Chapter 1: Playground

I. The Yes Before Anything

A Tuesday morning. The bench is wooden, a little damp from the night's dew, and the sandbox ten yards away is still in shadow where the hedge has not yet let the sun through. Her daughter is five and is not alone. There are two other children at the sandbox — an older boy, perhaps seven, who has the small yellow shovel; a smaller child, perhaps three, who is reaching for it; and her own daughter, who is watching the older boy with the grave attention five-year-olds give to questions of distribution.

She watches the children. The older boy holds the shovel for a moment longer than the smaller one finds tolerable. There is a brief flare. A small voice rises. The older boy concedes — not completely, but enough — and the shovel passes to the smaller child for a duration that is then renegotiated again, because the boy has not relinquished his interest, and because her daughter, watching, has now decided she also wants a turn. Within ninety seconds a new arrangement has formed in the sand. It will dissolve in another ninety seconds. The arrangement is not a solution. The arrangement is the practice. The children do not yet have the word for what they are doing. Their bodies have been doing it since they could reach for objects. They are negotiating their right size in the field of one another. The shovel is the medium. The morning is the medium. The presence of the mothers on the benches is the medium.

She has a coffee in a paper cup that has gone slightly cool. She has earbuds in. She is on the second day of using the app.

The app is simple. It offers one of one hundred and twelve contemplative practices from a tradition she has known about for perhaps three months and does not yet understand. The voice in her ears is a man's voice, even, unhurried, reading a passage from a book she has not yet finished. The passage is about consciousness. Not the everyday use of the word — the are-you-awake-are-you-asleep sense — but a use she has not encountered with this precision before. The passage describes a kind of Consciousness, with a capital C, that is simultaneously beyond every particular layer of the self and also pervading every particular layer of the self. Transcendent. Immanent. At the same time.

She is not a stranger to these words. She has read enough to know them. But the sentence that arrives in her ears as her daughter takes her turn with the small yellow shovel is not a definition. It is a description of something the speaker is claiming is already the case. Not a thing you reach. Not a thing you construct. A thing that is already pervading the listener, pervading the speaker, pervading the hedge, pervading the shovel, pervading the daughter, pervading the older boy, pervading the smaller child, pervading the morning.

Something in her says yes before she knows what she is saying yes to.

The yes is not a thought. It does not arrive with reasons. It is closer to what happens when a body that has been holding one posture for a long time is invited, without warning, into a different one — a subtle release in some part of her chest she had not known was clenched. The yes precedes any doctrine. The yes is older than the words that might try to catch it.

Her daughter looks up from the sandbox and, seeing her mother watching her, smiles. The smile is for nothing. It is just the smile of a five-year-old who has seen her mother's face and is glad. The mother smiles back. The voice in her ears moves on to the next sentence. She does not remember what the next sentence is. She is still with the yes.

I.a. The Right Size

The line that comes to her as she sits with the yes is one she has carried for years and cannot any longer trace to its source. She thinks she encountered it during a year she had spent helping with a book about Cildo Meireles, the Brazilian artist whose work has, since her twenties, been a quiet companion. The line was somewhere in that work. She does not remember whose voice it was — the artist's, a critic's, a curator's, possibly even her own marginal note. The provenance no longer matters. What matters is what his work, sitting in her body for the time it took to make a book around it, eventually rooted in her:

The object of a human life is to find its right size.

She watches the sandbox again. The right size of the small yellow shovel is the size that lets one hand close around it. The right size of her daughter is the size her daughter is. The right size of the older boy in relation to the smaller child is what they are working out, this morning, on the sand. The right size is not a property any one of them owns. It is a relation in continual renegotiation, body against body, intention against intention, with the small yellow shovel between them as the visible medium of the negotiation.

A man whose name she will learn later — the teacher whose voice is in her ears now — will, much later in her practice, use the word negotiation to describe what is and is not modern about the work of being in relationships. Pre-modern cultures, he will say, did not negotiate; they had assigned positions, mostly by gender. The work of negotiating boundaries and needs is what arises when the assigned positions dissolve and a person is left in a field of other persons, each entitled to different needs, each entitled to a different boundary, each entitled to be a different size from any size another person has decided for them. Negotiation, in this register, is the modern practice. It is harder than the old roles. It is also more honest.

She does not know any of this yet, in the playground. She knows only that the children at the sandbox are doing something she will spend the next decade trying to learn how to do herself.

