# Excellent explanations and interactions of all of the different triads



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

The Typeless Wonder said:


> Fair enough, but the point I was hoping to make is, 7 doesn't _have_ to integrate to a reactive type to gain insights into negativity (I'd think 5 is as capable of cynicism and staring into horror as 4; perhaps moreso because 4s tend to romanticise). I think the more important thing to ask is what is the core issue of the type and what really serves it. The triads that point belongs to may or may not count.


Yes, except 5s compartmentalize emotions which is one of the issues 7 struggles with, to recognize emotions and emotional content. 4 doesn't. 



> Should symmetry override observation, though? If it makes symmetrical sense to say A, but observation says B, what's the better conclusion? I mean, I imagine people didn't assign it to its current form just because they felt like messing up 3 inner triads.


In the case of the enneagram I have to say yes, actually. Normally I'd say observation should precede theoretical symmetry, but the problem with the enneagram as a theory is that all its symbolic meaning is derived from its numerological symmetry. Remove it and you remove much of the actual point of what the enneagram is about and that is a big problem. If you alter the system to that degree, you aren't dealing with the enneagram anymore but a different system entirely built upon the enneagram similar to how Keirsey builds on the MBTI but he's not an actual MBTI theorist because of how he denies the core aspect of MBTI theory which are the Jungian functional aspects of the psyche. 

And the reason why the symbol looks like the way it does right now is because Gurdjieff made it so; I don't agree with him. 



> Also, how is the current form asymmetrical? Geometrically, it forms a mirror image of itself. Serious question,in what ways would you say switching the connections improves it?


It's numerologically inconsistent. Here, let me show you a better image of how it should look like: 










Not only is it actually mirrored, but it's numerologically consistent, truly and fully operating on the power of 3 in all aspects. Its current conception doesn't. 



> Last, what do you consider the original symbol? I was under the impression that the symbol goes, possibly, as far back as ancient Greece and was later used by Gurdjieff, but the work since then has radically changed, including the concept of "types" itself. Whether or not Ichazo fiddled around with the symbol when he assigned the types, I cannot say. But given that it's undergone so much metamorphosis, revision, and refinement over the years, I feel like we could argue that about a lot of enneagram-related ideas.


See the above. Also, another point I want to add is that I feel that when it comes to people observations, I don't think there is any truly accurate way of how to assign the enneagram theory in observational reality anyway. How do we actually prove that 7 moves to 5 or 4 in terms of behavioral observation? 



> Okay. So I'm thinking you buy the DoI / DoD theory over the "connecting points" theory. Am I right?


Not really. I think they are connection points but I think the movement is also deliberate in its direction.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

Entropic said:


> By desire I mean ability to pinpoint what it is you really desire in life, what you truly want and is good for you.


Ehh...no. Not at all. 

I can't seem to be able to stick with one thing long enough to appreciate or acknowledge whether or not it's what I _truly _want, let alone whether or not its good for me. In my frustration I end up wanting to try and experience it _all _in the hope that it will fill the huge void inside of me. It never does, and as a result I spend most of my time feeling painfully unsatisfied.

SO.FRUSTRATING. :bored:

Actually, sometimes my bf asks me, _"well, what is it that you want?"; _and I end up getting really angry because I can't answer that question...why the hell is that so damn difficult?!


----------



## phoenix_9 (Nov 22, 2014)

Love reading this stuff...thanks for posting OP


----------



## Lord Bullingdon (Aug 9, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Yes, except 5s compartmentalize emotions which is one of the issues 7 struggles with, to recognize emotions and emotional content. 4 doesn't.


But the issues of every type are going to overlap.



> And the reason why the symbol looks like the way it does right now is because Gurdjieff made it so; I don't agree with him.


What was the symbol like before this, what did it look like, and how did it correlate to the types?



> It's numerologically inconsistent. Here, let me show you a better image of how it should look like:
> 
> Not only is it actually mirrored, but it's numerologically consistent, truly and fully operating on the power of 3 in all aspects. Its current conception doesn't.


