[Megillot] The Rise of the Pharisees in Qumran texts

[RUSSELLGMIRKIN]

It is generally agreed that the group the scrolls describe as the Seekers of Smooth Things should be identified with the Pharisees.  This is a reasonable position, since this group is described as having a set of teachings differing from the scrolls sect, and the scrolls with halachic content consistently polemicize against positions attributed to the rabbis.  What is often overlooked is that the scrolls contain important information on the rise of the Pharisees.   Much of this information centers on the Man of Lies, who is said to have “reproach[ed] the Teacher of Righteousness” and “rejected the Law in the midst of the Community” (1QpHab 5.11-12).  The “traitors with the Man of Lies” are described as “traito[rs of the] new [covenant]” who did not believe the words from “the mouth of the Priest” (1QpHab 2.1-10).  He is said to have “erected a community” by deceit (1QpHab 10.10).  In CD the scoffer’s “congregation of traitors” is described as having “sought smooth things” (or “easy interpretations”).  He is said to have caused Israel to stray and to have provoked God’s wrath on “his congregation” (CD 1.10-2.1).     From this it emerges that (1) the Man of Lies had a halachic dispute with the Teacher of Righteousness, whose followers considered the Man of Lies and his followers to be traitors to the covenant and promoters of false interpretations; (2) the Man of Lies was instrumental in leading Israel astray and founding a distinct community or congregation; (3) this community of “seekers of smooth things” is best identified with the Pharisees.   Rabbinical traditions are very useful in dating these historical developments.  At Aboth 1.4, the rabbis listed their earliest spiritual leaders as Simeon the Righteous, then Antigonus of Socho, then the first zugoth or pair Jose b. Jo’ezer of Zeredah (possibly the uncle of the Hellenist high priest  Alcimus) and Jose of Jerusalem, whose halachic rulings date them to the time of the Maccabean conflict.  The Pharisees, who revered the Zadokite high priest Simon the Righteous, thus broke away from the Sadducee temple in the generation after Simon the Righteous, i.e. the time of Onias III.  This situates the time of the conflict between the Teacher of Righteousness and the Man of Lies chronologically.   Onias III, son of Simon the Righteous, is described as a defender of the laws in 2 Maccabees, in terms appropriate to his identification as the Teacher of Righteousness.  He was driven from the office of high priest at the instigation of his sagan Simon the temple captain, who is described as a liar and traitor in 2 Maccabees.  Onias was eventually assassinated through the plotting of Simon’s brother the Hellenist high priest Menelaus, who is described as a wicked priest, and was indeed the most infamously wicked of all high priests of second temple times.  This suggests that the rise of the Pharisees as a distinct sect was related to the overthrow of the Zadokite (Sadducee) high priestly dynasty that inaugurated the Hellenistic Crisis.  Both Simon the temple captain and Menelaus had previously served in a high capacity under the last Oniads Simon and Jason (and possibly their father Simeon the Righteous), which is highly consistent with their description in the pesharim as traitors with Menelaus as having been formerly known by the “name of truth.”    The dating of the scrolls to the time of the split between the Sadducees and Pharisees is highly consistent with polemics against the Pharisees in CD, the pesharim, and halachic texts.  The rise of the Hasidim during the Maccabean war (possibly forerunners of the Essenes) introduced a third Jewish party.  4QMMT is IMO best interpreted as an appeal by the Sadducees for the Maccabeans (Hasidim) to adopt Pharisee practices in the newly dedicated temple of 164 BCE.  This is consistent with the pro-Sadducee anti-Pharisee polemics as well as the interesting description of David as a Hasid.   The schism under the Man of Lies thus finds a natural and interpretation in fully documented historical events surrounding the fall of the Oniad temple and the rise of the Pharisees.  By contrast, efforts to date the conflict between the Man of Lies and the Teacher of Righteousness in the Hasmonean Era have been highly problematic.  One school of thought viewed the Man of Lies as an Essene figure from whom the Teacher of Righteousness broke away [Jeremias and others], which is inconsistent with the Man of Lies described in Pharisee terminology.  Another proposed the differentiation of the Hasidim into Pharisees and Essenes took place only under John Hyrkanus [Brownlee], which lacks any direct historical corroboration and indeed is contradicted by rabbinical traditions dating the rise of the Pharisees in the pre-Hasmonean period.    Best regards, Russell Gmirkin