[Avodah] Fables and Lies

[Micha Berger]

I think RnCL's use of "myth" is technically correct, but distracting.
If I can resurrect an idea I posted when we looked at the question of
whether ANY rishon thought that every aggadic story was historical.
The list of rishonim and acharonim who don't take them as necessarily
being history was quite long, although I think only the Rambam goes so
far as to condemn those who make a farce out of the Torah (in his
opinion) by believing every medrash. Even as late as RYSalanter there
is clear sources against taking medrashim literally, sources with
solid bonafides even for the most RW among us.

So, here's the notion I posted in the past. I think it's along the
same lines as the "myth" idea, but without using a word that requires
a disclaimer (and I am not sure it's 100% identical):

Chazal used the story for a mashal. The question of whether the mashal
happened to also be what happened to occur or not isn't one that they
would have ever asked. Therefore, some could be historical, some not
-- it's not important and no one kept track. Even caring which is
which places you in a different perspective WRT the narrative than
intended by Chazal.

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
micha at aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv