Experience and the Apparent ‘I’

[Bruins8000]

Does all experience require the appearance of a localized experiencer/I/self? I know ultimately there’s none of this- I’m speaking about the relative nature of what we term experience. 
 

If so then why? Shouldn’t a prerequisite of a localized apparent self/center/I not be required by WHAT IS?

[Inception]

1 hour ago, Bruins8000 said:

Does all experience require the appearance of a localized experiencer/I/self? I know ultimately there’s none of this- I’m speaking about the relative nature of what we term experience. 

Ultimately as you say, Experience don't need to have the appearance of a self in order to be. However if Reality wants to have a relative experience, e.g. the illusion of eating an ice cream, it needs to create both the appearance of ice cream (other) and the appearance one eating the ice cream (self).

1 hour ago, Bruins8000 said:

If so then why? Shouldn’t a prerequisite of a localized apparent self/center/I not be required by WHAT IS?

Well it isn't as we just established, unless You want to have the illusion of something happening to someone. Illusion as we know it requires the appearance of a self. That's just how it is. It's always something happening relative to the appearance of someone. Otherwise it would be completely impersonal.