Rashi often incorporates midrashim in his biblical commentary. He was the first commentator to draw a clear distinction between commentary on the level of peshat, and teachings on the level of derash.
Rashi lays the foundations for the simultaneous parallel existence of different levels in biblical exegesis, and the legitimacy of independent exegesis on the level of peshat. His basic assumption is the polysemous nature of the text: i.e., it contains multiple meanings accessible through different levels and modes of interpretation, without one level cancelling out the significance another. For this reason, the level of peshat has value and significance in its own right.
Rashi represented a turning point: he awarded extensive attention to the plain meaning of the text in his commentaries on Tanakh. However, Rashi himself was aware that his exegesis was not the "last word" in the realm of peshat; he acknowledged that if he had time he should indeed compose new commentaries
Rashi’s disciple and colleague, Rav Yosef Kara argues that the interpretation of the biblical text must be based solely on the data that appear in the verses themselves; Tanakh is given over whole, with all the details needed in order to be understood. Hence his fierce opposition to the interpretation of verses based on information that is found only in midrash. Furthermore, he asserts that interpretation of the text in accordance with peshat is not only a legitimate exegetical approach, but is in fact preferable to interpretations that turn to derash.
This post is based on an article, To read the full article>>
Edited by the HaTanakh Site team