Insights from the book "True and Unstable"

Hello Rabbi
 
I wanted to thank you for the insights you conveyed in your excellent book. I heard you several times in lectures in Ra'anana and they were an excellent platform for me to understand the book. 
 
If I may add, the conclusion of the book connected to a few other ideas for me:
1. How can we understand the puzzling midrash that God addresses several nations to receive the Torah and they are not ready, and that they do not submit to the clear proof that the Creator of the world reveals himself to them and gives them commands?
But if we say that the reality of God was difficult for them to accept for an irrational reason... because in their intuition they do not accept a being who would command them something irrational like not to steal or not to murder or not to commit adultery, and therefore they are simply blind to accepting the word of God.
2. The question of why preachers do not say a blessing over the recitation of the Haggadah is well-known, and several answers have been given. One of them is that the Haggadah depends on understanding the heart, and since we are not sure that the child will understand, we do not say a blessing. And apparently, what is the difference between the Torah blessings that are said even though we are not sure that we will understand the Torah?
It seems that the difference is that in the Haggadah we are busy transmitting the faith, meaning that it combines testimonies/proofs of the Exodus from Egypt with the Seder Night experience, but it is not clear whether the judge - the child - will accept it, but rather it depends on the trust he places in us, and this is at his discretion. We are aware that there is also a wicked son who is not frightened by the proofs and is not impressed by the tradition of the fathers... We can direct with a blessing of truth and faith and pray that we will succeed in being convincing on the Seder Night.
3. There is a dispute in Tractate Berakhot between Rival and Rabbi Yochanan about the obligation to rely on Geulah for prayer in Arabic, and we see there that they cite the same verses, but each has a different opinion of the same proof, and each is convinced by his own method. Rabbi Sharki wanted to say that there is a dispute here between two conditions from different spiritual roots – a son of the world to come (Rival) and one who has a share in the world to come (Rival). According to the conclusion in your book, we see that even if there are differences of opinion between them that stem from a very intuitive place, one can try to convince and one can also rule on a halakhic ruling…
4. Rabbi Nachman of Breslov's method of solitude and a method invented called 'focusing' fit together well in my opinion and complement the connection between intellectual study and cognition...
 
Regarding the issue of stricter observance of the mitzvot, I recommend that you read the commentary of the commissioner to the question of the sage in chapter 6, verses 20 to 21, which, as I understand it, explains what is the love of a mitzvah and what is the way to be meticulous in fulfilling a mitzvah. My conclusion from his words is that understanding a mitzvah according to the rules of study and investigation increases the merit of the mitzvah, and not the neglect of the mitzvah that stems from external concerns, as you wrote in your article on legumes.