Bruce Love

~~ Bruce Love ~~ I think what may make the story of my quest of interest to others is the possibly unique approach I developed based on the work of two masters of healing, one living and one dead, and both of whom, in my opinion, have not been sufficiently appreciated. Like the triune nature of the Enneagram, my quest to know myself consisted of three major elements: a masterful expression of character, a compassionate and pragmatic way to understand oneself grounded in everyday experience, and the development of trust in my own capacity to work through the obstacles and defenses that blocked me arriving at a deep and clear understanding of my character and myself.

The first element was to come from Claudio Naranjo and his seminal work, Character and Neurosis. In it, I found the depth and certainty, the precision and strength I needed, and though other critical knowledge would come from his other teachings and direct contact, it is this book that proved to be foremost in the development of my self-work. In many ways, the story of my quest for self-knowledge is the story of my relationship with this book, and I hope to show in the paragraphs that follow the kind of effect the right reading of his book can have on a soul hungry for knowledge.

The second element was to come from the rebellious psychoanalyst, Karen Horney, and specifically from her book, Self-Analysis. This work would provide me with the framework and self-support needed to channel Naranjo’s masterful expression of character into a personal process which would illuminate my hidden character traits and motives. As it turned out, it would do much more than I asked, opening the way to seeing how my conditioned way of being informs my life in the present and in what had gone before, and integrating that understanding in a more awakened form of living.

The third element was learning to give myself the trust and confidence to not only “go it alone” and persist in the face of continuing frustration, but to give myself the encouragement and appreciation I desperately needed. Ultimately, these self-supports would give me the wherewithal to adapt what I learned from my two sources of inspiration, and to rely on myself in wrestling my demons so that I might finally see something real. As it turned out, being controlled by my type kept me from being open to others and their teachings, causing me to hold onto a rather hard view of myself and the world. While I needed the knowledge and opinions of others, in the end, it was by having trust in myself and in my own authority, that helped me track and find my elusive self.

My journey began, like many others, with one of the many Enneagram books available these days. Scanning its pages, it seemed weakly that the Three “worked” for me. Not feeling any strong sense of rightness, however, I sought out a teacher who at my urging dubbed me a Nine. Thus I was first subjected to the corrosive influence of another’s opinion. Over the next few months, I found that neither type held true, as I alternately “tried on” their respective natures in one after another workshop. I then discovered I had a strong negative reaction to a woman declaring she was a Six, and felt that something important was going on, so I “adopted” that type. In several week-long training sessions a few months later, everyone seemed comfortable with me as a Six (except me of course) and when I informed my teachers that I didn’t feel this was right for me after all, they declared flatly that I was indeed a Six and that I just couldn’t see it.

At about this stage, another teacher, seemingly more insightful, suggested I was a Three (oh no!) and off I went again, being subsequently typed a Two and then a One. Even my wife weighed in, the one person other than my mother who probably knows me best. She said I had a lot of my father in me, a man who was clearly an Eight. It seemed I was everything and nothing! It was enough to make me want to throw in the towel. Yet I was approaching 60 and felt this was my last best chance to break through my ignorance about myself.  But despite all the books and lectures, the panels and training seminars, the chat-boards and email discussions, nothing seemed to help me solve this puzzle.

During this “time of changing types”, I was blindly engaged in a search for a reliable authority, someone to pilot me through this roiling sea of confusion about types and character structures. Each author seemed to have his or her slant on the subject and I felt I needed a solid and dependable voice to guide me through all the different shades of meanings of the various names and descriptions, the type and trait look-alikes, the understanding of how a trait appears in more than one type, how “counter” subtypes make things maddeningly complex, and even the, at times, misleading traits found in wings and connecting points.

Clearly I needed an anchor to steady things while I worked out the puzzle! For I could not make progress while in the quicksand of conflicting voices and shouting viewpoints. I needed to settle on one teacher, one teaching, that could satisfy what turned out to be a long laundry list of demands – for certainty and depth, strength and subtlety, specificity and comprehensiveness, symmetry and humanness, science and spirituality, for context with other systems of personality, and perhaps most importantly, originality.

Quite a list! And in Claudio Naranjo’s book Character and Neurosis, it seemed I finally had found what I needed. I knew immediately it was what I had been searching for – the magnum opus, the secret code, the dead sea scrolls of our neurotic ways. As I later learned, there is a great deal more to Dr. Naranjo’s wisdom than what is found in Character and Neurosis.  I gained much insight and knowledge from his workshop teachings, his direct and open way of being with you as a person, and his other books. In particular, his teachings on instinctual subtypes have been crucial to my understanding of personality in general and mine in particular.

But the book was formidable. To be equal to the challenge, I felt I needed to bring a demanding nature to the reading, to the task of mastering his words, for it seemed to require that kind of power and strength to win out at the end of the day. I expected, with success in this endeavor, to find within it everything I needed – to possess the secret of the human soul. I would sacrifice myself to the task because the reward was great. Here surely would be found what I had to know, for I truly believed there was a clear and compelling answer to who we are. I hoped that in Character and Neurosis, I could discover the wisdom about the unyielding albeit dynamic substance of human nature, the simple and straightforward yet at the same time incredibly complex and subtle structure of character. Here a conditioned individual could discover his or her hidden self, however healthy and adjusted, however influenced by predecessors or traumas, and however defended and resisted by brilliant lies, clever distractions and disheartening compromises.

While there was much to learn from the Foreword and Introduction, the core of the book, and the answer to my elusive self, seemed to lie in the chapters about each enneatype, beginning with a tantalizing introduction to the passion of each character. Immediately, I was swept back in time to the original meaning of the words used to describe the governing emotional impulses – Wrath, Accidia, Pride, Avarice, Gluttony. As I was later to understand, Naranjo not only sets the right tone for appreciating the true nature of our constitutional poisons, he makes considerable advances upon Oscar Ichazo’s original descriptions – in clarifying, for example, the Six’s passion as Fear, Anxiety and Cowardice, instead of Timidity, by making Vanity and (classical) Narcissism the deficit craving of the Three instead of Deceit, by focusing the One’s interference of instinct on the more exact state of Resentment rather than Anger, and by improving upon Indolence with the more complex state of Accidia to capture the Nine’s unique deficiency-motivated drive.

These contributions bring much needed specificity and depth to this all-important, primal aspect of character, revealing the passive heart of each conditioned being – in the Three’s pervasive living for the eyes of others and her image in service of a neurotic need for attention and appreciation, in the Six’s constant uneasiness, apprehension and worry about what may happen, an anxiety coexisting with a neurotic need for safety and security, in the Nine’s persistent self-forgetting, disconnection and not wanting to see, arising in close conjunction with a neurotic need for inside and outside peace and stability. And the conditioned states of the other enneatypes seemed more strange and terrible: the Eight’s gritty greed to bring life to an inner deadness, the Five’s reflexive refusing of life by holding on and holding in, the Four’s heartfelt craving to bring goodness into an inner badness. The One’s emotional state seemed especially ironic, that such virtue should be hounded by such evil and destructiveness. But even the “lighter” types suffered – the Two and Seven – as their more pleasant states of heart led to false and ultimately unsatisfying and unrealized lives.

Perhaps even greater than this original work on the passions is Naranjo’s contribution to clarifying the types’ cognitive distortions, an area in which he breaks new ground. Differing with Ichazo, he establishes more compelling understandings of our supporting mental “strategies” (and ultimately more useful for recognition and healing). These can be clearly seen in the fixation of Accusation and Blame/Guilt Avoidance in the Six (Vs. Cowardice), in the focus on Perfection in the One (Vs. Resentment), in Deception of the Three (Vs. Deceit or Vanity), in Detachment in the Five (Vs. Stinginess), and in Fraudulence in the Seven (Vs. Planning) – all cognitive counterparts of their type-specific passions which negatively affect both an individual’s relationships with herself and others (e.g., self-accusation and accusation of others, perfection of self and others, etc.)

While Dr. Naranjo’s work on elucidating the intertwined and dominant traits for each type is of important and original significance, representing the main “x-ray device” for recognizing type (in addition to instinct expression), perhaps his greatest contribution in terms of adding an entirely new aspect to this “science of personality” is his aligning each type with the most relevant defense mechanism. This advance is seen clearly in understanding how the Nine sustains her unique kind of blindness through the blurring operation of Narcotization and Deflection, in appreciating the Eight’s sly and cunning resistance to seeing the truth about himself via Denial, Counter-Repression and Desensitization, and in recognizing how the Three maintains her unconsciousness of inner poverty through the “positive” false-self reinforcing effects of Identification, Rationalization and Negation.

There are other important aspects to Character and Neurosis but since they did not play as critical a role in my journey, I will only briefly note them here. These include a perspective on the typical etiologies of the nine types and comparisons of each type to antecedent psychoanalytical characterizations. (I was especially appreciative of his explanation of Jung’s types and how they play out among the enneatypes). Each type-chapter ends fittingly with existential psychodynamics, or how each enneatype lives out its particular Catch-22 cycle of self-interference and self-futility. This aspect is central to Dr. Naranjo’s work and a major contribution in understanding the self-frustrating nature of conditioned character. For it is in this mechanism that one comes face-to-face with the terrible and unique price each type pays for adopting the security of his character and how the craving to “find being” in conditioned personality serves to perpetuate the deficient craving and is doomed to fail.

Though at this stage I did not appreciate the ground-breaking steps being taken in Dr. Naranjo’s work, or the extensive work that had gone before, I knew that it met my long list of strident demands and could sense that in it lay the key to understanding myself and others. But there were two obstacles in my path. One was that this knowledge seemed to come at a steep price, that perhaps his book, while deep and strong, was maybe too deep and too strong. I couldn’t help feeling unsettled by what seemed to me the shockingly dark and tragic nature of these states of being and to wonder if our basic natures were really so grim and hopeless.

What about our good deeds, finer thoughts and idealistic feelings? Didn’t most of us lead pretty decent lives? But in his book, there seemed no relief; Dr. Naranjo had taken us to the center of Dante’s Inferno and once there, it seemed God had forsaken us. I wondered whether this Latin shaman, who worked with Perls and Ichazo, who prayed with Amazon Indians and Sufis, could truly be the bearer of the light that he hinted was possible by a greater awareness of these conditions. I wondered if, were I to accept this hellish state of affairs and not be blinded by the klieg lights of my protecting virtues, it would be possible to move on? For I seemed less capable of seeing myself in these grim portraits than in the lighter and more demonstrative descriptions of character in the “Enneagram marketplace.”

This grim acceptance was to be the next turning point in my journey. But first, I ran – away from his book and from what he was saying. I went back to the other teachers, sought relief in their friendlier, more comfortable ways of describing who we were. It was easier and it seemed I would be accepted back in the fold. But it turned out it was too late for that and after several false starts and detours, I decided to stay with my Virgil and went back to Naranjo’s book with even greater determination. I would stick it out, accept his dark vision and hope to transcend it. Perhaps there was something in his world-view that appealed to my more pessimistic inner nature. Or perhaps it was that sense of challenge, that here was something truly difficult, something truly worthy of attainment and thus worth spending a great deal on to overcome.

But there lay in me another, even greater obstacle to my self-knowing: a strong and unacknowledged desire to become great on the spine of the work, on the strength of its veiled truths; a secret urging to be larger than the rest, bigger than ordinary life. If I could decipher this puzzle, if I could reach the depths of understanding needed in this endeavor, I would be able to achieve what I wanted. This compulsion surfaced in a dictum I began to utter, first to myself and later to others: “No one can claim to understand the Enneagram, much less teach it, until he fully understands Naranjo’s book in its enormous extent, unfathomable depths, and extraordinarily illuminating subtlety.” Fine words these! – and a grand challenge to rise above the muck.

After several forays into this modern Hell of Dante’s, with this smiling, eye-twinkling Chilean Virgil as my guide (for that was how I imagined him before we met), I stumbled and became lost. The book was clear but also unyielding, rich and intelligent yet I was unable to really understand. I would occasionally run across shining nuggets and stash them in my bag but when I searched for the mother lode, all was dark and mysterious. The more I struggled, the more things seemed scattered, unorganized, chaotic. I couldn’t gain a foothold, couldn’t get traction. And so I discovered I could not satisfy my own standard, could not meet my own dictate. What vanity to think that I, who really knew so little, would be among the few who could answer this summons!

But filled with my powerful illusions and steely determination, I soldiered on, continuing the battle to plumb the book’s depths and make sense of its teachings. I would read and annotate, extract, organize and summarize into chart after chart, notebook after notebook, binder after binder, until the sheer size of the effort exhausted me and the groaning weight of my notes made any real understanding impossible. But despite gaining a tentative grasp of the essentials of character from Dr. Naranjo’s book, I still did not know myself. And in other areas of my life, I continued to react blindly with anger and hate. I judged and condemned without reason or compassion. I was anxious for approval and admiration. My capacities for love and empathy seemed meager compared to my selfishness and ambition. Even though I ardently believed that to leave this Hell, I must first see something about myself, something true, both in the moment and over my lifetime, that nothing else could proceed until I gained a sufficient degree of self-awareness, I was unable to move forward. Why was nothing happening despite my great effort?

In time, I would realize that I had not brought to the work the right attitude and attention, had not met it openly and directly, preferring instead mastery, logic and energy to direct communion. I was guilty of greed and hubris, frightened of true connection. I wanted to acquire rich ideas which fit neatly in square boxes so I could go forth and conquer. I had been seeking an exchange – I would dig in the gold mine and the book would provide 24-carat nuggets. I asked much of Character and Neurosis  but it seemed to be asking something of me. I didn’t understand that this “meeting” needed to be an exchange of shared intention to grow and evolve, that interacting with Dr. Naranjo’s book meant having a loving conversation about the human heart and mind.

Although I was confident I had narrowed the list of possibilities to two types, maybe three, with my then-habitual way of working, I had become hopelessly stuck. I burned with frustration and hopelessness. I not only hadn’t mastered Naranjo’s book; I remained as unclear as ever about my type, the most important goal of all. Was I not ready to see, not ripe enough? – as he asks the reader late in the book. Or was there some other reason, something about me or my type? Close to giving up entirely, I decided I needed a totally fresh approach to what I was doing. And what exactly was I doing besides creating chart after chart, list after list? Waiting for inspiration to strike, I suppose, as I continued my self-imposed exegesis. But my charts didn’t have the realness and the energy of life, their sharp edges lacked the vitality and chaos of the simple interaction with another person.

How could I bring them together? Apparently not by comparing a list of traits to who I thought I was, or by matching my behavior to some typical actions expressed by one type or another, or by correlating my feelings to one type or another. I would ask, Was my anger that of the One’s Wrath, the Two’s link to Eight, or the Three’s frustrated vanity? Was my worry that of the self-preservation One’s anxiety, the anxious-to-please Two, or the over-extended Three? Was my controlling nature that of the dominating One, the willful Two, or the achieving-oriented Three? All this comparing and matching and explaining was going nowhere. Each time I asked these questions, I came up with unclear or different answers, or sometimes I’d go back and forth between answers, making it feel as if I were going round in circles. I knew I didn’t know my type but it seemed there was a great deal more I didn’t know. Was I getting in my own way?

And then came the next important turning point in my self-knowing work, one inspired by Character and Neurosis. I turned for help to one of the Naranjo’s sources of inspiration, Karen Horney, and her approach to self-analysis and neurotic needs. In Self-Analysis, Dr. Horney took me on a entirely different kind of journey of discovery, of a client aided by psychoanalysis but also a process which seemed to provide the basis for working alone. After struggling fruitlessly with trying to reconcile her neurotic trends with the Enneagram’s types, the real value turned out to lie in the rules and framework she offers for doing self-work grounded in the realities of everyday living. This approach develops the capacity to be more aware of how we are in different types of significant experiences and follows with the free-associating of those reactions to other experiences. Together, they provide a rich basis for a penetrating form of analysis, for detecting underlying patterns which hold true over time and which must be either the expression of character traits and motives or the actual traits and motives themselves.

Aha! – I had been going about things backwards, looking to match a theoretical model to an equally abstract sense of myself and my relations (and thus completely vulnerable to the distorting effects of my self-image, conditioned feelings and thoughts). Here was a means to objectively record and understand what I actually did, said and felt, and to use that record as a basis for determining my type. Here was an approach which satisfied my desire for working alone (free from the distractions and distortions of others, no matter how wise) and which would take advantage of my strength of purpose and capacity for self-directed development. This approach also required I give myself the support, patience and encouragement I needed and which was obviously lacking.

Despite the sense of despair at “starting over,” for so it felt at times, I pursued this self-knowing approach, accumulating a substantial mass of significant living experiences and associations as well as learning to use it to channel Dr. Naranjo’s masterful expression of character into a personal work-on-self process. With my two guides, I began to see I had gotten hopelessly stuck in a dead-end of theory and analysis, however rich and true, and had not been able to open to what my life was about. I realized I had fallen prey to others’ opinions and an over-intellectual approach, looking for answers first without first looking for what was there. All my charts lay neat and orderly around me but they had not been alive with true awareness and understanding until now.

Horney’s approach not only provided a way to work up the very strongest explanations about my observed actions and reactions, i.e., what traits, defenses and motives were at work; it engendered a basis – in tandem with Naranjo’s teachings – by which to explore the impacts and consequences of my character on my life, past and present. In the later stages of this evolving process, I was to discover further that it contained the means to leverage that growing self-understanding to reach deeper to the core of my character, to include my several conflicting sub-personalities (or instinctual subtypes), and to help me understand more about my character’s origins. This process is now serving as a basis by which to absorb and integrate this greater self-understanding, and to encourage greater self-acceptance and compassion. Hopefully, in doing so, it will facilitate bringing a more complete sense of myself to my life.

