It is difficult to describe what psychoanalysis is. Every time I try to do this, there are always those who object: psychotherapy, meditation, etc. are no less effective. And they are right-they are indeed effective, it's pointless to argue.

But it is important for me to separate psychoanalysis from psychotherapy, to show its significance and value, and not to make up a tired and therefore vulgar "unique selling proposition" of psychoanalysis. To me, this sounds like the "usefulness" of Bach's music or the "effectiveness" of Zhuangzi's philosophy.

It is impossible to use psychoanalysis for quick, instant help. A similar example: if it is important for someone to quickly learn self-defense, then it is pointless for them to practice Tai Chi Chuan - it is better to go to boxing or krav maga.

My experience as both an analyst and a psychoanalyst, the experience of my analysts, the experience of my mentors and their analysts, confirms over and over again that psychoanalysis does not produce quick results. In principle. A bad support for psychoanalysis would be a lie: that analysis will quickly solve your problems. No, psychoanalysis will not solve problems quickly.

But it will solve them fundamentally, penetrating the most important, hidden node from which all problems emanate. Problems of the body, problems of consciousness, problems of fate, in the end.

If this fundamental knot is not untied, then, of course, it is possible to achieve relief or disappearance of symptoms. Up to a certain point. Having disappeared in one place, it will appear in a completely different one, and most often unexpectedly. I am reminded of the Gospel parable of the demon being cast out of the house, who later returns with all his brothers.

And this knot... is it so deep or far away... Beyond personal life. Beyond social life. When I start talking about it, I feel helpless - I don't have enough words. Buddhists are lucky: in Sanskrit there is a word called antarabhava, in Tibetan - bardo - an intermediate state between different lives and different worlds. The difficulty is that the knot is located not just in an intermediate state, but in an individual intermediate state, a personal abyss. And there are no maps or landmarks there. You cannot approach it with common measures and familiar maps. Therefore, there is free floating in free associations, silence of the analyst, and a strong intention of the analyzee (the one undergoing analysis). And here I recall an old Chan Buddhist aphorism: on the great Path there are no beaten paths, one is alone and in danger.

Of course, for those who are concerned only with survival, psychoanalysis is useless. But for those who have managed to rise above the heavy, dense veil of everyday worries and routine, for those who have solved the problem of survival and are already asking: what's next? Psychoanalysis is for such people.