Here's some things you might find helpful:

There is no Tathagata inside, outside, as, without or in any one of
the aggregates:

"How do you construe this, Anuradha: Do you regard the Tathagata as
being in form?... Elsewhere than form?... In feeling?... Elsewhere
than feeling?... In perception?... Elsewhere than perception?... In
fabrications?... Elsewhere than fabrications?... In consciousness?...
Elsewhere than consciousness?"
"No, lord."
"How do you construe this: Do you regard the Tathagata as form-
feeling-perception-fabrications-consciousness?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without
feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without
consciousness?"
"No, lord." - SN XXII.86
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-086.html

Notice that when asked if the Tathagata was "elsewhere" than the
aggregates, Buddha accepted the answer "No." Similarly with question
of whether the Tathagata was the aggregates themselves, or something
without the aggregates. To each of these it was replied "No".

It may be objected that the text in question refers to the Tathagata
only in this life, but if you read the beginning of the Sutta it is
clear that the question is about the Ultimate Nature of the
Tathagata - i.e. whether he exists or not after death. Our Lord
Buddha asks a series of questions about the present whereabouts of
the Tathagata in terms of the aggregates, and, in summation, says:

"And so, Anuradha -- when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth
or reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to
declare, 'Friends, the Tathagata -- the supreme man, the superlative
man, attainer of the superlative attainment -- being described, is
described otherwise than with these four positions: The Tathagata
exists after death, does not exist after death, both does & does not
exist after death, neither exists nor does not exist after death'?"

The Tathagata cannot be found as a truth or reality - here or beyond.

---

Further, does it follow that Buddha would proclaim a True Self,
though refuse to say that it is the same or different than the body
(the rupakhandha)?

"Is the soul the same as the body?"
"That, Poññhapàda, is a matter on which I have expressed no opinion."
"Is the soul one thing, and the body another?"
"That, Poññhapàda, is a matter on which I have expressed no opinion."
- the Potthapada Sutta of the Digha Nikaya (Rhys Davis tr.)

It would be the same if there was a man who asked if an apple was,
indeed, different than a snail and the man whom he asked were to
reply "That, my good man, is a matter on which I have expressed no
opinion."
Upon hearing that, the man asking about the apple & snail would be
in the right to think the other man was a loony.
In the same way, if Buddha had taught a Self but refused to even
pay people the common courtesy of saying it was different than the
body - he would be somewhat of a loony. And he would be even more
loony if he told people "Yes, I don't proclaim that the body is the
same or different than the soul, but the body is different than the
soul."
But the Buddha was not a loony and the plain meaning is wonderfully
clear & self-evident: any view of self is a wrong view, whether with
the body or outside the body.
Hence, no Tathagata elsewhere than the Khandhas, no Tathagata
inside the Khandhas, no Tathagata without the Khandhas, no Tathagata
as the Khandhas, etc.
There simply is no Tathagata as a truth or reality.

I have only quoted these 2 Suttas for brevity. There are many, many
more repeating the exact same things and you will no doubt encounter
them sooner or later in your Sutta studies.

A man once came to a well-known message board and proposed 21
Illogics inherent in the teaching of Anatta. I replied to each of
these - save for one - with Sutta and he never did reply. I have used
Thanissaro's translations as they are the most numerous & available
on the net. All translations are Thanissaro's unless otherwise
stated. I present them here for your perusal.

---


1. Illogical: SN book 4 "stands on the Other-Shore in emancipation",
but there is nobody standing there.
Refutation: The ‘other shore' or ‘end of suffering' is precisely =
where
there is nobody standing.

"Then, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the
seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the
heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to
the cognized, only the cognized. That is how your should train
yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the
seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in
reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the
cognized, then, Bahiya, there is no you in terms of that. When there
is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no
you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This,
just this, is the end of stress." - Udana I.10 Bahiya Sutta

2. Illogical: "bliss of emancipation", but nobody who undergoes this
bliss.
Refutation: The "bliss of emancipation" is the khandha of feeling.