Sorry, I'm a bit confused by this part. Is it numerology we're dealing with, or psychology? Need they overlap?



> See the above. Also, another point I want to add is that I feel that when it comes to people observations, I don't think there is any truly accurate way of how to assign the enneagram theory in observational reality anyway. How do we actually prove that 7 moves to 5 or 4 in terms of behavioral observation?


By that logic...how do we prove anything about enneagram?? I suppose if they find out that certain types have certain biochemistry, we can best determine which would be most beneficial for people. But short of that, all anyone's doing is kicking around ideas.



> Not really. I think they are connection points but I think the movement is also deliberate in its direction.


So a sort of synthesis of both? Is there a theory about this you do subscribe to?


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

Blue Flare said:


> Besides, you're focusing too much on the 'hyperactive' side of 7, which is just a way of avoiding the real problem, which is having trouble dealing with their own pain. I really fail to see how the hoarding mechanic of a 5 could solve the issue of avoiding emotional pain. Please explain why integrating to 4 wouldn't balance to the positive outlook of a 7, and why a 7 would need another link to a competence type, considering that it's already liked to type 1, instead of really needing a connection to a reactive type that belongs to the heart triad.


You don't "balance" positive outlook with negative outlook (actually self-image, but looks out in longing). Perhaps it looks good or logical in a model, but in real life? Of course, if you think that will work I'd be interested to hear how you do that, how a negativistic outlook would benefit a gluttonous mindset. Though I don't see integration as integrating maladaptive behavior (like hoarding), rather adaptive. 

Growth for 7 is not about outlook (imagination in anticipation) but to find satisfaction in here and now. (holy plan, holy wisdom)

The integration from 7 to 5 is non-attachment, to enable Sobriety.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

The Typeless Wonder said:


> But the issues of every type are going to overlap.


Sure, which ties into my previous point to you that we can't directly observe what is correct or incorrect way to understand the enneagram in the first place. 



> What was the symbol like before this, what did it look like, and how did it correlate to the types?


I assume it's based on the Star of David. I don't know if this is the origin of the symbol, however, as I don't have any proof to support that it is indeed based on the Star of David. Then of course the Star of David is based on even older traditions etc., so it becomes whatever to me. 



> Sorry, I'm a bit confused by this part. Is it numerology we're dealing with, or psychology? Need they overlap?


Numerology. The origin of the enneagram is numerology. It's based on the power of 3 or the three philosophical principles, a common idea in esoteric teachings. The problem is I think, is that modern enneagram practioners have brought in psychology to a system that is inherently spiritual and got nothing to do with the human psyche. Thus, they caused a theoretical mess to something that is at its heart actually quite simple and not all that different from say, astrology (hah, makes me think of a thread that got locked not too long time ago). 

The original idea of the power of 3 is something you can for example find in alchemy and the compounds of sulphur, salt and mercury, among other things. You also see this being represented in the enneagram too with the three centers, the Hornevian triads etc. Do you see now why it's important to preserve the numerological consistency of the system? 



> By that logic...how do we prove anything about enneagram?? I suppose if they find out that certain types have certain biochemistry, we can best determine which would be most beneficial for people. But short of that, all anyone's doing is kicking around ideas.


We don't. We can't prove anything. Hence, any supposed "research" in this subject is quite pointless too, because what does research even mean in this context? It's intangible. We can try to relate it back to psychic structures like Naranjo and others have done, but then why do we keep the spiritual aspect intact? Seems pretty pointless. May as well just make it a theory of the psyche instead of a spiritual teaching to achieve self-growth, since keeping the numerological symbolism is more of a hinder than a help, then. 



> So a sort of synthesis of both? Is there a theory about this you do subscribe to?


Nope. Just that terminology and their meanings are flexible to me.


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

The Typeless Wonder said:


> You'd think someone would have stumbled across something by now.


