Index

The Basics of Enneagram – The system and the types

Source: „Dramatis personae: Enneatypes, cinema and literature“ – Claudio Naranjo

 Introduction to the Enneagram:

 Enneatype 1 – The Angry

 Enneatype 2 – The Prideful

 Enneatype 3 – The Vain

 Enneatype 4 – The Envious

 Enneatype 5 – The Petty

 Enneatype 6 – The Forms of Fear

 Enneatype 7 – The Gluttonous

 Enneatype 8 – The Lustful

 Enneatype 9 – The Slothful

Introduction to the Enneagram

The psychology of Enneatypes

In the late 1960s I met a spiritual teacher named Oscar Ichazo, who claimed to be a representative of the „Western prophetic tradition“. I had never heard that term, although later I came across it again in the books of Henry Corbin in reference to an esotericism underlying the three Abrahamic religions. More commonly, Ichazo simply used the word „The School“, saying that this had been the source of Gurdjieff's teachings.

At Ichazo's suggestion, in 1970 I organized a group of just over forty people who traveled with me to the desert of Arica, in northern Chile, and we stayed there for just under a year with him, who guided us through an intense spiritual retreat. Ichazo considered me at that time as a privileged heir to his specialty, protoanalysis, about the application of the enneagram to the personality, and he foresaw that through me a synthesis would emerge between his psychological vision (inherited from an esoteric Christianity, really pre-Christian) and western psychology; he also foresaw that this understanding would be a great gift to the world, but at the time I didn't know whether to believe him. And when he himself subsequently traveled to the United States, he only associated with a small group, and the world considered him a rather dubious man, somewhat talkative and grandiloquent.

I did not come to Ichazo to learn something about personality (despite the fact that I had already become a specialist in the field), but in search of spiritual progress, and in this I was not disappointed, for he sent me on a long retreat in the desert that in turn triggered in me a spiritual birth from which all my later work would come. Although I later distanced myself from Ichazo, I can say (after several decades) that his prophecy has been fulfilled, since, without intending to, I have been understanding better and better the work on personality that he called protoanalysis and that I myself have preferred to call psychology of enneatypes.

I have already written several books on this subject, beginning with „Character and Neurosis“, and have used the psychology of enneatypes as part of my own method of developing consciousness. And while I have no doubt that even the academy will eventually understand this body of knowledge, in writing this book, which I imagine to be the last on this subject, I am speaking more to a general audience than to my own students. In this spirit, I present here a very brief explanation about the enneagram and its application to the personality as a guide to self- knowledge.

The Enneagram

An enneagram is a geometric figure in which nine equidistant points along a circle are connected in a particular way, three of them forming a central triangle, while the remaining six are connected in the sequence 1,4,2,8,5,7, to return to 1.

This figure was not known in the western world until, on the one hand, Gurdjieff disclosed it and, on the other hand, an article in an English magazine described the visit of a Westerner (Davidson) to a Sarmouni community in Afghanistan. Gurdjieff described the enneagram as the geometric expression of two natural laws which he called the Law of Three, and the Law of Seven, the first of which would allow the underlying ternary understanding of all things (something similar to the thesis, antithesis approach and synthesis, but in which the synthesis is not a simple result but a balancing or neutralizing principle between plus and minus, or between Yin and Yang). The Law of Seven, on the other hand, refers to an understanding of temporal processes, as it is present in our culture, for example, through the seven days of the week. But while Gurdjieff spoke of the enneagram as a cosmic map and said, among other things, that it had helped him understand the many opium alkaloids, what Ichazo conveyed was specifically about personality, and I can say, as a long-time follower of Gurdjieff, that this constituted new knowledge.

The Nine Sins

Although the classic deadly sins established by Saint Gregory are seven, Evagrius Ponticus, who was the first to write about them, enumerated eight; the version broadcast by Ichazo includes nine: the usual seven, plus vanity and cowardice. But he did not speak of „sins“, but of „passions“, and this different terminology, which could seem only a detail, invites us to a renewal of the concept of sin, which in classical Christianity became contaminated with a certain inquisitorial content. Mainly, the difference is that „sin“ is conceived as a disobedience towards a punishing God, but „passion“ as a problematic motivation that deviates us from our course of spiritual development and interferes with our true life.

The Enneagram of the Passions

Passions of the Enneagram – Anger (1), Pride (2), Vanity (3), Envy (4), Avarice (5), Fear (6), Gluttony (7), Lust (8), Sloth (9)

In the figure above you can see the passions in their positions in the enneagram, with sloth at the top vertex, fear at the left corner and vanity at the right vertex of the central triangle. This central triad alludes to the basic structure of the ego or character neurosis. And in this we can find a synthesis of three psychological visions:

1. A foundation of neurosis is fear —transformed into anguish (as Freudian and post- Freudian psychology asserts).

2. Another aspect of neurosis is narcissism or excessive preoccupation with one's image, as modern clinical psychology has asserted.

3. The root of neurosis is unconsciousness, as yoga and Buddhism affirmed in the past, and existential psychology has re-emphasized by speaking of a loss of being that involves something like robotization.

We can observe a reciprocal feeding and interdependence between unconsciousness that

leads to anguish, which in turn leads to the elaboration of a false idealized self, which in turn perpetuates unconsciousness.

These factors underlie (or, by combining them, generate) the rest of the passions, similar to how primary colors combine to produce secondary colors, just as green arises from the combination of blue and yellow. But without dwelling on it now, I will draw attention to how each of the sins can be considered a valid theory about neurosis, since for the angry the basic problem is anger, for the proud it is Karen Horney's view that everything derives from pride, for the envious Melanie Klein's vision is true, which gives priority to envy in her psychodynamic interpretation, etc.

The Fixations

It might be thought that each of the passions generates a type of character, and thus character could be represented by a circle with a series of specific character traits in different positions, and the fundamental passion in the center. But the vision conveyed by Ichazo is rather that of an ellipse around two foci: one emotional and the other intellectual. And just as destructive emotions are called „passions“, the name „fixations“ is given to a series of irrational assumptions that underlie passions and lend them the stability that makes it difficult to overcome them. Next, I present the enneagram of the fixations, although not with the names that Ichazo proposed for them, but with those that seem most appropriate to me throughout decades of experience on this subject.

 Fixations of the Enneagram – Perfectionism (1), False abundance (2), Self-delusion (3), False deficiency (4), Insulation (5), Doubt (6), Planning (7), Rebellion (8), Indolence (9)

The Instincts

The word „instinct“ has been practically abandoned by psychology since the time when ethologists described the operation of instinct in various animal species; specifically in psychoanalysis, the Freudian view of behavior as being driven by an instinct for self-preservation and a sexual instinct has been replaced by one in which the search for relationship is given explanatory priority rather than the search for instinctual gratification. The vision transmitted by Ichazo, however, invites us to consider three motivations that, without the fixity of animal instinct, constitute goals and motivational factors of psychic life: the search for conservation (reflected in the search for security, health, and money), a sexual instinct (which when it dominates leads the person to a concentration on the couple and the family) and a social instinct (in which the most important thing is contact and communication and the relationship with the world in general, more beyond self and family).

The Subtypes

It raises the psychology of the enneatypes that combines the dominant passion with the dominant instinct in the person, and thus three specific varieties of each of the nine personalities are generated. And although to understand each of these subtypes the explanation that the same energy can invade one or another sphere of life, due to its passionate nature, could be enough, each of the twenty-seven human types is also distinguished by a specific trait that is explained as an overflow of the instinctive area contaminated by a compensatory instinctive derivative. In the following figure I show, through brief terms, these specific characteristics of the subtypes, which are conceived as secondary passions beyond the nine basic passions. Thus, for example, together with the term SP6 („Self-Preservation Enneatype Six“: an acronym referring to the conservational variety of characters called „cowards“), Ichazo used the term „heat“ to refer to a

person who, having suffered from affective coldness during childhood, develops an exaggerated need to feel sheltered or sheltered, and becomes correspondingly insecure in his need for guidance and protection.

Thus, in the case of SX6 (the sexual variety of the frightened, which psychoanalysis calls the counterphobic character), the term is „force“, which we can explain as a strategic assumption that the best defense is attack, and the best attack it is one in which the adversary can be intimidated through a show of force, which is like the barking of a dog that drives away those who violate its territory.

