But it seems you really changed your mind about him. Is there a concrete reason, or is it part of the huge changes you chose to make since Two Carts?
Here’s a quote from 2004 from Atzach:
"…
However, one who believes in a certain objectivity of interpretations must adopt a different model. And here it is one of two possibilities: either we have access (more in raw potential form) to the author’s world, or we have access to the ‘truth’ itself, and we compare the text to it.
For those interested, these topics are discussed in my book Two Carts and a Hot-Air Balloon, mainly in the second and third parts, which are supposed to come out soon, God willing.

From here there is a peg and cornerstone for the entire topic being discussed here. Anyone who has even a little access to concepts of truth knows that Rabbi Moshe is among the greatest of the great in thought in our generation (that I know of. Maybe there are other hidden ones).
I heard several tapes, and I had occasion to speak with him about several topics. The man is an astonishing personal and intellectual phenomenon.
And I say this as someone who knows quite a few schools of thought and philosophy (at least general philosophy, not necessarily Jewish).
In my humble opinion, attempts to cast the discussion into patterns of comparison and consistency are ridiculous. Ideas like his can be assessed only by hearing him and testing the matter in one’s own personal crucible (deconstruction?).

I definitely agree, and even know, that the things in writing do not represent even the slightest edge of Rabbi Moshe, and that is also how he himself relates to them.
It amazes me that someone who speaks of Rabbi Nachman as original and great thought does not understand that there are things that cannot be grasped from writing, and apparently Rabbi Moshe himself does not write because of this. There are quite a few Jews whose Torah is essentially an oral Torah, and as is well known, strictly speaking all of our Oral Torah has that kind of character.

But I can’t go into it at length here, Michi"

Indeed I changed. He is definitely among the most prominent in the field of Jewish thought, if there were such a field.

There really are scholars of Rabbi Michi’s teaching who say that there were two Rabbi Michis, and indeed there is a great dispute among the scholars whether there were two, or whether he retracted, or whether in his youthful days he wrote for the general public and only at a later stage revealed what was truly in his heart to those who heard his teaching.
And there are those who claim that he hinted he would retract in the title of the book Two Carts—that it is not one cart here but two, and one of them is empty; examine this very carefully. And the hot-air balloon means that the mathematician remained on the ground while the questioning man floats off and does not know where to, and this is a hint to his doctrine as above.
And even in the title of the second book the above-mentioned Rabbi hinted at that which is and that which is not, in the secret of the two carts, one of which is empty, meaning that which is not, heaven forbid. That is, his first doctrine is no more.

To Tzachi — warm greetings,

After Bibi taught us that “there was nothing because there is nothing,” Rabbi Michael Abraham applied the rule to “Jewish thought” as well, and determined that “there is no such thing” 🙂 Bibi repaid his student by naming the “Abraham Accords” after him.

Best regards, M. “Rabbi-Michaeli”