Is vinegar considered leavened?

[The Leaven – exploring the relationship between science and religion (cont)]

The Jewish word for leaven is chametz. This is not normally thought to be yeast but naturally fermenting grain, particularly wheat, barley, rye, spelt or oats. In this respect, wine being fermented from grapes would not be considered leavened but beer probably would, as it is likely to contain barley. Sour wine or vinegar was also likely to be considered leavened. The Hebrew for vinegar is chometz meaning sour. This is almost the same as the word chametz which is probably derived from a similar meaning. Vinegar is made by fermenting an alcoholic substance, such as wine, a second time with acetic acid bacteria to convert ethanol  into acetic acid. Turning wine into vinegar can be avoided by excluding air from the process as these bacteria are predominately aerobic. It is likely that wine frequently turned to vinegar in the Biblical era as a consequence of contamination and therefore it was thought to simulate corruption in a similar way to  leaven. It has been suggested that when the term chometz is used in the Bible it refers to both leaven and vinegar as they are both considered to be sour. The Hebrew word for wine was yayin derived from the word yaneh meaning to squeeze or press. Sour wine was usually referred to as chometz yayin or chometz yin.

It is believed that vinegar or sour wine was offered to Jesus before and after the crucifixion:

And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, the place of the skull, they gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink. They crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, they parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots. And sitting down they watched him there; And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
Mt 27:33-37

Golgotha was thought to be called the place of the skull because it was a hill that resembled a skull although it may have also been called this because it served as a place for executions. It was located at the entrance of Jerusalem.  Some translations say that Jesus was offered  vinegar while bearing the cross to Golgotha whereas others say it was wine containing gall. Gall was often referred to as anything that was bitter so it was more likely to be sour wine or vinegar.  In his gospel, Matthew states that this was done to fulfil a prophecy. The particular prophecy that Matthew refers to is in the Old Testament. It describes the demeaning  manner by which vinegar is offered to quench a thirst. The guards further demean Jesus by removing his clothing in order to share them between themselves. This is also predicted in a prophecy:

When I was hungry they gave me poison. When I was thirsty they offered me vinegar.
Ps 69:21

The gamble for my clothes and divide them among themselves.
Ps 22:18

In the Gospel according to John, Jesus drank vinegar just before he died whilst on the cross in order to fulfill the prophecy.

Later, knowing that everything had now been finished, and so that Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.
Jn 19:28-30

The disrobing Of Christ, Cattura di Cristo. Guercino 1621.

It would seem that vinegar could be more likely to be viewed as a leavened drink than either wine or grape juice as it was synonymous with a corruptive influence in the same way as leaven.

Spontaneously generated wine

[The Leaven – exploring the relationship between science and religion (cont)]

The inexplicable nature by which grape juice turned into wine was at one time the subject of much speculation. In 15th century England leaven used in brewing was known as barm. In the Brewers Book of Norwich, written in the 15th century, the barm is referred to as goddisgoode because it was thought to be provided by Gods blessing. In the absence of understanding, God was invoked as the great provider. It seem inevitable that wine could be associated with miracles, given the mystery surrounding its existence.

The Wedding at Cana. Preti c1655

Perhap one of the most controversial miracles that Jesus performed was at a wedding in Cana in front of his disciples. It was claimed by John to be his first miracle:

There was a wedding in the town of Cana in Galilee. Jesus’ mother was there, and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. When the wine had been given out, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no wine left.”
“You must not tell me what to do.” Jesus replied, “My time has not yet come.”
Jesus’ mother then told the servants, “Do what ever he tells you.”
The Jews have rules about ritual washing, and for this purpose six stone water jars were there, each one large enough to hold about a hundred litres Jesus said to the servants, “Fill these jars with water.” They filled them to the brim, and then he told them, “Now draw some water out and take it to the man in charge of the feast.” They took him the water, which now had turned to wine, and he tasted it. He did not know where the wine had come from but of course the servants who had drawn the water knew; so he called the bridegroom and said to him, “Everyone else serves the good wine first, and after the guests have had plenty to drink, he serves the ordinary wine. But you have kept the best wine until now!”
[Jn. 2. 1-12]