In SO6 (the social variant of cowardice), the word „duty“ indicates that the person takes refuge from anguish in obligations, but such duty does not only refer to obedience to a hierarchy, but is associated with a excessively analytical mind that, in its desire to know what to do, can become fanatical or excessively ideological, or theoretical. In my own work I often refer to this social subtype as the „Prussian“ character.

Self-Preservation Subtypes

Concern (SP1), Privilege (SP2), Security (SP3), Tenacity (SP4), Cave (SP5), Heat (SP6), Family (SP7), Satisfaction (SP8), Appetite (SP9)

Sexual Subtypes

Vehemence (SX1), Seduction/Conquest (SX2), Attractiveness (SX3), Hatred/Competitiveness (SX4), Confidence (SX5), Strength/Counterphobia (SX6), Suggestibility (SX7), Possession (SX8), Fusion (SX9)

Social Subtypes

Superiority (SO1), Ambition (SO2), Prestige (SO3), Shame/Self-Devaluation (SO4), Totem (SO5), Duty (SO6), Service (SO7), Complicity (SO8), Participation (SO9)

I will not continue for now with the explanation of the character of the subtypes, since it seems to me that I have said enough as an introduction to a book. But before the detailed explanation of each of the characterological types, I will continue with a panoramic essay in which I show how the set of twenty-seven characters can be explained from the three poisons that Buddhism recognizes as the foundations of samsara or sick mind.

Related pathologies or enneatypes in light of the three poisons of Buddhism

Buddhism speaks of the „three poisons“, referring to what is considered the core of samsara, the three destructive forces that keep the „wheel of life“ in motion. For this reason, one sees in the iconographic representations of such a wheel of life (which is nothing other than the world of appearances) a small central circle in which three animals are represented: a snake, a rooster and a pig. The snake represents desire, or more exactly the hyper-desire that animates the neurotic mind, and the Sanskrit term for it (tanha) could also be translated as „attachment“ or considered similar to the psychoanalytic concept of „orality“. The rooster represents aggression or aversion and we can understand that, since we want certain things, we also harbor a negative desire towards everything that deprives us of them; What is not said, however, is that the nature of desire and aversion differ from the nature of the instinctual, in that we find desire and aversion again in a healthy form that some psychoanalysts call Eros and Thanatos and that they do not belong to the world of neurosis, but to the animal sphere, which is frequently represented in Buddhist iconography through the lion and also the serpent.

But not only are desire and aggression included among the three poisons, but also an apparently neutral alternative that might seem to be the condition of a mind that has transcended aggression and desire, but actually results from a blindness through which people are unaware of their passionate nature, and which Buddhism calls ignorance.

Symbolically represented by the pig, it is the ignorance to which Buddhism attributes the greatest importance; For, although it is often said that Buddhism attributes suffering to an excess of desires (and this is how Schopenhauer translated it to the Western world), it would have been truer to say that, for Buddhism, the root of suffering is in ignorance, spiritual blindness or unconsciousness.

These three animals that symbolize the three poisons seem to persecute each other, and this suggests a transformation between their energies or a dynamism by which the three negative aspects of psychic life are mutually engendered – but it is also recognized in Buddhist psychology that in people one or another among the three poisons, and this fact (that human types are distinguished in the Abhidharma) suggested to me one day that perhaps the variety of characters could be explained on this simple ternary basis (in much the same way as the twenty- seven enneatypes can be understood from combinations between the intellectual, emotional or active predominance).

Interestingly, it only recently occurred to me to explore this idea, and it seemed to me that the natural starting point for it should be the location of the three poisons around the three vertices of the enneagram. It is easy to see that desire corresponds to the right vertex, since emotional types are the ones who live their desires more intensely and who suffer the most from excessive attachment in their relationships with others.

But where should we place the poison of aversion or aggression? At the left vertex or at the top vertex? Judging by their behavior, the characters E8 and E1, at the top of the enneagram, are the most aggressive; but Buddhist psychology is a living tradition, and I know an expert in Abidharma who has been perceived by experts as one in which hatred predominates; This point of view can be understood, since Eysenck, in his pioneer statistical investigations of personality (where he was especially interested in the polarity of introversion and extroversion), conceived of introversion as akin to psychopathy. In other words: the contrast between the right and the left of the enneagram is one between those who adapt to social norms (because they want others to like them) and those who, giving up the priority of being liked, rebel against the norms and expectations of the social environment.

If the two angles at the base of the enneagram triangle correspond to desire and aversion, we should logically expect that the characters around the upper vertex correspond to the predominance of ignorance (or unawareness of their own inner life), and whoever knows the psychology of the enneatypes will not hesitate to confirm it; because the E8 are little interested in the inner life, and although the E1 may be interested in it due to their perfectionism, they are people with great difficulty for insight. In addition, the E9 is nothing but a form of personality in which self-forgetfulness predominates, neglect of one's own inner life and the diversion of one's attention towards the interests of others.

Having established that the three poisons correspond to the three areas of the enneagram, which we have so far distinguished by the predominance of emotion (heart traid), intellect (head triad), and action (gut triad), we are ready to tackle the following question: Is it possible to define the nine basic characters as combinations of the poisons with each other?

We already know that it is possible to contrast the emotional types by recognizing an emotional-intellectual type, another emotional-active type and a third emotional-emotional type, and now we must ask ourselves if a similar distinction can be applied to the three types in which the desire. Is there one particularly aggressive type in this desire group, and one predominantly ignorant?

For the connoisseur of the characters, it is not difficult to recognize that among those represented by the right angle of the enneagram, the E2 is the one in which desire predominates, that aggression has much greater relevance in the consideration of the personality of the E4, and that the E3, characterized by self-deception and the construction of a false identity, is the most ignorant or unconscious.

So far, the experiment is going well; and we may wonder if a similar analysis will also work for the left corner of the enneagram. Is there one among the three characters in this group that is the most aggressive? Obviously, the E6 can be manifestly very aggressive, and when this is not the case, it is because he has channeled the aggression against himself in the form of self- antagonism. And in which of the three in this group desire predominates? Certainly not in E5, but in the gluttonous E7, which leaves us with the attribution of ignorance to E5, because, unless they have undergone a healing transformation, these are the people who have the least to say about themselves.

We now go to the upper vertex, that of ignorance, with the same question as to whether in this group the three characters can be distinguished according to the three poisons, and it also seems easy for us to confirm it, since lust is nothing other than an exaltation of the intensity of the desires, and the anger (even when it does not manifest itself in visible rage) reveals an

attitude of rejection towards the other or towards one's own experience; and if E8 corresponds to desire and E1 to aggression, this leaves us with E9 as the type to which the formula of double ignorance corresponds.

Now, let us repeat and apply all of this to all the types in order.

Action/Gut Types:

 E8 – Ignorance+Desire

 E9 – Ignorance+Ignorance

 E1 – Ignorance+Aversion

Emotion/Heart Types:

 E2 – Desire+Desire

 E3 – Desire+Ignorance

 E4 – Desire+Aversion

Intellect/Head Types:

 E5 – Aversion+Ignorance

 E6 – Aversion+Aversion

 E7 – Aversion+Desire

Now, let us get into each of the enneatypes one by one.

Enneatype 1 – The Angry

Just as Dante shows us, in his conception of Purgatory, different types of sinners at different levels on the mountain of purification, the psychology of the enneatypes holds that people belong to a variety of human types, each of which is animated for any of the sins; only that we use the word „passions“ instead of „sins“ to emphasize that it is not a question of conduct prohibited by God, but rather of destructive emotional excesses for the individual that should be overcome in order to remain faithful to life and to one's own development.

I begin this explanation of the characters with the wrathful, which can be distinguished according to three varieties; but let us not forget that, according to this vision of personality, the characters are not only distinguished according to the passions, but also according to irrational ideas associated with the passions, which have been called „fixations“ because they constitute errors of perspective about life and human relationships that sustain the passions, giving them special stability; and in the case of anger, the corresponding fixation is „perfectionism“.

The trait that we call perfectionism can occur in people of various characters, but it is one of these that I have chosen to call perfectionist; which corresponds to what academic psychology calls „obsessive personality disorder“.

But those who suffer from an emotional pathology recognized in a broad sense of the word are not only perfectionists, since there are also perfectionists that medicine would call normal and even some that the world calls saints, like Paul the Apostle, who we could consider as the inventor of the Christianity.

Here is a brief explanation of perfectionism that will help you understand how, as a fixation, it is something much more problematic than a simple character trait.

