In response to Michael Beloved's comments and queries....

Seeing what? Knowing what?It's hard to put in words.  There was seeing and knowing, but of a different nature.  I knew the absence of feelings.  It was more like knowing something truly through its absence.  Seeing is closely related.  I glimpsed the swirling of feelings and also felt it being suctioned away. Silent stillness was unveiled as feeling swirled out of sight.  It was all objectively subjective.  When I was situated as a point of seeing and knowing, there was nothing left to see.  If I had continued in the experience longer, I would speculate that I would have seen and known the arising of mental and bodily sensations/activity. 

And there is no hint as to the observer.  

Using Buddhist terminology, there was mindfulness accompanied by awareness. I would not go as far as to say there was an observer as the semantics regarding that tend to create confusion. 

The teacher mentioned what he termed as impermanent features, which Buddhism is known to condemn. In contrast what is listed as permanent, if anything is that?In Buddhism, impermanence is not condemned. It is acknowledged as one of the three characteristics of the material aggregates which comprise our existence in samsara, namely:

• form
• feeling
• perception
• mental formations
• consciousness

The other characteristics are unsatisfactoriness (stressfulness/suffering)) and insubstantiality (not self).  Nibbana is that state which does not feature change, stress or an enduring self/soul.  

I did lose track of a sense of identity, and the point of seeing and knowing  seemed to lack any type of personality.  It seemed to be a bare mental function.   

There is still work to do but the practice continues to lead.