The yes in her chest, she realizes years later, was a yes to that as much as to anything else. A yes to the proposition that the right size of a life is what bodies work out together in the field, and that the field is, on her tradition's claim, already the kind of consciousness the voice in her ears was describing.

II. Why This Book Does Not Begin With a Question

For years she had thought the thing driving her was a question. She had a specific version of it — the one she had rehearsed at ten at night, sitting against a wall when the child was asleep and the dishes were done and the apartment had gone very quiet. Why does any of this matter? She had assumed for a long time that this was the question at the bottom of whatever was pulling her toward whatever it was pulling her toward. She had read the existentialists, who at least had the honesty to name the problem. She had read the contemplatives, who claimed to have resolved it. She had read the clinicians, who offered tools for managing the suffering the question produced without pretending to resolve the question itself. The books had accumulated beside the bed because the shelf had filled.

None of them had landed. Not because the ideas were bad. Some of them were precise, and she could feel their precision in her chest like a weight. They had landed in her head and refused to descend. She could think them. She could not stand on them.

It took her a long time to understand that the question of value was not the originating question. Value was the moral layer. To whom should I direct what I have? That was a relative question. An important one, and a hard one, but not the first one. The first one was spiritual — absolute, structural, not something you could answer by accumulating more information or by reasoning your way toward a better metric. What is the "I" that would direct anything at all? That was the question that had been pulling her. And it was the question that appeared in the passage in her earbuds, at the sandbox, on the Tuesday morning, dressed as an answer rather than as a question — because the tradition was not asking what the "I" is, it was telling her.

She did not have this clarity yet. She had only the yes.

III. The Reading Year

The summer before the playground morning she had begun, without quite deciding to, reading differently. She had read for most of her life as an accumulator — one book for the argument, one for the counterargument, one to see what the consensus was, one to see who broke from it. She had been a research analyst; the pattern was professional. But sometime around the fortieth or forty-first of the books she had stacked beside her bed, she had put down whichever volume she had just finished and realized she was not reading for arguments anymore. She was reading for something she did not yet have a name for. A frequency, almost. A pitch at which certain pages seemed to be written and others did not.

She read Paul Tillich. She read him in the bathtub, where she read most of the difficult books, because a bathtub is the only place in her apartment where no one can reach her and where the phone cannot be held. Tillich had been a German chaplain on the Western Front in the First World War. He had been at the battles she had only ever read about in history textbooks and had come home, in his own word, shattered — though that word, she would later learn, was the word of his grandson and not his own. His own word was closer to collapse. His entire nineteenth-century world had collapsed in the trenches, and he had built, from inside that collapse, a philosophy of something he called the courage to be. Courage, for him, was not a virtue among other virtues. It was not the thing that makes a person brave in an action movie. It was the ontological act — the bare structural self-affirmation of being when every ground for affirming has been stripped away. Courage, in Tillich's frame, was what was left when everything else had gone. And what was left was the act itself — the unadorned continuing — without a reason that could be named.

She read him slowly. She underlined with a pencil. She wrote in the margins. Her daughter found one of the books once and flipped through it and asked her why there were lines in it. "Those are the parts I want to remember," she said. The child seemed satisfied with that.

She read Marsha Linehan too, and she read her differently — not as theology but as clinical science. Linehan had been hospitalized at seventeen. She had burned her own skin with cigarettes, banged her head against the floor, been placed in seclusion — the locked room — repeatedly. She had described, later, in her own memoir, that the experience had felt like hell. She had gotten out. She had spent fifty years building a therapy — Dialectical Behavior Therapy — that reduces, with an evidence base now spanning decades, the suffering of people in the condition she had survived. At the root of the therapy was a theoretical choice — Linehan's biosocial theory of the condition — and Linehan had named the criteria by which she had chosen that theory against alternatives. A theory had to guide treatment. A theory had to engender compassion. A theory had to fit the research data. If it failed any of the three, it should be revised. No framework, in Linehan's posture, was exempt. Not even the one she had built.

The equity-analyst in her recognized something in Linehan's posture that she had not encountered in the theologians or the contemplatives. The posture was empirical without being reductive. The posture was compassionate without being mushy. The three criteria were a filter, and the filter had been built to choose between competing theories of the same suffering. She understood, reading, that the filter could be applied — at the same level Linehan had applied it — to any framework the self might be tempted to organize a life around. Including, she thought, the question of whether the filter itself should be trusted.