Oscar Ichazo used terms for fixations that were not consistent with his definition, and he specifically called the fixation corresponding to the first enneatype „resentment“, which does not mean much more than rage and does not allude to a cognitive process or a wrong assumption about life. So I changed it to „perfectionism“, meaning more than just a character trait (roughly equivalent to what Barry Stevens meant by „pushing the river“ – a lack of trust in the natural flow of life, as when you want to interfere too much in the spontaneous growth process of a child by trying to impose certain behaviors on him, manipulating him into becoming an adult prematurely, or training him in toilet training with an exaggeration that will influence his character forever).

While, as a behavioral trait, perfectionism only refers to one who works with great zeal and strives to do things very well, completes what he starts and deals with the details of things, fixation is refers to a belief that could be formulated as: „If I am unable to do things perfectly, I am not worthy of being loved“, or perhaps even, „If I don't do things perfectly (or „If I don't think and feel like a person of integrity“) I don't deserve to be alive.“ Furthermore, such a judgment can be extended to others: „The imperfect don't deserve to live—so we must weed out the defective or mentally retarded babies. Or perhaps the Chinese, the blacks or the Jews, if they seem to us to be inferior races“...

Perfectionism is a very inhuman attitude, no matter how noble it seems to aspire to the ideal. It starts with the idea that one must be equal to one's ideal self right now, and it doesn’t take into account that since we live in a causal universe, things are the only way they can be right now. For if at this very moment things are as they were conditioned by the immediate past, it is highly inhuman not to consider that "to err is human"; to err is intrinsic to human nature, since it is in the nature of things that reality differs from our idea of the ideal, which we approach only through a process of self-improvement. In other words, it's good to have ideals, and even want to get closer to them, but it's not right to punish ourselves for not having reached them. Thus, for example, forcing children (or our inner child) to be better can be a very cold and inhuman attitude, unloving, if not monstrous.

In animal symbolism we can approximately say that the angry ones (strong, but somewhat blind, like anger itself), only that when differentiating the subtypes it would be more precise to say that, while the sexual E1 is the most aggressive and resembles to the bull, the E1 conservation is more like the cow, or the ox, which has been domesticated through castration, and the social E1 to an eagle, as suggested by its morphology, as can be seen in the corresponding cartoon of Roberta Ranali.

According to proto-analysis theory, the difference between these subtypes relates to what happens when the force of the main passion, in this case anger, predominantly invades the realm of self-preservation, sexuality, or social life; We are therefore talking about three instinctive variants of perfectionism and the specific characteristics that anger acquires in each of these three areas.

In addition to these transformations of anger, a secondary passion or „satellite passion“ appears in each of the subtypes, as I will explain below and will continue to do throughout this book until I explain the twenty-seven passions that, according to proto-analysis, are added to the nine basic passions.

The comparative psychodynamics of subtypes

E1 Conservation

Ichazo called the distinctive passion of this earnest and well-intentioned character „angst“, but it's not E6 angst, it's the kind we usually call worry. We can say that the SP1 is worried, or that he is moved by an excessive impulse to make sure that he does things right — and this is carried out by a person we call obsessive.

Anger is expressed in the field of conservation as an assertiveness that, in order to manifest itself, must be justified according to socially shared criteria and, also, through good conduct itself. One must be virtuous to be able to judge others, but such virtue implies self- demand.

E1 Sexual

Ichazo called the characteristic passion of this subtype „zeal“, alluding to animal estrus; instead, I explain it as „vehemence“: an over-desire that is added to what the person wants, making him impatient and invasive. We can also say that he is a hot-headed person — as when Quevedo says: „I'm hot and people laugh.“

We can understand sexual anger as a hyper-assertiveness that is added to that of desire, as if anger gave desire this excessive power of fulfillment. This is also expressed as possessiveness and a spirit of conquest—which feel justified, as in the case of the Dutch when they exploited the diamonds of South Africa, or the Spanish conquerors who took away their lands from the Indians in the name of their very Christian emperor.

E1 Social

The term used by Ichazo in this case for the characteristic passion was „unadaptability“, which is relevant to the description of this rigid and aristocratic character in his feeling of superiority. The word does not designate a passion, however, and for this reason it seems more appropriate to speak of a passion for „superiority“, that is, a claim to be right and deserve the last word.

In the case of SO1, assertiveness is based on attributing an intellectual or moral superiority, which requires the corresponding effort to overcome, and is justified through the virginal concealment of desire.

Enneatype 2 – The Prideful

In Dante's scheme (which was that of the Church in his time), pride corresponds to the first level of Purgatory, as an indication that this is the most serious of the sins that must be overcome on the path to the divine. It is argued that pride was Lucifer's sin when, before God, he preferred a separate existence, thus ignoring his divine nature, and the concept that pride is the gravest of sins may be useful because the proud are the least likely to feel sinful.

On the contrary, they seem to feel better than the rest of the people and go through life smiling by adopting what would seem a very generous attitude of radiating love; For one who moves in the therapeutic world, however, it is clear that the proud often come to question and work on themselves through their love life conflicts. Were it not for such conflicts, they would be satisfied with life and would not seek a higher life. But even so, the vision transmitted by Ichazo differs from the Christian vision, insisting that all sins can be represented in a geometric map in which they are all at the same distance from the center; Saying that one or the other is better or worse, according to this view, may be true from a particular angle, but not in the same sense in which it is said in psychoanalysis that „there are characters that cannot be fixed“ —such as that of the E8 psychopath, that does not form enough bonds to support the therapeutic process, or E5, due to its poverty of bonds, which does not allow a healing relationship either.

Just as in the case of anger, also in the case of pride it can be said that it is a passion that is expressed in some individuals predominantly in the sexual sphere (of erotic-sentimental relationships), in the social sphere (of contact with others) or self-preservation, and then I explain it in a small outline.

The comparative psychodynamics of subtypes

E2 conservation

Ichazo described the satellite passion corresponding to this enneatype as an attitude of „me first“, and explained this phrase as an allusion to situations such as that of someone in a desert who claims priority over the water left in the canteen. In my own work I have given such an impulse the name of „privilege“. There is, side by side, however, in such people a demanding tendency which in children leads to bawling.

From the point of view of the transformation of pride in the various instinctive domains, the character of E2 conservation is expressed as a need to feel worthy of being the center of attention, which is achieved through a combination of infantile seduction and requirement.

E2 Sexual

The „secondary passion“ that accompanies pride in this character is something for which Ichazo used the words „conquest“ and „seduction“, to distinguish between a masculine and a feminine mode.

The transformation of pride in the sexual sphere is the desire to feel irresistible, which demands to be so at the cost of a seduction that cannot be made conscious without its purpose being distorted.

E2 Social

Ichazo's term for the secondary passion characteristic of this subtype was „ambition“, and we

can understand it as a desire for prominence, rank and leadership.

Social pride is expressed as a need to feel important, and implies a capacity to seduce groups.

In animal symbolism, we can say that the proud are felines, although felines are diverse depending on the subtype; and some of this can already be reflected in his morphology, but also in his gestures, his voice and attitude towards the world.

The fixation corresponding to pride is something that we could call „false abundance“ — understanding by it a concept of oneself that implies an imaginative aggrandizement and also, for this, a lack of knowledge of one's own limits.

The explanation that Ichazo proposed is not consistent with his own definition of what a fixation is. „Flattery“ seems to me to be a very misnomer, as flattery is not characteristic of all E2s (it mainly characterizes the social E2). And while it's true that some E2s are flattering, others are mostly dismissive. But primarily, flattery is behavior at the level of conduct, and does not fit the idea of a fixation, which is a wrong point of view or wrong assumption underlying character. I have proposed instead the expression „false abundance“, since it seems to me that pride is a form of self-inflation through which a person not only appears to be bigger than he is, but someone who does not take into account count your limits.

All human beings have things that we do not do well and things that we need; and especially, we all want more love; but if you go to the love market looking for someone to love, you will see that some people are looking for love and others are offering it, and the E2s, characteristically, are offering it, so they are the winners. They get more love by pretending to have it, being not only satisfied, but with enough love to share; but this entails an identification with a mask and an unconscious inauthenticity.

I remember watching a film by Steven Spielberg called „Artificial Intelligence“ that shows a world full of automatons and, among them, a woman with an impressive maternal smile.

These automatons are eliminated by burning them when they become too old, and in the case of this woman, even when she is burning, she keeps her loving gaze, full of love for everyone, powerfully reminding us that such is the case of some people strongly identified with a seductive love pose.

