# Interconnectedness: the Symbol explained ("Trifix," "Wings," "Integration," etc.)



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

*Interconnectedness: the Symbol explained ("Trifix," "Wings," "Integration," etc.)*

_The enneagram is a schematic diagram of perpetual motion, that is, of a machine of eternal movement. But of course it is necessary to know how to read the diagram. The understanding of this symbol and the ability to make use of it give man very great power. It is perpetual motion and it also the philosopher's stone of the alchemists._
-Gurdjieff,_ In Search of the Miraculous_


Through my studies of the Enneagram, I have come to the opinion that understanding the types individually leads to a fragmented understanding of ourselves, one that can easily perpetuate further compartmentalization and disconnection from our true selves. However, this is a fresh opinion, and for that reason most of this post is simply a presentation of relevant information (and not so much a "case" for interconnectivity). As usual, discussion and critique is welcome.

What follows is an explanation of the basis of the symbol through Gurdjieff, a presentation of Trialectics through Ichazo, and a basic covering of how all the passions are interconnected through Naranjo. Other concepts, such as Ichazo's Trifix & Wings, and the source of the ideas of Integration/Disintegration are traced through the history of the Enneagram. Through reading this, you can expect to learn why the symbol is constructed as it is as well as how each type is connected through the inner lines and outer circle.


*Gurdjieff*

Gurdjieff (known in many circles simply as "G") was first and foremost a spiritual teacher of the "Fourth Way." G spread his teachings in many places, traveling around Russia in the 1910s and America in the 1920s. It is difficult to know where G came up with his ideas, as he traveled many places as a young adult, years before he began teaching. Some believe he picked up his teachings from the Sufis (you can chase this rabbit here). G himself says he picked it up from various dervishes and 'real' Christians in the Middle East. Regardless, the confusion highlights the point that we need not trace history back beyond Gurdjieff to understand how the symbol is used today.

The "Fourth Way" is a spiritual path that combines the three traditional ways to create a practice that can be followed by ordinary people in everyday life. As Gurdjieff taught, each traditional way focuses on one of three centers: intellectual, emotional, or moving. Basic to Gurdjieff's teaching is the idea that humans are born without a soul, being instead many transient 'I's that have nothing in common with one another. It is only through "conscious labor" and "intentional suffering" that a person may create a soul, and live beyond this life.

Among the teachings of the Fourth Way are two cosmic laws, known as the Law of Seven and the Law of Three. Both are laws of unity (as reflected by the holy significance of 7 and the Trinity in other spiritual teachings.) Put plainly, the Law of Seven explains the development of processes through octaves while the Law of Three explains the creation of phenomena through opposing forces. Though these laws can be understood separately, they are best understood together, and what's more their combination leads to the creation of the Enneagram.

The Enneagram symbol illustrates how the Law of Three and the Law of Seven function together. In Gurdjieff's view, the Enneagram is a universal symbol, uniting all knowledge into one. Looking at the symbol, we find that the inner lines represent the two cosmic laws. The Law of Three is represented through the triangle (connecting points 9, 3, 6) while the Law of Seven is represented through the hexad (connecting points 1, 4, 2, 8, 5, 7). At first, much of this organization seems arbitrary, but Gurdjieff does have a rationale for all this.

First of all, the hexad is based off a property of the decimal system (which, like everything, is governed by the laws of unity reflected in all phenomena). We use the decimal system because we're adding the Law of Seven to the Law of Three (7+3 = 10). By dividing unity into seven, we get the lines of the hexad repeated infinitely (1/7 = .142857...). In addition, by "theosopical addition" (numerology), all the numbers in the hexad add up to nine, making nine the seventh number (1+4+2+8+5+7 = 27; 2+7 = 9). Additionally, the number 9 as the unifier can be seen in the division of seven into seven (7/7 = .999999...), meaning that the parts of unity cannot be connected without the number nine.

Second, the triangle is an intuitive representation for the Law of Three, but can be understood by the same logic (1/3 = .333..., 2/3 = .666..., 3/3 = .999...).

Third, as the Enneagram is universal, describing cyclical processes, it is best represented as a circle. The circle symbolizes "the eternally returning and uninterruptedly flowing process of the isolated existence of a thing or phenomenon under examination." The separate points which divide the circumference represent the steps of the process. Going back to the idea that the Enneagram is based on a decimal system, zero is represented by the symbol as a whole, being itself a circle.

Personality-wise, Gurdjieff only spoke of "chief features," which arise from the Seven Deadly Sins, and a "center of gravity," literally represented by the three centers (and while we're talking about centers, note that Gurdjieff further divided the moving center into three functions: sex, instinctive, and motor). There is a vague claim that he further divided these into 12 basic types (signified by the twelve symbols of the Zodiac), 27 human types, and finally to 72, but I've seen no mention of 9 types attributed to Gurdjieff. 

That's all we need to move on, but as the Law of Seven and the Law of Three still show up in various ways in the Enneagram of Personality, I've seen it fit to explain these laws in detail in the spoilers below:


* *














In Gurdjieff's view, the musical octave is just one case of the Law of Seven, though for our purposes it may perhaps be best understood the other way around. For one, if you're familiar with a musical scale, you'll know that there are seven basic tones (do-re-me-fa-so-la-si), with the fundamental (do) naturally being repeated in the playing of a musical scale. For Gurdjieff, the seven tones represent the Law of Seven, with the fundamental being a repetition of the first note in the another octave. The two smallest intervals, represented on the Enneagram by points 3 and 6, correspond to what Gurdjieff calls "shock points." Note that Gurdjieff intentionally places the point 6 shock point in the wrong location, saying that this misplacement "shows to those who are able to read the symbol what kind of 'shock' is required for the passage from 'si' to 'do'." 

