/ /. 'Z.2"5 LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY PRINCETON. N. J. Presented by "TVieWicAow of Greorp'eDuo^n ? "^ ^et;w».>...u..4!-..y k Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library http://www.archive.org/details/bookofruth43cass THE BOOK OF RUTH. PAQLUS CASSEL, D. D., PROFESSOR IN BERLIH. TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN, WITH ADDITIONS. P. R. STEEXSTRA, PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE IN THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL DITrHITT (OHOOC AT CAMBRIDGE, MASS. NEW YORK: CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1871, by Charles Scribnek and Company, <» tk« Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washingta*. THE BOOK OF RUTH. INTRODUCTION. § 1. Contents and Aim. The little Book of Ruth, the exposition of which usually follows that of the Book of Judges, consists of only eighty-five verses ; but these inclose a garden of roses, as fragrant and full of mystic calyxes, as those which the modern traveller still finds blooming and twin- ing about the solitary ruins of Israel and Moab, this side the Jordan and beyond. The sig- nificance and beauty of the brief narrative cannot be highly enough estimated, whether regard be hail to the thought which fills it, the historical value which marks it, or the pure uu 1 charming form in which it is set forth. It will be necessan rightly to seize its funda- mental idea, in order to treat to advantage the other historical questions which present themselves with reference to the time of its composition and place in the canon of the Old Covenant. Au ancient Israelitish family of Bethlehem fell into misery. They had left their native country in a time of distress, in order to save themselves from participating in it. But in the stranger's land, in Moab, a harder fate alights upon them. Death carries off father and miiis; the mother remains behind, childless and widowed. True, she has daughters-in-law; but these are without offspring, and — Moabitesses, aliens, not without fault chosen to be wives of her sons. Naomi's situation is as bad as it can be. In Moab she cannot remain ; sorrowfully she returns to Bethlehem. Her house is desolated ; upon herself, rests the hand of God. But in the midst of despair, a consolation arises for her. Ruth, her Moabitish daughter-in-law, remains with her, — no dissuasion of her mother-in-law restrains her. She gives up everything, native land and paternal home, yea, even the hope of better fortunes, continues faithful to her love for Naomi, and goes with her to her God and her people, — but in tears, poverty, and bereavement. Naomi arrives at Bethlehem, but no one helps, no one comforts her. Ruth alone becomes her support, — she labors, she begs for her. Her piety, however, does not remain unknown. The kindnesses done to these women by Boaz, on whose fields Ruth had been gleaning, origi- nated solely in the man's admiration of the pious love of Ruth, although it is true that he was a kinsman of Naomi. Ruth the noble man blesses, because she has taken refuse under the wings of God in Israel. She reinstates her mother-in-law in the good-will of her relatives. She overcomes the prejudices of Israel against the stranger. The rights of an Israelitish wife fall to her lot. But it is only on account of her love and purity that the blessing of Boaz fulfills itself. For her mother's sake she enters once more on a hard and difficult road. But thereby the sorrow of Naomi is at last lifted away. Boaz fulfills to Ruth the law of Israel, and marries her. From the Moabitess springs the son, of whom David, the king of Israel, who rose from among the flocks of Bethlehem to be a hero and a prophet, is the celebrated grandson. With good reason the book is not called " Naomi," or " Boaz," or " the Descent of David," but " Ruth." For she is the central point of the whole narrative. Her love is the ground- work of the history it relates. That she became the ancestress of David was only the reward af her virtue. The idea to be set forth, and which gives such great significance to the little book, is, the power of love, as conquering all national contrarieties, hostilities, and prejudices It is not a story of romantic love between man and woman, but of the reverential love of a widow for the mother of her deceased husband. The love portrayed in the character of Ruth is of the purest, most unselfish, most extraordinary kind. It is for the sake of this love, to INTRODUCTION. indicate its nature, that the strength which leaTes father and mother, and accepts the God of Israel, is delineated. For Naomi can be thus loved of Ruth only because the latter has some intuitive perception of the higher life of the God of Israel in her mother-in-law. The Jewish narrative, therefore, does not only, with unselfish uprightness, set forth the over- powering depth of affection of a Moabitess ; it teaches also that such love is valid before Ood, without respect of race, that through it Ruth is more deeply implanted into the kingdom of the true Israel than are natural children — consequently the women say to Naomi, that Ruth is better for her than seven sons — and that the blessing of God was poured out in superabundant measure on Ruth, although a foreigner, because she had confessed the God of Israel in love and from love. The narrative displays no hatred toward foreigners, gives no prominence to the keen dis- criminations of the Mosaic law against them, notwithstanding that they form the background of the story ; does not blame the really well-disposed Orpah, although she turns back ; has not a word of reprehension for the anonymous relative who refuses to marry Ruth ; but in contrast to these facts, it causes the brightness of the blessing that lights on Ruth to become known. Orpah is forgotten, the name of the superstitious kinsman unknown, but Ruth — is the grandmother of David. The Book was not written for the glorification of the king ; for how, according to human views, could he be flattered by such a descent ! But the fact of David's descent from Ruth, demonstrates and glorifies the praise of such as act as she did. It is a book of praise of true love and virtue ; a book of reconciliation for those alien nations who betake themselves under the wings of the living God. In Boaz and Ruth, Israel and the Gentiles are, as it were, per- sonified. In order to come under the wings of Israel, nothing is needed but the love and faith of Ruth. From these, and not from legal descent according to the flesh, do the might and glory of the kingdom of God proceed. The Book, it is often said, with its contents, stands at the portal of the history of David ; according to its spirit, it stands, like the Psalms, at the gates of the Gospel. And this not only on account of the genealogy of Christ in the latter, which carries us back to David and Boaz, but because of the spirit which informs the doctrine of our Book, that the greatest king of Israel sprang from the reconciliation of Israel and the Gentiles, from the marriage of Boaz and Ruth in the confession of Jehovah. § 2. Time of Composition. It is precisely the free and loving spirit with which Ruth is depicted, the Moabitess set forth as the ancestress of David for the instruction and joy of the reader, that enables us, on somewhat closer inspection, to determine, with considerable definiteness, the time in which alone the book can have been written. It is to be observed that the Books of Samuel say nothing of the descent of David from Ruth. Without the little book now under considera- tion, this fact would be entirely unknown to us. For the Book of Chronicles also, although it names Boaz as the ancestor of David in such a way that it were easy to believe that use was made of the last verses of Ruth, passes over the name of Ruth in utter silence. That our Book cannot have been written after Solomon, is evident from 1 Kgs. xi. 1, where the king is blamed for having taken many foreign wives of Moab, Ammon, Edom, Zidon, and Heth, " nations concerning which Jehovah said to the sons of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you." It is not for the honor of Rehoboam that the historian relates that his mother was Naamah, an Ammonitess (1 Kgs. xiv. 21). Nor is it without design that the (second) Book of Chronicles, ch. xxiv. 26 (the passage is wanting in Kings) informs us that the mother of one of the murderers of King Joash was a Moabitess, of the other an Ammonitess. Ezra says (ch. x. 10) : " Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives ; " and the names of those who were to separate from their wives were noted down. Nehemiah (ch. xiii. 1 ff.) went so far as to execute strictly the law that " no Ammonite or Moabite should come into the congregation of God forever." These nega- "ive data are sufficient of themselves to refute the opinion that the book written in praise of a Moabitess who did enter into the congregation of God, was perhaps composed in the times jttir Solomon, or during the exile, or when the spirit of Ezra or Nehemiah was in the ascendant. It is especially clear that it cannot have been written in the Exile, for in that situation Israel maintained the sharpest separation between itself and the Gentiles 1 (cf. Esth. I The Miphna (Jebamoth, ii. 6) decided that a Lerirate marriage cannot be demanded by a brother-in-law, if he be th« K>u >f a slave woman or of a foreigner. INTRODUCTION. 5 iii. 8). The Book, moreover, exhibits a homelike, peaceful coloring inconsistent with that lime of expatriation and distress. It cannot even be assigned to the reign of Solomon ; in that case the genealogy at the close would hardly have failed to add : " And David begal Solomon." But there are not wanting positive grounds which make it highly probable that the Book originated in the time of David, and while he occupied the throne, — circumstances which add their own instruction to that of the Book. It must indeed be admitted that our informa- tion concerning the great revolution brought about in Israel by the achievements, spirit, and reign of David, is very meagre and fragmentary. But it is also true that too little atten- tion has been paid to the fact that the new occupant of the throne at Jerusalem was nol merely a hero, but a creative genius, whom singular sufferings and experiences had thor- oughly tried, and in whom the full heart of Israel beat powerfully and grandly, although he appears not without the human coloring of his age. From the very opening of his public career in the combat with Goliath, and ever after, he displays, as no one else did, the enthu- siastic strength of faith and the immovable religious convictions of a true Israelite ; and yet it was he, driven into exile through Saul's distrust, who more than any other hero or prince, before or after, came into peculiar contact with alien nations. It was doubtless due, in part at least, to the recollection that his great-grandmother was a Moabitess, that he went to the king of Moab and said, " Let my father and my mother, I pray thee, come forth and be with you, till I know what God will do to me" (1 Sam. xxii. 3). Accordingly, he causes his father and mother to emigrate to the same country whither Elimelech and his family had gone. And they remained in Moab until David was master of Jerusalem. So also, at a later time, he remembers that the king of Amnion had formerly shown him kindness (2 Sam. x. 2). While he was hiding in the cave of Adullam, all sorts of wild and warlike people collected about him, of whom he formed his band of heroes and afterwards his body-guard. Their names Kerethi and Pelethi (2 Sam. viii. 18, etc.) sufficiently indicate their foreign origin. He abode a long time in the Philistine city of Gath (1 Sam. xxvii.) ; and there bands of brave men attached themselves so entirely to him, that they continued faithful to him even in his last great distress, brought upon him by Absalom (2 Sam. xv. 18). But everywhere he bore aloft the banner of his God and people. Whoever followed him, entered not merely into his personal interests, but also into those of Israel (cf. 1 Sam. xxvi. 10. etc.). Through the glory and heroism of his history, aided by the preparatory influence of Saul's achievements, the heathen, who till then continued to reside among Israel, were undoubtedly for the most part amalgamated with Israel, so that the intellectual preponderance of Israel, reinforced by military superiority, suppressed idolatry and extended the acknowledgment of Jehovah. We are reminded here especially of Uriah, who fell a victim to David's unlawful passions. This man, a hero and distinguished personage in Israel, was a Hittite or descendant of Heth (2 Sam. xi. 3). From his widow, that is, from an Israelitish woman once married to a Hittite, sprang king Solomon, just as David descended from a Moabitish woman, the widow of an Israelite. Nor is Uriah the only foreigner among David's distinguished warriors ; the list includes also an Ammonite named Zelek (2 Sam. xxiii. 37). It is remarkable, also, that David deposits the ark of God in the house of a Gittite, that is, a man who originated in Gath, a city of the Philistines. He was called Obed Edom, thus bearing the same name with David's grandfather, the son of Ruth.1 His surname Edom also betrays his alien origin. The ark of God was three months in his dwelling, and God blessed him and his house. Yet more noteworthy is the fact that in the saddest hours of David's life, when his favorite son, Absalom, and the chief men of Israel fell away from him, only such as had turned from among alien nations to Israel and its God remained true to him. He himself had the fame experience which Naomi had with Ruth ; they who loved him dared everything for him and with him. An Ammonite supplies him with provisions in his flight (2 Sam. xvii. 27). Especially prominent is Hushai the Archite,2 the companion of David, who in the hour of distress adheres to him, and renders him most important service at the court of Absalom, in 1 In the Levirate marriage of Ruth the symbolism of the shoe was employed. Obed Edom was the son of such a marriage. It is precisely with reference to Edom that the figurative expression : (t I cast my shoe upon It," twice occuri in the Psalms (lx. and cviii.). The Book of Chronicles first calls Obed Edom a Levite. Errors, however, such as thost Into which expositors fell concerning Kenaz (cf. Com. on Judges, ch. i. 16), must here also b* avoided. 2 Of Arke, in Phoenicia. Cf. Movers, Plwnizier, II. i. 116. INTRODUCTION. thwarting the intrigues of the apostate Ahithophel (2 Sam. xv. 32 ff.). Touching is th'. fidelity of Ittai, the man of Gath. The king says to him (2 Sam. xv. 19 ff.) : " Wherefore guest thou also with us ? return to thy place, and abide with the king, for thou art a stranger. If thou art banished, go to thy native place.1 Whereas thou earnest but yesterday, should I this day make thee go up and down with us ? seeing I go whither I may ; return thou, and take back thy brethren : mercy and truth be with thee ! " David, the fleeing king, who in his old age must leave his capital, speaks like Naomi. The answer of Ittai shows that he, like Ruth, has turned to the God of Israel : " As Jehovah liveth, and as my lord the king liveth, surely in what place my lord the king shall be, whether in death or life, even there also will thy servant be." Never again, in the history of the ancient Israel, do such relationa come to view. Under their influence, and therefore during the reign of David, the composition of a book which commemorates the truth and love of a Gentile, was perfectly natural. It is a signature of the spirit, more active in Israel then than at any other time, which recognized faith in God as the kernel of the kingdom of God, and saw that not only natural, but also spiritual Israelites could become its children. It must not be overlooked that it is especially in the Psalms that the relations of the Gentiles to the kingdom of God are unfolded. Take as specimens of many similar passages, these two : " Thou makest me the head of the nations ; a people that I knew not, serves me " (Ps. xviii. 43).'2 " All the families of the nations shall bow down before thee ; for the kingdom is Jehovah's, and he rules among the nations " (Ps. xxii. 27, 28).8 To point out definitely the years of David's reign during which the Book was written, will hardly be possible. But it is not improbable that it was done when he stood on the summit of his glory and enjoyed peace on all sides. At that time, a contemplative view of the king's history, in which so many men of alien origin had distinguished themselves by wonderful fidelity, gave rise to our Book. It may be assumed that its narrative concerning David's excellent ancestress influenced the bearing of the kind's faithful Gentile subjects, as manifested in the catastrophe of Absalom. It is a genuine historical characteristic of the reign of David, that it, and not the Psalter merely, is Messianic. It is informed by the idea of universality bounded only by the acknowledgment of Jehovah. It brought about closer connections between Israel and the Gentiles, which continued to exist in the reign of Solomon. The fall of this king, toward the close of his reign, consists in the very fact that he no longer subjected these connections to the domination of the God of Israel, but suffered his own faith and morals to be overcome by heathen influences. Solomon would not have been to blame for taking wives of Moab and Ammon, if these, like Ruth, had confessed Jehovah ; his fall consisted in his taking heathen wives, who withdrew him from the pure service of God. The Messianic idea was distorted, consequently obliterated and for a long time lost, and only restored by the vision of the prophets. Nothing of importance can be urged against assigning the origin of our Book to this period, almost the only time in which it can have been written. The arguments which Bertheau, alter Ewald and other earlier critics, founds on linguistic peculiarities, are not at all conclu- sive, and are sufficiently met by Keil's counter-remarks (Einleit. § 137). The more unusual expressions are due to the peculiarities of the matter, and are also to be met with elsewhere. The narrative exhibits life in its popular aspect, and probably makes use of popular forms of speech which to us seem Chaldaizing. This very circumstance attests the antiquity of the Book. A book of similar character, written in the Exile, would no longer possess the mani- Ibld idioms peculiar to original forms and views of life. Considering the small number of literary productions that have come down to us from the several earlier centuries of Hebrew history, and our ignorance of the places of their composition and the dialect of their writers, it is manifest that any attempts to fix the time in which any work was written by means of a few grammatical peculiarities alone, must always be exceedingly problematical. In the present case, however, the contents of the Book itself contradict the conclusion to which such a method of argumentation has led. For these speak decidedly against an exilic, and in favor of a Palestinian origin, in a peaceful, and indeed a definitely limited period. Critics have paid only too little continuous attention to these contents, and hence were led to overestimate lundry externalities of the Book. i [This is Dr. Cassel's own rendering of the difficult words TJpS~nb HPS nVS'DS"!.— Tb-1 2 This Psalm, at least, is admitted by Olshauaen also to be Davidic. Psalmrn, p. 98. 8 The history of this Psalm might alone testify to a higher antiquity than modern criticism will allow it. DelltaBoh »y« (Die P$ahnmt p. 194) : " It is a Davidic Psalm, of the time during which its author was persecuted by Saul." INTRODUCTION. § 3. Position in the Canon. The position which Jewish tradition assigned to our Book in the Canon, may likewise be due to the spirit of its contents. The Septuagint, it is true, attached it closely to the Book of Judges, as if it were but an appendix of that work,1 and was followed therein by Josephus and the Christian Fathers who were for the most part dependent on that version. I'ussibly, the desire to make the number of books equal to the number of letters in the alpha- .iet may have contributed to this result; for even in later times the supposed coincidence was invested with symbolical significance. Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, and Canticles could not be so directly attached to another book, there being none specially devoted to the history of Solo- mon, while Ruth and Lamentations could readily be joined to other writings. But it cannct have been for liturgical purposes merely, that the Canon of the Palestinian Jews, as appears from the Talmud, corroborated by manuscripts and traditions, considers Ruth as well as Lamentations as a separate work, and never unites it with Judges. If the little work be viewed simply as a genealogical narrative introductory to the history of David, then, indeed, its proper place is between Judges and the Books of Samuel. But since this is not its true character, since it sets forth a higher idea, of which the birth of David is but the crown and confirmation, an independent position was rightly assigned to it. The Messianic doctrine contained in it invested it with greater importance. Now, from the fact that the Jews con- tinued the Book in this separate and independent position, although they saw that the follow- ers of Christ viewed him as the descendant of Ruth, it may be inferred that in the Palestin- ian canon Ruth held, even before the birth of our Lord, the same position as at present. It harmonizes well with this, that from primitive times the Book was read during the Feast of Weeks. For this cannot have been done simply because a harvest scene occurs in it.2 The practice must rather be connected with a belief that Ruth prefigures the entrance of the heathen into the kingdom of God, and with the idea that the Feast of Weeks was a celebra- tion of the giving of the law on Sinai, which law, as the Midrash explains, was given to all nations, only it was not accepted by them. The Feast of Weeks, we know, corresponded to the Christian Pentecost, when the Holy Ghost was poured out, according to the words of Joel, on all flesh, and the Gospel was preached to all the world. Undoubtedly, however, the Book of Ruth offers an interesting parallel to that of Judges. While the latter exhibits the military history of Israel, the former introduces us to the peace- ful private life of the people. We hear no trumpet-blasts or pseans of triumph, only the rus- tling of the sickles among the grain stalks salutes our ears. We find ourselves transported into the rural family life of Israel. Not the warrior or king, but the farmer and householder find their prototypes here.3 The little book relates a narrative of social village life, and within it- brief compass exhibits the profoundest sorrow, the noblest love, and all the attractiveness of an Israelitish life of faith. Naomi and Boaz are not painted in the same colors as Deb- orah and Gideon. But the love of Ruth and Orpahcan only have grown up in the household uf Nnuui. Israel's fathers anft husbands must have so lived as to enchain even after their death the hearts of foreign and childless widows. With what nobility and moral beauty the faithful in Israel were adorned, is seen in Poaz. The whole picture is surmounted by a calm, clear sky. The reader finds himself now in the open field, now on the road, and anon among the assembly of citizens at the gate. The unadorned narrative shows such art in grouping, preserves such moderation, causes the finest lessons to shine through so geutly, and withal displays such great vivacity, that the aesthetics of the little work alone yield an important testimony to its origin. It can have arisen only under surroundings such as those it describes. It breathes an air of freedom and peace wholly inconsistent with the unrest 1 [Subjoined it without a separate title. The Jewish canon placea it in the third class of O. T. books, the Kethubiu; or Hagiographa. Its place in this class is variable ; the Talmud and some MSS. give it the first, but most MSS. the fifth place. Of. Wright, Book of Rullt, introd. § xi. 4. — Tr.] - The reasons for this usage given by Raschi and others, are, in their final consequences, undoubtedly tantamount to tile proclamation of the kingdom of Ood among the nations. Cf. Heidenheim, Machsor Schebnotk, 1811, p. 106, note. 8 [Wordsworth (contrasting the Book of Kuth with that of Judges) : The Book of Ruth is like some beautiful land scape of Claude, with its soft mellow hues of quiet eventide, and the peaceful expanse of its calm lake, placed side by side with some stern picture of Salvator Rosa, exhibiting the shock of armies and the storm of war ; and receiving more beauty from the chiaro-oscuro of the contrast. Or, if we may adopt another comparison, derived from classical literature, '.he Book of Ruth, coming next after the Book of Judges [which he regards as its proper place], is like a transition from the d;irk, terrific scenes of a tragedy of JSschylus, to the fresh and beautiful landscapes of some pastoral idyl of Theoc- ritus transporting us to the rural Thalysia, or harvest-home, under the shade of elms and poplars, on the banks of th« lialis yl/lyl vii. 1, 8), or to the rlowery meadows and sheepwalks on those of the Arethusa or Anapus (blijl i. 6H 117 tii 151, - Tr] 3 INTRODUCTION. and servitude of the Exile. Indeed, one is tempted to believe that the author must hav« lived in Bethlehem itself. He loves to indicate, with untutored art, the peculiarities of speech which obtain among his dramatis persona:. He makes his rustics talk in rustic fashion,1 while yet, when Boaz speaks on elevated subjects, the language rises to the level of the theme. § 4. Time of the History, The time in which the occurrences themselves took place, can hardly be more closely determined. Boaz was the great-grandfather of David. For it is not to be supposed that between Boaz and Obed, or Obed and Jesse, other names have fallen out. A wider remove of Ruth from David contradicts the thought and doctrine of the Book. The view that Boaz may have been a contemporary of Gideon 2 is without anything to support it. The Book suggests not a hint of war ; and although it speaks of famine in the land, there is not the least indication that it was a result of hostile devastations. Much rather does eh. i. 6 (cf. the Comment.) suggest elemental causes. The ancient opinion, found in Josephus, which places the occurrences of our Book in the time of Eli, has certainly much greater probability in its favor, since the later years of Boaz and the life of Obed may be conceived as running parallel with the life of Eli, and that of Samuel with Jesse. It is also remarked below that an atti- tude of mutual hostility between Israel and the Philistines, may explain why Elimelech emi- grated to Moab. Some expositors (Ewald, Bertheau) have found that the author of our Book maintains a specially " learned bearing," because in ch. iv. he gives information concerning certain old customs, and have inferred from it that he must have written at a late period. But he has only done, in the simplest manner, what it is the duty of every narrator to do, namely, explain and give information on points in need of it. He gives a picture of popular life ; in which he no more excuses himself from drawing the pursuit of the humble gleaner than the transac- tions at the gate of the city. Perhaps nothing testifies more clearly for the antiquity of the Book than ch. iv. The Mosaic law speaks of the pulling off of the shoe only in the particu- lar case in which a widow, being refused marriage by her deceased husband's brother, is authorized to subject the offender to this action as a sign of disgrace. But this was only a special application of a more general symbolical idea connected with the shoe, and explana- tory of its earlier use in transactions of exchange and redemption generally.3 Now, it was just because the Mosaic law prescribed the use of the shoe only in the case just mentioned, that it ceased to be used on other occasions. Consequently, it was precisely during the better observance of the law under Samuel, Saul, and David, that its use as the general symbol of transfer of rights or property had become obsolete. That which takes place at the gate of Bethlehem is no such transaction as is described in Deut. xxv. 7 ff. The unknown kinsman docs not regard it as such. It has reference solely to the redemption of the landed property. Nor is Ruth present. Had the Book been written in the Exile, when the letter of the law had become impressed upon the people, an explanation of this absence would not have been wanting, just as Josephus conceives it necessary to add, quite in opposition to the narrative, that Ruth having been sent for by Boaz, the whole levirate process was performed according to legal prescription. In our author's time the recollection of the usages he describes, was 1 A fact which clearly manifests itself in the so-called Chaldaisms. Compare, for instance, the conversation of Naomi with her daughters, ch. i., that of Boaz with Ruth, ch. ii., etc. Cf. Keil, Einkituns;, § 137. note 2. '2 [Among later writers who favor this opinion, Hengstenberg may be mentioned, who urges that if the famine had resulted from bad harvests, it must also have extended to the neighboring land of Moab, and points out how well the ten years' snjnurn in Moab agrees with the seven years' oppression by the Midianites, for "some years must necessarily have elapsed till the land could recover from its effects, and again present that flourishing state of cultivation in which Naomi found it mi her return " i Dissert, on Pent., ii. 92, note. Ky land's translation). Bertheau i, Com. p. 234) replies that the time i>l" Gideon is inconsistent with the genealogy of cb. iv. 21, 22. which affords the only certain data for determining the question. He places the history in the latter part of the time of the Judges, or somewhere in the earlier part of the Pailitftlne domination over Israel. Keil in his EtnUilnns. § 137, note 1 (2d edit . 1859) agrees with Bertheau, and fixes ■ in the time shortly before Eli; but in bis commentary (pubL 18631 adopts the view of Hengstenberg, and although he thinks it nut impossible that the genealogy is incomplete, so that Obed may have been the grandfather of Jesse, yet ei. leavon t-. snow that even on the supposition that it is complete, Obed may have been born in the last years of Gideon But he appears to forget that the combination of the famine with the Midianitic devastations requires Obed to be born, lint in the tist. hut in the earlier years of Gideon ; for the impression left by the narrative is that the union of Ruth with Boaz tooh place not very long after the return from Moab (cf. ch. i. 22 h). Now, supposing that the emigratioo occurred in the fifth year of the Midianite oppression, the return, ten years afterwards, would fall in the 8th year of Qldeon. But from say the 10th year of Gideon to the birth of David is according to Keil's own reckoning, a period of 127 \t-ars. somewhat too long to be spanned by means of one intervening birth. According to Dr. Cassel's chronology ,cf. lnlrod. to Judges, § 4) the interval would be thirty years longer. — Ta.] 3 Cf. the Commentary on ens. hi. and iv. INTRODUCTION. fresher ; the usages themselves having disappeared but a few generations before. Nor is this notice of obsolete customs peculiar to the Book of Ruth. Other O. T. books make similar explanations. Thus, the author of the Books of Samuel observes that " formerly " prophets were called " seers " (1 Sam. ix. 9) ; and the author of the Book of Judges frequently givei the earlier names of cities of which he has occasion to speak. § 5. Translations and Commentaries. The translation of our Book in the Septuagint bears a verbal character. The relation of Josephus (Ant. v. 9) evinces his efforts to bring the statements of the Biblical accounts into harmonv with the prescription of the law as observed in his time, and not to allow the virtues of Israel to be too much eclipsed by those of foreigners. The Chaldee translation, the Targum, being intended for the public instruction of the people, follows the same course yet more decidedly. It carries back into the ancient times of Ruth a good deal of later apprehension and exposition. Its interpolations may be found collected, for the most part, in the Midrash Ruth Rabba,1 which, on its part, has chiefly drawn from the Gemara of Jerusa- lem and older Midrashim. The Babylonian Talmud gives expositions of detache 1 passages of Ruth: Berachoth, 7; Sabbat. 113; Jebamoth, 47; Nasir, 23; Babakama, 30; Baba- bathra, 91; Sanhedrin, 19. There is another collection of Rabbinical interpretations in JaUcut Simeoni, torn. ii. ed. Venez. n. 596 fl". Interesting philological explanations on the Chaldee version of the Targum are given in the rare book : Perush hamiloth, Krakau, 1540-44. The most important commentaries of mediaeval Jewish scholars, are those of Rasehi and Ibn Esra. The commentary of Solomon ben Melech was published by Job. Ben. Carpzov, in the Collegium Rabbinico Biblicum in librum Ruth, Lips. 1703, and republished by Reland. The earlier Christian theology accorded little special treatment to the Book of Ruth. Cas- siodorus (De Divinis Lectionibus, cap. 1) says : " Ancient expositions I have nowhere been able to find. I have however persuaded the pious presbyter Bellator to write explanations, and he has said much in praise of this woman and others in two books." But of the work of this Bellator nothing is known, cf. Serarius, p. 680, ch. 8. In later ages, the expos- itors, older and more recent, of the Book of Judges, are also to be consulted on Ruth. Most prominent among these are the commentaries of Rupert v. Deutz, Saxctils. Serarius, Grotius, Clericus, Rosenmiiller, Maurer, Bertheau, and Keil.2 For special treatment of the Book of Ruth, the following are to be named : Christ. Aug. Heumann, Poecile, torn. i. 180, and ii. 383 ; J. W. Weinrich, Hist, und theol. Betrachtungen gelehrter Dinge, p. 237, etc.; Joh. Jac. Rambach, Notaz liberiores in libellum Ruthie ex. rec. J. H. Michaelis in liberior. adnot. in Hagiographos, torn. ii. Halae, 1720. The Collegium of Carpsov has already been mentioned. The Book was translated [into German] and explained by Dereser, Frankfort, 1806, and by von Riegler, Wiirzburg, 1812. Compare Umbreit on the spirit and design of the Book, in the Studien und Kritiken, 1834, ii. In 1856 appeared: Metzger, Liber Ruth ex hebr. in Int. versus perpetuceque interpret, illus/r. Tub. 4. Useful especially for teachers of Hebrew is : The Book of Ruth in Hebrew, with a critically revised Text, various Readings, including a new collation of twenty-eight Hebrew MSS-, and a grammatical and critical Commentary ; to which is appended the Chaldee Targum, etc., by Charles H. H. Wright, M. A., British Chaplain at Dresden. Leipzig, 1864. [Wordsworth's Commentary mentioned in the Introduction to Judges contains notes on Ruth also. A Comment on Ruth, by Thomas Fuller, D. D., London, 1868 (originally pub- lished in 1654), is a homiletical production, abounding in striking thoughts quaintly expressed. It only extends, however, to the end of ch. ii. The Rich Kinsman, or History of Ruth, by S. H. Tyng, D. D., N. Y.— Tr.] § 6. Homiletical Introduction.3 The Book of Ruth is one of the smallest in the O. T., but abounds in material for homiletical instruction. It was admitted into the canon of Holy Scriptures not merely on l Cf. Zunz, GottadiemUiehe Vortragc, p. 265. i Cf. also Wolff, BMiotheea Hebra-a, ii. 78 ; it. 18. 3 [Here, as ia Judges, the author appended his 'f Homiletical Hints " in a body at the close of the Commentary. For he sake of convenience as well as uuiforniity, they have here also been distributed and placed in immediate connection 10 INTRODUCTION. account 01 Is ultimate aim and issue, but also for the instructiveness of the narrative in itself. The O. T. points everywhere through history to completion, even as Christ him self says : I tm .'he Way and the Truth, the Alpha and Omega. The Book jf Ru'h does not preach by means of mighty deeds of war inspired by faith, like those of Gidt»>a and Samson, but by acts of love, which demand no less strength of soul (iod can be pihised not only with timbrels and trumpets, but also in quietness and silence. There is a heroism of faith in the family, at the sick-bed, and in grief for those we love, which is not inferior to that of Barak. Jephthah found it easier to triumph over Amnion than to subdue his sorrow on account of his daughter. It is often easier to die for the faith, than in the midst of men to live for it. The Book tells of no prophetic woman like Deborah. But it tells of women who?e hearts were capable of pure love, and such love is always prophetic. The fires which rouse a nation to enthusiasm glowed in Deborah ; but in the women of our book burned the gentle rlames of the household hearth, which distress and desertion cannot quench. The Book of Judges tells of a prophetess who was strong as a man ; the Book of Ruth of a man who was tender as a woman. No psalms lift up their lofty strains in the Book of Ruth. The scene of its history is not laid in the temple where the harp of God resounds, — its central figure is neither king nor poet. But the whole Psalter was born of suffering and love in God, like as David, the psalmist, descended from Ruth. A people must first have families in whom God is mani- fested forth by love and truth, before inspired singers can rise up from it to tune their harps with power. By the side of Sarah and Rebecca stands the retiring woman, who as Dante says (Parad. xxxii. 11), was " Ancestress of the singer, who for dole Of the misdeed said, Miserere met." Our Book contains no stern denunciations nor sorrowing lamentations over Israel, its peo- ple, princes, and priests ; but deeply impressive, penetrating to the heart, is the instance it gives of suffering, love, and victory. It proposes not. like Daniel, to unveil the destinies of nations and the world; but at its close appears the Son of David into whose Godhood ill history empties as the rivers into the ocean. No miracles occur in it like that of the three men in the fiery oven ; but it tells of three believing ones, who in the glowing heat of sulk-r- ing and temptation, were found strong and true. with the sections of the text out of which they grow. The opening paragraphs, as applying to the whole Boot, are hert inserted. The '' Hints " proper are arranged by Dr. Cassel under heads which, being suggestive in themselves, are here subjaiued : I. N'aomi the Beloved. II. Ruth the Loviug : 1. The confessor of the true religion ; 2. The woman of action : 3 The difficult suit III. Boaz the Well-doer: 1. The landed proprietor; 2. The professor of religion ; 3- The man cf k lion ; i The blessing. — T».) THE BOOK OF RUTH. CHAPTER FIRST. Verses 1-6. Distress in a Foreign Land. 1 Now [And] it came to pass in the days when the judges ruled [judged], thai there was a famine in the land. And a certain [omit : certain] man of Beth-lehem- judah went to sojourn in the country [territories1] of Moab, he, and his wife, and 2 his two sons. And the name of the man was Elimelech, and the name of his wife Naomi [Noomi],2 and the name of his two sons Mahlon and Chilion, Ephrathites of Beth-lehera-judah. And they came into the country [territories] of Moab, and con- 3 tinned [lit. were, i. p., abode] there. Ami Elimelech Naomi's husband died; and >\\v 4 was left, and her two sons. And they took them wives of the women of Moab [Moabitish wives]; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other .'> Ruth : and they dwelled there about ten years. And Mahlou and Chilion died also both of them ; 8 and the woman was left [behind]4 of her two sons and her husband. 0 Then she arose with her daughters-in-law, that she might return [and returned] from the country [territories] of Moab : for she had heard in the country [territory] of Moab how [omit: how] that the Lord [Jehovah] had visited his people in giving [to give] them bread. TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. [1 Ver. 1. — Prop, fields, plains. The form S"TC is variously explained. Bertheau regards it as another mode of writing mtt7, which occurs in ver. 6 of this chapter, and in ch. iv. 3, and according to Wright is in many MSS. found hew also. The original * of nouns derived from I"T ? stems frequently reappears before suffixes (Ges. Gr. 93. 9, Rem ), and Berth, thinks that the same change is occasioned by the close connection of the word with the following genitive (of. Ges. 89, 1). Ewald also takes s*7ll7 to be singular, but derives it from the ancient form ''TCP, the con- struct of which might be ^lii? after the analogy of sPt const. T7, S^T const. ^^T, etc. But NT " is not found in Rutb, unless it be in the disguise of the construct, while mt£? occurs not less than nine times. Better, therefore, with Gesenius, Fiirst, and others, take ^TK? as plural construct of mtC. Keil proposes to make ^ItD plural const. of *"TI£? pi. D*1"!^ (which however is not fouud anywhere) ; for what reason does not appear, unless it be that the plural of m27 is usually feminine, whereas *"7tt? is masc. But such irregularities are not uncommon ; see Green Gr. 200, c. The interchange of the singular and plural is readily accounted for from the meauing of the word, which. according to the more or less definite conception in the miud of the writer at the moment, may represent the territory as ">ne great field or as made up of many smaller fields. — Tr.] [2 Ver. 2. — J2V2 : Noomi, as the name should be written. Sept. NtueuiV ; Vulg. Noemi. — Ta ] [8 Ver. 5. — Better : " Then died they two also. Mahlou and Chilion'' — Ta.] [4 Ver. 5 — "")S*V^1 i * not, ,f was left from, i. e. was bereaved of,'' as Wright (with the Vulgate) interprets, — on ■• t • - ' the ground that tbe T!