How can it be understood that „false abundance“ constitutes a wrong point of view about oneself? Precisely because feeling like someone who has a lot to give constitutes a falsification of reality and a self-aggrandizement, arising in turn from a will to seduce. Just like the Pied Piper of Hamelin who attracted all children, some people are very motherly and attract everyone who is looking for a mother; but this role of universal giver does not favor its own growth; because to grow we also need to recognize what we are lacking, and above all we need to recognize our reality as it is. It does not help us to project our shortcomings onto others, perceiving them as those in need in order to become indispensable to them as givers, because this interpersonal strategic advantage perpetuates a great masked dependency and an unconscious loneliness.

Not only as ambition and social prominence, but also as a supposed superiority in love is manifested, then, what in Christianity was called the sin of pride; and one might be amazed that this sin was considered so terrible by the Fathers of the Church, since the E2 are charming. Aren't they the most loving people? Apparently, he is a sweet character, but he has the limitation of not being very interested in what is beyond himself and the object of his love. He is not a very religious character, because, on the contrary, he tends not to be interested in the spiritual, given the intensity of his worldly passions and the measure of his self-satisfaction.

In the Christian tradition, the sin of pride is attributed to Lucifer, who by saying „I“ in the presence of the One, gave excessive emphasis to individuality and something like „me“. False abundance is also something that could be compared to the condition of „self-congratulating fruit“ described by Idries Shah about some character. We are all fruits of nature, but we are not supposed to congratulate ourselves for it, since it is not to ourselves that we owe our experiences, abilities or genetic endowment.

Pseudo-abundance is an unconscious or unrecognized pretense, and, on the other hand, the way to reach a true loving fulfillment passes through a humble acceptance of one's own limits, defects and needs. An E2 needs to recognize its „inner E4“, because it is like an E4 that has masked its great need for everything behind the façade of its excessive abundance. In terms of working on itself, an E2 needs humility, but this means a shift of attention to its E4 aspect, which implies saying „I need“ instead of simply taking what it wants, ignoring both its need and its trampling or invasive action.

In addition, it is also true that any excessively seductive person is one who implicitly believes: „I need to seduce to have what I want, otherwise I would not have it, not deserving it just because I am who I am.“ In other words, the theater of pride hides a great lack of confidence in itself and in life, and it is convenient for it to leave its imaginary self-aggrandizement, because only by renouncing this falsification that presents it as greater, more powerful or irresistible can it meet its needs and shortcomings, and thereby grow.

Enneatype 3 – The Vain

Although in the Christian tradition pride (arrogance) is confused with vanity, in the vision that has come down to us from the Christian esotericism of Central Asia, a distinction is made between the passion of being aggrandized by the proud and the passion of being seen and valued by the vain, which leads them to become so interested in manipulating their own image. Also at an intellectual level, the types are distinguished by different irrational ideas, the vain being what we roughly call „deception“, but which we can more accurately understand as a confusion between what one is and one's own idealized image, through which seeks to satisfy vanity. The subtypes can be distinguished according to whether it is a predominantly sexual vanity in which the fundamental thing is to attract a partner, a social vanity that seeks prestige and success in the world, and a conservative vanity, which does not seem like a vain attitude, since it is about a „counterpassionate“ subtype that, vainly, strives to be a person without vanity as part of the attempt to be a good person and, rather, a support rather than a weight for others.

The comparative psychodynamics of subtypes

E3 Conservation

In the case of this enneatype, Ichazo spoke of a passion that seeks security, and it seems to me very appropriate for these people who tend to stay within the usual forms and who seek to have everything under control. Vanity in conservation „must be“ as it should be, but confuses being with appearing, becoming unconscious of their motivations and identifying with their roles, behaviors and performances.

E3 Sexual

In the case of this type of person, Ichazo spoke of a passion for femininity or masculinity, depending on the case; what I understand as a desire to be like the model person of one gender or another in order to attract the opposite sex. For my part, I have used the word „sex appeal“ to describe a great desire to attract by indulging the desires of others. The vanity in the sexual wants to please and please, and it achieves it through the cultivation of the image.

E3 Social

In this case, the key word is „prestige“, which can be understood as a passion that seeks recognition of its own value in the eyes of the environment. In the search for such recognition, however, the person manipulates his self-image by falsifying himself. Vanity in the social wants to shine and be admirable, and it achieves it in the same way.

In animal symbolism, the human type of the vain is related to the horse – an animal benevolent towards humans, but domesticated and often put at the service of success through gambling races and tournaments. According to its morphology, the three subtypes of vanity can also be recognized, and also through its emotional tone, which in the case of the sexual E3 is shy and dependent, while the conservational is maternal and protective, and the competitive social and more selfish and aggressive.

In enneatype Three it also happens that Ichazo's term — „vanity“ — seems to me more appropriate for passion than for fixation; because vanity is a passion for the look of the other or others that is expressed in a need for applause, in the compulsion to please or in the passion for success, which is being someone for society. But being someone for the other implies an act of imagination, as well as a disdain for the life we have. The vain live for an image they have built of themselves, and this self-image cannot be sustained very well without deceiving oneself and without also deceiving those who want to impress with it.

Ichazo also used the word „deceit“ for E3, only in relation to passion, while I swapped the terms and he accepted my correction as reasonable. One thing, then, is the passion to be seen, loved, appreciated, and another thing is the masking through which one wants to attract the pleasure or appreciation of the other.

It can sometimes seem out of place to talk about deception in the case of E3, in which the interest in the truth is very noticeable. Especially, the conservative E3 wants to be very clear, and tends to have a very precise mind, although it also tends to be wrong in interpreting its own motivations. I remember a woman in my country who, on the occasion of her golden wedding, gave her husband, with her domestic savings of many years, a tomb in the cemetery, or rather a pantheon, giving him on that day the key. She was not aware that it was not an appropriate gift, nor that a witness with a Freudian mind could conjecture about her unconscious motivation…

E3s can be very precise and even mathematical in their logical mind, but very confused in the interpretation of their emotions; but isn't it delusional thinking to believe that one is one's own idealized image? Certainly, it is a very deceptive thing, and many people do not suspect how much they deceive themselves in considering themselves so great, successful and valuable, when all this can be made to appear through the effort of intelligence and capacities much more ordinary than reality. true greatness. Self-deception turns a ghost into something more real than life itself, to the point that one seems not to exist by itself, but only in the imaginary perspective that another considers him successful (because he has done this and that, or because you are skilled or gifted, etc.). This is consistent with the fact that many times I have heard an E3 say that he does not feel that he exists except in the eyes of others.

It takes a lot of maturity, I think, to get rid of this ambition to please everyone, and be content with being liked by a few. It seems to me that the corrective to this thirst for love that makes us obsessively try to please everyone is to be content that there are some who like us and others who don't, and a lot of energy is saved when accepting what reality gives us. . But for this it is essential that we like ourselves. And the problem for an E3 is that it is invisible to itself, and it needs the love of others because it is not capable of perceiving its own value. If he enjoyed life, enjoyed himself and did not need to like or shine so much, he could rest in being himself or herself effortlessly.

Enneatype 4 – The Envious

According to the traditional order of sins, envy is the second after pride, and thus, in Dante there are, on the second ledge of purgatory, those who suffer the punishment and correction of living with their eyes stitched up so that, instead of compare yourself with what you can see, concentrate on yourself.

Envy implies an acute pain for what one lacks, but this suffering from an excessive thirst for love or value implies an erroneous perspective that we can call a „false deficiency“, which is to see the glass as half empty instead of half full. To be sure, envy arises from early frustration, but the attitude that the three subtypes adopt in response to this frustration is very different: social envy is one in which „your neighbor's lawn is greener than your own,“ and is associated with to sadness, while sexual envy is competitive and arrogant, and envy of the conservative type is a counter-envy, of someone who has not only resigned himself, but also protects himself from dependency and its possible frustration through autonomy . We can understand the subtypes, too, in attention to the forms that envy takes in the three areas of life, as I explain below.

The comparative psychodynamics of subtypes

E4 Conservation

I no longer remember the expression Ichazo used in this case, but I do remember changing it to „whatever it takes“. Later, however, I have understood it as an internalization or turning against itself of demanding orality, which becomes an excessive effort to be worth more, accompanied by the sacrifice of one's own desires.