"Whatever feeling is past, future, or present; internal or external;
blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: that is called the
aggregate of feeling." - Samyutta Nikaya XXII.48 - Khandha Sutta

Unwise attention bring about the idea of someone undergoing feeling:

"He assumes feeling to be the self, or the self as possessing feeling,
or feeling as in the self, or the self as in feeling. He is seized
with the idea that 'I am feeling' or 'Feeling is mine.' As he is
seized with these ideas, his feeling changes & alters, and he falls
into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change &
alteration." - Samyutta Nikaya XXII.1 - Nakulapita Sutta

Liberation is by getting rid of this thought:

"Now, Ananda, in as far as a monk does not assume feeling to be the
self, nor the self as oblivious, nor that 'My self feels, in that my
self is subject to feeling,' then, not assuming in this way, he is not
sustained by anything (does not cling to anything) in the world.
Unsustained, he is not agitated. Unagitated, he is totally unbound
right within. He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life
fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'" -
Digha Nikaya 15: Maha-nidana Sutta

3. Illogical: crossing the shore, but no-self is crossed.
Refutation: see Illogic no. 1

4. Illogical: There is clinging (tan.ha) but nothing that is clinging
(self).
Refutation: There is only clinging present in the five khandhas.

"And what are the five clinging-aggregates?
"Whatever form -- past, future, or present; internal or external;
blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near -- is clingable,
offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: that
is called form as a clinging-aggregate.
"Whatever feeling -- past, future, or present; internal or external;
blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near -- is clingable,
offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: that
is called feeling as a clinging-aggregate.
"Whatever perception -- past, future, or present; internal or
external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near -- is
clingable, offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental
fermentation: that is called perception as a clinging-aggregate.
"Whatever (mental) fabrications -- past, future, or present; internal
or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near -- are
clingable, offer sustenance, and are accompanied with mental
fermentation: those are called fabrications as a clinging-aggregate.
"Whatever consciousness -- past, future, or present; internal or
external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near -- is
clingable, offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental
fermentation: that is called consciousness as a clinging-aggregate.
"These are called the five clinging-aggregates." Samyutta Nikaya
XXII.48 -Khandha Sutta

The Blessed One said, "And what, monks, are clingable phenomena? What
is clinging?
"Form is a clingable phenomenon. Any desire or passion related to it,
is clinging related to it.
"Feeling is a clingable phenomenon. Any desire or passion related to
it, is clinging related to it.
"Perception is a clingable phenomenon. Any desire or passion related
to it, is clinging related to it.
"Fabrications are clingable phenomena. Any desire or passion related
to them, is clinging related to them.
"Consciousness is a clingable phenomenon. Any desire or passion
related to it, is clinging related to it.
"These are called clingable phenomena. This is clinging." Samyutta
Nikaya XXII.121 -Upadana Sutta

Clinging arises due to Paticca-samuppada:

"From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From
fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From
consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From
name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From
the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From
contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a
requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite
condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a
requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite
condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging
& death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into
play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress &
suffering." - Samyutta Nikaya XII.15 - Kaccayanagotta Sutta

Paticca-samuppada is not-self:

Dwelling at Savatthi... Then a certain brahman went to the Blessed One
and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an
exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he
was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "What now, Master
Gotama: Is the one who acts the same one who experiences [the results
of the act]?"
[The Buddha:] "[To say,] 'The one who acts is the same one who
experiences,' is one extreme."
[The brahman:] "Then, Master Gotama, is the one who acts someone other
than the one who experiences?"
[The Buddha:] "[To say,] 'The one who acts is someone other than the
one who experiences,' is the second extreme. Avoiding both of these
extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma by means of the middle:
From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From
fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From
consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From
name-&-form as a
requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media
as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite
condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes
craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes
clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition
comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth.
From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow,
lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the
origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.
"Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance
comes the cessation of fabrications. From the cessation of
fabrications comes the cessation of consciousness. From the cessation
of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form. From the
cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of the six sense media.
From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of
contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling.
From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the
cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From
the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming.
From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the
cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain,
distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire
mass of stress & suffering." - Samyutta Nikaya XII.46 - Annatra Sutta

5. Illogical: There is a path but nothing that reaps its attainment.
Refutation: see Samyutta Nika XII.46 above.

6. Illogical: There is religion but no fruit of following it
(selflessness).
Refutation: see Samyutta Nika XII.46 above.

7. Illogical: There is a Buddha, but he is only composed up of what is
evil by nature (Khandhas).
Refutation: "How do you construe this, Anuradha: Do you regard form as
the Tathagata?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard feeling as the Tathagata?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard perception as the Tathagata?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard fabrications as the Tathagata?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard consciousness as the Tathagata?"
"No, lord."
"How do you construe this, Anuradha: Do you regard the Tathagata as
being in form?... Elsewhere than form?... In feeling?... Elsewhere
than feeling?... In perception?... Elsewhere than perception?... In
fabrications?... Elsewhere than fabrications?... In consciousness?...
Elsewhere than consciousness?"
"No, lord."
"How do you construe this: Do you regard the Tathagata as
form-feeling-perception-fabrications-consciousness?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without
feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without
consciousness?"
"No, lord." - Samyutta Nikaya XXII.86 - Anuradha Sutta

