hgg wrote:But I have already mentioned what I've meant by Soul.
That "Individuality" spoken above.
I don't want to create a debate, but I think that Jagaro paragraphs (a) & (b) show that this is a very
difficult subject indeed.
Okay but why do you want something which is expressed through the word "individuality" then call "soul"? I mean you can call it whatever you like, e.g. "stone", "ship", "bartender" or "pasjgovipµ" as long as it maintains the meaning of what "individuality" means. It's just changing of a designation. But if you want to call it "soul" because you think that "individuality" is you
, when you think that "individuality" is what you are
, when you think "individuality" is yours
because you think it is your soul
, then I would suggest to not call that "individuality" "soul" because it's not your "individuality", it's not you, not yours, it's not your soul and it is not-self. You should definitely not call that "individuality" "soul" if you want to apply the usual meaning of "soul" to "individuality" because that's not the case.
best wishes, acinteyyo