Over a relatively short time, I began to see myself more clearly, to understand what it means to have a character, and to appreciate its hold over my life, especially its manifold manifestations, origins, consequences and even its value. I began to see how the manifold facets of personality play out in my work, my love life, with friends and family, and in the world at large; how they guide and limit me, how they provide security and also sameness and despair. As importantly, I became aware of my resistances, saw the cunning traps I set and the lies I told myself, and the crafting of clever inhibitions and evasions. I noticed, too, the constant self-blaming and invalidating, and my knack at arriving at wrong answers, the shading and compromising of truths, and the forgetting of significant experiences and insights. And with a growing irony, I became aware of the many false steps I had been taking – the premature conclusions, the superficial and partial “knowings”, the urgings to accept a number, the condemning of certain types (as if some were better than others!), the rushes to judgment, the desire to put one after another antidotal strategy into effect – all forms of progress which had led only to deeper entanglement.

As I began to see more, I began to realize that this seeing did not need to be so complicated, that the anxiety I felt in my body (when I bothered to notice) was a constant and normal state of affairs, and that it was tied to some basic but denied sense of fearfulness; that the anger I usually felt and too often expressed was a defensive reaction to threats and chaos and provided me with a means to stay in control (reinforced in childhood by my being the target of my father’s angry and controlling nature); that what seemed my harsh judging of others and myself was at bottom a means to alleviate an illogical sense of over-responsibility, was more in the nature of a constant blaming designed to fend off guilt; and that much of my search for the right and final answer to things was linked to my need for that great authority, that unerring god who knows everything. While I needed further help from Naranjo’s teachings on instinctual subtypes (since the other subtypes, while true at times, seemed as often to be as foreign to me as another type entirely, especially the self-preservation variety), I was at the place where I was able to finally track down and observe my elusive quarry, my hidden (and some would say, false) self  – the sexual counterphobic Six.

My initial reactions to this much longed-for success were both expected and surprising. They were expected in that there had been grounds for feeling the truth of this reality before and that others had apparently seen it as well. It felt awful and the more I saw it, the more awful it felt. I did not like being a Six. But the surprising aspect was that I did not feel especially elated by my triumph, that it came with realizing that, like others, I too had a type and was somehow less special and ordinary. In fact, I discovered, to my dismay and embarrassment, that I did not like having a type! Everything now suddenly felt flatter, duller. While believing that what I had discovered about myself was true – a feeling that has remained constant ever since (finally some certainty!) – things also felt anticlimactic, boring, almost despairing. As the song says – Is That All There Is?

But as the old drama in me slowly lessened, as that sense of life-and-death struggle that I had wrapped around my driving need to know and conquer began to fade, and with it the neurotic desire to do “great things”, these dark feelings have changed to feelings of a quiet optimism. Thanks to my two guides, it looks like I am half-way through this journey – not so blind to my blindness, not so unconscious of my unconsciousness. There’s even a sense of rightness (almost pleasure) about knowing I’m a mostly automatic person; that I live in a way that doesn’t leave me satisfied or proud, that I’m lazy, anxious, angry, selfish, fearful, proud, irritable, demanding, vain; that I’m greedy and inconsiderate, self-absorbed, and interested primarily in my own glory.

The good news is I know this, if not all the time, if not always in the moment, then sometimes and afterwards. I almost enjoy seeing the still-surprising arrival each morning of my passion, or more usually, one of its manifestations in disguise, as it seeks to take over me and my day, especially those things most important. While I’m a long way from Dr. Naranjo’s heaven of liberation, of being freely abundant and loving, or from Dr. Horney’s goal of being awake and free of neurosis, it feels I’m on the lower slopes of Purgatory and my Beatrice is waiting patiently to usher me into a place I cannot imagine. Whether or not this happens also seems less important than before.

In concluding this stumbling story of mine, I would like to say that despite my initial demands of Dr. Naranjo and his book – my wanting a clear and compelling answer to who we are, I have come to appreciate that no one has all the answers, that each of us can only bring his or her unique talent and perspective to this grand adventure. In my opinion, Claudio Naranjo is not only unique and talented but a special genius whose qualities shine forth in his work and relations with others, and who sits tall on the shoulders of the past masters of healing and character. I have learned from my own experience that the right reading of his book offers real hope for personal growth and awareness, and for ultimately being able to offer compassion for oneself and others.

I also think that, while different people, influenced by their types, may need different approaches to self-knowing work, Dr. Horney’s approach is one that merits serious attention by most of us. This is so because it’s value is not just in knowing your type (as I first thought). Indeed, I have begun to realize that knowing yourself means a lot more than that. It’s about knowing yourself and how your character impacts and informs your entire life. It’s about being aware of what you do, and how you feel and think. It means knowing why you express yourself the way you do because of your underlying motives. In this view, true self-knowing means understanding why your life has been the way it has, why you made the choices you made (or failed to), why you acted and felt as you did, and how these mechanisms of yours are not only a part of a whole but are consistent over time (even when it seems you contradict yourself and act in conflicting ways).

It means, as I painfully learned, accepting your commonality with the rest of humanity as well as honoring your uniqueness. And it means integrating those revealed (and not so admirable) parts of yourself in an awakened form of living. Karen Horney’s compassionate and pragmatic approach, combined with Claudio Naranjo’s deep and liberating wisdom, provides one way to attain that active and activating knowledge of ourselves.

The Enneagram Monthly is planning to run follow-on articles describing the enneagram-oriented self-knowing approach Bruce developed in his work-on-self. He can be reached at Brucelov @ pacbell.net.

From Issue 190, January 2003

family of monkeys in india

A New Year is a time to give in to the temptation of making resolutions — some keep them more than others— can’t brag that my record is worthy of mentioning…But what’s the harm in taking stock of where we’re at in life and if we can tweak some areas towards more wisdom.

Every positive change in one area can be seen as negative at some other level.  Well, that’s my excuse anyway for slacking on resolutions such as losing wight, exercising, being less grumpy, working harder, doing more spiritual practice, yada, yada, yada…

Doesn’t each positive resolution comes at a cost to something else? Are our actions not like loose particles in a circle of mirrors in a kaleidoscope — move one and the entire picture changes? Interconnectedness is a permanent condition everywhere in nature; human, animal or plant. And, being alive means engaging in action with all the risks and consequences that come with it. Act we must, but the degree of skill, attention or understanding we bring is largely up to us.

In This Issue:

The main theme is centered around examining common questions about what our purpose is, who we are and if needed, what we can do about it. A few specific and some more abstract perspectives are mixed together to address a range of questions.

Terry Saracino took to the enneagram like a duck to water and has been teaching it for more than 20 years. With that much experience comes refinement that usually results in a simplification right down to the most essential core elements of what really matters. Terry has gone through numbers or such refining processes and her you have “The Path with no Goal: Simple but not Easy.” Clear and to the point is her brief description of a few dilemmas most of us can relate to, and her specific suggestions of  how to deal with them.

In “Personality, Process and Levels of Development” Susan Rhodes explores Ken Wilber’s description of nine stages of transformation in Transformations of Consciousness (1986), a seminal book (co-authored with Jack Engler and Daniel P. Brown) that opens with Jack Engler’s superb description of the aims of psychotherapy and meditation…but I digress. Wilber lists pathologies that can occur at each of nine levels ranging from undifferentiated consciousness to totally integrated consciousness. Wilber’s approach is that any level can be either normal or pathological, from the lowest to the highest. As best we know, Wilber did not draw the nine levels from anything related to the enneagram, and yet, most of them seem to have an uncanny resonance.

Susan could see how this scheme can enrich the understanding of the enneagram and at the same time points out ways in which the enneagram can enrich Wilbers descriptions.

Amy Zoll has been wondering about what makes a person drawn to co-dependent relationships with those who suffer from a Borderline Personality Disorder. Has it something to do with the love/hate relationship we have with parts of ourselves or the degree to which we believe that we are an image, and lose contact with our real nature?  Apparently “The Seed of Splitting in All of Us”  and Amy takes us through a brief example of the conflicting narratives each type tends to favor.  Her point is that if we accept the premise that finding “perfection” is not what life usually can offer, especially if we expect such perfection from another….it may encourage us to move towards seeing the humanness in ourselves and others.

Mona Coates and Judith Searle continue with “Sex, Love and your Personality: Type Seven, the Enthusiast in Love” filling the gap at the Enneagram Monthly of articles about how sexual antics of each enneagram type.  Sevens are the “Jack of all trades and masters of (none/some)” by nature of ebullient curiosity and energy that makes it hard for them to stick to a few subjects. Voracious Sevens could not possibly engage in gluttony unless they had a sturdy digestive system. Psychologically, their digestive system is the ability to rationalize, and Sevens can be veeery good at that.  Well, to be good at something does not mean that one must indulge in it. Sevens who overload their plate in youth, with age and wisdom must learn what to eat and what to leave…

While on the subject, Judith Searle wrote this thoughtful article on “Sexuality, Gender Roles and the Enneagram” a while back, but human nature is fairly stable and does not changed from one decade to another.  The question of male/female differences has puzzled humanity forever and even last week during Stephen Hawking’s 70th birthday celebration when he was asked what the greatest mystery is in the universe….he responded “women.”

Few argue over male/female physical differences compared to the debates over the extent of cultural imprinting. Those who credit cultural differences as more important tend to regard the hormonal and physical as irrelevant. Their opponents claim that it is precisely because of the irrefutable physical differences that all cultures have developed a set of cultural expectations to fit physically and hormonally set realities. The truth is somewhere in the middle, as usual.  Judith sees the masculine energy most often typified by the type Eight, and the polar opposite female energy by types Four and Two.

Joel M. Rothaizer asks “What’s the Point?” A question most of us grapple with, rarely seen put so clearly as in this superb article. I can relate to every phase of how ambitions and expectations drive us and no matter how successful or pleased we are with the results, sooner or later we realize that we don’t get to keep (or own) any of it and that the only stable thing in life is the awareness of being. Yes, this elusive, yet omnipresent sense of being that is under the surface if we only cared to scratch… and yet, it feels that we can’t get to it even if we scratched our skin off. Why? Joel invested a lot of time, effort and attention in these matters and found how the enneagram can be of great help and also saw how it can be abused and act as an additional layer of armor that keeps us from that part in us we try to get to.

Tsivya R. Larson looks at “Type Three and Anxiety.” The title is somewhat provocative since the Three is reputed to be a feeling, not a fear type, an aggressive type to boot, one that exudes confidence and competency. But anxiety is probably a cousin of the survival instinct and rather basic to all types. Actually, let’s re-phrase that; anxiety is at the base of all types. It is part of the mechanism that motivates us to find a way — a suitable way for the type of energy we are gifted with or subscribe to — for dealing with the world.  Some say that type Three is the most inscrutable given their effectiveness at portraying themselves as they are willing to be seen. Such skill takes time and effort to develop. Tsivya’s analysis and description of the phases of this process is particularly illuminating. At some point, mindfulness is needed to step outside ourselves if we want to cultivate our inner observer that will stand, as if separate and without judging, be a witness.

John Howe tells his story of “Missing the Point.”  Some of us (me included) have experienced a similar process in the search for our enneagram type, some more than once, others are still at it, suspended in doubt between two or more types. It can be the damnedest thing to pin down your type if you happen to teeter on a cusp or if your life has been so turbulent as if you had multiple incarnations and were forced to bend and flex to adapt to changing circumstances.

There was a TV game show What’s My Line a few decades ago where panelists were required to probe a contestant’s occupation by asking only questions which could be answered “yes” or “no.” (Every “yes” allowed the panelist to ask additional questions, with every “no” it was the next panelists turn… ) Sometimes the line of questioning started with a lucky guess that made a short shrift out of the contestant’s secret; other times if questioning started on the wrong foot, it would remain resistant.

Our mind likes to seek out patterns and we can always find a plausible alternative to our own type. John is a type Six, a type that has earned the reputation of being particularly adept at considering alternative realities but at the price of doubt.

Connie Duckett is “Exploring Type Nine, the Mediator” which happens to be her type. She does not have doubts about being a Nine, but her dilemma is of a different nature — what it means to be a type Nine, really, and how much anger there was coiled under her façade of nineish congeniality. Where is the diplomatic sweet and tolerant side when stubbornness, passive aggression and withdrawing take over? How much of that sweetness, adaptability and tolerance was nothing more than a way to avoid conflict or prop up the image of being agreeable? This is a different way of “changing”our type, but this time it’s from an idealized and little understood model to the adult version, the one that includes the dark side as well.

Richard Curran Trussel + Carli

~~by Richard Curran Trussel~~

Moses had an easy going, placid nature. We got him early in his life and gave him lots of love, providing consistent training and discipline. He was a late bloomer. He didn’t bark until he was past 11 1/2 years old. I seriously questioned his intelligence. Often he just seemed so blasé, as if no one was home. But this German shepherd-Rottweiler mix turned out to be the most exceptional dog we’d ever had in terms of intelligence, attention span (longer than ours), and depth of being.¹  Moses was a Nine with a strong One wing. He was a Self-Preservation subtype whom we clearly observed moving along stress and healing lines to points Six and Three.

In this article, I will justify recognizing Enneagram types in non-human animals, essentially in the so-called higher mammals—especially companion animals such as dogs and cats. In passing I’ll also discuss animal totems that symbolically express type qualities. Finally, I wish to explore some of the implications of all this especially for humans and their use of the Enneagram for transformational purposes.

Many Enneagram affectionarios are familiar in passing with the expressions “the law of three” and the “law of seven” and the claim that all of nature is governed by the processes and operations represented by them. Combining these laws together forms the Enneagram which the esoteric tradition claims is a template that reveals a universal structure of nature. Those who have ever received Riso and Hudson’s mailer or seen the graphic at their web site, see this idea communicated in the composite picture of Enneagram diagrams merging/emerging with spiral galaxies.

Since humans are very much a part of that universe, the Enneagram structure has been applied and developed in human personality theory where it has yielded many fruits. With our legitimate self-interest, it’s easy to ignore the idea that Enneagram patterns must be all around us and most assuredly structure the animal world as well as the human. My reasoning is quite straightforward. If the Enneagram emerges from the triads, the three centers of intelligence reflected in the head, heart, gut—the thinking, feeling, instinctive; and if animals have the three centers in common with human beings, then they too should manifest Enneagram types.

What scientifically has been discovered about the continuity between beings, human and nonhuman? Biological similarities between humans and other species are quite clear in terms of nervous systems and organs. Astonishingly, the DNA of chimpanzees is 98% identical to humans. Animals are sentient beings capable of pain and pleasure. They respond to the environment pursuing life and avoiding death. On the level of intelligence, human beings differ in degree and not in kind.

These findings of contemporary neurophysiology and clinical psychology contradict the view advanced by René Descartes that shaped many of the modern assumptions about non-human life as mere instinctual or mechanistic organisms. As author Bernard Rollin concludes, to suggest that a creature with a nervous system displaying biochemical processes that in us regulate consciousness, that withdraws from the same noxious stimuli and dangers as we do, that has sense organs, and yet somehow does not enjoy a mental life is completely implausible.²

Animals exhibit discrimination and choice in assessing friend, foe, or meal ticket. They anticipate the outcome of their actions in the hunt, or in coaxing human beings to meet their needs. In relating to their environment, they learn from observation and experience. They make subtle logical associations. For instance, in our household, grabbing my coat and putting on certain shoes sends our critters into pandemonium, for a walk is immanent.

Animals entertain memories, they dream while sleeping, and they relate to others in complex ways. Language was once thought to be the exclusive province of human beings. While not enunciating human words, many animals can become bilingual to a degree, knowing their own species communications and learning the meaning of human words. Our dog Moses responded to 70 words and short phrases. We began to spell words around him as you do in front of children when you don’t want them eavesdropping. He quickly learned w-a-l-k. Other species are even more accomplished. Koko the gorilla is well known for learning a vocabulary of 600 words, composing simple sentences, and exhibiting an IQ between 80 and 90. Indeed, studies of gorillas by Jane Goodall and others first cracked the wall of prejudice and unfounded assumptions regarding animals. In their field research they began giving names instead of numbers or alphabetical letters to their subjects. They recognized distinct personalities and individual behavior strategies in the clans they studied.

In relating to humans, companion animals especially appreciate affection, enjoy being spoiled, and are susceptible to emotional distress. Indeed the FDA has recently approved an array of drugs to treat depression, anxiety and psychosomatic disorders in dogs and cats.

With the above examples, I’ve attempted to demonstrate that animals possess in common with humans the centers of head and heart. I think it is self-evident that animals would be strong in relating to the environment through the instinctual center. Therefore animals have in common with human beings the three centers which shape the triads out of which all nine enneagram types emerge.

Animal Totems and Type

We might note that animals have had a limited place in enneagram teachings. Beesing, Nogosek, and O’Leary use animals as a teaching aid to express something both of type compulsion and redeemed or healthy type.³ For instance, Threes can be peacocks demanding attention through vain strutting, but once integrated can be like the eagle, with economy of motion, an unmistakable identity, and maintaining stable life-long relationships (eagles mate for life). Fours can be basset hounds who express sadness as a way of being connected to others, or they may evolve into sleek horses maintaining a special, self-possessed grace. The Six is like a rabbit, nervous and alert, ready to freeze or bold and run—or fight if cornered. The Six transformed is the graceful deer uniquely adapted to survive, living in a relaxed way yet alert way and drawing strength from the herd.

More than just a simple teaching technique, these animal totems have an archetypal quality. In Native American terms, each has a certain kind of medicine or power that can be assimilated by a spiritually attuned two-legged. Perhaps the power or quality would not even be recognized or known at all unless manifested by the animal. On this level animals bear profound gifts.

Obviously not all rabbits are Sixes, nor are individual horses necessarily Fours. Here we shift from archetypal traits to the actual ones manifested in each animal. Perhaps a helpful analogy comes from the Enneagram typing of countries. Germany has a Sixness in its collective national persona, Italians can seem very Twoish, especially compared to the Five-like English. Latin countries can be very Eightish. But in each of the countries all the types are found, filtered through the persona of the mother country.

I speculate that there might be a higher incidence of certain types among particular breeds. Dog trainers differentiate among breeds and training styles that are most effective. For instance, many of the Rottweilers I’ve known seem to be Nines even though the breed has a reputation for Eight-like dominance. Trainers say Rottweilers respond to positive reinforcement rather than strict discipline, as indeed do most Nines (witness the passive aggressive behavior or stubbornness when Nines are pressured to do something the don’t want to do). Shifting species, perhaps many Arab horses are Fours, for the breed is known for being high strung, profoundly emotional, and capable of deeper relationships with people than calm quarter horse who by contrast is generally quite indifferent to humans.

