Ehyeh asher ehyeh, (I am that I am, i.e., A is) is the error existence-movement (x).

Change is the error next-tier. It is the word-undermining cancer that x is, as metastasis.

Modern Scholar (RG).

The English translation is "I will be what I will be".

Existence is now, persistence is then.

(RG).

That's an (your?) interpretation. There is no 'now' in that Hebrew sentence.

X is infinitely complicated as "form" to any order of integral "change."

Point-i (that everything is word) is that error x is for instance temporal as the errors now (point-I) as then (period-I), that is, infinitely complicated as "form" to any order of integral "change."

The error, and it applies to all existence/non-existence, is I was I am therefore I will be I am, wizard, like the Spirit. In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God.

I (subject), me (object). Plus "plurality" and "perspective."

I.e., what word is as the why and how explanation of word is the mayhem necessarily retroactively chronically blamed on "man," i.e., as mansplaining.

Point-i is no explanation. It is that everything, even x (as non-word word explanation of word, formal or informal), is word.

The utter self-contradiction that X is, is self-explanatory.

Whatever it is, am or will be, it's error. It's the error.

(RG).

Whose translation is it? THAT is the error.

Yes. Agency, am or will be, is a convoluted mess.

No wonder only the past exists.

Interesting. "... there is no present tense of the verb 'to be' in the Hebrew language." No wonder only the past exists.

(RG).

The present tense exists, but there is no verb form for it. However, in Classical Hebrew there is a present tense form (sort of).

Make of that what you will.

Classical Hebrew to English present tense form, is as derivative is to point.

Is the Classical Hebrew present tense verb form to the English present tense verb form what the derivative is to the point? And is the Modern Hebrew therefore true to "the mysticism of existence" as anything but present (tense)? Is it like "change?"

Ehyeh asher ehyeh, (I am that I am, i.e., A is) is the error existence-movement (x).

Change is the error next-tier. It is the word-undermining cancer that x is, as metastasis.

Existence is now, persistence is then.

X is infinitely complicated as "form" to any order of integral "change."

I (subject), me (object). Plus "plurality" and "perspective."

The utter self-contradiction that X is, is self-explanatory.

No wonder only the past exists.

Classical Hebrew to English present tense form, is as derivative is to point.

No matter how deep the rabbit hole goes, the same "change" ties it all together.