^ changes the simple meaning of the verb as found in ver. 3. "]?I2 has its proper partitive meaning, and points out the whole of which Naomi is now the only part left, cf. Deut. Hi. 11 ; Neh. i. 2, 3. The enumeration of the whole is so far incomplete that it does not expressly include Naomi herself. In ver. 3 the verb is used without ^£) because there is there no direct reference to the whole, but only the statement that at the death of her husband, she and her sous were left behind- — Tr.J EXJSGEi'ICAL AND DOCTRINAL. | nite is herteby ^pressed than that the occurrence about to he related took place in the time when Ver. 1. And it came to pass in the days there was vet no king in Israel. In those days when the judges judged. Nothing more defi- 1 there was no governor armed with imperative 12 THE BOUK OF RUTH. authority, who could help and discipline the whole people. Everybody did what he would, and helped himself in whatever way he thought best. Part of the tribe of Dan forsook the land in a body, because they were no longer pleased with it, and had no mind to overcome the remaining enemies ; and Elimelecb, an individual citizen, abandoned his home when the times became bad. There was a famine in the land. No rain fell, and the crops did not prosper. Notwithstand- ing good and diligent cultivation, with which that at present observed in those parts is not to be compared, no harvests were reaped from those extensive grain-bearing plains which in good years produce abundant supplies.1 In such seasons of scarcity, southern Palestine naturally resorted to importations from Egypt, as the history of Joseph has already shown. The increased prices, how- ever, necessarily resulting from a failure of the home crops, pressed with two-fold weight on the less affluent among the people. And if, by hostil- ities on the part of the Philistines, or for any other reason, they were also cut off from the granaries of Egypt, nothing remained but to look for sup- plies t" eastern countries. Even ancient Rome suffered famine whenever its connections with Egypt were interrupted, an occurrence which sometimes, as under Vespasian (Tacit, iii. 48, 5), involved serious political consequences. The famine extended to the most fertile parts of the land, for it visited Bethlehem. The very name, " House of Bread," bespeaks a good and fertile district. Even yet, notwithstanding poor cultivation, its soil is fruitful in olives, pomegran- ates, almonds, figs, and grapes (Ritter, xvi. 287 [Gage's transl. iii. 341]). The region was "re- markably well watered in comparison with other parts of Palestine."2 On this account, the name Ephratah, applied to Bethlehem and the country around it, is perhaps to be explained as referring to the fruitfulness insured by its waters.3 And a man went. The man left Bethlehem with his family in the time of famine, in order, [hiring its continuance, to sojourn in the fertile territories of Moab, on the eastern side of the Dead Sea, whither the calamity did not extend. For this the Jewish expositors rightly blame him. He left his neighbors and relatives in distress, in order to live in the land of the enemy ; forsook his home, in order to reside as a stranger in Moab. If what he did was right, all Bethlehem should have done the same ! The case stood very differ- ent, when Abraham for a like reason went to Egypt (Gen. xii. 10); for Abraham went with all his house, left no one behind, and was everywhere a stranger. But Isaac is already forbidden from adopting the same method of relief (Gen. xxvi. 2), and Jacob removes to Egypt, not on account of the famine, but because his lost Joseph has been found again. But this man undertakes, by his own strength and in selfish segregation from his fellows, to change the orderings of divine providence. The famine was ordained as a chastening discipline; but instead of repenting, he seeks to evade it by l Ritter (Erdlcunde, xiii. 458) states, on the authority of Burkhardt, that in Nejd, in Arabia, similar famines recur at intervals of from ten to fifteen years. ■1 Which even Benjamin of Tudela (Asher'B edit. p. 40) particularly notices. 3 J~HCS. nrpDN, from r"HQ, to bear, «c. fruit, TTV1 T T : V ' T T ef. mS, Phrath, in its Greek form Euphrates, an jTlQS, u it were. going to a foreign land. Whether ibis can be done, the ensuing narrative is about to show. Ver. 2. And the name of the man was Elimelech. His family was of importance in the tribe of Judah (cf. chaps, ii. and iii.), well known in Bethlehem (eh. i. 19 ft'.; iv. 1 ft'.), and by no means poor (ch. i. 21). The names of its mem- bers may be held to testify to the same effect. In accordance with the spirit of Israelitish life, they may be supposed to reflect those obvious peculiari- ties which popular discernment remarked in the persons of those who bore them. The man is named Elimelech, " my God is King." All names compounded with " melech," king, with which we are acquainted, Abimelech, Ahimelech, etc., are borne by distinguished persons. Now, it was pre- cisely in contest with a king of Moab, Eglon, that Israel had experienced that God is king ; and yet, here an Elimelech withdraws himself from the favor of God in order to live in Moab ! His wife's name was Naomi, " the lovely, gracious one." The name unquestionably corresponded to the charac- ter. Whoever is loved as she was, and that by daughters-in-law, is most certainly worthy of love. As to the names of the sons, Mahlon and Chilion, the derivations which make them signify " sickly " and "pining," suggested perhaps by their subse- quent fate, are undoubtedly erroneous. For, surely, they bore them already when in Bethle- hem, after leaving which they continued in life over ten years in Moab. It is much more likely that by these names, bestowed at birth, the parents expressed the feeling that these sons were their "joy " and " ornament." Mahlon (properly Mach- lon) may then be derived from '"fl2, machol, " circle-dance," Greek choroS' Comp. 1 Kgs. iv. 31, where Heman, Chalcol, and Darda, are called sons of Machol ; and in Greek, Choreyis or Chorokles, from choros. In like manner, Chilion* (or rathei Ktlion), may, like n?3, kallah, a bride, be re- ferred to -V^i to crown. The name would thus signify caronatus, just as k-allah (bride) signifies a coronata. It is particularly stated that they are " Ephrathites " of Bethlehem-judah. Ephratah was the ancient name of Bethlehem and the region around it. Accordingly, Ephrathites are natives of the city, persons properly belonging to the tribe of Judah, not mere residents in Bethlehem from other tribes (cf. Judg. xvii. 7).5 So David also, by a use of the word in obvious accord with this pas- sage, is spoken of as the son of an Ephrathite of Bethlehem-judah (1 Sam. xvii. 12); and the prophet, when he announces Him who in the future is to come out of Bethlehem, expressly speaks of Bethlehem-Ephratah (Micah v. 1 ). For the same reason, the full name Bethlehem-judah is constantly used, in order to prevent any confusion with Bethlehem in Zebulun (josh. xix. 15 ; cf. Com. on Judg. xii. 8). and also to make it impossible to think of Ephrathites of the tribe of Ephraim. Vers. 3-5. And Elimelech died. Probably not long after his arrival in Moab. This appears 4 Sept. XeAaiioi', Josephus XcXAtW. The magnificence of the names might rather seem to contrast with the un- happy issue. For Elimelech Josephus puts Abimelech, probably also in consequence of some allegorical exposi- tion. 5 Some of the older Jewish teachers not inappropriately render ft Ephratim " by eu-yeve'craroi, high-born, oi lata tini (Ruth Rabba, 29. Bte ). CHAPTER I. 1-6. 13 not onlv fiom the connecting " and " : " they came to' Moab, were there, and Elimelech died" (cf. the Com. on Judg. i. 1), but may also be inferred from the circumstance that the sons did not marry while he was yet living. The death of the father is the beginning of the sad catastrophe ; hut notwithstanding its occurrence the sons are unwilling to return. On the_ contrary, they proceed, in violation of the Mosaic law, to take Moabitish wives (cf Com. on Judg. iii. 6 f.). That such marriages fall within the prohibition of Deut. vii. 3 is not "to be doubted. The restrictions of that passage apply to all who serve false gods, and the idolatry of Ammon and Moab is as strongly abominated as any other. That Moab and Ammon are not expressly named in the pas- sage, is owing to the fact that it speaks with ref- erence to the country on this side of the Jordan. In other passages, the worship and fellowship of Moab are rejected in the same way as those of the other nations (cf. Judg. x. 6). The ques- tion is not what name a people bears, but what ts religion and worship are. No doubt, how- ever, the old Jewish expositors are right when they maintain that the law which forbids the en- trance of an Ammonite or Moabite into the con- gregation of Jehovah, even to the tenth genera- tion (Deut. xxiii. 3), does not bear on the case of Ruth. For this can apply only to men, who from their sex are enabled to act independently, not to women, who are selected and taken. A woman founded no family in Israel, but was taken into one. For that reason, also, there is no connection whatever between this law and that in Deut. vii. 2 ff. Israel was forbidden to take wives for their sons from among the neighboring nations, not because these entered into the congregation or founded strange families, hut because marriage is a covenant, and involves the danger of becoming mixed up with idolatry. Inapplicable, likewise, to the present case is the passage in Deut. xxi. 10 ff., adduced by Le Clerc in defense of Naomi's sons. Doubtless, the fact that a woman was a captive taken in war gave marriage with her an altogether different charac- ter. In that case all the presuppositions which underlie the enactment in Deut. vii. were want- ing. The womau, moreover, must first bewail her kindred as dead, before she is allowed to be mar- ried. But Ruth and Orpah were not captives. Marriage with them was in all respects such as Deut. vii. provided against. Nor does the narra- tive seek to hide the sin of the young men.1 It is precisely, as we shall see, the most striking beauty of the thought of our Book, that the wrong which has been done is overcome, and turned into a step- ping-stone to a great end. The Midrash makes a daughter of king Eglon out of Ruth. Her heart at least is noble and royal as any king's daughter could be, and her exterior was doubtless such as to correspond with it. The name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Buth. The designation of girls by names borrowed from pleasing animals or i The Targum justly brings it into full relief. [It para- phrases : (t and they transgressed the command of the Lord, and took foreign wives from among the daughters of Moab.M] The answers of Le Clerc are misunderstandings, which have been repeated down to Bertheau. Ranibach's excuses for the brothers are already offered by older Roman Catholic expositors. " But,1' says one of these (cf. Serarius, p. 690), " why make excuses for them ? for Scripture does in no way represent them as holy men." 1 Li"V11 is usually regarded as a contraction either of flowers is common to all nations. The conjecture that Orpah, or Orpha, as the LXX. pronounce it, like Ophra, signifies a hind, is therefore undoubt edly in accordance with Moabitish usage. A comparison might apparently be made with cerva, Celtic carv (cf. Benfey, ii. 174). The name of Ruth would gain in interest, if the derivation which I propose, were approved. Singularly enough the name of the rose is not mentioned in the Scriptures, although this flower to this day adorns the ruins of the holy land with wondrous beauty. The Mishna and Talmud speak of it under its Greek name, p6iov (cf. my Rose unci Nachtigall, p. 19). Now it seems to me that in jTH we have the ancient form of the word ji6Sov, rosa, undoubtedly derived from the redness of the flower, 4pv8pis, rutilus, Sanskrit ritdh-ira, Gothic rauds (Benfey, ii. 125). That even the so-called Semitic and classical languages have many words and roots in common, especially such as denote common objects, as colors, animals, plants, is mani- fest from numerous instances, as e. g. a\(p6s, albus, 137. At all events, the thought of Ruth as the Moabitish Rose is in itself, apart from the philolog- ical probability, too attractive to refrain from giv- ing expression to the conjecture.2 And they dwelt there about ten years. The selection of such maidens as the sequel shows Ruth and Orpah to be, and the peaceful relations which must nave existed between all parties con- cerned, may perhaps be allowed to reduce the offense of Naomi's sons against the marriage law to its mildest form. But the distance at which they keep themselves from their native land and people when these are in distress, in order to find happi- ness and rest for themselves elsewhere, does not prove productive of blessings. The lot that be- falls them is very sad. The father, who feared lest he should not be able to live at home, had scarcely reached the strangers' land before he died. The sons founded their houses in Moab, and Moab be- came their grave. They were probably determined not to return home before the famine was over ; and when it was over, they themselves were no more. The father had emigrated in order to have more and to secure his family ; and now his widow had neither husband, nor sous, nor property. Mahlon and Chilion had died childless ; "joy " and " ornament " had given way to mourning and the signs of bereavement — Naomi stood alone in a foreign land. Then she arose with her daughters- in-law. Ver. 6. For Jehovah had visited his people to give them bread. Believing Israel sees the government of God in everything. Everything comes from Him and is designed to discipline and instruct mankind. In Deut. xxviii. 47, 48, it is written that in case Israel shall apostatize from God and cease to serve Him, it shall serve its ene- mies, and that in hunger and thirst, in nakedness and want. That the famine which had at this time befallen Bethlehem was the consequence of one of those military tyrannies which, as the Book JTftO, vision, appearance, or better, of f"W1 female friend. The explanation of HC^V as hind, rests on the supposition that it is the same with n"12V, the two mid- dle letters being transposed. Geseniua derives it from the Arabic 'Orphun, a mane ; cf. the Heb. ?Yy2, neck. " It may, however, be more suitable," says Wright, tr as the name of a female, to regard it as identical with the Arabl* ' Orphun in the sense of liberality." — Tr.] 14 THE BOOK Ob RUTH. of Judges relates, chastised the people, there is not the least indication. But a chastisement it certainly was, even though this is not asserted. And doubtless, the people, as it usually did under such einumstances, tnrned with penitence and prayer to its God. Then the years of famine came to an end. God remembered his people. It is a judgment of God when He allows men to go their own ways and help themselves in their necessities and sufferings (cf. the imeptb'tbv, Acts, xvii. 30) ; but in his mercy He remembers them, as he re- membered Israel in Egypt (Ex. ii. 24). The word "T|23 here used, occurs repeatedly for such a re- turn of divine remembrance. God remembered - 1816) is as fol- lows : " We entered it on the south side by an aperture through which it was difficult to crawl, as it has no doorway, and found on the inside a square mass of masonry in the centre, built up from the floor nearly to the roof, and of such a size as to leave barely a narrow passage for walking around it. It is plastered with white stucco on the outer surface, and is sufficiently large and high to enclose within it any ancient pillar that might have been found on the grave of Rachel. Around the in- terior face of the walls is an arched recess on each side, and over every part of the stucco are written and engraved a profusion of names, in Hebrew, Arabic, and Roman characters." (Cf. Palestine, i. 336. ) H0MILETI0AL AND PRACTICAL.! " A man of Bethkhem-jitdah went to sojourn in Moab." Because there is famine at home, the family of Elimelech migrate to a foreign country. They alone think that the distress cannot be borne. Instead of crying to God and trusting in Him, along with their brethren, in Bethlehem, they pro- ceed to an enemy's land, where heathen worship false god-. Their emigration testifies to a decrease in their faith. Here it is not. as in the case of Abraham, Go to a land that I will show thee : but it must rather be said, They went to a land that God had rejected. The result was such as mignt have been expected. God did not bless their de- parture, and therefore their entrance brought no joy- They sought to avoid one affliction, and fell into a heavier. The men escaped famine, but death overtook them. They had not trusted God's love at home, and so his judgments smote them abroad. Results like these should also be contemplated by many who undertake to emigrate in our days. Not many go as Abraham went to Canaan, or as Jacob went to Egypt; the majority follow in the steps of Elimelech. Continue in thy land, and support thyself hon- estly. " To many " — says a book called Sabbat- lirhe JSrinnerungen, — "it may be a necessity to leave their native land, for the relations of life are See Scripture Illustrations, Boston, 1855, p. 102, where a small engraving of the present exterior of the sepulchre is al-o given — Tr.] •1 [Compare the Introduction, Sect. 6, for some general Homiletical Hints on the whole Book. — Tr.] CHAPTER I. 1-6. i: manifold and often strange ; but most of those sno in these days seize the pilgrim-start', are not driven by distress. It is not hunger after bread, or want of work that urges them, but hunger ifter gain, and the want of life in God." l Starke : Dearth and famine are a great plague, and we have good reason to pray with reference in th -m, " Good Lord, deliver us ! " tr is true, indeed, that Elimelech emigrated to a It a [h -ii land, where the living God was not ac- knowledged, while emigrants of the present day go for the most part to lands where churches are already in existence. But. on the other hand, Elimelech. notwithstanding his unbelieving flight, became alter all no Moabite. The emigrant's grand concern should be not to have the spirit of a Moabite when he leaves bis native land. Many have ended much more sadly than Elimelech, and have left no name behind Elimelech's kindred was vet visited with blessings, because the faithful. Relieving spirit of an Israelitish woman, Naomi, worked in his household. Starke : Husband and wife should continue true to each other, in love and in sorrow, in good and evil days. " And the name of his wife was Naomi." Naomi means, " pleasant, lovely." As her name, so her character. Her name was the mirror of her na- ture. And truly, names ought not to be borne in vain [Killer : Names are given to men and wo- men, not only to distinguish them from each other, but also, — 1. To stir them up to verify the mean- ings and significations of their names. Wherefore let every Obadiah strive to be a " servant of God," every Nathaniel to be " a gift of God," Onesimus lo be " profitable," every Roger " quiet and peace- able" (?) Robert "famous for counsel" (!), and William "a help and defense " to many. 2. To incite them to imitate the virtues of those worthy persons who formerly have been bearers and own- i r- of their names. Let all Abrahams be faithful. Isaacs quiet, Jacobs painful, Josephs chaste ; every Lewis, pious ; Edward, confessor of the true faith : William, conqueror over his own corruptions. Let them also carefully avoid those sins for which the bearers of the names stand branded to posterity. Let every Jonah beware of frowardness, Thomas of distrustfulness, etc. If there be two of our names, one exceedingly good, the other notoriously evil, let us decline the vices of the one, and prac- tice the virtues of the either. Let every Judas not follow Judas Iseariot, who betrayed our Saviour, 1 [Without questioning the correctness of the foregoing remarks . it may nevertheless serve a good purpose to call attention to the following sentences from Dr. Thos. Fuller (1654), which read to-day surest the great need of that caution in " application " which they also exemplify : '' Now if any .1# demand of me my opinion concerning our breth- ren which of late left this kingdom to advance a plantation In Xew England ; surely I think, as St. Paul said concern- ing virgius he. had " received no commandment from the Lord : ' so I cannot find any just warrant to encourage men it undertake this removal ; but think rather the counsel but Judas the brother of James, the writer of the General Epistle ; each Demetrius not follow him in the Acts who made silver shrines for Diana, but Demetrius, 3 John, ver. 12, who had " agood report of all men ; " every Ignatius not imitate Ignatius Loyola, the lame father of blind obedience, but Ig- natius, the worthy martyr in the primitive church. And if it should chance, through the indiscretion of parents and godfathers, that a bad name should be imposed on any, 0 let not " folly " be " with " them, because Nabal is their name In the days of Queen Elizabeth, there was a royal ship called " The Revenge," which, having main- tained a long fight against a fleet of Spaniards (wherein eight hundred great shot were discharged against her), was at last fain to yield ; but no sooner were her men gone ont of her, and two hundred fresh Spaniards come into her, but she suddenly sunk them and herself; and so " The Re- venge " was revenged. Shall lifeless pieces of wood answer the names which men impose upon them, and shall not reasonable souls do the same? — Tr.]