# Meditation insights as phase shifts in your self-model

Introduction
============

In his exploration of ["Intuitive self-models" and PNSE (Persistent Non-Symbolic Experience)](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/GvJe6WQ3jbynyhjxm/intuitive-self-models-6-awakening-enlightenment-pnse), Steven Byrnes offers valuable insights into how meditation affects our sense of self. While I agree with his core framework, I believe we can push this analysis further by examining how meditation fundamentally changes our model of personal boundaries and agency.

I propose that what we call "awakening" or "enlightenment" can be understood through the lens of predictive processing and information boundaries. Specifically, I suggest that meditation systematically alters our generative model of "self" - not just by removing the homunculus as Byrnes suggests, but by transforming how we perceive the [<<Boundary>>](https://www.lesswrong.com/s/LWJsgNYE8wzv49yEc)  between self and world.

To build this case, we need to start with a precise understanding of boundaries and agency. When we talk about "self," we're really talking about what we believe we have causal control over - our sphere of influence in the world. This boundary isn't fixed; it expands and contracts based on our experiences and beliefs.

In technical terms, we can model this using active inference and Markov blankets (different from the critch definition) - mathematical tools that help us understand how systems maintain separation from their environment while remaining causally connected. But rather than dive into the mathematics, let me offer a simple example that captures the essence of how these boundaries work in practice

Example:
========

![](https://res.cloudinary.com/lesswrong-2-0/image/upload/f_auto,q_auto/v1/mirroredImages/714f4b3598a236e8b4b701bbb6e7ed256760873fccfa6ac65476228961fa1afc/ljgbcgnbkwi4dy5cxmxa)

Boundary around a human

The example that I like to give for what the effects of self-modelling through this frame is what happens with a water bottle, before and after you buy it. What is it that makes a water bottle yours or part of your extended boundary?

### 1\. The water bottle is in the store:

![](https://res.cloudinary.com/lesswrong-2-0/image/upload/f_auto,q_auto/v1/mirroredImages/4b23d495d54192d68b55a26fb13206d879e443d50910b899975305e80ab78ff3/hxurddzkxeqlsrvfi3ak)

You haven’t bought the water bottle and so it is just standing on that shelf. Someone else might come and pick it up, so if you have no plans of buying it, you have no causal control over the water bottle and so you can’t plan with it in mind and so it isn’t “your” water bottle.

### 2\. You’ve bought the water bottle:

You’ve bought the water bottle and taken it home. It is now mainly affected by what variables your existing “self” does to it and so it extends under your control. It is now therefore an extended part of you.

![](https://res.cloudinary.com/lesswrong-2-0/image/upload/f_auto,q_auto/v1/mirroredImages/72f1e5220d850b7deee4834392ff988d8ac2254cfc95d438bfe847a8b1d0e559/isf6zyhixe9ro71ppbjx)

The core question for your generative model is: “**Is this under my causal control as defined by my existing boundaries?**”

Your sampling is based on your current generative model
-------------------------------------------------------

Our mental model of our boundaries shapes how we interpret everything we experience. This goes deeper than simple perception - it fundamentally alters what information we notice and how we process it. Let me illustrate with a concrete example:

Imagine two people, both spending an afternoon reading instead of working. The first person holds a mental model of themselves as "someone who struggles with depression." Through this lens, the afternoon of reading becomes evidence that confirms their depressive identity - another example of "failing" to be productive. Their boundary of self includes "being depressed" as a core attribute, so they unconsciously filter their experiences to reinforce this view.

The second person sees themselves as "someone who values creative recharge." The exact same afternoon of reading gets interpreted completely differently - as intentional downtime that supports their creative process. Their boundary of self includes "needing space for creativity," so they notice and emphasize aspects of the experience that align with this view.

This pattern runs remarkably deep. As one of my meditation teachers puts it: "Your attitude changes the circumstances." In more technical terms, your perceived boundary of self acts as a filter that determines not just how you interpret information, but what information you're capable of receiving in the first place. Your model of self creates a self-reinforcing loop - you notice what fits your model, which strengthens that model, which further shapes what you notice.

What does meditation do?
------------------------

Meditation is then a way of loosening your generative priors over what your self is. It is pointing at places where your generative model of yourself breaks down because it is simply impossible to hold that generative model.

It is pointing out that you cannot be what you think you are. It does this through making the instrument that you look at yourself through better at perceiving information. It also does this through “pointing out” instructions that point towards places where your generative model breaks down.

In this process you get so called insights. Fundamental shifts in your self-perceived boundary so profound that they change the information that you get from the world.

These would be phase shifts in the generative model. When you’ve had enough evidence that something is true, it also changes the fundamental model of the self and so you see the world differently. You sample differently and so it is easier to see an expanded self.

Step by step, your existing models break down and you start to realise that you don’t know what you are. A metaphorical explanation is that your boundary grows bigger and bigger until finally you just are the present moment without any preconceived notions of time, space nor cause and effect.

### *An example of a pointing out instruction:*

For all models are “empty” of inherent meaning. No system can prove itself and so no system can be true. 

Even the thought that the system can’t be true is empty for that can’t be true in itself.

There’s no ground, it is all an infinite regress, there are no axioms, no base reality.

*You just are, a point of awareness, coextensive with time and space, deathless.*

![](https://res.cloudinary.com/lesswrong-2-0/image/upload/f_auto,q_auto/v1/mirroredImages/5b092dcdfa7b2b7b5c77eeca1e12c085ecab0b32f41f6b1c40fc2b4fe559fab6/ogazftspev9skahczxst)