What you wrote in your last post seems very much in alignment with where I am at with this.
Then that is pretty much 'it' :-)
I was hit first of all with the absolute simplicity of there being no Self and therefore it could not be causing anything. I was able to see the obviousness of what you were pointing to all along.
If it is clear that the separate self is dependant on thought, then that is enough.
Without thoughts appearing suggesting the existence (and influence, choice and control) of something separate then it can clearly be seen to be 'empty'.
However, I could also see that every thing else is just as empty - nothing is more real than the illusory self.
Yes. You are very wise.
It is a common practise in order to see through the 'illusion of the separate self', that we compare the self, 'I', body-mind or person with something else that is considered to be inherently 'real' as a direct comparison . . . this is purely a temporary measure to break the hold of the mind on the belief in an inherent self. Of course as you rightly suggest, this may lead to a new belief that the separate self is an illusion (empty) but other things have inherent existence (not empty).
I tend to deal with 'other things' later on, but in your case you'd already made the connection.
I am not sure if I am adequately explaining myself.
You explain yourself perfectly.
I am though again left with the question, is this is it? How do I know I am done here?
Well . . . 'You know you are done when you realise there is no 'you to be done' (I mean inherent self).
You may be left with a feeling 'is that it'? Well, yes . . . it really is that simple. No bells or whistles, no ascending on a cloud to heaven, no 67 virgins :-)
But this does not dismiss 'I' as a conventional self, and in conventional terms there will always be other things to examine. The buddah was wise, and could see that breaking the first fetter did not break any of the other ones.
(Although in my opinion, breaking the first one automatically breaks the second one 'doubt and uncertainty about the teachings' - It may be that many of the sutras now have more meaning for you - that you can understand them more clearly and have an easier grasp of what is being pointed to.
There is more to be contemplated. For example 'other people' . . . if there is no inherent choice or control 'here' then is there inherent choice or control 'there'. Did my guide Xain have any choice or control in anything that he wrote as a reply to me?
Examine the fifth fetter - If there is no inherent choice or control for 'others' then what is 'ill will' based on?
If you are interested in joining LU and chatting with other people who have been guided and 'gone through the gate', I will need you to answer the six questions which are part of the process.
You don't have to though - It's your call. But if it interests you, then that is possible.
Xain ♥