 Someone did.
*Holy Will/Freedom -> 2*
*Holy Truth -> 8*
*Holy Omniscience/Transparency -> 5*


Almaas said:


> Because what happens is the functioning of the organism that is the universe, there is no randomness to the changes that occur within it. Events may appear random to our subjective point of view, but from an objective perspective, an inherent intelligence is seen to be operating, moving things in a particular direction. As Albert Einstein is reputed to have said, “God does not play dice with the universe.” This means that the universe does not function mechanically; it is a living, conscious presence, so its functioning is an organic unfoldment. Perceiving that the functioning of the universe has a particular momentum, and moves in a particular direction with a particular intelligence and a particular force, is the meaning of *Holy Will*. You are seeing, in other words, that there is a unified will in the total functioning of the universe. Implicit in this perception is seeing all change in the universe as a functioning, a doing. This means that the movement of a star is action and not simply change; it is the action of *Holy Truth*..........See also p119. So *Holy Will* is nothing mysterious, but very few people actually come to know it directly. It is a very subtle and deep perception of the operation of *Holy Truth*. At the same time, we can experience it as whatever is happening at any moment, whether it is a supernova exploding or your superego attacking you. All of it is *Holy Will*..........See also p119. *Holy Freedom*, the other aspect of this Holy Idea, is understanding functioning or will from the perspective of *Holy Transparency*. *Holy Transparency*, discussed in the previous chapter, is the perception that one exists as a human being who is completely inseparable from the whole. Therefore, your functioning and your actions are inseparable from the functioning of the whole, and are in complete harmony with its functioning. You are, in a sense, a co-creator, a participant in the expression of *Holy Will*. This is the experience of *Holy Will* acting through you, and we call that experience* Holy Freedom*. *Holy Freedom*, then, means that your action is not separate from the action of the universe, so your will is not separate from the will of the universe. There is, therefore, no conflict between your will and the will of the universe; your will is not opposed to that of the universe or disharmonious with it.


[HR][/HR]


The Typeless Wonder said:


> So a sort of synthesis of both? Is there a theory about this you do subscribe to?


 Disclaimer: I found/use the enneagram as a _spiritual_ system, *not* a psychological system. Not even the DSM is set straight (source: my _shrink_), and it's cleaner to examine systems independently _before_ mixing them. So screw much, though not all, of what Naranjo says.

There's this:


> Not really. I think they are connection points but I think the movement is also deliberate in its direction.


 Movement can be done deliberately. The enneagram is supposed to be a _dynamic_ system, but no one is defining what "dynamic" means. I don't think it _only_ means moving along the pre-established lines. And even then, people arbitrarily reject that movement around the circumference, a line which _already_ exists (law of one), is possible. My personal hobby is in investigating the unique energy/process/role/spiritual meaning behind each type.

The default map's lines connect like so:
Suppose that 5-8-2 triad deals with issues concerning predictability.
Suppose that 4-1-7 triad deals with issues concerning changes/mysteries.
In the default symbol, it goes change-> constant-> change-> constant, etc. 
Where the 3-6-9 triad are mediating the balance.

In my _personal_ subjective experience (take it or leave it), you need to do some _spiritual_ work to get the default map to look like this:



Entropic said:


>


 And this map makes more sense to me *after* doing enough Holy Work.

From what I experienced, fives (_internalized_ expression of fear; they fear the outside), when disintegrating, realize that they need to search the environment to get what they need. When disintegrating, they _invert_ the direction of their fear inward and _invert_ their attention outward, outside their thoughts. However, they still fundamentally fear the outside world. In counter-avarice (counter-vice is still a vice), they try to look like they're sharing, a distortion of non-attachment (five's virtue) _and_ a distortion of trying to be generous (type two). The difference between a real virtue and an imitation is that they're doing it to get something from you. If you take the bait, they will try to use that and impose that you "owe" them something. If you don't take the bait, then they slowly try to reel the bait back in, hoping that you didn't notice. In another set of strategies, they will try to impose that you "owe" them because they _offered_, or because they did something for you in the past (without prior agreement that something is expected in return) (type two). It also didn't matter that you didn't want them to do that favor, or that they had to break into your locked room to try to force their "help" onto you; they still expect something in return and they're banking on those "favors" to get whatever they need.

