Question

Hello Rabbi Michael Abraham.
I wrote yesterday what I think: that the real reason we believe is because of the Torah’s commandment of faith. And like every commandment, there is choice involved in it. Accepting the yoke of the kingdom of Heaven without reason or understanding. On top of that, there is room for proofs. Of course you couldn’t accept that, because it doesn’t sound logical…
Is it possible that what I’m thinking is basically Leibowitz’s view, just formulated in a more Hasidic style? A quote from a famous article of his:
I know of no paths to faith, only faith itself. The phrase “paths to faith” may be interpreted as expressing the opinion that faith is a conclusion necessarily derived from certain data of reality as grasped by the thinking person—natural reality, historical reality, or conscious reality—and therefore a person can be led to this conclusion by presenting that data to him and analyzing it conceptually. But I do not see religious faith as a conclusion that a person draws; rather, it is a value-decision that he makes. And like any value-content in human consciousness, it does not arise from information supplied or given to him; rather, it is an obligation that a person imposes upon himself. Therefore faith cannot be taught; what can be done is to present it before a person in all its force and power. … Faith is the supreme expression, and perhaps the only one, of man’s free choice. A person can take upon himself the yoke of the kingdom of Heaven and Torah and commandments, and he can refuse to accept them, and there is no method in the world that can direct this decision and determination. Nor is there anything in reality that can bring him to faith, if it does not arise from his own decision and determination.
Signs and wonders, the mighty hand and the outstretched arm, God’s salvation, and even revelation of the Divine Presence—all these were not enough to bring to faith the generation that witnessed them…. Yet much later there were dozens of generations of Jews who saw no miracles, and saw nothing in their world testifying to Divine providence, and saw no reward for a commandment or punishment for a transgression, nor were they saved—and they believed with complete faith. Religious faith cannot be drawn from nature or from history. If this were possible, faith would lack value significance; it would be forced upon a person, similar to scientific knowledge, regarding which a person has no choice, decision, or determination, but is compelled by it if he understands it.
Is his approach logical? It seems that he does not use intellect to arrive at faith, but only choice.