Splice

1

When J’s H enters a state of feigned sleep (i.e. ‘partial closure’), J’s I enters a state of ‘maximum’ (i.e. ‘extreme splicing’), whilst J’s W enters a state of ‘minimum’ (i.e. ‘extreme surrender’); thus, J^I becomes the starting point of R1. Why “feigned sleep”? This represents the ultimate level at which G^I places G^H in a state of “local closure”, because G^H cannot crash into walls, cannot fall, cannot punch, cannot swing a blade, and cannot detonate; it can only faint, fall into a deep sleep, or sink into “feigned sleep”.

If G^I perceives that J^W is entering ‘extreme surrender’, then G^I isolates J^W into Q, whilst G^I splices J^I onto V; thereby, G^I enters S1. Since G^I also perceives that J^H is entering ‘partial enclosure’—that is, J^I enters T1—G^I’s H enters ‘extreme openness’; thus, G^I becomes the starting point of R2. What is “extreme surrender”? It is approaching “sheer silence”.

(1) Based on the two on the left, G^I is a dead angle for J^W—and also for J^I—and for J^H—and even more so for J^I-R1 and J^I-T1, because G^I can detect J^W, J^I, J^H, J^I-R1 and J^I-T1, whereas J^I cannot detect G^W, G^I, G^H, G^I-S1 and G^I-R2.

(2) Based on (1), G^W enters an active state, whilst J^W enters a dormant state, because G^I becomes a dead angle and connects J^I to V—whereas J^I fails to become a dead angle and fails to connect to V.

(3) Based on (2), G^I is in the position of the ‘strong’ and enters a state of ‘active offence’, whilst J^I is in the position of the ‘weak’ and enters a state of ‘awaiting offence’, because J^H in a ‘locally enclosed’ state is far weaker than G^H in a ‘not yet enclosed’ state—after all, rodents’ sense of smell and hearing are far superior to those of humans.

Splice 2

If J^W experiences pain, it is because J^I experiences pain, for J^I is unable to perceive the complete ‘ego’; J^H’s ‘ego’ is an incomplete ‘ego’, whilst the complete ‘ego’ is determined by J^I; nor is J^I’s ‘ego’ always complete, but rather it depends on whether J^I can encounter a ‘sheer echo’ within the ‘sheer situation’. Furthermore, the complete ‘ego’ is not a single occurrence, but an eternal one—either existing forever or never existing at all; if J^I reaches the ‘sheer terminus’ through J^I-T1, this is because ‘trust’ yields the final 'echo', and this is further because ‘pain’ and ‘love’ yield the final ‘completeness’; thus, an ‘ego’ that does not exist forever has at least once possessed ‘sheer trust’; If J^I, through J^I-T1, becomes aware of the complete “ego” and fails to reach the “sheer terminus”, then J^I will encounter a “sheer echo” within the “sheer situation”—and will thus encounter the eternally existing “complete ego”.

(1) J^I, in the ‘sheer situation’, is also ‘awaiting an attack’—just as J^I’s ‘I’ awaits a random attack by J^I’s ‘ego’—until a ‘sheer echo’ arises; however, it remains unknown whether G^I will attack J^I. (2) Once G^I attacks J^I, regardless of the process, J^I is able to perceive the ‘sheer echo’ and the complete ‘ego’, because J^I finally becomes a ‘dead angle’—after all, J^I’s gaze upon G^I is a gaze upon the ‘ego’. (3) J^I is not waiting for G^I, but for the ‘sheer echo’. (4) G^I’s “attack” differs from G^H’s attack. (5) Even if G^H’s attack were to occur, this would in no way prevent J^I from obtaining “sheer resonance”.

