago I too would have lit a cigarette. Instead I grabbed my phone and searched Insight Timer for a guided miracle meditation (didn't find one with the right voice), then my Podcast list and YouTube to find some comforting guru ,then my Waking Up App for a practice and on and on until I just broke down in tears and surrendered to the whole catastrophe. Then it lifted. Don't know how or why, but it all just changed. I didn't make it happen, as much as I had tried. Grace, presence, awareness,God, whatever we call it, is always just waiting for us to let go, to give up trying to fix or run away. Knowing that I'm not alone in this and that even someone I consider far more ahead then me on this journey towards wholeness can feel just like I feel is truly comforting and I thank you for writing about it. Can I tell you I love you?
I love you, too. We're all waking up together as I see it. ❤️🙏
Many thanks Joan !!
So very very relevant and helpful!
There is absolutely nothing more to say dear Joan. This post truly says everything there is to be said. Thank you.
Ah, Joan. I love how you're able to express your experience in words that (however inadequate they necessarily are) convey beautifully the deep truths of free existence. I appreciate your openness, honesty, and profound explorations. THANK YOU for sharing your discoveries with us. I am always served and opened by reading your posts.
I really appreciate your honesty. Admitting that suffering, change and emptiness are the nature of the mind rather than a curable condition sure has helped me to relax with it all.
Yes, knowing that we are okay just as we are, and that nothing could be other than it is in this moment, is enormously relieving and freeing.
And yes, the nature of experiencing and of what appears is thorough-going impermanence. The word “emptiness” is used in many ways to mean many very different things, but I think you’re using it here in the sense of an emotionally painful sense of desolation such as I was describing at the beginning of my post? And if so, that kind of emptiness is a mix of thoughts and sensations--those thoughts can be seen through, and the sensations can be felt and allowed to be as they are, and the suffering can vanish.
So to be clear, what I was trying to say is that, while pain and painful circumstances are an unavoidable part of life, suffering (as I use the word—i.e. the mental overlay on top of that—the thoughts about it, the resistance, etc.) CAN fall away. It vanishes in the light of awareness, in simple awake presence here and now.
But it's true that, while certain particular forms of suffering may end permanently, for most of us, suffering in some form does tend to reappear. But then, once again, whenever it does, there is the possibility of waking up now, which is the end of suffering and confusion (not forever after, for there is actually no such time, but always only now).
So I wasn’t exactly saying there is no cure. But paradoxically, the cure seems to arise in the willingness to be completely incurable. And that willingness to be completely incurable is about an immediate surrender or letting go. It doesn’t mean not getting help if we are experiencing addiction, panic attacks, serious depression, or any other problem. And it doesn’t mean abandoning our spiritual quest from a place of discouragement or resignation, having decided it’s all bullshit.
And, of course, many forms of suffering can also be reduced or ended through psychotherapy and many other approaches, as I have experienced. But again, it seems to ultimately boil down to being okay with how we are. Perfectionism and idealism are suffering-inducing thought-patterns.
So, I'm happy to hear of the relaxation! 😊🙏
What I mean by emptiness is without substance. I certainly experience feelings of desolation that seem anything but empty but they pass. One of the comments on this thread referenced extreme emotions that, when passively observed, fall suddenly away. It’s always something of a welcome surprise for me when that happens. I’m reminded of a dialogue Toni had with someone who found it challenging to see the Holocaust as empty. The current tragedy in Israel is between two historically oppressed people with dueling and compelling narratives of dispossession. Thanks for your reply.
Ah, okay...I thought maybe you meant it that way. Yes, everything that appears is empty of substance, continuity and independent existence.
