To chabad shlucha and sechel and others. I don’t know how you made it this long. These chabad threads were unfair when the mods edited shlucha for “chashash apikorsus” (doubtful). They allowed a comment in calling the Rebbe some kofer from Russia.
We also allowed a comment calling the Rebbe Nasi Hador. The facts are up for discussing, apikorsus is not.
Syag lchachma
What you are saying is an explanation on a source can’t be it’s own source. The Rebbe said it can the the reason the rebbe is correct. Chabad isn’t really saying that (even if they are using those words). EG. If you ask where the ramabm got a halacha, you can give the lamdus of where it came from, but I can ask why he is the lone opinion, and the only reaponse is his own svara. Thus he has a source that no one agrees with, and his way of understanding is his own source. Similar to lubavaitch understanding the rambam and different understandings of the Zohar ect. That’s true of pretty much all machlokes. The Rebbe may be wrong, but Chabads way of thinking is really not illogical if his argument is sound, wich chabad for whatever reason thinks is.