Harimedia Forum

"The process of Inside-out is obviously dependent on the self: one’s perception, one’s awareness, one’s consciousness is the center of the process. And that personality is to be respected, that personality has integrity, and that personality is the source of all evolution for that soul." (Hari, 'Outside-in vs. Inside-out' lecture)

person - from Latin 'personа' - "human being", originally "character in a drama, mask," possibly borrowed from Etruscan phersu "mask."
self - from Proto-Indo-European *selbho-, from base *s(w)e- "separate, apart". Compare Sanskrit svah, Old Church Slavonic svoji = same in Russian.
"Personality is the supreme realization of the innate idiosyncrasy of a living being. It is an act of courage flung in the face of life, the absolute affirmation of all that constitutes the individual, the most successful adaptation to the universal conditions of existence, coupled with the greatest possible freedom of self-determination." (C.G. Jung)
(English etymological dictionary www.etymonline.com)

Dear Hari, what is actually personality, which is the source of all evolution for the soul?

Is it anyhow related with the structure of human, that we heard before (Soul, Ego, Intelligence, Mind, Senses, Physical body)?
Or may be it is related with the structure, described in NLP: Essense, Identity, Beliefs, Abilities, Actions, Surroundings?
Is it possible to build (rebuild), or at least revise, examine or verify one's peronality? To make sure everything is in order and on its place there, that all elements of it are pure and healthy and properly functioning, without dissecting it?

In Hare Krsna philosophy human personality had been more related to as ego and especially false ego, thus considering it to be unnecessary and even deleterious. And we see that Etruscan origins of the word person mean it exactly as a mask. That means something is behind the mask, or the masks... Nowadays ego seems to me meaning more as to whom or what we identify ourselves. And we can see that we have different roles in life that we play for different contexts or associations, and even for our relatives. Does it mean that the more our ego or personality, or our roles, or the masks reflect the individuality or the Self behind it the more valuable it is for the evolution of our soul?

If we really are created by the image and likeness of God/Goddess (Gods), what are the real attributes of the Peronality of God that we have similarity to? We heard that the attributes are His/Her name, form and qualities. We just had discussion about it with Kamalamala, and he wonders if the name and form are really so crusially important and absolute as we were taught before, or Their essense is really what is important for our connection with Them? After all, on other planets, in other universes, where reside sometimes even more intelligent entities than humans, they may not appreciate those God forms, which we consider as Absolute.. We witnessed that very often even the Deities installed in different parts of the world somehow tend to look similar to local residents. We came to conclusion that different forms and names of God and Gods are probably more like communicative keys or codes for living entities to clearly be able to approach and connect exactly to the Divine Personality they wish to connect to, by connecting to the appropriate portal or connection grid. On the other hand these forms, names and attributes are supposed to be Their images to facilitate and allow living beings most successfully to imagine and become aware of Them, of Their Personalities, are they not? Please correct if something wrong here and clarify this question, which maybe not even one!

Interesting!

Is person most important or is personality? Is there a difference? Well, sure! A person is someone, somewhere, not a specific identifiable someone. When you know a specific someone, you know their personality. How they relate to the world (meaning their body, their environment, their acts, others around them and so on) is more or less a manifestation of their personality. This can and will adapt to surroundings and will more often than not be clouded by stress. Neither of these terms refer to the living being. One is generic and the other is a manifestation. That I have a personality or that I am a person is also a generic understanding. When we get specific, we no longer speak about personality, we speak about specific quality.

We are essence and being and this is energy. Our particular energy is our unique being and this is the sum total of the manner we express our energy known as our personality. This personality manifests more clearly when we are more aware of our personal integrity. This integrity is somewhat similar to our identity, yet one can assume identities to fulfill roles. One's integrity is beyond identity. One's essence dictates one's integrity. To maintain integrity is to be true to oneself -- one's essence.

Everything else is a by-product of this essence.

Jung's poetic definition of personality is great. Yet it presupposes personality as an archetypical quality unique to each of us. Perhaps it is, yet is it still unique when we attempt to fit into our world as we are expected? What becomes of his definition when we act in an influenced manner? Obviously he had much more to say about personality than what you have quoted, I just took advantage of the quote's limited scope to make a point.

My point is that our essence energizes our mood. As we feel, so we create. Our creations therefore spring from our energy. One who sees the pervasive nature of this flow of energy from our essence into the world around us, learns to express their personal essence in an undiluted manner and thus appears in this world as a super personality.

More comments require a book. No time for that now! Sorry...