8. Illogical: There is perfection, but nothing perfect (selfhood)
Refutation: By 'perfection' I think you mean Arahantship. If so,
perfections is defined as state free from clinging. The khandha of
consciousness is free'd from clinging (quote sutta):

"If a monk abandons passion for the property of form...
"If a monk abandons passion for the property of feeling...
"If a monk abandons passion for the property of perception...
"If a monk abandons passion for the property of fabrications...
"If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then
owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there
is no base for consciousness. Consciousness, thus unestablished, not
proliferating, not performing any function, is released. Owing to its
release, it is steady. Owing to its steadiness, it is contented. Owing
to its contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he (the monk) is
totally unbound right within. He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the
holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this
world.'" - Samyutta Nikaya XXII.53 - Upaya Sutta

9. Illogical: There is an ultimate, but no-self reaps its attainment
Refutation: The ultimate is where there is no conception of self. See
Illogic no. 1

10. Illogical: There is escape from Samsara, but no element that
escapes it ultimately.
Refutation: Samsara is a process that ceases. There is no need to
bring in an element that escapes it.

"And what is birth? Whatever birth, taking birth, descent,
coming-to-be, coming-forth, appearance of aggregates, & acquisition of
[sense] media of the various beings in this or that group of beings,
that is called birth." - Samyutta Nikaya XII.2 -
Paticca-samuppada-vibhanga Sutta

"I have seen beings who -- endowed with bodily good conduct, verbal
good conduct, & mental good conduct; who did not revile Noble Ones,
who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of
right views -- at the break-up of the body, after death, have
re-appeared in the good destination, the heavenly world. It is not
from having heard this from other priests & contemplatives that I tell
you that I have seen beings who -- endowed with bodily good conduct,
verbal good conduct, & mental good conduct; who did not revile noble
ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence
of right views -- at the break-up of the body, after death, have
re-appeared in the good destination, the heavenly world. It is from
having known it myself, seen it myself, realized it myself that I tell
you that I have seen beings who -- endowed with bodily good conduct,
verbal good conduct, & mental good conduct; who did not revile noble
ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence
of right views -- at the break-up of the body, after death, have
re-appeared in the good destination, the heavenly world." -- Iti 71

Then Ven. Radha went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed
down to him sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the
Blessed One: "'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is
one said to be 'a being'?"
"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is
caught up (satta) there, tied up (visatta) there, one is said to be 'a
being (satta).'
"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling... perception...
fabrications...
"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Radha:
when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a
being.'
"Just as when boys or girls are playing with little sand castles (lit:
dirt houses): as long as they are not free from passion, desire, love,
thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, that's how
long they have fun with those sand castles, enjoy them, treasure them,
feel possessive of them. But when they become free from passion,
desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles,
then they smash them, scatter them, demolish them with their hands or
feet and make them unfit for play.
"In the same way, Radha, you too should smash, scatter, & demolish
form, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving
for form.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish feeling, and make it unfit for
play. Practice for the ending of craving for feeling.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish perception, and make it unfit
for play. Practice for the ending of craving for perception.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish fabrications, and make them
unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for fabrications.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish consciousness and make it unfit
for play. Practice for the ending of craving for consciousness -- for
the ending of craving, Radha, is Unbinding." - Samyutta Nikaya XXIII.2
- Satta Sutta

11. Illogical: There are Khandhas (aggregates/phenomena) but nothing
that liberates from them, i.e. oblivion-dogma
Refutation: Nothing is liberated from the Khandhas, but the Khandhas
are liberated from clinging.

