Marx, the gra could say that; we can’t – for us it’s eili ve’eilu and the rambam’s torah is treated as torah, not as Aristotle. It’s like how rav huna criticized rebbe’s statement that dovid hadn’t been nichshal with an eishes ish and said he was motivated by the kovod of his alter zeideh – for us to attribute torah from chazal as anything but the pure, unadulterated transmission of torah misinai would be included in “mach’chish magide’ah” as outlined in the rambam’s list of heretical ideas – this is not my hagdarah, but rather that of rabbi yoshe ber soloveitchik, as many in his camp had gone the classical route of the maskilim (introduced by the rasha zechariah frankel) and attributed maamarei chazal to anthropology, their own character/midos and the common thinking of their time and place. They reduced hillel to *easy going nice guy” and shamai to “angry old man with a stick” afra lepumayhu.
For all of his faults and influences, he stayed within the mainstream on such essential matters and did a wonderful job at curtailing the more anti religious elements in his camp.