Typing Animals

Moses, Nook and Bubbles

There is always a danger of mistyping anyone, including animals. The wildly divergent typing of famous people by the leading Enneagram authors readily demonstrates this. The Code of Ethics adopted by the International Enneagram Association says to allow others to discover their types themselves. But since animals cannot self-identify or answer questions verbally, correct typing is even more difficult and requires a lot of time spent together in careful observation. The issue is further compounded because each animal species has developed their own modes of communication with each other. These may include audibles, but more often are non-verbal. Dogs display a wide range of body language including tail position to telegraph submissiveness, dominance, or playfulness. Those with horses know to pay attention to the position of the ears, the flaring of nostrils, and the swishing of the tail.

Enneagram types in animals are easier for humans to identify as the species becomes more complex, and within a given species, as the intelligence of the individual becomes higher. With increasing complexity and intelligence, individual differences become more apparent. But even with all this, there is still the danger of unconscious projection, seeing our animals as symbols of people or incidents from our own past rather than as they are. Researchers have clearly documented cases of displacement, projection, and repetition compulsion in the ways people relate to their pets.⁴

So with animals quite a bit of evidence for typing conclusions is warranted. I mentioned earlier that Moses was a Nine who exhibited a strong One wing. My wife is a Nine and our intimate knowledge of point Nine actually made it easier to type Moses and to distinguish his One wing in contrast to my wife’s Eight wing. Moses thoroughly internalized a sense of right and wrong that we helped instill in him. Most other dogs will be obedient as long as you are watching them. With Moses, we could leave the house with food on the coffee table and return with it untouched. But middle dog Nook (a Seven) needs constant supervision, and once on a hike, ripped off a cucumber from my backpack while I was looking the other way. When caught misbehaving, Moses would make a point of letting us know how that he was really good most of the time. He liked the recognition, “good dog,” more than being petted. Moses also had a sense of the daily routines, and when we overlooked something, he would be in our face with a steady gaze until we figured it out and got back to the right way of doing things.

His Self-Preservation subtype manifested in a couple of ways. Whenever we’d been away, even for a matter of days, rather than excessive demonstrations of affection and excitement over our return, he would amble up to see if we brought him anything to eat, then go sniff some bushes. But how he hated it when my wife rearranged the furniture (in the past that sometimes resulted in a major move). He would get despondent and worried and live at point Six until his domicile stabilized. But for Nook, life is just one party after another. We are simply her ticket to adventure. Like Sevens who have difficulty making commitments to others, she never developed deep emotional bonds with us or even the other dogs in our pack.

Bubbles is the third in our canine clan and everything is about her. This high-strung toy poodle needs to be noticed. She considers herself exempt from the rules that apply to the other two dogs, yet rarely does she exhibit real joy or happiness. A pervasive melancholy surrounds her sense of being special and she has abandonment issues. Indeed, we got her as an abandoned stray from the Humane Society when she was 11 years old. Every once in a while I catch a look in her eyes that is identical to a human Four friend of ours.

Moving Toward the Integration Point

I’ve mentioned how Moses especially could move to the stress point. And while in fixation, he often displayed the laziness or sloth of a Nine in a pervasive economy of effort, refusing to go outside with the others if he had no business to do. Later in life, he increasingly manifested aspects of essence. Dog interests were never left behind, but through his extensive interaction with us, he learned greater self-awareness and esteem. Moving to point Three, he took pride in his accomplishments and knew he was alpha dog. He had spells of self-initiated activity and made conscious choices we offered to him, such as which toys to play with and what area to sleep in at night. It is more difficult for us to observe the integration lines with our other dogs. On a good day, tiny Bubbles acknowledges us with gratitude with a rare lick on the hand, feels serene and connected with us. She seems less emotional and more curious about the world around her. When Nook is most secure and there are no options for the immediate future, she seems to take on point Five traits when she retreats to another room to sleep and dream by herself.

Animals and Spiritual Practice

Healthy relationships between human and other species have widely documented benefits for humans. Time spent with animals can lower blood pressure, reduce physician visits for the elderly, lessen attention deficit disorders, and lower incidence of fights and suicide attempts in prisons.⁵ Beyond this, the conscious act of communicating and working with animals can function as a spiritual practice. Psychologist and author Dr. Margot Lasher says the lesson learned from animals “is one that all the major spiritual traditions emphasize: the wisdom of being present in the moment. If you watch animals, you see how they find joy in, accept, or instantly respond to whatever is around them, whether it’s the smell of the air, the feeling of the earth, or the attitudes of the people around them. They sense these things and respond in the moment.”⁶

Animals can help us in the affective area. Lasher says that when people can’t “see” an animal’s emotion, it’s usually because they’ve been blocking those same feelings in themselves for years. Interacting with animals can teach us to be able to handle a range of energies in another being, which may be a first step to working on them in ourselves. This recipe for fixation work is broached in my companion article that discusses typical type behavior and the potentials for growth in each enneagram style in their relationships with animals.

Ethical Implications

Our own experiences with animals and any review of current scientific studies corroborate the notion of the continuity of all life. Animals are conscious subjects with both interests and experiences that vary according to species and individual personality type. These conclusions raise inevitable ethical questions. It is beyond the scope of this inquiry to explore responses to the notion of animal rights. But postulating that such rights exist, I personally reject the segregationist position that advocates total non-interference from humans and liberation from human contact for animals. Yet it is unwise also to collapse all differences and distinctions in relating to animals. Striving to be only a friend to one’s companion animal is a recipe for neurosis on both sides. Animals, especially herd-based, need an established hierarchy, clear boundaries, and predictable rules and routines. It is the responsibility of the human to alter the dynamic of the relationship when things go poorly. With the Enneagram and animals, I think we are in a situation analogous to that of parents. The goal is always to enhance relationships and fine-tune parenting skills. What works for one child does not work for another.

I would like to underscore typing animals is not the main purpose of this article. Rather, it is to relate to animals attentively, compassionately, and with openness—such that each being is opened to deeper aspects of the other’s and their own nature. Each can help the other to grow and integrate, manifesting aspects of essence. Spiritual practice on this level is highly relational. The transformational encounter for both parties can overcome an unnecessary alienation. As Susan Davis has said, “Relating to animals means learning to communicate across the species barrier. When the communication is based on touch, trust, and gentleness, it can be truly life-enhancing, as it seems to call forth a very ancient link.”⁷

__________

1 This part of the article is dedicated to the memory of Moses, to the lessons he taught us, and to all joy and love he brought into our lives.

2 McDaniel, Jay B., Of God and Pelicans, A Theology of Reverence for Life (Westminster/John Knox Press, Louisville, Kentucky), 1989, page 65.

3 Beesing, Maria, Robert J. Nogosek, Patrick H. O’Leary, The Enneagram: A Journey of Self Discovery (Dimension Books, Inc. Denville New Jersey), 1984, pp.120-123 & 210-218.

4 Gavriele-Gold, Joel, Ph.D., “Is that Fido or Dear Old Dad?”, Dog Fancy, March 2000, pp. 31-35.

5 Davis, Susan, “Our Pets, Ourselves: Spiritual Lessons from the Animal World,” Yoga Journal (Issue 144 January/February 1999), p. 56.

6 Ibid. p. 57.

7 Ibid. p. 126.

Richard Curran Trussel is a self-described social type six.
From Issue 61, May 2000

Richard Curran Trussel + Carli

~~by Richard Curran Trussel~~

Not everyone relates to animals, but for those who do, elements of Enneagram type manifest. One of the many gifts animals offer us is that they potentially lead us beyond our fixations.

One

What place do companion animals have with someone who is organized and orderly, striving to make every detail perfect, someone who is hardworking, disciplined, and rather tense? Often no place. Dogs shed hair all over the neat house and tear up the yard. Cats love to jump into out-of-bounds areas at their whim. A Reformer I know finally acquired a dog because the perfect home for kids seemed to require one. She treated the animal as another household chore, attending to its food, water, and constitutional needs, then neglected it to scurry about other necessary and important tasks.

Other Ones establish deeper relationships, sometimes with an element of control. “I love the independence of cats, to train and work with them, to have them actually love you is a challenge and I love challenges.” Another one renounces the reformer track and accepts animals as they are. “My problems are with people. They won’t act right.” This gives the internal critic some time off but also testifies to a dichotomy—the split between the rational, tightly-controlled side of themselves versus repressed drives and feelings. “I once considered a career working with animals, I just adore them so much, but I realized I just can’t be rational about them like I am with people.”

Animals can help Reformers in many ways. Humane training techniques assist the One to be more generous with praise and encouragement instead of criticism. Animals, as sensitive beings responding to voice tone and body language, can inform ones of those rising tides of anger they usually don’t sense. Playful animals may lead Ones to nature and to point Seven where they can grow by relaxing and experiencing pleasure. Why not take the dogs to an open space, remove the leashes, and then run around with them like an idiot? Finally, if the Reformer is open to it, an animal’s unconditional love can be balm for a soul tormented by shoulds. It contradicts the belief that love is only earned by being perfect.

Two

Most companion animals would probably choose Twos if given the chance. Twos are renown for their ability to sense others’ needs. They readily give complements, praise, and reassurance. Animals as opportunists have no problem with the difficulty Twos face expressing negative feelings directly. What do Twos get in return? They get an opportunity to be indispensable to someone. The animal will give the care giver the recognition and love they crave. Could Twos lose themselves in animal relationships to the exclusion of people? Probably not, since normal to healthy Twos need to connect with people, and usually lots of them. For many Twos, animals help populate a warm and loving household. Twos appreciate an animal’s reading of their needs without the Two having to verbalize them. “They sense when you’ve had a bad day and they are onto you right away. They know.”

The Twos I know are evenly divided between cats and dogs. Cats mesh with the Two’s independent streak. Note how the following comments attend to the animal’s needs. “Dogs keep you more homebound. We just couldn’t have a dog with all our travel and social life. It just would not be fair to the dog.” Cats helped this Two overcome the presumption of I-know-what’s-best-for-you. She said, “They helped me learn tolerance of something that thinks and works so differently from you. To really relate to them, I had to see the world through their eyes rather than interpreted through mine.” The cats also softened the impulse to manipulate and reflected the Two’s ambivalence about intimacy. “It’s neat—they will come to your lap after they’ve escaped your grasp when you wanted them to be in your lap before.”

Other Twos prefer dogs for the ready connection and deep bonds. Their dogs get lots of attention and exercise. Each side gets high on the mutual interaction. All Twos report deep grief when they lose their companion animals, emphasizing the emotion of sadness. One Giver missed his pet so deeply that he attended a grief recovery support group.

Three

A Three’s need to succeed while being seen can conflict with having pets. What’s the point in having them when their care takes away from time working on important tasks? This nuisance is further complicated with image concerns. As one Three said, “Cat hair all over me and the furniture is not my idea of fun.” Some Threes might have animals that project a certain image—having an “in” breed of dog or cat. No doubt many Threes are found in the competitive world of show animals. Here winning takes precedence over relationship with the animal. Indeed the animal often lives with the trainer rather than the owner who shows it. But sometimes image gives way to something deeper. “We had cats, dogs, rabbits. It fit in with the “country mom” image I had at the time. But beyond that I really liked their companionship and enjoyed taking the dogs with me in the car and having them in the house.”

At heart, Performers are relational. Animals offer Threes an experience of love unrelated to performance or image. “At first I questioned if my cats loved me only because of what I did, my feeding them. But now I know it’s much more than that. The most important aspect is the unconditional love they give me no matter how I am on the outside. It’s very comforting—my cats have ESP and know when I need their attention.”

Four

Finding relationships to be elusive in which they really feel loved, many Fours cope with abandonment issues and a sense of being flawed and unlovable. This can lead them to withdraw from others. Animals can be used to resist total isolation. They certainly are much safer than people who don’t live up to expectations or ideals. “Pets represented what people were not—there for me.” The unconditional love animals offer may be a balm to a Four’s tormented soul, yet animals are not equipped to meet the complex range of human relational needs. The same Four told me that after a lot of inner work her relationships with animals had changed. You can see integration to point One in her comments: “There is still love, but they are not as important as before. They are fun and enjoyable, but now that I have more trust for people, pets are more like pets. They get less of my deep love, which is reserved for people. Ironically they get better care from me. I am more consistent and intentional in caring for them, like getting the dog exercised regularly. Before I would sit them on my lap and emote love to them.”

Coming out of self-absorption, being compassionate and serving the needs of others can be seen in these comments by another Four. “Before I became clear in my life, old emotional stuff would cloud my relationship with animals (and people!). Now I can really connect and know how they are feeling. The relationship is so pure, it’s about love. When I have taken in stray animals and given them shelter and love, or when I’ve helped other people with their pet problems (doing psychic animal readings) I’ve felt powerful, like I’m making a real difference with my abilities and my life is truly worthwhile.”

Five

Guarding their private space, stingy in expressing feeling, and being drained by demanding relationships with others, perhaps tropical fish would be the best pets to begin with for Fives. There is plenty to observe from a distance. And when a Five is absorbed in a project, fish can tolerate a measure of neglect. Moving up the scale, animals that like touch can move Fives out of their heads into a more sensate experience. Finally there is the whole business of having a mutual relationship with another being—not something a Five takes lightly. A Five friend described his exploration of this territory, beginning with the curiosity of having a living thing around. He observed how he could make the animal happy by feeding and petting it. He then reflected on his own responses. It felt good to take care of this creature and to be needed by it. It was not overwhelming at all. Finally he spoke of the comfort and happiness the animal brought him, and his appreciation for its unconditional love. We were far from gushy sentimentality, but I felt my friend had confided a lot.

Cats seem to be the animal of preference for the Fives I know. As a Five said, “I am attracted to self-reliant people and I like that also in animals. Dogs are too demanding. Cats are not that much work and can take care of themselves—do their thing.”

Six

When you are alert to danger, anxious, and filled with self-doubt, animals can be great friends and allies. “In my college years I had little self confidence and worried a lot about failing. But when I’d go for a walk through the streets with my German shepherd, I’ll feel strong and soon I’d have the attitude ‘hey world, take me seriously’.” In an us-and-them world there is safety in numbers, and the more of us the better. It helps to surround yourself with those you can really trust, who will be steadfast and faithful. While dogs meet this need, animals of all kinds can benefit Sixes. “As a kid they connected me to my feeling life and kept that part of me alive that wasn’t being nourished by my parents.” Another Six said, “When someone depends on you like a pet, it pulls you out of your analysis paralysis. They’re looking to you for leadership and to meet their basic needs.” Cats and dogs can help Sixes escape their fears through play and don’t mind it when Sixes are lost in thought. “More than anything else, my cocker spaniel gets me silly and outrageous. Then when I have something to worry about, I can take those long walks and be totally in my head. My dog doesn’t care and is having a blast anyway.”

Sixes who relate to animals have no patience for those who treat animals with indifference.  Here the responsibility and duty of the Six come through. “Having a pet is a responsibility not to be taken lightly. If there are problems either find a suitable home or keep them with integrity. Loyalty is definitely a two-way street.”

Seven

Making a commitment to care for an animal may not sound like much fun. It could tie a person down and limit options for adventure and excitement. If Sevens have problems with people who are clinging and put constraints on them, the same goes for animals. “Cats are independent and self-sufficient and they don’t demand that much of me. The lap stuff is a temporary sort of thing. Cats are rather exotic and it can be enjoyable to tune into their world periodically.”

What about dogs? More demanding? Perhaps. But Sevens like the companionship of those who enjoy the same things they do. Most dogs love to be included in anything involving their masters, especially if it means going somewhere. And unlike cats, you can play with them.  Sevens should select breeds that are enthusiastic, friendly, and easygoing. They should probably steer clear of nervous toy poodles who need to be coddled and sometimes are moody.

Nearly all companion animals can provide the Seven with a relationship that is steady and dependable. Certainly they are more forgiving than people of self-centeredness and not always being reliable (though many animals will set their owners straight with selected obnoxious behaviors). Finally, animals offer Sevens a path toward being more grounded and committed to something, a real step toward sobriety.

Eight

Herd or pack animals will be quick to recognize the dominance of an Eight. If the rules are sometimes erratically enforced, the consequences of disobedience are unmistakable.  The body-based signals eights send out telegraph to animals how much they can get away with. Eights have toughened themselves to the world and repressed their vulnerability and softness which they view as weakness. By accepting an Eight’s power and protection, animals can quickly bring the boss to integration point Two. “My soft side totally comes out. I spoil and indulge them.” Facilitating the shift is the innate innocence of animals, which must hit an octave with this eight virtue that lies on the other side of lust.

The repression of Eights pushes down their deep need for love. They often suspect that others hang around for what they can get from them. But once again, the unconditional love from animals is disarming. “If all the details aren’t just right, we Eights are somehow remiss. But with pets, it’s not what I do, but just the me, who I really am. Pets are emotionally sustaining.”

Nine

Hanging out with their animals is enjoyable and assuages the fear Nines have of being abandoned. Some Nines prefer animals because there is no pressure or prodding coming from people’s expectations and demands. They like the easy, harmonious connection and the absence of conflict. Nines readily turn their empathetic powers toward animals and report that they are easy to read. “I am attuned to all the animals in the neighborhood. They all have such unique personalities, I sense who they are and what they want.” Many Nines like low-maintenance animals. “Animals complicate my life. They take a lot of energy. My husband’s dog is so high energy. I finally trained her to settle down, to take on Nine traits. Now fish I like. I can watch them float around forever. I put in a couple of snails and a bottom feeder so the maintenance is real low.” Another Mediator said, “Our cat is an ideal pet. It is a community cat we took in. It greets me like a dog every night. But it goes outside to do its business and eats at the neighbors’.”

