RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Pharisees and Sadducees
the maintenance of what was peculiarly Jewish. And if they sought to extend their leadership over all other spheres of life, their sole motive was that these might thus become dominated by the thoroughly prescriptive form of their religious aims. There resulted an externally theocratic trend of policy, and this was naturally contradicted by a totally non- Jewish government; so that, theoretically, the Pharisees did not concede the legality of tribute to such a regime (Matt. xxii. 17). They endured government by a heathen power as brought about by the divine providence, but only in the expectation of its future downfall. And the hatred latent in such an attitude easily converted itself into fanatical deeds. But yet again, they could sacrifice the theocratical idea to an untheocratical Jewish prince like Alexander Janna^us. Furthermore, how little the Pharisees were disposed to bridge the gap between priesthood and people appears from their especially strict precepts regarding the tithe and other dues in favor of priests and Temple. Indeed, they set themselves over against the people with the utmost exclusiveness as a spiritual aristocracy, from which arose their party name, " the separated," the haughty behavior charged to their reproach by Jesus (Matt, xxiii. 5 sqq.), and the contempt with which they looked down upon the rest of the people as ignorant, not knowing the law, and unclean (John vii. 49; cf. the " Letter of Aristeas," dating from the time of Herod, in E. Kautsch, Apokrypfwn, ii. 67, 140 sqq., Tubingen, 1900). So the Pharisees' popularity among the common people had yet its limits.
Still less, however, is a national and patriotic attitude to be discerned in the case of the Sadducees. Their connection with the Hasmoneans (q.v.) came about only as the admin- 8. Relation istration of the same lost its incipiently of Sad- Jewish national character. The goal ducees to of their political action was, first of all, Nationalism, the strengthening of their aristocratic caste. Only as dictated to them through this class interest, did they stand on the national side. The circumstance that the first Hasmonean who ruled after the transition of Hyrcanus to the Sadducees' party, Aristobulus I., was surnamed the " Philhellene," throws light on their Hellenistic tendency. Subsequently, they became servile friends of the Romans. All the more overbearing and hard-hearted were they at that time in regard to the common people (Josephus, War, II., viii. 14; Ant., XX., ix. 1). Hence their unpopularity was so great that, in order to " make themselves possible " at all, they had to govern, in the administration of their offices, according to Pharisaic principles (Josephus, Ant., XVIIL, i. 4). Nevertheless, neither Pharisees nor Sadducees were of an antinational character directly. The Pharisees did not manifest that purely separatistic demeanor of the Hasideans or of the Essenes. Neither were the Sadducees willing, like the radical Hellenists of the pre-Maccabean era, to surrender the people's national existence, its faith and its law. Obviously, ' then, after the founding of the legally national Maccabean state, the extreme elements of both the previously existing tendencies were eliminated. The
most partizan among the Hasideans receded into small groups, which led eventually to the formation of the Essenes' order. And the radical Hellenists perished in the conflicts with the Maccabeans. Thus the more moderate elements were left over, and they merged, in turn, into the broad stream of the popular life whence they had originally issued.
With this alteration of parties, however, the fundamental religious trend persisted. ]f_The Pharisees,
like the pre-Maccabean party of scribes, 9. Religious assiduously cultivated a strictly legal- Character- istic piety, holding themselves aloof istics. from the world (Josephus, War, II.,
viii. 14; Ant., XVII., ii. 4;„ Life, xxxviii.; Acts xxiii. 3, xxvi. 5; Phil. iii. 5).) Religion determined all their aims. But they set the essence of religion in the knowledge and fulfilment of the law. 7From this one-sided and legal drift of their piety there emerged all the defects and excesses of the same, such as are exhibited quite sharply in the New Testament. They built or garnished the sepulchers of the prophets (Matt, xxiii. 29 sqq.), but had none of their spirit; they zealously disputed over their prophecies (Luke xvii. 20), but their belief in the same simply sanctified their venality. They labored zealously for the propagation of their faith (Matt, xxiii. 15), but only in behalf of outward results (cf. Sieffert, Die Heidenbekehrung im Alten Testament und im Judenthum, pp. 43 sqq., 1908; see Proselytes). Their faith was no inwardly liberating power, so that for them the law was but an enslaving yoke (John viii. 32; cf. Gal. v. 1). Out of this came the minute and anxious manner of fulfilling the law (Matt, xxiii. 23), the externalizing of the entire religious and moral life, the mechanicalism of their prayer (Matt. vi. 5 sqq.), the stress upon fasting (Matt, ix. 14); valuation of conspicuous borders to their garments, and broad phylacteries (Matt, xxiii. 5), the literalness of service in observing the sabbath (Matt. xii. 2, 9-13; Luke xiii. 10 sqq., xiv. 4 sqq.; John v. 1 sqq., ix. 14 sqq.). From this source arose their prescriptions of cleanliness (Matt. xv. 2, xxiii. 25; Mark vii. 2 sqq.; Luke xi. 38 sqq.), their preference for external acts of devotion above the plainest duties (Matt. xv. 5; Mark vii. 11 sqq.). This was indeed a straining at gnats and swallowing of camels (Matt, xxiii. 24). Of course, it was possible to practise all this in good faith and with honest sentiments. This is evidenced by the examples of Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, and in particular, too, by that of Paul, who even though recalling his bygone disquietude with aversion (Rom. vii. 7 sqq.), yet thinks back without shame to his Pharisaic past (Phil. iii. 5 sqq.; Acts xxiii. 6, xxvi. 5). Only often enough that emphasis upon external acts led to complete self-satisfaction (Matt, xix. 16 sqq.; Luke xviii. 10) and to ostentation of piety (Matt. vi. 5 sqq., 16, xv. 7 sqq.; Mark vii. 6, xii. 40; Luke xx. 47), extending even to the endeavor to conceal the lack of inner moral integrity by means of the outward show of devout deportment (Matt, xxiii. 25 sqq.; Luke xi. 39 sqq.). In the Talmud, besides, there occur not a few beautiful sentences, urging toward right thinking and true humanity (especially in Pirke Aboth). But
Pharisees and Sadducees Phelps