This is a third attempt at formulating a question. This question and this question have been asked, but not formulated in a way that conveyed the question. So now, in a third attempt, the formulation shall be: **what is volition?** **EDIT:** The answers still do satisfy the question in the mind, although they are answers to the question on 'paper'. Apologies for the lack of skill in phrasing the question. Let us see if the following clears up what is being asked: *Imagine life as a series of moments; one moment after another in a line infinitely long. Imagine that there is a decision that must be made, to chose A or B, both equally likely to be chosen (for whatever reason, such as lack of understanding which is the right choice). This decision is present only in a single moment within the infinite series of moments. __What is that single moment of choice? What is that single moment made of, what substance, what phenomena? Who/What is doing the choosing? Why A over B, or B over A, if both are equally likely?__*

In this page's explanation of the six realms of existence the human realm is presented as below, it reads a bit off. Is it not possible, for example in the heavenly realm, to make a good choice and aim for liberation? aren't their Suttas that indicate the existence of liberated beings or of beings that are greatly cultivated and working their way for final realize in the heavenly realm? > Human Realm > > The human realm is the only one in which one’s choices (good or bad) > affect one’s future—in all the others, one is either being rewarded or > punished for one’s actions as a human being. One’s present human > condition (e.g., wealth, social status, and physical and psychological > qualities) is based on one’s past karma, but one’s present choices > also determine one’s future (in this life, or a future life). **As > conscious moral agents, human beings have agency that the beings in > other realms do not**; this clearly underscores the importance of moral > action and spiritual development. > > ...

In this article, **the writer of the article** claims, purports or alleges that Bhikkhu Thanissaro and Bhikkhu Bodhi state that the Buddha NEVER said that there was no self. The Buddha NEVER said that there is no soul. The views and opinions expressed in this article are contrary to many response given in this platform, for example response given for one of the most frequently vised question here is described as fatalism and NOT Buddhism. The question is, is the view presented widely accepted view in Buddhism or is it a new development?

In Buddha's teachings, all mind-related entities are "not-self" i.e.: - uncontrollable (opposite of controllable = when I want it I can make it happen, I can turn it on and off as I desire) - unmanageable (opposite of manageable = I can make it details how it happen and how it behave) - not possess-able (opposite of possess-able = I own it, it is with me all the time, I can keep it, I can store it in somewhere I want it to be at) - temporary (opposite of permanent/eternal/long-lasting/with one's whole life). This not-self attribute also applied to _will_ or/and _volition_. I found sexual desire has it own physical limitation. It is difficult for me to keep sexual desire and sexual pleasure(effect of sexual desire) to last a single day, two days, three days, four days,... up to seven days (even if I use medical supplementary to keep my will/volition/desire). And another thing I found is sexual desire is not primitive will of man, it usually comes around/after puberty, sexual education, physical development in teenage ages. So if I had never learnt what sexual intercourse is (or I am autism child who does not have any chance to learn/understand sexual education in my whole life) I doubt there will be sexual desire/will happen in my mind. So I was looking for more self-ness will/volition or desire and I found another will/desire, Gastronomic. This may seem primitive to me since I had breastfeed to bottle-feed since I was born. But even without any physical limitation imposted (I haven't had any food so many hours), sometimes I lost my appetite. I found gastronomic will is also uncontrollable and unmanageable too here. It seems like chemical, environmental and other factors governed gastronomic will/desire. It may seem primitive but I have doubt that I can find self-ness in here. And I searched for more will/desire which can be self and found a weak will of survival. Everyone want to survive so as mine will and it seem primitive, closer to self to me. (You can tell there are some people who end their life by taking poison to death, yes but I am not looking for universal self, I am just looking for self to me, self to my life, self to individual being.) But on careful consideration, sometimes I crossed the street and nearly to die hitting by a car. If the idea of will to survive is controllable, manageable I can avoid those events by power of will. There should not be other things or will or desire to overcome one will or desire. So here is my question, is there any will/volition/desire that is controllable, manageable, self (at least for a person whole life if we cannot find eternal, indefinite period of time). If you have personal experience about it, I am glad to hear if it exists. If it is written in somewhere I like to get a reference.

For example, the body has the choice to walk on path A or B. Before the body starts walking, there must be thoughts of path A and B. There must also be a (mental?) decision/choice made to walk on one path or the other. What is it that allows to make choices? I have always been at loss to understand what that untouchable phenomenon is. What is it that let's me choose at all? I have trouble phrasing the question. So I will give another example. When someone offers me a marijuana joint, there are the options to accept or decline. Both feel just as far, just as easy to make. Sometimes I accept, sometimes reject. What phenomenon chooses? I've never been able to 'touch' that phenomenon directly. This question about changing habits is the same question as this one. EDIT: In another attempt to convey what is being asked (my apologies), there is now another question (this one with a bounty) https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/18738/what-is-volition

You may get to see someone or an animal is sick and suffering in pain. You may be able to give that person or animal a medicine that helps relieve the pain somewhat. But sometimes there’s so much pain that it goes beyond the reach of any morphine, any opium, any painkiller at all. At such moments what would be your thoughts? Being well informed of the Dhamma, you know in the back of your mind that it is our responsibility for what we are. We were the ones who chose to be born here. It was because of our desires and our cravings that we took birth as human beings or animals for that matter. When you’re responsible for your birth, then you also have to be responsible for how you handle your aging, illness, and death. They all come as part of the same package. So how could you be of help to self and the other in such a situation?

Sometimes we do thing intentionally sometimes unintentionally. But is there such thing such as unconscious intention in Buddhism (Theravada)?

This question is about a very specific situation, but there might hopefully be a more general answer. We've had conflicts at work, to the extent that we had to get a psychologist help us! There are many reasons for the conflicts, but for me the problem is that many of my co-workers are kind of lazy, not very competent and spend their time not doing their job but knitting, chit-chatting, complaining about everything etc. This situation leads to conflict and I have spent too much time being annoyed and tried to change the situation. Still, I sometimes think negative thoughts about these people. When I catch myself thinking negative ("lazy, incompetent people") I try to take a look at myself and see what causes the thoughts and what I really am thinking. This strategy also helps me to not take it out on them. But the question is, does the thoughts in themselves create bad karma?

Intention that is good will have a good result and bring happiness, bad intention will have a bad result and suffering as a result. But many things have been experienced in life, one thing can be experienced many times in different situation, condition and time. These all together with one's habit will give rise to different kind of intentions only for one action. The first intention will be followed by the second or maybe the third. Normally intention that first comes up is closely related to someone character/behavior, realizing this he corrects his mistake. Along with this correction, there will be another intention over two previous intentions. In that case, is one intention better than the other?