Some Nines have very intense bonds with animals and the amount of care and attention they require is not an issue, it’s just built into the routine and daily structure of life they establish for themselves. On this level they are like tribal peoples who many Enneagram teachers see as exemplars of point Nine. Tribal people refer to humans as the two-legged and land animals as the four-legged people. There is not the huge distinction between animals and people found in other cultures. All are our relations. Here the animal has a high degree of personhood and is a literal part of the family. So it’s almost as easy for Nines to lose themselves in their priorities and needs as it is with people. “The only down side is when they are hurt, you feel their pain, and when they die is feels like you do too.”

Richard Curran Trussel is a self-described social type six.
From Issue 61, May 2000

Tom Isham

Thomas Isham:
I wish to set the record straight on one issue and add some comments on another. As to the first: a delightful quotation has been floating through “The Conversation” for the past several issues, attributed sometimes to myself, sometimes to Antonio Barbato, and sometimes to both of us. “The Enneagram,” it says, “is like a compass needle pointing the way towards the transcendent.” Herewith I wish to give credit where credit is due: the quotation is from Antonio Barbato, not from me. How the confusion began, or why it continued, who can say?

The second issue derives indirectly from Antonio as well, who noted in the last conversation that St. Nylus of Ancrya “was probably the first…to write clearly that a Passion is an object of pleasure we cherish, an emotional game we play to give sense to an existence we didn’t choose and can’t understand.” The mention of St. Nylus and his affinities with Enneagram-like categories of thought prompted me to ponder more deeply a figure who is linked to St. Nylus in some important ways, Evagrius Ponticus (Fourth Century). Among the links is Chapters on Prayer, written by Evagrius but preserved under the name of St. Nylus, whose writings were acceptable to the Orthodox Church whereas portions of Evagrius’s writings were condemned as heretical. The name of Evagrius has appeared in these pages in years past, as well as in other Enneagram-related materials, and for good reason. This “desert father”—a monk and a teacher of monks—was a spiritual and psychological master whose instruction was marked by themes, vocabulary and insights that clearly resonate with the content of the Enneagram of Personality Types. His influence can be found in relation not only to personality types but to passions, essence, levels of integration and disintegration, and even Sufism.

Significantly, Evagrius, in his Praktikos, taught that there were eight logismoi or “passionate thoughts,” complete with dynamic movement and interrelationships. These eight, which correlate with all but one of the Enneagram types, are: pride (two), vainglory (three), sadness (four), avarice (five), gluttony (seven), impurity (eight), acedia (nine) and anger (one). Evagrius’s descriptions of these passions make clear that they are equivalent to the Enneagram types, absent only Type Six. John Cassian later picked up the eight passions (as did others) and Gregory the Great eventually regularized all but one of them as the Seven Capital Sins. It is obvious that Evagrius was thinking in terms very similar to those of the Enneagram community today.

According to Evagrius, the psyche (soul) was the seat of these passions, above whose turbulence was located the realm of “essential contemplation.” This realm of “essence,” as it were, could be reached in stages, as one advanced on the “cosmic ladder” up the scale of life and virtue, by purification and prayer. In essential contemplation, Evagrius taught, one attained union with God. The ascent up the cosmic ladder, the advance from one level to another, clearly has affinities with the “levels of development” elaborated by Don Riso and Russ Hudson, a subtle teaching derived from either intuition, observation, knowledge of historical precedents, or perhaps a combination of all three.

To Evagrius, as to St. Clement of Alexandria before him, the disordered passions of the soul were to be resolved into a state of deep, abiding calm; into “apatheia.” This Greek word is known to us generally as “apathy,” which carries the unhappy meaning of a lack of interest or appetite for the otherwise enjoyable things of life. Originally, it referred to release from the discord of the passions, a freedom from the interior bondages that prevented one from developing a harmonious personality capable of attaining to essential contemplation. In addition, according to Evagrius, “agape”—self-giving love, the primary Christian virtue—proceeded from apatheia.

Evagrius also taught of the “application of opposites,” a principle which appears to be similar to the Enneagram system of integration and disintegration, of “working against” or “following” the arrows. This teaching dominates his Antirrheticos and appears elsewhere in his writings as well. The principle, according to John Eudes Bamberger, may have come from Greek physicians who employed it in their medical practice. “Beyond any doubt,” Evagrius wrote, “the ability to drive away the thought of vainglory through humility, or the power to repel the demon of impurity through temperance is a most profound proof of apatheia.”¹ To Evagrius, by the way, the use of the word “demon” was not metaphorical: he believed in them. This may be offputting to some, curious to others. In the world of Evagrius, there was widespread belief that the passions were influenced by demons. Modern thought, which holds that spiritual beings are non-existent, pretty much reduces the mind to twitching gray matter. Not so the ancients.

Finally, Evagrius’s influence had a geographical sway to it. It was extensive in both the Syrian and Armenian churches and consequently influential in that crossroads region of the world. In addition, his manuals became the authoritative source of the ascetico-mystical way in Persian monasticism. It was Babai the Great, abbot of the monastery of Mt. Izla in Persia, “who introduced Evagrius’s works so successfully into Persia that they continued to be active even after the Moslem conquest, and have decisively influenced the development of the spirituality of the Persian Sufis.”²

So there you have it. Was not Gurdjieff an Armenian, and do not his teachings bear the marks of Sufism? Credit Evagrius with being a highly important link in the chain of Enneagram descent.

1. John Eudes Bamberger, OCSO, translator, with notes and introduction, Evagrius Ponticus: The Praktikos and Chapters on Prayer (Cistercian Publications, Kalamazoo, Michigan, 1981), p. 32. 2. Ibid., p. li.

Sterling Doughty

Sterling Doughty:
One of the most, or perhaps least, interesting aspects of The Conversation is its format. It’s not really a conversation nor is it that peculiar beast now threatening, along with the cell phone, civilization itself, the blog. Perhaps I enjoy it because it doesn’t fit any particular pattern and adheres strictly to a certain lack of predictability I find quite soothing. This month I thought I would plum-pick (it’s a different metaphor from cherrypick, but I’m not quite sure I want to explain the distinction quite yet) from some of last month’s entries and put my perspective into them.

Bert Rose mentioned the general agreement that the thinking triad has a base of fear and the body triad an emotional base of anger so that the emotional triad base might logically have pride as an emotional base. Sounds fine to me, except that in the fall of 1971 when I was originally passed the information on the fixations of personality, the thinking and body triads were associated, respectively, with anger and fear, while pride held the honors for the emotional triad. Then one day many months later the principles, without any explanation or discussion, as was the custom in the cult (Arica), were changed. Neither I nor my fellow apprentices thought it made much sense, but that was that. The thinking center became 4,5,6—doing—and the body center became 8,9,1—being. The living group, the emotional center, which was universally despised, was ignored. To me, evolution would have favored a relationship between fear (life / death) and the body while pride (warped sense of identity) and anger (warped sense of importance) would seem to have come later as organisms developed the capacity for weirdness of different sorts. Although that was long ago, I wonder if it might mobilize some energy.

Carl Marsak expressed the idea that he is one of the “provocateurs of the Enneagram of Personality Movement” and that a meeting of minds would be in order in the next year or so and that it should go on essentially forever. I would hardly consider myself qualified to be part of such an esteemed order of merit, but would be happy to join everyone for lunch at the Caveau des Ducs, a gourmet restaurant in a 17th century cellar in Fontainebleau, not far from Paris, near Gurdjieff ’s old Prieuré. We could eat well and toast the idiots; I would of course offer the first bottle of Armagnac and watch Carl present a kilo of “research.” Usha Mullan could certainly make it down from London, but every month or so seems a bit of a stretch. At the ripening age of 63, I must consider my liver.

Kirby Olson delves boldly, dare I say even recklessly, into classifying such disparate “beings” as a Harvard President, the author of Pornography, the chief architect and official bogeyman of Evil on Planet Earth and Odysseus as Eights, who if I understood correctly, embody a special form of lawlessness.

If such is indeed the case, would it not be wise to round all the Eights up and in the name of freedom and political correctness, terminate their existence? But perhaps we could spare Odysseus long enough from his fate for him to enjoy a leisurely meal in the halls of Congress, perhaps passing by the White House for dessert.

Antonio Barbato was his usual model of scholastic lucidity, and he is a person I rarely disagree with. But I would like to comment briefly on three points he mentioned, one being the church-and-state relationship in the early United States.

Many people seem to think that the Constitution provides for the “separation of church and state.” It doesn’t. The First Amendment starts with: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….” I think it clear the statement was intended to avoid the establishment of a State Church, as existed in England and which was the cause for the Pilgrims to flee the English Isles. But one has to remember the context. None of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention probably had the slightest idea about Buddhism, Hinduism or Islam. The only existing religion was Christianity and for the vast majority, that meant some form of Protestantism, not Catholicism. And it was obviously the will of the founding fathers that it was not to be the duty of the state to determine the acceptable forms of worship. By the way, of the 55 delegates to the Convention, all but eight were born in the colonies: four in Ireland, two in England, one in Scotland and one in the West Indies. Most were well educated, all were white males.
The second point is his assertion that “it was the Christians who understood and clarified the existential meaning of a Passion.…”

As for Passion. I think we must be very careful here to carefully define what one means by “passion” before things get too confused. The passions I learned in conjunction with the enneagram of personality are negative ego traits and would seem to have little if anything to do with, for example, the emotionally rich and energetic Passion of a divinely inspired being. Remember Gurdjieff ’s comment on how some people agreed with each other when they were actually in disagreement and vice-versa because they defined words they thought they understood commonly in different ways?

And finally: “…and that The Enneagram is not, ‘…a model of existence or a mirror to reflect the levels of self-consciousness,’ but …more likely, a lunar calendar mixed with planetary movements.…” I find this an absurd statement. One of the fundamental elements of Gurdjieff ’s theoretical presentation was the Ray of Creation and its relationship with The Enneagram. Certainly what he showed on The Enneagram as The All encompasses something more than the planetary movements of our miniscule solar system.

Antonio Barbato

Antonio Barbato:
I believe that my friend Sterling is not so much in disagreement with my point about the passions, but rather wants to point out the dangers that can come from the wrong use of the term. Picking up my previous statement, “I’m frequently astonished at those who seem to actually believe that, before the discovery or re-discovery of the Enneagram, nobody researched and commented on the passions, fixations and how the instincts work”—what is a passion?

The answer to that requires that we take into consideration how the trifold use of the Latin work passus came to be interpreted. I don’t want to go into a lengthy philosophical development of this term from Aristotle to Descartes. Suffice it to say that initially passions were seen as “irrational movements of the soul;” later, after the Stoics, passion was defined more as a negative trait of a less-thanevolved consciousness. Passion vas considered as a perversion of thought, a distancing from universal reason (logos), a sickness of the entire non-evolved ego stemming from the lack of understanding of the internal order of creation. The only remedy against this was to detach from worldly things (apatheia).

Many thinkers, Cicero among them, condemned the weakness of this argument that portrays man’s lot as resigned impotence. The Stoics too thought that it was almost impossible to rise above this state.

It was not until the 4th, 5th, and 6th centuries that the great Christian writers, Maximus the Confessor in particular, recognized that passion is to be understood in its existential significance as ego’s play with emotions. This play makes it so that the ego identifies with the passion in order to protect itself from the fear of death, from the anguish of seeing its finiteness, and to escape pain in general. Ichazo captured this point particularly well, and incorporated the ancient Greek and Christian philosophies into his theories, even if he claimed, not without merit, to have reformulated those philosophies into a new vision.

A passion therefore, is not merely a negative trait of the ego, but its essence; the specific form with which we try to give emotional meaning to our existence. We distract ourselves with “objects of the senses” that, quoting St. Maximus, “veil the perception of the underlying truth.”

As to my statement “the Enneagram was more likely, a lunar calendar mixed with planetary movements” that Sterling finds an absurd statement because of the Ray of Creation and its relationships with our symbol, it’s clear that we are talking of two different matters. I was not talking about the use of the Enneagram by Gurdjieff, but I was referring to my studying the Assyrian-Babylonian symbolism and looking for the Chaldean Seal or something that was similar to our diagram. I found some interesting references to a lunar calendar (where the full moon was placed at the top of a circle and the new moon in the opposite point), mixed with planetary movement.

The most surprising point was that these movements were connected with two repetitive numeric sequences which we are familiar with, 8241758… and 3693…. Hence my speculation that, at its beginning, the Enneagram could be something very similar to a zodiac, with the great difference being that Chaldeans used the moon and not the sun. On the other hand, the transformation of the meaning of a symbol was not unusual in ancient times and, as my dear Gloria Davenport noted in her comments a couple of issues ago: “in those early years, each symbol and teaching built on the other with no territorial claim and bickering.”

Liz Wagele

Liz Wagele:
Let me say something about passion. I’m really into “passion” right now. I’m especially interested on how the ego identifies with the passions in order to protect itself from the fear of death because of the writing I’m doing these days. I’m also into the more usual meaning of the word passion.

My piano just got its hammers replaced and I’ve been playing it more than I have for a long time. I’m putting passion into my music and music into my passion by playing Beethoven and Bach and improvising the blues long into the night. Sigh.

My relationship to the Enneagram, like my relationship to music, is highly personal.

Other than Enneagram type, there’s something making me who I am that has to do with aesthetics and sound. It touches upon being a Five with a Four wing, sure, but it also seems outside of that. Music colors the Enneagram for me and the Enneagram colors my music.
I think I’m different from a lot of people and from the way most of you Conversationalists here write, because I’m not very outwardly competitive, except sometimes. I’ve always been this way. I come from an academic family and I always sensed that not entering into intellectual arguments was tantamount to breaking some kind of law. Disappearing into the woodwork and not being seen just felt preferable for some reason, even though it was lawless. I’ve noticed it’s very hard for most men, especially, to do this. They have been taught by our society, and usually by their parents, that they have to make a mark in the world. (Just for the record, I DO have my moments of seeking attention. Also, I will compete if I need to or if there’s a compelling principal at stake.)

Are all of you men? When men, especially, “speak,” though women are doing it more and more, and I’m glad they’re able to do this, they adopt a relatively social-subtype-ish point of view. I’m not saying you’re all social subs, but in your arguments and how you back things up, you talk a lot about politics, “a fact is a fact,” theories, research—that sort of thing. You talk about what would benefit society, which is interesting, but it isn’t personal perspectives in the way I mean. Men are taught to keep their competitive edge. To get personal feels vulnerable. Am I right? Expressing highly personal feelings in an intellectual atmosphere is often felt by others as a threat.

I swim down to the bottom of the Enneagram circle where the (mostly) introverted Fours and Fives are and I like to stand up for the introverted point of view because it’s not very well understood. Once I pitched a book I wrote on introverts to a former editor of mine (this is to show you how poorly understood we really are) and without looking at the manuscript, he exclaimed, “I wouldn’t have a book about that subject in my house!” When it comes to discussions, extroverts have a certain style of quick repartee.

The introverted style is kind of different… Introversion/extroversion is a big type difference that is not an Enneagram difference per se, Jack. It may be the most important personality difference there is.

Jack Labanauskas

Jack Labanauskas:
Welcome aboard Liz. The introverted style has been fairly absent in the previous Conversations, but it is natural that the aggressive types would be the first to jump in. There is a welcome mat (with sugar on top) laid out for the currently absent points of view. Introversion/extroversion may indeed be the most important personality difference. This is exactly what I would like to talk about in this Conversation, the “other” forces along with type that shape us. I believe that the more fundamental a trait, the more important it is.

In that sense, One Consciousness (God, soul, spirit, nature) is more important than polarity driven by two, Yin and Yang; which in its turn produces the three centers, then the law of seven, then nine types, 27 subtypes etc…. all the way to the logical conclusion of ending up with billions of unique individuals, no two alike. Mankind has invented many systems of “charting” recognizable patterns and our dear Enneagram has a place, purpose and its own set of strengths and weaknesses. Broadening our understanding needs to be done in several ways; the heady analytical gnosis producing and the hearty, perceptive also gnosis producing way. In the end, either way will produce a complete human being endowed with a fully developed head hart and a gut that can take in all that beauty.

Sterling Doughty:
Thomas Isham strongly defends his position that The Enneagram is a form of esotericism and that Antonio Barbato (whom I call Vesuvius) is incorrect concerning the matter, by bringing up the classic and usually misused Apples and Oranges denigration. But his arguments only muddy the water. “After all, a fact is a fact, whether we approve of the fact or not. In other words, if the Enneagram is by definition a form of esotericism, then that’s what it is.” Whose definition is he using? Is it correct? And what does he mean by Enneagram anyway, the Enneagrams of Gurdjieff, those set forth by Ichazo, or those of today’s Enneagram Monthly contributors?

Gurdjieff was teaching The Enneagram in what can be considered an esoteric way at least by 1914 in Moscow and St Petersburg. And we know that he employed it in at least two ways. One was as a study and meditation figure without any labels attached to the points. This was, so to speak, the higher vehicle. The second way was with labels, to illustrate various movements and processes, the lesser vehicle. Very few of the techniques involved or the labels used ever made their way to surface in the exoteric world.
Most of the information about that period is found in the Ouspensky book In Search of the Miraculous. Nicoll and Bennett also used Enneagrams in their teaching that they had been passed by Gurdjieff.

Ichazo began teaching some Enneagrams in the late 50s or early 60s in Santiago (his own accounts are inconsistent). Some were seemingly identical to aspects of Gurdjieff ‘s work, others had no apparent connection. Certainly there was an element of secrecy in Ichazo’s work in Arica, but not when he came to the United States. If you paid the money for the trainings, you got The Enneagrams. Hardly esoteric. There was of course an attempt to control the information, but that was made through legal threats and the courts, again hardly esoteric. As for today’s Enneagram community, it would be completely daft to assert some sort of esotericism is still present. Facts are facts.

Thomas Isham:
Sterling Doughty has observed that I strongly defend my position that the Enneagram of Psychological (or Personality) Types is a variety of esotericism. He asks, among other things, whose definition of esotericism I am using, and if this definition of esotericism is correct. The definition comes from Antoine Faivre, one of the three or four leading scholars in the world on this subject. I took Faivre’s six-part definition from his Access to Western Esotericism, applied it to the Enneagram, and found it fit nicely. But I am also asked: to which Enneagram or Enneagrams do I refer? Gurdjieff ’s? Ichazo’s? Someone else’s? My answer: to them all. They all fit the definition, each in their own way. The root meaning of esotericism has to do with “interiority” and the knowledge and techniques used to explore and develop that interiority.