She read [T], though that was the name on the cover; in his own tradition he went by another. His book was a thick volume on a system of thought she had not known existed until a friend had pressed it into her hand at a dinner party. The tradition was called nondual Shaiva Tantra. It was, she discovered, nothing like the pop culture version of the word tantra. It was a sophisticated thousand-year-old philosophy, rooted in a specific school called the Recognition school, that mapped the self as a set of nested layers and claimed that at the core of the self was a Consciousness that simultaneously transcended every particular form it took and pervaded every particular form. The same claim that would arrive in her ears at the sandbox. She had read [T]'s treatment of the layered self, pencil moving, before she ever heard it read aloud. What the app did, for her, was give the body time to catch up with what the eyes had already parsed.

She read the Kybalion too — a small book, a 1908 book, written by people who called themselves Three Initiates and whose identity was contested. She read it knowing the provenance was contested and read it anyway, because what it said about polarity landed: that opposites are not two different things but two positions on the same spectrum, and that the truth, where there is a truth, lies somewhere on the spectrum between the poles rather than at either end. The book's twelfth chapter applied the same logic to freedom and necessity — neither total, neither absent, a graded field a person lives inside and not a binary a person picks. She would realize, months later, that this was the shape her own question had always wanted.

She read her aunt's tradition, too, because it was the one she had been exposed to first, long before she knew what she was being exposed to. Her aunt, on her mother's side, was a Brazilian espírita — a practitioner of a tradition that held, among other things, that all is in perfect balance. The aunt said this often. The aunt said it kindly, and the aunt had lived in a way that seemed to justify her saying it. For years the mother had held the phrase like a comfort. All is in perfect balance. It was only in the reading year that she began to feel, slowly, the near-enemy inside it. A hundred years of war was also balance, in some accounting. A stable equilibrium in which nobody thrived was also balance. A prisoner's dilemma was balance. Balance was not the measure. Balance was simply a property that certain configurations possessed, and some of those configurations were places you did not want to stand.

She did not reject her aunt. She did not tell her aunt that she thought the phrase was incomplete. She let the phrase keep its place, because her aunt had earned it, and began, privately, to hold it alongside a question her aunt had never asked her to ask.

She read Darwin, too, not as a biologist would read Darwin but as a person who had taken adaptive as an empirical category from a clinician needs to read Darwin — at the source. She wanted to know what adaptive meant when it was not a clinical term. She discovered, reading, that the word pointed at a much plainer thing than the therapeutic literature had suggested. A trait was adaptive if it helped an organism leave descendants. That was it. The word did not carry a moral charge; it carried a generational one. A stable equilibrium in which nobody thrived could be adaptive, if it left descendants. A beautiful and principled equilibrium could be non-adaptive, if it did not. She found this clarifying. Linehan's adaptive/non-adaptive had, at its empirical root, the same shape Darwin's did: the measure was whether the system continued. What shifted across scales was only the unit — individual, generation, community, species. The word stayed useful; the scale flexed.

She also read, in that same year, the books she had inherited from an earlier self. She had spent, in her twenties, several years inside an esoteric correspondence course — a Theosophy-descended school with a British back catalogue and a twentieth-century American expansion — that had promised a ladder up through planes of consciousness she would, in retrospect, find herself unable to climb. She did not regret the years. The discipline had been real. She returned to the books with a different posture. She composted them. She composted the parts she had outgrown — the racialized cosmologies buried in the architecture, the colonial unconscious dressed in a spiritualized frame, the certainty about hierarchies of beings. She kept what had worked. She let the rest go into the soil, and trusted that it might become, for a later growth, humus. The composting was not rejection. The composting was the work of letting a good-faith first pass decay into the ground a second pass could grow from. She had always taken, from that earlier reading, the instinct that the metaphysical questions were legitimate. She now had the instruments to check which answers had survived the filter. Some had. Most had not.

She went to Umbanda too, when she was home on visits. She went because her body went more honestly than her mind did, and because Umbanda let the body speak in a room where that speaking was the point. Umbanda was not her inherited tradition — the Catholic household of her upbringing had been the frame — but it was her country's tradition in the thick hyphenated sense her country made possible. She sat with it. She felt what she felt. She did not call herself an initiate. She learned, in the rooms she sat in, that the body had its own epistemology, and that the epistemology was older and better calibrated than the mind usually gave it credit for.