Does that mouse represent the ‘ego’ in the infant’s intuition? Both ‘mouse’ and ‘infant’ are derived from language, whilst J^W, J^I, J^H, J^I-R1, J^I-T1, G^W, G^I, G^H, G^I-S1, G^I-R2 all derive from natural laws; ‘sheer situation’, ‘sheer waiting’, ‘sheer attack’, ‘sheer echo’, ‘sheer awareness’, ‘sheer gaze’, ‘sheer becoming’, and ‘sheer completeness’ are not influenced in the slightest by language; the pain of J^I, ‘I’ and ‘ego’ are also unrelated to language; even if J^W is exceptionally frail, even if J^H cannot distinguish between excrement, urine, sweat and snot, even if J^I-R1 imagines that one-metre-long cloth rope as a mouse’s slender tail—being firmly tethered by the rope around the waist and back is like being securely embraced by a mouse’s tail—being tightly wrapped around the neck by the rope is like being deeply entwined by a mouse’s tail, even if J^I-T1 trusts that cloth cord to carry ‘I’ at will, like a mouse’s long tail, into a strange situation teeming with incisors and claws—or to wind ‘I’ at will into a silent situation devoid of colour, light, sound, scent, temperature, humidity, where one cannot reach out, lift a leg, shake one’s head, cry, laugh, or feel pain, J^I knows full well and with absolute clarity—that the cloth rope possesses no sheer intuition—that the cloth rope possesses no ‘sheer echo’—that the cloth rope possesses even less of a sheer gaze, awareness, stare, eye contact, a shared smile, or a passing chuckle—in a sheer situation where there is no one else around and no other mammals exist, only the rat possesses that familiar ‘sheerity’.

G^I is sheer and free.

G^H and G^W are both mature and full of vitality, and neither will renege on their promises.

Splice 3

J^H’s senses of hearing, smell, taste and touch are all extremely vague; only his sight is precise—not in the sense that he can accurately distinguish colours or sizes, but in that he can accurately discern which beings possess ‘ego-consciousness’. At the same time, J^H’s extremely poor echolocation is unable to detect mice outside its field of vision; its feeble vocalisation fails to deter any nearby mice; and its limited spinal mobility poses no threat whatsoever to any surrounding predators. Furthermore, the irregular odours produced by J^H as it scavenges nearby excrement completely erode the ‘ego’s’ territory, whilst serving as a key attractant for rodents or other predators.

G^H determines by smell—J^H is not yet suitable as food—J^H has not yet become a food carrier—J^H is not a rodent or a bird—J^H is not an arthropod or a reptile—J^H is a mammal—J^H urinates, sweats, defecates and has fur—J^H has not yet used scent to mark its territory—J^H also has no incisors. Furthermore, G^H determines via hearing that J^H’s vocalisation and echolocation abilities are both extremely weak. Additionally, G^H determines via sight that J^H’s spinal mobility is also extremely limited.

(1) J^H’s extremely weakened state causes both J^I’s defensive and offensive instincts to vanish.

(2) J^H searches visually for any beast—after all, beasts are his own kind.

(3) The irregular odour created by J^H exerts an irresistible attraction on G^H, for a substance combining saliva, sweat, urine, milk and faeces is not common—its presence near warm-blooded beasts is rare—and the existence of such a substance in a situation where there are no ‘olfactory alerts’, ‘vocal warnings’, ‘spinal movement alerts’ or brain ultrasonic warnings’—and where there are no incisors tearing flesh, bone and sinew—the scent of such a mixture remains fresh and shifting. This is utterly anomalous to both G^H and G^I—utterly alien—and profoundly alluring.

(4) G^H’s four incisors are now fully formed, but J^H’s four incisors have not yet emerged.

(5) J^H is not learning, merely adapting.

(6) J^H’s cerebral ultrasound is in a “semi-sleep” state; there are no “warnings”, no “distress calls”, no “submission”, no “desires”—only “unboundly-imagining”.

Splice 4

What is J^H’s ‘partial shutdown’? It is a limited shutdown of the senses & perceptions: vision no longer distinguishes between movement and stillness; taste and smell are both shut down; hearing and touch are both reduced to the absolute minimum; hunger, thirst, urination, defecation, joy and sorrow, sexual instincts, gregarious instincts, the ‘instinct to advance’, the ‘instinct to retreat’, individual consciousness, group consciousness, territorial consciousness and the ‘instinct of fear’ are all shut down, whilst J^H has not yet been endowed with any reason, sensibility or emotion, therefore J^H possesses only the most minimal senses & perceptions, instincts and consciousness, yet J^W still exists—thus J^I is engaged in ‘extreme splicing’—J^I uses its remaining ‘wildness’ to splice and randomly assemble at will within the imagination—J^I is both trusting everything and resisting everything—only in this way can J^I’s ‘I’ and ‘ego’ be driven into the V-structure that is VPFA (vague yet precise, fuzzy yet accurate). So, does J^H experience “extreme seclusion”? If J^H were to encounter a fleeting moment of “non-medical, painless amputation”, then “extreme sealing” might be possible; however, in such a painless instant, J^W is highly likely to be annihilated—J^H’s eyes, ears and brain are also highly likely to be dissolved—and J^I is even more likely to be dispelled; yet there remains one negligible, highly improbable possibility—namely, that J^H’s “partial sealing” requires to be deeply gazed upon by a single “extreme sealing”.