This miracle seems to differ from others in that its main purpose is to demonstrate that he had a divine gift that distinguished him from ordinary people. The wedding guests have already had their fill of wine and yet desire more. Here is a miracle that does not address any spiritual issues other than to appease Jesus’ mother, who seems distressed at this lapse in hospitality. This story is only mentioned in the gospel according to John. The first three gospels in the New Testament by Matthew, Mark and Luke show many common elements and have verbal similarity they are thought to be the more accurate records of Jesus’ ministry and have been written about the same time. Collectively they are known as the Synoptics as they share a common perspective. The fourth gospel according to John tends to show Jesus as a messiah and therefore may exaggerate some of the miracles performed. The objective of this first miracle according to John was for Jesus to manifest his glory and for the disciples to believe in him:

This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed in him.
[Jn. 2.11]

Through the disciples, the miracles were used to persuade others to follow Jesus’s teachings. The miraculous transformation of water into wine at the wedding of Cana is taken as a sign that Jesus sanctioned alcoholic beverages and their consumption was viewed as a socially accepted activity. Simultaneously,  Jesus acknowledged the sanctity of marriage. This miracle was seen by some as an indication that Jesus’s actions would enrich the lives of the community by benefiting their social needs. According to John the news of this miracle filtered through the local community. When Jesus later visited Cana he was greeted by a government official who thought his son was critically ill and dying:

Jesus said to him, “None of you will ever believe unless you see miracles and wonders.”
“Sir,” replied the official, “Come with me before my child dies.”
Jesus said to him, “Go your son will live!”
The man believed Jesus’ words and went. On his way home his servants met him with the news, “Your boy is going to live!”
[Jn. 4. 46-51]

This second miracle symbolised that not only could Jesus benefit the social needs of the community he could also protect them from harm. Jesus had the power to heal and to create. These two examples of miracles have a common denominator they both exploit social views of uncertainty. The first miracle exploits the views of uncertainty surrounding wine fermentation the second exploits the uncertainty of fear associated with disease and death. Two situations that, although are beyond the control of society, could be resolved by divine interaction.

Bread is full of goodness because a woman put it there

[The Leaven – exploring the relationship between science and religion (cont)]

What is the significance of the woman in the leaven parable (see earlier post)? Many theologists ask if she is incidental or essential? Most of them see her role as being incidental as traditionally, men’s work was sowing and harvesting, whereas making bread was mainly seen as a woman’s work. However if she was incidental why mention her at all? Jesus could have merely said the leaven was placed in the meal without saying who put it there.

The Bible often uses the figure of a woman to represent kingdoms or cities:

The two women represent to covenants. The one whose children are born in slavery is Hagar, and she represents the covenant made at Mount Sinai. Hagar, who stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia, is the figure of the present city of Jerusalem, in slavery with all its people. But the heavenly Jerusalem is free, and she is our mother.
[Gal. 4.26]

In this way, women in the Bible can represent authority and management, especially in the role of hospitality. The Church is often spoken of as a mother and Catholics often refers to Mother Church. When  women are spoken of in a matriarchal role they are granted great responsibility. For instance, the Virgin Mary was entrusted with giving birth to the messiah. Therefore, the woman may have been trusted to place the leaven in the meal as she was perceived as being caring and conscientiousness. If the leaven represents Christianity, it appears that she has been entrusted with it.

Madonna with the Yarnwinder. Da Vinci, c1510

In practice though women were not often given roles of responsibility. There were no women among the twelve disciples or among the seventy that were commissioned and sent forth:

Take the teachings that you heard me proclaim in the presence of many witnesses, and entrust them with reliable people, who will be able to teach others.
[2 Tim.  2.2]

Perhaps because the commissioning was partly undertaken by Paul the Apostle who did not consider women to be trusted with teaching or matters arising in the church:

Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
[1Cor. 14.34-35]

So privately women seemed to be held in high regard but publicly they were forced to be silent and not given the same privileges as men. Therefore, if making the bread is considered a domestic and caring role, then the woman could be trusted to place good leaven in the meal.

