the poignant Talmudic classification of the Pharisees. -There an- seven kinds of Pharisees," says the Talmud : ••1. Tfu sin, -In mill Phariset pOZUJ GJ1")fi I, who sim- ply keeps the law for what he can profit thereby, jusl as Shechcm submitted to the rite of circumcision that he might thereby obtain Dinah, the daughter of Jacob (Gen. xxxiv. 19); 2. Tfu Tumbling Pharisee pTiS ""I '. who, in order to appear humble before men, always hangs down his head, and scarcely lifts up his feel when he walks, so that he constantly tumbles: 3. The Bleeding Pharisee ('^"~ OTIS), who. in order not to look at a woman, walks about with Ins eyes closed, and hence injures his head frequently,
so that he has bleeding wounds; 1. The Mortar Phariset (X""~i~ b'PB), who wears a cap in the form of a mortar to cover his eyes, thai he may nol see any impurities and indecencies; 5. Th* What-am-I-yet- to-do Pharisee (""■- ni n"~X OT"lB), who, not knowing much about the law. as soon as he has done one thing, asks. -What is my duly now? and I will do it ' [ (comp. Mark x, 17-22); 6. The Phariset /nun Fear (flS^a -"^£), who keeps the law because he is afraid of a future judgment: and 7. Tfu Phariset from Love i"nx" CHS), who obeys the Lord because he loves him with all his heart" t Babylon Sofa, 22 b; comp. Je- rusalem Berachoth, cap. ix). It must also be admitted that it was among the Pharisees the glorious ideas were developed aboul the Messiah, the kingdom of heaven. the immortality of the soul, the world to come. etc. It was the Pharisees who. to some extent at least, trained such men as the immortal Ilillel. " the just and devout Sinn. hi. who w aihd for the consolation of Israel." and who. taking up the infant Saviour into his arms, offered up thanks to Cod (Luke ii. 25 35); Zacharias, " who was righteous before God" (i, 6); Gamaliel, the teach- er of Saul of Tarsus; Paul, the gnat apostle of the Gentiles, etc. <>nr Saviour himself occupied Pharisaic ground, and used the arguments of the Pharisees in vindication of his conduct and doctrines. Thus, when Jesus was charged by the Pharisees with allowing his disciples to break the Sabbath by plucking ears of corn
in the held on this holy day. he quofa d the \ cry maxim
of the Pharisees thai "the Sabbath is made for man. and not man for the Sabbath" (Mark ii. 27: comp. Juma, 85 b) : and his proof i> deduced according to the
Pharisaic exegetical rule denominated iTIO i"HT3,anaf- ogy. When David was hungry, he ate of the priestly bread, and also gave some to those who were with him. Accordingly one who is hungry may satisfy his hunger
with thai which is otherwise ly allowed to the priest-.
Now the priests perforin all manner of work on the Sabbath without incurring the guilt of transgression ; why. then, should one who is hungry not be allowed to do the same? (Matt. \ii. 1 7). We only add that the apostle Paul, who must have known all the denuncia- tions of Christ .against the Pharisees, never uttered a disrespectful word against this sect. hut. on the contra- ry . made it a mailer of boast thai he belonged to them Vets xxiii, 6; \\\i. ■">: Phil, iii, 5). Vet candor must acknowledge that great moral derelictions in practice 'often coexist with much that is beautiful in theorv;
PHARISEE
75
PHARISEE
and the uncontradicted rebukes of our Saviour against the Pharisees of his time prove an enormous depravity on their part. He denounced them in the bitterest lan- guage; and in the sweeping charges of hypocrisy which he made against them as a class, he might even, at first sight, seem to have departed from that spirit of meek- ness, of gentleness in judging others, and of abstinence from the imputation of improper motives, which is one of the most characteristic and original charms of his own precepts. See Matt, xv, 7, 8; xxiii, 5, 13-15, 23; Mark vii, 6; Luke xi, 42-44; and comp. Matt, vii, 1-5; xi, 29; xii, 19, 20; Luke vi, 28, 37-42. Indeed, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that his repeated de- nunciations of the Pharisees mainly exasperated them into taking measures for causing his death ; so that in one sense he may be said to have shed his blood, and to have laid down his life in protesting against their prac- tice and spirit. (See especially verses 53 and 54 in the 11th chapter of Luke, which follow immediately upon the narration of what he said while dining with a Phar- isee.) Hence to understand the Pharisees is, by con- trast, an aid towards understanding the spirit of uncor- rupted Christianity. This divergence is so wide and fundamental that we shall best apprehend the genius of J'/imisi i ism by developing the contrast somewhat in de- tail (see Delitzsch, Jesus und Hilkl [Erlangen, 1866]).
(1.) In relation to the O.-T. dispensation, it was the Saviour's great effort to unfold the principles which had lain at the bottom of that dispensation, and, carry- ing them out to their legitimate conclusions, to "fulfil the law" (Tr\r)puj(jai, Matt, v, 17, to "fulfil," not, as too often supposed to mean, to "confirm"). But, in con- trast to this, the Pharisees taught such a servile ad- herence to the letter of the law, that its remarkable character as a pointing forward to something higher than its letter was completely overlooked, and that its moral precepts, intended to elevate men, and to lead them on to the thought of a moral stage more glorious than that at which they then stood, were made, rather the instruments of contracting and debasing their ideas of morality. Thus, strictly adhering to the letter, "Thou Shalt not kill, "they regarded anger and all hasty passion as legitimate (Matt, v, 21, 22). Adhering witli ecpial strictness to the words '• Thou shalt not commit adul- tery,'' all impure thoughts and deeds which fell short of this were considered by them to be allowable (Matt. v, 27, 28). And, once more, acquiescing in the letter, "Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a letter of divorcement," they so interpreted the precept that, if only a letter of divorcement were given, a wife might be put away for any cause however trifling (Matt, v, 31, 32). Thus, the whole spirit of the O.-T. dispensation was misunderstood by them. They did not see that it was adapted to a particular stage in the history of man ; that its merit consisted, not in being perfect, but in being better than what wotdd have existed without it; and that it contained in itself the pledge that it must one day yield, as a system, to the full evolution of those principles at which it aimed, and to which, from time to time, it gave expression. When accordingly lie came, whose great effort it was to break through the letter, in order that lie might set free the spirit, which the circumstances of men had rendered it necessary to enclose and confine for a season, their hearts were steeled from the first against him, and they attacked him as a blasphemer against the God of Israel and his law.