But that Mashal is not a good one here at all. Any individual is not growing up in a vacuum, where the concept of G-d is alien and he needs to come to this brand new thought. The idea is already here and it is up to people to use whatever tools are at his disposal to conclude whether it is emes or not.
I acutally didn’t know that simpletoremember had an article on the DH altogether although after you mentioned it I found a couple. The professor that I was talking about is not mentioned there though. His book is considered a standard text on the critique of this. But let’s leave off it.
I am not saying that the gemarah is not also halachic, but there is definitely sod in every sugyah. And it is clear that this is what the Ben Ish Chai was saying. But really, think about it. They knew how to use the building blocks of the world that Hashem used to create the world itself -to create life (sanhedrin 67b) and you think they didn’t know that how the life they were creating worked?
Not being able to fathom anything about Hashem is not a stirah to anything I’ve said. About the atzmiyus of Hashem there is nothing we can say. It is only about what He created that we can talk about.
I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that from the Rambam’s works it is clear that he didn’t learn kabbalah since that is exaclty what I quoted to you earlier: That the Rambam said after he had already learned kabbalah that if he wouldn’t be so old already and his works would not have already gone out into the world he would have been chozer on many things he wrote.
I don’t know why you call the letter a forgery. The Shomrei Emunim HaKadmon didn’t think it was. The Abarbanel that he quoted didn’t. The Ramban and Mohara”m Alshker are also quoted. I don’t understand why you think it was a forgery.