Your use of 'individuality' is almost a synonym for 'personality'. 'Personality' has different orientations. It comes from greek drama. In greek drama the actors used to have 'personas', masks. They would be hiding behind the mask. You could not have seen their faces, you could have only heard their voice. 'Sona' means sound. 'Persona' means you can have a contact only with their sounds, not with their faces. They are hiding somewhere. From that comes the word 'personality'.

In that sense Buddha, Jesus, Zarathustra, Lao Tzu, have no personalities. They are just there in front of you, not hiding anything. They are naked, confronting you in their absolute purity. There is nothing to hide. You can see them through and through, they are transparent beings.

So you cannot say rightly that they have personalities or that they are persons. They are individuals, but remember the meaning of the word -- they cannot be divided. They don't have fragments. They are not a crowd. They are not polypsychic. They don't have many minds. Their manyness has disappeared and they have become one, and their oneness is such that there is no way to divide it. No sword can cut them in two. Their indivisibility is ultimate.

In that sense you can call them individuals. But it is dangerous. Because this oneness comes only when the many is lost. When the many is lost how can you say even that one is one? Because one can be called meaningfully one only when the possibility for many exists. But the very possibility has disappeared.

Buddha is not many, but how can you call him one? That's why in India we call god advaita, non-dual. We could have called him one, but we have resisted that temptation. We have never called him one, because the moment that you call something one, the two has entered -- because one cannot exist without the two, the three, the four. One is meaningful only in a series. One is meaningful only in a hierarchy.

If really one has become one, how can you call him one? The word loses meaning. You can call him only not-many; you can call him non-dual, advaita, not two. But you cannot call him one. Not-two is beautiful. It simply says that the twoness, the manyness, has disappeared. It does not say what has appeared, it simply says what has disappeared. It is a negative term.

Anything that can be said about the ultimate truth has to be negative. We can say what god is not, we cannot say what he is. Because to say what he is, we define him. Every definition is a limitation. Once god is defined he is no more infinite, he becomes finite.

So in a way you can call Buddha an individual, but it will be better to resist the temptation. He is certainly not a person, he has no personality, but to call him individual is also not right -- better than calling him a person, but still not perfect. He is not a person, he is not an individual -- because he is not.

The very idea of his being has disappeared. He is just a vast emptiness. He is space. He has no boundaries now.

Remember, if you have boundaries you can be divided. Anything that is finite can be divided. Ask the physicists. They say you can divide the molecule -- it is very small, but you can divide it because it has a boundary. You can divide the atom. It is very minute, but still it has a boundary; you can divide it. You can divide the electron, the neutron, the proton, because they also have boundaries. But beyond that, division is impossible because boundaries disappear; beyond that, matter loses all limitation; beyond that is the infinite pure space. You cannot divide. It is impossible to divide pure space.

So somebody becomes an individual only when he has become infinite. It will look paradoxical, but let me say it: somebody becomes individual only when he has become universal, when he is one with the whole. Then somebody is an individual. But then to call him an individual will be stretching the meaning of the word too far. It will be a little too outlandish. It is better to call Buddha a nobody -- neither a person nor an individual. All those things have been left far behind. He has transcended all limitations.

Personality and ego are two aspects of the same coin, just as individuality and self are two aspects of the same coin. The personality has a center -- that center is called the ego. Because personality itself is false, the center is also false, because a false circumference cannot have a real center and a real center cannot have a false circumference.

Personality is unreal. Personality is that which you pretend to be, but you are not. Personality is that which you show, but you are not. Personality is your exhibition, not your reality. Personality is that which you create around yourself -- a fiction to deceive -- but you are not. This personality has a false center, as false as it is itself. That false center is the ego. When you drop personality, ego disappears. Or you drop the ego and the personality collapses to the ground, to the dust.

Remember not to pretend that which you are not, otherwise you will never be able to drop the ego. Then you go on feeding the ego. Never try to look in any way different than you are. Whatsoever the cost, be true to yourself. Don't try to decorate it, to clothe it in manners, etiquettes, a thousand and one falsities. Be naked as you are. Let people feel your real pulse, and you will not be at loss.

In the beginning you may see that you are getting into trouble, but soon you will find that you are never at a loss. With reality nobody ever loses. With unreality you only think you are gaining, you go on losing. That's how many people destroy their whole life -- by being unreal -- and then they say that they are not happy. How can an unreal person be happy?

It is as if you have put stones in the soil instead of seeds and you are waiting, you are waiting for them to sprout and bloom and fill your life with flowers and fruits. It is impossible -- those stones cannot grow. Those stones are not seeds of something, they don't have any potentiality. They may look like seeds, you may have coloured them in such a way, you may have painted them in such a way that they look like seeds, but they are not seeds, they cannot grow.

The ego cannot grow. It is dead, a false entity. It is not alive. You can go on and on living with it, but your whole life will become like a desert... empty. No fulfillment, no contentment, no bliss will ever knock at your door.

You can wait for eternity, nobody will ever come. Because in the very beginning you missed something -- something very essential and basic. Only you can grow, not the pretensions.

I told you the word 'personality' comes from 'persona'. If you have a mask, the mask will not grow. You will grow. You may have put the mask on your face when you were a child, now you may be a young man -- but the mask will remain the same... a dirty old thing, rotten. It will simply rot, it cannot grow. You will be growing behind it, and it will give you many pains because it will be a confinement. It cannot grow and you are growing. It is as if you are still wearing your childhood clothes. You are growing and those clothes are not growing, so they have become a bondage. They don't give you freedom, they confine you, they crush you. You feel continuously a pressure, a tension, an anguish.