Free from individuality?

Free from individuality?

What is the distinction between the individual and the self, and why is one apparently negative and the latter positive?

Three passages apply to this: 16.18 (p. 129), 18.17 (p. 137), and 18.53,57-59 (p. 142-3). In the last he says:

If I am in your thought, by my grace
you will transcend all dangers;
but if you are deafened
by individuality, you will be lost.

Your resolve is futile
if a sense of individuality
makes you think, "I shall not fight"--
nature will compel you to.

In this passage, we see the stark contrast Krishna describes between individuality on the one side, and Krishna, duty, grace, etc. on the other. In 18.17 and 18.53 he speaks of 'freedom from individuality' in the senses of not being responsible for one's actions and of being one with Krishna, respectively and in a way which relates the two. It would seem that individuality is something very unattractive to Krishna, and in his glowing encomium of the demonic man, Krishna describes individuality as one in a list of traits:

Submitting to individuality, power,
arrogance, desire, and anger,
they* hate me and revile me
in their own bodies, as in others.
--16.18 (p. 129) *the demonic men

Miller draws a distinction between the self (atman, p. 162) and individuality (ahamkara, p. 158), saying that the latter is akin to individual identity whereas the former is "the animate, spiritual principle of life." The result being, for Miller, that "implicitly this means that liberation from empirical existence involves the negation of individuality.

I think I spoke without proper foresight when I spoke today on this; I didn't mean to spend time on how this can be spun one way or the other. I do think this topic could be useful, however, to come to a fuller understanding of, first, what exactly it is the Gita considers to be essential to the nature of humans, and second, what the end result or ideal would look like for a disciple, especially since now we have more resources regarding Krishna's opinion on the self and individuality. It could also be useful in light of Tolstoy's opinion on the individual will and in anticipation of other authors' opinions on individuality; last and not least, Krishna's words above put an interesting caveat onto our discussion today regarding the "individualistic" nature of this philosophy, in the sense that it is "soul-oriented" and not "society-oriented."