The School of Shammai

[Hoshiyya]

It has been remarked (by Christians and Messianics) that Yeshua and his disciples were closer in thought to the school of Hillel than in regard to the school of Shammai.

However I found two cases where this might not be so.

1. Divorce:

Shammai and Yeshua apparently both take the position that divorce is only permissible in the case of sexual immorality.

2. The strictest sect:

Paul claimed to have his background in the strictest sect of Judaism. The school of Shammai were known for being stricter than Hillel.

Paul could just be talking about Pharisaism in general, as compared to Sadducees or Essenes (whom he may have considered less strict or less orthodox).

Obviously it is possible to agree with Shammai on one issue, and Hillel on another issue.
But I found it interesting, and I think that as one grows one will find more and more interesting things in Scripture.

Any thoughts?

How did Yeshua, Paul and the disciples/apostles relate to the schools of Hillel and Shammai ?

Can you think of specific examples where they agreed or disagreed with one (or both) of them ?

 

[Meowzltov]

You are correct about Jesus' stance on Divorce. It makes it more believable. If he were perfectly aligned with Hillel, it would seem fake.

I don't think Paul really says which school he is aligned with, other than he is a student of Gamaliel, who was school of Hillel.

 

[Hoshiyya]

Interestingly though:

Yeshua's definition of sexual immorality seems more relative than Hillel or Shamai's, since Yeshua counts non-physical things as sexual immortality and perhaps therefore also grounds for divorce, whereas Hillel and Shammai would probably both be much more hesitant to count mental activity as a grounds for divorce.

 

[Dave-W]

1. Divorce:
Shammai and Yeshua apparently both take the position that divorce is only permissible in the case of sexual immorality.

My understanding is that Yeshua came down somewhere between the 2 but closer to Shammai. The dispute came down to what "ervah" meant in Deut 24.1, usually rendered "uncleanness" or "indecency." Hillel took it as almost anything that displeased the husband while Shammai took it as ONLY not finding her a virgin on the wedding night.

2. The strictest sect:
Paul claimed to have his background in the strictest sect of Judaism. The school of Shammai were known for being stricter than Hillel.
Paul could just be talking about Pharisaism in general, as compared to Sadducees or Essenes (whom he may have considered less strict or less orthodox).

I take it as Pharisaism as opposed to all the other Judaisms of the day: Herodians, Zealots, Essanes, etc.

How did Yeshua, Paul and the disciples/apostles relate to the schools of Hillel and Shammai ?
Can you think of specific examples where they agreed or disagreed with one (or both) of them ?

On the subjects of practicing medicine/healing on the Sabbath, Shammai was opposed and Hillel was in favor.
On the subject of plucking grain for one's own consumption on the sabbath, Shammai saw it as harvesting which violated the Sabbath while Hillel saw it as only eating, which did not.

 

[Lulav]

Interestingly though:

Yeshua's definition of sexual immorality seems more relative than Hillel or Shamai's, since Yeshua counts non-physical things as sexual immortality and perhaps therefore also grounds for divorce, whereas Hillel and Shammai would probably both be much more hesitant to count mental activity as a grounds for divorce.

For sure because a man cannot know what another man is thinking and can therefore not judge upon that, only the physical act. However since Yeshua could read minds and G-d knows our every thought as well he was speaking of from their perspective.

 

[Lulav]

I take it as Pharisaism as opposed to all the other Judaisms of the day: Herodians, Zealots, Essanes, etc.

The Herodians, however you want to believe who they were , were often coupled with the Pharisees at least in the Gospel records.

Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.

Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words.

Then the Pharisees went and plotted together how they might trap Him in what He said. 16 And they sent their disciples to Him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know that You are truthful and teach the way of God in truth, and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any.

 

[Dave-W]

The Herodians, however you want to believe who they were , were often coupled with the Pharisees at least in the Gospel records.

Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.

Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words.

Then the Pharisees went and plotted together how they might trap Him in what He said. 16 And they sent their disciples to Him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know that You are truthful and teach the way of God in truth, and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any.

I understand that. The Zealots and Pharisees also had an uneasy alliance. (with the Zealots and Herodians on opposite sides usually)
These alliances existed ONLY AS LONG as the 2 parties had a common goal. Once that goal was either accomplished or became impossible, the alliance was ended.

 

[Lulav]

I understand that. The Zealots and Pharisees also had an uneasy alliance. (with the Zealots and Herodians on opposite sides usually)
These alliances existed ONLY AS LONG as the 2 parties had a common goal. Once that goal was either accomplished or became impossible, the alliance was ended.

So you are saying they are the embodiment of 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend' proverb?

That may well be but without a distinct understanding of who exactly they were, it's really hard to say emphatically, wouldn't you agree?