Regarding the problem of kabbalah being very pacifistic, and the kabbalistic rabbis claiming absolute truth, from heavenly teachers. You seemed to agree that not just charlatans of today, but classic kabbalists were very pacifistic..
You mentioned that when kabbalah goes against halacha, we do halacha.
I agree..
But this just points to the idea of not taking kabbalah seriously. If a kabbalistic text goes against halacha sometimes, and we say "well, that can't be right". then it calls into question the entire text. Especially if as rabbi bar hayyim said, the text, e.g. zohar, has anachronisms in it.
And this calls into question even a great kabbalist that accepted the zohar(I think the arizal did).. Didn't his heavenly teacher tell him it was not all written or at all written by rabbi shimon bar yochai?
I can understand those that accept it completely, because they accept the truth claim, so they accept it. And I can understand those that reject it completely, they at least they are consistent.
But one that accepts parts of a text that doen't contradict what he believes, and rejects parts that do. That is just not honest, for a text whose claim, is that it was written by a certain person who received knowledge from an angel.
If parts contradict, then those parts we could say are unreliable. But the rest of it, the honest answer is that we don't know, and therefore, cannot take it seriously. And that's being politically correct and polite. The harsh answer is that the author is G-d forbid, a lunatic albeit an intelligent one, or, a liar or a gullible person with an overactive imagination who believes his own nonsense.
Of course, most of our rabbis have accepted kabbalah, and most of the great rabbis have been kabbalists. The vilna Gaon - another kabbalist and great rabbi. So people don't want to disrespect these personalities. So one politely uses a methodology that just proves they don't take kabbalah or kabbalistic texts or kabbalists writing kabbalah, seriously, while they say little against the text or person that wrote it. or people that claimed heavenly teachers, and accepted it as holy. It's a politically correct compromise. But really it calls into question these kabbalists and it is certainly not taking kabbalah seriously.