@shmei @sechel and all other metaharei hasherets
Not zohar and not noam elimelech and not minhat el’azar and not the rebbi from ropshiytz
A] none of them said anything about themselves, always about their rebbeim with no implication about themselves
B] there was no personal gain whatsoever to be had , for the proclaimant.
C] proof in the pudding – none of their followers interpreted what they said in any way different to the explanation offered
i.e. that they were davuk to havayeh
D] It had no impact whatsoever on their own followers re their followers veneration of themselves
whereas in habads case
A] it is clear that his remark about atsmut umehut had intended implications about himself
B] Equally clear that there was personal gain for the proclaimant
C] habad followers interpreted it NOT like the no’am elimeleh’s explanation of dvekut , rather like the pashtut
D] habad veneration of their leader excels by far any other veneration of hasidim/talmidim of their rebbi/leader
yb