"If one uses the concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply."http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... tself.html
To summarise Bhikku Thanissaro's main points:
1) When the Buddha is asked to take a position on the question of whether or not there is a self, he refuses to answer.
2) The passages which state there is no self covers all of describable reality.
3) Views that there is no self are ranked with views that there is a self as a "fetter of views", and both are best avoided.
4) The enlightened person sees a reality in which notions like self & no-self are redundant.
From this, it seems to me, that If you "dis-identify oneself from all phenomena" then you dis identify from any possible experience of "goodness within" or "Buddha mind". There is nothing you can point to, or talk about, as being "self" or "part of self".
If I start worrying whether I have "enough goodness" inside or "have I experienced Buddha mind?" then I worry that I will be just making more suffering for myself; I feel it would just lead me to more confusion. So the "Buddha's silence", and dis-identifying from all phenomena (including possible intimations of "goodness" and "Buddha mind"...) seems the best path for me, today