A STATEMENT MADE —
MOODY MY SON WROTE THIS AFTER HE FAILED IN A IELTS EXAMINATION FAILING TO SECURE GRADE FOR ADMISSION IN ANU (Australian National University) WHICH HE LATER JOINED IN 2006 TO DO HIS SECOND MASTERS.
Dearest Agha Jan, AOA!
This is by farthest the most difficult minute for me to explicate on any matter.
I do not exude sorrow over my results because they are realities of my recordings. How I reflect on them is from something that I have registered. I write them when required of me from my recollections. My writings become reading for those who understand them. Those who will read it will also have to record them just like I did.
In this whole process am I not writing and they have to read? But since my recordings are many, they will have to register many things along with their recollections.
It is Likely.
So they have something to read which is mine. Is it not so ?
It is then safe to say that their collections of things are yet not known
It is possible
So in this case many recollections from them and I, have become too many for them because they are readers with a possibility of few recollections?
If they read and understand it.
And if my recollections are from different things then whosoever reads them should also know many things?
That is the inference.
In their many recollections given from me also gives many questions. But as we said their recollection could be few? Then to answer their questions I must remember something so should they. But my recollections are already many. My remembrance then becomes many for them. True?
Eventuality is there.
This then requires them for something to repossess since their registry fall short of something with a need to know what I have written. Yes?
So their needs can also then become limited or less while ‘them’ evaluating me?
If needs be there!
So if there are needs to read many things of mine this requires them to read some more things. But as we said their readings are few with less needs making my writing difficult for them to read. This then makes something difficult. Does it?
Given the difficulty, yes.
The difficult things are mine, which are already many but less things, are theirs, which are few. Is this the case?
Few things are simple because they lack many things as they are few. Yes?
If stressed few, yes.
Are terms simple and difficult used for an understanding?
If understanding be such.
So a simple understanding reading by many reflections makes some evaluation more difficult. This difficulty then could also be a situation and in difficult situations there are many delays. Is it possible/
In that simple order of many and difficult things some things can go wrong to simple beings because of their virtue facing too many things
So a simple thing going wrong can make many mistakes because of few re collections chasing my many difficult possessions. Yes?
That is probable
Given this probability some simple being checking my results can make mistakes due to his simplicity by some possibility? We have already said that they are simple with possibilities of few recollections. Haven’t we?
Then my wrong results are not my true reflections but whosoever examines them because too many things require both to be competent or they being above it, which is not the case. Is it not so?
That is the inference
Does ability of one vary from competence of another involving some subject matter?
In which case my result matter should also involve some abilities but those abilities we spoke of are already few to a simple being. Yes?
So their abilities reflecting this order of things can result in my errors?
The errors are least competent differentiating with products of others are then often opposite viz contrary?
But some thing contrary and less can also give contradictory statements. It is likely?
And contradiction on a subject is some thing contriovertible being a statement?
Statements require dependence at levels on abilities of competence?
But ability out of competence we have is less by few things and these few simple things with less competence are more liable to make too many mistakes since they are confronted with difficult and too many things? Do they not?
When they are liable or limited in scope.
These mistakes are often reflections of some errors and in themselves committed by some one or resulting from it?
So there is a possibility of my many reflections could be their errors from their few recollections evaluating my result
Inference is there
Because we said earlier that error in a subject have mistakes and mistakes came from opposites and opposites when contradicting, must be giving errors by virtues of one or both parties we said of. Is it?
It is already said
These errors have already occurred in my result from their few mistakes as said earlier of simplicity. Have we?
Yes, we have
Given that my result is then their statement on something that I had written for them. Yes?
But the results of my writings have many errors and a statement with errors is erroneous. Is this error true?
So their result of my errors now appears in my result with errors. Correct?
In that case my result can be their erroneous statement we already have talked of opposites with lacking abilities and being less simple. Have we?
But errors occur in a statement due to a fault in a procedure, the procedure which part of system. Is this often a procedure in a system?
It always is?
This system of reading, recording, recalling is being reflected by some procedure.
The process is there
And the attributes of opposites we have already spoken of in this systematic way. Yes?
So procedures work differently in different by levels of understanding.
So understanding is at some point necessitated?
Their understanding of my recordings is then a matter of procedure but an error already described above in a procedural way of what is read and understood by them, since, I am a subject matter for them?
In that case my procedure is of my many correct composites and their few and full of errors existing in their attributes when valuing me.
12 April 2005