user11541: It is true that there is no permanent identity of self and there is no identity of self which doesn't result in suffering.
Nirvana is permanent , full of blessings, and is unchangeable.
We humans can reach to the state of Nirvana by following the Buddha and his Dhamma.
So my question is : Why can not we call Nirvana the true self of ours?
(As an example I can say that I am not form,feelings,perceptions,volition,consciousness but I am the permanent , pleasant and unchangeable state of Nirvana)

user-1: Dheeraj Verma,
It is described as nicca, unchangeable "stage" if reached, but since all Dhammas are anatta, it would be not unconditioned proper to regard it as such (atta), and the Buddha would have (like popular movements, Dhammakaya in Thailand for example and many individual teacher, doing laypeople a favor with such notion) easy more followers, since beings delight in "being".
Of cause one can call it "true"- Self, if one seeks sense or Self in it. But it would not hold. If understanding "real self" as senseless, meaningless, as like somehow "aṭṭa", than it will probably hold.
Consider the three meanings of aṭṭa carefully, high confussing or giving realese. Since one might see the base of atta and anatta, as a "game" of perceptions, stands.
Certain Brahmic-Attman- and certain Mohayanic-appoaches, are dangerous, had lead to bad thing in history, on it's account.
The Dhamma of the Buddha is not taught for certain Self-seeking, true self-purposes, but to get free from suffering. He rebuked a "rebelling" monk who said, "if you don't tell me if there is a Self or not, I will return to lower life", with asking himn "Did I ever told you that I will regard this matter, will ever teach such, as you ordained?"
(Careful read and proper attention was required to understand, for the case not, not grasp the message, after the finder, not looking at the moon)

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial purpose and other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange]

user7090: You got it somehow. True self or true nature of the mind is luminous, reflecting everything as it is. It is the buddha itself. Everyone has this true self and everyone can follow the Buddha's path to realize the true self.

user43: I'm not sure Nirvana is "pleasant" or "full of blessings". That sounds like Sat-Chit-Ananda. In Vedic tradition that said to be the nature of Brahman or Ishvara.
Some Mahayana traditions actually do what you say and call it our true nature or true self.
It doesn't matter what you call things as long as you know what is what. Labels are useful for their explanatory power, but once you have direct vision, you see that labels are only fingers pointing the direction. Dharma is a map or rather a guidebook. The jungle is not the book. 

11541: <p>It is true that there is no permanent identity of self and there is no identity of self which doesn't result in suffering.<br>
Nirvana is permanent , full of blessings, and is unchangeable.
We humans can reach to the state of Nirvana by following the Buddha and his Dhamma.</p>

<p>So my question is : Why can not we call Nirvana the true self of ours?</p>

<p>(As an example I can say that I am not form,feelings,perceptions,volition,consciousness but I am the permanent , pleasant and unchangeable state of Nirvana)</p>
 -1: <p>Dheeraj Verma,</p>

<p>It is described as <em>nicca</em>, unchangeable "stage" if reached, but since all <em>Dhammas</em> are <em>anatta</em>, it would be not unconditioned proper to regard it as such (atta), and the Buddha would have (like popular movements, <a href="http://sangham.net/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item93" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dhammakaya</a> in Thailand for example and many individual teacher, doing laypeople a favor with such notion) easy more followers, since beings delight in "being".</p>

<p>Of cause one can call it "true"- Self, if one seeks sense or Self in it. But it would not hold. If understanding "real self" as senseless, meaningless, as like somehow "<strong><a href="http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.0:1:327.pali" rel="nofollow noreferrer">aṭṭa</a></strong>", than it will probably hold.</p>

<p>Consider the three meanings of <a href="http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.0:1:326.pali" rel="nofollow noreferrer">aṭṭa</a> carefully, high confussing or giving realese. Since one might see the base of <em>atta</em> and <em>anatta</em>, as a "game" of perceptions, stands.</p>

<p>Certain Brahmic-Attman- and certain Mohayanic-appoaches, are dangerous, had lead to bad thing in history, on it's account.</p>

<p>The Dhamma of the Buddha is not taught for certain Self-seeking, true self-purposes, but to get free from suffering. He rebuked a "rebelling" monk who said, "if you don't tell me if there is a Self or not, I will return to lower life", with asking himn "Did I ever told you that I will regard this matter, will ever teach such, as you ordained?"</p>

<p><em>(Careful read and proper attention was required to understand, for the case not, not grasp the message, after the finder, not looking at the moon)</em></p>

<hr>

<p><em>[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial purpose and other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange]</em></p>
 7090: <p>You got it somehow. True self or true nature of the mind is luminous, reflecting everything as it is. It is the buddha itself. Everyone has this true self and everyone can follow the Buddha's path to realize the true self.</p>
 43: <p>I'm not sure Nirvana is "pleasant" or "full of blessings". That sounds like Sat-Chit-Ananda. In Vedic tradition that said to be the nature of Brahman or Ishvara.</p>

<p>Some Mahayana traditions actually do what you say and call it our true nature or true self.</p>

<p>It doesn't matter what you call things as long as you know what is what. Labels are useful for their explanatory power, but once you have direct vision, you see that labels are only fingers pointing the direction. Dharma is a map or rather a guidebook. The jungle is not the book. </p>
