One meaning of the root פרשׁ is “to separate.” We know this root well from rabbinic Hebrew: e.g., הפרישׁ, in the context of maaser and terumah. In Tanach itself, we have “peresh” for dung. Dung is what is separated from the body. The “separate” meaning is also found at Ezekiel 34:12 (sheep that are separated).

But several other times in Tanach, the root פרשׁ has the meaning “to make clear.” For example, at Numbers 15:34, we are told about the Israelite who gathered wood on Sabbath. The verse records: “They put him in ward (custody) because it was not פרשׁ what should be done to him.” The meaning of the phrase here is “had not been made clear to them.” A very similar verse is found at Leviticus 24:10 regarding the blasphemer. That verse tells us that they put him in ward (custody) because they needed to hear from God לפרשׁ—to make clear to them what to do. The other verses where our root פרשׁ means “make clear” or something similar are Nehemiah 8:8 and (in Aramaic) Ezra 4:18.

At first glance, “separate” and “make clear” appear to be two different (separate!) meanings.

But a widespread view among scholars and some of our traditional sources is that they are related. For example, Rav Samson Rafael Hirsch writes that “to explain” is “the separating out of complicated matters” (commentary to Leviticus 24:10). Mandelkern writes something similar. Already in the 11th century, Rabbi Yonah Ibn Janach—in his sefer “Ha-Shorashim”—related the two meanings: “hapeirush vehabiur hu hahafrashah bein hainyanim vehahafradah beineihem,” (Hebrew translation of the original Arabic). See also Brown-Driver-Briggs, page 831 and Ernest Klein’s etymological work, page 533. Klein suggests the following stages in the evolution of the root: divide, separate, make distinct, express clearly, clarify, declare, explain and interpret.

A related idea is the relationship between the words: בין,הבין and בינה. Understandings based on separating and making distinctions (בין) was probably the original meaning of the words הבין and בינה. See, e.g., Kings I, 3:9.

Later in Tanach, we have two other occurrences of our פרשׁ root. At Esther 4:7, we are told that Mordechai told Hatach all that happened and “parashat hakesef” that Haman said he would pay to the king’s treasury regarding the destruction of the Jews. Similarly at 10:2, we have “ufarashat gedulat Mordechai asher gidlo hamelech … ” The meaning of “parashat” in both of these verses seems to be “the full explanation with all its details.”

Another occurrence of our root is at Proverbs 23:32. The context here is the dangerousness of wine. In the first part of the verse, we have “it bites like a nachash.” In the second part, we have: “like a tzifoni (a poisonous snake) yafrish.” On first view, the meaning of “yafrish” here would seem to be something parallel to “bite,” like “sting.” But many prefer the translation “spurt forth (poison).” See e.g., the Soncino. With this interpretation, this word would be consistent with the fundamental meaning of the root: “separate.”

Finally, 57 times in Tanach, we have the word “parash” (in various forms) for someone who rides a horse. One can engage in much speculation to relate this to a “separation” meaning. E.g., the rider’s legs are “spread/separated.” The word appears in other Semitic languages with both the “horse” and “rider” meanings. In the early Semitic language of Ugaritic, it means “trained horse.” Probably, the word originated with the meaning “horse” and expanded to “rider.” And, probably, its “horse” meaning is not related to any of our other פרשׁ meanings. It is just a primary noun for this animal. See Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, volume 12, page 124.

——

I had always wondered about the origin of the word, “Pharisees,” i.e., פרושׁים. This is a chance to explore this issue.

Josephus mentions the Pharisees in his various works, all written in the last 30 years of the first century. He describes them as the leading sect (Wars II, 8,14). A widely-accepted view is that the Pharisees were the precursors to rabbinic Jews and their Sages.

Presumably, the name of a sect derives from an early stage of the sect. What could their early guiding principle or principles have been? Many explanations have been suggested. Here are the main ones:

1. They emphasized separateness in all ritual purity areas.
2. They emphasized separateness in ritual purity areas involving food.
3. They separated themselves from some or all of the above: intermarried Jews, non-Observant Jews/amei haaretz, gentiles, heathens and heathenizing tendencies and forces in their own nation (such as Sadducees).
4. They separated themselves from Sadduccees.
5. They were expelled at some point.
6. They excelled in commenting on and explaining the law (e.g., via Torah shebaal peh). (At Wars II, 8,14, Josephus writes that the Pharisees “are considered the most accurate interpreters of the laws. “ He does not link that to their name, but, perhaps, he is implying it.)

A related issue is whether the “Perushim” chose this name for themselves. Perhaps, it originated in a pejorative sense, having been assigned to them by those who disagreed with them. (As an analogy, I believe the term “Orthodox” was assigned by the non-Orthodox. Yet Orthodox Jewry kept it. It means “straight belief.”)

Suggestion no. 6 sounds attractive but it is, usually, not followed. Jastrow (page 1222) only mentions the meanings “seceder” and “abstemious, saintly or pure.” Similarly, here is what is found in ArtScroll’s mishna commentary to Hagigah (2:7): “The perushim were devout people, well versed in the laws of tumah and taharah, who carefully withdrew from the company of the am haaretz whose care in avoidance of tumah was suspect.” Kehati is similar.

Now, let us look at the Encyclopaedia Judaica entry (13:363), “Pharisees.” The beginning of the entry mentions that the meaning is “uncertain” and mentions a few standard suggestions like the ones above. But, later in the entry, (perhaps by a different author) we have: “Under John Hyrcanus, the Pharisees were expelled from membership in the Sanhedrin and branded with the name ‘Perushim—the separated ones.’ They took the name as their own, but used its alternate Hebrew meaning, ‘the exponents’ of the law.”

But even if we accept that John Hyrcanus—late in life—switched his loyalty to the Sadducees (see the story at Antiquities XIII, 10, in contrast to the one at Kiddushin 66a regarding his son Yannai), there is no source that records that John expelled all or most of his opponents from the Sanhedrin at that time. Even if he did, the word “Perushim” would typically refer to a voluntary separation, not an expulsion. (The Encyclopaedia Judaica’s suggestion would work with “Gerushim!”)

(The scholion to Megillat Taanit for the 28th of Tevet does have a story about the Pharisees taking back the Sanhedrin from the Sadducees. But this is not a reliable source.)

The above are just my first thoughts on this topic. It deserves a further column.

Mitchell First can be reached at [email protected]. He would like to thank Tamar Frazer—the 10-year-old daughter of Rabbi Ezra Frazer—for inspiring this column with a question about the root פרשׁ. (P.S. How are the books of Dr. Seuss sold in Israel? They are sold with the catchy title “Doctor (in Hebrew letters) סוס.” I learned this from Rabbi Frazer years ago.)