[huerta]

I think this has to do more with what door one comes in through to the dharma (dhamma) than anything else. I always heard the terms "ultimate reality" and "non-dual" used, so it is very natural for me to use these terms when referring to "no such thing as "me" and "mine".

When somebody says there is "no such thing as "me" and "mine", then of course, this comes as a surprise to most people, who are likely to point to themselves and say, "well, here I am". So naturally the question arises, "if you claim there is "no such thing as "me" and "mine" then why is that? How can that be true? On what basis is this true?"

From this, an analytical approach reveals that whatever can be thought of as "me" and "mine" is merely a series of temporary events involving various things (sources of physical input, as in the case of material objects, and mental input as in the case of thoughts) and those things are also essentially temporary events involving other things, and so on, and so on infinitely.

"Ultimately", meaning where it is impossible to go any further, or where distinctions become moot, where we see that all conditions arise interdependently. There is no self because there is no other and vice versa. There is no "me" and "mine" means there is nothing intrinsically arising that can be found to be "me" and "mine" .

For me, this is not complicated. But perhaps, I don't know, maybe for you somebody else it conjures up all sorts of metaphysical meanings.