What you are doing is attempting to view life from inside the notion of identification, as if identification is an event which induces a characteristic anamorphosis. But how could you discover this from the inside without the idea of how it looks from the outside? You need to keep digging further into this idea of identification. Is it necessarily a matter of some transcendent and independent self which has become enmired in physical reality as in a realm enclosed by time and space, a sort of imprisonment? This is a current of thought with a long history, versions of the fall, and it sets one aspect of the the totality of experience against another, the soul against the body, the higher against the lower, the primary against the secondary, the pure against the virtual. This kind of thinking is an intellectual temptation, itself a kind of fall, fighting dualism with more dualism. Whatever identification is however, the context is not dual, so it is not to be understood according to a logic of cause and effect. But then nothing can be understood non-dually, understanding falls back and spins its gears, and many tedious words and phrases are uttered such as 'arises' and 'functioning'. The quest to shed light on the nature of awakened mind is already an enactment of unawakedness, just as much as is the refraining from doing so.