Let's assume that in all of this outreach they're doing, they're trying to move to eight. But they haven't actually solved their main issue yet: _letting go_ of what they "know" of the world (which is why their virtue is non-attachment). So that means they took a detour to seven; fives withdraw into the center of intelligence they are most familiar with. With both internalized and externalized fear, they can't do this for too long or else they won't be able to tell their thoughts (how things _ought_ to be) from how things _will_ be.

In my _personal_ experience, part of that weirdness of the 4/5 arc is that, in disintegration mode, they have a hard time getting out of themselves to be able to tell the difference between their own thoughts/emotions/desires from reality/emotions/desires of others. It's like the opposite reference to the nine. I had to tap into/remember my experiences to separate out the four and five components to "fix" the map.


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

Entropic said:


> How do we actually prove that 7 moves to 5 or 4 in terms of behavioral observation?


 Yes, 7 does move to (5 or 4) in direction of growth. Doesn't matter which; parenthesis override from math. And vector analysis.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

cir said:


> Yes, 7 does move to (5 or 4) in direction of growth. Doesn't matter which; parenthesis override from math. And vector analysis.


...Huh? 

I'm interested but this is totally going over my head.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

Kintsugi said:


> ...Huh?
> 
> I'm interested but this is totally going over my head.


Im guessing it means that it would make sense for 7 to go to 4 in order to not avoid pain but seeing as 7's connection point is 5, cir placed the direction of integration in-between. Is what it seems to be.
@cir - have you thought about how this might work with others integration points? It would mean the whole integration/disintegration system as we know it might be quite different(which is kinda exciting and interesting to think about)! I think there's some merit to using wings to help with development - 4w5 using 5 wing to detach from emotions and the other way to 3, using the 3 wing to develop more pride in oneself etc etc.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

mushr00m said:


> Im guessing it means that it would make sense for 7 to go to 4 in order to not avoid pain but seeing as 7's connection point is 5, cir placed the direction of integration in-between. Is what it seems to be.
> 
> @cir - have you thought about how this might work with others integration points? It would mean the whole integration/disintegration system as we know it might be quite different(which is kinda exciting and interesting to think about)! I think there's some merit to using wings to help with development - 4w5 using 5 wing to detach from emotions and the other way to 3, using the 3 wing to develop more pride in oneself etc etc.


Well, I assume it would be more closely to the dodecagram that was posted some time ago minus the astrological signs:


----------



## Lord Bullingdon (Aug 9, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Sure, which ties into my previous point to you that we can't directly observe what is correct or incorrect way to understand the enneagram in the first place.


So even having this discussion seems pointless. Just killing time. (In my case, anyway).



> I assume it's based on the Star of David. I don't know if this is the origin of the symbol, however, as I don't have any proof to support that it is indeed based on the Star of David. Then of course the Star of David is based on even older traditions etc., so it becomes whatever to me.


I don't know what the Jews would think about that (I'm not one). I've never heard the two correlated anywhere else, though.



> Numerology. The origin of the enneagram is numerology. It's based on the power of 3 or the three philosophical principles, a common idea in esoteric teachings. *The problem is I think, is that modern enneagram practioners have brought in psychology to a system that is inherently spiritual and got nothing to do with the human psyche.* Thus, they caused a theoretical mess to something that is at its heart actually quite simple and not all that different from say, astrology (hah, makes me think of a thread that got locked not too long time ago).


I don't know the thread. I'll take it it was an interesting read. I do raise my eyebrows at that bolded part, I have to admit. How are the human psyche and spirituality separate? Though the connotation has shifted a bit in modern medicine, Freud even used the term "psyche" with spiritual overtones. I'd say they _were _linked. Body mind and soul are not separate.