What is ‘wildness’? J has it, and so does G; the two are both similar and different. For instance, G uses its four incisors to repeatedly gnaw at and pull out an iron nail thicker than a mouse’s tail. Even though G^H excludes this particular nail from the categories of ‘biteable’, ‘should be gnawed’ and ‘must be pulled out’, G^I nevertheless draws upon G^H’s ‘instinct for advancement’ and ‘sense of fear’—pushing the highly abnormal act of ‘gnawing out an iron nail’ to its absolute limit. Another example: J swallows 45 woodlice (i.e. ‘rat-tail insects’) whole. Even though J^H normally only occasionally gazes at or ‘plays with’ woodlice, J^I will nonetheless abnormally push the act of ‘swallowing woodlice whole’ to its extreme— —just as J^I, in the situation of “abruptly sealing off” J^H, draws upon J^H’s “sense of fear” and “instinct for aggression” and channels them into the rapidly expanding J^I. In short, the ferocity of both J and G resembles ‘madness’, ‘reversal’ and ‘fixated’, all fighting to protect the ‘ego’; the only difference lies in their distinct abilities of ‘abrupt sealing’ and the ‘recalling and borrowing’ of these states.

(1) J lets G get close—is that ‘mad’? G madly draws close to J.

(2) G keeps drawing close to J—is that ‘mad’? J madly remains silent.

(3) J lets G tug at him—is that ‘mad’? G madly tugs at J.

(4) G tugs at J time and again; is this ‘madness’? J thinks madly.

(5) J lets G tug back and forth; is this ‘madness’? G tugs madly at J, back and forth, time and again.

(6) Does G turn madly from white to red?

(7) Does J bleed madly, crimson?

(8) Does G frantically tear J apart?

(9) Is J frantically torn to shreds by G?

(10) Does G frantically gnaw at J?

(11) Is J frantically chewed to bits by G?

(12) Does G frantically pick through the scraps?

(13) Is J frantically tossed about by G?

……

Yet G and J have never been slaves to language; they are either broken incisors—like fallen leaves or pebbles—or like appetisers for laying hens or mud toys for sewage—or rather like skeletal debris in ruins or hardened dung in the desert; or they are severed earlobes —like broken twigs or strands of hair—or like carrion hunted by swarms of ants, or jerky scorched by the blazing sun—or like fish scales caught on a tabby cat’s whiskers, or dog hair drifting into the cracks of a wall; or else the vessel of intuition and life—and the vessel of sheer intuition and sheer life—or the vessel of the cosmos—or even the vessel of ‘I’ and ‘ego’. So, is a plucked-out incisor ‘I’? Is a shred of severed earlobe ‘ego’? G is the vessel of G^H, G^H is also the vessel of G^I, G^I is the vessel of G^W, and G^W is the vessel of J^W, J^I, J^H and J; if G does not tug at J, then J lacks ‘I’ and ‘ego’; If G tugs at J, then J is “I”, and G is “ego”. Therefore, “I” and “ego” either both exist or neither exists, and both exist or do not exist because of “echoes”.

None of the above (1) to (13) exist, for there is no echoes within them.

G engages with J, and J and G exchange a smile.

‘Wildness’ perceives ‘wildness’.

‘Sealed’ gazes deeply at ‘sealed’.

Splice 5

‘Completeness’ is trifling and insignificant, yet possesses a primal power; an instant's pain, either continuously concealed or sealed away forever, or veiled as if wrapped in layer upon layer of romantic sugar coating, or sealed as if encased in sheet upon sheet of perfect puff pastry, or continuously wrapped in dreamlike clouds, or forever enclosed in a picturesque breeze, or concealed by an opening smaller and more insignificant than the hem of a garment, or sealed by an exit smaller and more unworthy of notice than a flake of skin, or buried amidst a sky full of swirling white snowflakes, or preserved within pure blue flowers drifting across the sea with a fragrant scent, or danced into ‘innocence’ by immaculate snowflakes in the cold air, or painted into ‘brightness’ by the scent of innocent flowers in the frozen sunlight, or forgotten, or continuously forgotten, or forgotten by ‘forgetfulness’, or continuously forgotten by ‘forgetfulness’, or forgotten forever, or forgotten forever by ‘forgetfulness’, or forgotten forever by ‘continuous forgetfulness’, or forgotten forever by ‘eternal forgetfulness’, or forgotten by ‘forgetfulness’ until it becomes ‘forgetfulness’, or continuously forgotten by ‘continuous forgetfulness’ until it becomes ‘continuous forgetfulness’, or being “forever forgotten” forever forgotten to become “forever forgotten”, or being “vivid” vivid to become “vivid”, or being “graceful” graceful to become “graceful”, or being “funeral garments” funeral garments to become “funeral garments”, or being “corpse-skin” corpse-skin to become “corpse-skin”—none of this in the least affects a life living to its end, nor does it in the slightest affect a sheer life living to its sheer terminus…

