Talk:Enneagram (geometry)

message: I've attempted to remove redundancy (eg stuff which is on Gurdieff page) and to tighten up the explanation. I've begun to put stuff in the footnotes using the ref tag. Mccready 08:10, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  wikify 

message: Could editors of this article please refrain from using it to promote particular Enneagram teachers, organisations, products etc.  This is very inappropriate!
Hello,
I must say I am shocked that the article does not mention Ichazo.  Although there are issues with Ichazo and the Arica school, if you read the Gurdjieff material, especially the writings of Maurice Nicoll, there is no description of the enneagram in the matter it is typically presented in the 'modern' enneagram books.  The modern enneagram books are a derrivative of the Ichazon ego descriptions with some additional material.  I would say the Wikipedia article is a promotion and not accurate.  (btw I am not a 'follower' of Ichazo)
:Sounds like you know something of the matter, why don't you update the article? Also, what are you saying this article is promoting? --Chinawhitecotton 02:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate Promotion 

message: I found the following source for the "companies which use the Enneagram" comment, any thoughts on whether it's acceptable?  (scroll down to question #6) Perel 02:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fact tags 

message: This article appears to be written from the point of view that the enneagram concepts are valid and widely accepted; I believe that it needs substantial editing to conform with Wikipedia's NPOV policy. -- The Anome 13:30, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what exactly you are referring to - The concepts of the Eanneagram of Personality, or the concepts of Gurdjieff's Enneagram. If you found some critics on Gurdjieff's enneagram, feel free to add them, or even show me and then when I have time I will add them. If there isn't any intellectual criticism, then I'll move that NPOV tag down to the Enneagram of personality (since I am not familiar with the Enneagram of Personality I can't speak on behalf of the subject.)Aeuio 21:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Hi, I was just finding out about circles, and I find the page for Enneagram in the geometric sense is in the same article as this stuff about Personality and Psycology. I think a seperate article is needed, at least until all this controversy about neutrality is sorted out. Keshidragon 19:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the shapes bit in the middle doesn't relate to the rest of the article.  Is there another article about geometric 9 sided things or something that it could go in?Merkinsmum 01:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary, the geometry of the enneagram completely relates and has everything to do with Gurdjieff's teachings (Although this connection is poorly described in this article and I'll expand it later). But, you do have a good point, and if you wish to create a separate article solely on the geometry of the enneagram, then something similar to the what I did "See also: Enneagram of Process" could be made. Aeuio 04:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could we use a seperate article? 

message: ===1===
"It should be noted that these writers, particulalry Ouspensky, have claimed Gurdjief's works to be completely original but all of Gurdjief's ideas have been shown to a rehash of ideas from other traditions."
:What do you mean completely original? He never claimed to have invented it. What part of "going through Asia and other continents for 30 years and gathering knowledge" don't you understand? Where he got most of his ideas is mentioned in his books. (And a "genius" thing to say after the made up "evidence" you provided):
===2===
"The "law of three, which he calls the sacred Law of Triamazikamno, is the same as the Stoic Law of Causation as presented by the Stoic, Posidonius."
:Not only is it not the same, but Gurdjieff even attributed this law to ancient religions where it was expressed in the Holy Prayer - and therefore he never claimed it as original.(Out of Gurdjieff's enormous teaching, this is your best evidence point?)
===3===
"The concept that to obtain freedom by acknowledging and understanding the cosmic laws of the "Ray of Creation" (the law of seven) and the Law of Causation (the law of three, Triamazikamno)."
:This is by far the most ridiculous thing you said. Where in the world did you find this nonsense? Not only is it not mentioned or claimed in ANY Gurdjieff related book, but you won't even find this claim on the wikipedia's Fourth Way, Laws, Ray of Creation, articles. PS. Why would you say that the Ray of Creation is the law of seven?
Its good to know that your source for Gurdjieff's teachings is one or another Enneagram of Personality book. (I wont even bother with your last sentence) Aeuio 01:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Socratesreplies edits

message: "The concept that to obtain freedom by acknowledging and understanding the cosmic laws of the "Ray of Creation" (the law of seven) and the Law of Causation (the law of three, Triamazikamno)."
:This is by far the most ridiculous thing you said. Where in the world did you find this nonsense? Not only is it not mentioned or claimed in ANY Gurdjieff related book, but you won't even find this claim on the wikipedia's Fourth Way, Laws, Ray of Creation, articles. PS. Why would you say that the Ray of Creation is the law of seven?
Its good to know that your source for Gurdjieff's teachings is one or another Enneagram of Personality book. (I wont even bother with your last sentence) Aeuio 01:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 3

message: Nonagram is just a synonym for enneagram, and so nonagram should redirect to this page just like nonagon redirects to enneagon. /129.142.71.166 12:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not really correct.  A nonagram is composed of three triangles whilst the traditional enneagram figure is composed of a triangle and a hexagon.  So although they are both 'enneagrams' in as much as they both have nine points they are by no means synonomous - especially in terms of the enneagram article. Ontologicos 13:22, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nonagram merge

