(1) The trouble with conflating consciousness and self and imagining it to be an entity of the eternal, imperishable sort required of the Hindu Atman, is that both consciousness and self are clearly dependently arising phenomena. For them to have the qualities ascribed to Atman they would have to be self-established.
(2) If you look for consciousness you find only its objects because that’s what consciousness is - awareness, the appearance of a world, experience. It isn’t a thing in itself. Consciousness arises based on the coming together of necessary conditions and disappears when those conditions are absent. The same applies to the sense of self.
(3) Selfhood is part of the virtual model of reality of which consciousness is a necessary component, and like consciousness the first person perspective is not based on an entity. Self is not inherent in consciousness because experience is possible without any sense of self.
(4) It’s quite easy to disrupt the first person perspective, for instance through meditation, taking mind altering drugs, or applying strong magnetic fields to the brain. Certain kinds of mental trauma and disfunction may render sufferers devoid of a sense of self but they remain conscious. But even in normal life our sense of self waxes and wanes, often disappearing altogether during periods in which there is just awareness without any sense of there being a me who ‘has’ that awareness.
(5) Talking about the self is difficult because the word is so loaded with assumptions and preconceptions and we can mean different things by it. The innate subjective sense of self can disappear altogether during unconscious periods, as when under a general anaesthetic, but conventionally we would still think of the anaesthetised person as having a self, even if it is currently ‘unavailable’.
(6) Much of our view of self is confused and contradictory because there isn’t an underlying unitary and unchanging thing that is us. We have a sense of personal continuity that enables us to function but we recognise that we are also subject to constant change. Our understanding of self is a little like St Augustine’s understanding of time - if we’re not asked about it we feel sure we know what it is but when we are called upon to explain it we find that we don’t. That’s because we have the sense that there is a ‘me’ inside that is running the show but when we look for it we find no such thing. This can be unsettling and people understandably often look for some kind of solid ground to stand on, hence the need to locate something within us (such as consciousness) to which can be ascribed eternal selfhood. No doubt there will always be a market for eternal life and (for those so inclined) a basis for redemption, infinite personal growth or some other form of hero quest that confers meaning and purpose where otherwise there would be only emptiness.
I'll comment on what you say, not because I disagree, but to put the other point of view and perhaps keep the discussion going without it descending into the usual exchange of ad homina.
(1) The yogi would likely say, don't conflate, don't imagine. Atman is free of qualities. It is just consciousness or awareness pure and simple, but it does have levels.
(2) The yogi would likely say, don't look for consciousness otherwise your mind will jump to those conclusions. Inner stillness is required rather than inner turmoil.
(3) The yogi would likely say, a reasonable statement but the path is about transcending any virtual model of the self which the mind wants to create.
(4) The yogi would likely say, mind altering drugs and such like are just that, mind altering and should be avoided. Meditation, or dhyana as we like to call it, is a method used to transcend the mind and its embedded notion of self rather than alter it.
(5) The yogi would likely say, if 'talking about self is difficult' why do so many people frequently indulge in it? .... Perhaps because they are self obsessed and the times when that is not observably evident is when their consciousness does not appear to be observably present.
(6) The yogi would likely say, mental confusion is what needs to be transcended rather than added to and explanations only serve to confuse more, as does the desire to locate something imagined within us. A hero quest is another form of self worship and is better avoided. Whether the end result is one of emptiness or fullness, loss or fulfilment, might be questions that the mind wrestles with, but perhaps from a position of inner stillness all questions will be resolved.
