| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | The '''Pharisees''' were intellectuals who scrupulously observed the [[Bible|Biblical]] law. The "elites" of their time, the Pharisees were the leaders of [[Jew]]ish people in the Second Temple. The Pharisees opposed the priestly [[Sadducees]] who were not as great in number, but had political power. The term "Pharisees" derives from "Perisha" (the singular of "Perishaya"), which means "one who separates himself." In a religious sense it meant a group that separates itself from impure persons and things in seeking a higher level of holiness as desired by [[God]]. | | The '''Pharisees''' were intellectuals who scrupulously observed the [[Bible|Biblical]] law. The "elites" of their time, the Pharisees were the leaders of [[Jew]]ish people in the Second Temple. The Pharisees opposed the priestly [[Sadducees]] who were not as great in number, but had political power. The term "Pharisees" derives from "Perisha" (the singular of "Perishaya"), which means "one who separates himself." In a religious sense it meant a group that separates itself from impure persons and things in seeking a higher level of holiness as desired by [[God]]. |
| | | | |
| − | At times [[Jesus]] was very critical of the Pharisees, as observed in the [[Gospels]]. After the Jewish struggle with [[Rome]] (A.D. 66-135) that ended with the [[diaspora]], Pharisaism became virtually synonymous with [[Judaism]] itself. | + | At times [[Jesus]] was very critical of the Pharisees, as observed in the [[Gospels]]. After the Jewish struggl with [[Rome]] (A.D. 66-135) that ended with the [[diaspora]], Pharisaism became virtually synonymous with [[Judaism]] itself. |
| | | | |
| | ==Authorities== | | ==Authorities== |
| Line 45: |
Line 45: |
| | Because the ideal of the Pharisees was high, and because they reverenced learning and character above wealth and civil rank they had a tendency to despise those who did not agree with them, as in ''John'' 7:49: "This multitude that knoweth not the law are accursed." The distinction between the Pharisees and the the "people of the land" (''am ha-'arets'') began with the distinction that had to be kept between the Jews and the Gentiles who had entered the land as colonists or intruders. These would, during the Babylonian captivity, almost certainly speak Western Aramaic, and would certainly be heathen and indulge in heathen practices. They were the "people of the land" whom the returning exiles found in possession of Judea. | | Because the ideal of the Pharisees was high, and because they reverenced learning and character above wealth and civil rank they had a tendency to despise those who did not agree with them, as in ''John'' 7:49: "This multitude that knoweth not the law are accursed." The distinction between the Pharisees and the the "people of the land" (''am ha-'arets'') began with the distinction that had to be kept between the Jews and the Gentiles who had entered the land as colonists or intruders. These would, during the Babylonian captivity, almost certainly speak Western Aramaic, and would certainly be heathen and indulge in heathen practices. They were the "people of the land" whom the returning exiles found in possession of Judea. |
| | | | |
| − | Mingled with them were the few Jews that had neither been killed nor deported by the Babylonians, nor carried down into Egypt by Johanan, the son of Kareah. As they had conformed in a large measure to the habits of their heathen neighbors and intermarried with them, the stricter Jews regarded them as under the same condemnation as the heathen and shrank from association with them. During the time of Jesus the name was practically restricted to the ignorant Jews whose conformity to the law was on a broader scale than that of the Pharisees. Some have, however, dated the invention of the name later in the days of the Maccabean struggle, when the ceremonial precepts of the Law could with difficulty be observed. Those who were less careful of these were regarded as ''am ha-'arets''. | + | Mingled with them were the few Jews who had neither been killed nor deported by the Babylonians, nor carried down into Egypt by Johanan, the son of Kareah. As they had conformed in a large measure to the habits of their heathen neighbors and intermarried with them, the stricter Jews regarded them as under the same condemnation as the heathen and shrank from association with them. During the time of Jesus the name was practically restricted to the ignorant Jews whose conformity to the law was on a broader scale than that of the Pharisees. Some have, however, dated the invention of the name later in the days of the Maccabean struggle, when the ceremonial precepts of the Law could with difficulty be observed. Those who were less careful of these were regarded as ''am ha-'arets''. |
| | | | |
| | The distinction as exhibited in the Talmud shows an arrogance on the part of the Pharisaic chabher that must have been galling to those who, though Jews as much as the Pharisees, were not Puritans like them. A ''chabher'' - i.e. a Pharisee - might not eat at the table of a man whose wife was of the ''am ha-'arets'', even though her husband might be a Pharisee. If he would be a full ''chabher'', a Pharisee must not sell to any of the ''am ha-'arets'' anything that might readily be made unclean. If a woman of the ''am ha-'arets'' was left alone in a room, all that she could touch without moving from her place was unclean. It should be noted that the evidence for this is Talmudic, with limited historical value. | | The distinction as exhibited in the Talmud shows an arrogance on the part of the Pharisaic chabher that must have been galling to those who, though Jews as much as the Pharisees, were not Puritans like them. A ''chabher'' - i.e. a Pharisee - might not eat at the table of a man whose wife was of the ''am ha-'arets'', even though her husband might be a Pharisee. If he would be a full ''chabher'', a Pharisee must not sell to any of the ''am ha-'arets'' anything that might readily be made unclean. If a woman of the ''am ha-'arets'' was left alone in a room, all that she could touch without moving from her place was unclean. It should be noted that the evidence for this is Talmudic, with limited historical value. |