SuttaCentral
I do not feel Jasudho that i provoke you to reveal your practice. I also do not provoke you to share your realisations or whatever.
I think you are just afraid to admit that also you do not experience that you really change when formations, such as thoughts, cease. Afraid because it does not match with theory that there is no stable sense of self, while every person feels there is.
Is your purpose here to win an argument? To my mind this reads as quite ungenerous. What is the purpose for you to so confidently yet ungenerously infer the motivation of another? Perhaps it is time for this thread to cease. 
I just want a honest conversation with Jasudha. I do not ask him to share his practice. It is so evil to ask for an honest answer to the question…Jasudho, do you really have no sense of a stable self? If thoughts cease, for example, do you experience that you have cease? Why cant we have a honest conversation about this? It is not like i am asking for some huge revelation about his personal practice…
Why can’t people not just admit that they have a very stable sense of self? We must we always rely on some theory that this is delusion and is a misperception etc etc? Lets first start with what we experience.
You know this how?
I suggest you take it up with the Buddha, as in MN22:
"…self and what belongs to a self are not acknowledged as a genuine fact. So, mendicants, you should truly see any kind of form [and the other aggregates] at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: all form—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’ “
This is not to say we don’t have a personality or psychological-functional self. As humans, we do and it’s important for navigating through life.
But even these are selfless processes which cease at final nibbāna without rebirth.
ach…We humans can apply logic, reasoning in such a way that one cannot establish the existence of a person, a tree, a car, a Tathagata as genuine fact…but at the same time one can still die by a falling tree and car 
and one can also hurt a Tathagata and be sent to hell like being brought there.
Still we believe it is very wise, deeply wise we cannot establish these things/persons as genuine facts.
sure…wise, very wise.
I believe…all our socalled wisdom is mere pretention. It just gives a boost to ego and self-esteem to think about oneself as being wise.
But i do not really believe that even the idea of control can be real. One small blood clot and we turn into …is freedom not just an illusion? I hope not.
Well… we have differing views on this point – but on many others we appear to agree. 
Indeed. Thanks for the respectful and friendly conversations. 
This I believe is using the language of conventional self to refer to the 5 aggregates (without clinging) which we conventionally call Sariputta.
As opposed to the perception arises in another group of 5 aggregates called so and so who is not Sariputta.
To avoid using such lengthy words, the usage of conventional language of “me” is applied. They do not misunderstand this to be any ultimate self.
Seeing conditionality, remembering that before they were enlightened, they too suffered due to delusion of self and seeing that other beings (5 aggregates) have this sense of self and due to that suffer. Knowing the way out of suffering, compassion can naturally arise to help those whom they have the conditions to help. Of course, there’s also the inclination, perhaps there’s not so much inclination to teach, so they maybe just be a hermit and be a field of merit for those who offered food to them.
Similar to a rape survivor who had gone through PTSD, overcame it, and is helping others with their trauma.
It’s good to know where one stands, but one can still walk towards wisdom wherever one is from. It’s normal from the perspective of wrong view to see what is happiness as suffering, as your quote on evil suggests. The Buddha did said that the noble ones sees things differently from normal people. It’s not to be expected that one can immediately get the dhamma, even intellectually. But just have the humility, willingness to learn, willingness to let go of one’s cherished views and to learn what the Buddha taught instead of imposing one’s own view onto the Dhamma, as a lens to read the dhamma to fit in one’s own pet theory.
Faith arises gradually, only by practising and seeing the results, more and more one can accept more of the dhamma and have confidence in the Buddha.
I feel we all do Bhante. There is no escape.
I know, there is always this claim, this assumption…how i see things is right…but i feel, it cannot be validated.
In the end we can only follow our own hearts. I am not gonna follow a teachers and teachings that has no other goal then erasing all lifestream from existence without anything remaining.
For me this is an absurd idea of the goal of Dhamma and for me this is also an absurd interpretation of the holy life and the cessation of suffering. I feel it is ultimate egocentrism. I cannot accept it, or take refuge in such a teacher and teaching.
There is not something like confidence in the Buddha, i feel, but only confidence in who we belief Buddha was. It is never not about ourselves. One day i saw this and it is true. The path is not about Buddha and Dhamma but about what we believe that is. We are only guided by our own ideas.
In the end all comes down to our own desires, needs, wishes, ideas, etc. and i also feel that is oke.