message: Can I suggest that anyone who knows of some appropriate external links to articles etc. on the use of the Enneagram figure within the Fourth Way and other related traditions add them to this article.  The current links are mostly more appropriate for the Enneagram of Personality article. Ontologicos 10:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External Links

message: Let's take a look at the sequence of fractions with sevenths mentioned in the article. I've pasted the last two below. 
6/7=.857142...
7/7=.999999...
I admit that I have not double-checked this with a calculator, but I have always been of the impression that 7 divided by 7 (write it as 7/7 if you please) is 1, not .99999999 . . . 
If one puts  7/7 = 1, one misses out on the similarity with 7 * 142857 which will give you a whole string of nines . . .  but the math will be correct.
Mnentro 00:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, not only does it show you "the 7 * 142857 which will give you a whole string of nines" pattern, but it's also mathematically correct. Aeuio 00:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's really interesting. I would propose that the link be put on .0.999... in the text to preclude comments like the one I made before about this, and this comment itself,and the one I might make about it tomorrow . . .  Mnentro 13:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Nonsense already has its own entry. Mnentro 17:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know where you're getting at with "nonsense", but anyhow I made the numbers consistent while keeping the link to the .999 there - I think it looks better. Aeuio 22:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fuzzy Math? 

message: Some recent edits (late October 2007), although adding some useful information on the historical aspects of the Enneagram figure, have created some disjointed flow in the article.  This is obvious in the sections on the Fourth Way and Gurdjieff.  When editing the article please try to avoid this kind of disjointed flow.  Thanks.  Ontologicos 13:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Disjointed flow can't really be avoided when the article is really two separate articles, one on geometry and one on the fourth way "enneagram" cosmic glyph. Jeremytrewindixon 01:03, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Edits 

message: I don't agree with the recent anonymous edit that removed the references to Shah and Sufism as "unverifiable".  This seems to be a blatant POV edit.  Regardless of the person's POV regarding Shah's writings the reference to Shah and Sufism is as verifiable as just about anything else on Wikipedia.  Verifiablility is not the same as truth (as Wikipedia stresses).  An article on the enneagram requires some reference to its alleged Sufi connection. Ontologicos!  —Preceding comment was added at 01:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ???!!!  No one has claimed that "Shah is a reputable Sufi teacher".  All that has been said is that he is a "populariser of Sufism" (true) and that he has made a claim (true) for the enneagram within Sufism so, frankly, you seem to be barking up the wrong tree on this matter.  Nor has anyone asserted that Shah's claim itself is true - only that the claim is *verifiable*.  A person doesn't need to be a "Sufi teacher" to make such a claim - as preferable as this might be.  All sorts of people (scholars, for instance) are entitled - and do - make claims about ideas even when they are not members of groups that propose such ideas.  Such claims may or may not be true but they are still 'verifiable' as claims.  You really don't seem to understand what verifiablity means - and nothing in the article about Shah is against Wikipedia guidelines (quite the opposite).  Ontologicos 11:03, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is not about Sufism, it is about the enneagram.  The popularization of Sufism has nothing to do with the enneagram, unless it can be proved that Sufis use the enneagram. Ernobe 14:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

text:  Yeah, Ernobe, the aricle is about the enneagram. And people interested in the history of the enneagram will want to know of the existence of the widespread claim that it is of Sufi origin. Idries Shah has written many books on Sufism, and allowed the claim to be made on his behalf that he was a Naqshbandi sheikh (and has acted consistently with that claim), and was accepted as a genuine teacher by Gurdjieff's disciple and enneagram enthusiast J.G.Bennett (and by many others), and has also written at least one book on Renaisance magic. (I add the extra information, form personal experience, that his books are used as teaching material by at least one sheikh of the Mevlevi order.) Shah's books can be found in any general english-language bookshop. So the fact of his claim is in itself notable, even if bulldust.....especially since he is far from alone in making the claim.  The truth or otherwise of the claim is far as I know not verified. Or disproven. Neither is the significance of the enneagram itself. Jeremytrewindixon 00:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Idries Shah & Sufism 

message: I encountered this version of the enneagram in witchcraft circles before Shah published his remarks about the "disguised" enneagram and found it of great interest. It resembles the "sigil of saturn" which can be found in the grimoires and has other points of interest relating it to cetain Chinese symbols..... Note that the numbers in sequence make an infinity symbol and of course the inner lines follows the same sequence as the more familiar enneagram. Jeremytrewindixon 04:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unverifiable orignal research POV "Eight-pointed enneagram" of background interest

message: This seems relevant :
:23:6 · The enneagram, "nine-graph", a symbol denoting the essence of being in Cabbalistic mysticism. Through its womb-like form and the number nine it is associated with the conception and foetal development of new human beings.
:With the circle closed this ideogram has been used as a symbol for the esoteric philosophy of Gurdieff. The sign is called Nokoonja by the Nakhsbandi Sufis from long ago.
:Enneagram is also the name of the different structure 2720, used in Christian symbolism. Se that sign in Group 27 for more data.
I am looking for more info, but in the meantime I thought I'd post it here. --Chinawhitecotton 05:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it would be nice if there were a reference. Google doesn't come up with any pages that don't seem to come from the symbols site/book, unfortunately, and I couldn't find any info on the enneagram as a "womb-like form"/connection to foetal development. --Chinawhitecotton 04:14, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nokoonja