She read Vanessa Andreotti that year, too, and took her Facing Human Wrongs course, and sat with a framework that was different enough from the other frameworks she had been reading to require a different part of her mind to hold it. Andreotti's work, rooted in what she and a circle of collaborators called Gesturing Towards Decolonial Futures, was a refusal to let modernity be narrated as the villain in its own story. Modernity, Andreotti taught, was a pattern — one pattern among several — and it was not the cause of what was failing. It was a historically-specific expression of something older. The ecological crisis had not begun with the steam engine. In some readings, it had begun with fire. Fire was the first technology that had let a species alter its environment faster than its environment could alter it back. The disaster had been baked into the recipe of the species long before modernity put the recipe into industrial production. She underlined the phrase in her notes — fire before responsibility — and recognized, reading, that the phrase was the compact form of an argument she had not yet fully unpacked, and that the unpacking might be a different book.

She read Bayo Akomolafe in that stretch, through a podcast a friend had sent her early in the year — The Emerald, hosted by a mythologist named Josh Schrei, who would later turn out to have, in one of his episodes, interviewed her teacher. Bayo taught at the cracks. His register was different from Andreotti's — they collaborated, the work rhymed — but his voice did something specific the reading year had been looking for. He spoke of the cracks as the places where the dominant story had fractured enough to let a different story grow. She did not entirely understand him at first. She kept listening. She came, slowly, to recognize that what she had been doing, privately, with the Arcane School books and her aunt's espírita phrase and the Umbanda rooms and the Tantric app she would eventually download, was crack-work. She was not building a single coherent framework. She was sitting in the fractures between several incompatible ones and letting the fractures speak.

She did not, at the time, know what she was going to do with any of this. She knew only that she wanted, for her daughter, a different inheritance than the one she had been handed and had spent a decade composting. She wanted her daughter to have access to stories that had been tested by multiple bodies, across multiple centuries, in multiple languages. She wanted those stories to be transmittable through practice, not only through reading. She wanted the inheritance to come in a form the body could carry — the way Umbanda let the body carry what the mind could not hold alone. What she did not yet know was that this wanting — vague, motherly, impractical — was the seed of what she would later build at her desk. And that the thing she would build would be, in its own way, a small crack in the shape the engagement-internet had pressed into the shape of what a child's media could be.

IV. The App, and the Question That Sent Her to It

It was her husband who had told her about the app. He had not known what it was. A friend of his, he said, had mentioned a thing — a hundred and twelve practices from some tradition, all packaged in a phone. He had forwarded her a link because he knew she had been reading in this area. She had downloaded it the way people download most apps, which is to say, with a mild inattention and the assumption that she would probably delete it within the week.

The first day, she had sat on the couch after the child was in bed, put the earbuds in, and listened to the orientation. The voice was the same voice. It was not a salesman's voice. It named the tradition. It named the text — a medieval Tantric work that compiled one hundred and twelve practices for recognizing the nature of Consciousness. It explained that the practices were a menu, not a mandate. You did not do all of them. You worked through them and found the two or three that fit your life, and you made those your daily practice, and you let the rest be there as options for when life changed and a different practice became appropriate.

She had liked the menu framing. The menu framing was close to Linehan's posture — try, test, keep what works, revise what does not. She had begun.

The second day was the Tuesday on the park bench. The passage she heard that day was the passage about Consciousness as simultaneously transcendent and immanent. The yes that arrived in her chest was the yes to that passage, specifically — though it was also, she realized later, the yes to whatever had been accumulating through the reading year and had finally found a sentence in a voice in her ears at the sandbox to land on.

She took the earbuds out after the practice. She watched her daughter for a long moment. She finished the cooling coffee. She did not say anything to anyone, and she did not write anything down. The yes did not require words yet. It was allowed to simply be there.

V. Cutting and Piercing

A week or so later — the exact day she could not recover afterward, only that the morning light had been grey and the apartment had smelled of the breakfast she had made earlier — she was reading the text the app had recommended as a companion and came to one of the one hundred and twelve practices. The practice was verse 93. It suggested that the practitioner pierce any part of the body with a sharp needle, and keep awareness focused on that place, and through this focused attention perceive what the text called the pure state of Bhairava.

She read the verse twice. She read it a third time. Her internal alarms were firing. She had worked, in her year of clinical training, with people who hurt themselves, and she knew what the research said: that self-inflicted pain can relieve emotional distress in the short term and reliably fails to be adaptive in the long term. The practice, read through the filter she had been building, looked wrong. It looked wrong in a very specific way: not because it was forbidden but because it was, in the language she had learned from Linehan, non-adaptive. A practice that works in the short term and fails over time.

