In this reply to the commentators, the author defends an ontological conception of intercorporeality, derived from Merleau-Ponty, and of the concept of we-ness as a symbolic co-belonging, distinct but not separate from the individual pole of the subject. Through the clinical example of the jellyfish, he illustrates a fourth mode of listening: the session as a shared dream of patient and analyst. Drawing on Bion, Hegel, and the dialectic of recognition, he argues that aggression is internal to the bond (L/H), not its negation. The cure passes first of all through emotional attunement, through the silent repair of intercorporeality: insight is not to be excluded, but subordinated to the bond that keeps it alive and transformative.