. [Bp. Hall : Betwixt the reign of the judges, Israel was plagued with tyranny; and while some of them reigned, with famine. Seldom did that rebellious people want somewhat to humble them. One rod is not enough for a stubborn child. Fuller : The prodigal child complained, " How many hired servants of my father have bread enough, and I die for hunger ! " So here we see that the uncircumcized Moabites, God's slaves and vassals, had plenty of store, whilst Israel, God's children (but his prodigal children, which by their sins had displeased their Heavenly Father), were pinched with penury. The same : Let us not abuse strangers, and make a prey of them, but rather let us be courteous unto them, lest the barbarians condemn us, who so courteously entreated St. Paul, with his ship- wrecked companions, and the Moabites in my text, who suffered Elimelech, when he came into the land, to continue there. The same : " And Elimelech died." I have seldom seen a tree thrive that hath been trans- planted when it was old. The same : " And she was left, and her two sons." Here we see how mercifully God dealt with Naomi, in that He quenched not all the sparks of her comfort at once, but though He took away the stock. He left her the stems. Indeed, after- wards He took them away also ; but first He pro- vided her with a gracious daughter-in-law. — Tr.] best that king Joash prescribed to Amaziah. ' Tarry at home ' Yet as for those that are already gone, far be i* from us to conceive them to be such to whom we may not say, ' God speed." as it is in 2 John verse 10 : but let us pity them, and pray for them ; for sure they have no need of our mocks, which I am afraid have too much of their own miseries. I conclude therefore of the two Englands, what our Saviour saitu of the two wines, Lube v 39 : f N« man having tasted of the old presertly desireth the D*w for he saith, The old is better.' " — Tr.) 16 THE BOOK OF RUTH. Verses 7-18. Faithfulness until Death. 7 Wherefore [And] she went forth out of the place where she was, and her twc daughters-in-law with her ; 1 and they [already] went on the way to return unto the 8 land of Judah. And Naomi said [Then s;tid Naomi] unto her two daughters-in-law. Go, return each to her mother's house: the Lord [Jehovah] deal kindly with you." 9 as ye have dealt with the dead, and with me. The Lord [Jehovah] grunt you that ye may find 8 rest [a resting-place], each of you in the house of her husband. Then 10 she kissed them ; and they lifted up their voice, and wept. And they said unto her, 11 Surely4 we will return with thee unto thy people. And Naomi said. Turn again [Return], my daughters : why will ye go with me ? are there yet any more sons in 12 my womb, that they may be your husband? ? Turn again [Return], my daughters, go your way [omit : your way] ; for I am too old to have [to belong (again) to] an husband. If [Even if] I should say,5 I have hope, if I should have [should belong 13 to] an husband also to-night, and should also bear sons ; would ye [then] 6 tarry for them [omit : for them] till they were grown ? would ye stay for them [would you then shut yourselves up] from having husbands [in order7 (after all) not o belong to a husband]? nay, my daughters; tor it grieveth me much fir your sakes [it is much more bitter to me than to you],8 that [since] the hand of the Lord [Jehovah] 14 is gone out against me. And they lifted up their voice, and wept again.9 And 1 /> Orpali kissed her mother-in-law [and turned back] ; but Ruth clave unto her. And she [Naomi] said. Behold, thy sister-in-law is gone back unto her people, and unto her 16 gods [God]:10 return thou [also] after thy sisier-in-law. And Ruth said, Entreat [Urge] me not to leave thee, or [and] to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go ; and where ihou lodge>t [abidest], I will lodge 17 [abide]: thy people shall be [is] my people, and thy God my God: Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried : the Lord [Jehovah] do so to me, and 18 more also, if11 aught but death part thee and me. When [And when] she saw that -he was steadfastly minded to go with her, then she left speaking unto [ceased to dissuade] her, TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. [1 Ver. 7. — From this verse, and the preceding (cf. also ver. 10). it appears plain, as Bertheau remark?, that not only Naomi, but also both her daughters-in-law, set out with the intention of going to Judah. It may be true that yaomi, determined from the start that they must not carry out this intention, rf looked upon them as only bearing her company for a while before parting " (Dr. Cassel, below) ; but it seems at least as likely that in the struggle between duty and Inclination, she did not finally reach this conclusion until the moment that she attempted to give it effect. Tin D^IP 7 is of course strictly applicable only to Naomi. — Tr.] [2 Ver. 8. — "T3n E3S17 ^^^, nt&2?> : lit- Jehovah do kindness with you. On the form "ttTV* as opta- tive, cf. Ges. 127, 3, b. Although the shortened form *">'* is more usual, its substitution by the Keri is unnecessary. In C3!23? the suffix is masc, although referring to women, cf. also C*"VtE?3? 'D the next member of the clause. Similar 'departures from strict grammatical propriety occur in vers. 9, 11, 13, 19', 22, ch. iv. 11. Gesenius regards them as originally colloquial inaccuracies, which afterwards passed into books, § 121, 6, Rem. 1. All but two ^ers. 19. 22) of those in our Hook are actually found in conversations. [3 Ver Q. — ]K"72;I. imperat. seriptio defect, for HDS^i!?. On the construction, cf. Ges 130, 1. The iniperat. ii only a stronger jussive, hence easily connected with it. — Tr.] I* Ver. 10. — *3 : Dr. Cassel first supplies : " We will not turn back," and then renders *3 by denn, " for," cf dm Ler. 8. v. s3, B. 3, b. In that case, however (after the implied negation), sondern, ff but," would be better than ,: for.T 3ut it in best taken like in in N. T. before words directly quoted, cf. Lex. 1. c. B. 1. b. Keil's remark, that " ^3 before words in direct discourse serves to strengthen, being almost equal to an assurance," is certainly not true in all cases, cf t Sam. x. 19; 1 Kgs. xi. 22. — Ta.] [5 Ver. 12 — ^FHTDS ^3 : ^3 is causal, and introduces another but closely connected reason (the first, also Introduced by ^3, being given in the preceding clause) why they should return, cf. Isa. vi. 6 ; Ps. xxii. 12. In English w should represent this >3 — ^3 by "for — and." 'P1QS, TV,"!, and VI7- i are all conditional perfect* CHAPTER I. 7-18. 17 Fiy31t{M "I swear," or some such expression, is understood, cf. Gen. xxii. 16. The E. V. might be corrected by' leaving ^3 untranslated, and rendering : " only death shall part thee and me." The Hebrew, instead of invoking a definite judgment or calamity on himself, in case he breaks his oath, simply says 713, which with the addition " and more too," is perhaps more awful to the imagination because it is not definite. — On the article with " death," cf. Ges. 109, Rem. 1. c. — Tr.] EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL. Ver. 7. Arid she went forth out of the place. The place is not named, nor is it necessary. The Israelitish family had after all not become nat- uralized in it. No one asks Naomi to stay. No one accompanies her, save her two daughters-in- law, the youthful widows of her too early faded sons. And they already went on the way. Until then Naomi had looked on her daughters-in-law as only bearing her company for a while before part- ing. But being now far from their place of resi- dence, on the highway from Moab to Judah, she stops, and bids them return. Ver. 8. Jehovah deal kindly with you, as ye have dealt with the dead and with me. A scene now begins of uncqualed tenderness and amiableness. We get a look into a family-life that may serve as a model for all. It is an honor to the deceased sons, Mahlon and Chilion, that they made such a selection of wives ; but they must also have been worthy of the enduring love they awak- ened, notwithstanding that there were no children to strengthen the bonds of affection. The attach- ment of the Moabitish women, Ruth and Orpah, to their new family, must be grounded in psycho- logical facts, with a knowledge of which exegesis cannot dispense. The Moabitish women had en- tered into an Israelitish house, and had breathed the beneficent atmosphere of a family of Judah. Marriage and family life form the real mirror of religious belief and worship. Hence, the apostle, in his sublime manner, arranges the relations of husband and wife by referring to the love of Christ for his church (Ephes. v. 22 ff.). Ancient Israel, 2 therefore, distinguished itself from the inhabitants of Canaan, not merely by the name of its God, but by its life at home in the family, by faithfulness and love to wife and child. Purity and moralitv in marriage were the necessary results of faith iii the only, living God, as much as a life of unchaste and sensual pleasures belonged to the abomina- tions of idolatry among the Ammonites and Moab- ites. Among the worst sins into which Israel fell in the desert, was the whoredom with the daugh- ters of Moab in the service of Baal-Peor (Num. xxv.) ; by executing summary and terrible pun- ishment on which. Phinehas the priest won for himself an enduring blessing. The Mosaic law does not contain special and extended instructions as to the treatment of wife and child. But the command, " thou shalt not commit adultery," stands among the Sinaitic Ten as the reflection of that other which says. " thou shalt have no other gods." An affectionate, moral family life had become an Israelitish characteristic through the influence of the Israelitish faith, as is evident already in patriarchal times from the instances of Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah. But it showed itself still more brightly in Israel as a nation, liv- ing by the side of other tribes in Canaan, since monogamy had become its natural and prevailing practice. Every profounder apprehension of do mestic relations, brought about by man's cod sciousness of God, affects the wife especially. She experiences most deeply the beneficence of a life sanctified by the law of God. Her happiness and her love, indissolubly connected, depend upon the moral education of the man she follows. Ruth and Orpah felt the impression of the higher moral- 18 THE BOOK OF RUTH. itv which, in contrast with the Moabitish home, [ pervaded every Israelitish household. It is not I necessary to conceive of Mahlon and Chilion as men of eminence in this respect; but they held fat to their famile traditions, according to which the wife occupied a position of tenderness, pro- J tx eted by love and solicitude. They did not act in entire accordance with the law when they married Moabitish wives ; but neither did they unite with them in the idolatry of Baal-Peor. Although they may not have been specially pious and god-fearing men, their national mode of home and married life nevertheless contrasted with that of Moab, and all the more strongly because they lived in the midst of Moab. Both the young women, ac- quainted with the fate of Moabitish marriages, felt themselves gratefully attracted to the Israelitish house into which they entered. They had not ac- cepted the law and the God of Israel ; but they re- quited the kind and tender treatment they received with equally self-sacrificing love. That Naomi can acknowledge this, after having observed them through ten years of married life, what a picture of peace and happiness does it suggest ! The women had not only heard the religion of Jehovah confessed in Moab (cf. the expression : Jehovah deal kindly with you, etc.), but they had seen the expression of it in the life. What they have done and are yet ready to do, is the consequence thereof. For national divisions, we here see, are overcome rather by the preaching of the life than by the verbal proclamation of doctrine. Naomi praises not only the love which Ruth and Orpah have manifested toward their husbands, but also that which they have shown towards her- self, the mother-in-law. And this is yet more noteworthy. Ancients and moderns unite in com- plaints of the unhappy relations between daugh- ters- and mothers-in-law. Plutarch, treating of the duties of married persons, relates that in Leptis, in Africa, it was customary for the bride on the day after the wedding to send to the bridegroom's mother to ask for a pot, which the latter refuses, pretending that she has none, in order that the young wife may speedily become acquainted with the stepmotherly disposition of her mother-in-law, and be less easily provoked when subsequently more serious troubles arise.1 In Terence (Hecyra, ii. I, 4), Laches laments "that all mothers-in-law have ever hated their daughters-in-law " (uno animo omnes socrus oderunt mints).'- Juvenal, in his satire against women (vi. 231), says, in a rather coarse way, that matrimonial peace is inconceiva- ble so long as the mother-in-law lives (desperanda salva concordia socru). Old German popular say- ings faithfully reproduce the ancient maxims : " /'"/ Swiger ne iceiss, dass sie Snur gewesan " (the mother-in-law has forgotten that she was ever a daughter-in-law) ;3 " Die beste Swigar ist die, auf deren Rock die Ijanse weiden" (the best mother-in- law is one on whose gown the geese feed, ;'. e. who is dead). The family life of Naomi with her daughters in- law affords no trace whatever of such sad experi- ences. They mutually love each other — both during the lives of the" husbands and after their ii cease, — although they belong to different tribes. The praise fur this naturally belongs largely to 1 Cf. Jerome, adv. Jovinian. lib. i. 48, p. 317, and Com- ■<.»■ <<ns of Naomi and must therefore have been shut in. With this the explanation of the word H-""2 itself stands connected. Kallali means bride and daughter-n-law as newly-married wife), in the same way as the 3reek Israel or in Moab. but other prospect have you none. Here where everything turns on love. th6 fulhller of every law. Naomi does not think of the legal provisions with respect to levirate marriages; but she heaps up the improbabilities against her being able to furnish husbands to her daughters- in-law in Israel, in order in this veiled manner to indicate that this was nevertheless the only possi- ble ground of hope for them in Israel. For I am worse off than you are. It is very painful for Naomi to let them go, for she is entirely alone. But she cannot answer it to take them with her, seeing she can offer them no new home. Undoubtedly, she is in a worse situation than that of the young women. For them there is yet a possible future among their people. Naomi has buried her happiness in a distant grave, For her there is no future. The last of those dear to her, she herself must tear away from her heart. "Je- hovah's hand," she says, " went forth against me." She is soon to experience that his mercy is not yet exhausted. Ver. 14. But Euth clave unto her. Orpah suffers herself to be persuaded, and goes ; but Ruth remains, and will not leave her. The result of Naomi's tears is, that Orpah takes leave of her, and that Ruth clings to her only the more closely. The hopelessness of the future, on which the mother had dilated, leads Orpah back to Moab, but suffers Kuth to go with her to Israel. All that Naomi had said, her solitariness, poverty, sorrow, only served to attach her more firmly. Orpah too was attached and well disposed ; but still, with eyes of love, although she had them, she yet saw herself, while Ruth saw only the beloved one. It might be said with a certain degree of truth, that the same cause induced Orpah to go and Ruth to remain, the fact, namely, that Naomi had no longer either son or husband. The one wished to become a wife again, the other to remain a daughter. Few among the natural children of men are as kind and good as Orpah; but a love like that of Ruth has scarcely entered the thoughts of poets. An- tigone dies for love of her brother ; but the life which awaited Ruth was more painful than death. Alcestis sacrifices herself for her husband, and Sigune (in the Parcwal of Wolfram v Eschcn- liach) persistently continues in a solitary cell, with the corpse of her lover whom she had driven into battle, until she dies ; but Ruth goes to a foreign land and chooses poverty, not for a husband or a lover, but for the mother of him who long since was torn away from her- She refuses to leave her for the very reason that she is poor, old, and child- less. Naomi, having lost her sons, shall not on i'vix7j explains itself from the Latin nvbere. to cover, to veil. The bride already covered herself, like the wife, withdrew herself from the eyes of men, and was shut up. The goddesses themselves were originally called taVoJai probably because they were conceived of as rendered invisi- ble by the nature-covering of tree and fountain. The use of ovSi'»a»ja<|>os, for sister-in-law, by the LXX. in ver. 15. is peculiar, and doubtless inteuded to mean " the other, second the sister-daughter-in-law.1' rather than "sister-in-law* In classic authors it does not occur ; for iu o-vi-pv^oko^os the trvv refers to KOfios. The Hebrew bride derives hel name from the garland with which it was customary tc crown both bride and bridegroom (cf. Mader, de Corona.* Helmet. 1662. p. 35, etc.). The symbolism of the word con- tains profound poetical ideas. It represents a shutting in It is true ; but by flowers, — a shutting up unto perfactioi and coronation. 