This seems like a complete misunderstanding of poetry to me.

Then Joshu said, “Well given, well taken, well killed, well saved.” And he bowed to the hermit.

So here's the hashed text, though I'll freely admit it's an incomplete description:

The problem is that they haven't interpreted the crossbow line correctly. It's about distance. Once you know it's about distance, Zeno's paradoxes all deal with distance, in particular knowing the precise distances between things. Erasmus's glory was attained through his relentless dedication in all things, always having a notion of where the goal was and how to move towards it. The artists eyes and stealing, is in fact a reference to Steve Jobs "great artists steal". The great artists became great by carefully observing nature directly and noting its secrets, instead of focusing on the inaccurate crap someone came up with which was printed in books. They were instructed in every moment, by everything around them, and pursued the art no matter where they were. And they did in fact succeed in the basic goal of learning to draw everything (i.e, the whole world 'stolen'). It is easy to confuse things produced by a true observation of the world, with those which have just been copied from expectation after expectation, maps of maps. Hence the island that doesn't exist but hops from map to map. In telling the difference, you'll be able to see past magical aims and false expectations, instead noticing and being instructed by the world as you navigate through it, and cutting even while you don't formally take up the sword. Instead of cutting with every motion of blade-wielding, you cut in every moment even beyond that.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/j4hnx70exrp9nbx/riddleanswer short.txt?dl=0

(Just so you have the exact file to verify.) Lets start with the text I added in after first posting:

Why is it, that some people read a mere fraction of The Sequences and achieve something like 'rationality', where others read the whole thing and get nothing. Why is it that I have ostensibly novel thoughts on 'rationality' reading a book on the history of science, but a physics Ph.D reads that same book and gets little from it but fun trivia?

So, I'll go ahead and say that my personal hypothesis here is as simple as aim. A physicist might see having to read about alchemy for class as an imposition, and even if they don't they carefully scan it for physics-insight. How you look for things in the pursuit of your goals, determines a lot of how this vague thing we think of as 'noticing' works for you. The cipher goes a little deeper than that.

Paths are walked one foot after the other, by careful repetition. Crossbow is closer to Mars than pen. Zeno's wisdom of measurement must be considered carefully to achieve Erasmus's glory. The artists thieving eyes permit no wasted motion. All the world is stolen by their dedication. It is easy to confuse that which is stolen with that which New Caledonia's cartographer made, in telling the difference you'll map while you travel and cut with no blade.

To walk a path you need to know where you're going, repetition implies the thing described in the rest happens more than once. 'Crossbow is closer to Mars than pen' demonstrates a principle, it's grammatically distinct from the rest of the composition. (In retrospect I think this may have been a mistake.) That principle is really as simple as you being able to make such distance comparisons at all. The notion of distance is important as we move into Zeno. Zeno's paradoxes deal with the distance between things, as they become infinitely small and everywhere in between. Erasmus's glory was probably the wrong wording, I should have said "Erasmus's diligence" or something else. Because glory implies his achievements, but actually I wanted to focus on his methods.

In all likelihood it is this dedication by which the most exceptional scholars came into their own strength even with all of the world arrayed against them. Between the chatter of business, the sting of bitter poverty, or the disruptions of vagrancy. The life of Erasmus was one of wanderlust; born without a silver spoon and drawn from city to city and country to country by the promises of those who claimed they'd house him. These hopes always came to nothing, even as he each time believed and was beguiled by them. Yet somehow he continued the work. Through unceasing stability in effort, by a constant activation of energy in moments where others do nothing, Erasmus managed to write more in the same condition than others in the same place would hope to read. Having occupied every station in life, from highest court to lowest ghetto he wrote us the most complete description of civil manners in his age. He gave to us such knowledge of the world in that time that he will forever stand among the first literary heroes. How this quality was obtained he tells us, implicitly, by noting that the "Praise of Folly", among his best work, was written on the road to Italy. Of this he said: ne totum illud tempus quo equo fuit insidendum illiteratis fabulis terreretur: "lest the hours which he was obliged to spend on horseback should be tattled away without regard to literature".

(This is a modernized excerpt from a Samuel Johnson esasy.)

Erasmus's ceaseless dedication allowed him to pursue literature and the arts even among an environment wholly unsuited. The artist, whose craft relies on imitating or subverting the works of nature, is instructed in all moments by everything they see. "Good artists copy, great artists steal" goes the famous saying. Which is meant to direct towards the great artists, whose craft was more focused deeply on naturalism. The artists did in fact 'steal' the world, figuring out how to do everything in classical compositions and more. It's easy to confuse this sort of grounded investigation, and in fact your aims, with the magical expectations that others lay down. (eg. That Bayesian Mathematics will give you superpowers. Philip Tetlock for example insists it does no such thing.) This line was actually one of the bigger mistakes in the composition, because on reflection I don't think it's in telling the difference that you get the benefits outlined.

So how does Zeno's measurement come up? The basic answer is that in being able to judge the distance between things at every intermediate point on your path, you can run a life strategy something like gradient descent. And so long as you don't get trapped in a local maxima you'll probably do pretty well that way. This also lets you pursue something far away, even when your immediate environment doesn't necessarily seem to permit it. Mapping while you travel, is noticing and having insights on life as you walk through it, rather than just on reflection (which is a much weaker time to be able to notice). This might sound trivial but I find many people seem not to do this. Cutting with no blade is finding ways to make action towards your goals even without an ostensible 'weapon' to 'cut' with in the sense of The Book of Five Rings. (This is a fairly central thing in The Sequences, so I think it's okay to assume it as background material.)

The primary thing when you take a sword in your hands is your intention to cut the enemy, whatever the means. Whenever you parry, hit, spring, strike or touch the enemy's cutting sword, you must cut the enemy in the same movement. It is essential to attain this. If you think only of hitting, springing, striking or touching the enemy, you will not be able actually to cut him.

Or as I put it to a friend in trying to explain the essence of things:

I think the core of it though is summed up in that phrase: permit no wasted motion.

If you structure yourself to be taught The Art at every moment you can be, trying to find it even in the impositions and annoyances, less of your life will be aimless. If you know the goal and always where to step in its service (by always having a notion of the distance between your next step and the goal), then much fewer actions are careless or without consideration. If you maintain that ceaseless activation of energy, always stepping when you can step and always looking for the ways in which you can cut without your sword, then you'll have more purpose in your motions. By always knowing the goal, and always connecting it to what you see, you will get more from everything you encounter.

This is the first lesson, all else comes after.

Not providing context is in fact a flaw of the original post. The basic reason I didn't do it is that I felt providing inside-view accurate context might be promising too much. And providing inside-view inaccurate context would feel too much like lying. But in the original context where this sort of riddle is used, there is usually some non-ciphertext to help you out. Oliver Habryka kindly provided some of this, otherwise I probably would have posted it myself.

Crossbow is closer to Mars than pen

If you treat war and conflict as directed intentionality along the lines of the Book of Five Rings, then this is something akin to a call to taking actions in the world rather than spilling lots of words on the internet.

It is not a draft, that is the whole text.