The method of the exercise is very simple. I will talk to myself (assume the role of "client- self") and I will listen to myself (assume the role of "therapist-self") as I talk to myself. Dr. Henry Reed introduced this method as a way of learning how to listen. The essence of his introduction was that as a transpersonal therapist it is important that the therapist "be there" on all levels for the client. In this listening exercise there are only two elements:

1) The first step required is to open up to become more "intune" with how I will feel towards myself as I am in the role of the speaker. This requires a caring, compassionate approach to myself. I will feel "connected" in some way. I am learning from the unconscious (therapist-self) a deeper meaning for the speaker’s (client-self’s) consciously posed feeling or problem.

2) The second step is to be non-interfering. In the listening mode, non-interference requires simply that the listener simply not ask questions.

The listener reflects back towards the speaker 105% of what the speaker said.

The listener may not shift the focus of the speaker by inquiry.

My First Encounter Using the Technique The steps listed above seemed very easy. I began my first "session" with myself in a quiet room, by myself, after a long work day. The day was very stressful.

I felt bombarded by both phone calls and paperwork. I had not had time for lunch and was now just beginning to "wind down" after having eaten a late dinner.

The "session" began by finding the somewhat comfortable posture of sitting erect in a straight backed chair near my kitchen. Since I found myself physically tired I thought this might be helpful in developing a more prolonged conversation. I then closed my eyes and focused on the purpose at hand. I wanted to learn the technique and wanted to help myself with some sort of problem. I would allow that problem to spontaneously "pop up" as I did not want to have a preconceived idea about how the exercise would go. I wanted to "be there" for myself and help myself.

I then shifted away from the role of "therapist-self" and became the self I had been all day. I sat quietly for a few moments and thought how silly this seemed. I was going to talk to myself. I thought about all those times I had noticed others talking to themselves while they worked and the comments that people make when they either catch themselves or catch someone else talking to themselves. Then I remembered that there was a purpose to the exercise and I decided to begin.

"I’m really exhausted and tired" I said aloud.

I sat and waited. Nothing happened so I decided to shift to another chair. This time I sat in my desk chair that swivels. It was still straight but it would allow me to move back and forth as Henry had in his demonstration of the listening exercise in class. I was reminded of a Fritz Perls’ exercise, but this felt less confrontational.

I started again. I sat, refocused on the purpose, adopted the "client-self" role and repeated what I had said before. "I’m tired. . .no . . I’m exhausted!" This time I didn’t wait. I swiveled in the chair and looked back as if I was talking to another person. . .the person who had just spoken. "You do seem tired, I can hear it in the way you said that." "My mind has been racing all day." The chair swiveled again.

"Racing, huh, sounds like you’ve been trying to beat something in a race." "Yeah race is a good word, I’m racing against time all day and I don’t seem to get anything accomplished."

"You feel like you’re not accomplishing anything. . . not producing any results."

"I am productive. I get the job done. Its just that today there was just so much of it. . .and it just kept coming!" "So you were frustrated because you were doing the job but there was just . .

more work than you could do."

"Yeah in a way that’s it. But there’s more." I started to slow down a bit as I felt dissatisfied with what I was telling myself. "I lost myself in my work today"

"Uh Huh" This was new I thought. Sure I had thought about the problems of the work place and how I sometimes got so involved in trying to make the work flow that I lost myself in it.

"Yeah, but there is a reason for it." The chair had stopped swiveling. The voice seemed to come from behind my head.

Suddenly another (third) voice had entered the conversation. I sat still for a second and thought about this development. Who was this? Was it the voice of the client-self or the voice of the therapist-self? What did it represent? Was this the voice of reason?

I realized that this was not part of the exercise. It had gone well up till this point but now there was something new. Here was another voice and perspective. Great! Maybe something had gone wrong. Maybe I had made a mistake.

I abandoned the exercise. I had pretty much removed myself from it anyway. I had become analytical about the method instead of working with the content.

Identifying the Third Voice

I spent the next several days back at work again and did not return to the exercise. When I did return I began by thinking about what had happened. This voice had interfered. It had tried to force its way into the conversation uninvited. I did not know then if it would reoccur if I tried the exercise again, but in the back of my mind I had a sneaky suspicion that it would.

Sure enough, every time I tried the exercise over the next two days, this voice interjected. This always occurred at a point of shifting in the client-self’s perspective. Every time the client-self was going to bring up a different slant on the topic this third voice spoke up to judge how the conversation was going.

Always it was produced a justification for the position of the client-self, as if to say "It’s OK to be the way you are, there is no reason to change." This voice became known to me as "The Judge." It always appeared to pass a lenient sentence on the client-self. This sentence seemed to be in contrast to the way the therapist-self felt the conversation should or at least could have gone. I felt as if I had two points of view to the same problem, both seemingly valid, yet in opposition.

The Purpose of The Judge

I continued to do my homework. One night while reading I discovered the following in a book I was reviewing. I found a description of the danger of the controlling self in the practice of active imagination. Active imagination, classically done, is a similar exercise. Active imagination is practiced while alone. A possibility exists that the person doing the exercise will withdraw from completely engaging in the practice and the practice becomes passive. The active engagement stops, and benefit from the dialogue becomes minimal.

This position of the judge seemed to be that also. It was a voice of pacification. I could carry on the conversation involving all three voices, but the judge always provided a justification for the client-self’s position. The judge rationalized for the ego of the client-self a reason not to grow and more importantly — a reason not to change. The judge, it turns out, is not to be trusted.

The Judge’s Departure

Interestingly, the next time I returned to practice, I encountered the judge in a new light. I had realized who the judge was. Both the client-self and the therapist-self recognized that the judge was a voice from the past. From then on the voice didn’t interrupt as much. The comments became more anecdotal and did not try to stop the conversation. I continued the listening practice. The judge gradually disappeared.

The Importance of Honest Dialogue

This report is not a critical evaluation of the listening technique. It is written to examine a control area which might develop during its practice and, in my experience, limit the benefit of the technique.

Some self evaluation is in order however as this sheds light on this pitfall.

The technique proved to me that listening as a skill is not easy. The judge could easily show up in therapy with others. I practice developing empathy for others as a way of recognizing where I must be tolerant. The adage of "walk a mile in the other person’s moccasins" comes to mind. That, after all, is what the judge urged me to do. The transpersonal approach may provide a solution to that dilemma. Non-judgment as provided by the therapist-self is fine, providing excuses as provided by the judge, is not.

I am able to use a meditative approach prior to my self-listening practice that allows "more heart" connection to take place. The intent is to be more compassionate with myself. This is perhaps why the judge arrived.

In evaluating my experience I must credit the observations of Robert Johnson in his work with active imagination as quoted on page 52 of John Rowan’s The Transpersonal: Psychotherapy and Counselling. I must, for my own evaluation of my "listening practice," draw parallels to his observations of active imagination. The therapist-self does help the client-self find broader or deeper meaning to a problem providing that both are willing to be honest and truthful.

I must be willing to engage in real dialogue. If I see something within myself as a weakness I must be willing to meet that weakness head on. I must not allow the rationalizations of another judge to interfere. As I seek to continue to create a new reality through this practice I must recognize that a judge can offer only a historic perspective.

True growth occurs only if I accept the notion that the therapist-self in the reflective posture is the true connection with a higher self. As Hegel would have observed, if my evolution is likened to the metaphor of a house, and the furniture represents my issues, then the judge wants me to rearrange the furniture. It is the therapist-self that wants me to move out of my house altogether, and up a floor in the building.