The real case behind the "4 wheels = car must be a ferrari" fallacy

Here's the actual case I have in mind, when I earlier asked the simpler version of the question, "A car has 4 wheels. Therefore it's a ferrari. What's the fallacy?"

What are the essential prerequisite elements that make vocalized speech? 

(Wrong answer from Famous Buddhist teacher): Placing the mind and keeping it connected are the prerequisite elements.

That's wrong. Placing the mind and keeping it connected are some prerequisite elements of vocalized speech, but they're just a subset, and not even the distinguishing feature or the most important of the essential prerequisite conditions to qualify for vocalized speech.

The correct answer is, "verbal thoughts, thoughts with linguistic labels, the thoughts you think before you say them out loud" 
are the essential prerequisite elements that make vocalized speech.

What this famous Buddhist teacher then does with that fallacious definition above, is use massive equivocation. Everywhere in the collection of thousands of scriptures in the Buddhist canon, he plugs in his version of "prerequisite conditions of vocal speech" when he wants to advance his agenda to redefine deep meditation to be a state where no thinking is possible.

Essentially it's just like the 4 wheels = ferrari example I give, where anywhere the scriptures requires the specific conditions to be a ferrari, he'll swap in his "four wheels" and then use the 4 wheels to say his honda civic meets the conditions for being a ferrari.