Key Point

• Reading the body remains a pseudoscience; yet, examining the mystery of body types through systems like Ayurveda or somatotyping can help practitioners approach each client in ways distinct to their constitution.

After 50 years in hands-on work, the intriguing interface between our personality and our body remains mysterious to me . . . and I’m not the only one. Many very smart people have tackled the body-mind connection, from Plato to Descartes to the brain-computer interface research happening today at Neuralink,¹ but the underlying principles and processes remain wonderfully elusive and enticing.

Since prehistoric times, the curious have sought to map out the correlation between body and behavior, resulting in various typologies—from Hippocrates’s four humors on. The doshas of Ayurveda are one of these deeply rooted systems that link physical and spiritual manifestation.

We all intuit a correlation between our body makeup and how we “are”—the archetypal images of the fat, jolly person; the intense military roughrider; the thin, persnickety librarian—but it has proven difficult getting reliable biological markers for these observable psychosomatic tendencies. To be sure, modern scientists have also studied this “morphology-expression” correlation, supported by various theories on the linkage mechanism. Here, we compare one of those attempts (William Herbert Sheldon’s somatotyping) with the ancient Ayurvedic doshas.²

Some folks, like those who read magazines like Inc. and Wired, might think this is all hogwash: your body is one thing, formed by genes and diet; your personality is quite another, formed by your experience, especially early on with your caregivers. But you, dear practitioner, are steeped every day in the correspondences between our clients’ body constitutions and their responses to life in general. Nevertheless, the question: How does it work?

Recognizing Connections

Reading the body remains a pseudoscience—more indicative than proven.³ Even so, examining the depths of the mystery can really be helpful in approaching each client in the manner that will work for them. It’s also fun.

These days, hands-on therapists have a greater understanding of trauma and its effect on perception and the autonomic nervous system.⁴ The vagus nerve is ascendant, and even mainstream researchers acknowledge body-mind interaction.⁵ We see that some people fold and stay folded around their physical or psychological hurts until it is written into their fascia. Others arch into a leaping posture when their underlying physiology is saying “Flee!” Likewise, fascial bowstrings hold them there (Image 1).

At the same time, different shapes and constitutions respond differently to similar traumas, and they go through their healing process differently. Could it be that we “come in with” certain innate (as opposed to imposed or learned) tendencies? By saying “come in with,” do we mean it comes spiritually, as if from an oversoul or another previous life, or is it genetic, meaning your responses are built into your DNA and thus totally fixed? 

There is no objective answer so far. If spirit expresses itself in the forming of our shape, then how this works depends on your beliefs about spirit in action. As far as DNA goes, James Watson and Francis Crick discovered its structure last century, and we have assigned way too much power to genes ever since. Science has been walking back the supreme power of genes this century, as we come to understand that genes switch on and off through environmental stimuli—epigenetics. The genetic structure is responsive and not immutably carved in stone.

A third body-mind connection possibility lies between the writing of your genetics and your first breath of life experience, and that is your nine months in the womb. What elements of your response systems are set during embryological development? (Maybe you agree or not. I am not even sure that I do, but let us consider it anyway.) Genes are set at fertilization, and only limited “experience” makes it into womb life. Nevertheless, many internal psychophysiological markers that affect us through life are laid down in this liminal stage.⁶

With all that acknowledged, are there useful ways of thinking about what is neither genetically determined nor trauma-based? Yes is the answer, and here we trace a connection between a Western research project—somatotyping of ecto-, meso-, and endomorphs—and the ancient art of Ayurveda. According to this idea, the tendencies to go in one of these directions or another are put in place during the nine months between your genes getting wired and your life experience beginning. We will return to the embryology of it all in a bit, but let’s first lay out the types.

Ayurveda teaches about the three doshas (vata, pitta, and kapha), which permeate and predict not only our shape but our physiology and personality. You don’t have to believe in Ayurveda or Sheldon’s somatotyping to get value from having a look (Image 2).

The dosha idea sees a vata type as governed by the elements of air and ether—light, subtle, dry, and adaptable. The body type associated with vata is thin and tends to be nervous, with long bones, wiry muscles, and fairly fixed ideas. We will associate it with the nervous system and the flitting nature of neurotransmitters (and thought), like a hummingbird. Think mice, giraffes, gibbons, and greyhounds.

The pitta type is fiery and associated with active chemistry in your body—the bile and the juicy enzymes that work hard to make your food acceptable to your cells. The body type that goes with pitta is athletic, muscular, and competent, sometimes to the point of aggression. Think cats, dogs, and bears.

The kapha type is the watery, earthy one, and associated with mucous and phlegm. Centered in gut feeling, the kapha personality type is softer, slower, more tender, and nourishing but fierce in the middle. Think koalas, camels, horses, and hippos.

If you will, vata is associated with thinking, pitta with doing, and kapha with feeling. I will let the other writers in this issue go into more depth about Ayurveda—I am no expert. Instead, we are going to a Western typology, somatotyping, that has interesting correlations with the types identified in the doshas.

