Character and personality 7: temperament [A16]

There is another issue that seems to me not to have been understood: the speech of the Vibration First, if he was born before or after, what was it that modified the DNA, and so on. The situation, stated in very simple terms, is this: What does Vibration do first? It affects the akasic body.

Il Akasic body is what, under the influence of Vibration First in search of total understanding, it influences the constitution of the bodies that it needs to experience, and therefore activate the DNA to have that kind of character, that kind of predisposition and therefore that kind of personality.

Basically it is the akasic body that activates the DNA but, going to a higher level, obviously the akasic body is driven by the call of the First Vibration. Therefore, there is no dichotomy between what the First Vibration does and what the akasic body does; the First Vibration permeates everything and is clearly the engine of all Reality.

D – The manipulation of DNA by human science to try to modify what are called «hereditary defects», it is a useless effort because DNA is subject to other rules anyway…

It is not a useless effort and, over time, if used in the right way, you will also see the results and the usefulness of the thing. The problem is that, without a doubt, it will be impossible to codify this type of intervention that always has the same results, because there are clearly elements that escape the set of mechanisms that regulate the activation or deactivation of certain genes . Not to mention that, obviously, there is the karmic problem behind it and many times it won't be possible to intervene or, when the intervention is done, it won't give the expected effects.

Q - There is a continuous modification of DNA that can put back, for example, the modification made by science.

Also, but we wouldn't want us to get confused with the terms: it's not that DNA changes, it changes its activation or otherwise of certain genes!

[...] D – It almost seems to me that, if we didn't have theIo, towards the personality we would be able to acquire a lot of elements, while the ego blocks this thing.

But, apart from the fact that the ego is an inevitable creation, therefore it is not possible to say «if we didn't have the ego»; the ego must necessarily be there because it arises from the clash of the reaction of the individual's bodies with reality, but it has its uses.
Like all things that hold back, think of the various Commandments: there are some that are decidedly stupid like Commandments, seen with the eye of today's man, yet in the past they had their own logic, their own usefulness.

The same goes for the ego; the Ego has the function - even if it does not exist - to ensure that the individual does not try to assimilate or to understand too quickly and faster than he can assimilate; because realize that a datum or two data does not arrive to the akasic body, but millions of data will arrive.

So much so that, if you remember, we said that sleep is necessary to be able to stop the acquisition of data for a moment and allow it to finish flowing back to the akasic body for understanding. And the Ego, in some way, also constitutes a filter to allow the most suitable possibility of understanding for the individual; not to mention all the other issues that move the presence of the ego and that are necessary to face the experiences that, otherwise, the individual would not even dream of facing!

  • Readings for the interior: every day a short spiritual reading of the Cerchio Ifior and the Cerchio Firenze 77, up Whatsapp and Telegram.
  • Summary of the philosophical teaching of the Ifior Circle: HOW CONSCIOUSNESS CREATES PERSONAL REALITY, you can order here the book. If you're reading this and want support, write.

D – Regarding the discourse «I, personality and character», the «temperament» aspect of an individual…

We need to see for a moment what you mean by "temperament". The temperament it can be considered a way of expressing oneself, rather than a way of being. If we consider it this way, temperament is nothing more than the implementation of what is personality and, therefore, character. Temperament can be considered the way of being implemented personality under the influence of character.

Q – So the temperament cannot be changed?

Of course it can be changed! Temperament arises from the clash between character and what the ego desires, for example. The personality of the individual and his ego can come into conflict, as happens very often; and, at that point, then what comes into play? The real misunderstandings that the individual has come into play, they are the ones that the individual must be able to find in order to implement the best behavior in the situations he is experiencing.

D – But, in practice, when you tell us: «put what we are talking about into practice, so that it doesn't remain only theory», in thinking about it in our daily life, being, acting, a flow of emotions, of actions, of reactions implemented and not implemented, how do we distinguish: this is character, this is personality, this is ego?

[…] So, let's take this element as an example: the curious person. The curious person undoubtedly has curiosity as an active element within his character; however, this curiosity must then manifest itself on the physical plane; Right? How will it manifest itself? It will manifest itself modulated by the individual's ego; therefore it can be accentuated, insistent, repressed, excessive…

Now, what we ask you to do is "simply" - in quotation marks, because nothing is ever simple as far as consciousness and understanding are concerned - it is be careful to yourself and try to realize when you really do what you do it flows spontaneously and freely, therefore it comes directly from your character and from your conscience, and how much of what you do comes from attempts to change reality according to the wishes of the ego. Sounds hard, but it's really not that hard!

