The Witness’s Argument vs. the Samaritans’ Arguments
Hello, and thanks in advance.
Regarding the witness argument, the Samaritans also have a tradition that they are descendants of the tribes of Israel, and I assume that they also have a revelation at Mount Sinai, etc., but the position of the halakhah is that they are not part of the people of Israel, but rather exiled Quts. If we rely on and accept the witness argument, why don’t we also accept their tradition? And if we don’t accept their tradition, doesn’t that undermine the witness argument. After all, they also claim a mass revelation, as I believe. (As I understand it, according to genetic studies, there is indeed truth in both methods, that they are descendants of both Israel and another people, and apparently these are Israelites who have carried foreignness.) Is the root of the difference in the number of people who pass on the tradition? Or is it perhaps that we rely on additional arguments to believe in Judaism, such as the special history of the people of Israel, etc.?
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
My question is whether it can be argued that they are only Kuts, if so then they are transmitting a tradition of revelation even though their ancestors were not present at it, which shows that it is indeed possible to create a false mass tradition.
And if they are a mixture of Kuts and descendants of Israel, then why is their conversion not as valid as ours? And why do we not treat them as an acceptable tradition regarding the Oral Torah, the laws of the Sukkah, etc. Or regarding the holiness of Jerusalem, as I understand it they claim that the holiness is generally on Mount Gerizim, how do we know which tradition is correct? According to the majority?
I don't understand the argument. It is very likely that they are originally Jewish, and perhaps they mixed. Their conversion is not valid because it is not according to the halakhah that was handed down to us. For them, this is their tradition and they will convert according to it. You are mixing different concepts of tradition. Their form of conversion is not a tradition that indicates an event. It is a halakhic tradition that was created at some point, and it has no validity as truth.
In general, the validity of a tradition is a matter of general impression, and it is impossible to compare one to the other.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
