I was recently challenged as to why be concerned with theology which is basically an attempt to rationalize G-d when we have explicit statements that this is impossible
Yeshaya (55:8-9) 8. For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways, says the Lord.9. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts.
Rambam (Yesodei Haorah (01:10) What did Moses want to comprehend when he requested: "Please show me Your glory" He asked to know the truth of the existence of G-d, to the extent that it could be internalized within his mind, as one knows a particular person whose face he saw and whose image has been engraved within one's heart. Thus, this person's identity is distinguished within one's mind from that of other men. Similarly, Moses asked that the existence of G-d distinguished in his mind from the existence of other entities, to the extent that he would know the truth of His existence as it is in its own right.
In Rav Treibitz's introduction to my Daas Totah he wrote:
G d commands us to study the Torah twice - in Deuteronomy (11:19) and again in Deuteronomy (4:9–11). Each verse, however, is uniquely distinguished by its own internal semantical and syntactical form as well as the context in which it appears. Deuteronomy (11:19) states, “You shall teach the commandments to your children to speak about them, while at home, while traveling on the road, when you lie down to go to sleep and while you rise up.” This verse appears in the description of the reward and punishment which will result from the fulfillment or transgression of the commandments. Consequently, this verse is generally understood to refer to the study of the halachic obligations of the Torah - in all their variegated details. In contrast, Deuteronomy (4:9) concerns the necessity of recalling the monumental events of the giving of the Torah at Sinai. Here the Torah informs the Jewish people, “Be careful for yourself, and guard your soul greatly, not to forget the events that your eyes beheld at Sinai. That is in order that they shouldn’t leave your heart for the rest of your life, and you shall tell them to your children and to your children’s children.”
Ostensibly, the second verse deals with our obligation to effectively communicate the experience of the mass revelation of the Torah at Sinai. It requires us to preserve the memory of the event which constitutes the pivotal historical proof of the truth of the Torah and Moses’ prophecy. However, the Talmudic Sages (Kiddushin 30a) understood the verse to be a command to study the Torah. Furthermore, Nachmanides (Maimonides’ Book of the Commandments) asserts that it is specifically a command to study the “faith of the Torah.”
Consequently, the two verses which obligate us to study the Torah actually refer to two types of study. One refers to the study of the legal part of the Torah, and the other refers to the study of Torah’s theology. Each form of study is deemed a separate scholarly enterprise. Given the fact that each is based on a separate verse, it is incumbent upon us to explore the unique features of each, what they have in common, and their differences.
In the world of Talmudic and Rabbinical epistemology, the idea itself and how we derive it from its source in the Torah are inextricably intertwined. Therefore, one can explore the nature of a Torah concept, even to its fine details, by careful scrutiny of the verse from which it emerges. Towards this end, it is instructive to compare the two verses with respect to their salient contrasting features. Such an analysis yields three notable distinctions.