Non-possession

The view that no one or anything possesses anything.

The concept directly references non-stealing.

Stealing is possible under this world view. Not everyone in the world holds the non-possession view, they have the right to define their boundaries. The breach of these defined' boundaries constitutes theft. Logically, the existence of theft would appear to be invalid If there are no rules as to how one can and cannot define boundaries. Without the ability to define a boundary, there is no way to discern where one entity begins and the other ends, therefore, not possible to define possession. Without possession, there can be no theft. Non-possession does not deny the existence of the concept of possession.

If some entity has the ability to lay claim to any object without contest, theft is still possible. One can steal from this entity if one is not part of this entity. Also, that the entity is empowered to lay claim necessitates that there are objects which the entity can lay claim upon, therefore, objects which this entity does not possess. Boundaries may exist between objects before the entity lays claim to them, (that is, if it intends to lay claim upon them.) Breach of these boundaries constitute theft. The entity empowered to lay claim upon any object can also approach a grey area between possession and theft if its possession of an object is not clearly defined, that is, if this entity has doubts as to whether it possesses the object in question.