Thanks Joan. Right on the mark. I'm 73. I belatedly stumbled into Zen 25 years ago through Joko Beck. I knew almost nothing about Zen but my seemingly successful life was punishing to me and for those around me. I thought there had to be a better way to live. Joko seemed to be pointing to something important. I thought that would be life of serenity and certainty. Huh! Wrong. I drifted from formal Zen after awhile, not because of anything it did, but I saw what I was doing with it; that I was becoming a Zen Student! of Joco Beck! While I'm older now and some triggers have worn out, new ones arise and they tend to be more basic. I looked at your post this morning because unexpectedly last night thought-Hell was ignited by some silly thing, and I reached for escape in 'spiritual' teaching. Thank you for your reminder that no such place exists. You are appreciated. Bob
Hi Bob. Thanks for your comment. As you may or may not know, Joko was one of my most important teachers, although (like you), I left formal Zen behind. Joko and I worked together mostly by phone during the 1980s and 90s, but we were in touch until her death, and I did several sesshins with her in Oakland at Diane Rizzetto’s home, before Diane was a teacher herself—those must have been in the late 80s. So I guess it was before you were with her. And yes, Joko was great at disabusing people of spiritual fantasies.
As I said in my response to Mack Paul above, I’m never saying there is no such thing as liberation, and it might even be triggered by reading something. But it can also be noticed how we reach for it in addictive ways, as you describe, and how we make spirituality into an identity in various ways, as you also alluded to (“Zen student,” “teacher,” “awakened one,” “hopeless case,” “Buddhist,” “nondualist,” “the only real nondualist,” etc). Perhaps all of that is an inevitable part of the process, but in any true spiritual path (whether formal or informal), it all gets exposed. That exposure was certainly at the heart of Joko’s teaching—and Toni Packer’s as well. I’m deeply grateful to them both.
Thank you for being here.
For you lovely soul this beautiful poem from a Portugueses poet
I want to love, to be lost in love!
To love just to love: Here... there...
This one, that one, another one,
Everyone! To love and not love anyone!
Remember? Forget? It’s all the same!...
Hold on or let go? Wrong? Or right?
Those who say they can love someone
Their whole life long are telling a lie!
There is in every life a Spring.
When it flowers, it must be sung.
The voice God gave us is for singing!
If I must come to ashes, dust,
Nothing, then let my night be a dawn
And let me be lost... to find myself...
© Translation
This post brought to mind a quote from Mike Kewley's book "The Treasure House," which you recommended: "The world does not need teachers who have never felt the depths of despair, but people who have sat with their suffering and found the light." I know you understand suffering and have found liberation from it, and I am so grateful you are willing to share your journey and understanding with all of us.
Dear Joan, There is always so much in your writing that compels reply. I think it is because your thoughts are offered so lightly and are so well considered, and well meant. Almost always there's an angle to "spiritual" writing, more sales pitch than offering. Yours is the latter, and I enjoy that a lot. If there is a bias, it is to help people think clearly, as I hear it, and that is rare. Thank you!
Having read many of your recent posts, a similar thought occurs to me each time, and I'd like to share it with you by responding to a particular section of this article. You said,
"Awareness illuminates, reveals and dissolves the thought-constructed prisons we seem to be in along with the thought-constructed self who seems to be trapped in them."
I have found this to be a false notion (very common in the spiritual world of course) that was for me at the heart of a fear and desire driven life, aka a life of suffering. If it were true that awareness "reveals and dissolves the thought constructed prisons" we seem to find ourselves in, you and I and anyone else that had discovered awareness as our nature would be free, liberated, whole and complete, content, and completely without remaining existential questions. After all, as you eloquently said, awareness is upstream (prior) to experience. It's a lovely idea, but on inspection it doesn't hold water. 
The only other conclusion I can see that one could draw if they thought they discovered that awareness is my "true nature" and that it is "always right here and at zero distance," to paraphrase you, is that they had NOT actually experienced that or somehow needed to experience it more. Doubt becomes inevitable. Otherwise, what would stand in the way of knowing myself as limitless, boundless, unchanging being itself? It must be doubt in the form of ideas I am holding that prevent  this knowledge from liberating me.
The implication of this being inaccurate - if that is the case - is that if indeed limitless "freedom" is possible for human beings (which must be the assumption if this conversation has any meaning), there must be some way to "get there" and reap the benefits of that fact. Since, unfortunately, hearing or knowing "I am that which has no other" apparently wasn't enough. This is where for me, and countless others for thousands of years, Vedanta stepped in. Not Neo Advaita silliness or half baked "this is it" teachings, which do point accurately to non-dual no other-ness, but traditional Vedanta which includes/explains the person/world scientifically and comprehensively in order to address what incomplete versions fail to: once non dual vision is recognized as true and as me, what the heck do I make of and how do I deal with the "apparent" person I still am and the circumstances (world) around me?