Finding a Place, Kind Of

Before we get there, a word of caution: When you divide the world into types, no one fits exactly. Astrology divides the world into 12 sun signs. That means there are approximately 700 million Capricorns in the world, meaning there are a lot of different ways of being goaty—or leonine or crab-like. The Enneagram has nine points, acupuncture five elements, and so on.

In the system we are about to explore (and with the doshas), there are only three types (so around 3 billion people in each category). Before we start, we need to understand: Every body contains all three doshas and all three somatotypes. It’s a question of how they are mixed, and there is endless variation within each type. Your typical Santa Claus is an endomorph-kapha type, but so is Luca Brasi, the galoot hit-man in The Godfather. The Wicked Witch of the West is definitely an ectomorph-vata type, flying around on a broom, but so are most depictions of aliens—thin, child-like creatures. In other words, lots of variety.

With variability in mind, we come to the somatotyping world of Sheldon. Ectomorphs, mesomorphs, and endomorphs (Image 2) are definitely worth knowing in a practical sense, because one does not work with these three types in the same way, nor can you expect the same results in their unfolding healing. Jump to the end of this article on page 56 for the practical application, or enjoy the journey.

Sheldon came at this body-behavior conversation as a scientist. Starting at Brown University, Sheldon settled at Harvard, where he was able to photograph thousands of Ivy League students for his study. (The first controversy that dogged Sheldon: the nude pictures were used without the model’s consent.)

Sheldon presumed—“common knowledge” in his day—that these differences were genetically set. (Second controversy: After World War II, the academic trend was to minimize genetic differences and attribute all our differences to environment alone. “We are all the same, so if we gave equal opportunity to all, we’ll all thrive equally!” was the spirit of the time. Sheldon’s determinism did not fit into the liberal notions of the time or the behavioralist tenets of B. F. Skinner, which dominated psychology completely then, so Sheldon went on the back burner.)⁷

If these types are set after fertilization in utero, perhaps by ion channel signaling or some as yet unknown inside or outside influence, could different phenotypes (individuals) arise from a single genotype (set of instructions)?⁸ In other words, what exactly is set during our first nine months of development?

Let us look at the early embryo: Within a couple of weeks, the ovum has multiplied into a three-layer disc.⁹ The three layers are the ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm (outer skin, middle skin, and inner skin). The outer ectoderm will form the skin, nervous system, erogenous zones, and parts of everything else. The middle mesoderm forms the muscle tissue and all the connective tissues everywhere, including blood. The inner endoderm will form the digestive system and organs, the endocrine glands, and all the linings of your sacs and vessels throughout your body.

Sheldon’s theory was that one of these germ layers comes to govern the developmental process. If the ectoderm comes to dominate, the resulting person will be “cerebrotonic” or ectomorphic, and that carries with it certain physiological and psychological characteristics—generally thin and long, weaker of muscle, with a tendency to anxiety and introversion. Hmm, sounds like vata.

If the mesoderm becomes the governor of the three layers, the musculoskeletal system and blood predominate. These folks tend to be harder of body, more athletic, with even weight distribution and thicker skin. Mesomorphs are seen as more extroverted, competitive, and tough. Maybe a bit like pitta?

If the endoderm becomes the controller of the others, you get an endomorph. Endomorphs are built around their gut and fluid feelings. Endomorphs are said to be friendly connectors, more intuitive, laid-back to the point of laziness, soft, and accommodating. Sounds like kapha.

There seems to be no way of knowing whether Sheldon was familiar with Ayurveda, but likely not, as an East Coast academic in the 1940s and ’50s.¹⁰ In any case, he was looking for correlates that could put this idea on the rock of science, grounding our common intuition in measurement. (Sheldon also got caught up in the post-war eugenics movement—and that third controversy was game, set, and match for his ideas.) Few people have heard of Sheldon these days, but his concepts fit very well with an Ayurvedic analysis, so I hope his ideas will re-emerge in a renewed form.¹¹

Connecting the Connection

There is another singular aspect of the close correspondence between these two systems we can highlight. Ayurveda posits the three types as polarities, and each of us lives somewhere within the triangle formed by vata, pitta, and kapha. So does Sheldon—we can see how he plotted the mixing of the three elements in different individuals in Image 3, giving each model a three-digit score on the somatotyping scale.

Additionally, Sheldon identified intermediate types. As well as the more “pure” types, he identified some as meso-endo, ecto-meso, or ecto-endo, indicating that their composition had elements of both types strongly expressed. If all was balanced (444 in Sheldon’s system), that put you right in the middle of the triangle for a seventh type.

Ayurveda similarly identifies transitional types (e.g., vata-kapha) that would cause the practitioner to think through how these elements might be constellated in the individual in front of them. Assigning letters to the three Ayurvedic types, this results in a very similar seven categories: the corners of the triangle: p(itta), v(ata), and k(apha); plus the sides of the triangle: PV, PK, and VK; and if all three doshas are equally expressed: PVK.

It is this remarkably similar array that caused me to go from Sheldon (Ida Rolf introduced me to his work in the ’70s) to appreciating the Ayurvedic system, which is coming on strong in our Western-alternative world these days in a way it didn’t in earlier decades. 