In Gurdjieff's eyes, these two shock points are the only true intervals, as these are the only places at which conscious beings can intervene. It is here that I'd also like to point out that Gurdjieff believed only higher organisms contained an inner triangle, with other organisms being enneagrams without inner triangles. Additionally, because these intervals signify points of retardation, conscious effort is required shift a path of energy from descending to ascending (relevant for our later exploration of Ichazo's Trialectics). 

(Another attempt at working further with this idea of life being organized by music intervals has been attempted here. I only mention it because he proposes a revision to the Enneagram; however, he does not discuss the Enneagram beyond the page linked.)

The Law of Three is simply the idea that every phenomenon is the result of three opposing forces. He called them "Active," "Passive," and "Neutralizing" (sometimes "reconciling"), but we can see this as another case of dialectics (thesis, antithesis, and synthesis). For Gurdjieff's purposes, this is the law by which learn to see ourselves in terms of three forces. I do not have on hand which three forces he is referring to, if any, but I believe this is best understood as the forces of the three centers (intellectual, emotional, moving).

As this idea of three opposing forces is relevant to Ichazo's concept of Wings, let me point out that Gurdjieff says these forces are only "passive" or "neutralizing" in respect to the other energies. All three can be understood as equally active.





*Ichazo*

In 1954 (5 years after Gurdjieff's death), Ichazo had an insight into mechanistic patterns of behavior, leading to the creation of nine ways in which a person's ego becomes fixated within the psyche. By Ichazo's system, one of these becomes the primary fixation, while two other secondary fixations develop in the other two centers. These arise as a response to the three instincts, and form the three egos, reminiscent of the many 'I's we saw in Gurdjieff's Fourth Way teachings. It is said (on Wikipedia) that Ichazo repeatedly emphasized that every person contains all nine types, and that we have to awaken all these positions within ourselves.

Also, there is supposedly an emotion associated with each point of the Enneagram. When we are compelled to react out of our fixations, a cascade of emotion arises from each point that moves in a predictable, clockwise fashion around the Enneagram (My source for this is questionable. Let me know if you have a better source.) This predictability highlights the fact that our fixations are not conscious choices, but automatic responses. For this reason, the fixations are not part of our identity, but rather keys to self-discovery.

These truths can be seen reflected in Ichazo's 108 Enneagons. Though you'd be hard pressed to find all 108 (as Ichazo is very secretive about his teachings), only a few are relevant to how we understand the Enneagram of Personality today. Most notably is the Enneagram of passions, which is in essence the Seven Deadly Sins with two added: vanity (which Gurdjieff himself mentioned as the basis for his "chief features," along with the deadly sins), and cowardice. It would be foolish to say that we are only capable of one deadly sin. All of these passions are within us, but as in line with Ichazo's teachings, the passion associated with the dominant fixation is strongest.

Ichazo uses the Enneagram symbol to explain the laws of cycles and processes, for which he coined the term "Trialectics." Though a closer inspection seems to place this Trialectics as questionable, Ichazo claims that his system cannot be worked with either dialectical or formal logic. So for his sake, and to explain how he accounts for the connection to the Enneagram symbol, here are his three laws:

_1. The Law of Mutation: there is mutation from one MMP (material manifestation point) to another MMP_

From my understanding, this law is basically a reformulation of the relationship between quality and quantity (see here). For instance, an object that is heated (quantitative increase in temperature) undergoes a qualitative change (change in state; solid to liquid). An MMP is a point of energy retention, meaning in essence a state of matter. We can understand the law of mutation as the change between one state of matter to the next.

On the Enneagram, this law is represented by a sequence of distinct points (psychological states).

_2. The Law of Circulation:  inside everything is the seed of its apparent opposite. Seemingly contradictory MMP's are mutually related to each other through a cyclical process of circulation._

To elaborate, this is similar to the idea of thesis-antithesis-synthesis seen in dialectics; however, the cyclical process of circulation is the key addition which is the basis for Ichazo discounting dialectics. Rather than thinking of opposites as two poles of a line, Ichazo is asking us to think of opposites as being one and the same, with birth being a type of death and vice versa (the circle of life).

On the Enneagram, this law is represented by each fixation point being between two wing points. By this, the 9 points necessarily form a circle, in order to make all points equidistant between two other points. A point can be understood as the result of the actions of its wing points.

_3. The Law of Attraction: each MMP has an inherent attraction or orientation towards a higher or lower MMP._

In other words, all points are inherently in motion, which can be readily seen by the transience of life and things in general. As everything is being attracted to either one point or another, everything in apparent equilibrium is moving towards one state or another.

On the Enneagram, these are the inner lines of change, which necessitate either an orientation towards improvement or deterioriation.

(If the laws of Trialectics still confuse you, here's another explanation of the idea: Trialectics - P2P Foundation.)


*Naranjo*

In 1970, Naranjo set off on a six-month pilgrimage with Ichazo. As Ichazo kept the knowledge of his teachings secret, it isn't until Naranjo that the Enneagram of Personality was shared and spread to the broader world. For this reason, it is here that I will begin talking about the Enneagram of Personality as we now know it.

In Naranjo's view of the Enneagram, each ennatype is characterized as being motivated out of a deficiency. In echo of Maslow's self-actualization, Naranjo proposes the dichotomy of an abundant love possible at self-actualization, with a characteristic (and typical) motivation out of deficient desiring. He further divides this deficient desiring into the Buddist three poisons: ignorance, aversion, and craving. Note that these are in contrast to the three poisons given by Ichazo, which served as the link between the three egos and instincts (and dictated that each instinct is _necessarily_ associated with its respective center).

Though he defines each ennea-type by its prevailing fixation and its corresponding passion (a revised form of Ichazo's Enneagons), Naranjo sets the passion as being the principle component. Put plainly, this means that the 9 types are fundamentally related via the seven deadly sins (plus vanity and fear). Naturally this puts the Enneagram on a very dark background! But alas, it is this formulation that makes the most sense for a thorough understanding of the meaning of the connecting lines.