> The original idea of the power of 3 is something you can for example find in alchemy and the compounds of sulphur, salt and mercury, among other things. You also see this being represented in the enneagram too with the three centers, the Hornevian triads etc. Do you see now why it's important to preserve the numerological consistency of the system?


To be honest about it, I don't actually. Maybe I'm just retarded, but if you're going to use the sulfur salt and mercury as evidence for why the enneagram has the wrong connecting points...you've just lost me. Sorry.



> We don't. We can't prove anything. Hence, any supposed "research" in this subject is quite pointless too, because what does research even mean in this context? It's intangible. We can try to relate it back to psychic structures like Naranjo and others have done, but then why do we keep the spiritual aspect intact? Seems pretty pointless. May as well just make it a theory of the psyche instead of a spiritual teaching to achieve self-growth, since keeping the numerological symbolism is more of a hinder than a help, then.


That would be fine by me, actually. I'm interested in how things work, and that includes human minds. I have a rather limited capacity for faith in humans' spirituality, though like I said above, I don't see how _psyche_ is exclusive of _spirituality_.



> Nope. Just that terminology and their meanings are flexible to me.


They're not to me.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

The Typeless Wonder said:


> So even having this discussion seems pointless. Just killing time. (In my case, anyway).


Why is it pointless? 



> I don't know what the Jews would think about that (I'm not one). I've never heard the two correlated anywhere else, though.


Well, there isn't much for them to comment on in the first place, I think. 



> I don't know the thread. I'll take it it was an interesting read. I do raise my eyebrows at that bolded part, I have to admit. How are the human psyche and spirituality separate? Though the connotation has shifted a bit in modern medicine, Freud even used the term "psyche" with spiritual overtones. I'd say they _were _linked. Body mind and soul are not separate.


Depends on how you define and understand the psyche. The way I experience it is that it has to do with psychic structures, and when you try to structure the psyche which I do not in itself relate to modern medicine, you lose out on another more symbolic dimension similar to how neuroscience devolves the humanities by making it all relate to the brain. It's not to do with that body and soul and mind are separate; but it's to do with the methods, how they are being understood. 



> To be honest about it, I don't actually. Maybe I'm just retarded, but if you're going to use the sulfur salt and mercury as evidence for why the enneagram has the wrong connecting points...you've just lost me. Sorry.


Not evidence, but parallel example. The point was more to show you the link to the power of 3, and how this is related to the esoteric movement which you could argue the enneagram is a part of. 



> That would be fine by me, actually. I'm interested in how things work, and that includes human minds. I have a rather limited capacity for faith in humans' spirituality, though like I said above, I don't see how _psyche_ is exclusive of _spirituality_.


The psyche in itself? No, but how you structure and make sense of it? Yes. 



> They're not to me.


Why not?


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

mushr00m said:


> Im guessing it means that it would make sense for 7 to go to 4 in order to not avoid pain but seeing as 7's connection point is 5, cir placed the direction of integration in-between. Is what it seems to be.


 Yeah, I did this via seven wing. 8->5 is energy intensive, but I needed to do that as well because I have a lot of experience at 8->2.

@_Kintsugi_ That location is the difference between your "real" integration point and the simplified version. You need to figure out which component is five and which component is four. The Spiritual Enneagram: Type Five - Sacred Integration For a 7, the "flow" will make sense if you keep in mind your 7->1 connection, because once you found 4, you should be able to feel a complete cycle of 7-4-1.



> @_cir_ - have you thought about how this might work with others integration points? It would mean the whole integration/disintegration system as we know it might be quite different(which is kinda exciting and interesting to think about)! I think there's some merit to using wings to help with development - 4w5 using 5 wing to detach from emotions and the other way to 3, using the 3 wing to develop more pride in oneself etc etc.


 I do use wings to help with development! I'm split relatively evenly between 7 and 8, so I've always been able to use them flexibly. Though I'm only one person! I need help! 

