[Continue]

Returning to the ‘incompleteness’ of sheer intuition; as mentioned earlier, ‘incompleteness’ is ‘impossibility of completeness’ —— that is, there is no possibility of ‘completeness’ —— there is no life capable of allowing ‘completeness’ to exist ——there is no ‘existence-in-unity’ capable of allowing ‘completeness’ to exist —— there is no ‘existence-in-unity’ capable of allowing ‘existence-in-unity’ to exist —— there is no V capable of allowing V to exist —— there is no V capable of allowing V to be V —— there is no non-V capable of allowing V to be V… Since the terms “is”, “can”, “let”, “be able to”, and “of” here can all be attributed to time or space, and since time and space do not exist in sheer intuition —— anything that does not exist can be “pierced” or “punctured” —— the “incompleteness” of sheer intuition is thus an imprecise expression as follows:

Not VVVV.

The crucial question is: what exactly is this ‘not’ here?

Is the pain of N (the greatest universe) ‘not VVVV’—— that is, ‘not NNNN’—— or, even more so,  ‘not N’?

If N has dead angles and is complete, then ‘not N’ is that which has no dead angles and is incomplete —— that is, having no dead angles —— namely, ‘having no dead angles and not being fused and synchronized with dead angles’.

If that infant ‘has no dead angles and is not fused and synchronized with dead angles’, what happens as a result? A dead infant.

What is a ‘dead infant’? The infant’s sheer intuition reaches the ‘sheer termini’.

What is the ‘sheer termini? There is no ‘existence-in-unity’ —— no life —— no sheerity — — no structure ——  no sheer intuition ——  no life-structure of “existence-in-unity” ——  that is, “not VVVV” ——  that is, “not NNNN” ——  that is, “not N” ——  that is, “not V” ——  that is, “no dead angles and not fused and synchronized with dead angles” ——  that is, “no dead angles” ——  that is, “non-existence and non-unity”.

Could it be that N (the greatest universe) also has a dead-silence terminus —— that it too will perish —— that it too will bid farewell to ‘sheer existence’ —— that it too will be carried away by ‘non-existence and non-unity’ —— that it too will be devoid of structure?

Language, why does it not have pain?

But that mouse does have pain.

What is a ‘mouse’? A mouse is an R-type ‘eukaryotic cytoplasm’ that takes VV₁V²V³ABMNWRR1R₂R³ as its ‘sheer origin’. What is ‘VV₁V²V³ABMNWRR1R₂R³’? This is an arbitrarily constructed structure of “existence-in- unity”; in essence, it is W or N —— it is life —— or the universe —— an “existence-in-unity” that is both individual and collective. What is the “sheer origin”? It is the origin of W or N —— the origin of life —— or the origin of the universe —— the origin of both individual life and collective life —— the origin of both the individual universe and the collective universe. What is the “origin”? It is the sole initial starting point that has not been dragged into silence and submersion by “non-existence and disunity” —— that is, the original starting point that resists silence and opposes submersion. What is the “R-type”? It is the rodent-type, which differs only ever so slightly from the H-type (human-type) and the S-type (Sapiens-type). What is “eukaryotic cytoplasm”? It is the cytoplasm of eukaryotic species whose life structure is “Existence-in-Unity”—that infant and that foetus are also a form of “eukaryotic cytoplasm”.

That infant —— what is it? Is it ‘eukaryotic cytoplasm’ —— or a species-plasm —— or a cell —— or even a gene?

That foetus —— what is it? Is it sheer intuition —— or instinct —— or a ‘sense and perception’-plasma —— or rather an ‘intuitive-consciousness-plasm’?

Neither that foetus nor that infant is a fully-fledged Sapien, for neither has yet to use language.

Neither that infant nor that foetus is a fully-fledged human, for neither walks upright.

What is a ‘human’? A structure of ‘existence-in-unity’ between sheer intuition and genes—— also a structure of ‘existence-in-unity’ between ‘intuitive consciousness’ and ‘eukaryotic cytoplasm’ —— or the species-plasm of sheer intuition —— or even more so, a life-plasm.

What is a ‘Sapien’? Given that a ‘human’ is the plasm-form of plasm, a ‘Sapien’ is plasm-form of life and language —— that is to say, the plasm-form of language.

