Prem Turiya, J. Krishnamurti is right. Analysis cannot lead to understanding or insight.
First, analysis is something like…you break a mirror into a thousand pieces, but each small piece of mirror reflects you exactly – as the whole mirror used to reflect you. Instead of one reflection, now you have one thousand reflections.
So I would like to say to you that J. Krishnamurti is not only right…he is only half right. Analysis cannot lead to understanding or insight; on the contrary, analysis will lead you to thousands of reflections of the same problem. In the place where there was one problem, now there are a thousand problems. You have broken the glass. You will be more puzzled than you have been ever before.
And secondly, the analysis is being done by somebody else. And analysis is not a science; it is just a hunch. The same problem…you go and be analyzed by Sigmund Freud and the conclusion of his analysis is not going to be the same as it would have been if you had gone to Carl Gustav Jung or to Alfred Adler or to Assagioli. And now there are thousands of schools, each pretending that they have found the fundamental truth. They have all found different pieces of the mirror.
Analysis simply breaks the mirror into parts. Analysis is perfect as far as objects are concerned. Dissection, analysis – that’s the only way to find out the truth about the objects that surround you. But you are not an object.
And I have not used the metaphor of the mirror without any reason. Your consciousness is a mirror. It reflects the whole world, just as your eyes are mirrors and they reflect the world. The eyes carry the impressions inside, and your consciousness reflects whatever the eyes bring to it. Your consciousness is your deeper eyesight. No eye specialist will suggest that to understand the eyes one has to dissect them into pieces. That will be destroying them.
In Jaipur, in India, there is a palace made by the same man who created the city of Jaipur, Maharaja Jai Singh. Perhaps Jaipur is the only city in India which is planned. And Jai Singh’s whole idea was to create a city which is far more beautiful than Paris. He was almost succeeding, but he died in the middle of the process – only half the city was made.
But still, it shows signs that if he had lived he would have defeated Paris, certainly. It has a beauty of its own kind: very broad roads, which no old city can have, neither Paris, nor London, nor New York – very straight roads that you can see…they go for miles; and on both sides of the road all the houses are made of the same red stone – no two houses are different. It gives a very different feeling, as if the whole city is one house.