20 THE BOOK OF RUTH thai account lose her daughters also. Rather than leave her to suffer alone, Ruth will starve with, or beg for her. Here is love for the dead and the livlug, surpassing that of Alcestis and Sigune. That Ruth does for her mother-in-law, what as the highest filial love the poet invents for Antigone, when he represents her as not leaving her blind father, is in actual life almost unexampled. Nor would it be easy to find an instance of a deeper conflict than that which love had to sustain on this occasion. The foundation of it was laid when Elimelech left his people in order not to share their woes. It was rendered inevitable, when, against the law of Israel, his sons took wives of the daugh- ters of Moab. It broke out when the men died. Their love for their Israelitish husbands had made the women strangers in their native land ; and the love of Naomi for her Moabitish daughters made her doubly childless in Israel. Nationality, laws, and custom, were about to separate mother- and daughters-in-law. But as love had united them, so also love alone has power to solve the conflict, but only such a love as Ruth's. Orpah escapes the struggle by returning to Moab ; Ruth ends it by going with Naomi. Ver. 15. Thy sister-in-law returned home to her people and to her God. In these remarka- ble words lies the key to the understanding of vers. 11-13. Her daughters had said to her (ver. 10), " We will go with thee to thy people." It grieves Naomi to be obliged to tell them, with all possible tenderness, that in the sense in which they mean it, this is altogether impossible. It was necessary to intimate to them that a deeper than merely_ na- tional distinction compels their present parting : that what her sons had done in Moab, was not customary in Israel; that her personal love for them was indeed so great, that she would gladly give them other sons, if she had them, but that the people of Israel was separated from all other na- tions by the God of Israel. Orpah understood this. Strong as her affection for Naomi was, her natural desire for another resting-place in a hus- band's house was yet stronger ; and as she could not hope for this in Israel, she took leave and went back. For the same reason, Naomi now speaks more plainly to Ruth : thy sister-in-law returned home to her people and to her God. It is not that we belong to different nations, but that we worship different Gods, that separates us here at the gates of Israel. Vers. 16, 17. And Ruth said, Thy people is my people, and thy God my God. Naomi's house, her character and life, have won for her the love of her daughters-in-law. Ruth cleaves to her and will not leave her, although poverty and misery await her. For love to her she proposes to give up not only home and family, but also all the heart-joys that might there yet be hers. She cleaves to her thus, although she is of Israel. Naomi and her house have made Israel also appear lovely in the eyes of Ruth. Who would not wish to go to a people whose sole known representatives were so amiable as Naomi and her family ! In Moab, the young women had not been made aware that one cannot be united to Israel without ac- knowledging Israel's God, for they had entered the marriage relation with sons of Israel without en- tering into covenant with their God. Now, how- rver, they learn, from Naomi's intimations, that that which Mahlon and Chilion had done, was against the custom of Israel. The discovery in- Itantly manifests itself in different effects on Orpah »nd Ruth. Orpah is repelled, because she thinks only of the bridal she might lose. Ruth is attracted for if that which distinguishes this people which she already loves be its God, then she loves that God also. In Naomi she loves both people and God. Ruth's love is true love : it cleaves to Na- omi not for advantages, but on account of her vir- tues and amiability. Ruth desires to be one with her for life. She will not let her be alone, wher ever she may be. What Naomi has, she also will have, her people and her God. And this she ex- presses at once, so clearly and decidedly, that in ver. 17 she swears by Jehovah, the God of Israel. The Jewish expositors, after the example of the Targum, suppose a dialogue to have taken place in which Naomi has first explained to Ruth the difficulties connected with faith in the God of Is- rael. All this, however, should be considered merely as a didactic anticipation of her subsequent experiences. In our narrative, the confession of Ruth, " thy God is my God," is the highest stage of that devotion which she yields to Naomi for life. She has vowed that nothing shall separate her love from its object ; for whatever could sep- arate it, would make it imperfect. But since the God of Israel is the true ground of all the love which she felt for her Israelitish friends, it follows that her confession of Him is the keystone of her vow. It is at the same time the true solution of the conflict into which persons who mutually loved each other had fallen. It rectifies the error com- mitted by her husband when he took the Moabi- tish woman notwithstanding her relation to the idol of Moab. The unity of the spirit has been attained, which not only shows true love, but even in mem- ory reconciles what was amiss in the past. For Naomi's grief was so great, not only because she had lost her sons, but also because the daughters- in-law which she had must be given up, and she be left alone. And as love enforced the separation, so love also became the cord drawing to a yet closer union. If Naomi believed herself fallen out of the favor of God on Moab's account, she could derive comfort from Ruth who for her sake entered into the people of God. Ver. 18. And when she saw that she was firmly resolved. Older expositors have imagined that Naomi's efforts to persuade her daughters-in- law to return homeward, were not altogether se- riously meant. She only wished to test them. They "take this view in order to free Naomi from the reproach of being too little anxious to intro- duce her daughters into Israel and the true faith (Rambach: Quarunt hie biterpreies an recte fecerit Noomia, etc.).1 But this whole exposition is a dogmatic anachronism. Naomi could entertain no thoughts of missionary work as understood in mod- ern times, and for that she is not to be reproached. The great love on which the blessing of the whole narrative rests, shows itself precisely in this, that Naomi and her daughters-in-law were persons of different nationality and religion. This contrast — which a marriage of ten years has only affection- ately covered up — it is, that also engenders the conflict of separation. During more then ten years the marriage of Naomi's sons to Moabitesses was and continued to be wrong in principle, although, in the happy issue of their choice, its unlawfulness was lost sight of. What she had not done then in the spring-tide of their happiness, Naomi could not think of doing now. Her generous love shows it- self now rather in dissuading her daughters-in-law 1 « Sed alii tamen Uebraei pariter ac Christian! interpre- tes Noomiam a reatu liberant, et non serin Bed tentand. ammo Id egisse statuunt." - Rambach, p. 743. CHAPTER I. 7-18. 21 fron. going with her to Israel. For they surely would nave gone along, if their deceased husbands, instead of remaining in Moab, had returned to Is- rael. But their death had in reality dissolved every external bond with Naomi. No doubt, Naomi now feels the grief which the unlawful actions of her husband and sons have entailed. Had her daughters-in-law been of Israel, there would nat- urally be no necessity of her returning solitary and forsaken. She feels that " the hand of Jehovah is against her." How indelicate would it be now, nay how unbecoming the sacredness of the rela- tions involved, if Naomi, at this moment, when she is herself poor, and with no prospect in the future, were to propose to her daughters-in-law to leave not merely the land but also the god of Moab, that thus they might accompany her. If she had ever wished, at this moment she would scarcely dare, to do it. It is one of the symptoms of the conflict, that she could not do it. The ap- pearance of self interest would have east a blot on the purity of their mutual love. Naomi might now feel or believe what she had never before thought of, — she could do nothing but dissuade. Anything else would have rudely destroyed the grace and elevation of the whole beautiful scene. The great difference between Orpah and Ruth shows itself in the very fact that the one yields to the dissuasion, the other withstands. Ruth had the tenderly sen- sitive heart to understand that Naomi must dis- suade ; and to all Naomi's unuttered reasons for feeling obliged to dissuade, she answers with her vow. Naomi dissuades on the ground that she is poor, — " where thou abidest, I will abide," is the answer ; that she is about to live among another people, — " thy people is my people ; " that she worships another God, — " thy God is my God ; " that she has no husband for her, — " only death shall part me from thee." Under no other circum- stances could the conflict have found an end so beautiful. Naomi must dissuade in order that Ruth might freely, under no pressure hut that of her own love, accept Israel s God and people. Only after this is done, and she holds firmly to her decision, does Naomi consent and " cease to dis- suade her." Note to verse 8: "Jehovah deal kindly with you, as ye have dealt with the dead and with me." The love which unites husband and wife in mar- riage, reconciles the contrasts inherent in difference of nationality, makes peace, gives a good con- science, and leaves a blessed memory. Christian families, too, will do well to look upon the good understanding existing between Naomi and her daughters-in-law as an example to be followed. It originated in the right love of the wives for their husbands, and of the mother for her sons. A right love rejoices in the happiness of its objects, even though derived through others. The jealousy of mothers toward their children-in-law, and of wives toward their husbands' parents does not spring from love. A pleasing instance of right relations with a nother-in-law comes to light in the gospel history. Jesus enters into the house of Peter, whose mother- in-law liss sick of a fever. Request is immediately made ir her behalf, and He, always full of love ready tc *ow forth in miracles wherever He sees love, heais her (Matth. viii. 14 ff. and paral.). The term wtvSepd, used in this account by the gospels, is also employed by the Sept. with reference to Naomi. Origen has a remarkable passage, thoroughly worthy of his noble spirit (cf. on Job, Lib. i.) : Blessed is Ruth who so clave to her aged mother in-law that she would not leave her until death For this reason, Scripture indeed has justly ex tolled her; but God has beatified her forever. But He will judge, and in the resurrection con- demn, all those wicked and ungodly daughters-in- law who deal out abuse and wrong to their parents- in-law, unmindful of the fact that they gave life and sustenance to their husbands If, therefore, thou lovest thy husband, 0 wife, then love them also who gave him being, and thus brought up a son for themselves and a husband for thee. Seek not to divide the son from his father or mother ! Seek not to bring the son to despise or father or mother, lest thou fall into the con- demnation of the Lord in the day of awful inquest and judgment." But these excellent words never found the right echo. Even Jerome says : prope modum natwale est, at minis socntm et socrus oderit nurtim. And yet it never was the case where Christian virtue was actually alive. Monica, the mother of Augustine, had to endure not a little from her mother-in-law. The lat- ter supported Monica's disobedient maid-servants against their mistress. She allowed them to bring her all sorts of evil reports about her. Her daugh- ter-in-law she daily chided and provoked. But Monica met her with such complaisant love, quiet obedience, and amiable patience, as to conquer the irritable mother-in-law, so that she became, and continued to be to the last, the friend and protect- ress of her daughter-in-law. No wonder that from such a heart there sprang the faith and spirit of a man like Augustine (cf. Barthel, Monica, p. 31). Not only the history, but also the traditions and the poetry, of the ftliddle Ages, frequently depict the sufferings of daughters-in-law, inflicted on them by the mothers of their husbands. As part of the " swan -legends " of the lower Rhine, we have the peculiar story of Matabruna, the bad wife of the king of Lillefbrt, who persecuted and tormented her pious and believing daughter-in-law Beatrix, until at last the latter, by God's help, came off vic- torious (cf. Wolf, Niederldndische Sagen, p. 175; also my treatise on the Schwan, p. 24). Hermann Boerhaave's step-mother having died, the universally celebrated physician wrote as fol- lows : " All the skill with which God has endowed me I applied, and spent whole half-nights in con- sidering her disease, in order to prolong her life, — but all in vain But I weep too, as often as the thought occurs to me that now I shall have no more opportunity to show her my love, veneration, and gratitude ; and I should be alto- gether inconsolable, if, since my coming of age, I had been even once guilty of disrespect or ingrat- itude toward her." It may hence be seen how deeply-grounded in the nature of things it is, that in German [and if in German, then in English too. — Tr.] glauben [to believe] and lieben [to love] are really of the sam root. In Gothic, Hubs means, " dear, beloved " ; hu ban, " to be beloved." With this, the likewise Gothic laubjan, galaubjan, " to believe," is connected. In the version of Ultilas, even i\Hs, hope, is at Rom. xv 13 translated by lubains. And in truth : Faith, Love Hope, tl»ese three are one ; but the greatest of them is Love. H0MILET1CAL AND PRACTICAL. "Jehovah deal kindly with you, as ye have deal, with the dead and with me. ' Naomi's husband 91"'!3, with ^"TTO' as Keri, in the margin. But 3^13 occurs ouly once more (Prov. vii. 4), and there also we must probably read V^T2. The reading VT1J3 was preferred by the Masora only on account of the fem. HV'JTO, which occurs at eh. iii. 2. The participle ^^TP is of more frequent occurrence, cf. Ps. lv. 14. Hitherto. Naomi could say, as does the Psalmist (lxxxviii. 9): "Thou hast put my kinsmen ('<'iJ.,*?) far from me." Com- pare also ver. 19 of the same psalm, where it stands in parallelism with 2HS, lover, and ?3 compan- ion. She has likewise experienced what is written IV xxxi. 12, ef. Job xix. 14. Literally, to he sure, the word means only an "acquaintance;" but it expresses more than we mean by that term. The man was not a very near relative, but one " known " to the family, as belonging to it. It was an ac- quaintance valid within the family lines ; hence the word signifies as much asjamiliaris. It is used in n noteworthy connection at 2 Kgs. x. 11, where Jehu -lays all the great men, the C'V^Jp, and the priests of A hah, — i. e. everybody that adhered to him. whether from family connection or interest. The Latin notits may occasionally approximate to the idea of the Hebrew term even more closely than the Greek -yvJipifios \ not so much, however, in (Jatull. lxxix. 4 [sitrifi riotorum basia repeierit), as h f.iv. iii. 44, where, with reference to the violence done to Virginia, is said : nolos gratia (patris el iponsi) turbam indignitas rei viryini cow that. Th( fact is emphasized that Boaz was only a iJTXJ This not only explains a certain remote- ness of Naomi from him, but it makes the piety, which notwithstanding the distance (manifest also from ch. iii. 12) of the relationship, performs what the narrative goes on to relate, more conspicuously great than it would appear if, according to an un- founded conjecture of Jewish expositors, he were held to be the son of Elimelech's brother. A valiant hero. These words are applied to Boaz in no other sense than to Gideon (Judg. vi. 12), Jephthah (xi. 1 ), and others, and have no refer- ence to his wealth and property. He was a strong and able man in Israel, in war and in peace. Probably he had distinguished himself in conflicts of Israel against enemies, perhaps against Moab. The ancestor of David is, as the Midrash (Ruth 31, d) remarks, rightly thus described. His name, Boaz (T5?3l, is to be explained by reference to the name of one of the pillars erected by Solomon, and called Boaz, while the other was named Jachin (cf. my Gold. Thron Salomo's, p. 45). It is not a compound of fj? "t3> but a contraction of '2""i?, " son of strength, of enduring vigor." The signifi- cation alacritas (Ges., Keil, etc.), would hardly be applicable to the pillar. H0.MILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. The same characteristic is ascribed to Boaz as to Gideon, and to David. But concerning his warlike deeds nothing is related. In Israel, however, there was no valor, properly so called, except such as sprang from the acknowledgment of the living God. The word is not applied to wild battle-rage, but to moral strength, which valiantly repels distress and dishonor, as Abraham drew the sword for his coun- try against foreign oppressors. Boaz was a hero in war through his virtue in peace. And this virtue conies so clearly to view in the Book of Ruth, that the narrator could justly add : he was a brave man. For morally brave he shows himself in every rela- tion : 1. as landlord; 2. as confessor of God; 3. as man of action ; and hence he receives the reward both of him who dispenses blessings and of him who receives them. [Fuller : " This first verse presents us with twe remarkable things : 1 . Poor Naomi was allied to powerful Boaz. 2. Boaz was both a powerful man and a godly man." — Tb.J CHAPTER II. 2-17. 27 Verses 2-17. The Reward of Faithfulness begin*. 2 And Ruth the Moabitess said unto Naomi, Let me now go to the field, and glea: ears of corn 1 after him in whose sight I shall find grace. And she said unto her, 3 Go. my daughter. And she went, and came, and gleaned in the field after the reapers: and her hap was to light on a [the] part of the field2 belonging unto Boaz, 4 who was of the kindred [family] of Elimelech. And behold. Boaz came from Beth- lehem, and said unto the reapers. The Lord [Jehovah] be with you : and they 5 answered him, The Lord [Jehovah] bless thee. Then said Boaz [And Boaz said] 6 unto his servant that was set over the reapers. Whose damsel is this ? And the servant that was set over the reapers answered and said, It is the8 Moabitish dain- 7 sel that came back with Naomi out of the country [territories] of "Moab : And she said, I pray you [thee], let me glean and [I will] gather after the reapers among the sheaves: so she came, and hath continued even from the morning until now, 8 that * she tarried a little in the house. Then said Boaz [And Boaz said] unto Ruth, Hearest thou not. my daughter ? Go not to glean in another field, neither go from 9 hence, but abide here fast by my maidens : Let thine eyes be on the field that they do reap, and go thou [fearlessly] after them : have I not charged the young men that they shall not touch [molest] thee? and when thou art athirst,5 go unto the vessels, 10 and drink of that which the young men have drawn. Then she fell on her face, and bowed herself to the ground, and said unto him, Why have I found grace in thine eyes, that thou shouldest take knowledge [friendly notice] of me, seeing I am a stranger ? 11 And Boaz answered and said unto her, It hath fully been shewed me. all that thou hast done unto thy mother-in law since the death of thine husband : and how thou hast left thy father and thy mother, and the land of thy nativity, and art come 12 unto a people which thou knewest uot heretofore. The Lord [Jehovah] recom- pense thy work, and a full [complete] reward be given thee of the Lord [Jehovah] 13 God of Israel, under whose wings thou art come to trust [seek refuge]. Then she said, Let me find favour 6 in thy sight, my lord ; for that thou hast comforted me, and for that thou hast spoken friendly unto [to the heart of] thine handmaid, though 14 I be not like unto one of thy handmaidens. And Boaz said unto her, At meal-time T come thou hither, and eat of the bread, and dip thy morsel in the vinegar. And she sat beside the reapers : and lie reached her parched corn, and she did eat. and was 15 sufficed [satisfied], and left [over]. And when she was risen up to glean, Boaz commanded his young men, saying. Let her glean even among [between] the sheaves, 16 and reproach her not: And let fall [pull out] 8 also some of [from] the handfulls [bundles] of purpose for her, and leave them [it], that she may glean them \it], and 17 rebuke her not. So she gleaned in the field until even, and beat out that she had gleaned : and it was about an ephah of barley. TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. [i Ver.2. — C^bati'S nfcjvbSI : lit- ,:and glean, among the ears." The construction is exactly parallel to th»t in ver. 7 : i. t. ntlpbs is used absolutely, without an accus., as frequently in our Book and elsewhere. The idea is, Let me gather (sc. some ears) among those that are left lying in the field by the harvesters. — Tr.] [2 Ver. 3. — nTti'n fipbn : " the field-portion," i. e. that part of the grain-fields about Bethlehem that belonged to Boaz. rr Though gardens and vineyards are usually surrounded by a stone wall or hedge of prickly pear, the grain fields, on the contrary, though they belong to different proprietors, are not separated by any inclosure from each other. The boundary between them is indicated by heaps of small stones, or sometimes by single upright stones placed at inter- vals of a rod or more from each other " (Hackett, Must, of Scripture, p. 167). In rHpO ™T/.*1> ut' " aer haP hap- pened,"' 7"HJ7tp is the subject of ~^)*\ cf. Eccles. ii. 14. (Tlt^n np_?n >8 the accus. of place, cf. Ges. 118, 1. — Tr.] [8 Ver. 6. — Op : " She is a Moabitish maiden, who came back with Naomi from," etc. This supposes that n3t£T1 Is, is the accentuation makes it, and against which nothing is to be said here, the third fem. perfect, cf. the note on ch. I. 22. Thus taken, the answer does not assume that Boaz is acquainted with the return of Naomi. The B. V. may. lowever, be justified by taking ~T"~twr"T as a participle, cf. Ges. Ill, 2, a — Tr.1 28 THE BOOK OF RUTH. [4 Ver. 7. — HT is joined by Dr. Cassel to nj-lH""!^!, as adv. of time (so also Gesenius and Fiirst, cf. Lexiea . v.): "and until now her resting (cf. below) in the house was little." But this unnecessarily disturbs the accentua* tion. Better translate : " this her sitting in the house (rPiSH, accus. of place) is but for a little " (tS^tt, adv. oi tccus. of time). HT rW2tE7 is an Aramseizing of the more regular Hebrew H-TH H/HSE?. cf. Ew. 293, b, and the v t : • t : • ' Ltxica, s. v. iTr.— On TISDSI, in the preceding clause, see Ges. 126, 6. Ruth says : Pray, permit me to glean, and and (in consequence of this permission) I will gather, etc. — Tr.] T5 Ver. 9. — D!i!i, from KOtJ, but inflected as if from a form HOS, cf. Ges. 75, Rem. 21, c. On the use of the word as perfect, ct on ch. 1. 12. On the perfects £127711 and nVHHJI, Ges. 126, Rem. 1 ; and on the imperf. 