message: I'll have to check but I believe it was Robert de Ropp in The Master Game who said there was a complete description of the enneagram in Faust. I have found waht I believe he meant, an apparent nonsense verse in scene 6 "The Witches Kitchen", spoken by the witch who restoresd faust's youth with her potion. I don't read German so here give two modern english translations:
The first from Tony Kline (freely reproducible for non-commercial purposes) http://www.tonykline.co.uk/PITBR/German/FaustIScenesIVtoVI.htm
You shall see, then!                                                                                 
From one make ten! 
Let two go again,
Make three even, 
You’re rich again. 
Take away four!                                                                                     
From five and six,
So says the Witch,
Make seven and eight,
So it’s full weight: 
And nine is one,                                                                                      
And ten is none. 
This is the Witch’s one-times-one! 
And, from http://www.fullbooks.com/Faust-Part-13.html
This must thou ken: 
Of one make ten,
Pass two, and then
Make square the three,
So rich thou'lt be.
Drop out the four! 
From five and six, 
Thus says the witch, 
Make seven and eight. 
So all is straight! 
And nine is one, 
And ten is none, 
This is the witch's one-time-one! 
In my view, this could well be taken to refer to a circle incribed with nine points, each point referring to the stage of a process. I wouldn't call it a "complete" description of course. The rhyme trnaslations of course tend to obscure the sense a bit, if anyone can read the German or has a prose transaltion of the passage that'd be good. 203.214.63.138 07:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Robert S de Ropp, I put in a stray full stop. Jeremytrewindixon 07:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Robert S. de Ropp]] and [[Goethe]]'s [[Faust]]

message: All the occult stuff is now in a separate article. - ∅ (∅), 01:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split! 

message: I restored the link to Fourth Way Enneagram. Most people who come to this site will either be looking for that of the personality enneagram. the matter would have been better handled with a disambiguation page. Jeremy (talk) 05:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: link

message: I'm a little confused here. Last I checked, a nine-sided polygon was a nonagon, not an 'enneagram'. Irbisgreif (talk) 16:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: However, a regular Nonagon is a nine-pointed always-convex polygon, not a self-intersecting star polygon.... AnonMoos (talk) 11:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just never seen ennea in a geometric context, and there seems to have been some confusion when the article was written, where people didn't realize that an N-gon isn't an N-gram. It really throws me off to see non-standard naming. Irbisgreif (talk) 12:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Update: Some of the material is not in nonagram and it may be desirable to merge this. Esowteric+Talk 13:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't this called a nonagon? 

message: Irbisgreif, I notice that you've taken out all the material explaining the application of the enneagram in the Fourth Way, (see Fourth Way Enneagram edit diff). Yes, there were no citations, but I think you are wrong to dismiss beliefs held in a school of mysticism as what you choose to label "pseudoscience". If citations can be found, then this material deserves just as much right to exist here as many other beliefs that others hold, one being the belief that this is pseudoscience. Esowteric+Talk 07:22, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My main complaint was that it was being presented as some kind of fact. If you can find citations, feel free to work the information back in, as appropriate. But I think it's best to keep it presented as "X thinks Y" or "The X group views Y as Z", rather than the tone it previously had. Irbisgreif (talk) 12:10, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  18 August 2009 

message: I have actually seen Enneagram being used, though I don't remember where. But I agree that in this context nonagram is more common. Perhaps the disambig should be kept and the geometrical material moved to nonagram. In fact, that's what I'm going to do now. --Professor Fiendish (talk) 12:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh wait a minute, I forgot that I can't move pages yet. Oh well. I'll have to ask someone else to do it then. --Professor Fiendish (talk) 12:48, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, I failed to strike through my earlier thoughts on the matter. I started off thinking the material in Enneagram was all covered in Nonagon, then only vaguely mentioned that some might not be. I just felt that a disambiguation page was better than a redirect to nonagon which would leave Fourth Way Enneagram and Enneagram of Personality out in the cold, especially when 99% of folk would be looking for those articles when searching for 'enneagram'. The link to nonogon from enneagram is a bit of a red herring, imo (but worth a disambiguation link for the 1%). Many apologies again. Esowteric+Talk 12:53, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Have struck through earlier, superceded thoughts. Esowteric+Talk 13:13, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Damn, just realized I didn't read you quite right. I've reverted to where we were a short while back. I'm ok with a move to Nonagram and disambiguate Enneagram as you suggest. Cheers, Esowteric+Talk 13:19, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Well, I propose moving Enneagram (disambiguation) to Enneagram. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 08:34, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done! Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 08:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continuing discussion on [[User talk:Professor Fiendish]] 

message: When this article says that the word Enneagram combines the numerical prefix "ennea" and the suffix gram, should it not say that "ennea" means " nine"? Vorbee (talk) 18:16, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Numerical prefix "ennea"