I've had the misfortune of being able to see a 5w4 disintegrate all the way, so I'm incredibly familiar with their defensive strategies. If you notice, in the original map, 4 could disintegrate to 7 and 5 could disintegrate to 2 as well, so some vector math and knowing that they'll try to take shortcuts, you'll see that they'll arrive at those (2 and 7) via disintegration anyway. It also makes sense from 2->5 for me, because 2 needs to completely detach from the world to tend to their own needs.

Unfortunately, I don't have enough experience with all of those other points, but I'm contributing my piece to the puzzle in hopes that others will understand and contribute what they think! I think the default map is just a _simplified_ version of the full map, and they choose to emphasis the _worse_ disintegration route instead of all of them. 5->2 and 5->7 are both valid paths of disintegration.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

Entropic said:


> Well, I assume it would be more closely to the dodecagram that was posted some time ago minus the astrological signs:


It's an interesting diagram to correlate to the enneagram diagram. This one includes an extra 3 points(signs) which may be missing links in a form we have not progressed onto. Since astrology is determined by planetary movements and a superstitious theory has come about from this, I'm wondering how the signs would be compatible with type structures otherwise parts of the correlations may just be wishful thinking because it seems so coincidental, coincidental enough to pair the two systems although it may be helpful to borrow aspects of this diagram to fit in with the E diagram. Personally, I see strong validity on type structures in isolation to numerical perfection but it can lose validity when trying to achieve numeral utopia is placed above and beyond. Sometimes I wander if the enneagram symbol was structured the way it is in order to justify some numerical consistency being that type structure(character traits) is a valid tool on it's own feet and then the connections(possibly arbitrary to fit the numerical flawlessness)have been created. But considering we are working with an ancient diagram, older than our knowledge of type structures if the two elements are as authentically compatible as they seem.

The above diagram includes an extra centre - sensorium. Not saying it may be definitely an extra centre necessarily although it implies such above. It be a missing part if there is credence to the above diagram. Where does this diagram originate if you know? Thanks for posting it.


----------



## Lord Fudgingsley (Mar 3, 2013)

This has given me a rather novel view of Enneagram relationships. I wholly resonate with the 1-4-7 Idealist notion, and those were always the three types that have interested me most - perhaps because those most resemble the way I see things.

I've picked 1 (possibly 9 wing) as my type; I think it fits me best. But I'm not at all inclined to my old typing of 6w7 now.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

mushr00m said:


> It's an interesting diagram to correlate to the enneagram diagram. This one includes an extra 3 points(signs) which may be missing links in a form we have not progressed onto. Since astrology is determined by planetary movements and a superstitious theory has come about from this, I'm wondering how the signs would be compatible with type structures otherwise parts of the correlations may just be wishful thinking because it seems so coincidental, coincidental enough to pair the two systems although it may be helpful to borrow aspects of this diagram to fit in with the E diagram. Personally, I see strong validity on type structures in isolation to numerical perfection but it can lose validity when trying to achieve numeral utopia is placed above and beyond. Sometimes I wander if the enneagram symbol was structured the way it is in order to justify some numerical consistency being that type structure(character traits) is a valid tool on it's own feet and then the connections(possibly arbitrary to fit the numerical flawlessness)have been created. But considering we are working with an ancient diagram, older than our knowledge of type structures if the two elements are as authentically compatible as they seem.
> 
> The above diagram includes an extra centre - sensorium. Not saying it may be definitely an extra centre necessarily although it implies such above. It be a missing part if there is credence to the above diagram. Where does this diagram originate if you know? Thanks for posting it.


It's the pet theory of the currently banned member @Blystone.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

@_cir_ 

Any person can be generous, unsolicited and may expect the other to return a favor. 

This mechanism of social exchange is called reciprocity. This generosity, commonly known in evolutionary biology as reciprocal altruism is not limited to the human species, and though it is found all over the world, not every person is aware of these social mechanisms, and unwritten code of conduct. But I would for instance expect the stereotype 3 businessman to be well aware of this informal exchange of favors. 











