No, it means one realises the luminous essence of consciousness.
But then the aggregate of consciousness, being vivid, present and
intimate as it is, is mistaken to be a true self. That is why other
religions teach a true atman and not anatta. When self-view is
destroyed, life goes on with much greater clarity, wisdom and
liberation. Action is seen to arise via dependent origination and
not an agent. There is no doer, but action is. No seer, but seeing
happens.
As what Ven Buddhaghosa said:
"Mere suffering is, not any sufferer is found
The deeds exist, but no performer of the deeds:
Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it, The path is, but no
wanderer is to be seen."
"Everywhere, in all the realms of existence, the noble disciple
sees only mental and corporeal phenomena kept going through the
concatenation of causes and effects.
No producer of the volitional act or kamma does he see apart
from the kamma, no recipient of the kamma-result apart from the
result. And he is well aware that wise men are using merely
conventional language, when, with regard to a kammical act, they
speak of a doer, or with regard to a kamma-result, they speak of
the recipient of the result.
No doer of the deeds is found,
No one who ever reaps their fruits;
Empty phenomena roll on: This only is the correct view. And
while the deeds and their results
Roll on and on, conditioned all, There is no first beginning
found,
Just as it is with seed and tree.
... No god, no Brahma, can be called
The maker of this wheel of life:
Empty phenomena roll on,
Dependent on conditions all."