7^— Mt27\ Ges. 127, 4, b. "")t2?MD is rendered t( out of which " by Bertheau and Keil (because water-drawing was ordinarily done by women?); but in that case the more natural position of iTilttn would be after D^^SH, thus : and out of what the young men draw (drink), drink thou (too). — Ta.J [0 Ver. 13. — N^DM I optative. " To take it as present indicat. : I find favor, as is done by Le Clerc and Bertheau, Is not in accordance with the modesty of humility which Ruth manifests in the following words M (Keil). Nor is the word expressive of a permanent state or condition, which would justify the imperfect indicative , as is the case with the rPrlM of the next clause, cf. Ges. 127, 2. — Tr.] [7 * Ver. 14. — According to the accentuation of the Masorites, these words belong to the preceding clause : (t And Boas said to her at the time of eating, Come hither," etc. stT3, from C32, an anomalous form for ''IT?, as !|tP2 for *m73 Josh. iii. 9 ; 1 Sam. xiv. 38. The second accent, merca, is here, as in other instances (Gen. xxviii. 2 ; Num. xvii. 23, etc.) used instead of metheg. — H7 without mappik as in Num. xxxii. 42 ; Zech. v. 11. — Tr.] 8 Ver. 16. — ^rviPP'^tT. The use of 7 7t£7 in the sense " to draw out " is only a return to the original mean T ~ T ing of the word. It is the same word as ooth of which words occur only here in Hebrew, to be referred to the same radical signification, as has been done, fce. g. by Fiirst (in Lt.x. ), who renders ver. 14 : 'f and they bound together for ber parched ears of corn fin bundles) : " ind declares the meaning " to reach out," after the Targ. t^ECIS, to be merely conjectural. — Ttt.] The one comes pie and doctrine. Of example, indeed, they hav« often seen too much. Everything that has ever been done for them, and which is sometimes made matter of disguised boasting, is not equal to what a single proselyte, burning with love for the king- dom of his Lord, has suffered and accomplished. Starke : " To begin a good work is glorious ; but to continue in it, notwithstanding all induce- ments to apostasy, is godly." True love can never fail in its purpose, although success may tarry long. Ruth had been married ten years in Moab, before she could say, " Thy God is my God." But now only a few harvest- days elapsed, and the favor of God, exerting itself through a genuine Israelite, overspread herT Fail- ure always has its ground in the spirit of the pur- pose. If that spirit be love rooted in God, as in Ruth, it will not be disappointed. Hence, the surest sign of love is gentle and thankful patience. Cheysostom : " Observe that what happened to Ruth is analogous with what happened to us. For she was a stranger, and had fallen into the extremest distress ; but Boaz, when he saw her, neither despised her poverty, nor contemned the lowliness of her family. So Christ took up the Church, and chose the stranger, who lacked the most necessary possessions, for his bride. But as Ruth would never have attained to such a union, had she not previously left her parents and given up people, home, and kindred, so the Church also does not become dear and deserving in the eyes of her Bridegroom, until she has left her ancestral (heathen) morals and customs." " Boaz came from Bethlehem and said unto the reapers," etc. A true believer is also the best em- ployer. He greets them, " Jehovah be with you ! " They answer, " Jehovah bless thee ! " Living faith in God is the best bond between master and work- man, preventing a wrongful use of power on the one side, and presumptuous insubordination on the other. Not as if the servants of Boaz were free from the rude manners so generally characteristic of their class ; but the just demeanor of their master, refined by humility, controlled them. Where a pious and brave spirit like that of Boaz pervades the com- munity, social questions and crises do not arise. For external laws can never restrain the inward cravings of the natural man. But where the landed proprietor, in his relations to his people, is governed by other principles than those of self-interest, and cares also for their moral and religious develop- ment ; where, further, the laborer understands that an increase in wages is not necessarily an increase of peace and happiness ; where, in a word, the con- sciousness of an omnipresent God regulates the up- rightness and care of the one, and the honesty and devotion of the other, there no artificial solutions of conflicts between capital and labor will be re- quired. Boaz lives in God, and therefore knows what duties of faith and love sre obligatory upon him. Starke : " If God be with work-people, and if they are reverently mindful of his omnipresence, they will be preserved from idleness and unfaithful- ness, and restrained from all sorts of frivolous and from a root which means (t to give," the other from one which means K to take." The first is cognate with th« Arabic dhabalha, to take, to lay hold of with the hand hence a " handfull," manipulus (cf. 11. xi. 69). The other is to be compared with the Greek Sait-avn, expense, " out- give," cf. 6i'6wjui, Sanskrit dadamiy dare. 2 [And necessary, too, if we follow the Masoretic accentu- ation, according to which Boaz himself calls Ruth at meal time: " Come hit ber." Cf. ncte under the text. — Ta.] CHAPTER H. 18-23. 33 offensive babble ; and such labor draws after it God's especial blessing." " Jehovah, the God of Israel, give thee a com- plete reward." Boaz finds that Ruth has come to glean on his field. He had not yet seen, but had heard of her. But now, seeing her diligence, but also her neediness, he yet does not speak to her as a rich man to one on whom he bestows an alms, nor as one relative to another, but, before all else, as an Israelite to one who has come to shelter her- self under the wings of Israel's God. The Israelit- ish proprietor speaks like a priest of Jehovah. Be- fore all his people, he blesses her in her confession of his God. He announces to her prophetically the reward of her love. And his word was fulfilled, for, as a church-father expresses it, " every believer, in spirit and in truth, is a prophet." Boaz pre- sents a beautiful contrast with Ruth; with him, love comes of faith. The chief and special reason why he does good to her, is, that she is a guest in Israel, a dove under Jehovah's protection, — that love has made her a believer. His religion has the uppermost place in his soul. It gives birth to his works — it makes him conscious of his duty as an Israelite. It gives him also that delicacy of percep- tion which enables him to sympathize with the anx- iety, lonesomeness, and isolation, which attend an entrance into a new land, among a new people. Only a genuine believer is truly discreet. Refinement of the heart springs only of faith. There may be a lack of courtly manners ; but the most elevated style of intercourse with men, and the truest polite- ness, are the natural outgrowth of a disposition permeated with the humility of the gospel of truth. Starke : " This also is given to pious souls by God, that being devoted to him, he often secretly, and even without their becoming aware of it, im- pels them to this or that good action." The sash; : "A meritorious person may well enough be in- formed that his merits, or whatever there be worthy of praise and love about him, are recognized and properly estimated." Verses 18-23. The Beginning of the Blessing. 18 And she took it up, and went [came] into the city : and her mother-in-law saw * what she had gleaned: and she brought forth, and gave to her that she had reserved 19 [left over] after she was sufficed [satisfied]. And her mother-in-law said unto her, Where hast thou gleaned to-day ? and where wroughtest 2 thou ? blessed be he that did take knowledge [friendly notice] of thee. And she shewed her mother-in-law with whom she had wrought, and said, The man's name with whom I wrought to-day 20 is Boaz. And Naomi said unto her daughter-in-law, Blessed be he of the Lord [Jehovah], who hath not left off his kindness to the living and to the dead.8 And Naomi said unto her, The man is near of kin [related, lit near, i. «. near, not in comparison with other relatives, but with men in general] unto us, one of our next kinsmen [one of our 21 redeemers]. And Ruth the Moabitess said, He said unto me also,4 Thou shalt keep 22 fast by my young men [by my people], until they have ended all my harvest. And Naomi said unto Ruth her daughter-in-law. It is good, my daughter, that thou go out 23 [only] with his maidens, that they meet [maltreat] thee not in any other field. So she kept fast by the maidens of Boaz to glean unto the end of barley-harvest and of wheat-harvest ; and dwelt [and then she abode, remained] with her mother-in-law. TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. p Ver. 18. — Pinion S^ril : Wright points the first word aa Hlph., N"lpn, " and she showed." " So we prefer to read, following the Vulg., Syr., and Arab. It is rather harsh with the ordinary punctuation to make njHQn the nom. to S^J7!] (so pointed by the majority of MS3.), when Ruth is the subject of all the verbs that precede and of those that follow immediately after. Two of Kennicott and De Rossi's MSS. read PTnDnVtW, which would seem to Uuply a reading M^i^lT > but while two of my own MSS. have the reading nTH^n-flN, either by first or second band, the verb is pointed as ordinarily, K^J-H* ^Q aDaence °f nW does not prove that PTiTlEn ie not an accufl^ rf. Ges. 117, 2.— Ta.] p Ver. 19. — /Yt£73? : used absolutely for " to labor," as In Prov. xxx. 13 ; Job xxili. 9. Dr. Cassel translates : a und wohej hast du (dtis) geschaffl," i. e. " and where (woher, whence, freely for wo, where) didst thou procure (iTtt?^, acquire, make, cf. Gen. xxxi. 1 ; 2 Sam. xv. 1), this ? " But, 1, in this sense the verb could hardly be left without an object ; and, 2, the word must have the same sense here in the question which it has in the answer in the next clause. Wright prefers to render " where hast thou stayed," i. e. spent the time, ^W being understood (cf. Eccles. vi 12 and the phrase iroieTy \p6vov, Acts xv. 33). But when the talk is of gleaning, it is certainly more natural for Ruth to say, '< the man with whom (on whose fields) I worked to-day is Boaz," than " the man with whom I spent my time to-day,1' 3 34 THE BOOK OF RUTH. rtc. Wright says that " Gesenius in the Lex. Man. prefers this rendering." It is not impossible that Gee. may hart varied in different editions ; but he has no such preference in the sixth edit, of his German HandworterbucA, nor in Robinson1! transl. of his Lat. Lex. Man. — In H3S, the force of n local is lost, as in il^HS — ^"PS, nb^b = Vb. — Te. [8 Ver. 20. — SVnSrTTlSI Q,*nnTIS'l - " with reference to the livinr and the dead." Accusatives of the objects to which the kindness is done, cf. Ges. 139, 2. "The verb 3T3? is here construed with a double accusative; for if HN were used as a preposition, it would hare to be jHSD as we find DVQ in Gen. xxiv. 27 " (Keil). — ?0 ^SB 13 according to Ges. (Lex. 8. v. vS3 and ]J2) is a sg. noun, 7S3Qj with the plur. sun", of first person — " our second goel." But as no such word is found elsewhere, and as there is no real difficulty in the way, the form in the text is to b» taken as script, defect, for !Q^ vS3J3, and rendered " one of (on 1T2 in this sense, cf. Ges. 154, 3, c) our redeemers." — Tb.j [4 Ver. 21. — D2 ; not "even so, i. e. may he be blessed, as you have said " (Wright), which with the following "for (^3) he said to me," etc., would make but a mercenary amen to Naomi's prayer, to Bay nothing ot the fact that by the intervention of another clause the prayer is too far away ; but, ct also ! " as we say, t( more ! I have not told you all ; for he said," etc., cf. Ges. 155, 2, a. — On the periphrastic genitives of the verse, cf. Ges. 115, 1 Ta.] EXEGBTICAL AND DOCTRINAL. Ver. 1 8 f. And her mother-in-law saw what she had gleaned. Naomi looked with astonish- ment at the large quantity brought home by Ruth ; and her amazement increased when Ruth in addi- tion produced and gave her the remains of her din- ner. To this astonishment she gives utterance by asking, " Where hast thou been '! in whose fields canst thou have been at work ? " Piety, however, does more than indulge in curiosity simply. The natural heart would have rejoiced, received, en- joyed, and inquired just as Naomi did, but withal with no thought except of self. She, on the eon trary, before her inquiries are answered, induced simply by the abundance of the gifts and the man- ifest happiness of Ruth, blesses the giver. For this she needs not to know who he is. Whoever treated Ruth kindly and loaded her with presents, must have designed to indicate his appreciation of her lot and her virtues. He must know what Ruth has done, seeing he manifested so much solicitude for her, a Moabitess. " Blessed be he who has taken special notice ' of thee ! " It had been a hard thing for her to send Ruth out for such work. The man who has treated her dear child so kindly that she comes home, not only enriched with pres- ents, but also cheerful and happy, deserves a bless- ing, and that before she knows anything more. This done, Ruth has opportunity to relate the par- ticulars of her good fortune, and finally gives the name of the man who has befriended her, namely, Boaz. She could not know what a consolation and joy the utterance of this name conveyed to Naomi. Ver. 20. Blessed be he of Jehovah, who hath not left off his kindness to the living and to the dead. This peculiar exclamation of Naomi on hearing the name of Boaz is undoubtedly worthy of more careful attention than it has hitherto re- ceived. Light is thrown upon it by a passage in the history of Abraham. Eliezer has come to Aram, to procure a wife for Isaac from among Abraham's kindred. He is aware of the great importance which his master attaches to his mis- sion. Arrived at the well outside of the city of his destination, he prays that Jehovah would so " or- der" it (N3VHi?n, Gen. xxiv. 12), that he may there meet with the one appointed to answer the wishes of his master. And, in fact, it turns out 1 ?|T*3J2 : trjo iame word used by Rath in expressing ker gratitude to Boat (ver. 10): ""iVTSnb. that the atfable maiden who draws water for him- self and his camels, is Rebecca, the daughter of Bethuel, Abraham's nephew. The desired " order- ing " has been vouchsafed, and the astonished Ehezer exclaims, " Blessed be Jehovah .... who hath not left off his kindness," etc. (3TO Sb "WpPl, precisely the same expression as in our passage). A similar providence has happened to Ruth (rHpJS ~^*\ ver. 3). Without knowing what field to select, she lights on that of Boaz. With- out knowing who he is, she is favored by him. Naomi recognizes God's hand in this, even more profoundly than Eliezer did. It is to be remem- bered that above (ch. i. 13, 20, etc.) she has re- peatedly lamented that God's hand is against her, that God has inflicted sorrow upon her. She has indicated that in her view this fate comes upon her because she — or properly her husband and sons, although she does not say this — went to Moab. In the wonderful providence which made Ruth find a friend in Boaz, the rich relative of her husband, she feels herself justified to find an indication that God i= once more gracious to her, and has not left off his kindness. If now it was through the fault of her dear departed ones that she had hith- erto experienced distress, then it also follows that, since God's goodness again manifests itself so con- spicuously, his anger against those must likewise be come to an end. For that reason, she speaks of his kindness not only to the living but also to the dead. For these had died through the same sin which had brought suffering on herself. Hence, God's help to her in her suffering, is a manifesta- tion of his unwearied grace toward both the living and the dead. But it is certainly proper to find a yet farther meaning in these words. Independently of the special history of the family of Elimelech, this utterance of Naomi concerning God's kindness to the living and the dead, must have its absolute and general application. Indeed, it must be assumed that in using it, Naomi only applied a generally employed formula to her special case. When one says of God that " He does not leave off his kind- is," he thereby praises him as the God of par- doning love ; as the God who, though He tarry long, hears at last, and does not leave the penitent forsaken. In this shorter form, the expression was appropriate in the above-mentioned passage from Abraham's history. For Eliezer is in perplexity, and knows not well how to perform his task. But CHAPTER II. 18-23. 85 it was especially appropriate in the mouth of Naomi, who had thought herself wholly forsaken of God. And hence, it would seem natural to think that if the saying had not already been cur- rent in a fixed form, Naomi would have contented herself with saying, " Jehovah who hath not left ofl" his kindness toward us," or " toward the wid- owed and the poor," etc. The kindness of God " toward the living and the dead," is the most gen- eral form of which the saying is susceptible. Now, that God does not leave off his kindness toward the living, is evident to believers from the history of every individual human being, of Israel, and of the world in general (Ps. liii. 4). The very exist- ence of the world testifies of mercy that never ceases, of love that is never embittered. But wherein is his " kindness toward the dead " mani- fested? If these words do not presuppose the immortality of the soul, as an article of Israelitish faith, what meaning can they have 1 Although Naomi, reassured by the benevolent actions of Boaz, may regain confidence in God's mercy toward herself, she surely cannot speak of them as kindness to the dead, if the dead have no longer auy being. In that case, the actions of Boaz, however viewed, are and continue to be kindness to the living only. God could indeed release the living from the consequences of the guilt of the dead ; but when in one and the same mercy He is said to show kindness to the latter as well as to the former, this can have its ground only in the pre- supposition that the grave ends but this earthly state of existence. Bertheau and Keil both ex- plain, in the same words, that God, " by his care for the widows, showed himself merciful to the husband and sons even after their death." But how can mercy be shown to such as exist no longer ? It would never occur to any one to speak or think of that as a mercy to the dead, which, in whatever light it be put, is just mercy to the living, and nothing more. No ; we have in this exclama- tion of Naomi a significant indication of the con- sciousness of the immortality of the soul which existed in Israel. It had its natural basis in that very mercy of God which does not cease. In this mercy the history of Israel in the world and in the domain of the spirit originated and lives. The Sadducaic doctrine was raised on no other founda- tion thau an Epicurean negation of history. On the enduring mercy of God toward the living and the dead, rests our Saviour's great answer (Matth. xxii. 32) : " God is not a God of the dead, but of the living." Ver. 21 f. The man is related to us. Naomi, observing the astonishment of Ruth at her exclama- tion, explains the reason of it. (The " redeemer," 7S"I2 will be treated of farther on.) That Ruth had been directed to the field of a blood-relative, seemed to her a sufficiently great mercy. For from all that Ruth had told her, it was evident that she was there well and securely situated. The fear lest Ruth might meet with rude treatment in the narvest-fields, must have been one of Naomi's chief anxieties. Ruth, having learned who Boaz is, now adds, as if she now understood the reason of it, ivhat rs not expressly brought out in the foregoing conversation, namely, that Boaz had given her 1 [In the Pentateuch "13?3 ^ u^i in every instance ixcept one (Deut. xxii. 19), where the later language would vrite rt"1372, cf- SVT for S^H. Qesenins and Fiirst lake the plural here in the same way, as used for the femi- nine *, but both Boaz (ver. 3) and Naomi (ver. 22) use the permission to keep with his people (Q"1^^??) during the whole harvest-season. And it testifies again of the loving solicitude with which Naomi, like i tender mother, thinks for Ruth, that, as soon as she hears the latter repeat the words of Boaz about keeping with his D',~]3}3 (people, masc.1), she at once rejoins : " Good, my daughter, go with his maidens OVJin???)