Q&A: Ethiopian Jewry as a Refutation of the Oral Torah
Ethiopian Jewry as a Refutation of the Oral Torah
Question
Just now I saw that the Rabbi accepts that Ethiopian Jewry undermines the Oral Torah, and these are his words: "The halakhic status of Ethiopian Jews and of their Jewish law is a fascinating topic that challenges our halakhic conceptions. Even if one accepts all of their historical claims, they rely on a tradition that predates the Talmuds, and therefore their Jewish law does not contain a significant part of the Oral Torah. In principle, one could broaden the question and ask whether it is possible to forgo the Oral Torah altogether in light of the halakhic tradition of Ethiopian Jews."
It really sounds like you agree with the claim. On the other hand, you have written more than once that what has come down to us is what is binding. How does that fit together?
Answer
A different tradition reached them. So this challenges Jewish law, because their tradition too is a tradition. Now we have to discuss whether you are permitted to join a different tradition, and even if not — whether that is only because of "do not forsake" or whether this itself is the Jewish law from your perspective. I wrote here that one can wonder about it, not that I accept it.
Discussion on Answer
Not true. The question is which tradition is the binding one. Which tradition is the correct one is hard to determine. It is not in heaven.
How can there be such a halakhic challenge here (whether I am allowed to move from one tradition to another or not)?? The question is really theoretical: whether our tradition is the more accurate one or not, and the halakhic question depends on that, no?