The app had a community attached to it — a large messaging group, several hundred people, moderated by the teacher and his students. She hesitated. She was new. She had not introduced herself. Introducing herself, as a beginner, by challenging one of the tradition's practices would be the sort of thing that in her younger life she would have hesitated to do.

She did it anyway.

She typed her question carefully. She asked whether certain practices might be suited to certain cultures and certain practitioners and not to others. She said she thought this particular practice might not be suitable as a daily practice for people who dealt with self-harm, for example. She asked whether the teacher and the community agreed.

The first response came from one of the moderators. It was clean and fast. The practice was not categorized as a daily practice, he said. It was optional. If someone chose to do it, the recommendation was medical blood-drawing or professional jewelry-piercing, under the supervision of a professional. Not something to be done alone with a needle at home.

She was relieved by the guardrails. She asked a follow-up. She asked whether the goal of working through the hundred and twelve was to find the two or three that could serve as daily practices going forward. The moderator confirmed that this was so.

Then another member of the group — not a moderator, just a practitioner — wrote back with a different reading. He suggested the practice was also about getting beyond the sense of self in a certain way, that the point was not only the sensation.

She hesitated before replying. She did not want to argue with a fellow practitioner on her second week in the community. She also did not want to let the frame pass uncorrected. She wrote what she thought. She said there was a biological dimension to consider — that in clinical work it was well known that certain forms of self-injury relieved emotional pain in the short term but were non-adaptive over time. She said that she did not think she wanted to open that door in herself. She noted that this was perhaps why various cultures had ritualized forms of piercing and cutting — ritual, she suggested, was the container that made such practices adaptive rather than destructive, the social form that did the work of holding what the individual body could not hold alone.

The teacher responded later that day. His first response was to the fellow practitioner's reading.

"Not so."

Two words. No softening.

Then, to her: "It's nothing to do with cutting. It's to do with piercing — like piercing your ear."

She read it twice. The distinction was clean. Cutting was an act of release. Piercing was an act of focus. The needle was not a wound to be closed. The needle was a window for awareness. She had misheard the practice through the frame of the clinical work she had done, and the teacher had corrected her without condescension. She felt the correction in her body — not as shame, but as something being set right.

She asked once more, to make sure she had understood. The goal of working through the hundred and twelve, she said, was to choose a couple that might be suitable as daily practices going forward.

The teacher: "Yes."

Then, separately, to the whole group, he added what the moderator had said earlier — that the piercing practice was not a daily-practice item, that the framing had been imprecise, that the app should not present it as such, that the guardrails would be strengthened. Several people pushed back. People with self-harm histories, some argued, would find a way; why restrict the tradition? The teacher held his position. This, he said, should not be framed as a daily practice. Let us be precise.

She closed the app and sat on the couch with her hand over her chest. She did not know yet that this exchange was, for her, the first time she had ever applied the filter to a tradition and been met by the tradition with precision rather than defense. She did not know yet that the teacher's willingness to revise was the thing that would eventually earn her trust for everything else. She knew only that the conversation had been honest, that the filter had worked, and that she had met someone through the medium of a group chat who could both correct her and be corrected.

This was before she had met him. This was before she had walked into the barn. The first real exchange with the teacher had happened on a screen, in the apartment, between putting the child to bed and running the dishwasher.

VI. The Decision

The retreat was announced in the app a few weeks later. Five days. A converted farmhouse in New England. Forty people. She read the announcement twice and closed it and did not open it again for three days.

On the third day, she opened it and signed up before she could talk herself out of it.

Her husband, when she told him, was not surprised. He said, "Have a good one," in the voice he used for her work conferences. She loved him for that voice. It was the voice of a man who had been married long enough to know that the best support, sometimes, is the support that does not make the thing into an event. She packed a small bag. She packed a notebook she thought she might not open. She kissed the child at the door and drove north with the sun high over the Massachusetts hills and the car warm in the way cars are warm on the first real day of spring, when the sun is strong but the air has not yet caught up.

She did not know, driving, that the question she had been carrying — the one the yes had pointed at, the one the filter had sharpened, the one that had been sitting under the value question all along — was about to ask itself out loud for the first time.

She did not know about the hug she would ask for on the final day, or the dialogue that would follow, or the answer that would hold the absolute and the relational in the same sentence.

She knew only that the barn was ahead of her, and that she had agreed to five days, and that the yes from the sandbox was still, faintly, saying yes.

She drove.

CC BY-SA 4.0