Our Gemara mentions the extensive additional restrictions, that the Rabbanim who were known as perushim, took upon themselves. They would conduct themselves with stringencies that treated ordinary non/sacred foods as if they were sacred. They conducted themselves with similar maintenance of ritual Purity as if they were Cohanim who ate of the sacrifices. From what I can tell, the term Perushim and Chaverim are analogous in Shas (See Yachin Demai 2:12), and refer to a level of personal piety and holiness that a man or woman (See Sanhedrin 8b) can voluntarily accept upon him or herself.

Once one is a Chaver, he or she must consider the possessions and the very bodies of the amei Ha-Aretz as contagiously impure, with the highest form of Tumah applied to them as detailed in our Gemara, and many other social restrictions such as not eating with them or inter-marrying (see Pesachim 49b). They also had personal requirements for extra pious conduct such as avoiding levity and lodging with amei Ha-Aretz (see Mishna Demai 2:3)

We will define these designations in more detail shortly, but first let us ask why? From the strict halachos, purity and impurity seem to be a concern when approaching sacred places such as the Beis HaMikdash or eating sacred foods, but is there a basic ethical concern to maintain ritual purity in ordinary life? Apparently yes, and this was the higher level that these Perushim sought to achieve. The Shalah (Asara Ma’amaros, Ma’amar Shevi’i) confirms this idea.

In order to become a chaver, one must affirm in front of three other chaverim to abide by all the purity and piety requirements, and maintain his commitment in a probationary period of 30 days to prove his consistency. An established Torah sage will be believed by making the commitment even privately with no probation. (See Rambam commentary on Mishna Demai Op. Cit, and Bechoros 30b). Notably, Rambam in his commentary says the term chaver, which literally means associate or companion, comes from the fact that the chaverim are bonded by a sincere purpose to assist each other in serving Hashem. True friends, if you will.

From our Gemara it is also apparent that there were different levels of observance of these restrictions, and not every sage conducted himself with the fullest restrictions. Therefore, an Am Ha-Aretz was not merely one who wasn’t a Chaver. Rather the Am Ha-Aretz fell below certain more specific thresholds of religious conduct as delineated in Berachos 47b:

The Sages taught: Who is an am ha’aretz? One who does not recite Shema in the evening and morning. This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Yehoshua says: An am ha’aretz is one who does not don phylacteries. Ben Azzai says: An am ha’aretz is one who does not have ritual fringes on his garment. Rabbi Natan says: An am ha’aretz is one who does not have a mezuza on his doorway. Rabbi Natan bar Yosef says: An am ha’aretz is one who has children but who does not want them to study Torah, so he does not raise them to engage in Torah study. Aḥerim say: Even if one read the Bible and studied Mishna and did not serve Torah scholars to learn from them the meaning of the Torah that he studied, that is an am ha’aretz. Rav Huna said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Aḥerim.

Notably, Rashbah and Tosafos (Op. Cit.)  hold the designation is in accordance with the final opinion. This definition certainly includes many of the common folk within this category. However, Rav Hai Gaon (see Tosafos, Rashbah) ruled that this caste system was no longer followed in our times.

It is hard to fathom the impact this practice had on social Cohesion and enmity. It must have been like two nations within a nation, or at least two castes. Indeed the Gemara Pesachim (49b) catalogues the rivalry and strife between these groups. Rabbi Akiva was a “defector” from the Am Ha-Aretz group to the Chaver group and in that Gemara he shares some inside lore.

Despite this separation and the difficulties, during the festivals the Rabbis suspended these distinctions and the Amei Ha-Aretz were considered to be ritually pure (Chaggigah 26a), in order to allow for celebration in unity.

The Gemara (Bechoros 30b) discusses a circumstance where a woman who came from a Chaver family married into an Am Ha-Aretz family. The sages where of the opinion that she maintains her status of chaver unless her behavior proves otherwise. However Rabbi Meir dissents, offering a psychological quip and observation about spousal loyalty:

A certain woman married a cḥaver and would tie his Tefilin on his hand. Later, she married a tax collector and would tie his tax seals on his hand.

This truism is especially meaningful when you understand that in the times of the Talmud the tax collector was the lowest scum, often believed to cheat and appropriate funds for themselves in the name of the government (see for example Shavuos 39a). Thus, we can imagine this simple devoted woman. When her husband was a sage she happily tied Tefilin to his arm, yet when she found herself married to a tax collector, she supported and respected his work as well without prejudice.