The position of 9 at the top evokes the fact that 9's dominant passion of psychological deadness (acedia/sloth) is the most fundamental, and is the background of all other passions. Along with 3 and 6, it forms the inner triangle, which plots the following psychodynamic cycle: the psychological deadness of acedia deprives the individual of a basis from which to act (loss of inner guidance), leading to fear; fear compels us to act from a false sense of self (attachment to the assumed self of personality), causing vanity; vanity leads us to repress our true nature (fabricated boundaries of the self), leading us back to the psychological deadness of acedia. Additionally, we can see that at each step of the way, there underlies a psychological sloth, with avoidance of fear and craving of vanity ultimately being succumbed to out of sheer laziness. 

The hexad points to a similar pattern. Here it is clear that no point is really the first, as Sloth (which underlies all other passions) is not connected by the lines of the hexad. However, I'd like to point out that I did not find the following, complete formulation of these dynamics in Naranjo's work. There _may_ be a case for the opposite directionality as well, but as I'll point out I think the opposite direction flies in the face of reality. With that said, let's begin with point 1: Wrath.

Wrath (1) is a defense against Gluttony (7) through the repression of desire, yet can lead to a hateful Envy (4) of those who freely indulge themselves. Envy (4) is a defense against Wrath (1) through turning anger onto oneself, yet can lead to a romanticization of pain and a corresponding Pride (2) in one's self-destructive suffering. Pride (2) is a defense against Envy (4) through repression of inferiority and lack, yet can transform into an exploitative Lust (8) when the need for others is fully repressed out of consciousness. Lust (8) is a defense against Pride (2) through a denial of the need for their own and others' approval, yet can mutate into a withdrawn, clutching Avarice (5) through the decision to erase others from their life. Avarice (5) is a defense against Lust (8) through a rejection of one's hunger for aliveness, yet can lead to scattered, superficial Gluttony (7) as the need for anything at all is dismissed in favor of a false sense of abundance and love for life. Lastly, Gluttony (7) is a defense against Avarice (5) through a false love of life, yet can lead to an inner deadening, a mounting anger, and finally Wrath (1) as the individual's false love of life shatters, leaving the illusion and denial of destructiveness only on the inside.

In the opposite direction, one may say that those in Wrath have a point in repressing the self-indulgent way of Gluttony, but it is rarely the case that one who is truly wrathful (rather than being compelled by others to exhibit the perfectionistic tendencies at Wrath) can let loose enough to become overly hedonistic. The same may be said of the truly gluttonous becoming avaricious, and so forth.

Additionally, each passion of the Enneagram may be understood as a combination of the two points adjacent to it, similar to the formulation of Ichazo's wing points being the result of the actions of its wing points. So let's go around the circle once more: Wrath (1) is the hybrid of drowning out one's perversion of justice (implicit in the moral apathy of acedia, 9) with Pride, insisting that one's actions must be right. Pride (2) is the hybrid of an excessive concern for one's image (vanity, 3) with Wrath (1), insisting that one's image is inherently above others. Vanity (3) is the hybrid of Pride (2) and Envy (4), a union of opposites that neither inflates oneself nor has spite for others, but which has both a love for garnering others approval and and an excessive concern for what one is lacking. Envy (4) is the hybrid of vanity (3) with Avarice (5), with both a concern for one's image and a vindictive need to take what they lack from others. Avarice is a hybrid of fear (6) with Envy (4), leading to fearful grasping for what one deeply lacks. Fear (6) is the hybrid of Avarice (5) and Gluttony (7), again a union of opposites that leads to neither a grasping for what one lacks nor a passion for life, but which has, for that reason, a confusion on a basis for which to act and a compound avoidance of the external and internal worlds (ironically, how these two combine leaves me the most confused). Gluttony (7) is a tempering of fear (6) with Lust (8), leading to a pursuit of life that is superficial and scattered precisely because of the underlying fear it keeps at bay. Lust (8) is the overt expression of the moral apathy seen in acedia (9) being excessively hedonistic, coarse, and careless through its union with Gluttony (7). Acedia (9), at the crown of the Enneagram, is the union of Lust (8) with Wrath (1), forming a character that is neither concerned with being just nor with pursuing life. In fact, this neutralization is the greatest union of opposites, leading to peaceful disposition that denies both destructiveness and the desire for aliveness.

In case the focus was lost: the above serves to illustrate the union of wing points and the transformations along the inner lines of change, giving a concrete basis for the abstract laws that Gurdjieff used to construct the symbol. Note that Naranjo acknowledges Gurdjieff's cosmic laws through referencing a musical connection to the Enneagram (e.g. 9 as the "do" of the passions).


*Others*

Various members on the Enneagram Institute forums suggest that it was Naranjo who first proposed (and later himself questioned) the inner lines of change as lines of integration and disintegration. However, probably as it is in line with the earlier ideas of there being a necessary orientation towards either improvement or deterioration (see Trialectics above), the idea has stuck and flourished in the hands of later teachers. 

The two primary sources for the Enneagram known today are arguably Riso & Hudson and the Fauvres. While Riso & Hudson are responsible for the thorough fleshing out of subtypes by a dominant wing, the Fauvres introduced the idea of a three-part personality, known as a tritype. These have come, not by a reflection of the Enneagram symbol, but by years of empirical observation, making the significance of the construction of the Enneagram much less relevant for their understanding.

Wings, as they are understood today, are simply a mixture of the dominant passion with one of the adjacent passions, as if to say that Riso & Hudson observed a characteristic imbalance in the actions of the wing points that Ichazo notes and saw it fit to create subtypes that highlight this imbalance.