Assessing Our Clients Through These Scopes

Whether somatotyping or using Ayurveda, with only three types, the amount of variability within each type is vast that the categorization is helpful but not complete on its own. It is an aspect I assess informally every time I sit down with a new client. Why? Because ectomorphs do not respond to bodywork the same as mesomorphs or endomorphs. Of course, other elements apply—genetic or traumatic, as we said, and given that no one is a pure “type”—but here in a nutshell is what I have reaped about this dynamic.

If your client tends toward mesomorphy, the musculoskeletal type, you are in luck. Mesomorphs respond most easily and most straightforwardly to bodywork of all kinds, especially direct stretching of the short tissue. Because the movement system is their governing system, changes induced in the mesomorphic system (i.e., muscle relaxation, stimulation, circulation increase, and fascial release) will ramify out to their organs and nervous system, usually for the better. Go for it with these folks, and they will come with you.

If your client predominates in endomorphy, know that this is one of life’s “feelers.” You will need to work more slowly and with exquisite sensitivity. Although outwardly friendly, the larger fat layer is often protecting a very retiring (and sharpish) inner self, so safety is a vital element for successful work with endomorphs. While mesomorphs are more linear, endomorphs will take a more meandering path with you, maybe coming forward a step only to retreat two before coming forward more confidently again. Patience and attentive care will get you farther with these folks than the go-for-it adventuring one can do with a mesomorph.

Ectomorphs are the wild cards. Ectomorphs do not tend to go to massage—their skin is sensitive so massage can be received as irritating or invasive. If you look, you probably have fewer ectomorphs in your practice than either of the other two. Working with a strongly ectomorphic person can be an exercise in frustration because change is so difficult with them. Their skin—literally a big part of them—is subject to more pain, their muscles are often like piano wire, and you can work away for a number of sessions with nothing appearing to happen.

Persevere! As long as they are still with you in the work, keep working. When they are ready—but not until—ectomorphs will change quite suddenly through their whole body. Being cerebrotonic, their body needs to get the “idea,” and once they do, they change overall. If your skills include cranial work or unwinding, indirect methods like this will often be well-accepted by ectomorphs.

Dive In

With all typologies, my recommendation is to learn them thoroughly, and then let them be absorbed into your intuition. There are so many typologies around, from Myers-Briggs to Bioenergetics, you can get snarled up trying to figure out all the details. Typologies give you perspective, but they should not be used to substitute for good eyes, good hands, or good sensitivity. 

Notes

1. Antonio Damasio, Self Comes to Mind (New York: Vintage, 2012).

2. W. H. Sheldon, The Varieties of Human Physique (New York: Harper & Rowe, 1940); W. H. Sheldon, Atlas of Men (New York: Harper & Rowe, 1954).

3. Thomas Myers, BodyReading (self-published, 2016), www.AnatomyTrains.com.

4. Stanley Keleman, Emotional Anatomy (Berkeley: Center Press, 1985); Ashley Montagu, Touching (Harper & Row, 1971); Stephen Porges, The Polyvagal Theory (New York: WW Norton, 2011); Peter Levine, Waking the Tiger (Berkeley: North Atlantic Books, 1997); Gabor Maté, When the Body Says No (Vintage, 2004).

5. Vicki Brower, “Mind-Body Research Moves Towards the Mainstream,” EMBO Reports 7, no. 4 (April 2006): 358–61, www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.1038/sj.embor.7400671.

6. We are not denying the importance of either genes or those first moments and days after you were born. The manner of one’s arrival can be very determinant of one’s emotional state. Birth trauma, attachment disorder, bonding interruptions are all very real. Modern obstetrics and our increasing distance from nature have made coming into this world more fraught and technological than ever. Those very real and time-honored natural processes that have started us on our psychological way for 6 million years are foundational. We have interrupted them without realizing how important they are—and we live with the alienating consequence of divorcing the birthing process from the healthy psychology of the child and their mother.

7. B. F. Skinner, Science and Human Behavior (Free Press, 1965).

8. The fascinating world of Michael Levin: www.drmichaellevin.org.

9. Richard Grossinger, Embryogenesis (Berkeley: North Atlantic Books, 2000); Keith L. Moore, T. V. N. Persaud, and Mark G. Torchia, The Developing Human, 6th ed. (London: Saunders, 1999); Thomas Myers, Anatomy Trains, 4th ed. (Edinburgh: Elsevier, 2020), 294–302.

10. In my own case, many have pointed out the similarity of my Anatomy Trains myofascial meridians with the acupuncture meridians. I have little to no knowledge of acupuncture or the meridians; my meridians were derived from Western anatomy only. We are all climbing the same mountain of the body trying to understand it, so it is not a surprise when we meet at the top. I like to think that Sheldon and Ayurveda are the parallel—they saw the same deep pattern without knowing about each other.

11. Sheldon and Ayurveda are not the only systems with three types, of course. For further discussion of the three whole-body systems—nervous, musculoskeletal, and circulatory—and their psychophysiology, please see pages 289–302 of Anatomy Trains, 4th ed. (Elsevier 2020).