Question

From the book Kuzari:
And the philosopher said to him: The Creator has neither will nor hatred, for He is exalted above all desires and all intentions; for intention indicates a lack in the one who intends, and the fulfillment of his intention is a perfection for him, which means that before it is fulfilled he is deficient. Likewise, in the view of the philosophers He is above knowledge of the particulars of things, because they change with the times, and there is no change in the Creator’s knowledge. He does not know you, much less your intentions and deeds, and certainly He does not hear your prayer or see your movements. And if the philosophers say that He created you, they say this only figuratively, because He is the Cause of causes in the coming-to-be of every created thing, not because it came from Him intentionally. Nor did He ever create a human being, for the world is eternal, and man has never ceased to be born from man who preceded him, with forms, temperaments, and traits compounded in him from his father and mother and relatives, and qualities from the climates, lands, foods, waters, together with the powers of the spheres, the constellations, and the forces according to the relations that arise from them. And everything goes back to the First Cause, not because of any intention on its part, but rather by emanation: from it emanates a second cause, then a third and a fourth; the causes and effects are linked and unfold in succession as you see them. And this chain is eternal, just as the First Cause is eternal, having no beginning. For each individual among the people of the world there are causes through which he is brought to completion. There is a person whose causes were complete and he came forth complete, and there is one whose causes were lacking and he came forth deficient. Like the Cushite, who was prepared for no more than receiving the form of a human being and speech in the utmost deficiency; and the philosopher, whose traits were prepared so that he can receive through them the moral, intellectual, and practical virtues, lacking nothing of perfection. But this perfection exists in potential and requires being brought into actuality through study and ethical training, until the aptitude becomes manifest in the matter for which it was prepared, whether for perfection, deficiency, or endless intermediate states. And to the perfected person there will attach from the divine kind a light called the Active Intellect, and his potential intellect will cleave to it in a union so complete that the man will appear as though he himself were that Active Intellect, with no difference between them. And his faculties—that is, the limbs of that man—will then be used only for the most perfect actions, at the most fitting times, and in the best of matters, as though all his faculties were instruments of the Active Intellect rather than of the hylic, receptive intellect that had used them at first, when it sometimes did well and often sinned, whereas this one always does well. This level is the highest goal that can be hoped for by the perfected man. Once his soul returns purified of doubts, understanding the sciences as they truly are, it becomes as if it were an angel and rises to the lowest angelic rank, separated from bodies. This is the rank of the Active Intellect, which is an angel whose rank is below that of the angel appointed over the sphere of the moon. These are intellects abstracted from matter, eternal together with the First Cause, and they never fear annihilation. And the soul of the perfected man and that Active Intellect become one thing, and he does not feel the destruction of his body and limbs, because he and it have become one thing, and his soul rests in life, because he has joined the company of Hermes, Asclepius, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle; for he, they, everyone who reaches their rank, and the Active Intellect, are one thing. And this is what is called “the will of God” only figuratively or by approximation. Pursue this and seek knowledge of the truth of things until your intellect becomes active rather than merely receptive. Cleave to the ways of the righteous in character traits and deeds, for they help in forming the truth, in attachment to learning, and in becoming like that Active Intellect. Immediately after this you will attain the quality of contentment, lowliness, humility, and every lofty trait, together with magnifying the First Cause—not so that His will should favor you, nor to remove His wrath from upon you, but in order to resemble the Active Intellect in apprehending the truth, in describing each thing as befits it, and in believing it as it really is; for these are among the qualities of the intellect. And when you are established in this mode of belief, do not worry about which Torah you follow, or which religion, or which deed, speech, or language you use to exalt God. Or devise for yourself a religion for the sake of humility, exaltation, praise, and the ordering of your traits, your household, and the people of your city, if they will rely on it. Or adopt for yourself the religion of rational conventions composed by the philosophers, and set as your aim and intention the purification of your soul. In short: seek purity of heart in whatever way is possible for you, after you understand the principles of the sciences in their truth. Then you will reach what you seek—namely, attachment to the spiritual, that is, the Active Intellect. And perhaps it will inspire you prophetically and make known to you future events through true dreams and trustworthy visions.
 
 
Hello Rabbi,
At the beginning of my study of the Kuzari, I find myself stopping again and again in the first section at the words of the philosopher, because I cannot find in his words any flaw or logical failure. Moreover, I find in his words points of contact with Jewish faith, certainly according to Maimonides.
As I understand it, the philosopher describes a theological outlook that does not necessarily contradict the principles of Judaism and that was common among various sages throughout the generations.
I have not found any serious engagement with his words in any of the online lectures on the subject, and I would be glad to hear your opinion on this topic and your philosophical response to the claim raised by the philosopher in the book, and whether there is a reason the king should not accept it.
 
Thank you very much