Tritype is arguably a more thorough formulation of the Ichazo's trifix theory, though there are notable differences. One being that types in a trifix are always arranged clockwise, rather than by strength of fixation in tritype. Another being that tritype assumes a set of three coping mechanisms that one oscillates through when effective while trifix happens nearly simultaneously (as I understand it), one fixation mixing with the effects of another as the three egos try to dictate what a person should do at any given moment.

One point I have left out, but which deserves mention, is the discussion of instincts. Note that while Gurdjieff split his "moving" center into three functions, it was Ichazo who came up with the idea of three instincts. However, Ichazo saw these instincts as being the basis of the egos, meaning that the Image ego is necessarily associated with the Relation instinct, and so forth. Naranjo gave a new formulation of many of Ichazo's concepts, leading to the three possible subtypes by instinct that we now use. 



*Sources:*

Gurdjieff
Fourth Way - Wikipedia
Unveiling the Enneagram - Introductory Points

Ichazo
Arica School - Wikipedia
Unveiling the Enneagram - Arica Psychology

Naranjo
Claudio Naranjo - Wikipedia
_Character and Neurosis_
Naranjo's Instinctual Subtypes


----------



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

I've titled this thead with the words "Trifix" "Wings" and "Integration." Let me summarize how these are centrally explained by what's written:

*Trifix*
Trifix (literally, three fixations) is a case of the Law of Three. You and I are the result of three opposing forces. These forces are the three 'I's that comprise all of what we understand ourselves to be, and further still the illusion that we are one 'I' can lead to a larger confusion of the many 'I's that Gurdjieff spoke of, with many contradictory thoughts and feelings being perceived at any given moment. Ichazo claims these three fixations follow a pre-established, cyclical pattern, with a cascade of emotion flowing from each fixation, flowing clockwise around the Enneagram. Gurdjieff did not emphasize thinking of these forces as fixations, but rather as affirmation, denial, and reconciliation. Both emphasize the concept of self-remembering as the starting point.

*Integration*
Integration is a case of the Law of Seven. Without conscious intervention, we follow a cyclical pattern of degeneration. Through aware intervention and transformation of our negative emotions, we can become more integrated, whole human beings. Naranjo came up with the idea that integration happens through the path 758241..., but there is talk that he later took this idea back. Regardless, we can think of the return to an original point as moving up or down one level. Ascent vs descent, depending on whether we are consciously intervening or not in our process.

We can see this process in all three laws of Ichazo: law of mutation (change from one passion to the next), law of circulation (movement through the lines of the circle), and law of attraction (pull either towards one passion or the other along the inner lines of change).

*Wing
*I've already covered this one, but again, the concept of wing points has changed a lot. Ichazo discussed this as two forces in tension that results in a third force. Forces two points away from one another can thus be understood, in some sense, as opposites. In that regard, any given type can be understood as a union of opposites, though this can probably best be seen in the three core types.

Riso & Hudson discussed the three types in each center as a thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. They attempted to ground the basis for three types per center in dialectics, with one type underexpressing the problem of the center and one overexpressing, with the one in the middle most out of touch. This idea is very debatable, as it is something of a stretch to say that Type 6 is out of touch with the intellectual center, or that Type 4 underexpresses the emotion center, for example.


----------



## Tater Tot (May 28, 2012)

This was actually very good. :O I didn't know tritype and trifix were different. Turns out I agree more with trifix than tritype :laughing:


----------



## SharkT00th (Sep 5, 2012)

I'm still not understanding what the Tri-fixes are. What are these 3 I's that you are referring to?

I've found that Naranjo's descriptions are bar-none the best that exist and most accurate while R&H add more depth/flavor to each type but R&H is trying to make the Enneagrams more commercially appealing. It's not that R&H doesn't know the cores, I actually believe that R&H probably know just as much as Naranjo about the cores of each type, he just makes a Micky Mouse version of each type for greater adaptation of the system.

EDIT: Naranjo states that Social 8's can mistype as Counter-phobic 6's........This is an interesting revelation.
Also, Sp-Type 9's can be aggressive.


----------



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

SharkT00th said:


> I'm still not understanding what the Tri-fixes are. What are these 3 I's that you are referring to?


My bad, I forgot to cover these. In Ichazo's view, the three instincts produce the three fundamental centers of attention: physical, emotional, and intellectual. As the instincts are basic to our survival, they become basic to our psyche and cannot be ignored. It is for this reason these instincts give rise to the three I's:
*

Historical Ego *(Physical Center; Being Group) - "How am I?"

Historical Ego is a response to the *Conservation* instinct (preservation). We develop concerns and strategies for finding food (and shelter). The Historical Ego learns from past experiences (hence the name "Historical") and leads to the accumulation of property and wealth. Very closely related to greed, as it is commonly understood.

You develop a primary fixation here if the conservation instinct is consistently threatened in childhood.


*Image Ego* (Emotional Center; Living Group) - "Friend or foe?"

Image Ego is a response to the *Relation* instinct (association). We develop concerns for how others appear to us, adopting an image-persona in order to play a social role. The Image Ego works with likes and dislikes (as these are our responses to friends and foes). This area is associated with hatred.

You may develop a primary fixation here if you feel insecure in your relations during childhood.


*Practical Ego* (Intellectual Center; Doing Group) - "Where am I?"

Practical Ego is a response to the *Adaptation* instinct (orientation/direction). We develop ideas of what to do in any given situation, filling our mind with questions about where we're heading. The Practical Ego works with knowledge on how to survive in the world, setting the basis for what we do. This area is filled with deceit.

My source gives no mention on how this becomes a primary fixation; it may be through growing up in a confusing environment.


----------



## SharkT00th (Sep 5, 2012)

@*Dying Acedia *Here is what I'm extrapolating from Ichazo's work, thoughts? 

