[baskentt]

In reality no self or not self indicate the same truth.
a) It has no self.
b) It has not self.

Definitely not. Although "self" is not a permanent intrinstic reality, "self", as a mere concept, exists.

The Buddha extensively taught how the notion of "self" arises, therefore it does exist (in unenlightened minds).

Human beings act under the delusion of "self", such as killing other human beings to protect their "self" or serve their "self interest".

If there was no self anywhere, the world would be 100% peaceful, without any suffering or conflict.

Also, if there was no self anywhere, beings would probably not look after their children & belongings, which they consider "theirs", "ours" or "mine".

To feel a self, we need all the 5 skhandhas. Only one skhandha is not enough to feel the self. How can a "self" be "felt" if you formerly said there is no self? Further, the phrasing here is inaccurate thus irrelevent.

Sure, for the mind to develop the view of "self" requires all five aggregates because the mind cannot exist without the body.

But Buddha was concerned with how "self" is concocted and only one aggregate concocts "self". That is why the Buddha taught the origin of self identity is craving leading to becoming. Craving & becoming are only one aggregate.

Although the mind depends on body and craving depends on feeling & perception, etc, only one aggregate concocts "self" belief. Similarly, to be free from "self" requires right view by only one aggregate. Thus, only one khandha creates "self", as the Buddha taught.

Craving cannot exist without the other aggregates. "Self" cannot exist without the play of all five aggregrates. But all five aggregates can exist without "self". All "self" can end via the right understanding of one aggregate.

Thus, ultimately, the sole cause of "selfing" is ignorance (avicca). Ignorance is the product of only one aggregate.

Also, the notion of "the self" is absurd. There is merely a temporary thought that cries out "me" (when under the power of defilement). There is no "the self". There is merely temporary becoming.

Without any of these skhandhas one can not feel the self. So it is by product for sure... No. Self is not something "felt". "Self" is constructed by thought formation.

Regards

[Buddha said:]

He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? 'I am' is a construing. 'I am this' is a construing. 'I shall be' is a construing. 'I shall not be' is a construing. Construing is a disease, construing is a cancer, construing is an arrow. By going beyond all construing, he is said to be a sage at peace.

Dhatu-vibhanga Sutta 'The origination of self-identification, the origination of self-identification:' it is said, lady. Which origination of self-identification is described by the Blessed One?

The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming: This, friend, is the origination of self-identification described by the Blessed One.

Culavedalla Sutta