A relatively modern concept, esotericism is composed largely of bits and pieces of natural philosophy and religious wisdom from ages past, often of a profound nature. As to the notion of secrecy, which appears to obsess Sterling as the end-all and be-all of esotericism, it is in fact of secondary importance.

In the past several decades, an outpouring of esoteric teachings has become available to the public, the Enneagram included. But there is also alchemy, kabbalah, magic, anthroposophy, hermeticism, freemasonry, and many others, all available at your nearest bookstore. Just because they are now public does not change their basic nature. The Enneagram is not science, it is not psychology, and it is not religion. It is, in fact, a type of esotericism. One final point: by using the word “esotericism,” I am not making a value judgment, only attempting to define the Enneagram in relation to other forms of thought. That the Enneagram is a serious, accurate, and helpful form of esotericism I have no doubt.

Sterling Doughty:
I agree that the Enneagram has the positive qualities Thomas Isham mentions, but have no idea where he gets the idea that I am obsessed with the notion of secrecy. My comment was only a few lines and I made no statement at all denying that there were other aspects to esoteric than secrecy, which there certainly are. But I fail to see the necessity of defining the Enneagram as a “form of esotericism” or anything else for that matter, as it seems artificially limiting and not especially useful.. Moreover, the concept cannot be said to be recent as we know that early Tao, Buddhism, Sufism and the Kabala for example, all had esoteric components which might be said to involve their purpose as well as their relative lack of public visibility. Kirby Olson asked: “Does each type have a different erotic trigger?“ Kirby, why on Earth do you want to know? I can only tell you that back in the days of discovery of the personality types all nine triggers were equal and we had a lot of fun.

Kirby Olson

Kirby Olson:
Why I want to know the erotic triggers of each type? I suppose it’s because I have my own theory based on the Jungian theory of enantiodromia. One could define enantiodromia as a psychological phenomenon in which if one resists something long enough one becomes that thing by flipping violently to its opposite. I am just curious if this happens in the orgasm and whether it’s been studied.
If so, the One would trigger (or flip) to frivolousness, the Two would become demanding, the Three would become incompetent, the Four quite ordinary, the Five clueless, the Six disloyal, the Seven very serious, the Eight helpless, and the Nine a warrior.

If my theory is adequate to what actually happens (I don’t have the resources to check it, but maybe someone has already done the research), then I suppose there are implications beyond implications, and then some. The whole idea of the anima/animus would be clarified, for instance, when it is at present a fairly amorphous concept.

Oh, and Sterling, I never said that all Eights should be rounded up and slaughtered, and I think I was careful enough to indicate at least implicitly that there were a spectrum of Eights and I was only discussing the devolved Eights. Mildly, rather than wildly reckless perhaps, but I see the Conversation as a place to open up a bit and speculate in the interests of sparking new conceptualizations (or even nude conceptualizations!)

Jack Labanauskas:
Here’s a question to all, but particularly to my dear friend Antonio Barbato. For the benefit of our readers, it’s only fair to mention that one of Antonio’s PhDs is in Political/Economic/Sociology and that aside from being a “political animal,” Antonio has actually put some effort and time into studying this stuff. Most political animals I know are either misinformed or severely biased—some even suffer from spasmodic knee afflictions that cause spouting off opinions grounded in passion over thoughtfulness.

Okay, I’d say that most students of the Enneagram of Personality are comfortable in acknowledging differences attributed to our type, passion, fixation, or instinctual center. A few select systems such as the MBTI, graphology, Greek temperaments, or Sheldon’s body types are generally accepted in Enneagram circles, but it ends here. Judging from the articles and comments that I have been receiving over the years, and from conversations with prospective authors, I noticed some resistance for reasons of political correctness and/or a reluctance to engage in a discussion of other factors that have a large influence on our personality— after all, this publication is focused on the Enneagram and we can’t deviate from that.

Having said that, I believe the Enneagram is “larger” than its current applications and besides, does not operate in a vacuum. We are not a blank slate waiting to be fertilized by enneagrammatic factors. We are engaged in the world of chemistry, physics, time, space, genetics, food, environmental influences, and beliefs. We all come from different life experiences, have listened to different teachers, read different books—why, we may even prefer different sources for our news.

So my question is actually an appeal to open a discussion that explores how our personality is shaped by differences that originate in our sex (gender), political inclination, world-view, beliefs, and other circumstances.

In short, aside from our Enneagram type, what other factors make and shape us?

A part two to this question would be: How does type influence the above mentioned “other” factors? My question is part curiosity, part guile. Personally, I would like to gain clarity about why there are such deep differences in styles of reasoning; where do they come from, can they change or are they as hard-wired as the Enneagram type? Why do some (within the same Enneagram type, even subtype) gravitate to the left and others to the right? Why do some believe that it is more the power of the collective that shapes our destiny, while others believe it’s more the nature of the individual? Where does this bifurcation of direction occur? When? How? Why?
So there. All opinions are welcome, let’s rock.

Antonio Barbato:
My dear Jack, these are interesting and difficult questions you are posing. I certainly can’t claim to be able to respond adequately. In his book Males del alma, males del mundo Claudio Naranjo attempts to analyze some of the subjects you have raised. It seems to me that your question(s) contain several themes that are not very related other than being subjects the Enneagram community has shown little inclination to tackle.

For example, differences in behavior between the sexes are quite distinctly unlike differences originating from having embraced opposing world-views or politics.

Aside from hormonal and genetic factors, differences in behavior between the sexes are the fruit of massive social and cultural conditioning, while world-views and politics stem primarily from a need to embrace a certain psychological identity or the rejection thereof.

For example, in ancient Sparta, which had the most horrendous and repressive political system known in human history, the needs of the individual were completely irrelevant and always secondary to the needs of the community. Spartans had almost no regard for feelings or even for male/female differences.

Their children were raised under the tutelage of the state from early childhood (age 8). Both sexes were put together and had to endure the same harsh training which aimed at producing subjects useful to the state—like ants, that assign the duties of warrior or worker indifferent to sex or social status. Spartans were taught early in life that the only thing that mattered was their society.

Only perfect children were allowed to live (male or female did not matter), and mothers and fathers both were equally willing to submit newborns that showed some defect or weakness for extermination. This goes completely against the preconceived idea that mother-instincts cannot be overcome by indoctrination.

Spartans apparently were able to largely extinguish sexual differences. but notwithstanding the constraints of this regime, diverse personal ambitions and political visions would develop due to the different personalities of the protagonists. While in the ancient Greek city-state of Sparta dissent was discouraged and squashed through micro-management of every detail and severe repression, the Enneagram community probably ostracizes unwelcome viewpoints with silence. We can observe this tendency very clearly in the “separateness” with which various Enneagram “schools” tend to keep to themselves without much cross-pollination. The result of this is a calcification of one’s viewpoints and a closure of mind towards the ideas of others. In extreme instances this takes on an aura of arrogant superiority complete with the disdain for other’s viewpoints and a struggle for supremacy of one’s own school. I believe that this type of parochialism is what Jack Labanauskas meant when he talked about “…by-products of higher education, to discourage from thinking freely and debating opposite points of view in a manner that would seek clarity rather than agreement.”

I believe that engaging in subjects that invite heated debates helps flush out hidden self-images that otherwise remain concealed because they are socially not acceptable. Furthermore, such debates would reveal deep differences in the thinking styles, expose errors, encourage understanding, and open us to feedback from others.

Most invitations to engage in discourse are generally perceived as too threatening by the “experts” who prefer the safer course by claiming to embrace “higher” principles. There appears to be an effort to validate and support only that which seemingly unites the movement—as if by maintaining the status quo and by avoiding engaging in ideas diverse from our pet beliefs we can do so. I believe this aspect provoked Carl Marsak’s critique of some policies of the IEA.

Jack’s other question is a fundamental inquiry into power, one of the main themes in sociology. My apologies to the gentle reader, but independent from the high opinion Jack seems to have of me, I can’t come up with a concise answer for now about the basic difference in left/right thinking. This task is further complicated because it changes radically if we are talking about these characteristics under a democracy, a monarchy, or an oligarchy.

Generally speaking the idea is accepted that political ideologies are motivated from a deep sense of personal advantage; which in turn is linked to personal issues, such as our acceptance or rejection, rebellion or embrace, compliance or disdain towards authority. Each person will have his or her own approach that may explain why opposite ideologies often exist even among members of the same Enneagram type.

Sterling Doughty:
I agree completely with Jack Labanauskas that we are formed by many influences besides our Personality Fixation. To argue otherwise would reduce the variety of the species to nine more or less robotic patterns or “personality suits” distributed among some six billion people.

But I wonder where Jack is trying to go with this, towards a new publication, the Monster Psychology Monthly? I am not against “opening up the discussion,” although in my case I have never felt it in any way to be closed. Jack seems to want to introduce a dualism within each type, one liberal (collective-bad) and one conservative (individualgood)— I’m basing my presumption on my experience of Jack’s philosophy—and then to find the “why” behind the “bifurcated” choices. Although I consider my own world-view to be somewhat beyond the ludicrous talk-show-host simplicity of such an argument, I still like rock & roll and look forward to some intensely interesting conversation.

Jack Labanauskas:
Hmm, I wonder why Sterling inferred what I did not imply? Especially since I know some good liberals and some bad conservatives… and regarding to all this dualism I want to introduce, dualism has been here way before my time…a sine qua non of the relative/material world, and personality is a part of that. Our consciousness (in the sense of soul, atman, the observer or the Self ) is without dualism. Like the observer looking through glasses at objects. The glasses are our mind/personality, and the holder of all dualisms together with the objects being looked at, but it is not the observer—our consciousness (and the term “our“ in this instance is inaccurate, since consciousness by its very nature cannot be other than one) is without duality and also without characteristics we can talk and write about. Our conversations have always been about either dualism itself, or about what other than dualism there might be.

Certainly it would be nice to open the discourse to include all of human nature and factors that make us tick. A Monster Psychology Monthly…now why didn’t I think of that?

I’m glad you’re beyond ludicrous talk-show-host simplicity, I hear that in your neck of the woods, the Swiss, like most Europeans don’t even have talk radio and have to make do with largely unopposed news and commentaries unless they use the internet.
Changing subjects to a timely issue: Ginger Lapid-Bogda is currently writing the Wake Up and Take Action series (part 2 in this issue) on the subject of ethical use of the Enneagram. This series was triggered by derogatory comments about the Enneagram in Barbara Ehrenreich’s latest book, Bait and Switch. In her book Ehrenreich describes her experiences with a hapless coach who used the Enneagram improperly, and another coach who used the MBTI in a less-than-stellar manner. Ginger’s focus is thorough and almost entirely on the limitations of the system and the proper boundaries that enneagrammers need to respect. I would like point out another, more speculative angle that went unmentioned: The reason why Ehrenreich may have felt a need to poohpooh personality assessment systems may stem from a particular branch of Marxist ideology wherein “religion is the opiate of the masses.”

Ehrenreich is the honorary Vice-Chair of the Democratic Socialists of America and a consistent theme of Bait and Switch (as well as her previous bestseller Nickel and Dimed) is that the poor deserve to earn more; the rich do not deserve what they earn; and the bourgeoisie are merely robots—an inference taken almost verbatim from Marx’s theory of alienation. Typically, Ehrenreich does not explain why she deserves her own wealth, nor why she does not dispense with her material possessions.

People like Ehrenreich get their jollies saying witty things to needle American society. So what if the standard of living grew far worse after liberal doctrines became government policies in the 1960s? The vision is what matters—and the opportunities it presents for her to be clever with words.

It is not surprising that she would blame social conditions as the cause of success or failure rather than the individual. In other words, any drawing of attention to the importance of personality traits takes away from importance of the social structure— which in her world-view is driven by economics.

Paradoxically, that makes her as obsessed with money as the capitalists she skewers; except, the Marxist view blames the world’s ills on money, while the capitalist view thinks money is the cure…

I believe that when Ehrenreich decided to have her sessions with the Enneagram coach, she did it for the purpose of exposing yet another brick in the capitalist wall helping to support heartless corporations; then again, she just may have a Fourish streak and got miffed at the coaches for not having recognized the obvious, i.e. her brilliance and talent as a writer… Had she found a coach who used the system properly, that chapter would probably have never been written. If Ehrenreich had been interested in the truth rather than confirmation for her bias, she could have bothered to check out more than one source before finalizing her verdict.

Her patronizing dismissal of the personality assessment tools as bogus reminds me of an episode with Maoist hecklers (identifiable from their red Mao & Che T-shirts) at the university of Amsterdam (Holland) in the late 60s. They shouted down a guest speaker who was invited to speak to 150 students about Transcendental Meditation. The Maoist hecklers, seven or eight of them, kept screaming that meditation is a “selfish” act without social value, hence unworthy of being heard by their fellow students who had paid to get in. After 20 minutes of this, the lecture was cancelled and we all left. I had seen my first demonstration of a trend in academia that continues to grow in the western world; and an example of how lethargic majorities can be bullied by very few determined ideologues.

I would be surprised if in Ehrenreich’s worldview it is useful to spend any time in self-contemplation, meditation or other “selfish” pursuits such as Enneagram or MBTI.

Hmm, am I being opinionated?… Nah. But on second thought, I’m sure Antonio or someone else will straighten me out on this.

From Issue 121, Dec 2005

Clarence Thomson

~~by Clarence Thomson~~

The Intimate (One-to-One, or Sexual) Four

The Intimate Fours begin with a sense of defect which appears in relationship to someone or something else. It is not enough that one feels defective—one must also recognize that no one else is. The vice of envy is relational—it is not free-standing. Envy will take its place in the subtypes depending on what the type uses as its point of comparison.  In any relationship, when one pole shifts, the position of the other is altered.

The focus of the Intimate subtype is personal relationships, usually one-to-one. In a professional setting, the success of the person on whom I focus is the ruin of myself. Salieri, the court musician of Mozart’s time obsesses about Mozart. He, a talented musician in his own right, cannot enjoy what he knows is celestial music. Every success of Mozart is a nail in his cross. And he sees himself in that kind of religious dilemma. God gave him the longing and Mozart the talent. His envy is cosmic, the universe is out of joint. Life is just not fair. And Salieri laments this situation for a full ten minutes to start the movie, Amadeus. Salieri demonstrates the Fourish introjection well, too. He has swallowed Mozart; he obsesses about him. To compare oneself constantly to perhaps the greatest musician in the world is a sure way to induce envy.

On a less refined plane, Dennis Rodman, the gifted, troubled style Four basketball star, mentions Michael Jordan frequently in interviews. He plays off him emotionally as well as on the court.

In romantic relationships, the Sexual Four demands to be the most important person in the lover’s life. This passionate position is at the heart of many a fine romance novel. In Sense and Sensibility, Kate Winslet proclaims it perfectly fine to die for love. All else pales alongside the surging passion of the Four for her lover. The uneasiness in others about this posture stems from another Fourish characteristic: the world of the emotions is more real than the external world. Passion without regard for worldly consequences is a recipe for disaster, as her mother and every mother knows.

Jim Morrison of the “Doors” sung that the external world was in black and white and his imagination was in color. This primacy of the inner reality gives rise to an emphasis on individuality. We share external reality. My traffic light is your traffic light. That’s fine, but our imagination is all our own, and mine is different from yours. Add the intensity of ardor to that belief and you get a sense of entitlement that is difficult to mesh with social norms or ordinary expectations and customs. Because passion is all, Intimate Fours prefer hate to indifference, a preference that would be modified if the external consequences were more heavily weighed. In Dante’s Inferno, two men who hated each other in life are depicted locked in an eternal embrace of mutual destruction, gnawing on each other’s brains. They were united in hatred. Indifference would have separated them. But envy, like hate, unites and is relational.

The Social Four

The dynamics of the Social subtype are similar, of course, but the polarity is between self and the group. To the social Four, the group has what I don’t have, can’t get and absolutely must have. May I suggest “The Penguin” in Batman Returns as a model? Defective at birth (those flippers!), he is thrown over the bridge into the sewer and spends the rest of the movie trying to be accepted by the group. He agrees with the group assessment (Three wing often goes with this subtype) that he is ugly and deformed and is ashamed that he does not measure up. Revenge is his motive for everything he does, not realizing he has interiorized that which requires revenge.

France, with a Four culture, has a tradition of social misfits who are outwardly ugly, earning social scorn, but who are inwardly beautiful. Hunchback of Notre Dame, Beauty and the Beast, Cyrano de Bergerac are all examples of social Fours who dealt with social shame with spiritual heroism. The French saint, St. Terese of Lisieux is a thoroughly neurotic and delightful contemplative who frequently extolled God’s mercy, unaware that her praise of God’s mercy was balm for her own conviction of a defect that needed it.

The issue for the Social subtype is shame. The sin of envy is related here to the group opinion. To them, the group has what I do not. I’m defective and the group knows it. Therefore, I am ashamed because I am different. Perhaps because of the Three wing which increases awareness of group norms, I?agree with the judgment of the group. I should be ashamed of my deformity.

Fours have an idealized self-image, as do all the types, but it is reversed—they assess their relationship to it negatively. “I know what I should be like and it is such a shame that I?can not and never will be able to measure up to that idea. Shame on me.”

Many male homosexuals are Social Fours That is the stereotype you see in the movies. For them, coming out of the closet and facing their shame is facing their deepest Enneagram problem and social rejection at the same time. For someone with a Three wing to have society reject you at your deepest orientation can feel like total rejection. It can be really excruciating, especially if their family—one’s first social group—rejects them.

Fours turn to their imaginative life for solace. Social Fours can fantasize how they will become a social celebrity and then heap scorn on all the people who looked down on them before their national recognition. Revenge frequently plays a part in the fantasy life of Fours. Sometimes this revenge sharply colors the real-life relationship and they reject a person before that person can get to a place where they they might reject the Four. This preemptive strike can emerge as generalized hostility.