*(Historical Ego)*The body Triad-Relating to food and the need to eat or we die. _HUNTER INSTINCT_
*Type 8: Avarice*-the constant need to obtain food in order to be sure that you won't starve. Translates to Lust: THe need to constantly obtain food by any means. Represents a constant craving for food. 

*Type 9: Greed*-Hording of food. Food cannot be stored and eaten so this translates into indolence, a deliberate ignorance towards food so that one is ignorant to how much food he really has. Represents a non-conformity to our need to eat. 

*Type 1: Possessiveness * Food needs to be possessed in order to be eaten, but once it's eaten its gone. This translates into resentment since food that is consumed is no longer in our possession so we resent that fact, it's really a wishing that we had food that we once possessed. Represents an over perfectionism is just a mechanism in which we need to make sure we have adequate resources available to us. 

*(Image ego)*The heart triad-As an embryo we needed our mothers to breathe, as an infant we needed to be touched by another to keep our respiratory system going or we die, we needed the mothers milk as well. This is about relating and the need to breath/keep our hearts going. "taking my breath away" is a term that is used when falling in love the ultimate form of connecting to another. We breath in our environment and so we need to have an adequate environment in which to breath in._ HERDING INSTINCT 
_*Type 2: Envy-* Hate that is so great that causes one to become over-independent, I do not need to love others, I will get others to love me instead. 

*Type 3: Ego-Drive:* The drive to be efficient that we can make the connects we need in order to continue to breath. If you cannot breath, you are dead so nothing else matters but the ability to continue to breath, everything is secondary to this. 
*
Type 4: Jealousy-**Over reasoning and melancholy:* Iron Maiden wrote a song _Powerslave_ which is about a Pharaoh who has everything that he could ever want on this earth, but it's only on this earth so he asks the question why must he still face the inevitable end: DEATH. The Type 4 asks the questions of why must I need the connection to others and than seeks out the answer. IN this search they stumble upon the fact that not all connections are created equal and so they aspire to attain the perfect ones since the perfect connections will create the perfect living environment to thrive in. 

*(Practical Ego) *Head center-Does mankind adapt it's surroundings to it's own needs? Or is man adapting to it's environment Either way adaption needs to occur _EVOLVE OR DIE _ 

*Type 5-Confusion and over observation: *As we grow from infancy to adulthood we develop cognition and the ability to think. AS this improves we become confused by our environments and in doing so continually begin to observe it in order to better understand it so that we feel safe. The problem lies within the fact that we don't know what is important and what is irrelevant for our well-being. 

*Type 6-Over Adventure: *If you stop and think for a moment about your life you will see that there is a pattern everyone follows. First we are within our mothers in a womb were the surroundings never change and once we leave that womb our tranquility is broken and we are constantly seeing a shifting environment. One thing happens to us and so does another and another, it is natural to give into cowardice and want to just retreat back into the womb in order to once again experience a sense of tranquility. 

*Type 7*-*Over idealization:*With the gift of cognition comes imagination and the ability to actually envision the world in which we want to be in, but unfortunately, that world only exists in our minds so we are stuck with a dilemma: WHAT DO I ADAPT TO? Do we adapt to our ideals and hope that it will happen? Or do we adapt to the reality of the moment because it is vital to survive? The 7 switches between these two modes on the one hand they must adapt to their current environment but on the other they can't escape their idealized world and keep adapt to it as if it was real. 

Now we can see that each triad has it's own specific fixation. Remember that our behavior is sublimed and at our very core we are continuing with the childhood script that we are trying to adapt to. A type 8 is seeking food so his hunter instinct translates to his daily life, the individual infront of him may appear as irrelevant to his survival in our modern society, but remember that to the baseline psyche this individual maybe what's between the man and his dinner, the survival instinct decrees that the man be eliminated so that the hunter can proceed to his dinner.

*SUMMARY:
Body-Need to obtain food
Heart-Connection/relating instinct
Head-Adaptation drive on overdrive. *


----------



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

SharkT00th said:


> Here is what I'm extrapolating from Ichazo's work, thoughts?


The way you've put it brings this symbol to mind:











Note that Food is the primary concern of the gut triad, and you've emphasized breath and the respiratory system in the image... air. Was this on purpose? It surprisingly seems to fit. Perhaps "Impressions" are central to what Ichazo meant with the adapting instinct? After all, Ichazo only had this version of the Enneagram to work with when he came up with his own ideas.

I also think you've brought up very good points with 8 and 4 specifically. 4 may seem irrational in its wants, but it's simply asking too many questions about the significance of things. It is over-reasoning, and through that creates misery where no such thing need be felt. 8, I think you're spot on about 8 fixating on the conservation instinct's command to eat, leading to as you say, a "hunter" instinct.


Otherwise, I'm still trying to make sense of all this.


----------



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

Tater Tot said:


> This was actually very good. :O I didn't know tritype and trifix were different. Turns out I agree more with trifix than tritype :laughing:


Glad you liked it.

Yeah, based on what I've read the Fauvres originally called theirs "trifix" as well, but someone from the Arica institute told them that it was so different from what Ichazo taught that they couldn't go around calling it that.

That said, the Fauvres _do_ treat it like it's three types, with all of them together creating a certain type of person. Moreover they speak of them as if they charted some sort of life mission and revealed the true desires of the person in question. For all their data gathering and real-world experience, it comes off as surprisingly vacuous, at least in their book about it. They themselves might have more sophisticated opinions, but what they publish isn't.


----------



## SharkT00th (Sep 5, 2012)

Dying Acedia said:


> The way you've put it brings this symbol to mind:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Any explanation behind the symbols and other elements anywhere?


