This derivation of the name ' Sadducees ' ia not inconsistent with what we know of the behaviour of many of these ' sons of Zadok.' As early as the time o^ Ezra and Nehemiah, not only did many of the common priests intermarry with the Gentiles among whom they lived (Ezr 9'^), but Kliashib, the high priest, and members of his family, entered freely into alliances with the neighbouring aris-
• It is not claimed for this derivation of the name 'Sadducee,' which was first suggested by Geiger, that it is more than prob- able. Montet (I.e. 51 f.) argues against it that there is not a single trace in post-exiUc literature of this close connexion between the Sadducees and the Zadokites, and that this unanimous silence is fatal to the hypothesis. Kuenen, whom he cites (p. 59 f.) as holding substantially his own view, after- wards changed his opinion. 'The name "Sadducees," which the priestlv nobility of Jerusalem received later, I now also identify with Zadokites. In the not unjustifiable reaction against Oeiger's exaggeration I went too far" (Gfammeltt Abhandlungm mr BMuchen WUtert»cha/i, 496).
tocracy and with the Persian officials {Neh 13"- "). They were evidently more concerned for their own
{irivileges than for the reformation so dear to the leart of Ezra and Nehemiah. The position of the high priests as civil heads, under the Persian or Greek governors, of the community in Jndaea, almost inevitably led to their gradual seculariza- tion. They were necessarily brought into close contact with their Gentile rulers ; and their political interests tended to thrust their religious interests into the background. There were doubt- less some of these high priests who remembered what was due to their position as the servants of Jehovah, but the temptation to forget must have been very great. Towards the close of the Greek period many of the chief priestly families were entirely secularized ; they felt no interest in what was distinctively cliaracteristic of the Jewish religion ; for the sake of their own personal enjoyment and advancement they were willing, and indeed eager, to adopt the manners and customs of their Gentile masters. 'The high priests regarded their sacred office only as a pedestal of worldly power' (Wellhausen, IJG' 248). There is nothing, therefore, improbable in the supposition that the aristocratic priestly party, whose interests were mainly political, and of which they formed from the beginning a considerable part, came to be known by their family name.
iii. Their Opposition to the Pharisees.— Though the Sadducees were the priestly nobility and the Pharisees were drawn mainly from the ranks of the common people, the opposition between them was not a mere opposition between two dif- ferent classes of society. Nor was it merely a question as to the laxer or stricter interpretation and observance of the Law. It was an opposition of principles, of dispositions, and of theories of life (Wellhausen, I.e. 295). The Pharisees were, in their own peculiar way, intensely religious ; their great desire was to mould their fellow- countrymen into a ' holy ' nation by means of the Law ; the}' looked forward to a future, in which their hopes were sure to be realized, and could therefore meanwhile endure the foreign dominion, provided it allowed them perfect religious freedom. The Sadducees, on the other hand, were largely indiflferent to religion, except in so far as it was a matter of custom ; their great care was for tlie State as a purely secular State; they were satisfied with the present, so far as it permitted them to live in comfort and splendour. The acute opposition between the two parties first manifested itself in the political sphere, in the struggle for power durin" the reign of John Hyrcanus and hig successors. When the Hasraonsean dynasty fell, the animosity still continued ; but to a large extent it necessarily ceased to be political, and concentrated itself upon questions as to the Law, matters of ritual, and doctrine.
(a) Controversies as to the Law. — The Sadduceei refused to acknowledge the binding force of the oral law, the 'tradition of the elders' (Mt 15', Mk 7'), to which the Pharisees attached supreme importance. They held that only the written law of Moses was binding (Ant. xill. x. 6, XVUI. i. 4) ; and although, as judges, and in order to maintain their position against the Pharisees, they must have had their own exegetical tradition, they did not regard themselves as absolutely bound even by it ; they held it praiseworthy to dispute with their teachers (Ant. xvm. i. 4). It is incorrect, however, to represent them as acknowledging onW the Pentateuch and as rejecting the rest of theOT. They also doubtless agreed with the Pharisees on many points settled by the oral law ; only, unlike the Pharisees, they did not regard it as binding (cf. 'Taylor, Sayings 0/ Jewish Fathers', p. 115).
SADDUCEES
SADDUCKES
351
In addition to, and j.iartly in consequence of, thi8 fundamental differyiirc Itetween the two parties, there were differences as to Indtviduiil Ifj^l questions, (l) Vrimiuai Law, Aa judges, the budducees were more severe tjian the Pharisees {Ant. xx. ix. 1 ; cf. xin. X. fl). They interpreted literally the Ux lalionis (Ex 2124. |)t 1921), whereas the Pharisees mitigated its severity by accepting as punishment a money payment. They also inter- preted literally DC 2o''* (' spit in his face ') ; the Pharisees said It was enough to spit before the offending person. As regards Ex 2l^'''-^^'^lhey went beyond the requirement of the Law in exacting compensation not only for the damage done by one's ox or ass, but also for that done by one's servants. 'They were less severe, however, than the Pharisees in punishing false witnesses. According to Dt lyi^ff. a false witness was to suffer the punishment whicn he hoped to see inflicted on the per-ion falsely accused by him. The Sadducees held that this punish- ment should be inflicted on him only if the falsely accused peraon had been punished ; the Pharisees demanded his puni.sh- ment, provided sentence had been pronounced on the accused, whether the sentence was executed or not.