The point is, and why I used the example quote from your article to respond to, that the overlooked and unrecognized resolution to the paradox lies in knowledge. That is a big Debbie downer for spiritual people and in my own experience, since knowledge is much maligned as "merely" intellectual and - god forbid - not a "feeling based" knowing. The problem as I corroborated for myself, is that that is a big huge lie. Not a purposefully propagated one, but a lie nonetheless.
It makes all the sense in the world that there is/must be a "feeling" benefit (for lack of a better description) to self knowledge, but what isn't true - which any decade long, tired sincere seeker can attest to - is that you can't feel or "just be" your way to freedom. If that was possible, all of us that have done/felt that would be free! That's the "lie." It does not work that way. Instead, while there is lots of wisdom out there and many deeply realized beautiful people, there is a tremendous dearth of real knowledge. 
No one seems to be able to tell knowledge from helpful (or not) ideas and opinions, which is why there are lots of beautiful shiny paths supposedly leading to a common goal, at the same time as there is no obvious common "spiritual" understanding. Why wouldn't there be? Or if there is, do we secretly fear it is irrelevant since no one seems to truly "achieve" it or even know what that actually means? It is as if we have collectively accepted the lowest common denominator rather than probing just a little bit deeper to the (potentially) obvious fact that there is no logic whatsoever to "flavors" of self realization or self actualization.
Of course, there would still be infinite flavors of creativity and personality, but the core craving we all have is to be perfectly OK in this crazy fleeting world, and that particular "achievement" (if indeed we believe it's actually possible)  can't possibly be anything other than impersonal, ordinary and not one bit different at its essence for anyone. If that were true, it would have to be true that each of us has our own unique particular awareness and even existence, within which we must find a solution to this conundrum we find ourselves in.
And, on one level that is even true, making it all the more difficult to see through, but at the level of conscious being itself there are not two of us. No matter how hard one tries, there is absolutely no way to distinguish the factor of "self" or "conscious being" in oneself from that "in another." The reason is because that "experience" can't actually be objectified. It is known and felt as "me," in the same exact way by everyone. The reason is obvious, though really difficult (impossible, effectively) to even begin to accept the implications of for one still attached to the "me-identified thinking mind," as you call it. That's the "me" that has a story of course, not the "me" of non-dual conscious being. 
So having rambled on, the point is that the genuine knowledge is knowledge which results in the known and felt certainty of being absolutely ordinary and perfectly Ok as we are. Not just bearing life a little or a lotbetter, or getting by (which are fantastic and satisfying goals if that's what one is interested in), but actually free, boundary-less in our experience as self, and unaffected by discrete experiences.
That requires not only the knowledge you express often, which is "I am that which does not change" (you use different words sometimes, but frequently and eloquently point to that), but also the corresponding removal of all the false notions we have about life that keep us suffering needlessly IF our conscious desire is to end that particular form of suffering. If one is content as they are, then either they know this or it doesn't apply because they are already satisfied and happy. The question becomes, how do those ideas get removed, and how do we know which ideas to let go of and which to assimilate?

The first answer I would give if asked that, is only those ideas that make every bit of sense to us to either let go of or assimilate. No one decides but you. Getting advice from someone, a friend or spiritual teacher, could make sense if that is your inclination, but never ever surrender even the smallest bit of autonomy in terms of deciding what is best for you. Of course, if one is not ruthlessly honest with oneself then delusion is probable, but that is infinitely better than playing the victim and ascribing blame to someone or something else for a decision that you alone made. 
To my tremendous surprise and gratitude, I found that Vedanta can deliver this knowledge. Not that it has any exclusive capacity to do so, it definitely does not, but rather that it is perfectly in line with the scientific, logical, and experiential recognition and analysis of what it actually is to be a conscious being and how seeming personhood and the world relate to that (what I am).