A 1:1 example is sexual interaction as a self-reinforcing, climactic exchange of unsolicited favors, that is normally expected to be in balance, and as you may find elsewhere on this website, often is cause for indignation when it is not. 

Comparable would be an intimate exchange on a more emotional level. But some people fear intimacy and vulnerability. Or avoid it like the plague. They just don't want to establish that kind of connection or relation, and reciprocate 'sharing'. And don't need or want help either. But they do feel the pressure. Questions like 'what are you thinking' or 'what do you feel' can already feel like controlling. 

To break into a locked room to 'help', that is quite forceful. But I have seen other types do that too. It wasn't about 'helping' decorating or doing the dishes. I don't think you need to be type sx5 to desire to share and I don't think it is exclusive to 2 to expect reciprocity or to want to help someone you care for (though resist reality), and in your case, it doesn't sound like they were concealing their needs and desires.

btw I do agree with circumference


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

@mimesis


I have a shrink, and it isn't your place to be of psychological counsel to me.
I also don't need you to define words for me. I can look them up myself, thanks.



> To break into a locked room to 'help', that is quite forceful. But I have seen other types do that too. It wasn't about 'helping' decorating or doing the dishes. I don't think you need to be type sx5 to desire to share and I don't think it is exclusive to 2 to expect reciprocity or to want to help someone you care for, and in your case, it doesn't sound like they were concealing their needs and desires.



You don't know my case other than what I wrote. You don't even know about his instinct stacking; I have never shared that information. Don't insist that you know.
*For my friend, it was about "helping" me "study" things, by retrieving information for me that I did not ask or care for. Sort of like what you are doing to me right now.*



> The third Sacred Idea of Type Five is Sacred Integration. Once Five detachment and withdrawal have enabled us to get in touch with the *Sacred Omniscience of the Universal Divine Mind*, we are then able to organize the various components which contribute to that knowledge in a systematic way. This Five tendency to create grand systems of knowledge that transcend particulars is related both to the *impersonal* quality of detachment and to the universal quality of Omniscience that knows itself through all things. Indeed, this blog’s presentation of the Sacred Ideas is one way of creating this sort of grand system. Here, each Enneagram type manifests a different aspect of the one Divine Being and a different way It focuses on Itself. All of these then become parts of a single integrated Whole.
> 
> *It is important to realize that various aspects of the Whole cannot be integrated until they are first distinguished and separated.* We cannot form a complete puzzle until all of the *unique and individual puzzle pieces* have been found. The partners in a romantic relationship must first have their separate identities well-established before they can come together in loving union. Otherwise, the less individuated person will end up merging with the concerns of the other person, forgetting their own uniqueness in the process (the temptation of the Nine). Similarly, *various world views must be adequately distinguished before they can be joined together*.* Otherwise, the person trying to integrate them will end up importing their own view into the others and thereby doing them an injustice.* This is precisely the tendency of New Age religion. Proponents of the New Age will often declare that all religions say the same thing, ignorant of the fact that there are differences between them, and that these differences can be complementary. In the process, they fail to realize that they are importing their own biases into all of the other views. For example, when examining Buddhism, they will often focus on individual enlightenment without realizing that in Asia, this is based on a foundation of love and compassion for the entire community.
> 
> Healthy Fives use Sacred Detachment both to *recognize the personal biases* that appear in their attempts at combining various views through Sacred Integration, and to *detach each view from the others before joining them all together*.



Reread the quote on Holy Will/Freedom. It clearly links Holy Truth and Holy Omniscience/Transparency together. Which makes sense, since type two is "balance" between eight and five. If you disagree, that is your right. It isn't any of my business. Please keep it away from me.


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

mimesis said:


> btw I do agree with *cir*cumference


 Aaw, I do respond a lot better to agreement!


> God is a *cir*cle
> whose center is everywhere
> and whose circumference is nowhere.
> 
> ...


The Spiritual Enneagram: Type Eight - Sacred Omnipresence


----------