"Consciousness, thus unestablished, not proliferating, not performing
any function, is released. Owing to its release, it is steady. Owing
to its steadiness, it is contented. Owing to its contentment, it is
not agitated. Not agitated, he (the monk) is totally unbound right
within. He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the
task done. There is nothing further for this world.'" - Samyutta
Nikaya XXII.53 - Upaya Sutta

also see Illogic no. 4

12. Illogical: Since there is always other (khandhas), and never self
(atta'), then perfection is always being other and never self.
Refutation: ‘Self' is a product of unwise attention:

"There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person --
who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in
their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not
well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma -- does not discern what
ideas are fit for attention or what ideas are unfit for attention.
This being so, he does not attend to ideas fit for attention and
attends [instead] to ideas unfit for attention.
"This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not
in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having
been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I
not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in
the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else
he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not?
What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it
bound?'
"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view
arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true &
established, or the view I have no self ... or the view It is
precisely by means of self that I perceive self ... or the view It is
precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self ... or the view It
is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him
as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self
of mine -- the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening
of good & bad actions -- is the self of mine that is constant,
everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long
as eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views,
a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound
by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not
freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain,
distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering &
stress." - Majjhima Nikaya 2 - Sabbasava Sutta

13. Illogical: The goal of Buddhism is to emancipation from
Punabhavati (becoming and Re-becoming), but this does not designate
there is emancipation of anything on the ultimate level.
Refutation: The goal of Buddhism is not emancipation from Punabhavati,
but the cessation of Punabhavati.

"From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth.
From birth as a requisite condition, then old age and death, sorrow,
lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. Such is the
origination of this entire mass of stress and suffering.
"From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth.
From the cessation of birth, then old age and death, sorrow,
lamentation, pain, distress, and despair all cease.
Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress and suffering." -
Udana I.3 - Bodhi Sutta

14. Illogical: There is grasping [ie 2nd noble truth of source of
suffering], (Tan.ha),but nothing that is grasping of its own accord
apart from the absence of the attribute of grasping.
Refutation: see Illogic no. 4

15. Illogical: Buddhism became popular amongst Brahmins who believed
in a Soul, by spreading a Nihilistic dogma that ultimately, in every
way, you never exist in any true sense.
Refutation: Buddhagosa was a Brahman who was well versed
in the Vedas (probably the Upanisads too), as well as the Yoga verses
of Patanjali, but totally denied any form of self in the
Visuddhimagga.

16. Illogical: There is suffering, but nothing ultimately that reaps
the rewards of living the holy life, ie absence is absolute.
Refutation: See Illogic no. 11 and no. 1

17. Illogical: Gotama taught not only absence of suffering (dukkha)
and its root (tanha), but also the absence of that which is undergoing
suffering and clinging.
Pefutation: Perception of a ‘something which undergoes suffering' is
wrong attention:

"That any priests & contemplatives -- teachers of kamma who declare
that pleasure & pain are self-made -- would be sensitive to pleasure &
pain otherwise than through contact: that isn't possible. That any
priests & contemplatives -- teachers of kamma who declare that
pleasure & pain are other-made... self-made & other-made... who
declare that pleasure & pain are neither self-made nor other-made, but
arise spontaneously -- would be sensitive to pleasure & pain otherwise
than through contact: that isn't possible."
"When there is a body, pleasure & pain arise internally with bodily
intention as the cause; or when there is speech, pleasure & pain arise
internally with verbal intention as the cause; or when there is
intellect, pleasure & pain arise internally with intellectual
intention as the cause.
"From ignorance as requisite condition, then either of one's own
accord one fabricates the bodily fabrication on account of which that
pleasure & pain arise internally, or because of others one fabricates
the bodily fabrication on account of which that pleasure & pain arise
internally. Either alert one fabricates the bodily fabrication on
account of which that pleasure & pain arise internally, or unalert one
fabricates the bodily fabrication on account of which that pleasure &
pain arise internally. (Similarly with verbal & intellectual
fabrications.)
"Now, ignorance is bound up in these things. From the remainderless
fading & cessation of that very ignorance, there no longer exists [the
sense of] the body on account of which that pleasure & pain internally
arise. There no longer exists the speech... the intellect on account
of which that pleasure & pain internally arise. There no longer exists
the field, the site, the dimension, or the issue on account of which
that pleasure & pain internally arise." Samyutta Nikaya XII.25 -
Bhumija Sutta

Also see illogic no. 3 and 4

18. Illogical: Gotama is called the "great doctor" in Sutta, but he
isn't interested in curing you, but in destroying you ultimately
(nihilism).
Refutation: Wrong, buddy.