Women in the Bible are often denoted as being the source of corruption. For instance, Eve was persuaded by the serpent into eating fruit from the tree of knowledge. As a consequence of this the Lord punishes  Adam for listening to her but he also punishes Eve with the pain of childbirth and subordination to men.

Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Michelangelo, Sistine Chapel, 1500’s

The action of the women in the parable may be symbolic. She hid the leaven in the meal. If the leaven in this parable is associated with something good she would not need to hide it. This could suggest that if the woman was conveying positive doctrines she would boldly speak out. Jesus himself spoke openly unto the world, and his followers perhaps were expected to do the same. He said to them, “Go throughout the whole world and preach the gospel to all mankind.” It is therefore supposed that secret hiding and the spreading of false doctrine are in some way linked. In contrast to the positive message this parable first appears to be conveying some theologians believe that the woman represents a false messenger, her objective is to introduce a corrupting element into the meal. On the other hand, Jesus was condemned for his teachings therefore perhaps he is suggesting that his followers spread his message in a concealed way so they do not endure a similar persecution.  As previously mentioned, woman were discouraged  from speaking in the church or in teaching  men, so perhaps Jesus is suggesting that women should ignore these restrictions and take a more prominent role in spreading the word of the gospels.

…heavenly bread making

[The Leaven – exploring the relationship between science and religion (cont)]

Leaven when used figuratively in the bible is most often used to denote something that is corrupt. The initial conception of it in the leaven parable (see previous post) is of a favourable component in the dough, this implies that Jesus is contradicting its symbolic use in the Bible.

The Leaven Parable. Illustration by Jan Luyken from the Bowyer Bible.

This parable could be interpreted in many ways. The leaven is taken by the woman and hidden in the meal or flour. The leaven may represent the subtle way that evil can permeate through the dough. In this manner leaven still represents something that corrupts, disintegrates and breaks up. The woman is impregnating the pure symbol of heaven symbolised by the meal with evil symbolised by the leaven. The first indication that leaven was associated with corruption in the Bible was when Lot baked unleavened bread for the angels:

But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without leaven, and they ate.
[Gen. 19.3].

Lot did not give leavened bread to the angels because he did not want to offer them anything containing impurities. The next reference to leaven is in the book of Exodus when the Hebrews left Egypt. They received a command from the Lord, through Moses, not to eat leavened bread for seven days. Similar sentiments occur in later sections of the Bible when the Lord demands that leaven should not be offered in sacrifices to him.

Do not offer bread made with leaven when you sacrifice an animal to me. Do not keep until morning any part of an animal killed at the Passover festival.
[Ex. 34.25].

Leaven was excluded from any sacrifice because it was thought of as a contaminant that did not reflect sinlessness. Leaven  during the Biblical era would have contained many undesirable elements in addition to microbes that fermented bread dough. It’s unlikely that the primitive baking processes used at that time would have destroyed all pathogenic microbes and therefore there was the potential for leaven in bread to transmit diseases. This is perhaps why it earned such a bad reputation and why people tended not to offer it to guests during festivals or at other times. Perhaps one person’s leaven was another person’s poison. Interestingly, animal sacrifices were disposed of before they started to decompose or they could become contaminated also. Perhaps there was the additional fear that Egyptians would look unfavourably upon this practice and there would be consequences for  the Hebrews if they were caught with animal remains:

If we use these animals and offend the Egyptians by sacrificing them where they can see us, we will be stoned  to death. We must travel three days into the desert to offer sacrifices to the Lord our God, just as he commanded us.
[Ex. 8.26-27]

The words leaven and unleavened occur over sixty times in the Old Testament and nearly twenty times in the New Testament. In every instance, except for in the leaven parable, it is used to denote something corrupt or sinful. Mostly, Jesus  uses leaven  figuratively in the same way as it is used in the Old Testament to denote corruption. For instance, Jesus compares the doctrines of the Pharisees with leaven:

Be on guard against the leaven of the Pharisees, I mean their hypocrisy.
[Lk. 12.1]

In Mark’s gospel  “and the leaven of Herod” is added to the above quote [Mk 8.14-15].  According to Lockyer the leaven of the Pharisees can be interpreted to represent the hypocritical formality and ritual of their beliefs. The leaven of the Sadducees was rationalism and the denial of supernatural events. The leaven of Herod was the consequence of these two doctrines, a departure from God and his teachings to a devotion of secularism and indulgence.

Throughout history the nature of leaven has led it to be seen with similar connotations. A rabbi reportedly said “Trust not a proselyte till twenty-four generations, for he holds his leaven.” Here leaven is used as a symbol of hostile infidelity. It was also used by the Talmund to signify “Evil affections and the naughtiness of the heart.” The ancient interpretation of leaven by the Greek historian, Plutarch, presented a figurative meaning that had similar connotations:

Leaven is both generated by corruption, and also corrupts the mass with which it is mingled.

Paul‘s also uses leaven to illustrate corruption[1 Cor. 5.6].  Paul encouraged the purging of a sinful man because if his sins remained unpunished they would spread amongst the group. This statement by Paul cements the traditional meaning associated with leaven of being  a corruptive persuasive and a permeating influence.

Of the leaven parable Martin Luther states that:

Our Lord wishes to comfort us with this similitude, and gives us to understand that, when the Gospel, as a piece of new leaven, has once mixed itself with the human race, which is the dough, it will never cease till the end of the world, but will make its way through the whole mass of those who are to be saved, despite of all the gates of Hell. Just as it is impossible for the sourness, which it has once mingled itself with the dough, ever again to be separated from it, because it has changed the nature of the dough, so it is also impossible for Christians to be ever torn from Christ. For Christ, as a piece of leaven, is so incorporated with them that they form with Him one body, one mass… leaven is also the Word which renews men.

Martin Luther assumes that leaven is used merely for its permeating quality and not in relation to corruption. He has interpreted leaven in this parable as depicting faith rather than corruption. Christ is the piece of leaven that is incorporated into the dough, which is portrayed as the human race. Once the leaven has mingled into the dough it can never be separated.

The Leaven Parable

[The Leaven – exploring the relationship between science and religion (cont)]

Then the disciples came to Jesus and asked him, “Why do you use parables when you talk to the people?” Jesus answered, “The knowledge about the secrets of the Kingdom of heaven have been given to you, but not to them. For the person who has something will be given more, so that he will have more than enough; but the person who has nothing will have taken away from him even the little he has. The reason I use parables in talking to them is that they look, but do not see, and they listen, but do not hear or understand. So the prophecy of Isaiah applies to them:

‘This people will listen and listen, but not understand; they will look and look, but not see, because their minds are dull, and they have stopped up their ears and have closed their eyes. Otherwise, their eyes would see, their ears would hear, their minds would understand, and they would turn to me, says God, and I would heal them.’

As for you, how fortunate you are! Your eyes see and your ears hear. I assure you that many prophets and many of God’s people wanted very much to see what you see, but they could not, and to hear what you hear, but they did not [Mk 4.10-12; Lk 8.9-10; Matt 13.10-16].”

Jesus’ teachings and philosophies are predominately analogical; he tried to encourage new insights by allowing people to draw comparisons with familiar situations. Perhaps this is why simple foodstuffs and domestic chores feature so many times in the Bible. It is fairly evident that his preferred audience are not the wealthy or powerful so many of the terms he uses are familiar to them. By using parables he is encouraging freedom of thought in an imaginative style that would appeal to this audience. Parables encourage self-assessment, are memorable and others could pass the stories through the community. Moreover, they would permeate through society in a leaven-like manner.

Return of the prodigal son. Rembrandt, 1665.

The parables also tend to be grouped together by subject manner. For instance the parable of the Lost Sheep is grouped with the parable of the Lost Coin and the parable of the Lost Son [Lk.15]. These parables all deal with the issue of finding belief when it has been lost. In the Lost Sheep Jesus describes how joyous a shepherd is when one of his sheep strays and is found even though he has several that are not lost. Similarly, in the parable of the Lost Coin a woman loses one of her few coins searches frantically for it and rejoices when it is rediscovered. In the final parable a father celebrates when a sinful son repents, he was lost and then was found. Some of the parables are told within the context of life at that particular time in history, perhaps referring to a current or political situation. Therefore, the parables are sometimes difficult to interpret accurately.

