Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes
 
 
 
    After the revolt of the Maccabees, Israel was once again a united state.  Freed from the imposing Hellenists, Israel began to reassert itself as its own nation with its own customs; John Hyrcanus, a descendant of Simon Maccabeus, purged Judah of the Hellenism implanted there by Antiochus Epiphanes.  Having endured years of exile, occupation, and oppression, Israel was filled with optimism.  A united kingdom, however, was not easy to maintain.  Israel seems to have lost God’s favor when Aristobulus, high priest in the year one hundred six, crowned himself king though he was not of David’s line (Hahn 289).  Soon Israel’s unity crumbled, and society was divided primarily into two powerful emerging parties: the Pharisees and the Sadducees.  Another, more ancillary group, reacting in disgust to this priestly-political merger, withdrew into the desert and was known as the Essenes. An examination of the formation of each group, the sources of information about them, and general characteristics of each will help to understand the social background of New Testament Israel.
    There are two ways to envisage the formation of the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes.  In the first place, these three groups can be pictured as political parties, directly or indirectly involved in the governing of Israel.  Coming from groups of conservative, pious Jews, the Pharisees strove to hold Israel to its prophetic ideal.  Established in opposition to the Sadducees, the Pharisees was literally known as the “Separators” and had a direct hand in the nation’s politics.  The Sadducees, coming from groups of Hellenistic Jews, took their name from Zadok, David’s high priest.  Hence, they claimed the right to the high priesthood, and exerted considerable, direct political influence.  Finally, the Essenes came from groups of Jews dissatisfied with the corruption of the Temple under the Sadducees. Eventually withdrawing from Jerusalem in protest, the Essenes nevertheless indirectly influenced Israel’s political life.
    Perhaps more accurately than as political parties, however, the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes can be pictured as schools of thought.  In Israel there persisted, even after the Maccabean Revolt, of voluntary associations of people following a common philosophy.  Such associations, particularly the one known in Greece as hairesis (meaning “revolutionaries”) became materialized, in Israel, as such voluntary schools of Jewish thought as the “passionately devout” groups as the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes.  Eventually, these associations turned into political interest groups, but it can be argued that they began as mere philosophical association, or schools of thought.
    There are three main sources by which information can be obtained about the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes.  First and foremost, one can consult the Bible, especially the Gospels in the New Testament.  This source is both somewhat problematic and beneficial.  The Gospels are not a work of history, but a work of “literature” (Hahn 525); hence, they “are not the best source of historical information” about these groups, at times exaggerating their practices in order to teach a lesson.  Nonetheless, to rescue inquiry from the dangers of the historical-critical method, it should be noted that the Gospels are in a sense the best source of information about them.  Though not a book of history, the Bible is the book of salvation history.  If the Holy Spirit has inserted certain depictions of such groups in the Bible, then it is in these ways that Christians are supposed to understand them as fitting into God’s plan of salvation.
    Two other sources for gaining knowledge about the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes are rabbinic literature and the Dead Sea Scrolls.  The rabbinic literature tradition consists of the annals of the Temple rabbis, the most prominent of whom is the historian Josephus.  However “inadequate” are his accounts alone to give a complete understanding of these groups, such historical accounts fairly accurately portray the practices and beliefs of especially the Pharisees and Sadducees.  A final source of information, the Dead Sea Scrolls, concerns exclusively the Essenes.  The mostly leather scrolls hidden in clay jars in caves near the Dead Sea not only have revealed the beliefs of this hermitic group, but also have enabled scholars to reach behind present Old Testament texts in order to reconstruct the older traditions lying behind them.  Such a process “assures (scholars) that (current) texts have accurately preserved ancient traditions.”
    From these sources, certain insights can be gained into the mores of the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes.  The Pharisees believed that they could best be faithful to God by keeping the Gentile people and customs out of their lives.  They wanted to keep themselves pure, mimicking the ritual purity of the Temple priests, and even mandating by law such practices as the washing of hands before meals.  Bound up to the letter of the law, the Pharisees made the Law, which included wearing such visible signs of distinction from the Gentiles as phylacteries, a heavy onus for others.  They, however, managed to evade the Law when it suited them (Mt 23).
    The Sadducees differed from the Pharisees in a few ways.  They felt that the best way for Judaism to survive is to cooperate with Gentiles.  The Sadducees mimicked the ritual purity of the priests, as did the Pharisees, but also lived it: they were destined to be high priests forever in Jerusalem.  The Sadducees comprised the majority of the Sanhedrin, the daily governing body of the Jews.  Finally, the Sadducees rejected the Pharisees’ strict, literal interpretation of the law.
    Different from both the Pharisees and the Sadducees, the Essenes were an extremely orthodox, apocalyptic community withdrawn into the desert near Wadi Qumran.  Mentioned even less than the Sadducees in any text, save the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Essenes are a largely unknown group.  Because Vespian burned Wadi Qumran, there exists next to nothing in terms of first hand knowledge about the Essenes.  Scholars do know that they were a pure and righteous group, living a life of privation and penance in the desert awaiting the coming of Judgment Day.
    To sum up, certain general characteristics categorize the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes in such a way that it is easy to understand each group in comparison to the others.  In terms of presence in the community, the Pharisees and Sadducees were both majorities, while the Essenes were a minority.  Concerning beliefs about the divine, the Pharisees held God to be immanent, the Sadducees believed Him to be Transcendent, and the Essenes focused more on the notion of fate than that of a God directly involved with human life.  With reference to lifestyles, the confrontational Pharisees had an un-attractive lifestyle, the welcoming Sadducees had an attractive lifestyle, and the pious Essenes had a respected lifestyle.
GOSPEL REFERENCES---MATTHEW
5:20—Your righteousness must surpass that of the Pharisees.
9:10—The sick need a doctor: mercy, not sacrifice.
9:14—Fast not when the Bridegroom is here.
12:2—The disciples pick wheat on the Sabbath.
12:14—The Pharisees seek to kill Jesus.
12:24—The Pharisees accuse Jesus of exorcizing by Beelzebub.
12:38—The Pharisees demand a sign.
15:1-2—The disciples don’t wash hands before meals.
16:1-4—No sign will be given, save Jonah.
19:3—Lawfulness of Divorce
21:45—The crowd prevents Jesus’ arrest by the Pharisees.
22:15—“Should we pay the Tax?”
22:34—Jesus silences the Sadducees; Pharisees ask: “what is the greatest commandment?”
22:41—“Whose son is Jesus?” the Pharisees wonder.
23:1—The Pharisees don’t practice what they preach.
23:13—Jesus’ “woes” to the Pharisees (white-washed tombs).
27:62—The Pharisees are nervous about Christ’s promised resurrection.