I would like to propose an understanding of xuan in terms of recursive logic rather than inclusive logic. Inclusive logic suggests that, for example, a finite set A must necessarily be within an infinite set B, so a contradiction arise if we say that set B is within set A. A recursive logic sees that set A and set B are not simply maintained by an inclusive or exclusive relation, but rather by a paradox. Consider the sentence “Nothing nothings” – according to the logic of inclusion/exclusion, it makes no sense. But according to the logic of recursion, a paradox is produced, accompanied by a new space of speculation. To understand the relation between “to exhaust in order not to exhaust” and lanugage, we may want to put it in the form of an antinomy:

Thesis: Writing possesses a limited number of symbols with which to fully express the world.

Antithesis: The world cannot be fully expressed by writing since writing itself is finite, while the world is infinite.

The resolution to this is to exhaust the finitude of lanuage and set it into movement, so that it can implicitly incorporate the meanings that cannot be directly mapped onto its existing components. This is the meaning of “to exhaust in order not to exhaust”.