The Leaven parable, mentioned by Mathew and Luke, is grouped with several parables describing the Kingdom of Heaven, such as the parable of Weeds [Matt. 13.24-47] and the parable of the Mustard Seed [Mk. 4.30-32, Matt. 13.31-32; Lk. 13.18-19]. In each of these parables the coming of heaven could be interpreted as the end product resulting from the growth of all these items; the leavened loaf of bread, the weed-free harvest and the fully-grown tree from a mustard seed. The parable of Weeds describes how the Kingdom of Heaven is compared to a field sown only with good seed. Any weeds that grow represent evil and are separated from the crop to be destroyed by the harvesters. In the context of the era leaven may have had a different connotation. The parable of the Leaven consists of just two sentences:

“The Kingdom of heaven is like this. A woman takes some leaven and hid it in three measures of meal until the whole batch of dough rises”
[Matt. 13.33; Lk. 13.20]

To many this parable is thought to illustrate how the Gospel will slowly permeate through society until all is converted to Christianity. This is in contradiction to how leaven is usually interpreted in the bible, to symbolically represent corruption. The leaven parable can be divided into three component parts: the leaven, the woman and the meal or flour. Each of these component parts plays a different role in the message being conveyed within the parable and are discussed separately in following posts.

…forget Harleys, real rebels ride donkeys

[The Leaven – exploring the relationship between science and religion (cont)]

The philosophies of Jesus predominately passed by unnoticed until the last year of his life. His teachings in Galilee had not reached the major religious centre in Jerusalem but when he did arrive in the city he caused a major disturbance. Firstly, he arrived in a messianic role but in a humble manner riding on an ass, as prophesised by Zechariah. In Eastern tradition horses are associated with war whereas the donkey is a symbol of peace:

I have seen how my people have suffered. Shout for joy you people of Jerusalem! Look, your King is coming to you! He comes triumphant and victorious but humble and riding on a donkey.
[Zec. 9.9]

“Tell the city of Zion. Look, your king is coming to you! He is humble and rides on a donkey”
[Matt. 21.5]

Secondly he forced the vendors and money-changers from the temple in direct conflict with the behaviour of those obeying the Torah.

Jesus went into the temple and drove out all those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables and money-changers and the stools of those who sell pigeons, and said to them, “It is written the Scriptures that God said, my temple will be called the house of prayer, but you are making it a hideout for thieves!”
[Matt. 21. 2-13]

In the days leading up to the Passover everyone visiting the Temple to worship or make a sacrifice had to pay a temple tax, apart from the Pharisees, High Priests and Rabbis of the temple. A special currency was used for the tax which could only be obtained from money-changers, who usually offered unfair rates and charged a fee for their services. Money-changers were often relatives or associates of the Pharisees and High Priests. As a consequence of his disruptive actions religious leaders and Roman authorities considered Jesus to be a rebel who had the potential to influence a Jewish uprising.

Jesus weeps over the city of Jerusalem. Painting by Simonet 1892.

Shortly after Jesus leaves Jerusalem he senses that his predicament is precarious and arranges a meal with his disciples. Here, unleavened bread is once again used to symbolise doctrines and philosophical thoughts. The last supper was thought to occur during the festival of unleavened bread,  kept to commemorate the Israelites flight from Egypt featured in the Old Testament. It seemed to be Jesus’ intention to share the Passover meal with his disciples but there is strong belief that he was in fact executed before the Passover ceremonies were due to take place on the Sabbath [Mk. 14, 12-21; Lk. 22, 7-13, 21-23; Jn. 13, 21-30]. Even though the last supper may not have been a Passover meal it was portrayed as one by Jesus who saw himself as the sacrificial lamb, the wine was symbolically the sacrificial blood and the unleavened bread used to represent his body:

While they were eating, Jesus took a piece of bread, gave a prayer of thanks, broke it and gave it to his disciples. “Take and eat it,” he said; “this is my body.”
Then he took a cup, gave thanks to God, and gave it to them. “Drink it, all of you,” he said; “this is my blood, which seals God’s covenant, my blood poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will never again drink this wine until the day I drink the new wine with you in my Father’s Kingdom.”
[Mk. 14. 22-25]

In following posts this passage will discussed in more detail. Following information supplied by Judas, the high priest has Jesus arrested and following a brief court appearance he was accused of blasphemy and sentenced to death. He was brought before Pontius Pilate who was reluctant to condemn Jesus because he did not understand the charge but accepting that he was politically dangerous ordered his execution.