----------



## Tater Tot (May 28, 2012)

I've never really done any research on the Fauvres because I've seen so many people talking about how biased they are. Tritype/trifix really needs to pick up off the ground and become a thing, so more in-depth information can be put out there and not be so unorganized. At this point it reminds me of that tiny Christmas tree from Charlie Brown that everybody was putting ornaments on and it tipped over.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

Did you write this? It's well done and is very much appreciated but there are a few things I would like ask you since I think there are a few misconceptions taking place right now.

What do _you_ mean with the "I"? I know what it is but I doubt that you know what it is so let alone others here and this - the "I" - is crucial. It must be defined properly.

Enneagram is basically nothing more than pseudo-science if you don't understand and see its correlation with mystical movements and religions. Now I seen many people here talking about religions and no one seems to have a clue what they're talking about, the incompetent ignorant fools (yes, I judge them harshly), and I am afraid that the same thing is about to/could happen here. I don't want that to happen.

I don't think Gurdjieff meant that we are born without a soul and we create a soul (this is also in relation to the "I") but we are born with a soul the first time we come here and our experience makes our soul grow (or not) which means we are born with a clean slate. This must not be confused with the mind or spirit. Do you understand where I am going with this?

And then this:









@_SharkT00th_

I see 9 types and the music notes C D and E in a recurring pattern and do re mi fa sol la si (C D E F G A B) but 3 and 6 are skipped, they're shock points. The inscribed figure resembling a web connects the other six points in a cyclic figure 1-4-2-8-5-7→0.142857 is 1/7.

The scale C D E F G A B is just your typical C-major scare or also known as Ionian Renaissance mode. Now the first tri-chord is a major 3 (C D E where minor would have been C D E flat) and this is followed by a tetra-chord F G A B. The interval F to B is an augmented 4th (sounds quite kinky) and the tetra-chord is also known as the tritonus or devil's chord. The interval E→F is a semi-tone. The major third (C D E) sounds harmonious where the tetra chord with its augmented fourth sounds quite disturbing (Think of the climax in Berlioz' Symphony Fantastique 5th movement). F G A is also a major third however but the B adds that spicy fiendish effect. The augmented 4th was banned from renaissance church music.

Notice that type 3 (deceit) and 6 (cowardice/fear) are originally not one of the 7 capital sins but were added later by Ichazo. This information was handed down to him by the spirit Metatron. 

If you want, I can make this as complicated as you want and I can go deeper into this than most people here, (think of Pythagoras and music in relation to humanity and the cosmos for example and sacred geometry). But let's first find out if you understand this.


----------



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

I wrote this, drawing from the sources I listed at the end of the first post.



All in Twilight said:


> What do _you_ mean with the "I"? I know what it is but I doubt that you know what it is so let alone others here and this - the "I" - is crucial. It must be defined properly.


Anything which a person assumes is what they are. 

Gurdjieff spoke of the 'I' as being any thought or feeling that we see as our self, but since it there are many conflicting ones, we have many I's. Ichazo spoke of this as three Egos. (I believe, though I don't see him referring to these egos as 'I's. Maybe this is what you are taking issue with?)




> I don't think Gurdjieff meant that we are born without a soul and we create a soul (this is also in relation to the "I") but we are born with a soul the first time we come here and our experience makes our soul grow (or not) which means we are born with a clean slate. This must not be confused with the mind or spirit. Do you understand where I am going with this?


I don't actually. I've read Gurdjieff saying that if we don't cultivate a soul we "die like a dog." We are born asleep, live asleep, and die asleep. The soul is not created until you reach the "Fifth Man." The first three are driven by one, imbalanced primary center. The fourth is stable with all three but has not created a soul. The fifth is where the soul is created.

Could you explain why you disagree with this?


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

Dying Acedia said:


> I wrote this, drawing from the sources I listed at the end of the first post.


Well done, I didn't read all of it yet but it looked very informative. So thanks for the effort.





Dying Acedia said:


> Anything which a person assumes is what they are.
> 
> Gurdjieff spoke of the 'I' as being any thought or feeling that we see as our self, but since it there are many conflicting ones, we have many I's. Ichazo spoke of this as three Egos. (I believe, though I don't see him referring to these egos as 'I's. Maybe this is what you are taking issue with?)


Ego means "I"of course. I was actually referring to the "I" as explained by R. Steiner and ancient mystery schools but they're related and the information Gudjieff applies is actually related to those schools. I am more of asking myself or you if he could be aware of this and I think he was.



Dying Acedia said:


> I don't actually. I've read Gurdjieff saying that if we don't cultivate a soul we "die like a dog." We are born asleep, live asleep, and die asleep. The soul is not created until you reach the "Fifth Man." The first three are driven by one, imbalanced primary center. The fourth is stable with all three but has not created a soul. The fifth is where the soul is created.
> 
> Could you explain why you disagree with this?


It's not so much that I am disagreeing with you (you clearly did your homework) but with Gurdjieff. I am well aware what he wrote about the soul but I think he is lying and he is lying for a good reason: he wants to wake us up. The soul received a finishing blow by F. Nietzsche and meanwhile East and West was about to be re-united again. But you must understand that G is opposing every "mystic" with his statements about the soul. If the soul isn't there, you can't create it. It has always been there but most people are not aware of this anymore and I think that is why he was so ruthless in his commentary. G is too smart and knows too much to fool around with stuff like that. So I agree with him as a device, but I disagree with him because that is not a statement of truth.


----------



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

All in Twilight said:


> It's not so much that I am disagreeing with you (you clearly did your homework) but with Gurdjieff. I am well aware what he wrote about the soul but I think he is lying and he is lying for a good reason: he wants to wake us up.


Ah, I can respect that. I misunderstood you originally.

Yeah, I haven't quite made up my mind about what I think of Gurdjieff's ideas yet. That's partly what I was getting at when I said my OP is mostly just a "presentation of relevant information." I'm currently of the opinion that Gurdjieff at least thinks our souls are augmented or "purified" through managing to reconcile all the parts of our human form.

