This text presents a clinical moment that raises a paradoxical question: why did the analyst almost give in to a patient’s request outside the setting, with the corollary feeling of guilt for not having done so? The so-called analytic superego is brought into play here, and the list of its “phantom visitors” begins with a lineage going back to Freud himself, whose totemic heritage is subject to ever-changing versions. This instance in which the analyst almost acted out gives rise to a dream representing the importance of being able to rely on a reputedly solid institutional training, the different identifications of which accompany us during our solitary activity. The internal processuality of the analyst can be looked at from the angle of his personal equation, as Jérôme Glas shows in his article (Glas, 2023), but also trans-personally: when the legs fail, a prosthetic and unconscious group function takes on the task of keeping the analysis going.