You raise some interesting questions, to which I've given a lot of thought.

Where do you stand on the viewpoint that there is a (sort of) permanent self which is perceiving the amalgamation of sensory impressions, thoughts, feelings, memories, and consciousness. Do we not need such a permanent self in the first place in order to make these observations? Why is it assumed that the self is the end product of these transient things, and not the necessary observer? Can Buddhism prove in any way what it says, or is all this merely an assumption?

The Western traditions might call this permanent observer the incarnated soul.