…tale of two tribes

The teachings of Jesus of Nazareth did not obey the Torah in an orthodox or  familiar  way and therefore, some religious groups treated him with contempt. The two main sectarian Jewish groups at this time were the Sadducees and the Pharisees. In the New Testament Jesus uses the characteristics of leaven to denote human behaviour or more specifically a mutual social conduct that permeates through society. For instance, Jesus tells his disciples to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees [Mk. 8.14-21; Matt. 16.6]. He was symbolically warning them against false doctrine and hypocritical practises. Jesus had acquired a reputation of performing miracles by feeding thousands with a few loaves of bread. The Pharisees doubted his ability, asking him to execute a similar act as evidence that God approved of him. He did not replicate a miracle. On his journey away from the Pharisees with his disciples to the far side of a lake, his followers began complaining about their lack of food. Jesus explained the reasons for his inability to perform a miracle to make more bread in the following passage [Matt. 16,.5-12; Mk. 8.14-21]:

When the disciples crossed over to the other side of the lake, they forgot to take any bread. Jesus said to them, “take care; be on your guard against the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. “
They started discussing among themselves. “He says this because we didn’t bring any bread.”
Jesus knew what they were saying, so he asked them, “Why are you discussing among yourselves about not having any bread? How little faith you have! Don’t you understand yet? Don’t you remember when I broke the five loaves for the five thousand men? How many baskets did you fill? And what about the seven loaves for the four thousand men? How many baskets did you fill? How is it that you don’t understand that I was not talking to you about bread? Guard yourselves from the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees!”
Then the disciples understood that he was not warning them to guard themselves from the leaven used in bread but from the teachings of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.
[Matt. 16. 5-12]

This passage seems to suggest that in fact it was the quality of the leaven that could increase the bread yield or, metaphorically speaking, spiritual fulfilment. Obviously some leaven had better fermenting properties than others and this could be used as an analogue for comparing the quality of philosophical thought. Here Jesus compares the unproductive corrupt leaven or doctrines of the Pharisees with the bountiful yield produced by his own. Perhaps he is also commenting on the rituals involving leaven practiced by the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Politically and religiously, the Sadducees were the most conservative segment of the Jewish population. They were mainly wealthy and aristocratic families that were anxious to stay peaceful with Rome. They strictly followed the Pentateuch and stressed the importance of the Law of Moses (The Torah) in upholding sacrificial rites and regulations governing the priesthood. The main focus of their worship was a temple in Jerusalem where they practiced the rites specified in the Torah, many sacrifices were conducted several times a day.

The temple in Jerusalem had been rebuilt when the Jews returned from exile around 500 BC according to specific instructions laid down in the Pentateuch. The temple consisted of a series of courts leading to an innermost court that only the High Priest could enter. The innermost court was where God was thought to dwell. On a daily basis many sacrifices were performed in the temple; the area was always crowded with priests, Jewish subjects and people selling sacrificial animals. Money-changers were there to provide the coins that were specified by the Torah. Ritual and ceremony had reached a high level of intensity, with even the priests having to fit into the stringent criteria of the Torah. Only those that were direct ascendants of the sons of Aaron could officiate at ceremonies. The High Priest had considerable social status and enjoyed a high amount of authority, being incorporated into government decision-making. He was also head of the Sanhedrin, a court that handled cases that defied the Torah and was recognised by the Romans. This authority was often questioned by the Pharisees and eventually diminished when the temple of Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD. The disappearance of the temple marked the disappearance of the Sadducees who were so entrenched in the Temple cult that they couldn’t survive without it.

