The Pharisees, the Sociological Background of Their Faith by Louis FinkelsteinReview by: Jacob S. MinkinIsis, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Jul., 1940), pp. 179-181Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of The History of Science SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/226080 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 07:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The University of Chicago Press and The History of Science Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to Isis.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.34 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 07:16:38 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REVIEWS 179

Louis Finkelstein.-The Pharisees, the sociological background of their faith. Two volumes, pp. XXvIIIn ,793. Notes, bibliographies and indices. Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society of America. Golden Jubilee volume.

Like the Jews themselves, the Pharisees, their spiritual ancestors, are the great misunderstood of history. While they are perhaps the most written about sect of ancient times, little was done to lift the veil that screened them for two thousand years. It is difficult enough to obtain an impartial view of the past, but when to that difficulty is added the prejudiced judgment of contemporary sources, the task is almost hopeless. Thus, no fair estimate of the Pharisees can be gleaned from the New Testament, where they figure as hypocrites and leathery forrn- alists who had spitefully shut out the advancing light and delivered unto death a king of glory.

Their image had been distorted no less by JOSEPHUS, who might have known better. JOSEPHUS had his own axe to grind, for he was a member of the aristocratic priestly family in Jerusalem with whom the Pharisees were frequently at odds. Besides, JOSEPHUS was a Roman who wrote for the Romans, and, therefore, had to curb his pen when telling the. story of this most patriotic group of Jews whose love of country held the Roman invaders at bay for many a year.

Christian scholars who relied on the testimony of either the New Testament or JOSEPHUS, for the most part on the former, remained satisfied with the stinging rebuke administered by the Gospels, " Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites." As often as not, it was not so much malice as the inaccessibility of the sources of Pharisaism that was responsible for the misrepresentation. To examine the records of 6ooo folio pages of the Babylonian Talmud and the equally stupendous literature of the Jerusalem Talmud and the Midrashim, on which basis alone an unbiassed opinion of the Pharisees can be formed, is a task to tax the patience and industry of the most conscientious scholar. It was chiefly because of this difficulty, that a number of Christian scholars, as, for instance, WEBER, SCHURmE, BoussET, and WELLHAUSEN, who had written about the Pharisees, were unable to escape their limitations.

If, however, in recent times the ancient wrong has been righted and the Pharisees no longer figure as flinty legalists or hair-splitting casuists, but as a great influence in the religious instruction of their contemporaries, whose power extended far beyond their time and place, reaching out to the moral and spiritual development of the human race, without whom it would have decaved and atrophied, the credit for it is largelv due to GEORGE FOOTE MooiRE and R. TRAVERS HERFoRD. They not only became pioneers in explaining and interpreting the faith and

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.34 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 07:16:38 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

i8o ISIS, XXXII, I

doctrines of the Pharisees, but thev held them up as the humanizers of the religion of Israel who, by strictness and righteousness, by non- resistance and peace preserved the spiritual nationhood of the Jewish people from being nibbled away by assimilation with their Greek and Roman oppressors.

Professor Louis FINKELSTEIN does not go over familiar ground. He has assimilated all that was written on the subject by Jewish and Christian scholars, but does not repeat the obvious. His treatment of the Pharisees is novel, one might almost sav daring. If some of his views had been anticipated, he defends his argument with such eloquence and freshness of style as to be almost convincing. Not all mav accept his conclusions, but the noveltv of his presentation and the persuasiveness with which he presses his thoughts make his book a contribution to a much-disputed subject which cannot be ignored.

In substance, the main thesis emerging from his analysis is that the prophetic, Pharisaic and rabbinic traditions were the product of a social economic and cultural battle carried on in Palestine for fifteen hundred years between the submerged unlanded groups, and their oppressors, the great landowners. From the province the conflict was transferred to the cities, where it expressed itself in the resentment of the traders and artisans against the nobles and courtiers. Finally, it appeared in the sanctuary itself in the bitter rivalry between the Levites and the priests. The wealth which accrued to the latter from the Temple service, made them the spokesmen of the upper classes, while the Scribes and Pharisees, themselves members of the spumed class, cast their lot with the poor and disinherited. It was from the social and economic struggle between the patrician and the plebeian elements of the population that the Pharisaic or rabbinic tradition arose with its enormous wealth of laws and regulations.

Even such purely doctrinal teachings as the immortality of the soul, resurrection from the dead, or the belief in angels, were, according to the author, more social and economic in their origin than theological. The Sadducees, glutted with wealth and power, had no need of these things, for this life offered them all the pleasures and delights of the senses they wanted. An abstract doctrine of the hereafter was sufficient for them. But not so the Pharisees, who spoke and thought for the humble slum dwellers. Having been denied this world, thev would be comforted with nothing less than personal immortalitv and physical resurrection after the manner of the Persians and Egyptians. And so in everv other way, the Pharisees made themselves friends of the lowly and humble in spirit and did everything to ease the burden of their life.

The writer goes far bevond the immediate scope of his work as indicated

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.34 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 07:16:38 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REVIEWS i8i

by its title and extends his investigation to the very beginning of Israel's historv. What would appear as irrelevant chapters on the Prophets, are perfectly related to the central thesis of the book in the author's belief that alreadv at that time, the clash between the social ideologies of the patricians and plebeians was keen and sharp. Dr. FINFELSTEIN thus ascribes certain Psalms as having originated under patrician influence because they do not reflect the struggle for social or economic justice.

It is an ingenuous theory to which the author has devoted some of the finest and most eloquent chapters in the book, although some readers may find it fantastic. Dr. FINKELSTEIN is certainly correct when he points out that at all times the struggle for existence was great and grave; but he makes a mistake in conceiving the need in too limited a sense. History records many events which cannot be explained in terms of social conflict. Fellowship with God, for instance, stands far above class struggle. It would be carrying the Marxian view of history to an absurd degree to suggest that the philosophic melancholy of Ecclesiastes, the questioning mood of Job, or the superb devotional lyrics of the Psalms, were inspired by no higher prompting than social conflict. The heart of mankind assigned to the Prophets a higher task, and though it may be an illusion, it would be a pity to disturb it.

In conclusion, one cannot but admire the enornous amount of work that has gone into the making of this book, and the wide vista it covers. The notes and bibliographies alone indicate the exhaustive manner in which the author conceived his subject. Professor FINKELSTEIN ap- proached his task with a definite hypothesis, in the light of which he connected and co-ordinated fifteen centuries of Jewish historv. If the results are not always cogent and convincing, they are never common- place. There are in the book flashes or rare insight, and chapters that are written with great warmth and conviction. Although the sustaining evidence is sometimes strained to the utmost, the author has a fascinating way of presenting his material which lends charm and dignitv to the. book. In an age of social conflict, the attempt to bring a great historic sect up-to-date, should prove of absorbing interest. At a time when the social and economic forces are being marshalled against the Jews, this work should find an attentive and grateful reading public. Whether the author has written history or fiction, Professor FINKELSTEIN has written a book worth while pondering over.

NVew York. JACOB S. MINKIN.

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.34 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 07:16:38 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions