conventional self

[befriend]

do we say there is a self in conventional reality but there is no self in ultamite reality?

[daverupa]

We define precisely what Self is denied. There is such a thing as an empirical self, but it's anatta, anicca, dukkha. The Self denied in anatta is one which is permanent, self-willed, independent, and essentially sukkha. This is not to be found anywhere in the five khanda, and there is no experience that is not at least one of the five khanda. But the empirical self is a sankhara, and easily found. It is this empirical self which can lean and incline toward the Dhamma, or not.

[rowyourboat]

do we say there is a self in conventional reality but there is no self in ultamite reality?

Hi befriend,

Do you see a self outside of the five aggregates? If so, such a thing is considered just imagination. If you see a self within the aggregates - that requires closer inspection, through discussion, questioning, pondering and doing vipassana until you come to Right view.

With metta

Matheesha

[Oh.Wow]

Well, according to what the Buddha taught, there is no self. What you consider to be "you" is just a combination of several components that came together, and will eventually fall apart. When it comes to a "conventional self" the selfless nature of "you" is still present; that's not going to change, but "we" do live in a world where it is natural to distinguish from being to being, and object to object - it's OK.
-Wow