Are questions about non-rabbinic forms of Judaism (Karaite, Sadducee, Essene, etc.) in scope here?
I've added a tag (non-rabbinic-judaism) to at least group these questions. It would be great if someone with privileges can add relevant synonyms of the sects.
See the answers to this question, which do not discuss non-rabbinic Judaism specifically, but whose points can be expanded to them. My own answer there says:
The question asks:
1. Are questions asked from the perspective of, or about, a particular movement on-topic? Always? Only halachic movements like Conservative? Never; this is an Orthodox site?
Monica Cellio's answer (hereinafter "MC" (just for ease and WADR)):
Asking questions about, or from the perspective of, any Jewish movement or community should be permitted.
I agree in general, but we need a question to be answerable and (as the FAQ list says) "for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more".
Thus, it cannot be "Can someone explain this practice of Mysect Judaism?" where Mysect Judaism lacks Jewish-tradition-based sources that discuss the question.
As far as I can tell from what little I know about Karaite Judaism, that last paragraph applies to its practices directly where such practices differ from mainstream Judaism's, or at least to most such. Definitely this can be decided on a case-by-case basis, though.
Compare https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/a/472.
I'm guessing you asked this as a followup-to the recent question "Are there any Jewish sects which regard the Oral Law… as unlawful addition to the religion? If yes who are they and what are their beliefs?". The last part of that ("what are their beliefs?") is off-topic IMO per what I wrote above. The rest of it is, from the perspective of the asker, not off-topic, since it asks about something that the asker doesn't know lacks Judaism sources; a good answer might be "yes, but such is not generally considered Judaism; the most prominent example is the Karaites" with a link to more information.
While it might at times seem less than diplomatic, it makes little sense to broaden the scope of the site to include offshoots of Judaism that promote ideas generally considered to be heretical by the overwhelming majority of mainstream authorities (e.g. the outright rejection of Maimonides 13 principles of faith and/or the denigration of the Jewish sages). If one were to include such outside sects, the boundaries defining the scope of the site become, at best, capricious. After all, Christianity also claimed to be the "true" Judaism. Islam, as well, is an offshoot of and/or borrows heavily from the faith. Furthermore, atheistic and/or Reconstructionist Jews have their own religion they christen "Judaism". What remains off-topic? I think it's important to be to distinguish being appropriately respectful of persons from other socio-religious backgrounds without having to abandon one's own sense of religious identity and one's own traditions, in the name of a false pluralism.