D – Scifo, sorry; I find it very difficult to recognize myself in transient archetypes of this company. It is not suffering, it is "intolerance"! This is a character aspect, not a personality one.

Well, partly yes, but partly it's also a pretty normal position when you get to the end of experimenting with an archetype. If you remember, when we talked about the transient archetypes we said that, within a transient archetype, the consciousnesses of the people related to this archetype connect in various stages to experience the whole archetype.

When one reaches the end of experimenting with that type of archetype, then impatience sets in because one feels that that type of archetype must be abandoned because it no longer satisfies enough. Hence, beyond the character component, this intolerance towards an archetype that begins to feel no longer useful for themselves.

D – Which, however, does not mean that the archetype has exhausted its function on a broader level!

Certainly. It is probably exhausting its function for that individual, but the other individuals who are connected and who keep that archetype alive still need it to influence their actions, their way of expressing themselves in reality.

D – But the fact that some individuals reach a level of annoyance, of intolerance, this already per se pushes the modification of that archetype towards something different, or should we wait for another turn of life?

Let's say that it usually pushes the individual towards hooking up with another series of transitory archetypes, which are more useful to him. This is the case, many times, of the famous rebels of society, who however very often tend to idealize too much, to consider as exceptional people - what do I know? – a Che Guevara; while he was simply a person with big problems who, no doubt, also had the conscience of a good one evolution, but he still couldn't understand that the archetype he was living led him to live in an excessively violent way, for example.

D – I wanted to go back to the character for a moment. If I am made in a certain way, I have certain predispositions, so my life experiences I must somehow, through the personality, express them in that way, with these predispositions…

No, there is a small inaccuracy here. The character that the individual has means that the individual can express those characteristics, not that «must» express them, the expressive way is then dictated by the rest. That is, what you have inscribed in the font does not tell you «like» express characteristics.

Character - we repeat it to you, then - character is the foundation on which you build your life; it is the basis upon which you manifest within the physical plane. This is the basis, but this basis is then modified - turning into personality - in the actions you take, as you interact with the rest of reality.

Therefore, if you have the drive to become a football star by nature and you are unable to implement it and then end up living a life as a bricklayer, in reality it does not change the situation at all because your character, however it may be, is expressed equally; probably your personality will express this unexpressed (unfulfilled?) wish through problems of some kind, which you will manifest as a personality or as reactions, and on and on and on.

Some time ago we said to you: «speak to your ego»; Do you remember what we told you? Well, that's what we meant. Do not consider your ego an enemy, but consider it a tool you need to understand and, therefore, at that point, instead of opposing it, try to make it useful.

D – Sorry, Scifo, I wanted to go back a bit to the topic of «passive observation»; so does it somehow mean not allowing our ego to judge how we are, more than anything else, but accepting our character for what it is, even if there are some aspects that we don't like that much?

No. You don't have to intervene, you just have to observe. You don't have to influence the ego while you observe passively, it doesn't help if you influence yourself! How would you affect the ego? Using the ego.

It is difficult for you to understand because it is very far from what the Western thought tradition is. Certainly, in certain oriental philosophies it would be easier to make this type of concept understood, but little by little you will see that you will get there, you have many lives to get there!

Remember one thing: while we are making these talks, your ego is alarmed, so all the things you can't understand, many times are such because your ego refuses to make you understand them!

2008-2017 Annals

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2 comments on “Character and Personality 7: Temperament [A16]”

  1.  "Temperament can be considered the way of being implemented personality under the influence of character.
    [...] The individual's personality and his ego can come into conflict" [...]The real misunderstandings that the individual has come into play, they are the ones that the individual must be able to find in order to implement the best behavior in the situations he is experiencing."

    These are the main passages regarding temperament. Depending on the understandings reached, the thrust that comes from the conscience and which translates into the character will have the more or less crystalline possibility of manifesting itself in the personality.

    Reply
  2. Well the concept of temperament, a little complicated to keep in mind the interrelationships between the various components:
    Character, personality, me, temperament.

    Reply

Leave a comment