Yet, a moment’s pain—may become the most insignificant of entry points—may become the most insignificant of exit points—and may even become the most insignificant ‘entry and exit’ for a sheer life to reach its sheer terminus; A sheer life ‘enters’ from a sheer moment and ‘departs’ from a sheer moment; the former is the sheer origin, the latter the sheer terminus. Whether it be the sheer terminus or the sheer origin, whether it be a ‘sheer departure’ or a ‘sheer entry’, there is but a single instance; A single life is a single origin, a single terminus, a single entrance, a single exit; it is a single ‘entering’, a single ‘leaving’, a single ‘sheerity’, a single ‘becoming’, a single moment; A life of a single instant is the smallest origin, the minutest terminus, the minutest entrance, the minutest exit, the minutest ‘entry’ and the minutest ‘departure’; it is the minutest ‘sheerity’ and the minutest ‘becoming’; it is the minutest instant and the minutest time (minitime); the minutest time (minitime) of life is the origin of the minutest time, the terminus of the minutest time, the entrance of the minutest time, the exit of the minutest time, the ‘coming in’ of the minutest time, the ‘leaving’ of the minutest time, the ‘sheerity’ of the minutest time, the ‘becoming’ of the minutest time, the ‘is’ of the minutest time, and the minutest dead angle; Life in the minutest dead angle is the origin of the minutest dead angle, the terminus of the minutest dead angle, the entrance to the minutest dead angle, the exit from the minutest dead angle, the ‘coming in’ of the minutest dead angle, the ‘departing’ of the minutest dead angle, the ‘sheerity’ of the minutest dead angle, the ‘becoming’ of the minutest dead angle, the ‘dead angle’ of the minutest dead angle, the ‘completeness’ of the minutest dead angle, the minutest love (minilove)…

All life possesses the minutest love (minilove), and yet the minutest love—insignificant in all time and all space—is not worth mentioning—is not worth a single glance—is as though it had countless origins and termini—is as though it had countless entrances and exits—is as though it had countless ‘entrances’ and ‘departures’—is as though it had countless forms of ‘sheerity’ and ‘becoming’—is as though it had countless moments—is as though it had countless times and spaces—is as though it had countless forms of ‘completeness’—all like countless lives—all like pain that can be forgotten in an instant—all like pain that can be forgotten forever in an instant—all like pain that need not be detected in an instant—all like pain that need not be gazed upon in an instant—all like pain where not a single echo in an instant pierces any non-existence—all like pain where a single echo in an instant devours all existence—all seem like pain that never existed and will never exist—all seem like pain that has no dead angles and will never have any—all seem like pain that has no moment and will never have any—all seem like pain that has no possibility and will never have any—all seem like pain that has no change and will never have any—all seem like pain that has no sheerity and will never have any— —all like pain that has never had life and will never have life—all like pain that has never had a cosmic-septum and will never have a cosmic-septum—all like pain that has never had cosmic-slurry and will never have cosmic-slurry—all like pain that has never had a cosmos and will never have a cosmos—all like pain that has never had pain and will never have pain……

But can a moment’s pain be continuously obscured by ‘the absence of pain’—can it be sealed away forever by ‘eternal absence of pain’—can it be forever shut out beyond the cosmos, the cosmic-septum and the cosmic-slurry by ‘the pain of the absence of pain and the eternal absence of pain’?

    Regardless of ‘whether’, ‘can’, ‘may’, ‘must’, ‘need’, ‘moment’, ‘continuous’, ‘eternal’, ‘pain’, ‘dead angle’, ‘ ‘complete’ or ‘existence’—whether these terms exist or not—a momentary pain will exist in an insignificant way—it will exist in an insignificant yet complete way—it will approach and penetrate one dead angle after another in an insignificant way—and it will approach and penetrate one moment after another, or one pain after another, in an insignificant way—until ‘insignificance’ approaches and penetrates the insignificant, sheer terminus in an insignificant way.

