[1544] Those who understand the character of Josephus' writings will be at no loss for his reasons in this. It would suit his purpose to speak often of the fatalism of the Pharisees, and to represent them as a philosophical sect like the Stoics. The latter, indeed, he does in so many words.
[1545] For details comp. Hamburger, Real-Encykl. ii. pp. 103-106 - though there is some tendency to colouring' in this as in other articles of the work.
[1546] Yoma 38 b.
[1547] Baba B. 16 a.
[1548] Siphré on Deut. xi. 26, § 53, ed. Friedmann, p. 86 a.
[1549] Ab. iii. 15.
[1550] Jer. Chag. iii. 8; Tos. Chag. iii., where the reader will find sufficient proof that the Sadducees were not in the wrong.
[1551] In Yad. iv. 6, 7.
[1552] The Pharisees replied by asking on what ground the bones of a High-Priest defiled,' but not those of a donkey. And when the Sadducees ascribed it to the great value of the former, lest a man should profane the bones of his parents by making spoons of them, the Pharisees pointed out that the same argument applied to defilement by the Holy Scriptures. In general, it seems that the Pharisees were afraid of the satirical comments of the Sadducees on their doings (comp. Parah iii. 3).
[1553] Wellhausen rightly denounces the strained interpretation of Geiger, who would find here - as in other points - hidden political allusions.
[1554] Comp. The Temple, its Ministry and Services,' pp. 309, 312. The rubrics are in the Mishnic tractate Parab, and in Tos. Par.
[1555] Parah iii.; Tos. Par. 3.
[1556] Parah iii. 7.
[1557] The Mishnic passage is difficult, but I believe I have given the sense correctly.
[1558] Shabb. 108 a.
[1559] Vv. 15, 16.
[1560] Men. x. 3; 65 a; Chag. ii. 4.
[1561] This difference, which is more intricate than appears at first sight, requires a longer discussion than can be given in this place.
[1562] Rosh haSh. i. 7; ii. 1; Tos. Rosh haSh. ed. Z. i. 15.
[1563] Sukk. 48 b; comp. Jos. Ant. xiii 13. 5.
[1564] For details about the observances on this festival I must refer to The Temple, its Ministry and Services.'
[1565] Sukk. 43 b; and in the Jerus. Talm. and Tos. Sukk. iii. 1.
[1566] Jer. Yoma i. 5; Yoma 19 b; 53 a.
[1567] Specially Ant. xx. 9.
[1568] Other differences, which rest merely on the authority of the Hebrew Commentary on The Roll of Fasts,' I have discarded as unsupported by historical evidence. I am sorry to have in this respect, and on some other aspect of the question, to differ from the learned Article on The Sadducees,' in Kitto's Bibl. Encycl.
[1569] Decreed in Deut. xix. 21.
[1570] Makk. i. 6.
[1571] Baba B. 115 b; Tos. Yad. ii. 20.
[1572] Yad. iv. 7 and Tos. Yad.
[1573] Geiger, and even Derenbourg, see in these things deep political allusions - which, as it seems to me, have no other existence than in the ingenuity of these writers.
[1574] Ant. xiii. 10. 6.
[1575] Ant. xvii. 2. 4.
[1576] Acts v. 17; Ant. xx. 9. 1.
[1577] So Wellhausen, u. s.
[1578] So Geiger, u. s.
[1579] Sheqal. iv. 4; vi. 1; Eduy. viii. 2; Ab. ii. B &c.
[1580] St. John i. 24.
[1581] In the Ab. de R. Nath. c. 5.
[1582] Tseduqim and Tsadduqim mark different transliterations of the name Sadducees.
[1583] This theory, defended with ingenuity by Geiger, had been of late adopted by most writers, and even by Schürer. But not a few of the statements hazarded by Dr. Geiger seem to me to have no historical foundation, and the passages quoted in support either do not convey such meaning, or else are of no authority.
[1584] So Dr. Löw, as quoted in Dr. Ginsburg's article.
[1585] Yad. iv. 6 &c.
[1586] The argument as against the derivation of the term Sadducee would, of course, hold equally good, even if each party had assumed, not received from the other, its characteristic name.