As they were sitting there, they said to Ven. Yamaka, "Is it true,
friend Yamaka, that this evil supposition has arisen to you: 'As I
understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no
more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes,
& does not exist after death.'
"Yes, friends. As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed
One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is
annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death."
"Don't say that, friend Yamaka. Don't misrepresent the Blessed One.
It's not good to misrepresent the Blessed One, for the Blessed One
would not say, 'A monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the
body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.'" -
Samyutta Nikaya XXII.85 Yamaka Sutta

"And if I -- being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is no
self -- were to answer that there is no self, the bewildered
Vacchagotta would become even more bewildered: 'Does the self I used
to have now not exist?'" - Samyutta Nikaya XLIV.10 Ananda Sutta

"What others call happiness, that the Noble Ones declare to be
suffering. What others call suffering, that the Noble Ones have found
to be happiness. See how difficult it is to understand the Dhamma!" -
Sutta Nipata vv. 756-765, Ireland's translation.

19. Illogical: Gotama states succinctly that ultimate bliss is to
uproot all defilements, but that truly there is nobody that ultimately
uproots it.
Refutation: The state of ‘nobody' is the end of suffering, i.e.
ultimate bliss. See Illogic no. 1

20. Illogical: Gotama says that not only is suffering to be negated,
but also him who negates it, creating a self-negation paradox.
Refutation: There's nothing to negate but unwise attention.

Then Mara the Evil One, wanting to arouse fear, horripilation, &
terror in her, wanting to make her fall away from concentration,
approached her & addressed her in verse:

"By whom was this living being created?
Where is the living being's maker?
Where has the living being originated?
Where does the living being
cease?

Then the thought occurred to Vajira the nun: "Now who has recited this
verse -- a human being or a non-human one?" Then it occurred to her:
"This is Mara the Evil One, who has recited this verse wanting to
arouse fear, horripilation, & terror in me, wanting to make me fall
away from concentration."
Then, having understood that "This is Mara the Evil One," she replied
to him in verses:

"What? Do you assume a 'living being,' Mara?
Do you take a position?
This is purely a pile of fabrications.
Here no living being
can be pinned down.
Just as when, with an assemblage of parts,
there's the word,
chariot,
even so when aggregates are present,
there's the convention of
living being.
For only stress is what comes to be;
stress, what remains & falls away.
Nothing but stress comes to be.
Nothing ceases but stress."

Then Mara the Evil One -- sad & dejected at realizing, "Vajira the nun
knows me" -- vanished right there. - Samyutta Nikaya V.10 - Vajira
Sutta

21. Illogical: "Buddhists" know that nihilism is a heresy in Sutta,
and yet cannot escape the fact that their viewpoint is inseperable
from nihilism in every respect and vehemently deny this obvious fact
when confronted with it.
Refutation: Nihilism is defined in Sutta as:

"There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is
no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no
next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no
priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly and practicing rightly,
proclaim this world and the next after having directly known and
realized it for themselves. A person is a composite of four primary
elements. At death, the earth (in the body) returns to and merges with
the (external) earth-substance. The fire returns to and merges with
the external fire-substance. The liquid returns to and merges with the
external liquid-substance. The wind returns to and merges with the
external wind-substance. The sense-faculties scatter into space. Four
men, with the bier as the fifth, carry the corpse. Its eulogies are
sounded only as far as the charnel ground. The bones turn
pigeon-colored. The offerings end in ashes. Generosity is taught by
idiots. The words of those who speak of existence after death are
false, empty chatter. With the break-up of the body, the wise and the
foolish alike are annihilated, destroyed. They do not exist after
death.' " - Digha Nikaya 2 - Samannaphala Sutta

Some "Buddhists" do believe that - not all, though.

---

And a final note,

Anyone who teaches you Dhamma should practice it himself. If they,
themselves, do not practice the Dhamma, then, according to that very
same Dhamma, they are unfit to teach it.

As it says in the Flower Chapter of the Dhammapada:

"Like a beautiful flower, full of colour, but without scent, are the
fine but fruitless words of him who does not act accordingly."

And one of these - perhaps the most important, even - is Samma-
vaca, usually translated as "Right Speech."
Now, take a deep breath, count backward from 5 and read what
Glorious, Mighty things Right Speech entails:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/samma-vaca.html

Beautiful, isn't it?

There are some jokers on the Usenet boards who proclaim a self in the
Pali Canon but also proclaim their fellow, suffering beings
are "scum" "rancid fecal matter" and exort them to kill themselves.
You can see for yourself at http://www.google.com if you type in the
name ScriptureAuthor.

Much metta to you, Samatha
Have a wonderful day. :)