There is no self. 

That is just a disturbance between awareness and experience. 

Like disturbing the clarity of calm waters.

°•●●●•°••○○

What is disturbance?  Has this (my use of language to describe the universe) if not my awareness.  Is there reality-based awareness?  Therefore, all of nature is not normal per se.  For example: even this language in its arrangement of words, cannot - will not - eliminate disturbance of the self.  We think we know, but we in fact do not.  The grass I feel beneath my feet, or the smell of grass is not the scent alerting my senses.  The grass is an interference.  I am not aware of the grass. Which makes my awareness a lie.

- Marco

°•○○•○○●○○••

Aleksandr Vilinskiy said:

If we are listening through the listener then we aren’t really listening, we are listening to a disturbance.

Grass is a word, if there is a word between awareness and the thing in itself then we aren’t aware of the thing in itself as is rather we are aware of the word that maps the thing in itself. 

°•○●●○••○○

(My rebuttal) I appreciate your reply. However, I think you have (we) stated the same things. However, to the point related with the listener. I can only infer I am creating a disturbance = for the listener. Otherwise, language would collapse entirely. This acting as my analogy, between the word, the listener, and our memory. Memory is selective mind you. But I digress. The games we may see through language. Awareness has no part in. Therefore, if you still follow? The awareness between sense and memory can only be a three-dimensional model. (What is reality-based) Yes? This is my theory. My theory of language in between the void. The void = awareness. The silence = the listener. - Marco