Did the Rambam believe what he wrote?

So we really don't know what the Rambam's opinion is?
Or is the Rambam's opinion clear because the Rambam wrote that he passed over the Mishnah of the Torah after he wrote it at a young age
But does it make sense to say that the Rambam lied?
Maybe he had a different approach but from here to…

Rubin also admitted in an interview that the book's real purpose is to show the radical commentators who are heretics.
Rabbi Yosef Kapach writes about Narboni that he is known to have had attitudes that tended towards epicureans (according to the Rambam), and Rabbi Kapach adds that he wouldn't mind if he said this as his opinions, but that he included it as if the Rambam said it was unacceptable.
What does the rabbi think about this?

I explained that this is not a lie. In any case, my opinion is that none of this is interesting or important. What do I care what Maimonides' true opinion was? I read his arguments and those of others and formulate a position, on the merits of the matter and not on the merits of the person.

In discussing Rubin's book, it is highly recommended to read the response book to his book, "The True Beliefs of Maimonides," which appears on Wikipedia under the entry "The Fruits of Maimonides" in "External Links."

Because the reader will formulate a position on the merits of the matter, his words are not emptied of content. Someone who is embarrassed and has faith in the Rambam will search for clues in his words and perhaps find the Rambam's solution, and perhaps the solution will convince him or help him think of an alternative solution. And someone who is not embarrassed, or not diligent enough, or from the Executive Committee for the Preservation of the Holy Scriptures, may think that the Rambam is saying interesting and not radical things (these are the silver masks that wrap the golden apples). And in my opinion, this technique was indeed exceptionally successful for the Rambam.

In my opinion,
any position, whatever it may be, that is taken to extremes – loses its flavor.
The book allows *those who want to make the effort and look at the parallels* to stand by the opinion of the Maimonides,
and there is a very small part that cannot be decided. That is what I tried to do in my commentary on the book.

In my opinion, it is important to know the opinion of the Maimonides and stand by its interpretation, not because it is binding (it is not),
but because it contains thought that can be learned from for inspiration, it is comprehensive, and mediates between halakha and thought, between the individual and the general, between body and soul, and more. It is an exciting and intelligent option that is worth studying.

Yochai Makbili, Mifal Mishnah Torah