There is an experience right here and now - a computer screen, words, keyboard. There is an assumption that there is a "someone seeing" the screen, words and keyboard. That "someone" is apparently evident because of what?
How do you know yourself?
Maybe the hands are seen on the keyboard. Is that evidence of a "someone" there? Maybe the arms are seen, attached to the hands. Is that evidence of a "someone" there?
There is a torso seen attached to the arms. Is that evidence of a "someone" there? The toes are felt to wiggle - is that evidence of a "someone" there?
Breathing is felt. Is that evidence of a "someone" there? Heartbeat is felt. Is that evidence of a "someone" there?
Who knows all these "things"?
Thoughts are known. Is that evidence of a "separate ME"? Is the coming and going of thoughts evidence of a thinker? Thoughts are evident yet where is the thinker? Thoughts appear but does the thinker appear?
This question is the EXACT point of inquiry. Does the thinker appear?
The assumption of a thinker comes because of what? Because you know you ARE. Because you know you exist. Therefore the assumption of "being the thinker" is tied or mixed up with the obviousness of existence.
I know I am so I MUST BE the thinker. Yes?
Yet there is no direct evidence of this. Thoughts are there but there is no evidence of a thinker. In direct experience, thoughts appear. You ARE. They aren't tied in together except in assumption. Thoughts are paused - you ARE. Thoughts come - you ARE. Thoughts are absent - you ARE. Is that the evidence that you are the thinker? No - it's only pointing out that you ARE whether thoughts are present or not.
So "I am the thinker" is an assumption. There is no evidence that you are the thinker.
You ARE and you know it how? Because of thoughts? No. Because of the presence of breathing or heartbeat? No. Because of the presence of wiggling foot, torso, arms and hands? No.
You KNOW you ARE because of what? Because of the idea of a ME? No. That is also appearance - more thought.
You KNOW you ARE because of what? Why are you so certain that you exist?
Isn't it because you are HERE, no matter what the experience is? Isn't it because you are HERE always even as thoughts come and go, the body changes, the experiences change? Aren't even the hands, arms, torso, foot, breathing, heartbeat and thoughts experiences TO you?
Isn't there a pure subjectivity which doesn't change as all these experiences come up and go? Isn't THAT how you know you ARE? Isn't this pure subjectivity always there yet the source or center or "space" or capacity of knowing all these experiences, even the experiences attributed to this separate "someone"?
Doesn't the idea of "ME-seeing" appear in this already-present and unchanging subjectivity?
Isn't this pure formless but ever-present subjectivity what is really meant by "I"?
Hasn't "I" been tied or mixed up with objects? Aren't thoughts objects? Isn't heartbeat or breathing objective TO "I"?
Can you find "I"? Can you describe "I"? No. Yet "I" is undeniably there through every single experience that comes and goes, every single thought that passes, every breath that comes, every heartbeat - "I" is the immediacy and presence TO WHICH these objective experiences come.
Yet "I" is not another experience. "I" is the space of experiencing. "I" is the source of registering, "I" is the cognizing itself, "I" is the pure and ever-present knowing which has no objective nature.
"I" is the Self. And "I" is always known BECAUSE experiences come and go. "I" MUST be present for experiences to come and go. Therefore "I" or Self is ALWAYS known in all experiences. "I" or Self is the very necessity or condition or principle for any experience to come, even thoughts, the body, the idea of "ME as a separate person".
"I" is the "space" IN WHICH the experiences come - the unchanging condition or container for every experience. "I" is the undeniable principle WITHIN WHICH the "ME-thought" comes and goes. "I" is the knowing in which the ideas of "knower and known" come and go. "I" is the obvious capacity for thoughts of "other I's" to come. Other "I's" is more objective content.
"I" is the Self. YourSelf. And there is no other "I". "I" is THAT which never comes or goes.