Trust in God with no effort was brought by Rav Israel Salanter as being mentioned in Nahmanides/(Ramban). But I have not heard where that statement of the Ramban is.

However clearly it is in the Gra in Mishlei/Proverbs.

IN the Obligations of the Hearts [Chovot Levavot] by Ibn Pakuda it is brought in a slightly different way that when one trusts in God and places all his effort towards teh serve of God then God takes away the yoke of things of this world and in particular the money issues.

However in the Mir in NY where I learned about this idea, it was understood that service of God means to learn Torah. [i.e. Gemara in depth with Rav Haim of Brisk and the other sages of Lithuania like Rav Shach.]
The only difference is that I would like to add learning Physics and Metaphysics to what is in the category of serving God.
[That is quite clear in the Rambam in the Guide and also in the Mishne Torah in a slightly round about way. But it is not his particular new idea as you see it is most of the sages of Sefarad that followed Rav Saadia Gaon.

Ashkenazim more or less rejected that approach. However you do see it somewhat in the Gra in the Translation of Euclid done by a disciple of the Gra who quotes the Gra thus: "One who lacks any knowledge in any one of the seven wisdoms will be lacking in understanding of Torah 100 times in proportion".

G Minor w75 Andante    w75 midi format  w75 in nwc format

D Major w74

It is odd that the deepest thinkers of this generation in philosophy are not really on the same page. Dr Kelley Ross is with Kant, Fries and Leonard Nelson. [Friesian School]. Michael Huemer with the reaction against Kant: i.e. G.E. Moore. [Intuitionists]. Ed Fesser totally with Aristotle and Aquinas! And it seems unlikely that even getting them into a room to discuss the issues would change much. [But who knows?]
[Also you might notice that Hegel does not have any really bright advocate. Even the best Hegel site is specifically communist!] I feel sorry for poor Hegel who really did not deserve all the misuse and abuse he got.][Hegel once had a great advocate--McTaggart who is still important.] But  nowadays mainstream  philosophy (swamp philosophy) ignores all three.

Rav Moshe Haim Lutzato (author of the great Musar book מסילת ישרים) brings in Path of God [I think] and also in the other of his more philosophical books that the purpose of Creation is the revelation of God's Oneness and that the way that happens is by "the measure one measures out to others is the measure that is measured back to him."

This I think is actually close to Hegel. Though I have not read much however I noticed in his Lectures on History is that at the very beginning he sees history as a revealing of the Wisdom of God.
Or as he puts it the revelation of Reason as the Absolute Spirit makes it known.

w73 G Major

W-73 midi file

w73 nwc

"Forward To Kant"

 "Forward To Kant" is the slogan of Robert Hanna [who was at the University of Colorado]. And that makes a lot of sense to me.

Anyway given that I have  a great liking for Kant, and that particular stream of Kant that was Leonard Nelson I have to agree with that.
And that goes along well with the idea of the Rishonim that held from learning Metaphysics as presented by Aristotle.
Why not just go straight then with Aristotle? Because of Berkeley. To some degree you really can not ignore the problems in Aristotle. And you do not get much of an answer until Kant and Hegel. But then twentieth century philosophy fell into a ditch. So the best idea is to retrace our steps forward to Kant and Hegel. 

But I would like to add that philosophy without Physics seems to be not grounded. Sometimes they are so smart they come up with really dumb conclusions. So I would suggest first getting through Physics up until String Theory and then doing Kant and Hegel