user8157: SN 12.35 is translated by Bhikkhus Sujato, Bodhi & Thanissaro as follows:

Mendicant, if you have the view that the soul and the body are the same thing, there is no living of the spiritual life.
Taṁ jīvaṁ taṁ sarīranti vā, bhikkhu, diṭṭhiyā sati brahmacariyavāso na hoti.
If you have the view that the soul and the body are different things, there is no living of the spiritual life.
Aññaṁ jīvaṁ aññaṁ sarīranti vā, bhikkhu, diṭṭhiyā sati brahmacariyavāso na hoti.

Is there an explanation why the translation of "soul" is used here for "jiva"?

user471: Jiva can mean life or life force or soul, depending on context.
In the context of SN 12.35, it refers to soul.
If the soul and body are the same, then this refers to annihilationism, because when the body is destroyed, the soul is destroyed.
If the soul and body are different, then this refers to eternalism, because when the body is destroyed, the soul continues existing.
Instead, the Buddha taught the middle, which is dependent origination.
So, the term "soul" here is not used to affirm the existence of a soul, but it is used to refer to eternalism and annihilationism.

If there is the view, ‘The soul and the body are the same,’ there is
no living of the holy life; and if there is the view, ‘The soul is one
thing, the body is another,’ there is no living of the holy life.
Without veering towards either of these extremes, the Tathagata
teaches the Dhamma by the middle: ‘With ignorance as condition,
volitional formations.’
SN 12.35 (Bodhi)


8157: <p><a href="https://suttacentral.net/sn12.35/en/sujato?layout=linebyline&reference=none&notes=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN 12.35</a> is translated by Bhikkhus Sujato, Bodhi &amp; Thanissaro as follows:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Mendicant, if you have the view that the <strong>soul</strong> and the body are the same thing, there is no living of the spiritual life.</p>
<p>Taṁ <strong>jīvaṁ</strong> taṁ sarīranti vā, bhikkhu, diṭṭhiyā sati brahmacariyavāso na hoti.</p>
<p>If you have the view that the <strong>soul</strong> and the body are different things, there is no living of the spiritual life.</p>
<p>Aññaṁ <strong>jīvaṁ</strong> aññaṁ sarīranti vā, bhikkhu, diṭṭhiyā sati brahmacariyavāso na hoti.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Is there an explanation why the translation of &quot;soul&quot; is used here for &quot;jiva&quot;?</p>
 471: <p><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/jiva#pali" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Jiva</em></a> can mean life or life force or soul, depending on context.</p>
<p>In the context of <a href="https://suttacentral.net/sn12.35/en/bodhi" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN 12.35</a>, it refers to soul.</p>
<p>If the soul and body are the same, then this refers to annihilationism, because when the body is destroyed, the soul is destroyed.</p>
<p>If the soul and body are different, then this refers to eternalism, because when the body is destroyed, the soul continues existing.</p>
<p>Instead, the Buddha taught the middle, which is dependent origination.</p>
<p>So, the term &quot;soul&quot; here is not used to affirm the existence of a soul, but it is used to refer to eternalism and annihilationism.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If there is the view, ‘The soul and the body are the same,’ there is
no living of the holy life; and if there is the view, ‘The soul is one
thing, the body is another,’ there is no living of the holy life.
Without veering towards either of these extremes, the Tathagata
teaches the Dhamma by the middle: ‘With ignorance as condition,
volitional formations.’<br />
<a href="https://suttacentral.net/sn12.35/en/bodhi" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN 12.35</a> (Bodhi)</p>
</blockquote>