    An insignificant, complete pain—a pain that neither returns to the sheer origin nor journeys towards the sheer terminus—yet renders the “romance”, “perfection”, “sugar coating”, “flaky pastry”, clouds’, ‘winds’, ‘immaculate white’, ‘pure blue’, ‘purity’, ‘innocence’, ‘floral fragrance’, ‘drifting snow’, ‘blooming flowers’, ‘snowflakes’, ‘bitterness’, ‘solidification’, ‘dreamlike’, ‘picturesque’, ‘swirling through the sky’, ‘fragrance drifting across the sea’—all these words are consigned to the hem of a garment—to dandruff—to the air—to sunlight—to the cosmic-septum—and to the cosmic-slurry and the cosmos—and further to life and the moment—and even more so to a pain that has never been and will never be, and a promise that has never been and will never be… Existing in parallel with the minutest time (minitime), and merging with the minutest love (minilove), allowing sheer intuition to splice any insignificance into the structural state of ‘existence-in-unity’ or the state of septum of ‘non-existence and disunity’; allowing the complete insignificance to be spliced onto other incompletions or other insignificances; and allowing all pain, completeness, dead angles, insignificance, sheerity or unsheerity to be subsumed into ‘insignificant promises’ and ‘insignificant fulfilment of promises’, until the insignificant ‘one’ is subsumed into the insignificant ‘only’—that is, the sole sheer terminus—or the sole sheer origin—or, indeed, the sole sheer intuition. 

     What is minuteness? It is the minutest pain within minutest time (minitime); it is the minutest completeness within the minutest dead angle; it is also the ‘minutest love (minilove)' within the minutest completeness; or, indeed, the minutest sheer intuition.

     What is ‘Dao’? It is the minutest love (minilove) existing within the minutest time (minitime); it is the fusion and synchrony of the minutest pain and the minutest echo; it is the fusion and synchrony of the minutest dead angle, the minutest completeness and the minutest sheerity; and it is, above all, sheer intuition (that is, sheer life), sheer commitment (that is, the sheer promise of life), and the sheer fulfilment of that commitment (that is, the sheer echo of life); sheer ‘Existence-in-Unity’ (that is, the sheer Cosmos), sheer ‘Non-existence and Non-unity’ (that is, the sheer cosmic-septum), sheer ‘Seal and Flow’ (that is, the sheer cosmic-slurry), and the sheer Origin and Terminus (that is, the sheer Life Experience)—these seven fused and synchronized as one.

     What is the ‘Primordial Chaos’? It is the absence of a sheer origin—nor a sheer terminus—nor anything between the sheer origin and the sheer terminus; that is to say, there is no rising point, no landing point, nor anything between the rise and fall of life; nor is there any purpose, meaning or value to life; and yet, the origin, the terminus and the sheer totality do exist; it is not that the torrent and the wasteland require an origin and a terminus, nor that any life requires ‘sheerness’, and certainly not that the universe, the cosmic-septum or cosmic-slurry that requires ‘everything’; rather, it is the ‘Sheer Promise’ that requires the origin, the terminus, and all that is sheer—‘sheerly fulfilling the promise’ is all that is sheer, for all ‘Primordial Chaos’ becomes a torrent that washes away all things because of the ‘Sheer Promise’—and becomes a desolate wasteland where all sounds fall silent because of the ‘unsheer promise’ —— and is swept away and levelled by raging floods due to “sheer fulfilment of the promise”—and is reduced to a desolate wasteland in an instant due to “failure to fulfil the promise”; after all, the natural law of all things is that “sheer promise” and “sheer fulfilment of the promise” coexist in parallel and are fused and synchronized as one.

     What is “force”? The minutest love is the minutest force; sheer love is sheer force; a single, sheer, minute promise can point to the minutest primal force; a single instance of sheerly fulfilling a minute promise can create the minutest primal force…

What is “not”, “enough”, “of”? There is no need to know from origin to terminal.

Is “love” the same as “cancer”?

Is a ‘wind’ the same as a ‘seal’?

Is ‘dancing’ the same as ‘rubbish’?

Is a ‘purpose’ the same as a ‘grave’?

Is ‘cleansing’ the same as ‘resisting’?

Is ‘affection’ the same as ‘tipping’?

In truth, ‘love’ never needs to know ‘love-thinking’ from origin to terminal.