It's almost laughable how far away I was from even beginning to recognize "scripture" as having any application to me (anyone) in the "modern" world, but that is exactly why I have gone on and on here. It is, or most definitely can be, applicable especially when it is seen for what it actually is and isn't. What it is, and this is directly from the scripture itself, is a means of self knowledge. A tool only, meant to be discarded after use (ironically a very modern approach), diametrically opposed to an instruction manual for living some kind of imagined pious or ideal prescribed life.
So in contrast to what I praised you about, your lightly held and eloquent presentation of the ideas that you express in every article, this is obviously a biased angle. However, as my own teacher (whose presentation of traditional Vedanta is enlivened and empowered by his own application of the knowledge on himself as heard in turn from his own teacher, and so on) is fond of saying: Vedanta has a bias. It is that you are beautiful, non-dual, limitless, and unchanging. You are whole and complete exactly as you are.
The fact that this statement is not "just words," and that when properly unfolded and understood has the capacity to remove all doubt about that bias (assuming one wields the knowledge upon oneself), has never and will never cease to amaze me. Who would actually have thought it?? Not me! That's what inspires me to go on such a rant, and hopefully not to sound bonkers, though that would be fine as well and no price at all whether or not someone hears this and gets curious about an actual resolution to existential ignorance :).
Thank you again for your articles, for the inspiration they provide, and for the space to reply. Peace, peace,peace.
Dave
I'm glad you've found a path that works for you. I admit I skimmed your comment as it was very long. In my view, freedom isn't a permanent acquisition, but something that can only happen NOW. It isn't a special feeling, but a falling away or seeing through of the thought-stories that create our suffering. The word "awareness" is used in different ways, and when I said that, "Awareness illuminates, reveals and dissolves the thought-constructed prisons we seem to be in along with the thought-constructed self who seems to be trapped in them," I was referring to direct insight, and I did not mean that this kind of immediate, direct insight dissolves these things forever after. And I don't actually speak of an unchanging ground. I say ever-present, which is actually not the same. Anyway, thanks for your comment and for being here.
Yes that was really long, and I understand skimming. Thank you very much for your comment. I'm going to sit with it and see if any questions or comments emerge about the clarification you have made.
I do have one question though, if you are open to responding, which is how do you see the difference between ever-present (a term which I completely relate to) and unchanging? Note I removed "ground" because I didn't say that and I also agree that word is a disaster of opaqueness and I don't relate to it anyway :)
And one further question, would you relate what you call "ever-present" to you as you are, or does it mean something different to you?
Really appreciate the engagement. Thank you again.
I remain agnostic on the ultimate nature of reality. It seems clear to me that some degree of awareness is present even in deep sleep or under anesthesia, thus I call it ever-present. I sometimes also speak of awareness synonymously with Here-Now and thus describe it as immovable. I don't know if it is unchanging. On that, I remain agnostic. I use the word awareness in different ways...sometimes as the ever-present screen on which the movie plays, the Here-Now timeless immediacy, the common factor in every different experience, and sometimes I use it to mean the light of attention that reveals things, sees thoughts as thoughts, and so on--in that sense, it is something that can be cultivated, and someone can be said to be more or less aware in that sense of the word. My background is more in Zen than it is in Advaita, although I've been with a number of Advaita teachers (Jean Klein, etc), and I've read I AM THAT many times, and other Advaita classics and scriptures. My own approach and perspective is a mix of Zen and Advaita and other things that have influenced me as well (e.g. Christianity, Sufism, Taoism, radical nonduality). My main teacher, Toni Packer, was a former Zen teacher who had a great affinity with J. Krishnamuti, so that's in my background as well. I don't feel that there is only one correct spiritual path or perspective. I say, go with what resonates and works for you.
When I read this, I see, I feel love, in doubt, in insecurity, in uncertainty, in confusion, in vulnerability. Beauty and aliveness and preciousness.
Thank you for sharing. 💚
dear joan,
thank you as always for sharing this and these (and that and those)!
this is particularly beautiful: "Waking up is a lifelong journey, and yet it only happens NOW."
love,
myq