The Pharisees also followed the Torah but did not concentrate exclusively on the written word in the Pentateuch but other writings and books that were being incorporated into the Old Testament. The Pharisees led the Jewish community to recovery following the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple around 70 AD during the war with Rome. The Torah excludes certain people viewed as unclean, such as lepers, from society. The fact that Jesus associated with people considered socially and religiously unacceptable, angered the Pharisees and his radical interpretation of the Torah also alienated him from the Sadducees. The fundamental difference between the philosophies of Jesus of Nazareth and the other sects were in obeying the Torah. The Pharisees believed that righteousness consisted within the Torah whereas Jesus believed that the Torah was in itself under the judgement of God. Despite this it is very clear from his teachings that Jesus did not reject the Torah as he was very familiar with its content. For instance when a follower asked him what he must do to inherit eternal life Jesus referred him to the Ten Commandments :

“Good Teacher, what must I do to receive eternal life?”
“Why do you call me good?” Jesus asked him. “No one is good except God alone. You know the commandments: Do not commit murder; do not commit adultery; do not steal; do not accuse anyone falsely; do not cheat; respect yur father and mother.”
[Mk. 10. 17-19]

He also told the man that if he wanted to enter the Kingdom of Heaven he must sell all of his belongings, give the money to the poor and then he would find riches in heaven. When the man walked away dismayed Jesus turned to his followers and told them that it was easier for a camel to pass through the needle’s eye than it was for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven [Mk. 10. 20-25].

The Pharisees question Jesus. Tissot 1886

There were numerous conflicts between Jesus and the Pharisees, particularly in the association with undesirables, sinners and social outcasts. In response to the Pharisees criticism Jesus explained that if you are not sick than you do not need a physician; I came not to call the righteous, but sinners [Mk. 2.17]. According to the Pharisees, Jesus constantly defiled himself by coming into contact with lepers and outcasts and therefore was ritually unclean and in direct contradiction to the Torah. The Pharisees believed that eating food without first washing the hands was ritually unclean. They and all Jewish people believed that the Torah instructed them to clean all utensils and food before eating. In response to this criticism Jesus argued:

“There is nothing that goes into a person from the outside that makes him ritually unclean. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that makes him unclean.”
[Matt. 15.10-20; Mk. 7.14-23]

In many ways Jesus seems to place the sinners above the self-righteous Pharisees. He explains that those that do not pass judgment on others will be looked upon more favourably in the eyes of God, as described in the Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector:

Jesus also told this parable to people who were sure of their own goodness and despised everybody else. “Once there were two men who went up to the temple to pray: one was Pharisee, the other tax collector. The Pharisee stood apart by himself and prayed, ‘I thank you God I’m not greedy, dishonest, or an adulterer, like everybody else. I thank you do I not right that tax collector over there. I fast two days a week may give you a tenth of all my income.’  But the tax collector stood at a distance and would not even raise his face to heaven, beat his breast and said, ‘God, have pity on me, a sinner!’ I tell you” said Jesus, “the tax collector and not the Pharisee, was in the right with God when he went home. For everyone who makes himself great will be humbled, and everyone who humbles himself will be made great.”
[Lk.18.9-14].

More specifically what Jesus exactly feels about the Torah is explained in the gospel according to Mathew [5.17-20]. He states:

‘Do not think that I have come to do away with the Law of Moses and the teachings of the prophets.’

He goes on to explain that if anyone disobeys the commandments and teaches others to do the same they will be the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. He ends by saying:

‘You will be able to enter the Kingdom of heaven only if you are more faithful than the teachers of the Law and the Pharisees in doing what God requires.’  

Jesus disagrees with the methods that the Pharisees use to follow the Torah. The Pharisees had evolved a self-righteous approach to obeying the Torah whereas Jesus was more concerned with spiritual fulfilment and consciousness. This perhaps explains why he compares the corrupting characteristics of leaven to the philosophies of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. He is suggesting that by obeying the Torah according to their teachings, through rules and regulations, you will lose sight of the message that God was initially trying to convey.