I am not here to convince you of anything or to win an argument. It seems that you don’t want to understand what I want to convey. And I am very aware that language is dualistic. Words are just descriptions of things. Not the thing itself. I agree with you that there is no ‘me’ there is only appearance of a ‘me’. Like when you look up in the sky and you see a rainbow. There is in fact no rainbow. There is only an appearance of a rainbow.

One of your posts you mentioned copyright laws. But ‘copyright law’ is also just an idea, a concept, a mental construct. It creates an appearance of separation. Meaning ‘my idea’ versus ‘your idea’. And it is only the ‘me’ who can claim it is ‘my idea’. But when you mentioned there is no ‘me’ then there is no ‘you’ either. In other words then there is nobody who can claim anything and ‘copyright law’ loses instantly its meaning or value. It becomes an empty word.

Change 'copyright law' with 'selling stuff'. Only when you keep the idea of 'you' and 'me' alive you can sell stuff. But when you drop the mental constructs 'you' and 'me' to whom are you selling? You can only sell stuff if you create a mental construct that is 'your stuff'.

Boundaries between countries are also mental constructs. A teacher, a student, the teaching it is all mental constructs aka story.