Because they see themselves as defective, they are frequently extremely sensitive to criticism. Low self-image is a defining quality, and criticism merely confirms what they have felt all along. If this appears in objective standards (ACT scores, bank accounts, penis or truck size, book sales), they feel confirmed in their abject state. Shakespeare, himself a Four put it well, of course:

When in disgrace with fortune and men’s eyes,
I alone beweep my outcaste state.
I trouble deaf heaven with my bootless cries and curse my fate.
Desiring this man’s art and that man’s scope,
with what I most enjoy contented least.

That’s not a temporary affliction for a Four—it is an inner posture, a way of life.

With their emotional resources, however, they may resort to charm to cover their inner desolation, especially if they have a Three wing. “No one will ever know what I have suffered” kind of attitude. But [Tom] Condon points out that with a Five wing, they can grow antisocial and depressed like Meryl Streep in The French Lieutenant’s Woman. “The shame is more than I can bear.” (In Batman Returns, The Penguin is a Four who is defective and wants revenge for the way people have looked down on him.)

The group rejection that Social Fours feel (and resent) is not based on any specific social skill or attribute they feel they should cultivate The group just “knows” they are made wrong and should have been rejected at the factory. You see the high side of this in the writings of St. Therese of Liseux, who is a clear Four. She writes so eloquently of the mercy of God because that is her issue: she needs mercy for the inner wrongness she knows darn well is there. She knows she’s bad but her faith assures her that even so, God’s mercy is greater. (Now we all know that, but it’s not the inner song we play all day…)

The perception that I?am wrong inside is only slightly different from the One’s inner critical voice. The difference is that Ones are critical of everything; Fours are critical largely of themselves. But both Fours and Ones have the nasty perceptual habit of comparing reality to what should be.

This habit costs Fours some important relationships. In the case of Social Fours, it makes them social critics and makes them critical of social norms. At times this can give them permission to do things that are immoral because they don’t care about social injunctions. They then tend not to like working, organizations, or belonging to institutions. And if they do belong, they can be highly critical.

The Self-Preservation Four

The Self-Preservation Four is compellingly acted out by Kate Winslet (Three wing) and Melany Lynsky (Five wing) in the movie, Heavenly Creatures. Winslet is more accomplished and socially polished, Melany is more introverted and moody. They both prefer their imaginative life to reality, both have a strong hostility to type One figures in their lives. They meet and share defects—one an injured knee, the other a defective lung ruined with consumption, as Tuberculosis was often called. The chronicle of their inner lives spells out their inner intensity that finally leads to a brutal murder of Melany’s mother.

The Self-Preservation Four takes personal chances, hoping to create the kind of intensity that assures a vibrant existence. Often called “Dauntless,” the Self-Preservation Four lives on the edge. Picture Kate Winslet in Titanic on the bow of the ship. She had all the externals, but her soul needed more. She needed to have her self-preservation threatened. Suicide is a real possibility within this trance. “I’ll die and then you’ll see how much you miss me.” One thinks of the gravestone marked, “I told you I was sick.” Notice that the trance is self-preservation so that is precisely what is threatened in order to value it more.

If you suffer from any of these configurations, may I suggest the suburbanly popular book by Sara Breathnacht called Simple Abundance. Oprah made it a best seller. It portends to be a book on daily spirituality—and it is—but for those with Enneagrammatically sophisticated eyes, it is a manual on how to be a happy, authentic, spiritually rich Four. Notice especially how she modifies her environment in order to massage her inner moods. Fours do that better than other numbers. It’s their specialty.

Resources

Tom Condon’s video in which he works with a Social Four is instructive. You can see the push-pull of relationships: they want them but they want to be left alone to revel/wallow in their own fantasy/emotional world.

If you are Catholic/Christian or you are interested in meditation, the Carmelite tradition is known for its superlative development of meditation. Therese of Liseux and St. John of the Cross are both Fours, as is much of the Carmelite tradition. You might profit from reading the material. Beginners are often warned off the stark Spanish Jesuit because of his harshness, but Fours will love the emotional richness, the poetic expression and the vividness of the emotional states.

See Clarence Thomson’s website at: www.enneagramcentral.com.

From Issue 61, May 2000

Antonio Barbato

~~by Antonio Barbato~~

These are three stories of actual type Four women (one of each subtype), and about how each major change in life came with its own physical component, its own emotional state and its own reasoning. I focus quite a bit on the style in which each of the subtypes deals with relationships and what their inner motivations are. In these examples we can see how difficult it is for those in the “sway of envy” to distinguish between a positive or negative relationship. The passion can permeate our being and taint all physical signals to a point where it becomes almost impossible to distinguish the authentic inner voice from the voice of our passion. These case studies look at the inner polarities of Envy—how the Sexual Four tends to project on the intimate partner, the Self-Preservation Four blames destiny, and the Social Four turns on herself.

Nile (Self-Preservation Subtype)

Nile was married to a Nine (Self-Preservation) doctor. During their engagement period, this calm man, so different from her, appeared as the most desirable man in the world. Nile felt that he could bring to her life the peace and beauty she had searched for since she was a child. As a good Four, she pretended that everything between them would be perfect, and she proceeded to present the image of a woman completely able to put herself aside in order to please her partner. Nile had not yet leaned to distrust her heart and took its messages as unvarnished truth when she should have doubted them.

Their sex life was not satisfactory and Nile wasn’t able to reach orgasm, but that didn’t matter much to her. What mattered more was that her man was enjoying it and that made her feel like a “real” woman. She told me that at the time she felt enthusiasm in her body which worked like a drug and made her feel on top of the world. At the same time, Nile was unconsciously reclaiming status as her “own woman” vis-a-vis her mother who had always been the central figure in her life.

Shortly after her birth, Nile’s father contracted a disease that made it impossible for him to have sex, and her mother reacted to the situation with a strong sense of guilt, even though it was not her fault. Nile subconsciously felt superior to her mother because she was able to bring enjoyment to a man who desired her. This made her feel so good about herself that she did not mind feeling very little physical pleasure herself, as long as she could satisfy her man. Actually, what she really wanted, was to be desired deeply by a man. A Freudian would say that Nile was living the complex of Electra, the female counterpart to the Oedipus complex. (Electra was Agamemnon’s daughter and with her brother Orestes she avenged the murder of her father by killing her mother and the mother’s lover, Aeghistus.)

Things went well in the beginning of the marriage. Nile had two children, but soon started complaining that her husband was not quite as passionate as he used to be, besides, he seemed to be more absent on account of his work. Her husband, as a good Nine, did what ostriches do. He stuck his head in the sand and ignored the complaints of his wife which he didn’t seem to understand.

This started the phase of Nile’s disorientation [Entitlement/Claim and Disorientation are the two polarities of Envy; see Inner Polarities: The Structure of Passions by Antonio Barbato and Jack Labanauskas in the March and April 2000 issues] which was further aggravated by tensions with her mother who continually sought to convince Nile that her marital frustrations were perfectly normal and happened in all marriages. Nile could not accept this idea. Her craving to be desired (the drug) and her need to feel beautiful in the eyes of someone (the illusion of those Fours who continuously seek only physical beauty) made her feel sick psychologically and physically. Nile started blaming her husband and acting out, unconsciously trying to attract his attention. She began flirting and even started an affair with a colleague of her husband’s, hoping to shake him out of his torpor so that he may become again the man she had imagined he was (that’s why I think idolization is particularly dangerous to a Four). Instead, as a good Nine and at a loss how to respond, he escaped into frenetic Hyperactivity (the polarity of Sloth). He refused to see what didn’t work in their relationship, became busier than ever at work, and lost himself in a thousand stupid things rather than confronting the “problem” his wife had become. In other words, he expressed the rage which he felt at an unconscious level, by using the typical response of Sloth: “forgetting” the person and the bothersome situation.

Nile’s sense of something missing grew ever louder as did her feeling of being entitled to “her fair share” of life’s goodies. She became ever more brazen and almost rubbed her adulterous relationship in her husband’s face, seeking to shake him out of his torpor. She told me many times that she would have preferred to be beaten bloody by her husband if he only would express passion and the interest she craved so much. Nile also tortured herself with inner feeling of guilt vis-a-vis her mother (who had stayed faithful to her father), and transferred that anguish and blamed her husband, lavishing him with outbursts of fury.

The situation came to a head when Nile realized that she was pregnant by her lover, who, himself being married to a wealthy woman, didn’t know what to do. Taken aback by her lover’s doubts and not having the strength to face up to her mother any more, Nile collapsed and entered a state of total disorientation. Her great energy and remarkable intelligence did not seem to do her any good and did?not prevent her from feeling terribly empty. For the first time in her life, she felt completely alone. She could not talk to her mother; she obviously could not talk to her husband, or to her lover, who now seemed to be a truly small, small man, incapable of offering any help at all.

In a state of shock and as if on automatic pilot, she decided to abort without asking anyone’s help, and kept it a secret. (She told me this during therapeutic work many years later when she was going through another crisis. During the telling of the story, she re-lived the pain of those memories—in her face and in her body. It was a shock for me to see because I, too, remembered moments in my life when I had felt this alone.)

After the abortion, Nile entered into therapy and courageously tried to lick her wounds. Her mind was in such a state of abject disorientation that she rapidly lost 60 pounds—as if in her type Four way she was silently asking for help. Her mother started fussing about her health, and pampered her with love; meanwhile her husband too, became more interested in her again; but her problems were far from over.

After these stormy events in her life, Nile had a temporarily reprieve from her difficulties during which she dedicated herself totally to her kids and her work. She mediated her anger with the idea of being an excellent mother and as an activist for social change directed at helping the needy. However, even during this relatively calm period, her sense of dissatisfaction and her sexual frigidity remained as tokens of her latent malaise, although she was rapidly gaining back weight.

It was not long before Nile’s passionate character and her craving to be desired returned. She started excluding her husband from her life again, blaming him for not wanting to understand her and accusing him of being completely absent. This absence was not physical, as her husband tried to be home as much as he could, but it was rather his lack of understanding Nile’s deeper needs. The more she blamed him for her dissatisfaction, the more her sense of Entitlement (her claim to “all the things she was missing”) grew.

During a course of therapy, Nile met a young man, 20 years her junior, also a Sexual subtype Four with a lot of issues surrounding his mother. The attraction appeared almost inevitable and flared into a relationship that sent Nile into seventh heaven—even though sexually, her frigidity persisted. In my opinion, Nile was acting out her defiance against her mother and husband to a point of becoming destructive. Without consciously being aware of wanting to, Nile did everything to make her husband notice the existence of her young lover. Her husband tried to pretend that nothing was happening in order to avoid confronting her. This allowed the situation to become dangerous on the physical level, with a high risk of madness. More than once, the young lover attacked the husband verbally and quite obnoxiously, trying to elicit a reaction.

Nile’s moods alternated between moments of enthusiasm when she felt great, and moments when she was completely miserable. Everything built towards a grand finale which finally blew up when Nile’s mother found out about the affair. Her mother acted as if she were Nile’s husband, forbidding her to see her lover—and even succeeded in freezing Nile’s financial savings (cutting off her options).

Nile responded by kicking her husband out of their home (which belonged to Nile’s mother) and filed for divorce. Her mother threatened to evict her and asked the courts to remove the children from her custody on grounds of immoral behavior. In a dramatic confrontation, her mother told her that she would have preferred to have aborted her rather than seeing her only daughter turn into a whore. In a moment of clarity, Nile rebutted that she had done what her mother would have liked to have done to her own husband, if she had only found the courage. In previous conversations, I had suggested to Nile that unconsciously she had assumed her mother’s shadow side—which completely destroyed her image in front of her mother, Nile was merely asking, as a good Four, to be loved even if she was “ugly and bad.”

Obviously, the destruction of her image and the condemnation of the mother were signs of a total loss of her own psychic orientation. Nile’s passion had led her to a position of disorientation similar to a state of sentimental anarchy of a Two, but worse, since she had also destroyed everything around her.

Her lover tried to talk to Nile’s mother, but she accused him of being only a kid and a family breaker with nothing worth offering her daughter.

Towards the end, Nile and her lover started quarreling. Her frustrated sense of claim to life’s rewards to which she felt entitled made her turn destructive. Their relationship no longer had intense passion. One of the last things they did together was to violently attack their therapist, accusing him of having been useless.

After a longish period of disorientation, Nile is again alone, coping with life, finding what little satisfaction she can in her work and in caring for her children. She does not regret losing her husband, nor her lovers, but she complains about being alone. In a recent telephone conversation, she appeared quite changed when she said, “I have learned to not look back at my past and to not delude myself about the future. Neither my mother’s judgment nor needing to be a certain way for a man is the center of my own life—now I am the center of my life, and although it’s not going to be easy, I?hope that life will give me another opportunity.”

Lissy (Self-Preservation Subtype)

Lissy had it particularly rough as a child. She was born in a small village in the interior of Southern Italy and lost her mother at age six. Her mother died very young, leaving her father at a loss of what to do. He had three small kids, felt overwhelmed and decided to send Lissy to relatives who lived far away. It was difficult for me not to remain touched while Lissy told her story—eighty years after these facts—how she was put on a train by herself, clutching a paper ticket in her small hand on the back of which was written the address of her new family. These events forever and irrevocably marked the tenor of her life.

Contrary to the Sexual subtype who feels a sense of entitlement towards the primary partner or by projection towards the gender which is socially dominant, the Self-Preservation subtype is more oriented to being demanding towards fate or destiny.

Lissy’s life is an example of how the Self-Preservation Four resists a cruel fate, and attempts, often in utter despair, to survive life’s hurdles with dignity. However, disorientation always lurks in the background, ready to bring on a sense of guilt for every mistake or slip in dignity causing the Four to further lose their internal compass.

Lissy was okay in her new home. She had to work hard, was treated more like a maid than a family member, and did not get schooled properly, but at least she could eat and her basic needs were taken care of.

She often told me her biggest dream was to have her own house, to be able to decorate it in her own taste and not that of others. Though Lissy was very small—about 41?2 feet tall—she did not have a hang-up over her size. She was well-shaped, knew that she was fairly pretty and had beautiful blue eyes. (I’m mentioning this because contrary to the Social Four, the Self-Preservation Four is rather seductive and does not feel shame about her physical appearance.) Thus, it wasn’t long after she became a woman that several men took notice of her, one of whom proposed.

Lissy didn’t really love this man, and realized during their brief engagement that she had more vitality and intelligence than he did. That, however, didn’t seem very important to her because she felt that marriage would be a ticket out of her lifestyle. She agreed to marry hoping that all could be well—“No,” she convinced herself, “everything would be well.”

Unfortunately, things didn’t go well. Her husband felt progressively more inferior after he became aware of her superior intelligence and enterprising nature, and, intimidated by that, lost his ability to have complete sexual relations with her. In spite of that, they had two children which made things worse. Her husband’s sense of frustration grew and so did his impotence. He sought consolation in the arms of a woman who did not make him feel inferior and with whom he could have satisfying sexual relations.

For Lissy, the worst aspect of this situation was not the betrayal, but that her husband had turned abusive and started venting his anger by beating her for little things and denying her household money she needed for their children. She tried to cope as best she could, but pretty soon the situation went from impossible to worse.

After a particularly violent quarrel during which Lissy’s husband cracked two of her ribs, she began plotting revenge.

Fully aware of his extramarital affair, Lissy began tailing her husband in the hopes of surprising him in flagrante delicto. One day, when she was sure that her husband was off to have a rendezvous with his lover, Lissy picked up a kitchen knife and went after him.

Lissy’s initial plan was to kill her husband and his lover, but as it so often happens with Self-Preservation Fours, this plan remained only at the level of idea. She followed her husband to the location where he met his lover, sneaked up to them when they were engrossed with each other, knife in hand, and launched to strike the fatal stab. But something deep inside made her arm hesitate, as if in spite of the rush of confusion raging in her mind, heart and spirit, her sense of Self-Preservation won the upper hand. Instead of piercing his heart, her arm bent downward and stabbed him in the thigh instead, merely wounding him.

What followed was a kind of delirious nightmare. Lissy fled and hid with a girlfriend, leaving her husband lying bleeding and his lover half-dead from fright. As soon as her husband’s family found out about this, they did what they could to cover up the event so that it would not become a scandal. They called a doctor they trusted who quietly patched him up without filing a report with the police. Lissy’s mother-in-law went to see her and demanded to know why she had done it. Lissy confessed, explaining everything. Her mother-in-law embraced her very tightly which made her cry because she felt that finally somebody had forgiven her. Obviously, not all of her in-laws were as understanding and generous as that, but in the end, in spite of a few voices to the contrary, the idea that it was best to let the whole thing drop was accepted. Lissy’s mother-in-law tried her utmost to bring about reconciliation for the sake of the children and also her son—who agreed to play along. That was the last straw which made Lissy despise her husband utterly. She thought about the personal risk that she had taken because of the actions of this man who was now bending to the will of his family—and not out of any true feeling for Lissy. She lost all interest in him.

In order to save face, the husband’s family proposed that they maintain the appearance of marriage: they would live together and Lissy would be able to come back to her house and her children. Lissy was terribly undecided and profoundly tormented to the depth of her soul. Maybe she could accept this arrangement out of love for her children and for reasons of her own survival, but could she accept a life without love with a man who would continue to betray her at the first occasion and to mistreat her?

Lissy refused this choice and preferred to leave even though it made her feel as if she had lost everything. At the time, divorce was illegal in Italy, and she could have been prosecuted for abandonment. Furthermore, she did not have a job, was not trained in a profession, and did not have blood relatives nearby. Lissy was facing a bleak and looming destiny all by herself. This brought on a violent crisis of disorientation. She had a nervous breakdown, lost 58 pounds (41?2 feet tall!), and vegetated, smoking three packs of cigarettes a day while locked up in a room she rented in a convent. Only her Self-Preservation instinct saved her.

When it looked as if nothing could be done for her, a very intuitive doctor managed to find a key to her heart. In order to shake her up, feigning disdain, he told her that she would be soon dead or turn into a bag lady because she didn’t have the courage to face her own life. These words hit Lissy as if her mother had spoken to her—the way she remembered being scolded with hurt deep in her soul. She could simply not surrender in the face of destiny that wanted to humiliate her and take everything away. She had to pull herself together and claim what she was entitled to.