Thanks for pointing out your views though. I have come around to spirituality mostly through people like Gurdjieff, so I'm not too keen on the collective wisdom of mystics and where G is deviating from core truths.


----------



## The Wanderering ______ (Jul 17, 2012)

The type 7 Over-idealization sounds a lot like me.

PLEASE MAKE MORE OF THIS!!!!!


----------



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

SharkT00th said:


> Any explanation behind the symbols and other elements anywhere?


I mean, you can probably learn more about them by reading _In Search of The Miraculous_, but I only have the quotes from it that ocean moonshine has posted.




The Wanderering ______ said:


> The type 7 Over-idealization sounds a lot like me.
> 
> PLEASE MAKE MORE OF THIS!!!!!


Ha, glad you like it. Have you read this: Unveiling the Enneagram - the enneagram ...info from the underground?

Search "Idealist" ... this is where shark is getting the idea of Over-idealization. Ichazo's work is not currently my focus, so it'll be a while before I can get around to writing about it more in depth.


----------



## SharkT00th (Sep 5, 2012)

Dying Acedia said:


> Have you read this: Unveiling the Enneagram - the enneagram ...info from the underground?


Just have and the each personality type is tenfolds clearer to me now. I'm going to work on a write up of what Ichazo is getting at within each type. Naranjo and Ichazo's works are very very similar and echo the exact same point. I'm finding that R&H's work really deviates considerably from what Icahzo/Naranjo were writing about.


----------



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

SharkT00th said:


> Just have and the each personality type is tenfolds clearer to me now. I'm going to work on a write up of what Ichazo is getting at within each type. Naranjo and Ichazo's works are very very similar and echo the exact same point. I'm finding that R&H's work really deviates considerably from what Icahzo/Naranjo were writing about.


Looking forward to it! Ichazo is still fuzzy for me. I see some similarities, but it felt a bit tangential to how I currently understand the Enneagram. The dichotomy thing for each type really threw me for a loop.


----------



## SharkT00th (Sep 5, 2012)

Dying Acedia said:


> Looking forward to it! Ichazo is still fuzzy for me. I see some similarities, but it felt a bit tangential to how I currently understand the Enneagram. The dichotomy thing for each type really threw me for a loop.


Each type has a core idea that is their domain and is in flux. For a type 9 that is spirituality which can range from being real about it or turning into fanaticism.

The Type 5 has been put up. The next ones to come will be probably be the Type 4, followed by the Type 1 and the Type 8 being put up at the same time since there is a lot of parallels between the two types since they represent the full spectrum of the Being(body) types and I predict a lot of people will be confused about the two. Followed by the Type 3 and the Type 2 at which I marvel how the internet has really miss-construed them so they will need to be put up since a lot of 2's and 3's will want to re-check which type they are. Lastly, the Type 6 and 7 will be put up together since they are quiet straightforward to explain, I don't expect anyone to re-think their types after reading about the TYpe 6 and 7 since it will only add a greater perspective for those who are sure in their typing of the two types.


----------



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

SharkT00th said:


> Each type has a core idea that is their domain and is in flux. For a type 9 that is spirituality which can range from being real about it or turning into fanaticism.


I think I'm starting to see why 9 is about spirituality at least. The indolence of 9 is undeniably spiritual in nature, meaning that it's very intangible and difficult to place exactly, but there's a characteristic "hole in the soul" quality that can be understood as a damping of one's inner spirits.




> The Type 5 has been put up. The next ones to come will be probably be the Type 4, followed by the Type 1 and the Type 8 being put up at the same time since there is a lot of parallels between the two types since they represent the full spectrum of the Being(body) types and I predict a lot of people will be confused about the two. *Followed by the Type 3 and the Type 2 at which I marvel how the internet has really miss-construed them so they will need to be put up since a lot of 2's and 3's will want to re-check which type they are.* Lastly, the Type 6 and 7 will be put up together since they are quiet straightforward to explain, I don't expect anyone to re-think their types after reading about the TYpe 6 and 7 since it will only add a greater perspective for those who are sure in their typing of the two types.


Yeah, I had my suspicions for 2. I hope you can make a good case for it. If not, I'll see what I can do with them once you've put them up on the web, as it probably won't be well-received at first. Showing how it connects to what Naranjo said will probably help a lot here.


----------



## SharkT00th (Sep 5, 2012)

I just had a revelation and realized that Ichazo never actually uses Types, Instead Ichazo refers to all as points on the enneagram. There is no such thing as a Type 6 for example, there is only an individual who has fixated on the 6th point on the Enneagram and his fixations span from the 5th to the 7th point which encompasses the entirety of the 6th point. Integration is simply connecting with another point that is the lost compliment of the point, one who is fixated on the 6th point will need to expand their awareness and embrace the 9th point which contains phislophy that will grant them the knowledge needed to liberate themselves from their fixation.

The Enneagram really encompass the essential senses that we have as human beings. Whenever we feel criticized and feel like we are flawed afterwards we are encompassing the 4th point and we can choose to either take it to heart and see the criticism as who we are, or we can choose to act different otherwise and at those moments we have fully experienced it's range. An individual not of the 4th primary fixation will not have a fundamental problem with taking criticism. If you have ever been hurt, abused, or violated you have experienced the 8th point and you have either decided to forgive the perpetrator, or break even and return the offense, some call it vengeance, the law calls it recompense. The Point that's fixation has become so large that our ego has latched onto and internalized it is the enneagram point that is your core fixation.


