How Far A Rashi Pashtan Must Go

In a previous post, I wrote about some adherents to the view that Rashi only ever comes to solve for pshat questions, no exceptions. As was rightly pointed out to me by Rav Herczeg in an email, I made it seem as if Nechama Leibowitz was an innovator of this method of analyzing Rashi, when in fact it preceded her by many generations, and this is the method of many meforshei Rashi. I have since corrected that, but it is definitely true that she popularized it. Anyway, I call such a commentary, a "Rashi Pashtan". If one examines the footnotes in the Artscroll Rashi, one can see the great deal of work Rav Herczeg put into answering many of the questions by using these meforshim to answer these questions.

Maskil L'David was such a Rashi Pashtan. His commentary to Rashi on Leviticus 19:18 is very instructive to us to show how sometimes commentaries have to go far afield to answer the questions on Rashi.

So let's see this Maskil L'David. But first, a reminder of the question:

Rashi writes:

You shall love your neighbor as yourself: Rabbi Akiva says: “This is a fundamental principle of the Torah.”

ואהבת לרעך כמוך: אמר רבי עקיבא זה כלל גדול בתורה:

 What pshat question is Rashi dealing with? Is there something wrong with the verse that this comment is correcting, and if so, how?

The Maskil L'David says something that is a chiddush on many levels. Not only for Rashi, but for the verse, and for Rabbi Akiva's statement as well.

He writes:

ואהבת ללעך כמוך: אמר ר״ע וכו׳ פירש״י בפ׳ במה מדליקין שכל המצות הנאמרות בתורה נכללו בזה דרעך זה הקדוש ברוך הוא דכתיב רעך ורע אביך אל תעזוב ואל תעבור על דבריו שהרי שנאוי לך שיעברו על דבריו ע״ש ולפי״ז מובן למה הוצרך רש״י להביא הרבר בשם בעליו לפי שבא לפ׳ דלרעך זה הקב״ה ואי לאו לאמרוה רז״ל לא הוה מפ' הכי מדדיה דלאו אורח ארעא אלא שרז״ל ברוח קדשם קבלו שזו כוונת הכתוב והיינו דאמר מה אמר רבי עקיבא זה כלל וכו׳ כלומר ואי לאו לאמרה ר״ע לא הוה אמינא לה

The Talmud Shabbat 31a has the famous differences between Shammai's method and Hillel's method. When a guy came to Shammai wanting the entire Torah on one foot, Shammai pushed him away with a ruler. Hillel told him,

דעלך סני לחברך לא תעביד זו היא כל התורה כולה ואידך פירושה הוא זיל גמור

That which is hateful to your friend you shall not do, that is the entire Torah, the rest is its commentary, go and learn.

Rashi writes on those words,

ריעך וריע אביך אל תעזוב (משלי כז) זה הקב"ה אל תעבור על דבריו שהרי עליך שנאוי שיעבור חבירך על דבריך ל"א חבירך ממש כגון גזלה גנבה ניאוף ורוב המצות: 

(Proverbs 27:10) "Your fellow and the fellow of your father do not forsake." That is God. Do not transgress his word, that it would be hateful to you for your fellow to trasgress your word. Alternatively, literally "your fellow", meaning [don't] steal, rob, have adultery, and most commandments.

Rashi is answering the question of why Hillel changed the phrase of the verse into a negative commandment, by giving two options of what he is saying. The second one we are familiar with, that he is paraphrasing the verse and makes it refer to negative commandments bein adam lechaveiro such as stealing. 

But the first one has Hillel saying that the entire Torah is not to transgress God's word!

The Maskil L'David thinks that's what Rashi is doing on our verse. He is quoting Rabbi Akiva to say that the verse is referring to God! You shall love God as yourself, and not violate his command because you would not want your friend to violate your command! And the reason why he felt the need to quote Rabbi Akiva in name is because had Chazal not said it, you would not have believed that was the meaning of the verse!