? tnat tney injure thee not in any other field." She has in all this as yet no other thoughts than those of joy and gratitude toward God, that He has so ordered it as to direct Ruth to a relative on whose estate she can glean safely and profitably through the entire harvest, and thus provide the sustenance of both for a whole year. The great question, how to live, was by this providential intervention answered. The fear of want was dissipated and that without insult 01 shame. While all other means of help failed Naomi, she was first comforted by the love of her daughter-in-law, then upheld by her self-sacrifice, and finally saved from want by the fame of he» virtues. Amid the sorrows that befell her in Moab, Naomi, as she herself acknowledged, was not alto- gether free from blame, for she too had gone thither ; only Ruth of all the family had nothing to repent of; and it was through her that God now showed that He had not left off his kindness to the living and the dead. Ver. 23. So she kept fast by the maidens of Boaz unto the end of the harvest. It is mani- festly not without design that it is added concern- ing Ruth, that she continued with the maidens throughout the harvest-season. Her diligence did not relax from what it was the first day, although she now knew more than then. Her demeanor was modest and unassuming as ever, so that she re- turned to the field not otherwise than as she had left it. Her eyes were on the field ; and to pro- vide for her mother-in-law continued to be her only solicitude. Boaz had opportunity enough to ob- serve this. He daily saw her gentle and virtuous conduct. Externally and internally, she was no longer a stranger to him. He doubtless found opportunities to show her favors. After an ac- quaintance so long and hearty, the narrative of chap. iii. is happily introduced. HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. [" Blessed be he that took kindly notice of thee." Fuller: "Learn we from hence, upon the sight of a good deed, to bless the doer thereof, though by name unknown unto us. And let us take heed that we do not recant and recall our prayers, after that we come to the knowledge of his name ; as some do, who, when they see a laudable work, willingly commend the doer of it; but after they come to know the author's name (especially if they be prepossessed with a private spleen against him), they fall then to derogate and detract from the action, quarrelling with it as done out of osten- tation, or some other sinister end." Bp. Hall : " If the rich can exchange their alms with the poor for blessings, they have no cause to complain of an ill bargain." fern, form, which seems to show that at that time the dis tinctioD of gender was no longer neglected. D"H37? b here, as in Job i. 19, to be taken as inolnding both se'xes there in the sense '.( " young people," here in that of " ser vents." — Te.) 36 THE BOOK OF RUTH. "Kindness to the dead." The following re- marks, though based on an interpretation which Dr. Cassel decidedly, and in so far as it assumes to be exhaustive, probably justly rejects, may never- theless suggest a very true and useful line of thought. Its entire exclusion by our author is certainly an error. Nothing is more natural or universal than the feeling that kindness done to those left behind by the dead is kindness done to the dead themselves; but it may well be asked whether this feeling is rooted in anything else than the conviction, natural and instinctive, or other- wise, of the continued existence of the son! after death. Fttlleb : " To the dead. Art thou, then, a widower, who desirest to do mercy to thy dead wife ; or a widow, to thy dead husband ; or a child, to thy deceased parent ! I will tell thee how than mayest express thyself courteous. Hath thy wife, thy husband, or thy parent, any brother, or kins- man, or friends surviving 3 Be courteous to them ; and, in so doing, thy favors shall redound to the dead. Though old Barzillai be uncapable of thy favors, let young Chimham taste of thy kindness. Though the dead cannot, need not have thy mercy, yet may they receive thy kindness by aproxy, — by their friends that still are living." — Tb.] CHAPTER THIRD. Verses 1-6. Obedience in Innocence. 1 Then [And] Naomi her mother-in-law said unto her, My daughter, shall I not seek 2 rest [a resting-place] for thee, that it may he well with thee? And now U not Boaz of our kindred [ lit. our acquaintance, i. e. relative], with whose maidens thou 3 wao the whole family. Perhaps he knew verv well that Naomi had for good reasons sent Ruth to his threshing-floor, — that the other relative would not be able to act as redeemer ; but it is best for both Ruth and himself that due regard be had to formal right. Ver. 1 3 If. Abide here to-night ; he down un- til the morning. He repeats the same injunction twice. He cannot send her away in the darkness of night ; nor is he afraid to let her remain. She, for her part, hears his words, and obeys, with equal confidence. But she is only to remain till earliest dawn. Before it was possible to recognize each other clearly,3 both were up ; that it might not be known that the woman came into the floor.* By an early departure, he hopes that Ruth may escape meeting with any one, who might put injurious suspicions into circulation. He un- doubtedly speaks of "the woman," with special 1 "All know that thou art a good woman." The LXX., with singular literalness, render 7,n iltTS by yu^ 2 The Midrash(fturt Rnbba, p. 34 b), which would fain hold fast to the letter of the law, which speaks only of the brother as goett thinks that the name of the nearer relative was Tob (cf. ver. 13). As if Boaz had intended to say : " If Tob will redeem thee, let him redeem." But Ibn Ezra already found tins unsuitable, and ch. iv. maKes it wholly impossible. 8 The Talmud [Beracliorh, p. 9 a) teaches how to measure the break of day. The Mishna had decided day-break to legin when it becomes possible to distinguish between white and blue ; R. Mair, when a wolf and a dog — R. tkiba, when an ass and a wild ass — could be distinguished. ffBut others said, when one sees and recognizes another person at the distance of four ells." * [Wright . " These words express Boaz's opinion, which u had previously intimated to Ruth ; for the use of the emphasis. It would have been very unpleasant to Boaz to have people connect himself with any wo- man in a suspicious way ; but scandalous rumors of this kind, with Ruth for their object, would have been exceedingly injurious. To say nothing of the fact that an undeserved stain would have been fixed on the good name of Ruth, it would have rendered it very difficult for him to prosecute her claims in Bethlehem.5 But as she is about to go, he bids her first spread out her cloak or shawl, into which he empties six measures of barley,6 to be carried home to her mother-in-law. What is his intention in this act 1 That, as he says, she " come not empty to her mother-in-law." A mere sign of his friendly dis- position, it cannot have been ; for Ruth will tell her all that he has said. He must have had other reasons for not wishing her to go away empty. If notwithstanding every precaution, Ruth was recog- nized when she returned from the threshing-Hour, her appearance, laden with grain, would be less suspicious, than if she were met dressed up as a fine lady. Thus laden, it was usual to see her come from the fields of Boaz. Thus, the last occasion of possible suspicion was cut off. Still, the whole significance of the proceeding is not exhausted with this. Decided stress is laid on the tact that he gave her six measures of barley. When Ruth comes home, and Naomi asks, " Who art thou, my daughter," i. e. " how comest thou ? as one whose claim has been acknowledged, or otherwise t " she informs her mother-in-law of all that Boaz said, and expressly adds, what the reader has already been informed of, and what if only the liberality of the giver came into consideration, Naomi could see without being told : " these six measures of barley gave he me." She evidently deems it important that Naomi should know, that he gave her just six measures of grain. The old Jewish expositors have made all sorts of allegorical attempts with this " six." They are undoubtedly so far right, that apart from the friendly custom of sending vis- itors away enriched with "gifts for their families, Boaz, on this occasion, meant to give a hint to Na- omi of the result of Ruth's application. This re- sult was, that in any event Ruth would obtain a " resting-place." The number six is the symbol of labor and service, which is followed bv seven, the time of rest. Whoever has served six years, is released in the seventh. Naomi receives what she may take as an intimation that the time has come, when after long labor she must let Ruth go out free. The day of rest is at hand. Ver. 18. And she said, Remain quiet [cf. Gen. xxxviii. 11], my daughter. Ruth is to remain at home, like an affianced bride. From both words article (the i. e. this woman) forbids us to suppose that they were actually addressed to Ruth. The Targumist, probably influenced by this reason, and considering it un likely that Boaz should have been alone in the threshing floor, renders : " and Boaz said to his young men " etc — Tr.) 6 The Mishna (Jebamoth, ii. 8| determined that one pus. pected of previous intercourse with a foreigner, even though she were a convert, was not allowed to perf >rm the duty of levirate marriage. 6 The measure is not given ; the expression is simply ■ t( six of barley." It made a considerable load, for he had to put it on her. The allegorical interpretation of the Mid- rash (in the Targum) brings out six descendants of Ruth, namely, David, Daniel, "the companions " (Dan. i. 6) and " the king, Messias." Ruth Rabba, p. 34 a. counts eight descendants with six prominent characteristics. In thil case, Hezekiah and Josiah are added to the others already named. 1-t THE BOOK OF RUTH. and actions of Boaz, Naomi perceives that he will not rest, until he makes good his promise. This fery day will decide the issue of the matter. And whatever that issue may be, it will not be without a blessing. " The man will not rest, until he have provided for thee a resting-place." HOMILFTTfUt AND PRACTICAL. "And now, my daughter, fear not; I will do to tliee all that thou sayest." The faith of Boaz is such as leads to action. He not only instructs, by his prophetic words to Ruth (ch. ii. 12), and by the pious spirit that breathes in his intercourse with his servants ; he not only gives, moved by sympa- thy sprung from faith ; he not only enters into the necessities and anxieties of Ruth ; but he has also a clean heart, in which no impure thought arises, aud stands as firm in the hour of temptation and secrecy as when the eyes of all Bethlehem are upon him. He is an Israelite not only before man, but also before God alone. And it was because he did not forget, what man is naturally so prone to for- get, that God sees him, that he is so mindful of his duty. Hypocrites, when alone, are different from what they appear in company ; Israelites like Boaz feel and act m the presence of the all-knowing God alone, not otherwise than they would if all the 6tars of heaven and all the creatures of earth could testify against them. Boaz showed an active faith when he gave no place to temptation. Pious and offenseless as he was when Ruth came to claim the right of the poor, he is equally so now when she asks for her right of redemption. Then the ques- tion was only about a few ears of grain, now it involves his own person and estate. Then he was kind in the presence of Ruth's humility, now he is humble in the presence of her claim to be righted. Then he forgot herself in the fact that she had left the land of Moab, now he forgets that she had evi r owned another law than that of Israel. Then his tender delicacy made Ruth assured of her safety in his fields; now that same delicacy understands that since she has come to him, the right she claims must be fulfilled. He might have released himself by the letter of the law to which she appeals, — there was a nearer relative ; but his faith is an active faith. The question was one of right, noi of ingenious play with the letter. The claimant must be satisfied ; and he does what he promised to do. Freely and purely, full of that love which is the characteristic of faith, he keeps himself and keeps his word. People speak of a man's " word of honor ; " it were more correct to speak of " the word of a Christian," " the word of a confessor of God." For only the Christian does not walk in the crooked ways of intrigue and false advocates. Starke : " Christian, behold the kindness and gentleness of Boaz ! Will it then be possible that God, when thou art in need, will send thee empty away ? Never ! his generous hand is never closed. Only open Him thy heart, and divine gifts flow in upon thee, without any action on thy part." The same : " A Christian must be upright in word and deed." CHAPTER FOURTH. Verses 1-12. The Israelite without Guile. 1 Then went Boaz [And Boaz went] up to the gate, and sat him down there : and behold, the kinsman [redeemer] of whom Boaz spake ' came [passed] by ; unto whom he said, Ho, such a one ! turn aside, sit down here. And he turned aside, and sat 2 down. And he took ten men of the elders of the city, and said, Sit ye down here. 3 And they sat down. And he said unto the kinsman [redeemer], Naomi, that is come again out of the country [territory] of Moab, selleth [sold] a parcel of land 4 [the field-portion], which ivas our brother Elimelech's : And I thought to advertise thee [determined to inform thee 2], saying, Buy it before the inhabitants [the sitters, i. e. those present8], and before the elders of my people. If thou wilt redeem it, redeem it ; but if thou 4 wilt not redeem it, then tell me, that I may know : for there is none to redeem it besides thee ; and I am alter thee. And he said, I will redeem it. 5 Then said Boaz. What day thou buyest s the field of the hand of Naomi, thou must buy [thou buyest] it. also of Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of the dead, to raise up 6 the nam,, of the dead upon his inheritance. And the kinsman [redeemer] said, I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar [injure] mine own inheritance : redeem thou my right [my redemption, ;. e. that which it is my right or duty to redeem] to thyself; for I 7 cannot redeem it. Now this was the manner [custom] in former time in Israel concerning [in cases of 1 redeeming and concerning [in cases of ex-] changing, for to confirm all things [every matter] ; a man plucked off his shoe, and gave it to hia 8 neighbour: and this was a [omit: a] testimony6 in Israel. Therefore [And] the kinsman [redeemer] said unto Boaz, Buy it for thee. So [And] he drew off las CHAPTER IV. 1-12. it 9 shoe. And Boaz said uuto tlie elders, and unto all the people, Ye are witnesses this day, that I have bought all that U'as Elimeleeh's, and all that was Chilion's and 10 Mahlon's, of the hand" of Naomi. Moreover, Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of Mah- lon, have I purchased [acquired]7 to be my wife, to raise up ihe name of the dead upon his inheritance, that the name of the dead be not cut off from among his breth- 11 ren, and from the gate of his place: ye are witnesses this day. And all the people that were in the gate, and the elders, said. We are witnesses. The Lord [Jehovah] make ihe woman that is come [that cometh] into thine house like Rachel and like Leah, which two did build the house of Israel : and do thou worthily [lit. make thou 12 strength] in Ephratah and be famous [and get a name] in Beth-lehem: And If* thine°house be like the house of Pharez [Perets, Perez], whom Tamar bare unto Judah, of the seed which the Lord [Jehovah] shall give thee of this young woman. TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. [1 Ver. 1. — Sc. " to Ruth,'' ch. iii. 12. ~IK?S is the accus. after "127, cf' Gen- xix- M ' xxii1- 16-~0n the *""* JTVO and POtt?. cf. Ges. 48, 6; 72, Rem. 3; 69,3,2; on ~ID*1, 72, Rem. 4. — Tb.] t t : ' "T [2 Ver. 4. — Lit. " And I said. I will uncover thine ear," i. t. I determined to inform thee. VHON, is the same In sense as the fuller >3b2 THHS, Gen. *™- 17i etc-> cf- Ex- "■ U< etc- lt miSht be supposed to refer to what Boaz said to Ruth, ch. iii. 12 f. '; but asRuttJis not spoken of until the next verse, this is less likely. The expression " to uncover the ear,'' originated in the practice of removing the hair that hangs over the ear, for the purpose of whispering a secret to a person. In general it means to communicate anything confidentially, but is here used in the wider sense of impart- ing information. The suflVx of the second per. in TJDtS is perhaps best explained by regarding the whole clause after TTIQS as mentally uttered by Boaz, while considering how to proceed in the matter of Ruth. In this consideration, the nearer kinsman was present to his mind, and to him he addressed the conclusion, which he now only rehearses, " I will inform thee,"' etc. — Tr.] [3 Ver. 4. — So Dr. Cassel. Keil : " Many translate n,2tL,!'n by ' inhabitants,' sc. those of Bethlehem. But although according to ver. 9, a goodly number of the people, besides the elders, were present, this can scarcely be conceived to have been the case with the inhabitants of Bethlehem generally, so as to meet the requirement of "T22. Nor would the in- habitants have been named before, but as in ver. 9, after, the elders as principal witnesses [but cf. ver. 11]. for these reasons 2t£7> is to be taken in the sense • to sit,' and D^tt?5!! is to be understood of the same persons who form the subject of !Qt£?s 1 in ver. 2, the elders. The following ^l?? T221 is to be taken explicatively : before those who sit here, even before the elders of my people.'' — Tr.] [4 Ver. 4. — The Text. Recept. reads bS2\ third per., concerning which Keil remarks, that "it strikes one as singu- lar, since one expects the second person, vS2fl, which is not only read by the LXX., but also by a number of MSS., and seems to be required by the context. It is true, the common reading may (with Sebastian Schmidt, Carpzov, and others) be defended, by assuming that in uttering this word Boaz turned to the elders, and so spoke of the redeemer aa of a third person : 'if he, the redeemer here, will not redeem ; ' but as this is immediately followed by a resumption of the direct address, this supposition — to our mind at least — seems very artificial." — The substitution by the Keri of nj?!S1 for VTK1 is not necessary, cf. Ges. 127, 3 b. — Tr] t : ■• : t -■ : [5 Ver. 5. — Ni"V2r?. Keil : " According to sense and connection, this form must be the second per. masc. ; the ** at the end was either added by a slip of the pen, or it arose from an original 1, so that we must read either rTOp (with the Keri) without an accusative, or, with an accusative, ijT2!7, ' taou DUVest •'•' " — Tb.] [6 Ver. 7. — iTTO.FI. Gesenius and Fiirst define this word here as "custom having the force of law," "attested usage." Dr. Cassefs rendering, Wiisstkum, is probably intended to convey the same idea (cf. Hoffmann's Wortcrb.). But It Beems better to take the word here in its proper sense of " attestation," as in E. V. So the ancient versions, Bertheav. , Keil, etc. Cf. the root "TO7. — Tr.] [7 Ver. 10. — The Heb. H2p is less specific than our word "purchase." It means to obtain, to acquire; which may be done in a variety of ways. The rendering " purchased " is unfortunate in this particular case, as it tends to convey the erroneous idea that Ruth was treated as a chattel, or at least as a sort of ndseripta gltba. The same word is used also in vers. 4, 5, and 9, where there is no particular objection to represent it in English by " buy," although " ac- quire " would be preferable for the sake of uniformity. — Tr.] EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL. Ver. 1 . And Boaz went up to the gate, and Beated himself there. Very early, even before Ruth with her burden of barley had vet started for home (eh. iii. 15), Boaz, energetic in deed as he was kind in word, took the wav to Bethlehem. It was necessary to set out so early, in order to be sure of reaching the gate before the person with whom he wished to speak, and who like himself was probably in the habit of coming to the city from the country. The gate, it is well known, waa the place where judicial business was transacted and markets were held (Deut. xxi. 19 IF. ; cf. Ps 46 THE BOOK O-t RUTH. ;xxvii. 