One of the difficulties in translating from one language to another, is that a word in the original language, may have more than one meaning. Sometimes, the meanings of one word could be opposites. This is the case with the word "cleave" in English, which can mean "to stick to" (as in cleave to a person) or "divide", (as in to cleave a piece of meat). When translating into another language, we must be certain how the word was used in the original context, or else, our technically correct translation, will, in fact, be a total distortion.Sometimes it is actually difficult to know what the author meant, or the ambiguity may have been an intentional literary device, essentially impossible to translate..
This is the case with the word "Tradition". A tradition may be a custom, like having cranberry sauce with our Thanksgiving turkey. It's not a law; I have yet to hear of anyone arrested for not eating it. Yet, it is a long standing American tradition. If one only had a hamburger on Thanksgiving, he would probably feel that he had missed out, and would spend the next few days regretting the loss, albeit temporary, of this tradition, of which he has memories going back to his earliest childhood, with associations with friends and family, many now gone. He has lost out on a connecting link between past, present and future. Yet, it is not obligatory.
Now let's take a look at England. England has no constitution. It's laws are based on Common Law, much of that going back to the Magna Carta. Essentially, they are Traditions, which have the force of law. One such Tradition is the right to trial by jury. This has become enshrined in the Constitution of the United States, as well as of some other countries. If an accused criminal demanded a jury trial, it would be outrageous for the judge to tell him "I don't think so. It's only a custom, and I'm too busy this week to deal with it". True, in England it is only common law, but is, nevertheless, law. It cannot be compared with the cranberry sauce.
In Judaism, the cranberry sauce example would be called "minhag" (custom; a traditional practice). The English trial by jury would be called a "mesorah", which means "to be handed down". Some Mesorot are considered Biblical, although not spelled out in the Bible. For instance, nowhere in the Bible do we have the age of thirteen as the time when a boy becomes enough of a man to be considered responsible for his actions, and fully bound by the laws of G-d. However, we have "received" a mesorah that this is the meaning of "a man" in the Bible. This has been handed down by G-d to Moses, and from Moses to the people. It would be ludicrous to think that there is no Torah definition of reaching one's majority, as the courts would have needed to know when to enforce a certain law in the case of a particular person. In fact, we consider this Biblical, not rabbinic. Other things have been enacted by rabbinical courts, as specified in Deuteronomy 17:8-13. They may legislate to strengthen, or "put a fence around" a Torah law. Although they do this by authority of the Torah, nevertheless, it is considered rabbinic law. An example of this would be the eating of Hametz (leavened food) on the day before Passover. The Torah commands to bring the Passover sacrifice on the afternoon of the day before Passover, before Sundown.We are told in the Torah to not bring the Passover "with leaven". We have a Mesorah, going back to Moses, that this means that leaven must be out of our possession by noon of the day before Passover, the time when the sacrifice was offered..We regard this as Biblical. The ancient rabbis forbade eating leaven for two hours before this time, and required having it out of our possession, by one hour before noon, as a "fence" so as not to make an error on a cloudy day. We are careful to note that this is NOT part of the Torah, except as the Torah gives the courts the right and obligation to protect the laws. This is rabbinic law.This, too, is part of the Mesorah, while keeping the two separate and distinct.Otherwise, we would be violating the Torah's prohibition of "you shall not add or detract" from its laws.There will be differences in how it is applied. For instance, in a case of a doubtful situation, in a Biblical law we need to be strict, in a rabbinical law we may be lenient. Now, there may be local, or family, traditions surrounding Passover. These are considered Minhag, and depending on the community, they may be regarded as very sacred, albeit not laws. This is especially true in Ashkenazic tradition. In other communities, this is much less the case. I was told by a leading Yemenite rabbi "the minhag is to keep a minhag, but there is no legal necessity". In the former cases, the Tradition is, in fact, law. In the latter, it is below the level of law, but nevertheless is observed, and honored, as Minhag.
Therefore, when we speak of "Jewish Tradition" we must be very clear of what we mean. Do we mean Mesorah, and, if so, what kind of Mesorah, or do we mean a custom? All are holy, but not all are obligatory in the same way.