Transdisciplinary education emerges today as a necessary response to the supercomplexity of contemporary crises, yet its institutionalisation remains difficult because universities are still largely organised through disciplinary territories, inherited hierarchies and evaluative routines. Tsao, Kochhar-Lindgren and Lam argue that the Common Core at The University of Hong Kong offers a persuasive case study for understanding how such a curriculum can become durable without becoming rigid. Drawing on Deleuze and Guattari, they conceptualise the curriculum as an assemblage: a dynamic configuration of students, teachers, policies, funding streams, administrative procedures, institutional desires and material infrastructures. Its success depends not on abolishing disciplines, but on reassembling them through porous yet recognisable curricular boundaries. The concepts of territorialisation and refrain are especially important: policies, timetables, course approvals, grading systems and funding cycles produce recurring rhythms that stabilise the programme, while periodic revision, new thematic areas and pedagogical experimentation prevent stagnation. The HKU Common Core demonstrates this process at scale, having enrolled more than 200,000 undergraduates, approved 290 courses and engaged hundreds of teachers since its full implementation in 2012. Its significance lies in showing that transdisciplinarity requires neither vague generalism nor anti-disciplinary rupture, but a carefully orchestrated ecology of repetition, variation and institutional desire. Ultimately, the article concludes that sustainable curricular transformation depends on creating structures flexible enough to absorb future uncertainty while stable enough to command legitimacy.