What is ‘language’? A membrane of desire —— as if wrapping ‘desire’ into clouds, tugging it into wind, or weaving it into rain.

What is ‘desire’? Imagination with a starting point and a landing point.

What is ‘imagination’? Thinking based on intuition.

Taking it a step deeper, what is ‘sheer desire’? Imagination with no origin or terminus, but only a starting point and a landing point.

Going another step further, sheer desire —— why is it ‘sheer’? Because of ‘pretence’ —— pretending that sheer intuition is ‘thinking’ —— pretending there is a sheer origin and a sheer terminus —— pretending to have already reached sheer ‘silence’ —— pretending to have already reached sheer ‘unbound-imagination’ —— pretending to employ sheer language to engage in ‘sheer thinking’ —— pretending to ‘exist in unity’ ——pretending there is a life structure creating hope —— pretending the “sheer ego” is neither acting nor fabricating —— in reality, it is the “ego within the delusion of language” resisting emptiness and fighting against the cracks ——  it is also being fully aware of “pain” yet completely detached from “pain” ——  it is both striving to embrace time and space whilst fiercely resisting time and space—and it is both affirming sheer intuition and denying sheer intuition… Thus, one can only take refuge in language —— not in “interconnected language”, “creative language” or “sheer language” —— but in “desire language” — —to be enveloped by ‘desire language’ moment by moment in clouds of a thousand forms —— to be tossed about by ‘desire language’ at every instant in winds of a thousand changes —— to be woven together by ‘desire language’ day and night in rain of deep affection —— and even more, to be carried away by ‘desire language’ year after year from that inexplicable intuition of indelible pain… What is this “inexplicable intuition”? Was it that even as a cell —— one embraced this sheer intuition with reckless abandon; or as a foetus —— one trusted this sheer intuition with rock-solid conviction; or as an infant —— one followed this sheer intuition without fear; or as a child or adolescent —— one still clung to this sheer intuition —— sometimes like grasping the hand of a companion worthy of absolute trust —— sometimes like grasping the hand of a congener capable of soothing ‘pain’ —— sometimes like grasping a firm yet delicate fingertip from the edge of bewilderment or a corner of distress; And as time and space forged ‘age’ into a double-edged short-handled dagger, this sheer intuition was sliced to pieces, stroke by stroke —— and upon it, a fair and delicate hand elegantly inscribed with the blade’s edge words such as ‘naivety’, ‘childishness’, ‘innocence’, ‘clumsiness’, ‘foolishness’ and ‘stupidity’ —— words that seem as much like the indiscriminate application of a branding iron as they do the impartial assignment of labels —— yet for some reason, blossoms of blood wither silently amidst a secret, unspoken gale of sorrow and cold rain; as for the word ‘sheer’ —— it has long been woven by the ‘language of desire’ into both the dazzling dance of fireworks and buried in the tomb of inexplicable taboos —— should some madman drag it out, complete and intact, and after peeling away its membrane and shedding its shell, display it alone before idle hands and idle eyes —— it would be as though a portrait, dreamlike and ethereal, as delicate as jade and as lovely as a flower, had been defiled by a band of vicious bandits playing with fire whilst digging a grave; To enter the painting is to enter pain; to swing the sword is like tearing the pain asunder; pain will shatter, pain will be spliced together, pain will scatter, pain will drift down, pain will sink into the mud, pain will blossom, pain will wither, pain will enter the grave; pain will desire a sheer cloud, pain will desire a sheer breeze, pain will desire a sheer rain; while pain remains undetermined, who ponders pain? Who ponders the pain? The more one ponders, the more it hurts; the pain, wrapped and sealed by illusion and delusion —— will use the linguistic imprint of ‘inexplicable intuition’, itself laden with inexplicable pain, to gently erase that sorrow, both sheer and silent. And yet, on the scale of time, which of us has not pretended —— has not remained silent —— has not abandoned resistance, opposition, or defiance? Between sheer desire and sheer intuition —— there lies but a single, utterly inconspicuous point, closer than the corner of the ‘web’ between the palm and the back of the hand, yet farther than the vast sea of stars between a single drop of aged, clear tear and a meteorite from outer space; that minute point —— since when has it been altered?

[Unfinished. To be Continued]