Sadducean Philosophical Approach

178 The Festivals and Sacred Days of Yahweh

Conclusion

Discovering just when the knowledge of the original forms of Phasekh, the seven days of unleavened bread, and Pentecost was lost and how so many variant views came into existence is clearly part of the purpose of this section of our research. Several other questions must also be addressed: • What was the historical and cultural context that helped develop these different views? • Who were the spiritual fathers of these different views? • What was the reasoning used to support their respective positions?

We shall begin our search for the one correct view of how to celebrate the Festival of Phasekh and Unleavened Bread and the Festival of Pentecost by examining the historical and cultural context that gave birth to the differing opinions. We shall also examine when and why the advocates of the Hasidic views were able to politically suppress the Aristocratic understandings. This background shall be followed with the evidence documenting the practices and reasonings used by the Hasidic (System B) and Aristocratic (System A) schools. We shall also examine a late compromise which combined the Hasidic interpretation of the seven days of unleavened bread with the Aristocratic view of byn ha-arabim (System C). Finally, we shall examine the various views advocated by the ancient Jews for counting the days to Pentecost.

Chapter XI Historical and Cultural Background

How did such radically different views for the expression μybr[h ˆyb (byn ha-arabim), the Phasekh supper, and the seven days of unleavened bread come into existence among the Jews? To fully understand this dispute we must begin with an examination of the historical and cultural context wherein the division of views took root in Judaism.

The Dark Period

We preface our examination with one premise. Few are able to challenge the fact that as late as the sixth to mid-fifth century B.C.E. knowledge of the correct system for the Festival of Phasekh and Unleavened Bread was certainly known. We are assured of this assumption based on the fact that there still existed at that time a number of important prophets and other men of Yahweh. What followed them was a dark period.

To demonstrate, it was during the fifth and sixth centuries B.C.E. that the prophets of Yahweh named Haggai and Zechariah prospered (fl. 520/519 B.C.E.).1 Also living at this time was the famous scribe, priest, and prophet of Yahweh named Ezra (who died shortly after 456/455 B.C.E.).2 Ezra is identified by the Targum of the Minor Prophets as the author of Malachi,3 the last book of the Old Testament; and in 2 Esdras we are told that it was Ezra who restored and edited the books of the Old Testament, which had been damaged during the previous period of the Babylonian exile.4 Nehemiah, of the book of Nehemiah fame, was even governor of Judaea during this period (456–444 B.C.E.).5

Next, it is the precise meaning of the biblical report that serves as the source for the later dispute. Therefore, to begin our task, we are forced to seek the assistance of non-biblical sources in order to discover the different Jewish opinions about the festival and to uncover just when variant views came into existence. Unfortunately, in this endeavor we cannot find any extra-biblical report defining exactly how the term byn ha-arabim was understood or how Phasekh and the days of unleavened bread were kept until the mention by a writer from the mid-third century B.C.E. This evidence comes from a Jewish priest named Aristobulus, who is cited by a much

179

1 In the second year of King Darius of Persia (Ezra, 4:24–6:22). 2 That Ezra died shortly after 456/455 B.C.E. see SJC, chap. xi; cf., Jos., Antiq., 11:5:5. 3 Codex Reuchlinianus of the book of Malachi, 1:1 (TMP, p. 229, n. 2). 4 2 Esd., 14:19–48; Clement, Strom., 1:22. 5 SJC, chap. xi; cf., Neh., 5:14, 13:6.