Dependent Origination in terms of conventional truth or teaching (Vohara Desana) and Ultimate truth or teaching (Paramattha Desana)? It appears many of my doubts and questions about Buddhism is the result of not being able to marry the teaching of conventional truth and the ultimate truth. For instance, when we take Jati in Dependent Origination, in terms of Vohara Desana it applies to the physical rebirth of a person. However, in the ultimate sense, there is no person then who is re-born? Ultimate sense what is re-born is the attachment, aversion, and ignorance.
We can apply this duality to all 12 links of DO.
Actually, this dilemma is very similar to the problem of scientists who are trying to understand the relation between the universe and the atoms.

Does Dependent Origination cover both conventional teaching and Ultimate teaching?
The Buddha did not teach Dependent Origination has a "conventional truth". Dependent Origination, as taught by the Buddha, only explains the arising of the ideas of "beings" ("satta") which cause the arising of suffering. 


  In the course of the future there will be monks who
  won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep,
  deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are
  being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing
  them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But
  they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works
  of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of
  outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and
  set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as
  worth grasping &amp; mastering. In this way the disappearance of the
  discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their
  meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.