When it looked as if nothing could be done for her, a very intuitive doctor managed to find a key to her heart. In order to shake her up, feigning disdain, he told her that she would be soon dead or turn into a bag lady because she didn’t have the courage to face her own life. These words hit Lissy as if her mother had spoken to her—the way she remembered being scolded with hurt deep in her soul. She could simply not surrender in the face of destiny that wanted to humiliate her and take everything away. She had to pull herself together and claim what she was entitled to.

Thus, Lissy, wounded but not destroyed, found the strength to come back to life. She started working as a maid and did what she could for her kids who had remained with the father and the woman he was living with. Subconsciously, Lissy was re-living the scenario of her childhood in a different role. Now it was she who was in the role of her own mother who had gone away (i.e., died) but somehow took care of her children even though from a distance.

Over the years, Lissy’s life was a continuous attempt to demonstrate that she was not less than others. In spite of living under the shadow of social condemnation due to the fact that she was a woman separated from her husband, and despite her scarce economic resources, Lissy continued helping those dear to her (a trait that makes the Self-Preservation Four similar to a type Two), and always carefully maintained her commitments.

Over the years, Lissy’s life was a continuous attempt to demonstrate that she was not less than others. In spite of living under the shadow of social condemnation due to the fact that she was a woman separated from her husband, and despite her scarce economic resources, Lissy continued helping those dear to her (a trait that makes the Self-Preservation Four similar to a type Two), and always carefully maintained her commitments.

Although she entered and maintained a relationship with a married man for 20 years, she never wanted him to leave his wife and marry her even after divorce became legal in Italy. When I asked her why, she simply answered that she did not want the other woman to go through what she had suffered.

Working hard and being frugal with what she hadn’t generously given to those who were more needy, Lissy finally, as an old woman, achieved her life-long dream and bought her own house— a very, very small house in rather bad shape, but one which she managed to transform with her usual tenacity into a monument to her capacity of always seeking out the beautiful.

I believe that the time spent decorating and restoring her house was the best time of her life. Talking to her today, almost at age ninety, she reminisces about her efforts with pleasure and complains about the weakness of her children.

Lissy’s life brings to my mind the beautiful poem by Lee Masters, “Lucinda Matlock,” an excerpt from the first Spoon River:

What is this I hear of sorrow and weariness,
Anger, discontent and drooping hopes?
Degenerate sons and daughters,
Life is too strong for you—
It takes life to love life.

Rena (Social Subtype)

Rena was the second daughter to parents who very much desired a male child. This always bothered her a lot because she felt that somehow she was never quite what her parents would have wanted. Also, as a child, she was very skinny and not at all built in a way that corresponded to the Italian model of a beautiful child. Her family environment was pretty rotten because the relationship between her parents was rather cold due to the difference of their characters (according to Rena, her mother was a fanatically religious Six with a Five wing, and the father a rambunctious atheist Seven with an Eight wing). Thus, very early in life, Rena got used to low expectations of receiving affection.

Rena described the two kinds of education she received: on the one hand was her mother who was obsessed with the idea of sin and dragged her and her sister to frequent and boring religious processions or ceremonies; on the other hand was her sensuous father who stayed as little as possible with the family, was constantly pursuing a thousand adventures, and would often give in to attacks of fury. Rena remembers that ever since she was a small child, she felt that she was very different from both her parents. And given a choice, she could relate more with her father because of his vitality and the craving for life they shared.

I think what happened was that she had established a secret and subconscious complicity with her father—something that happens very often to Social Four females. This complicity caused a string of guilt complexes in Rena towards her mother, who, in her turn, became jealous of her daughter because she felt excluded from that relationship.

The mother’s resentment towards this relationship (which she even considered sinful), grew as Rena became older. She forbade Rena to wear clothing that was revealing, or too short, even though Rena, following her natural instinct, would have loved to wear them.

The situation came to a point when Rena was 11 years old, just starting puberty. It was summer and hot, and Rena was wearing only a shirt and a short skirt doing housework chores. While she was standing on a chair dusting a lamp, her father entered the room and started feeling up her legs. Rena felt paralyzed and froze in a daze not knowing what to do. She felt a huge fear and a sense of panic, but before her father could complete whatever he planned to do, Rena’s aunt walked in interrupting the situation. However, it was too late and the damage was done. When Rena’s mother found out about this, she immediately sent her away to a nunnery for schooling. Unable to confront the husband, she directed her frustration and fury at Rena, blaming her for what had happened.

Consequently, Rena suffered a sense of complete disorientation which can hit the Social Four very strongly and became ashamed of her own body and of her own impulses. She developed the typical tendency of the Four to feel inadequate or dirty. The memory of this abuse and the pain that accompanied it remained locked in her heart for many years, as she was unable to vent it to anybody.

Poor Rena felt that she could not tell anybody what had happened and she unconsciously and desperately went in search of someone who could understand her without her having to say anything. She was so ashamed of herself that she was not even able to mention her “sin” to her priest which, in its turn, made her feel even more guilty for having withheld in confession.

She spent a lot of time alone ruminating about what had happened to her. Thirty years had gone by when she told me about this ancient episode, after many years of psychoanalysis had partially liberated her. Though there was clearly visible pain in her face, I asked if she ever felt anger for what had happened. Her answer clarified exactly how the polarity of entitlement/claim works in a Social Four.

Yes, she had felt anger for the abuse, but paradoxically, her anger was directed at herself. In other words, she blamed only herself for not having been able to defend herself from her father’s abuse initially, or afterwards from her mother’s accusations.

After I gently pointed out that even for grown-ups it’s difficult to defend against evil committed by those who are supposed to love us, and therefore almost impossible for a child, she cried bitterly.

After two years at the nunnery and the sudden death of her father, Rena, barely a teenager, returned home. This, of course, denied her the possibility of confronting that which had been the cause of her pain. As soon as Rena reached adulthood, she escaped her family environment and left the city to find a job. This meant that she abandoned her chance for a higher education and took job which allowed her merely to get by. Although she came home for frequent visits and had a cordial relationship with her sister (an easy-going type Nine), Rena always felt desperately alone.

With the passage of years, Rena convinced herself ever more that there was something terribly wrong with her and that she therefore could never reach the kind of beauty she desired but felt that she lacked.

I call this conviction of the Four the Ugly Duckling Syndrome, referring to the story as told by Hans Christian Andersen. A duck egg erroneously placed with goose eggs, hatches, and from the get-go the duckling feels totally inadequate and inferior to his brothers and sisters—until he later meets another duck and realizes how beautiful he actually is. The search for such a validating duck is in some ways a fundamental motivation of Envy.

Rena, too, was searching for just such a duck, but her search led her always towards men who deceived and wounded her. She was unconsciously reliving the delusion of love that she was subjected to by her father without being aware how she was merely feeding her pain and desperation.

After the nth disappointing and abusive partner had dumped her after a violent fight which broke her nose, Rena reached the end of her wits. She collapsed and decided to seek help from her mother. The encounter with her aging mother was memorable. Seeing her daughter in distress, Rena’s mother opened her heart and confessed in tears that she had sent her away out of fear, fear for not being able to protect her once she had realized that her husband had become morbidly attracted to her. She proposed that Rena come and stay with her. Even though the idea of returning home to her old house was almost unbearable to Rena, she accepted.

Paradoxically, this turned out to be a brief period of serenity in her life.

After a short and difficult initial period while getting used to accounting for her whereabouts again, she began appreciating some advantages. Having been alone for so long, she could finally enjoy the proximity of her dear ones—even though deep inside she still felt never properly understood by those closest to her. This observation caused her to reflect deeply about her relationships with her mother, her sister, and herself.

Rena realized that she had always been jealous of her sister—who, in her eyes had been preferred by their mother—which had caused her an unconscious sense of guilt. Thinking back over her entire life, Rena realized how in one way or another, all her actions had been influenced by her desire to be different from her sister, a Nine, who always accepted what her mother told her to do.

To remain close to her mother and sister, Rena started to participate in spiritual retreats and became a member of a charitable association. During one of those retreats, she met a timid and sensitive man (also a Social Four) with whom she started a romantic friendship. In reality, Rena did not feel deeply attracted to him because the men to whom she habitually had been attracted in her past had been completely different, but she felt a certain tenderness towards him. The kindness with which he treated her was something that touched her deeply, and for the first time, Rena thought she had found somebody who finally understood her. Thus, when he proposed marriage, Rena found herself in a terrible conflict. On the one hand, he did not fit her image of beauty—the illusion of the Four—and he didn’t ignite the kind of electric chemistry she always dreamt about. On the other hand, she was seduced by his attentiveness and kindness.

In reality, she did not know how to make a decision. In spite of his and her family’s insistence, for two years she refused to give in to marriage. When I asked her how her indecision felt, she answered “I tried to allow all the decisions in favor of marrying him to become dominant inside of me, while there was a resistance that told me that I did not really desire him. I knew, however, that I did not want to hurt him by telling him ‘No,’ because then I surely would have lost him.”

At long last, when he became progressively more disappointed and frustrated, he stopped seeing her as frequently as he used to, which affected Rena’s decision and she agreed to marry.

Initially, their marriage was not at all bad, even though Rena was less than thrilled with her husband, and the passage of time made her feel a growing sense of something missing. Even the birth of a daughter to whom Rena was very attached did not alter her feeling that grew day by day of having married the wrong man.

Rena lived in a trance—she separated her real life which seemed banal and monotonous to her, from the life of fantasy where she dreamt with open eyes all sorts of romantic adventures. Her sense of entitlement to justly claim fulfillment in marriage grew daily, as did blaming herself for not having picked the right man, as did resentment towards her husband who didn’t “really” understand her and couldn’t give her what she wanted. It was therefore almost inevitable that Rena felt attracted to men who were completely different from her husband. It was not long before she met a new colleague at work who was nice and seductive, and started a relationship with him.

This was obviously the end of the marriage, because Rena only had eyes for her new man and considered her husband a nothing. She felt so elated and enthusiastic in this new relationship that, even though her mother was against it, she decided to divorce and to go live with her new man, taking her daughter along.

Unfortunately, this relationship was of very short duration. After a brief period of passion, the man got tired of her, became bored with her complaints and melancholy, and started physically and verbally abusing her. In the end, he dumped her rather casually without even telling her that he was leaving.

After a period of utter disorientation, Rena understood that the best thing was to live alone with her child. Her sister helped her overcome the worst of this new solitude, showing her that there was at least somebody in the world who wished her well without wanting something in return. Her ex-husband tried several times to re-establish a relationship, but Rena didn’t go for it—she didn’t want to risk repeating her mistakes yet again. Currently, Rena is not happy, but at least she has started taking care of herself and has a good relationship with her daughter and sister.

Last time I saw her, she took my hand and told me that she had not lost hope in changing the course of her life. My heart started beating fast because I recognized in those words the same will that I feel of never surrendering the hope that we Fours secretly nurture for a truly beautiful life, even though habitually we don’t seem to find ways of fully enjoying the one we are offered.

From Issue 61, May 2000 

Sterling Doughty

Sterling Doughty:
I also think it pretty obvious that Western culture is far more concerned with having than with being. Sometimes I think Descartes’ axiom should be revised to read: “I shop therefore I am.” That said, most Asian cultures are not exactly making much significant progress in transcendent peace, harmony and respect for the environment either.

I can still remember standing on a ridge high above the ocean in Big Sur, California watching two fingers of smog far out on the Pacific horizon, a large one moving north from Los Angeles and a somewhat smaller one moving south from San Francisco. At that time, 1967, they were not yet touching. I was living comfortably in an alternative culture, but the sight convinced me that although I personally was pretty much immune to the ill effects of society, it was not enough.

It seemed to me that the only solution was not one of individual “salvation” but a collective raising of consciousness to a point where we would behave like real human beings, not a species suffering from a severe case of arrested development. Then, like millions of others at that time, I began my quest. Alas, looking at the current world situation, it appears we are still somewhat short of our goal. Still, as my old friend, I. Ching likes to say, “Perseverance Furthers.”

So the reminder in last month’s episode of The Conversation—that the Enneagram is a compass needle pointing to the transcendent, seemed particularly apt. The Enneagram is not just something to study per se, like a perpetual lab experiment, but rather a living diagram which we can very usefully employ on the path to true liberation. We have to use what we gain from it to further our progress on The Way.

For me the essence of the Enneagram has always been how it has helped me (through work on type or fixation) to understand my “false personality.” In particular, I try to develop my abilities of self-observation which was as fundamental to Gurdjieff ’s work as it was to Jesus’: “Know Thyself.”

The other day I ran across a small book by Maurice Nicoll, a student of Gurdjieff. In it he said: “The object of self-observation is to enable us to change ourselves. But its first object is to make us more conscious of ourselves. Only by making us more conscious to ourselves does it enable us to begin to change…. “We cannot be changed unless we see the kind of person we are. We practice Self- Observation in order to increase our consciousness, and without an increase in consciousness, nothing in ourselves—or in mankind—can be changed.”

Carl Marsak, M.A.

Carl Marsak:
Well, the Conversation is really heating up and getting interesting. I appreciate Thomas Isham’s discussion of Antoine Faivre’s work on Esotericisms, and would agree that the Enneagram falls under that rubric.

And I read Gloria Davenport’s contribution with great interest. I too found that my personal journey into the ancient religious and philosophical traditions became transforming, and I too “soon forgot about typology, personality traits, even passions and fixations.” Which is an important point to note given that the Enneagram is (or should be), in the words of Isham and Antonio Barbato “a compass needle pointing the way towards the transcendent.”

For this installment of the EM I would like to make a suggestion, namely that some of us “provocateurs of the Enneagram of Personality Movement” (to use Gloria’s expression) try and meet somewhere in the next year or two for 2-3 days of roundtable discussions. In doing so we would be proactively creating an alternative to the IEA, perhaps our own equivalent of the famous Eranos conferences of C.G. Jung, Henry Corbin, Gershom Scholem and others. Except they needn’t be so intensely scholarly and exclusive. They could be Fourth Way gatherings in the spirit of the 21st century and the Enneagram, and would be open to anyone who had sufficient interest and was capable of spending the time, money and energy to attend.

There would be no board of directors, no mission statement, no code of ethics, and very little publicity. It could be advertised by the EM, word of mouth and invitation. We could meet every year or every other year, and trade off between Europe and North America, maybe eventually including other parts of the world. Unlike the IEA events, we could meet in beautiful, elegant, comfortable resorts away from large urban areas. The goal would be to provide a space for a few of us to engage in serious conversation, reflection and the presenting of research. Does this interest any of you out there…?

Kirby Olson

Kirby Olson:
I probably honestly couldn’t attend a beautifully appointed seminar at a luxurious hotel but would dearly love to do this and talk about the kinds of things that Carl has suggested.

I wanted to return to some comments that Jack brought up in regard to the crisis of the Harvard President. Academia—especially in its most elite institutions— has somehow and for some reason become lawless. There is a lynch justice in operation and everyone is vulnerable to it. That said, Lawrence Summers is probably an Eight, and he likes to provoke. Even he however had to back off when he saw the hornets aiming at him.

One of the unfortunate side-effects of no longer believing in individuals but rather in race and gender and class comes lynch justice. Andrea Dworkin, for instance, explicitly argued for lynch justice in regard to purported rapists. She does this in her book Pornography. Dworkin was also almost certainly an Eight. There is a certain kind of lawlessness that is possible for all the different types, but eightish lawlessness is especially terrifying because for some reason it motivates mobs like no other because they can be such charismatic leaders. Osama Bin Laden—I now do see him as an Eight—and his call for justice for the Islamic cause—is an example of this eightish lawlessness.

Michael Goldberg’s new book Travels with Odysseus presents Cyclops as the archetype of the Eight. Utterly without any law other than brute force Cyclops attacks Odysseus’ men. Not only is he under Zeus’ law to provide hospitality to travellers and to feed them, but instead he eats the men, unceremoniously ripping off their heads and devouring them while continuing to make conversation.
The founders of America feared this kind of lawlessness and our constitution is a bulwark against it.

The radicals of the extremes are always attacking the middle. The radical greens will run a nail across the paint of a new SUV, and feel justified in doing it. The extreme right will blow up an abortion clinic and feel justified in doing it. Feminists like Andrea Dworking advocate lynch law, and the KKK of the extreme right—not very far in our past—advocated the same. Balance, proportion, a sense of humor—and a sense of restraint may not have been Gurdjieff’s ideals (he could be a bit of a Cyclops, too) but I think they may emerge as the ideals of the enneagram movement. They appear to be so in Riso’s books, for instance. One thing I fear in the Enneagram movement is too much inward growth (there is a mystical side which I find gets too far from ordinary life) at the cost of trying to think about outward maturity. The enneagram might be a bulwark against the growing lawlessness of left and right in this country. It might help the country to cohere? How does the enneagram present a model of logos—of law and order that allows for not only inward but outward peace with justice?

Usha Mullen

Usha Mullan:
Jack, I am not sure this will warrant a space in your “conversation platform” but I would like to mention that I have been thinking along the same lines as Carl Marsak. In December my website will go live (hopefully) in which I have a space under Group Studies with the specific purpose of initiating study groups (April/May 2006) for a deeper understanding of the Enneagram at varying levels. The idea is to meet every month or every other month, depending on interest and schedules, to exchange ideas on a pre-selected topic.Yes, it would also be a round table with no chairperson. Happy for you to have the first event in London!

Antonio Barbato

Antonio Barbato:
The last Conversation (#4) was so full of important and worthy comments, that it would take a book to treat all the subjects adequately. Space permits me only to touch on several points briefly.

I want, first of all, to correct a mistake I made. The French Constitution was not “taken” from the American one. It would be more accurate to say that the authors of both texts shared a similar philosophy and a similar point of view regarding human destiny.

