Vacchagotta asked the Blessed One: “Now then, Venerable Gotama, is there a self?”
When this was said, the Blessed One was silent.
“Then is there no self?”
A second time, the Blessed One was silent.
Then Vacchagotta the wanderer got up from his seat and left.
Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, “Why, lord, did the Blessed One not answer?”
“Ananda, if I were to answer that there is a self, that would be eternalism. If I were to answer that there is no self, that would be annihilationism. If I were to answer that there is a self, would that be in keeping with the arising of knowledge that all phenomena are not-self?”
“No, lord.”
”And if I were to answer that there is no self, the bewildered Vacchagotta would become even more bewildered: asking ‘Does the self I used to have now not exist?”’
(SN 44.10, liberally abridged)
As we can see, "no-self" is a mis-translation. Buddha specifically refused to negate the self.
So what is the self? Well, Buddha refused to answer that question too. Buddha did not affirm or negate the self.--So what is the "self"?