As far as I understand, Buzaglo and people like him aren’t talking only about Jewish law. One could perhaps argue against them that this is where they begin to distort Judaism, but in the name of the principle of charity we should describe their position in the fullest and fairest way. In short, the question of right or wrong that you raised is probably seen by them as broader than the question of Jewish law.

My view is that there is no Judaism apart from Jewish law. That’s why I addressed only that.

It’s interesting when—and whether—a type of “traditionalists” will arise that simply does not accept the authority of the Talmud (and the Mishnah) as binding. It rather surprises me that there is no group (that I know of) that truly upholds the Written Torah, and perhaps also a few solid traditions from the words of the Sages, but also relates to the Tannaim and Amoraim etc. as part of the study-hall circle. It may very well be that in practice—what is permitted and what is forbidden—we would end up with something very similar to today’s traditionalists.

I think traditionalism is being presented here not quite correctly. Traditionalists do not observe the commandments only as tradition (in the style of Ahad Ha’am), but out of belief that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave them. Why not all the commandments? There are many reasons, some connected to tradition (if grandpa didn’t keep it, apparently you can do without it) and some unclear, and indeed there is not necessarily any philosophical basis here.

As for moderation too, I don’t know what Buzaglo said, but usually the intention is simply inclusiveness. That is: he does not turn on a light on the Sabbath because he is “secular,” but because he does not think that this is “hard labor” that is forbidden. That creates a spectrum of halakhic commitment without antagonism (and also without agreement. Inclusiveness is not agreement).

These questions have come up here more than once in the past. I explained that I am not dealing here with diagnosis. My claim is a principled one: if a person observes the commandments not out of commitment but as folklore or as a means of national and religious identity, then it has no religious value at all and it is not a commandment. Whether this or that traditionalist does it for those reasons or for other reasons does not really matter for the principled discussion.
Inclusiveness and moderation are not halakhic terms. Everyone may adopt whatever policy he wishes. It has no essential connection to Easternness or Westernness, even if we accept that Easterners are usually more inclusive. In short, if you want religious inclusiveness, argue in favor of inclusiveness and don’t tell me stories about Easternness and its importance (even if factually you are right that Easternness means inclusiveness).

The basic question is: what is authentic Judaism? Or, phrased a bit differently: what is the central authentic component in Judaism? Only after answering that correctly can one ask what traditional Eastern Judaism has to contribute to us on this matter. I think Buzaglo and people like him really do distort the picture a bit, which is roughly what Michi is saying (though in my opinion the distortion comes from a different place than he claims).
A second problem, connected to the first, is that the Buzaglo-style proposal may lead to adopting mediocrity and even superficiality. I’ll give an example: not long ago I met a young traditional Yemeni guy, who told me that according to Rashi a person can impregnate a dolphin (or a female dolphin…). Since we’re talking about a righteous man, he obviously can’t be wrong… I’m of course not claiming that if you’re traditional you necessarily adopt that kind of thinking, but I do think that the traditional Eastern public in Israel in many cases adopts an automatic way of thinking and perceiving “Judaism” out of the same conformism that tradition instills in it.

That is really not a characteristic of traditionalism. Ask any Haredi (and also many non-Haredi religious people) and you’ll get a similar answer.

What isn’t a characteristic of traditionalism? Conformism?

Or did you mean holding such an opinion about dolphins’ reproductive habits…

It is not clear whether traditionalism (Eastern traditionalism) is really a lack of commitment to Jewish law. It may be that at its core it contains (unconsciously) a genuine desire to keep all the commandments (and certainly faith in the Holy One, blessed be He, and in the Torah), except that because of social influence and a childish mentality, a reality emerged of making kiddush on Friday night and afterward (the next day) going to a soccer game. Maybe that is what Rabbi Ovadia’s ruling is based on—that one of these traditionalists who respects Torah scholars (they kiss their rabbis’ hands) even though he publicly desecrates the Sabbath may still be called up to the Torah. Rabbi Auerbach also ruled that one may let a secular person recite a blessing over food served to him (perhaps on the assumption that there is some sort of belief deep in his heart if the person wants to honor you by making the blessing. Though among Ashkenazim it is harder to say that, and as a Haredi—who is a bit naive—he doesn’t know this reality. Personally, I always hesitate whether to ask them to make a blessing or whether that would be taking God’s name in vain, and when in doubt I am stringent and do not ask them to make a blessing, relying instead on his own leniency that one may give them food even when they will not bless over it.)

The Sabbath before last, Rabbi Melamed argued that on the basis of something similar, some are lenient in conversion and convert people who will most likely be traditional after the conversion, on the assumption that in their hearts they really do accept the yoke of the commandments and at some point will observe all the commandments. This indeed happens among traditional Eastern Jews, who for the most part grow stronger over time and become religious (I personally know several like that). In my city, lots of traditionalists have actually become Haredi.

The clinging to the words of the Sages or the medieval authorities as though they cannot be mistaken.

The point is not the specific issue of blind faith in righteous men and in their wisdom, but the setting up of an overall norm according to which turning to Judaism should be anchored first and foremost in some automatic sentiment (by virtue of belonging to a particular community and heritage). As Rabbi Ovadia said during the elections: one Sephardi woman who kisses a mezuzah is preferable to 50 professors at the university. This is not only a criticism of “external wisdoms,” but also a statement about how a Jew ought to approach his religion. A “warm” feeling and not “cold” intellectuality. This approach has negative consequences (and perhaps positive ones too) for one’s attitude toward life, religion, society, etc. I could give examples.