I'm sorry I didn't acknowledge you when you posted this. It was too much for me to process at the time and see that our conceptions very much align. My understanding of soul does not stem from rigid religious dogma. I have no reason not to accept the details you provide. In fact, I do. I may have not responded at the time you posted because of my state of mind then and I may have felt that the details you provide make the message difficult for some to swallow.

In one of my first drafted for Medium essays I took exception with the statement that Buddhism does not believe in souls. I have very little to no knowledge about Buddhism. I just deduced that from what little I do know, that when the word soul is properly defined, of course Buddhism actually does believe in souls. The essay is here: https://medium.com/know-thyself-heal-thyself/eternal-soul-properly-defined-fe7a93e534f8 . It contains: "Souls are discrete entities; Souls are eternal. Eternal does not imply unchanging....A journalist wrote on Medium, 'One of the most ancient rejections of the self is the Buddhist doctrine of anatta — the belief that there is no self, or soul, or other permanent essence of who we are.' I have reviewed several definitions of “soul” in preparation for this essay and none imply unchanging personality traits. That inference is misplaced and, frankly, illogical. Buddhism teaches that there is after-life and reincarnation. Thus, Buddhism does teach that there is an eternal soul once soul is properly defined."

Many Buddhists tell me I am wrong as Buddhism is atheistic. You and I know, I am not. Apparently there are many schools of Buddhist schools of thought and a few do teach that there are souls but they are not widely followed.