Mods
In the response to ARso above the following was not intended to be part of my post. It was a quote from ARso that I ended up not responding to.
“The Maharsha, by the way, does exactly the same. He explains Rashi literally, then disagrees respectfully. Only you and your the rabbis and talmudei (sic) chachamim that you allegedly ask hold differently. And I declare without reservation, if they say that Rashi does not mean it literally, not only are they not talmidei chachamim but they are not even talmudei chachamim.”
It would be geshmak if this could somehow be corrected. If not, I guess this will serve as a correction