Conservation envy wants to take care of itself, as if it implicitly takes for granted that no one will take care of it and has resigned itself to that frustration.

E4 Sexual

In this case, Ichazo proposed two words: „competition“ and „hate“; and it seems consistent with the fact that some people (depending on the second instinct in their personality structure) can be very competitive without being hateful, while others are very aggressive in the way they compete, and also dismissive in the expression of their assault.

Sexual envy wants to deprive others of what is envied for its own benefit (cannibalistic impulses, insofar as the search for the introjection of the other is already present in the fury of the bite).

E4 Social

The term Ichazo used in this case was „shame“, which seems to me descriptively appropriate for being a shy and insecure type of person. A more exact formulation of the satellite passion, in this case, seems to me to be „self-devaluation“, which in turn can be understood as a turning against one's own aggression, which results in something like chronic poisoning and a feeling of inferiority.

Social envy wants to elevate what it envies above itself and beautify it, as if it allowed itself to be swallowed up by the beauty it conceives or perceives.

In general, in animal symbolism this human type can be related to goats, but the sexual type has been symbolized by a snake, and I have been interested in observing that the homeopathic remedy that corresponds to this character is Lachesis, extracted from a poisonous viper, since the simultaneous exaltation of sexuality or desire and guilt is characteristic of this type.

Evagrius Ponticus, the first in the Christian tradition to describe sins, spoke of tristitia, sadness, but although he referred to sins as errors, the word sadness does not seem to refer to an error. We can understand, however, that sadness can indeed involve a mistake through an image of Dante's hell, where those who are submerged in a swamp instead of enjoying sunlight are described. The scene implicitly suggests that we are not victims of ugliness, sadness or bad circumstances, but rather that in some sense we choose them to a greater extent than we suppose.

We could say that an E4 chooses to suffer. We usually say that they reject pleasure and being satisfied, as if they needed their dissatisfaction as indispensable to their complaint or protest. I have called this fixation „false deficiency“, a term symmetrical with that of E2, „false abundance“.

It's easy to imagine how this can come about when you think of a crying baby. When a baby is hungry, cold, or needs anything, it is natural for him to cry and call out to her mother through crying. It's as if the character of E4 is fixed in this biological moment that was appropriated in early childhood. But to return to that childish call to the mother, surely there is the pretense that one's own needs are greater than they are, or that the frustration is more painful, or that some illness is causing discomfort. Just as some children feign illness to stay in bed and not go to school, adults can resort to feeling sick or unhappy to, ironically, enlist someone's help in their search for happiness.

It is very easy to understand that some people resort to crying to be comforted, or to feel needed to feel satisfied, because when we were children crying worked very well. Among adults, however, whoever whines to attract love has a certain chance of being rejected. Above all, because crying also implies demands that in turn are confused with anger. And so it happens that those who anticipate being rejected end up being rejected, and this perpetuates a vicious cycle. It can be helpful, however, the perspective of false deficiency, as well as the fact that nightmares become real. And it complicates things that suffering has a very good press in Christian culture. Are we not invited to conceive the crucifixion as the best way to reach heaven? However true it is that we should imitate Christ and carry our cross, understanding our suffering as a path to bliss, it is also true that the „false deficiency“ does not lead to heaven or bliss, and that the E4 would benefit learn to enjoy.

Enneatype 5 – The Petty

The Christian tradition uses the term „greed“ for a passion that in a way impresses us as a dispassion: a tendency to indifference that in the language of psychology might be called a „retentive“ character. We can describe it as a passion for not giving that involves both an economy of oneself and a feeling that one has little to give — feeling poor, or poor in spirit. If we ask ourselves about the expression of retentivity in the three spheres that correspond to the subtypes, it can be said that conservational greed wants to retain what little it has as a consequence of having anesthetized and restrained its greed. Like Canetti's Finolora, who walks with very short steps and pauses a lot in doorways, hardly breathing. In sexual greed, on the other hand, an invasive possessiveness demands a delivery that is as excessive as the need for love is excessive, and social greed leads to wanting to feel important, but at the same time insignificant or without interest, so from inner poverty one looks for the magic of meaning, the richness of experience, the special, the lofty, great, or extraordinary.

It seems to me somewhat more difficult than in the other characters to differentiate morphologically the three forms of greed, but below we will be able to see what our cartoonist has highlighted after observing many who have attended the SAT programs.

In animal symbolism we can say that the conservational E5, being the most hidden and shy, corresponds to the mouse, while the sexual, hypersensitive and more intense, corresponds to the stoat (a little animal slightly larger than a mouse and very fast, who is the only one who knows how to succeed in an encounter with a cobra); the social E5, however, is very much like a giraffe that, with its long legs and long neck, can look down on things and also eat from the leaves of trees that are too high for other animals.

What is the crazy idea that sustains the excessive economy in the energies of life. If I ask myself how an E5 is wrong, in the first place, I would highlight his choice not to enter into relationships with others and the corresponding idea that the independence of solitude is better than ties, which imply being open to giving and receiving. Well, isn't there in the relationship with the other the danger of having to give more than what is received? An E5 tends to think that it is better to go alone in life, and could even say that it is better business to go alone, since the thought of how much is given or how much is received implies an economic element.

Of course, he derives such implicit reasoning that, during childhood, an E5 was manipulated, received false love or was not raised properly, so he has intuited that the expression of love has been somewhat manipulative, invasive or superficial, but more deeply, it seems to me that an E5 is not convinced that there is such a thing as love, and therefore their distrust of relationships is associated with the suspicion that love is perhaps only an illusion, an attempt at seduction or manipulation. Sometimes an E5 seems to be an exception to the universal search for love, and seems to prefer to be at peace or to be interested in the secret of the stars, or perhaps in the search for mystical experiences. Look for some alternative to love, but it is very difficult to find an alternative to love that is truly fascinating, unless one has an extraordinary mind that allows one to feel like Newton or Darwin, who were passionately absorbed in their creativity.

The barely suffered loneliness of an E5, except in the form of vague dissatisfaction, can be understood as a result of a basic non-relatedness, which in turn derives from a lack of understanding that a relationship is not a one plus one equal to two, since it implies the passage from individual consciousness to a consciousness of a very different order, as Martin Buber proposed when distinguishing the relationship with a you from the relationship with an object or thing. Relationship implies mutuality, and when two come together, they must give up a certain freedom, but instead acquire a different horizon. We all have difficulty forming true, deep, and deeply satisfying relationships, because we all resist the notion that humans are more or less the same. Much has been said about recognizing oneself as equal to others, but I believe that such recognition comes naturally from the recognition of one's deep awareness. If I recognize my deep self, I can feel that we are all that deep self, but without it, we are all a bit like the E5, and we feel isolated. But, unlike others who start life with a strong symbiotic tendency, an E5 starts out distrusting that it's a good thing to blend in with others, and especially fears that a relationship means giving more than you get.

The comparative psychodynamics of subtypes

E5 Conservation

In the case of the conservation E5, Ichazo used the word „castle“, in reference to the search for refuge in distancing and the inhibition of expression. Sometimes in my own practice I have used the term „den“ or „sanctuary“ for this strategic concealment that leads to a need to relinquish desire and aggression. In addition, conservational greed wants to retain what little it has because it has anesthetized and restrained its greed, it walks with very short steps and stops a lot on thresholds, hardly breathing.

E5 Sexual

In the case of this subtype, the term used by Ichazo was „trust“, and we can understand it as a great need to trust the other that is expressed through the demand for ideal conditions to be able to trust, but that reveal a great lack of self-confidence. Sexual greed is transformed into an invasive possessiveness that demands a surrender as excessive as his need for love is excessive.

E5 Social

In this case, Ichazo's term was „totem“, and I have continued to use it as an allusion to a passion for importance, for lofty ideal models, and for the self-importance that resembling such models lends. Social greed wants to feel that it matters, but feels insignificant or uninteresting and, from inner poverty, seeks the magic of meaning, the richness of experience, the special, lofty, great, or extraordinary.

Enneatype 6 – The Forms of Fear

Just as the nine-fold scheme of the esoteric tradition differs from the traditional notion of the seven deadly sins in its recognition of vanity as a passion independent of pride, so too does pride include the sin of cowardice, which is not exactly fear, but something as well as a fear of fear, which is accompanied by inhibition of action or expression. But if the Christian tradition (perhaps because of its authoritarianism, which has wanted to inspire obedience) omits to speak of fear and submission as sins, not only were the followers of Jesus Christ and Christians in the times of the martyrs clear that courage and bravery are a virtue, but modern psychology and the therapeutic tradition have given us a vision of the disease that emphasizes more than anything fear, anguish, doubt and everything that derives from them.

