Coming down from Syria, it would have been difficult to fix the exact spot where, in the

view of the Rabbis, "the land" itself began. The boundary lines, though mentioned in

four different documents, are not marked in anything like geographical order, but as

ritual questions connected with them came up for theological discussion. For, to the

Rabbis the precise limits of Palestine were chiefly interesting so far as they affected the

religious obligations or privileges of a district. And in this respect the fact that a city

was in heathen possession exercised a decisive influence. Thus the environs of

Ascalon, the wall of Caesarea, and that of Acco, were reckoned within the boundaries of

Palestine, though the cities themselves were not. Indeed, viewing the question from this

point, Palestine was to the Rabbis simply "the land,"  3 all other countries being summed

up under the designation of "outside the land." In the Talmud, even the expression

"Holy Land," so common among later Jews and Christians,4 does not once occur.

It needed not that addition, which might have suggested a comparison with other

countries; for to the Rabbinist Palestine was not only holy, but the only holy ground, to

the utter exclusion of all other countries, although they marked within its boundaries an

ascending scale of ten degrees of sanctity, rising from the bare soil of Palestine to the

most holy place in the Temple (Chel. i. 6-9). But "outside the land" everything was

darkness and death. The very dust of a heathen country was unclean, and it defiled by

contact. It was regarded like a grave, or like the putrescence of death. If a spot of

heathen dust had touched an offering, it must at once be burnt. More than that, if by

mischance any heathen dust had been brought into Palestine, it did not and could not

mingle with that of "the land," but remained to the end what it had been--unclean,

defiled, and defiling everything to which it adhered. This will cast light upon the

meaning conveyed by the symbolical directions of our Lord to His disciples (Matt

10:14), when He sent them forth to mark out the boundary lines of the true Israel--"the

kingdom of heaven," that was at hand: "Whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your

words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet." In

other words, they were not only to leave such a city or household, but it was to be

considered and treated as if it were heathen, just as in the similar case mentioned in

Matthew 18:17. All contact with such must be avoided, all trace of it shaken off, and

that, even though, like some of the cities in Palestine that were considered heathen, they

were surrounded on every side by what was reckoned as belonging to Israel.

The Mishnah (Shev, vi. 1; Chall. iv. 8) marks, in reference to certain ordinances, "three

lands" which might equally be designated as Palestine, but to which different ritual

regulations applied. The first comprised, "all which they who came up from Babylon

took possession of in the land of Israel and unto Chezib" (about three hours north of

Acre); the second, "all that they who came up from Egypt took possession of from

Chezib and unto the river (Euphrates) eastward, and unto Amanah" (supposed to be a

mountain near Antioch, in Syria); while the third, seemingly indicating certain ideal

outlines, was probably intended to mark what "the land" would have been, according to

the original promise of God, although it was never possessed to that extent by Israel.5

For our present purpose, of course, only the first of these definitions must be applied to

"the land." We read in Menachoth vii. 1: "Every offering,6 whether of the congregation

or of an individual (public or private), may come from 'the land,' or from 'outside the land,

be of the new product (of the year) or of old product, except the omer (the wave-sheaf at

the Passover) and the two loaves (at Pentecost), which may only be brought from new

product (that of the current year), and from that (which grows) within 'the land.'" To

these two, the Mishnah adds in another passage (Chel. i. 6) also the Biccurim, or first-

fruits in their fresh state, although inaccurately, since the latter were likewise brought