I contemplated the Buddha's utterance to Rahula in MN62:
Please forgive me, because I'm a bit at loss for words to describe this adequately.Rahula, any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near:
every form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'"
"Just form, O Blessed One? Just form, O One Well-gone?"
"Form, Rahula, & feeling & perception & fabrications & consciousness
Seeing any of the aggregates as 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' directly leads to the realization that in the same way any of the aggregates is to be seen as "This is not yours. This is not your self. This is not what you are.".
If one assumes the aggregates to be "not mine, not my self, not what I am' but is still assuming any of them to possibly be "yours, your self or what you are" then he or she is still thinking in terms of appropriation. He or she then still regards certain things as self and assumes "a being".
This would lead to the realisation that there is in fact only one set of each of the different aggregates, one accumulation of forms, one accumulation of feelings, one accumulation of perception and so on. Not many, not your aggregates, my aggregates, other or noone's aggregates.
In day to day experience it seems as though as there are "my" aggregates (one particular set of aggregates that constitute "my being") and then there are the aggregates "of others". From there I usued to assume for example that "my feelings" are somehow disconnected from the "feelings of others" (the same applies for any of the aggregates), but actually what I considered "my feelings" "lies" on the very same heap of feelings like all the other feelings I considered "belonging to others" (same applies for any of the aggregates again).
This arbitrary separation (mine/yours) not only creates the notion of "I am this" but also "this is yours", which actually is nothing but a "this is mine" in disguise of "being another", but still is wrong appropriation.
Experience as a whole starts to change from the core with glimpses based on that perspective, because personality-view or in other words, the point of view of a person, starts to disintegrate.
The common experience of "being someone in the wold experiencing myself, others and other things" transforms into a vague experience of different connected conglomerations that interact in dependece to each other.
The relative meanings of "yours", "mine" or "a person" and "a being" remain, because the knowledge what these terms are supposed to signify remains, but with seeing the underlying "realities", which are packed together in desperate desire, the believe of indipendence of the implication those terms try to signify, which is the believe in a self, gradually looses its plausibility.
I hope this post can convey the message I try to share.
Thoughts?
best wishes, acinteyyo