Babylonian Talmud, Menajot 65a:

“The Baitusim said the Omer should be cut after the Sabbath, for it is written: ‘on the day following the Shabbat’. But the wise answered: ‘Shabbat’ here means the holiday, not on the sabbath”.

1) What were and where did they come from

• Identity and etymology. “Boethusians” designates a group akin to the sadducees, whose name is linked to the priests house of Boeto (Boethus) that reached the dome of the Temple under Herod. The rabbinic literature are treated as a sub-group sadducean cultured; the Jewish Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia.com pick up this interpretation and its classical sources.
• Link with the priestly aristocracy. Herod appointed high priest Simon ben Boeto (c. 25-24 to. C.) and, since then, several members of that family Boeto occupied the office; Josephus list to several high priests of that house. This explains the political weight-temple of the Baitusim.
• Chronology of activity. Its peak is situated in the I century a. C. and up to the destruction of the Temple (70 ce. C.). Britannica and Encyclopedia.com put your existence in the last century of the Second Temple.

2) primary Sources on which they appear

• Talmud/Mishna. They are explicitly mentioned in Menajot 65a for the dispute on the Omer and the computer to Shavuot; and Rosh Hashanah 22b in an attempt to corrupt witnesses to the novilunio to alter the timetable. The Mishnah also alludes to a public measures to counter them (cutting of the Omer “with pageantry”).
• Midrash halachic and rabbinic tradition. The Sifrá (Ajarei-Mot), and parallel passages collected a dispute over the incense of Yom Kippur (if you are going on inside or outside the Holy of Holies), associating the position dissident sadducees/boetusianos.
• Flavius Josephus. Do not use “Boethusians” as a sect, but documents the house of Boeto and its role in the high priesthood herodian, which serves as a historical background.

3) the Doctrine and disputes halájicas key

Although the sources rabbinical make up de facto in the universe sadducean cultured, of the passages we infer the following profile:

1. Rejection of the Oral Law and literal reading of the Torah (a trait shared with the sadducees). This explains their positions in calendar and ritual.
2. Omer calendar of Shavuot. For the wise men (pharisees), “my-mañájat ha-shabbat” (“the next day of ‘shabbat’”, Lev 23) is understood as the next day, the first Yom Tov of Passover; for the Baitusim, “shabbat” = Saturday, so that the Omer fall always on the Sunday and Shavuot also on Sunday. The Mishnah records that, in this dispute, the cutting of the Omer it was a liturgy public questions and answers for shielding the official practice.
3. Testimony of the novilunio (Rosh Jodesh). The Baitusim bribed witnesses to fix bad the new moon, and thus force their calendar; the Talmud tells of a wise made them pass through the witness purchased and unmasked the maneuver.
4. Yom Kippur – incense of the High Priest. They argued that the incense should be placed onto the coals outside the Holy of Holies and enter as smoking; the wise normaron otherwise (enter with coals and incense and burn it within). This dispute is contained in Sifrá Ajarei-Mot and in the talmudic tradition (Yomá).
5. Funds of the sacrifice (Tamid). Another controversy (Menajot 65a) the sample questioning the Tamid should be covered with public funds; the sages insisted on his character community.

Notes doctrinal related to the sadducees: several reference works, point out that, as the sadducees, they denied the resurrection and the immortality of the soul and concentrated support in the wealthy elitealthough in rabbinic texts this is mentioned in a general way (not always separating “sadducees” and “boetusianos”).

“The Baitusim tried to deceive the court by bringing false witnesses to change the date of the novilunio. But Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai discovered and established new rules for the witnesses.”
(Rosh Hashanah 22b).

4) Position of social and political

• Aristocracy of the Temple. The power of the house of Boeto under Herod explains the projection policy of its supporters: they were a faction priestly with access to worship, to the Sanhedrin, and the resources of the Temple. Josephus and lists of high priests illustrate the frequency with which the family Boeto he served at times herodians and romans early.
• Relationship with the sadducees. The majority of specialists looks like subset sadducean cultured (not a sect completely separate), although Schiffman warns that could go back before Simon ben Boeto, and that there are parallel with Qumran in certain faults calendrical.

5) geographic Extent and chronology functional

• Center: Jerusalem / the Temple Mount. Their disputes are rituals of the Temple (omer, Yom Kippur, Tamid), which indicates an anchor jerusalemita.
• Decline and disappearance. As the sadducees, disappear the history of organized after 70 d. C., to destroy the Temple and lost its institutional base.

6) Legacy halachic and historical

• Reinforcement of public proceedings for the Omer (Menajot 10:4) and strict controls about witnesses of the new moon (Rosh Hashanah 22b), both designed for neutralize sectarian agendas.
• Fixing pharisaic-rabbinic calendar (Shavuot the 6 Siván, according to computation rabbinical), against the Sunday fixed advocated by baitusianos/sadducees.

7) what is differentiated from other streams?

• In front of pharisees: discrepancy method (Oral Tradition vs. literalism) and social power (elite priestly vs. leadership rabbinical-popular).
• In front of the essenes/Qumran: although there are parallel calendricalthe essenes separated their worship of the Temple, while the Baitusim fight for control your ritual from within. (Schiffman discusses possible connections, no final consensus).

“The Baitusim said, the incense should be placed onto the coals out of the Holy of Holies, and enter it as smoky. The sages said: no, should be placed inside, before the Lord.”
(Sifrá, Ajarei Mot, 3:2).

8) State of the question (historiography)

• The rabbinic tradition which makes result “sadducees” and “boetusianos” two disciples of Antigonus of Sojo (Zadok and Boeto) is seen as legendary or not historical on the part of much modern scholarship; the substrate historical verifiable is the family Boeto and its insertion on the cusp priestly herodiana.

Bibliography and sources of verification

• Passages of talmud: Menajot 65a (Omer/Tamid), Rosh Hashanah 22b (novilunio).
• Midrash halachic / Yom Kippur: Sifrá Ajarei-Mot (dispute of incense).
• References summary: Jewish Encyclopedia; Encyclopedia.com; Britannica.
• House of Boeto and high priests: compendiums from Josephus.
• Academic analysis: Lawrence H. Schiffman on sectarianism in the Second Temple.

“The Torah does not need interpreters; just read what is written.”
— The principle that differed from the pharisees, who were the Oral Law.

Conclusion

The Baitusim/Boetusianos were a faction priestly aristocraticclosely related to the sadduceesactive in the final stretch of the Second Temple. Its distinctive features emerge in disputes halájicas high-impact (computing Omer/Shavuot, novilunio, service of Yom Kippur, financing of the Tamid), always with literal reading Writing and resistance to authority pharisaic-rabbinic. Your power derived from the priests house of Boeto low Herod; its disappearance, of the ruin of the Temple in the 70's. The law rabbinic later crystallized, in part, as answer their attempts to influence the calendar and the ritual.

“The time of the festivities to mark the sabbath, not men.”
— An allusion to his doctrine on the counting of the Omer and Shavuot.

“The priesthood is the measure of purity; the wise men only are the voices of men.”
— The expression of his hierarchical view of the priesthood as the center of authority.