a) makes metaphysics serve as physics .. but I don't think this matters ... b) it would be falsehood to call it water You've created a liar's paradox: b' pretty much rules out a', and conversely.
it would be falsehood to call it water I doubt this is the issue. It goes to the core of usage of homonyms in Torah/Talmud. Water is ubiquitously called water in Sefer Torah and by Chazal. No Pharisee getting to that point (Marble) would confuse Water with ordinary water, Tree with ordinary tree etc, - that's simply impossible. Perhaps the issue is not mystic's own confusion, but calling things by their proper Names, and not by euphemisms. Then this underscores that a) they are normally using euphemisms bordering on falsehood, and b) there's another entire (complete!) set of terminology, to be used instead, beyond that point. A' would actually strengthen the point I'm usually making (except for the falsehood part) (омонимия, ПСТ-1), but b' is pretty much impossible, or at least unknown to us in Hebrew/English; unless we consider loshen kodesh as an alternative.
no subject
You've created a liar's paradox: b' pretty much rules out a', and conversely.
it would be falsehood to call it water
I doubt this is the issue. It goes to the core of usage of homonyms in Torah/Talmud. Water is ubiquitously called water in Sefer Torah and by Chazal. No Pharisee getting to that point (Marble) would confuse Water with ordinary water, Tree with ordinary tree etc, - that's simply impossible. Perhaps the issue is not mystic's own confusion, but calling things by their proper Names, and not by euphemisms. Then this underscores that a) they are normally using euphemisms bordering on falsehood, and b) there's another entire (complete!) set of terminology, to be used instead, beyond that point. A' would actually strengthen the point I'm usually making (except for the falsehood part) (омонимия, ПСТ-1), but b' is pretty much impossible, or at least unknown to us in Hebrew/English; unless we consider loshen kodesh as an alternative.