Moses and Aaron. Goodwin Thomas Aiken
the profoundest Doctors for the exposition of the Law, so that they were termed93 Peruschim, quia Poreschim; Pharisees, because they were Expounders of the Law. Thirdly, others derive the name from the same Verb, but in the conjugation Piel, where it signifieth dividere, separare, to separate.94 In this acception, by the Greeks they were termed ἀφωρισμένοι, we may English them Separatists. Their separation is considerable, partly in the particulars unto which, partly in those from which they separated.
First, They separated themselves to the study of the Law, in which respect they might be called, ἀφωρισμένοι εἰς τὸν νόμον, Separated unto the Law. In allusion unto this, the Apostle is thought95 to have stiled himself, Rom. 1. 11. ἀφωρισμένον εἰς εὐαγγέλιον, Separated unto the Gospel: when he was called from being a Pharisee, to be a Preacher of the Gospel; and now not separated unto the Law, but to the Gospel.
Secondly, They separated themselves, or at least pretended a96 separation to an extroardinary sanctity of life above other men. God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, Extortioners, Unjust, Adulterers &c. Luke 18. 11.
The particulars, from which they separated themselves, were these.
First, From commerce with other people, as afterward will appear in their Traditions: whence they called the common people, by reason of their ignorance, עם הארץ populum terræ, the people of the earth. In the Gospel of Saint John 7. 49. they are called ὄχλος. This people who knoweth not the Law are cursed.
Secondly,97 From the apparel and habit of other men: for they used particular kinds of Habits, whereby they would be distinguished from the vulgar. Hence proceeded that common speech, Vestes populi terræ, conculcatio sunt Pharisæorum.
Thirdly,98 From the customs and manners of the world. This heresie of the Pharisees seemeth to have had its first beginning in Antigonus Sochæus. He being a Pharisee, succeeded Simon the Just; who was Coetanean with Alexander the Great: he lived three hundred years before the birth of Christ.
The Pharisees were99 not tied to any particular Tribe or Family, but indifferently they might be of any; S. Paul was a Benjaminite; Hyrcanus was a Levite.100 Each Sect had its Dogmata, his proper Aphorisms, Constitutions, or Canons: so the Pharisees had theirs. My purpose is, both concerning these and the other Sects, to note onely those Canons, or Aphorisms, wherein chiefly they were heretical, and one differing from the other.
First, The Pharisees101 ascribed some things to Fate, or Destiny, and some things to mans Free-will.
Secondly, They confessed that there were Angels, and Spirits, Acts 23. 8.
Thirdly, Concerning the resurrection of the dead, they acknowledged it, and taught102 that the souls of evil men deceased, presently departed into everlasting punishiment; but the souls, they say, of good men, passed by a kind of Pythagorean μετεμψύχωσις into other good mens bodies. Hence it is thought103 that the different opinions concerning our Saviour did arise; Some saying that he was John Baptist; others, Elias; others, Jeremias, Matth. 16. 14. As if Christ his body had been animated by the soul either of John, Elias, or Jeremias.
Fourthly, They did stifly maintain the Traditions of their Elders. For the better understanding what their Traditions were, we must know that the Jews say the Law was twofold,104 one committed to writing, which they called תורה שבכתב Thorah schebitchtah, The written Law; the other delivered by tradition, termed by them, תורה בעל פה Thorah begnal pe. They say both were delivered by God unto Moses upon Mount Sanai, the latter as an exposition of the former, which Moses afterward delivered by mouth to Joshua, Joshua to the Elders, the Elders to the Prophets, the Prophets to those of the great Synagogue, from whom successively it descended to after-ages. These Traditions were one of the chief Controversies between the Pharisees, and the Sadduces.105 The Pharisees said, Let us maintain the Law which our fore fathers have delivered into our hands, expounded by the mouth of the wise men, who expounded it by tradition. And lo, the Sadduces said, Let us not believe or hearken to any tradition or exposition, but unto the Law of Moses alone. The Traditions which they chiefly urged, were these;
1. They would not eat until they washed their hands, Why do thy Disciples transgress the Tradition of the Elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread, Mat. 15. 2. This washing is said to have been done πυγμῇ Mar. 7. 3. that is, often, as some translate the word, taking πυγμῇ in this place, to signifie the same as πύκα in Homer, frequenter. Others translate the word accurate, diligenter, intimating the great care and diligence they used in washing: with this the Syriack Text106 agreeth. Others107 think that there is, in the phrase, allusion unto that rite or manner of washing in use among the Jews, termed by them נטילת ידים Netilath iadaim, the lifting up of their hands. The Greek word πυγμὴ is thought to express this rite, because in this kind of washing, They used to joyn the tops of the fingers of each hand together with the thumb, so that each hand did after a sort resemble τὴν πυγμὴν i. a fist. This Ceremony was thus performed: First, they washed their hands clean. Secondly, they composed them into the fore-mentioned form. Thirdly, they lifted them up, so that the water ran down to the very elbows. Lastly, they let down their hands again, so that the water ran from off their hands upon the earth.108 And that there might be store of water running up and down, they poured fresh water on them when they lifted up their hands, and poured water twice upon them when they hanged them down. Unto this kind of washing Theophylact seemeth to have reference, when he saith, that the Pharisees did109 cubitaliter lavare, wash up to their elbows. Lastly, others110 interpret πυγμὴ, to be the fist, or hand closed, & the manner of washing thereby denoted to be by rubbing one hand closed in the plain or hollow of the other. All imply a diligent and accurate care in washing: the ceremonious washing by lifting up the hands, and hanging them down, best expresseth the superstition, which only was aimed at in the reproof, though all the sorts of washing, to the Pharisee were superstitious, because they made it not a matter of outward decency and civility, but of religion, to eat with washt or unwasht hands, urging such a necessity hereof,111 that in case a man may come to some water, but not enough both to wash and to drink, he should rather chuse to wash than to drink, though he die with thirst. And it was deemed amongst them as great a sin to eat with unwasht hands, as to commit fornication. This Tradition of washing hands, though it were chiefly urged by the Pharisees, yet all the Jews maintained it, as appeareth by the places quoted.
We may observe three sorts of washing of hands in use among the Jews. 1. Pharisaical