One of the most important points of their “vision” regarded the role that religion should have in society. The famous phrase “Free Church in a free State” comes from these free thinkers and is one of the foundational principles of the Western World, which is grounded in secularism. That’s why it’s hard to believe Madison “was afraid there would be too little (church),” as Kirby Olson stated. And going on with mistakes…. Jack Labanauskas who translated my thoughts from Italian into English, made a lapse that could have pleased Freud when he was writing “Psychopathology of Daily Life.” Jack changed my sentence where I was accusing “leaders of the last American government know little about the cultures in other parts of the world,” to a statement more pleasing to his beliefs, “leaders of the recent American governments.” This says a lot about Jack’s Sevenish mind, yet doesn’t convey my real thought.

Also, I don’t understand what Jack means by his statement that: “type is linked with the body.” The relative characteristics of our bodies (to have, for instance, blond or black hair, to be tall or short) will not be changed even if we will become the Greatest Enlightened Human Being. Free yourself from the fears of loss and death we built in our youth and you will find your “essential Self,” not something like “a pure type”!

I want to clarify also, with my friend Sterling Doughty, about the 108 Enneagrams. I was simply reporting Ichazo’s opinion, not mine. In fact, I added that this statement “may seem excessive, even if…it is obvious that some areas of life will have not been addressed.” Carl Marsak and Gloria Davenport talked largely, even if from different point of views, of the wisdom sources that can be useful to deeply study the Enneagram. I want to underline that we must be careful here. While all knowledge is useful, we have to distinguish between indispensable and the non-essential.

It’s ironic that I, a heterodox Christian, must emphasize Christian writers and not the Stoic philosophers or other thinkers. It was the Christians who understood and clarified the existential meaning of a Passion. Saint Nylus of Ancyra (about 400 A.D.) was probably the first (even if the same thought appeared in other forms in previous Christian writings), to write clearly that a Passion is an object of pleasure we cherish, an emotional game we play to give sense to an existence we didn’t choose and can’t understand. He writes: “We get stuck in childish thinking worthy of writing songs about, while we neglect embracing thinking like mature adults.”

At the same time a “deviated intellect” finds “distractions” in order to forget the “fear of the inescapable end.” When I wrote, “the Enneagram is like a compass needle pointing the way towards the transcendent,” I was thinking exactly of the great lessons you can find in the Christian tradition, not about some strange and mysterious secrets.

And about the “esoteric thoughts” I’d like to add that I appreciate Thomas Isham’s explanation, yet can’t agree with him. The word “esoteric” derives from the Greek suffix eso, that expresses a sense of “in the inner part,” but it has always been used meaning “hidden or occult.” My dictionary adds: “something that is revealed only to the initiated people and remains unintelligible to the ignorant ones.” The word esoteric was used in connection with the Gnostics of the second century, who maintained that Christian revelation had inner meanings that could be revealed only to those able to understand them. Do I need to add that the only people able to “understand” were obviously the same Gnostics and their followers? The deeply ingrained egalitarian inside of me refuses the idea that some valuable Knowledge may be “reserved” only to a limited number of persons.

The Enneagram in my opinion is not a magical object, “a model of existence or a mirror to reflect the levels of self-consciousness,” but more likely, a lunar calendar mixed with planetary movements, as I discovered studying the Assyrian-Babylonian symbolism in my vain quest of the “elusive” Chaldean Seal.

Last but not least, I totally agree with Richard Daffner when he affirmed that, ignoring the power of sexuality, the Enneagram is wounded in its capacity of being a “vibrant, living, tool for self awareness.” In response to his question about the relations between aggression and sexuality, I can only suggest reading Erich Fromm’s enlightening Anatomy of Human Destructiveness. It explains how the control and the manipulation of the sexual instinct have always been a means to control and address aggression in ways that served the established power.

Thomas Isham

Thomas Isham:
I see that Antonio Barbato has appreciated but not agreed with my definition of the Enneagram as a form of esotericism. As he elaborates his disagreement, however, it appears to me that he is talking about two different things. He appears to be saying, on the one hand, that esotericism connotes the secret and the mysterious and, therefore, is not for the public at large, and, on the other hand, that since he wants the Enneagram to be available to the public at large, it should not be seen as an esotericism. I believe this is an apples-and-oranges approach to the question. After all, a fact is a fact, whether we approve of the fact or not. In other words, if the Enneagram is by definition a form of esotericism, then that’s what it is.

Whether it should be made available to the public at large (which, of course, it has been) is a secondary issue.

Now, as to Antonio’s comments: first, he does grant me the core meaning of the word esotericism, which derives from the Greek esoterikos, which means “inner,” or, as he points out, “the inner part” (from “eso”). But then he says that esotericism, instead of being used according to its original meaning, has always and everywhere been used to mean that which is “hidden or occult.” In fact, however, the historical understanding of the word is not an either-or proposition, scholars having shown that esotericism has been understood in both ways. Those who have propagated esotericist doctrines down through the centuries have centered their teaching on the interior aspects of the human person. They have also, as Antonio indicates, done so mostly in a “hidden or occult” manner by way of initiation. Because of his distaste for such practices, Antonio would like to disengage the Enneagram from the category of esotericism.

But facts are facts. Thus I affirm once more that the enneagram is an esoteric teaching. I have reread my comments on the matter from the last conversation, comments which appear at greater length in my recent tome, and believe they hold up to scrutiny. In addition to the four characteristics of esotericism that I mentioned (these being, in the schema of Antoine Faivre, correspondences, living nature, imagination and mediations, and transmutation), there are two ancillary characteristics, which I did not mention, one of which is “transmission.” The Enneagram, as taught originally by Oscar Ichazo, was, we should remember, transmitted in a typically esotericist manner, from master to disciple, with an element of secrecy.

It seems that Antonio’s principal objection to my view has to do with the fact that an esotericist Enneagram would be secretive and mysterious, available to initiates only but not to a larger public. He compares such a notion to the teachings of the Gnostics of the early church, who held that their illumined knowledge was reserved for the few. Such was indeed the Gnostic view, and Antonio is right in contrasting that approach to that of the larger church, which for its part presented the Christian revelation openly and publicly, to all with “ears to hear.” As a matter of fact, I agree with Antonio’s desire to be “egalitarian” in this matter, and I too wish to make the Enneagram available to all whom it would benefit. Yet again, this does not alter the fact that the enneagram is a form of esotericism, as I have defined it. It is an esotericism, of course, that already has been released into the public sphere. But again, in the beginning, in Ichazo’s view, it was a teaching designed to be transmitted only to initiates. The genie having escaped the bottle—by way of Claudio Naranjo and others—it now roams far and wide, to the benefit of many.

Jack Labanauskas - Editor

Jack Labanauskas:
Talking about a Freudian lapse, my dear Antonio, you thought Freud would be pleased with my translating and correcting history at the same time. Freud will get tickled pink with your Fourish interpretation of my Sevenish (self sacrificing) attempt to spare you from being inaccurate.

The constitution has been raped, twisted or ignored from the time the signers’ ink was still wet. We currently are plagued with courts, lawyers and politicians who work day and night nibbling away at all our constitutionally guaranteed rights, or are cooking up new and unlisted rights.

Regarding my point that “type is linked with the body,” it was intended to mean that “type is linked with the individual” as opposed to “one consciousness” or “universal consciousness” which by definition is without diverse qualities since it is all encompassing.

For example, any creature or object containing matter falls under the rule of polarity, yin yang, space and time. Type is only possible after polarity is activated. All creatures that have a body, don’t just have any old body, but specifically “their body”—which is unique and one of a kind; with it’s own type, yin-yang mix and role in space and time.

Type therefore is part of the relative and “everchanging” aspect of what we are, not only the ego.

While the absolute and never changing aspect of what we are (beyond body/ego/time), is without characteristics and hence without type.

You are certainly correct that our basic characteristics will not change even if we become the “greatest enlightened being,” nor will our type. What may change is our attitude/belief that tells us whether we are our ego/body or consciousness. Such a change does not require that anything about our external persona change at all.

Antonio Barbato

Antonio Barbato:
My dear friend and esteemed colleague Jack, even from my side of the ocean I could see with my magical crystal ball heavy drops of sweat falling from your forehead during your attempt to sparing me from being inaccurate about US Constitutional issues. Thank you for your noble (to the point of self-sacrifice) effort. Yet, I have been living 47 years in the city of Naples, with its very strong Sevenish cultural aura, where we have a sage proverb that says: “It’s not wise for you to play a serenade in a musician’s house.” Why am I bringing this old adage up? Because some of our gentle readers, perhaps, remember my article on aggression (EM September 2004), where I described the Sevenish tendency to “outflanking” as “a strategy to use a series of actions, concealing their true purpose from others to skillfully maneuver around resistances, and obstacles while furthering their own goals.” You see, in my last intervention I was not generally talking about the fact that, as you wrote, “The constitution has been raped, twisted or ignored from the time the signers’ ink was still wet:” that may or may not be true. My intention was that a very specific and important principle in the US Declaration of Independence was totally ignored by the current government, i.e. in the management of the Iraq affair.

I would like to ask you, dear Jack: Are you still sure your true purpose was that of cleaning my “feverish mind,” or, did you mistranslate me to fit with your version of reality? In the end it seems that I really made a mistake, I thought that your lapse “could have pleased Freud when he was writing Psychopathology of Daily Life,” it is now I who is getting tickled pink over this new example of guile I can add to those I see everyday in my Sevenish city.

Jack Labanauskas:
My dear Antonio, I caught the jab at the current administration and wanted to avoid shifting the attention onto politics. But since I love politics—and so do you—and we have spent countless hours discussing how to solve the world’s problems and who is to blame for them, I made a change in the translation to bring your text closer to what I believe to be the truth. And, to put a stop to what otherwise would become a political argument. No big deal. Your original point (Founding Fathers being Nines and Ones) was not hurt nor helped by picking on the current government, or by me including past perpetrators of violators of the constitution. After all, to intelligently argue, which government is more disrespectful of the constitution is a can of worms and beyond the scope of this paper.

I know and respect you well enough to be sure that, although we often disagree about the causes and solutions to problems, your mind is rarely feverish (only when you disagree with me, of course) and even then, never out of malice but simply out of having lived and experienced different aspects of life than have I; and hence, you came to different conclusions. Ultimately that’s what makes us different types with different passions.

I would point at another example of how such differences come about, using your exchange with Thomas Isham in the paragraphs above.

Thomas described esotericism from his experience. If esotericism was an orange, he could have said it is “orange” and you responded that it was “round.” Who was right? You both are. Thomas looked at the stated purpose of esotericism, while you looked at how it was historically applied.

The quote by Woody Allen comes to mind: “Just because I’m paranoid, doesn’t mean they’re not after me.”

Kirby Olson

Kirby Olson:
Quick question: in terms of the sexuality issue: does each type have a different erotic trigger? That is to say, would each type have a trigger issue or image, what have you, that ups the ante to the point of orgasmic freefall?

From Issue 120, November 2005

After five years of daily homework and yearly trips to attend month+ intensive retreats in India, Sue Ann McKean got her master’s degree as a Jaimini Scholar,  (better her than me, I couldn’t have done it…) while I came along three of those years in search of links between Jyotish and the Enneagram.  Well, to be honest, it was also fun hanging out with some of the scholars from various countries that had become good friends. But most rewarding was the time spent with our teacher, pundit Sanjay Rath and his wife Sarbani who is an accomplished Sanskrit and Jaimini scholar. Sanjay is widely respected as head of a venerated lineage of jyotishees and author of many books on that subject. He is also no slouch in things new, scientific or Western, given his degree in satellite engineering.

During our stays in India and whenever Sanjay and Sarbani came to California on teaching tours, we’d have discussions about correlations between the nine “grahas,” cosmic influences that affect our personality, (as symbolized by the nine planets used in Vedic astrology) and the nine enneagram types. We have finalized the correlations to our satisfaction and to our surprise found that both systems can benefit from the strengths of each.
The Enneagram’s contribution is in the dynamic of the figure describing the movement of energies, while Jyotish offers a deeper understanding of the energies themselves.  Furthermore Jyotish has always had the thing that was missing in the Enneagram completely: the element of time!  For example, how can we know when we are likely to make a move along the lines towards what we generally refer to as integration or disintegration. Here too we found a way of predicting the timing and nature of these shifts. We are currently testing this theory and in a few months we hope to have worked out a technique that is practical and easy enough to apply without complex calculations.

As I have mentioned before, Jyotish is infinitely more complex than anything that has been written about the Enneagram since and including the Greeks, Evagrius Ponticus, Ramon Lull, Gurdjieff, Ichazo, Naranjo and others. But that’s not a fair comparison, since Jyotish stands on the shoulders of 3000-5000 years of sacred scriptures, many attributed to enlightened souls. The enneagram in its current form is about half a century old and considering that, we’ve come very far.

In This Issue:

Antonio Barbato and Jack Labanauskas tackle the “Internal Polarities of Passion: Questions and Answers.” One of the difficulties in recognizing which of the nine passions is at the core of our personality was driven by the expectation to see each passion as “consistent.”  By consistent, I mean that Anger would always manifest as anger, Pride as pride, Deceit as deceit etc. We would of course allow for variations in intensity and degree of a passion, but the passion itself maintained that same negative characteristic. This encouraged the notion that somehow we can (and must) eventually “kick” the passion to make room for our essence to shine through. This idea is at the root of the assumption that personality is an inherent flaw in our nature rather than the container of our individual traits. If we break down each passion into its polarities, we see quite a different picture; a picture of our passion as energy — like a pulse, heartbeat or breath — neither evil, nor good, just alive and active as long as we live. Each passion therefore has an active and a passive “phase” (polarities) that go by a different name, for example, Anger oscillates between Security and Sensitivity (see EM, issue 178, June 2011).

Bill Dyke asks: “Did Marcus Buckingham Write an Enneagram Book? A Review of StandOut.” From what I can see, the answer is, “Not exactly,” but there are so many lines of thought that harmonize with the Enneagram that it’s a reasonable question. On the other hand, if we assume that human nature operates by fairly stable “rules” (or traits if you prefer), it would make total sense that researchers who dug deep to the bottom of what makes us tick hit on the same qualities again and again. We either see how we are accurately or we don’t. Marcus Buckingham is a person with deep insight into the natures of individuals, their desires, motivations and flaws. It comes as no surprise if he comes up with the same number of subdivisions, although he slices his pie not quite along the same grooves as we enneagrammers do.

Susan Rhodes has a positive commentary on Mary Bast’s article, “Going for the Gold: Alchemy in Coaching,” that appeared in the previous issue. It’s interesting how introducing another system can bring a completely new angle and enrich our understanding. We have talked and written extensively about the nature and nuances of each type, but relatively little has been said about the roles that each type plays in a  transformational process such as alchemy. Since Susan has been exploring links between the personality and process enneagrams, this article leapt out at her as being a prime example of how it’s possible to see personality as playing a role in transformation—which means that it’s also possible to use Bast’s approach to examine the transformational potential inherent in each type.

Mario Sikora’s “Enneagram in Business, Part 2,” continues to explore the appropriate way to use the enneagram in a business setting.  As always, his approach is thoroughly practical and grounded in the idea that it’s best to stay completely away from metaphysical speculations when dealing with a business clientele. He advocates teaching people to work with the “clay” of their type (however seemingly “unspiritual”) while taking a swipe at the idea that constructive change is about “letting go of some allegedly ‘false’ thing [personality] and embracing some allegedly ‘real’ thing [essence] that doesn’t actually exist.” Brave words, those! Of course, Mario has a long history of coming down in favor of concrete ideas and approaches in preference to those dependent on ideas about spirituality that he sees as unproven. And unproven they shall remain by the very essence of their nature.

Katharine Rawls, through no fault of her own, found herself cajoled by her type Six boyfriend to improve her dancing, just in time for her friend’s wedding.  “Sexy Dancing, One-Style” became Katharine’s project to master— and she had a whole week to do it in. She hired two teachers, and what she thought would be “fixed” with a few cosmetic adjustments of style turned out to be changes that stirred up “stuff.” Katharine, is a type One Sexual subtype and her story illustrates how deep our  type’s roots reach.

If we are not “afflicted” by our type, but see it as a compass pointing out the direction our life meant to take, there is no need to pushing  ourselves “out of the comfort zone” as if that was a good thing in and of itself. It’s one thing to oppose zones that offer the wrong sort of comfort;  laziness, corruption, or libertine unrestricted impulses.  But if the compass of a Ones comes with an inclination to act as custodians of social mores (or dharma if you prefer), they will be uncomfortable stepping across the bounds of  what their sensitivity tells them is nor proper, and…for whose benefit?

We are not exactly living in a time where puritanism still rules as say in a Talibanesque society. Our pendulum has swung the other way and we can see a need to cool it a bit.  And Ones make good role models for those gone too far to the other side.  Ones happen to be able to perceive perfection (i.e. the golden middle way) instinctively, and are thus more reluctant to stray. That’s their gift to the other eight types.  Aside from that, we operate best from the strengths of our own type rather than by straining to imitate behaviors that are natural to other types.

Katharine’s story is a perfect companion piece to the series on Sex, Love and Your Personality.  As luck would have it, I had held back the stories of the Self-Pres and Sexual Subtype Ones, saving it for an occasion such as this one.

“Sex, Love and Your Personality — Type One, the Perfectionist in Love” by Mona Coates and Judith Searle continues this precious series. We are going back to type One, this time a male and a female each of the Self-Pres and Sexual persuasions.

Over the years, we had several complaints that we were way too “goody two shoes” when it comes to articles about sex and violence, two ingredients that play a large role in life and puny one in our pages. Well, we are on the way to remedy  Ennegram Monthly’s sexual deprivation with Mona and Judith’s excellent examples, but are waiting with baited breath for stories of how different types deal with violence.

We are now well into the season for sex, so please consider yourselves invited to share your thoughts and if you like, commenting on violence—although in this case I recommend leaving it at comments only…

Antonio Barbato took a stab or two at it with a thoughtful piece on violence portrayed in art. His main character was a Type Two, Artemisia Genileschi  and her painting of Judith beheading Holofernes. For comparison Antonio added how other artists painted the same theme: Type Three, Cranach the Elder; Sandro Botticelli a Seven; Gustav Klimt, also a Two; and Michelangelo Caravaggio a type Eight.

If you are interested in reading these articles please consider buying a yearly subscription.