Restrictions in the matter of the reception of strangers <ref>see Proselyte and Proselytism</ref> were made in the case of
# [[Edomites ]] and Egyptians, who were entitled to acceptance only in the fourth generation, i.e., the third from the original immigrant; and
# Ammonites and Moabites. These latter two were put on a level with persons of illegitimate birth, and were therefore excluded from ''the congregation of the Lord forever'' <ref>Deut. xxiii. et seq.; compare the American anti-Chinese legislation</ref>.
==Judaism Not Hostile to non-Jews.==
In pre-exilic times the intercourse between Israelites and non-Israelites (non-Canaanites) was not very active or extensive, and non-Israelites (Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians) always appeared as enemies. But the Exile brought Israel into closer contact with non-Israel. If the conclusions of the critical schools are accepted, according to which the opening chapters of Genesis date from this period, the fact that Israel posits at the beginning of history the unity of all humanity should give pause to the ascription to Judaism of hostility toward the non-Jew majority of humanity. The books of Ruth and Jonah are also documentary proof that the Hebrew racialism of Ezra met with strenuous opposition. Greeks, Syrians, and Romans, the peoples with whom post-exilic Israel had incisive relations, were not animated by a spirit apt to engender in the Jew a responsive sentiment of regard. Nor were their morals (''Chukhot ha-goyyim'') such as to allay the apprehension of faithful Jews as to the probable results of contact. The Maccabean revolution, the struggle against Hellenism, the rise against Rome under both Titus and Hadrian, are the historical background to the opinions expressed concerning non-Jews and the enactments adopted against them. Yet withal, both relatively —by comparison with the attitude of the Greek world toward the non-Greek (barbarian), or with the Roman treatment of the non-Romans (the ''pagani'') —and absolutely, the sentiments of the Jew toward the non-Jew were superior to the general moral and mental atmosphere. The [[Essenes ]] certainly represent the cosmopolitan and broadly humanitarian tendencies of Judaism; and as for the Pharisees, their contempt for the non-Jew was not deeper than their contempt for the Jewish 'Am ha-Arez. (the unlearned, suspected always of laxity in religious duty). The golden rule is Pharisaic doctrine <ref>comp. Ab. R. N., Recension B, xxvi., xxix., xxx., xxxiii.</ref>.
In judging the halakic enactments one must keep in mind not merely the situation of the Jews—engaged in a bitter struggle for self-preservation and exposed to all sorts of treachery and suffering from persecution—but also the distinction between law and equity. The law can not and does not recognize the right of demented persons, minors, or aliens to hold property. Even modern statutes are based on this principle; e.g., in the state of Illinois, U. S. A., an alien can not inherit real estate. But what the law denies, equity confers. The Talmudic phrase ''mi-pene darke shalom'' (''on account of the ways of peace''; see below) is the equivalent of the modern ''in equity.''