In his recent book, Maimonides and the Shaping of the Jewish Canon, James A. Diamond examines the influence of the great medieval Jewish philosopher on a series of later Jewish thinkers, from the 13th-century rabbinic scholar Moses Naḥmanides to the 20th-century philosopher Hermann Cohen and even Franz Kafka. Menachem Kellner writes in his review:

Diamond sets out to prove that “at virtually every critical turn in Jewish thought, one confronts Maimonidean formulations in one way or another.” Diamond’s claim is actually much stronger than that. He [in fact] sets out to prove that the collected works of Maimonides, alongside the Bible, Talmud, and Zohar, “comprise the core spiritual and intellectual canon of Judaism.” . . . Diamond . . . makes a subtle and sophisticated argument to the effect that Maimonides set the agenda for the future of Jewish thought by providing an “inextricable link between philosophy, law, and narrative.”

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.