----------



## The Wanderering ______ (Jul 17, 2012)

SharkT00th said:


> I just had a revelation and realized that Ichazo never actually uses Types, Instead Ichazo refers to all as points on the enneagram. There is no such thing as a Type 6 for example, there is only an individual who has fixated on the 6th point on the Enneagram and his fixations span from the 5th to the 7th point which encompasses the entirety of the 6th point. Integration is simply connecting with another point that is the lost compliment of the point, one who is fixated on the 6th point will need to expand their awareness and embrace the 9th point which contains phislophy that will grant them the knowledge needed to liberate themselves from their fixation.
> 
> The Enneagram really encompass the essential senses that we have as human beings. Whenever we feel criticized and feel like we are flawed afterwards we are encompassing the 4th point and we can choose to either take it to heart and see the criticism as who we are, or we can choose to act different otherwise and at those moments we have fully experienced it's range. An individual not of the 4th primary fixation will not have a fundamental problem with taking criticism. If you have ever been hurt, abused, or violated you have experienced the 8th point and you have either decided to forgive the perpetrator, or break even and return the offense, some call it vengeance, the law calls it recompense. The Point that's fixation has become so large that our ego has latched onto and internalized it is the enneagram point that is your core fixation.


Wait so do I need to pay attention to the 5 fixation in order to grow. Cuz I already thought I was 5 and 7 at the same time.


----------



## SharkT00th (Sep 5, 2012)

The Wanderering ______ said:


> Wait so do I need to pay attention to the 5 fixation in order to grow. Cuz I already thought I was 5 and 7 at the same time.


Liberation of the 7th point needs to attain a vital element of the 5th point, that being observation as opposed to idealization.


----------



## The Wanderering ______ (Jul 17, 2012)

SharkT00th said:


> Liberation of the 7th point needs to attain a vital element of the 5th point, that being observation as opposed to idealization.


So I need to observe the world instead of idealizing it. I mean I don't idealize the world anymore because most of my basic needs have been met, but wouldn't a 7 be more inclined to participate than observe.


----------



## SharkT00th (Sep 5, 2012)

The Wanderering ______ said:


> So I need to observe the world instead of idealizing it. I mean I don't idealize the world anymore because most of my basic needs have been met, but wouldn't a 7 be more inclined to participate than observe.


The type 7 over-participates due to over-idealization of the world around it. This is something that I'm going to cover in greater detail when I make a post about the Type 7.


----------



## The Wanderering ______ (Jul 17, 2012)

SharkT00th said:


> The type 7 over-participates due to over-idealization of the world around it. This is something that I'm going to cover in greater detail when I make a post about the Type 7.


OOOOOHHHH That sounds delightful. If I have a hard time identifying its not because your descriptions suck. I just have a hard time with self-analysis.


----------



## Dyidia (May 28, 2010)

SharkT00th said:


> The Enneagram really encompass the essential senses that we have as human beings. Whenever we feel criticized and feel like we are flawed afterwards we are encompassing the 4th point and we can choose to either take it to heart and see the criticism as who we are, or we can choose to act different otherwise and at those moments we have fully experienced it's range. An individual not of the 4th primary fixation will not have a fundamental problem with taking criticism. If you have ever been hurt, abused, or violated you have experienced the 8th point and you have either decided to forgive the perpetrator, or break even and return the offense, some call it vengeance, the law calls it recompense. The Point that's fixation has become so large that our ego has latched onto and internalized it is the enneagram point that is your core fixation.


Aha, this must be what Ichazo meant when he said we have all nine within us and must "awaken all the nine positions" (source). A person who has no fixations would have no type, though this is probably near impossible for most people to achieve.


Also...



SharkT00th said:


> The type 7 over-participates due to over-idealization of the world around it.


I think we could make one-liners about the types as a whole like this. Very elegantly put.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Dying Acedia said:


> Glad you liked it.
> 
> Yeah, based on what I've read the Fauvres originally called theirs "trifix" as well, but someone from the Arica institute told them that it was so different from what Ichazo taught that they couldn't go around calling it that.
> 
> That said, the Fauvres _do_ treat it like it's three types, with all of them together creating a certain type of person. Moreover they speak of them as if they charted some sort of life mission and revealed the true desires of the person in question. For all their data gathering and real-world experience, it comes off as surprisingly vacuous, at least in their book about it. They themselves might have more sophisticated opinions, but what they publish isn't.


Based on what Katherine claims, she arrived at a similar theory that Ichazo did, realizing that people do not seem to possess just one type that motivates their behavior but 3 of them, with one taking prominence over the other two. Katherin also proposed a specific order in which we move between the fixes but I personally don't agree with this. As a 548, I should for example I always first try to solve problems with thinking (5), feeling (4), and lastly, acting (8) and this is regardless of whether you're a 584 or 548. 

Anyway, I think the real reason why the Fauvres couldn't call their theory trifix too is because of copyright issues since if they used the sem terminology, people would confuse it and think it's the same theory as Ichazo's etc. But aside basically fleshing out Ichazo's tritype and adding a few quirks I don't agree with such as mentioned above. I treat them pretty much the same with different names.


----------



## varuna (Jul 15, 2015)

hey GUYS or GIRLS 
Talking about G. himself , never fotget that he was also a mystificator , a very good one , who intended to be it, even for reasons he _told to the people _ , so farewell many still follewed him , spent all their money and so . 
For example *dont take too serioulsy the diagramm stuff*, the way or circulation , because the clock sense in a convention in mathematics ant the names of characters changed a lot .... 
BUT 
even a "false" master can be "good " for you , plenty in zen literature ...olders


Zen students are with their masters at least ten years before they presume to teach others. Nan-in was visited by Tenno, who, having passed his apprenticeship, had become a teacher. The day happened to be rainy, so Tenno wore wooden clogs and carried an umbrella. After greeting him Nan-in remarked: "I suppose you left your wodden clogs in the vestibule. I want to know if your umbrella is on the right or left side of the clogs."

Tenno, confused, had no instant answer. He realized that he was unable to carry his Zen every minute. He became Nan-in's pupil, and he studied six more years to accomplish his every-minute Zen.


----------

