How does the pre-reflective consciousness affect eastern philosophies of mind/self?

I was reading over the SEP article for pre-reflective consciousness and the writer there says that the PRC is, more or less, sort of an open and closed case that has a great deal of support on both sides of the aisle and few, if any, detractors. It got me thinking about how the PRC would effect certain theories of mind popular in the east. I'm perhaps best thinking of Nagarjuna, and his thoughts on co-dependent origination, wherein the (please correct me if I'm wrong) the notions of the durable, lasting self and mind are constantly arising phenomenons dependent on a whole host of conditions, but untraceable to a hard and fast self. Dogen comes to mind as well here as well, but it has been a long time since I have studied him.

Nonetheless, I'm just wondering how to square these two ideas. PRC is about a durable mode of consciousness, always "running", that informs a private, "mineness" of experience; how would thinkers who reject a durable self explain this?

I'm also open to direction on this question as well, whatever papers or books you can recommend would be great.