In the realm of animal symbolism, cowards can be said to be like dogs, but their affinity with canines can be understood primarily from dogs' relationship to authority. The dog is not only a friend of man, but one that listens to the voice of the master and is faithful to him, unlike the cat, which only obeys to a certain extent in the presence of its owner, but not when the latter turns his back. Other symbols, however, are relevant when we talk about the subtypes, and the sexual (counterphobic) E6 has traditionally been represented as a rooster, and the warm conservational E6 as a harmless rabbit or a sweet lamb. The social E6, on the other hand, is the canine itself, and among all the canines it is especially similar to the wolf due to its solidarity with the pack and its obedience to the leader, as well as its sense of hierarchy.

The comparative psychodynamics of subtypes

E6 Conservation

Ichazo used to call the passion of this subtype „heat“, although the term „warmth“ might be more appropriate, as it is a sense of familiar warmth that compensates for an experience of cold loneliness and a fear of abandonment.

Fear in conservation manifests itself as insecurity and lack of protection; and because he wants the warm benevolence of the other to feel that he will not be threatened by loneliness or the harshness of life and the world, he must be good, inhibiting his aggression and other impulses.

E6 Sexual

In this case, Ichazo used the term „force“, referring to an attempt to offset fear with a brave stance and an attitude of intimidation. More accurate, however, seems to me to be the psychoanalytic term „counterphobia“, which already exists in the field of academic psychology for this kind of flight forward in which the person feels that the best defense is attack.

Fear in the sexual is afraid of being seen as weak, and wants to appear strong to intimidate the weak and not succumb to a weakness that feels dangerous. Whether or not it is true that for the Sexual 6, counterphobia is something like a castrated man with an impressive prosthesis, symbolically the image serves to speak of his personality in a metaphorical way.

E6 Social

Ichazo's term, in this case, was „duty“, and indeed, we can say that this subtype manifests a desire to do things well and a tendency to conform to the rules dictated by authority. More important than fulfilling the duty, however, seems to me the passion to know what the duty is, which makes these people too analytical, reflective and normative, lending them something like an excessively legislative mind when what is missing is that they trust more in their desires and intuition, and less in their beliefs or ideology.

Fear in the social leads to the fanatical character, which, fearing its ambiguity and vacillation too much, develops an intolerance for ambiguity. Here one can also speak of a kind of prosthesis that protects him from fear, only in this case, this prosthesis is like an electronic brain that allows him to know what to do and what to avoid.

Much can be explained by fear, cowardice or anguish (as the language of the therapeutic tradition prefers), but, according to the vision that I transmit, this passion or sin of cowardice depends on an erroneous interpretation of the world, which by projecting destructiveness or enmity justifies attack or flight.

Regarding dysfunctional thinking, we find in type E6 a practically universal phenomenon, which is that of self-antagonism; only that, in this, the E6 can be said to be the specialists. When I started talking about fixations in the early seventies, I used the word „doubt“ for E6, but not in the sense of intellectual doubt, as when one wonders if one thing or another is true, or which is the right path or the wrong path, nor in reference to ambivalence as a character trait, which refers to indecision or hesitation (characteristic of the insecure), but rather in that of a „self-doubt“, which is a lack of faith in oneself.

When you distrust yourself, where does such lack of confidence come from? It seems to me that, mainly, from the implanted idea that we are perverse, bad. And in Christianity original sin has been called the notion that in very archaic times we were condemned to sin, evil and corresponding guilt by a punitive God, in response to something we did not personally do: a disobedience of our ancestors.

It is not very clear what Adam and Eve did, but the book of Genesis speaks of a fig leaf with which they hid their genitals, and how when God saw it, they understood that they had „eaten the forbidden fruit.“ There is no doubt that the idea of carnal sin underlies this story, and since all civilizations have shared this notion that sexuality is sinful, we can consider it intrinsic to our civilized or patriarchal condition.

It can be said that we have all learned during childhood to turn against ourselves in order to be acceptable to an authority that reigns over everyone's life, and we can consider it intrinsic to socialization, which is also a domestication; we could even say that a process of domestication is the essence of civilization; but the E6 excel at turning against themselves, becoming insecure or persecutory, or adopting a quasi-godlike position in which everyone is judged from a critical and normative superiority, and all this implies what I have called the „Freudian delusion“, according to which a dangerous and disgusting beast lives in the basement of our mind. Furthermore, this delusion is perpetuated because, precisely because of our conviction that such a basement must be something very dangerous, we do not dare to open its door.

The Six aspect of us has endorsed that notion of being wicked or evil, and we all share such a collective accusation that keeps us obedient to authority; but the E6 are the specialists in self-accusation (which they sometimes project onto others).

When the anguished passion of the E6 turns to the field of self-preservation, it becomes insecure and unprotected, and then the individual seeks the warm benevolence of others so as not to feel threatened by loneliness or the harshness of life and the world. But for others to be friendly and not aggressive, you must also be good at inhibiting your aggression and other objectionable impulses.

When fear turns to the sexual sphere, on the other hand, the person fears being seen as weak, and in order to intimidate the weak, he wants to appear strong, thus hiding a weakness that he feels is dangerous. For this reason, we could say that in the sexual or counterphobic E6 character, a shyness or inhibition is compensated by a threatening attitude.

In the social sphere, the fear of being wrong is compensated by a corresponding intolerance of ambiguity that makes him a fanatic, and in this case too, this excessive security can be understood as a prosthesis aimed at his own security or protection, an excessively analytical and intellectual that comes to replace the organismic function of those who consult with their intuition, their emotions, and trust in the exercise of their abilities.

Enneatype 7 – The Gluttonous

More than once I have seen a film about the seven deadly sins in which successive stories are presented to illustrate them, and it always seemed to me that gluttony was presented in such a way that it made me doubt that it was correct to include it among sins that are so much more serious. In one such story, for example, a man who had been given shelter by peasants gets up at night and surreptitiously eats a cake. If we want to understand gluttony, it seems to me that it is convenient to consider the taste for food as a symbol of something more important.

Thus, we can reformulate gluttony as addiction to pleasure or intolerance to pain; but it is also true that the search for pleasure is not the fundamental thing, but only the surface of this psychological type and something like an ointment for its sores. Gluttony is an excessive orientation to pleasure that diverts the individual from his course, by reinterpreting this meaning from an implicit hedonistic ideology that arises as a defense against a hypersensitive attitude towards pain.

If we must choose a single animal for the human type of gluttony, none seems to me more appropriate than the monkey —because of its mobility, its playful spirit and its impudence— but we can also find animals that correspond to the character of the subtypes, and in that case we would say that the monkey itself is the sexual E7, while the conservational one has more of a bear (and that is how Kipling and Disney perceived it in „The Jungle Book“). Regarding the social E7, we must understand it as the counterpassionate type in which the person, preconsciously perceiving his exploitative and excessive tendency as a glutton, prefers to become a good, loving and even holy person, despite the fact that, in some cases, it is transparent that those who go good hide something from us, as is typically the case of the fox of fables.

The comparative psychodynamics of subtypes

E7 Conservation

Ichazo explained the characteristic passion of this subtype with the expression „castle guardians“, which over time I have been replacing with „family“ and understanding as a search for power and protection through reciprocal alliances. These are people who love their own, while they can be cold and exploitative towards the rest, as occurs with the phenomenon of the mafia, to which the association of characters of this type tends to lead. The need for „family“ that underlies this – and need not refer to blood family – could in turn be understood as a passion for inclusion, with the corresponding suffering of feeling excluded.

Conservational gluttony wants the good things life has to offer, starting with motherly love and, by extension, the warmth of family, as well as money and sex, but all this in the context of a passion for inclusion.

E7 Sexual

In this case, Ichazo used the term „suggestibility“, which we could understand at the same time as a dream capacity that confuses dreams with realities, and a capacity to bewitch, hypnotize and deceive, thus playing with the suggestibility of others.

Sexual gluttony, in its impatient intensity, dreams of what it wants and pursues it too eagerly, but peace, trust, and dedication to life are lacking in its heart—which, in turn, fuels its impatient pursuit.

