From the Sabbasava Sutta, "Am I, do I exist or do I not? What will I be in the future? Where will I be in the future?" I can't remember all of it but it has a lot to do with me and mine, creating ideals about "I have a self, I have no self, from this self I perceive self, from those self's I perceive no self". It's talking about something we cannot know, whether there is a self or not self. So what we normally encourage people to do, in order to not get enmeshed in all these views about what we ultimately are, is to investigate into what we are not because we are normally attached to things that we are not. We normally consider ourselves to be the thoughts, the body, all the feelings, all the perceptions, all the mental formations. So part of letting go of the speculation on what we cannot ultimately know, or who and what we are. We investigate into what we are terribly attached to, in order to let go of attachment to these things. Then we may begin to understand by experience, by letting go of attachment to what we are not, what we truly are.
I give the analogy of a person who goes to the market place and asks the fruit seller for some apples and the fruit seller shows them some mandarins. So we say, "Well, that's not apples", but that's not saying that the mandarins don't exist. It just means that a mandarin is not an apple. Oftentimes people get attached to views about what they ultimately are, especially in the Buddhist world where people are philosophizing about the ultimate reality. There are a lot of views and opinions in Buddhism, like, does the Buddha exist after death or not, is the world eternal or non-eternal etc. However when the Buddha was asked about these things, he usually said, "I give no opinion on that". When he was asked why he gave no opinion, he said, "Because it doesn't lead to profit, to the purification of the mind". He also said "I give an opinion about Dukkha, the cause of Dukkha and the ending of it".
So rather than getting lost in philosophizing about things that we do not know, or believing them to be true, just because others believe in them and/or they sound good, we can try to let go of this philosophizing and investigate into what we can really know.
Looking into phenomena, we see that they are impermanent, unsatisfactory and because they are impermanent, they can't be said to be mine. So by letting go of attachment to what we normally think we are, we may come to understand what we truly are, whatever that is. That helps us open to the phrase that I normally say, "not knowing", leaving ourselves open for understanding. Experiential understanding to arise rather than think we know everything already, about the ultimate reality or ultimate views about ourselves and the world.
So that's enmeshed in views, the jungle of views, the wilderness of views, the scuttling in views, the agitation of views, the fetters of views.