If you think I wasn’t talking to you about disregarding Rashi based on your values, which is true, why do you respond to that?
The Gemara also has some differences in letters in the Torah. Did you ever see Rishonim saying it is wrong? We say it is different.
I’m aware of the fact that there was a different Seder Olam in France than the one in Bavel at the time of the Geonim. Somebody tried quoting Tosfos as saying that there are conflicting versions of it, and that is wrong. Personaly, I would give more validity to the one used by the Rishonim rather than something we came across, being that they edited out what they saw fit and we can assume that their Nusach was chosen and perfected by them.
Then there is the aspect of Hashgacha. Just as we say that Hashem is present in Beis Din, so too do we apply that to the Torah of the generations. We cannot disregard a Rashi no matter what. Chazal say that Hashem quotes the Chachamim, even though the reason for Machlokes is the lack of passing the Torah down. What caused it is one thing, but now it is Torah that is a product of Torah Lishma and is added to and a part of the ever growing tree of Torah. When Rishonim argue on Rashi they don’t say he is wrong, they use the term, it does not shine. We seldomely find ‘wrong’ in the Rishonim or Acharonim, even in the face of alot of proof.
So, while it is fine to point out that there are different Nuschaos, there is a way to approach that without saying that Rashi is wrong. Talking like that is what got you responses saying that you have no idea who Rashi was, which of course we don’t, and other derogatory statements (besides for your political leanings, which seems to be the worst sin). Our approach to Torah is not like a professor browsing ‘texts’. It’s our Torah and our lifeline and our connection to Hashem.