I often wonder how much rashi truly contributed to medival french society. His fellow frenchmen went off and invaded England, and many of them even fell at hastings whilst rashi selfishly sat and learnt his midrashim.
I believe if rashi were alive today he would lack the necessary skills to look for ways to kill time in an 8 hour a day unnecessary and meaningless corporate role.
"Rashi was part of a thoroughly anti-rationalist tradition, one that has been all but lost with the dominance of Maimonidean thought that has left a deep impression on even the “mystical” chareidi community. Modern-day halachists would certainly not recommend following this shitah of Rashi. He could say it, we cannot."
Alternatively - Maimonidean Rationalism has been canonized. (Mysticism, on the other hand, can never be canonized because it's irrational and the "National Will" would never agree to that!)
"All of these issues stem from the fact that apparently, Rashi was a “literalist”, which (according to Eric and Natan) means two things. 1. Rashi takes everything literally, including every single unbelievable Medrash. Due to the ancient mindset of believing anything no matter what, plus Rashi having no secular education and no exposure to rationalism, he was infinitely credulous. 2. Therefore, we should also take everything Rashi himself says absolutely literally."
"God is cramped up for space because a human being made (and worshipped) an idol? This is Rashi's view?"
I personally do indeed find that hard to believe, so maybe in that case, Rashi is using your understanding of k'vyachol. However, I also find it hard to beleive that Rashi took a literal interpretation of Aggadatas about people tunneling to the Heavens, or about Adam mating with animals, and yet this is how Ramah, Mizrachi etc., understand him."
I often wonder how much rashi truly contributed to medival french society. His fellow frenchmen went off and invaded England, and many of them even fell at hastings whilst rashi selfishly sat and learnt his midrashim.
I believe if rashi were alive today he would lack the necessary skills to look for ways to kill time in an 8 hour a day unnecessary and meaningless corporate role.
Great points.
"Paging Natan and his indefatigable sidekick, Eric Lawee"
As far as I know, Lawee has absolutely no connection to Slifkin. He certainly isn't his sidekick, whatever that might even mean.
As an aside, here's an interesting interview with him.
https://seforimchatter.com/2020/05/17/with-prof-eric-lawee-discussing-his-new-book-on-rashi-his-first-book-on-abarbnel-more/
https://rationalistjudaism.blogspot.com/2011/01/when-drash-becomes-pshat.html
"As my friend Professor Eric Lawee has demonstrated..."
I interpret "friend" as "indefatigable sidekick".
Fair enough. I stand corrected. I still don't think he's his 'sidekick,' or anything close to that.
"Rashi was part of a thoroughly anti-rationalist tradition, one that has been all but lost with the dominance of Maimonidean thought that has left a deep impression on even the “mystical” chareidi community. Modern-day halachists would certainly not recommend following this shitah of Rashi. He could say it, we cannot."
Alternatively - Maimonidean Rationalism has been canonized. (Mysticism, on the other hand, can never be canonized because it's irrational and the "National Will" would never agree to that!)
"All of these issues stem from the fact that apparently, Rashi was a “literalist”, which (according to Eric and Natan) means two things. 1. Rashi takes everything literally, including every single unbelievable Medrash. Due to the ancient mindset of believing anything no matter what, plus Rashi having no secular education and no exposure to rationalism, he was infinitely credulous. 2. Therefore, we should also take everything Rashi himself says absolutely literally."
Where do they say (or imply) this?
Nevertheless I edited the wording for improved accuracy
For example
https://rationalistjudaism.blogspot.com/2009/08/as-it-were-so-to-speak.html?showComment=1250469362602#c5422822795728576493
"God is cramped up for space because a human being made (and worshipped) an idol? This is Rashi's view?"
I personally do indeed find that hard to believe, so maybe in that case, Rashi is using your understanding of k'vyachol. However, I also find it hard to beleive that Rashi took a literal interpretation of Aggadatas about people tunneling to the Heavens, or about Adam mating with animals, and yet this is how Ramah, Mizrachi etc., understand him."
This type of heresy is easy. Elokim is plural, therefore one should worship idols.
In the insane situation that someone takes this seriously please see https://ishayirashashem.substack.com/p/smash-burn-crash
As in Bereishis bara