Define what theintelligence it has always been quite difficult for all those who, over the millennia, have tried to do it.
In the majority of cases it has ended up being defined by relating it to particular qualities of the individual, thus making the definition, already by itself sé, subjective and relative to the point of view of those who tried to define it.
Even today there is no unanimous definition: those who define it as the ability to solve problems, those who theorize it as the ability to adapt to new situations, those who divide it into sectors trying to isolate the various factors, thus coming to speak of motor intelligence or verbal or attitudinal and so on.
In all cases, however, the consequence seems to have almost always been this: the intelligence of the individual has been seen, over the centuries, as something closely linked to what he expresses on the physical plane, in his daily relationship with what everyday life, from time to time, presents him.
Io I believe that all these criteria (even if useful for trying to quantify some particular aspect of the individual) have the defect of trying to demonstrate something without having a real starting idea of what really is what you want to measure, and they have in their relativity the very limits of their ability to univocally define what intelligence is.
Let's take some examples to try to clarify what I mean.
If intelligence could be defined, as some argue, as the "ability to solve problemsThis should mean, absurdly, that a good carpenter is without it shadow of doubt more intelligent than I know of an Einstein for whom planting a nail in the right way was something that went beyond his manual possibilities (or, perhaps, his interest).
If intelligence could be defined as "ability to adapt to new situations "on the other hand, most of you could easily be labeled an "idiot" since you would not be able to do what any monkey in the Indian forests can do, very well and without great difficulty, that is, survive.
If we want, therefore, to find a definition of intelligence that is adaptable to every creature, we need to find a uniform meter, that is valid for anyone and in any daily condition he may find himself, and there can only be one element that fully satisfies these conditions. which you can refer to: theevolution.
Taking, therefore, evolution as a starting point, in my opinion it could be defined intelligence as the ability to draw useful elements for one's understanding (and therefore for its own evolution) managing not to be misled by what one is experiencing.
It no longer makes any sense, using this perspective, to talk about smarter or less intelligent people: those who have understood more elements of the Truth have greater intelligence and are more easily able to stick to it, and this happens as a simple consequence deriving from having more elements included and therefore greater possibility of intertwining and connections between them.
This does not mean that those who are more intelligent are better, or that they are better, nor that they do not suffer in the face of adversity.
- It only means that, in all likelihood, his suffering will be limited, in time and intensity, by the understanding of the Truth.
- It means that he will try not to bully those who appear less intelligent than him but to learn from him those nuances that he himself, perhaps he has not yet learned.
- It means being aware that you have learned a lot but also that you still have a lot to learn, with the enormous sense of humility that this inevitably brings with it.
You, as good schoolchildren who have assimilated the teaching, will notice that we had said that no one, when he is embodied, really expresses, to the end, the evolution he possesses, being subject to the expressive limitations of the transitory bodies that from time to time he possesses and which, being aimed at essentially attaining, in the course of that life, only defined portions of understanding, are not structured in such a way that the understandings set aside in the akasic body (and therefore the evolution achieved) can flow satisfactorily and manifest themselves in the individual in the course of his experience on the physical plane.
This does not invalidate the relationship that we have tried to define between evolution and intelligence of the individual, but simply places limits on its expression, bringing with it the obvious consequence that, however, from the behavior that the individual has during his life it is not possible (especially observing him from the outside) to go back to his real intelligence, nor, much less, to quantify the evolution that possesses him.
Leaving the Absolute out of competition because with Him, of course, there is no possibility of competing, do you want to know who, in my opinion, is the most intelligent individual of anyone else? It is that individual who is capable of spontaneously following the Great Design, supported by the awareness that what happens must happen and that, in any case, nothing better for himself could ever hope for it to happen.
"Passive behavior in the oriental style" you will sentence, but there is nothing passive in what I have stated: I did not say that the Great Design is immediately passive on the contrary, intelligence is implemented and demonstrated at the very moment in which the individual manages to follow (or, at the limit, tries to oppose it) going against what his transitory ego would dictate him to do and manages to make it useful for his further growth precisely the observation of the difference between what his ego would like it was and what, instead, in the daily reality of the facts, it is.
Intelligence, therefore, my brothers, is not an attribute of the physical body, nor of the brain, nor of the mental body.
Instead, it is an attribute of the entire individual with all his bodies and is born and structured - parallel to what happens for understanding - precisely as a result of how he manages to use in the best way all those bodies, all those tools that they were provided to help him get closer, step by step, to the Truth. Andrea
Readings for the interior: every day, a short spiritual reading of the Ifior Circle and of the Florence 77 Circle, on Whatsapp. (Read only, cannot comment)To subscribe
Privacy policy of this site to consult before commenting, or subscribing to feeds
The post is very clear. The definition of intelligence given by psychology is closely linked to the mental plane, that given by the Guides is instead connected to the level of consciousness and therefore of feeling, and it is the latter that counts.