E7 Social

Ichazo's term for the passion corresponding to this subtype was „sacrifice“, which at first glance does not seem consistent with the fact that it is, after all, a glutton that will never sacrifice as much as an E4 conservation and other types. It is true, however, that in this subtype there is a certain renunciation of gluttony, which is replaced by a desire for purity and an aspiration to the ideal. We can say that the social type of the glutton is a good one who makes a special effort not to be impulsive or exploitative, and who tries to be an ideal person to be appreciated. All this could be expressed with the use of the term 'contragula', understood as an equivalent of counterphobia – but with the meaning of a passion to be an ideal person, rather than one to be brave.

Social gluttony is that of good children who defend themselves against their gluttony through an aspiration to purity, nobility of spirit, and even holiness, and seek validation of their image as good people through performance, kindness, generosity and charm.

The Type Seven is one that I've found the hardest to understand from a single idea, but let's just call him a masked antisocial. In contrast to the Eight type, which in clinical psychology is called the „antisocial personality“, the E7 is an antisocial who pretends to be very social, and manages to break the rules in a way that is considered acceptable. They are considered acceptable despite their antisociality because they are charming, because they know how to use words very eloquently, and because they argue that this or that is the right thing to do. They are not rebels, but rather behave like the fox of the fables, who typically appears very helpful: one who, precisely through his friendly role, gains some advantage.

But, beyond saying that the E7 is determined to take advantage and that it is opportunistic, what supports such attitudes? What conviction supports such a way of life? Just ask me, and Walt Disney's portrayal of Aladdin comes to mind, depicting him as a charming rogue who is loved by ordinary people. He goes around the market stealing an apple here and a banana there, and so he manages to feed himself without bothering anyone too much. And it seems that everyone thinks he's fine, because he's a good person, quite pleasant to deal with. But, mainly, I would say that people accept it because they know that we live in an unjust world and that, just as some survive by force, others survive by seduction and small tricks.

The Seven, in the labyrinth of life, know how to get along, and the same can be said about corruption, which is perhaps the worst political problem in the world, because it rests on the feeling that it is not a good thing to take into account to the authorities that are in charge of the world, the laws, the decisions of the legislators, and that it is better to take care of their own interests and those of their friends. Isn't this what defines a mafia? I don't want to get into the big question of whether they are wrong, but I do want to point out that it is understandable that, in an unjust world, some personal injustices can be understood.

Sometimes I find myself saying to an E7, „You need to suffer more,“ because they often live on the surface of their mind, and their avoidance of suffering entails an avoidance of going deeper into themselves. They become too light people, alienated from their own life and their true purposes. It would also seem that an E7 seeks pleasure too much, as if it were more important than love or obedience to intuition, but I have come to the conclusion that this is not the case, since the deep problem of an E7 is not hedonism but the refusal to suffer, and pleasure is sought as a refuge from the possibility of pain, as a protective ointment on a wound.

On the one hand, the E7 do not know how much they suffer, as they do not have the direct experience of suffering, and on the other they flee from the present to the future or to the past, either in their thoughts or in daydreams, and this implies a rejection of the reality that appears to them as insufficient; but even more true is that reality is painful for them, even if they don't know it. They would need to get in touch with the fact of a more serious basic dissatisfaction than has been recognized.

But why do these characters that psychoanalysis has called „oral optimists“ avoid suffering so much? And why those famous glasses that make everything appear pink? I once met a very bright-eyed and apparently happy dwarf, and asked her to what she attributed her good humor; she simply replied that, if she had not developed it, she would have wanted to commit suicide. It was easy to imagine that, during her childhood, when she understood that she was not going to grow up anymore, it was terrible to her, and that is why she had to put on the pink glasses and develop humor in the face of everything. And if I ask myself, about the E7 in general, what made them suffer so terribly that they have chosen to avoid suffering at all costs, I imagine that it has to do with an excessive fear of suffering; an anticipation that suffering could be life-threatening. In other words, it may sometimes not be so much a great suffering as a fantasy that indulging in suffering could be fatal. Such unconscious fantasy, it seems to me, can explain a manipulative attitude towards life, which is an attitude that lacks confidence in surrender.

This fantasy seems to be corrected by the experience of suffering, which is particularly difficult for them because they are satisfied people to begin with, and it is hard for them to let go of their habitual joy. In addition, they suffer more than other characters from the discipline that comes with trying to change their habits.

Enneatype 8 – The Lustful

According to the usual conception of the deadly sins, lust consists of an exaggerated sexuality, but according to the vision transmitted by Ichazo, the essence of lust is an exaggerated thirst for intensity, or more specifically, a thirst for intensity that is satisfied through of action and, especially, with an intensification of desires that, at the same time, militates against their satisfaction. And not only sexuality lends itself as a source of intensity, but also aggression and the same arousal of the senses in the face of stimuli such as intense noise/music or spicy foods.

Although in the sexual subtype the lust is mainly oriented to the erotic field, we can say that it is not simply a sexual lust, since people with this character are also impulsive in their aggression. Already as children, they were people who tended to be hyperkinetic, and interpersonally they are also possessive: they overwhelm people and excessively take over the will of their partner or their children.

It can be said that sexual E8 are those in which rebellion is most manifested, since, although conservationists may be more antisocial, they are also more strategic, and this gives them a certain character of „wolves in sheep's clothing“, as in the case of Henry VIII, who has gone down in history for his passion to do his own will to the point of rebelling against the Pope and becoming the center of the Church in England. In order to achieve this, however, he had to occupy himself a lot with theology, something that would hardly interest a sexual E8, who reveals himself to us as more visceral and passionate. Because of this characteristic viscerality and because of the shameless way in which the sexual E8 makes fun of conventional values, it can be said that it embodies for us the voice of the Dionysian, and that by becoming a defender of the enjoyment of freedom and criticism of character repressive of society, he cannot fail to become an echo of something repressed or contained in the minds of almost everyone —and therefore, also, a sympathetic character.

Ichazo, to whom we owe the first presentation in the west of the ideas I have developed, called the fixation corresponding to lust „revenge“, and this might seem embarrassed in view of the high aggressiveness of the lustful, which can be interpreted as a vengeful response to aggression experienced by a child during his childhood. That's how it seemed to me for a long time, but I've come to think that it would be more correct to consider rebellion as a more essential part of an E8 than revenge, and this is what leads to these characters being consider (in its most expansive form) manifestations of an „antisocial personality disorder“.

Unlike most people, who adapt to society during childhood by becoming good kids who abide by social norms without questioning them, the characteristic of the E8 is a greater faith in their natural impulses than in the voice of the authorities, and in such a situation, it dares to challenge not only parents and school teachers, but also the culture itself or the intellectual discourse that justifies it. But, although it is common to react to this situation of certain individuals as a pathology or disorder, I cannot help but feel that it is heroic that some people are capable of rebelling against the entire world driven by great faith in their natural impulses, according to which, what they do or feel is not bad, and that if the world insists on calling it „bad,“ evil is no worse than what is called „good“ — to the point that the „good“ are hypocrites.

If we say that rebellion is the most distinctive of this type, we will understand the aggressive character of such people or their antisocial attitudes as a natural thing that derives from their point of view, according to which the fundamental thing is a doubt regarding the validity of the authority with which they want to be tamed.

The point of view that I expose, however, implies a social critique that is not present in the ordinary academic model of mental health as an adaptation to society, and it seems to me that this insufficient model, which does not perceive the underlying social pathology to individual neuroses, does not favor the cure of antisocials—which requires a measure of validation of this critical point of view.

Just as we speak of E1s as perfectionists or E4s as pseudo-deprived, in the case of E8s we can speak of rebels or „antisocials“, but not in the sense of the DSM-5, which distinguishes the most problematic antisocials from those who live with fewer problems, but of many intense, strong and perhaps tough people who are not recognized as pathological in a culture little aware of universal pathology.

As in other enneatypes, three varieties of lustful can be distinguished, one of which is the most fiery, intense and aggressive, which is the sexual E8: the most prone to presenting himself to the world as a bad guy — or as a person aware of his little respect for conventions and even for such things as truth or fidelity.

In contrast to this sexual type, which is also somewhat histrionic, is the social E8, who often appears simply as a good person who expresses himself strongly and acts with a vehement sense of protection towards the victims of injustice and, specifically, towards the antisocials that society has collectively condemned to repudiation.

Lastly, there are the tough ones. Just as in the sexual E8 possessiveness is exacerbated, which makes them tyrannical in their intimate relationships, and just as the social E8 is characterized by intense „friendship“ ties that, considered more deeply, are actually complicity, the E8 conservation is characterized by an impatience with any delay or frustration of his desires, which makes him crushing in his demands and at the same time cruel in his ignorance of what such demands mean for others.

If we want to find an animal representation that evokes such characters, we can say that the conservational E8, due to its hardness and coldness, reminds us of the crocodile (which we also use when talking about crocodile tears, referring to false demonstrations of suffering by people little emotional), while we can compare the social E8 with the pig, which is a relatively domestic and highly intelligent animal, and the sexual E8 with the wild boar, which is a wild, untamed and dangerous pig, whose fearsome fangs.

The comparative psychodynamics of subtypes

From the point of view of how lust manifests itself in the conservation, sexual and social realms, the following can be said:

E8 Conservation

In the case of this subtype, Ichazo's term for the characteristic passion was „satisfaction“, which we find reminiscent of a person who strongly insists on doing or receiving what they want, but which is not an appropriate name for a passion, since all passions seek satisfaction. What is most characteristic in this case is the intolerance of the frustration of one's own desire, which leads to a kind of childish impatience and a determination to overcome such impotence with a violent assertion of one's will.

Conservative lust wants what it wants too much, so that its selfishness loses the counterweight of solidarity.

E8 Sexual

In this case, the term Ichazo used was „possession“, which seems appropriate to me in reference to a tyrannical tendency of these people in their relationship with their partner or with others, who end up being enslaved in a certain way.

Sexual lust takes over the other through fascination and threat.

E8 Social

Ichazo's term, in this case, was „friendship“, which seems to me relevant to the friendly attitude of such people, even in their aggression, since it is usually expressed as a claim for justice implicitly in solidarity with the mistreated. Personally, however, I prefer to limit the use of the word friendship to healthy friendship, and alternatively use terms such as „complicity“ for manipulative friendship in which links aimed at power are established.

Social lust wants to show solidarity with the oppressed, putting its righteous vengeance at their service.

To finish, I must say something else about the fixation of the lustful, which I have proposed to understand as a rejection of domestication that we can simply call „rebellion“. What I have explained, however, could be interpreted as a universal justification of rebellion against the social mandate to adapt to a sick culture, ignoring the fact that the excessive tendency to rebel is not something less problematic than the other fixations, nor is it necessarily more justified than them, since they all constitute the response to a social pathology transmitted by the family.

We must recognize, then, that an excessive invalidation of social mandates, or perhaps of paternal authority, constitutes a pathology regardless of whether an intrinsically problematic patriarchal paternal authority prevails in the world, which is what determines that certain people can recognize the bad authority without turning into boars (or some other kind of animal). This would require research that does not seem to have been carried out and that could reveal, for example, that a child will rebel more when he does not feel sufficiently accompanied by the mother or when he feels in danger due to the intensity of the punishments; but it will be advisable that, in a therapeutic situation or in the self-analysis of the independent seeker, it be taken into account that the passion for intensity derives from an existential emptiness, and that this emptiness is created by a posture of aggressive rejection towards a world without which one cannot live. In other words, turning against the whole world will necessarily imply loneliness, no matter how much you want to compensate for it with lust or hide it through hardening; and no matter how noble his warlike position may seem to an antisocial, his excessive quest for autonomy is more of a utopia than a path to sanity.

Enneatype 9 – The Slothful

The term „laziness“ chosen by monastic Christianity wanted to translate the Latin word acidia..., but this implies a mistaken conception of what the fathers of the desert called thus, since, originally, this sin referred to a spiritual laziness known especially by monks deeply dedicated to his quest who, in the desert, found their spiritual thirst quenched. „The midday demon“, Evagrio called this passion that today could be called „psycho-spiritual inertia“, which would seem more like a dispassion than a passion and which manifests itself as a tendency to automatism, a spiritual numbness and an exaggerated conformism or overfitting.

Among the animals, we can say that the elephant corresponds to the acidious due to its meekness, its group spirit and its thick skin, which makes it little sensitive to subtle stimuli; but the subtypes are quite different, with the sexual E9 being a sweet, inconspicuous person who goes out of their way for someone else with compulsive altruism, while the social E9 is energetic, jovial, and hard-working (especially when it comes to people, to serve your group) and the E9 conservation is strong and irritable, and could even be mistaken for an E8. Morphologically, they can also be distinguished, and even more so through voice and movement.

The comparative psychodynamics of subtypes

E9 Conservation

In the case of this subtype, Ichazo used the word „appetite“ — which seems relevant to us in relation to the tendency of these people to transform their thirst for love into an excessive desire to eat that often leads to obesity. Not only is the thirst for love transformed into a physical appetite, however, but into another type of less visible voracity, which leads them to the invasion of other people's space, to curiosity, to the search for novelties through travel, and even to the need for distraction through things like television or hobbies.

Conservational sloth is neglect of one's survival-related needs, done through not knowing, and attempted to compensate through a need for food, comfort, distractions, or sleep.

E9 Sexual

In this case, Ichazo's term was „union“, which seems to me appropriate for a symbiotic tendency that does not lead to a true meeting between two autonomous persons, but to a confusion with the other, in which the other becomes a kind of substitute for yes. We could, alternatively, reserve the word union for the healthy phenomenon of love and speak, in this case, of a passion for confluence or a „fusion“, in which one seeks to be through another, excessively resembling the other and confusing own desires with the desires of others.

Sexual laziness also postpones pleasure in its excessive complacency.

E9 Social

In this case, Ichazo's term was „participation“ or „belonging“, which seems to me appropriate in reference to these very outgoing people who seek to serve the groups of which they are a part (in a similar way to how the sexual serve the couple ). We could say that there is a confluence with the needs of the group, and an implicit desire to be accepted as part of that group in compensation for not having felt sufficiently part of their own family.

Social laziness does not seem so lazy, because it is disguised behind hyperactivity.

What is the mistaken assumption that locks these resigned people in their passion? The word acidia derives from the Greek achedia, which translates as non-care, and indeed, the slothful are people who do not take care of themselves, and therefore put all their care into others. Naturally, this implies a conviction that they are worthless or do not matter; and this is explainable in people who were emotionally abandoned, despite sometimes belonging to large families. The daughter of a mother who can barely care for her many children, for example, may feel that demanding more attention or trying to stand out would get her nowhere, and may then implicitly decide that the best way to become loved is to help her mother in her overload.

Nines might appreciate if we didn't talk about them, as they are used to being forgotten. His problem is excessive altruism, consistent with an ideal of altruism transmitted by the Christian Church that contradicts the Christian precept of loving one's neighbor as oneself. The culture conveys an admonition to be good in an overly generous way that does not include healthy self-love, which is perceived as selfish. But it is a wrong ideal that leads to a pathology, because without people's love for themselves, the necessary basis for love of neighbor disappears.

When we love ourselves we feel good, and this well-being makes us become like one of those fountains where water flows from one container to another. Thus, love for oneself naturally turns into love for others; and even this flows beyond the human—such as ideals, the divine, or life itself.

 Without love for oneself, none of this can happen, and this love that E9s lack towards themselves is like the love towards the inner child that we all carry in us, and also a love for one's own body. We all lack that which is not endorsed by our criminalizing culture of pleasure and the body, with its natural impulses, but more than anyone else, the E9s lack, who have over- adapted to the culture in an excess of conformity.

It is as if the E9s have discovered that no one will take care of them and they have no choice but to collaborate with their mother, prematurely becoming adults. Like a child who feels that it is no use crying or complaining, or trying to be special, and that the best thing he can do is help his mother deal with her care burden, they try to be good, adapting excessively to the precepts of culture.

Although the greatest sin of the E9 is that of not loving themselves enough, it is obvious that this is not considered a sin by the culture, and even less so by the religious culture — although the sin of acidia has constituted for the parents of the desert a negligence with respect to oneself.

It is as if all the E9s feel that they are not important, and that the important thing is to take care of other people's needs, in such a way that even introspection is somewhat forbidden for them (as if it is not a good thing to take care of oneself), and it seems that this is the main crazy idea of this character. The admonition to be good and kind means for them a compulsive self-sacrifice that could seem like love but is not really love, as when in the film „Fiddler on the Roof“ (Norman Jewison, 1971), Tevye, the protagonist, asks his woman: „You iron my shirts, you wash my clothes, you make my bed, but do you love me?“