5). This is still the case in the East. In Zach. viii. 16, the prophet says : "Judge truth and the judgment of peace in your gates;" on which Jerome (ed. Migne, vi. p. 1474) remarks : " It is asked, why among the Jews the gate was the place for administering justice. The judges sat in the gates that the country-people might not be com- pelled to enter the cities and suffer detriment. Sitting there, they could hear the townsmen and country-people as they left or entered the city; and each man, his business finished, could return at once to his own house." At the gate was the proper forum ; and it is certainly more satisfactory than all other explanations of the Latin word, to derive it, notwithstanding the later central situa-! tion of the place to which it was applied, from the j archaic fora, gate, whence foras, cf. biforis, septiforis. Certain Some-one, come and seat thyself. We have here the whole course of an ancient legal procedure before us, with its usages and forms. The fact that Boaz sat at the gate, plainly declared i that he sought a judicial decision. When the per- son for whom he waited made his appearance, he made no delay to seat himself as requested, for the language addressed to him was a formal judicial sum- mons. His name is not mentioned. Peloni almoin is a formula like our German N. N. [used as in Eng- lish we now generally use a simple or " blank." j — Tr.] In former times.it was customary among us, in legal documents, to use in the same way Dames that were very common, such as Hans, etc. (cf. my Erf. Bilder u. Brauche,j>. 29). The un- derlying idea of Peloni almoni is a different one from that of SfTva. (cf. Matth. xxvi. 18) or nuidam. It intimates that the name is unknown and hidden. It conveys the idea of anonymus, in every sense of the word. There is an ancient explanation to the effect that the name of the first god is not given, because he was unwilling to raise up a name for his deceased relative. This is the reason, probably, why the LXX. here have Kpitpte, " hidden one." Without maintaining this, but even supposing that the narrator omitted the name merely because he did not know it, it remains none the less an instructive fact that he who was so anxious for the preservation of his own inheritance, is now not even known by name. Ver. 2. He took ten men of the elders of the city. That the number of elders in any city was not necessarily limited to ten, may be inferred from Judg. viii. 14 ; but ten were sufficient to form a college of witnesses. In post-biblical times it was a maxim that an assembly for religious worship (ml?, "congregation"), must consist of ten per- sons (cf. the Jerus. Targum on Ex. xii. 4) ; but the attempt of the Mishna (Sanhedrin, i. 6) to ground this biblically on the supposed fact that the ten faithless spies are spoken of as a congregation (Num. xiv. 27), can hardly be deemed satisfactory. The custom, however, of selecting exactly ten men for such service as was here required, was so old and well-established among the Jews, that the term ]^3!D, " number," by itself, meant ten persons. 1 ^3HnS. It is only necessary to refer to the Com- mentaries of Bertheau and Keil, to perceive in what respects 1 have deeme-i it needful to depart from their expositions of khis passage. Benary (dc Hrbr&orttm Leviratu, Berlin, 1835, p 23 ff ), following Jewish example, has made Boaz a nephew, and the Peloni a brother, of Elimelech. But no peat stress is to be laid on this tradition. nW, brother, u our passage itself shows, is often used where the rela- ionship is more distant than that which exists between Others, it is true, as we learn further on, had assem bled about the two relatives ; but the ten elden formed, so to speak, the necessary official witnesses. Ver. 3. The inheritance of onr brother1 Elimelech, Naomi has sold. The expositors, with one consent, demand by what right Naomi could sell the inheritance of Elimelech, since the Mosaic law contains nothing to indicate that it considered the widow as the rightful heir of her deceased husband. But this view of the law is incorrect.- The whole system of leviratical marriage presupposes that the title of the deceased husband's property vests in the widow. When a man dies childless, leaving a widow, the brother of the de- ceased is to marry her, in order " that the first-born may enter upon the name of the dead," ;'. e. that the name of the dead may continue to be connected with the inheritance which he has left behind, for in no other sense can the expression " to raise up the name of one " have any meaning in Israel ; and, accordingly, in ver. 5 the words of the law, " to raise up the name of the dead," are supplemented by the addition, " upon his inheritance." But in case the brother-in-law refused to marry the widow, and consequently refused to raise up the name of his brother, he thereby also gave up all right to en- ter on the inheritance of his brother. The duty and the right were indissolubly connected. The law would have been illusory, if the brother, notwith- standing his refusal to marry the widow, had ob- tained the inheritance. In that case, possession remained with the widow, who, albeit childless, carried within herself, so to speak, the embryonic right of the heir. Of the symbolical act of drawing off the shoe, we shall speak farther on. But it is to be noted here that when the widow drew off the shoe of the recusant brother-in-law, she thereby declared that he must withdraw his foot from the possessions of his brother. Naomi was a widow. But although she herself says (ch. i. 12) that she is too old to become a wife, even this fact gives no right to her property to any blood-relative, without marriage. Undoubtedly, the name of her husband would vanish from his estate as soon as she died ; but until then it re- mained upon it, and Naomi had the same right and power to dispose of the property as the law gave to the husband himself. Now, in Lev. xxv. 25, we read : " If thy brother become impover- ished and sell his possession, let his nearest blood- relative (3~'i^L' "* '£W) come to him, and redeem that which his brother sold." This contingency was here actually come to pass. Naomi had be- come impoverished, — she had sold. The name of Elimelech was still on the property : consequently the law demanded its redemption, and directed this demand to the nearest blood-relative. It is on the basis of this prescription, that Boaz begins his negotiation with the unnamed kinsman, in the interest of Naomi. The sale of the land had hitherto not been men- tioned. Nothing was said about it in the conver- sation between Ruth and Boaz on the threshing- floor. The fact that Boaz knew of it, confirms the sons of the same parent. Blood-relatives, and even friends, are also t( brothers." The very law, by which the usage now under consideration is sanctioned, uses the term in a wider sense, Deut. xxv. 5 (cf. Hengst. Pentateuch, ii. 83 ff., Ryland's ed.). 2 Compare the later determinations in the Mishna (Jeha- moth, 4, 3), the spirit of which, at least, confirms what is Baid in the text. Both Rabbinical schools admit that • wife can sell. CHAPTER IV. i-12. 47 surmise that before Ruth came to him with her great request, he and Naomi had already had some communication with each other. These communi- cations, having reference to the sale of the land, and the necessity of its redemption according to law, may be regarded as having ultimately led to the proposition made by Naomi in ch. iii. 1 . Naomi advanced from the redemption of the land to that of the widow, just as Boaz d"ns here in his negotia- tion with the nearer kinsman. Ver. 4. Buy it before these who sit here, and before the elders of my people. Boaz had said to Ruth, that he would ask the nearest kins- man whether he " will redeem thee ; and if not, then will I redeem thee." But this is not the way in which he opens his address to the man. He does not mention the name of Ruth at first. He . desires of him apparently only the redemption of the land. This testifies to the uncommon deli- cacy of legal proceedings at that time, as con- ducted by pious and believing persons. The cause is entirely saved from appearing as if Boaz had begun it only in behalf of the woman. Nor does Boaz put the nearer kinsman under any constraint ; for he says at once : " If thou wilt not redeem it, then will I, for I come next." He admonishes the other of the duty imposed on him by the law, by the recognition of his own ; while, on the other hand, he facilitates the other's decision, by inti- mating his readiness to render the service de- manded, if the other should prefer to be excused. He says nothing of Ruth's connection with the matter. He leaves it to the kinsman himself to take the open and generally known relations be- tween Naomi and Ruth into consideration, and to shape his answer accordingly. His address is gentle, noble, and discreet. It brings no complaint that the kinsman as nearest relative has not troub- led himself about the matter in hand. It asks nothing of the other, that he is not willing to do himself. It is sufficiently discreet to wait and see how far the other will limit his duty. And withal, the interest and decision with which he urges the matter to a conclusion, make the transaction a forcible example to the people, teaching them to make the law a living spirit, and openly to ac- knowledge the duties which it imposes. And he said, I will redeem. The kinsman, therefore, acknowledges the right of Naomi to sell, and also his own duty to redeem. But he thinks only of the land. He answers the question of Boaz only according to the literal import of its terms. By saying, "I will redeem," he declares his readi- ness to buy back the land left by Elimelech, but his words do not indicate whether he is conscious of the further duties therewith connected. Boaz may have expected that he would make further inquiry concerning them ; but as he did not do this, Boaz could not rest contented with the brief reply, " I will redeem," seeing that he was chiefly Bolicitous about the future of Ruth, and that the duty to redeem not only the land but also the widow must be expressly acknowledged before all who were present. Hence he says farther : Ver. 5. In the day that thou buyest the field of Naomi, thou buyest it also of Ruth the Moabitess, .... to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance. With these words, the law of entailment as recognized in Is- rael, becomes perfectly clear. Elimelech had left ions, who, had they lived, would have been the i This view of the reason of the refusal is also indicated oy the Midrash (Ruth Rabba 35 a). Le Clerc is very far from the right understanding. Other opinions, to which he proper heirs. But they died. Now, if Ruth had not come from Moab with Naomi, Naomi would have been the sole possessor of the land. Having no means to cultivate it, she could hare sold it and the blood-relative could have bought it back without taking upon himself levirate duties, sine? her age rendered it improbable that they wouk answer the purpose for which they were instituted. But Ruth did come ; and having entered into the Israelitish community, she also possesses Israelit- ish rights. She is, consequently, the heiress of Mahlon ; and no one can redeem her inheritance, without at the same time providing for the contin- uance of the name of the dead. In her case, con- siderations like those which applied to Naomi, have no existence. Her husband Mahlon, whether he were the younger or the older brother, was an heir. Since Orpah remained in Moab, the claims of Chilion as heir, were also transferred to the es- tate of his brother. Separate possessions of their own, the sons of Elimelech probably had not, as long as they lived in Israel. Consequently, the land was the joint possession of Naomi and Ruth. And just because Ruth was part proprietress, the obli- gation existed not to let the names of Elimelech and Mahlon perish. The inheritance alone could not, therefore, be redeemed, as the anonymous rel- ative proposed to do. Ver. 6. And the redeemer said, I cannot re- deem it for myself, lest I injure mine own in- heritance. Thus far the kinsman has accurately acknowledged his duty as prescribed by the Mosaic law. He is ready to redeem the land. Nor does he challenge the right of Ruth, as wife of the de- ceased Mahlon. Why then does he think that the performance of levirate duty to her will damage his own inheritance ? For although accepted even by the most recent expositors, the idea that he is influenced by the thought that the land which he is to buy with his own money will one day belong not to himself, but to his son by Ruth, has no great probability. There is something forced in an exegesis that makes a father regard it as a per- sonal detriment and injury when his own son en- ters upon an inheritance. Nor could the kinsman justify himself with a ground so external, before the assembly present. No ; as he has hitherto not failed to honor the requirements of the law, it is to be assumed that he deems his present refusal also to be not in contravention of its provisions. Boaz here expressly speaks of Ruth as the " Moabitess." It must be her Moabitish nationality that forms the ground, such as it is, of the kinsman's refusal. Elimelech's misfortunes had been popularly as- cribed to his emigration to Moab ; the death of Chilion and Mahlon to their marriage with Moab- itish women. This it was that had endangered their inheritance. The goel fears a similar fate.1 He thinks that he ought not to take into his house a woman, marriage with whom has already been visited with the extinguishment of a family in Is- rael. To him, the law against intermarriage with Moabites, does not appear to be suspended in favor of Ruth. He is unwilling to endanger his own family and inheritance ; and as Ruth is a Moab itess.'he holds it possible to decline what in any other case he would deem an imperative duty. The man appears to be superstitious, and de- voted to the letter of the law. He sees only its formal decisions, not the love that animates it. He fears; but love knows no fear. From anxious refers, come no nearer to it. Cf. Selden, Uxor Hebroa, lib. L cap. 9. 18 THE BOOK OF RUTH. regard to the lower, he overlooks the higher duty. He thinks of Moab ; whereas Ruth has taken refuge under the wings of the God of Israel. He loes not comprehend the difference of the condi- tions under which Mahlnn once married her, and those under which he is now called upon to act toward her. He knows not how to distinguish times and spirits. The legal severity which he would bring to bear on the noble woman, recoils on himself. He is unwilling to endanger his name and inheritance, and — history does not even know his name. While the guilt of Elimelech and his sons is removed through the love of Ruth, so that their name survives, his lovelessness toward Ruth is visited by namelessness.1 What a priceless lesson is hereby taught ! What an honor does it award to love, and what a punishment does it hold out to the superstitious Pharisee ! Ver. 7 f. Formerly,- in cases of redemption and exchange, a man pulled off his shoe and gave it to the other. The symbolism of the shoe, as it existed in Israel and among other nations, has been so wretchedly misunderstood and perverted, especially in the books of a man whose distorted and dishonest compilations will be injurious to many (Nork's Mythd. der Volkssagen, p. 459, etc.), that it will be worth the trouble to explain it, at least in outline. The shoe is the symbol, first, of motion and wan- dering ; secondlv, of rest and possession. The fol- lowing mav serve t" illustrate the first of these signi- fications : When Israel is directed to eat the Passover in a state of readiness for instant departure, among other specific injunctions, is this : " your shoes on your feet " (Ex. xii. 1 1 ). With reference to the wan- derings through the desert, it is said : " thy shoe did not grow "Id " (Deut. xxix. 4 (5)), etc.3 The wanderings of the gods form a singular feature of the old heathenism, in its search after God. The fact of their passage was often supposed to be at- tested by the footprints they left behind ; but in Chemmis in Egypt, a blessing ensued (as Herodo- tus tells us, ii. 91) whenever the gigantic shoe of Perseus was seen. It was not the shoe, but the god, who brought the blessing. Heathendom, es- pecially Germanic heathendom, continued to search and wander even after death. The dead, when buried, were provided with an helsko, or shoe, for the journey they bail to make (Grimm, Mi/th. 795). Even until" comparatively recent times, there were popular legends concerning deceased persons who lament that they received no shoe (Stober, Elsus- sische Sagrn, p. 34). In certain districts, any last token of respect shown the dead is, perhaps to this verv day, called " the dead-man's shoe." The sor- rowful idea expressed in the practice was that the 1. id must be helped on in his last journey. Sim- rock's explanation concerning good works is en- tirely erroneous [Myth. 154). The passage of Pope Gregory on Ex. xii. 11, means something al- together different. Gregory intends there to refer to tlie example of pious persons who have gone be- l. ic. The Christian Church opposed, rather than favored, the heathen usage. i Tbe Greeks also spoke of an oTkos aviowfj-os yevofievos, In case a family died out without leaving heirs to its name, Cf. hoeratest xix. 35. s 72^35 /. Formerly it was customary to pull off the «hoe on every occasion of exchange or barter; now, i. e. at the time when the writer of our Book lived, it was done only in the special case contemplated in Deut. xxv. 7 ff., and then it was removed not by the man himself, but by the Of cognate and yet very different signification are certain passages of the Talmud and the Mid- rash (Jerus. Talmud, Kelajim, § 9, p. 23, b; Midrash Rabba,§ 100, p. 88a), where the aged teacher desires that when he is buried sandals may be fastened to his feet, in order that he may be able to follow after the Messiah as soon as He comes. Luther gave utterance to the saying : " Tie a pair of sandals to his door, and let them be called ' Surge et ambu/a.' " Hence also the still current popular superstition of throwing the shoe on New Year's day, the alighting of which with its toe pointing outward, is considered to be indicative of departure (cf. my Weihnnchten, p. 273). The shoe was the symbol, secondly, of rest and possession. With the shoe one trod the earth, whence on holy ground it must be pulled off; over it, one had complete control, and hence it symbol- ized the power of the possessor over his possession. In the Psalms (lx. 10 (8) ; cviii. 10 (9)), God casts his shoe over Edom. Rosenmuller ( Morgenland, n. 48.3) has already directed attention to the practice of the Abyssinian Emperor, who throws his shoe over that which he desires to have. That which in ecclesiastical architecture is called Marien- srhith * points to nothing else than the domin- ion ascribed by the mediaeval church to the mother of God. The custom of kissing the pope's slipper, likewise refers to his dominion. The idea of the old Scandinavian legend, according to which, at the last day the wolf finally submits to Widar. who sets his shoe upon him, is that of the victory of the new earth over the old wicked enemy. The shoe symbolized a possession which one ac- tually had, and could tread with his feet, at pleas- ure. Whoever entered into this possession con- jointly with another, put his foot into the same shoe, as in old German law was done by an adopted child and the wife (Grimm, Eechtsaiterth. p. 155). Hence, when in our passage the god. pulled off his shoe anil gave it to Boaz, he therewith surrendered to him all claims to the right of possession which would have been his had he fulfilled its conditions. Nor has that use of the shoe, of which the law speaks, in connection with the leviratical institute, any different meaning. The widow, whose brother- in-law refuses to marry her, is authorized to pull off his shoe, and to spit in his face. His house, hence- forth, is " the house of him that hath had his shoe pulled off." Had he performed his duty, he would have set his shoe upon the inheritance of his brother (including wife and estate) as his own. But hav- ing contemned this, he undergoes the shame of having Ins shoe drawn off by the widow. The shame of this consisted in the fact that he must submit to it at the hands of the woman. A man might pull off his own shoe, and hand it to another, without suffering degradation. This was done in every instance of exchange. It was but the exercise of his manly right. But when the shoe was taken from him, he was, as it were, declared destitute of every capacity and right toward the widow syrubol- ized'by the shoe, and in tin's consisted the disgrace. Now, although in our passage, strictly speaking, woman. The present case does not fall under the latter head (Cf. the lnlrod. p. 8). 3 [ Word.nvonh : The returning prodigal in the gospel has shoes put on his feet (Luke xv. 22): he is reinstated io the lost inheritance. We, wnen reconciled to God in Christ, have our "feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace" (Eph. vi. 15). — Tr.) » [Mariensckuh, "Our Lady's slipper." A sculptured rep. resentation of the flower or plant usually called "Lady's slip per? " — Tr.1 CHAPTER IV. 1-12. 49 ■ similar case to that contemplated by the law in Dent, xxv. 7 ff. occurs — for the kinsman refuses to marry Ruth — yet the ceremony of the kins- man's* delivering his shoe to Boaz was significant only of his simple, voluntary renunciation of his rights. On the one hand, Ruth was not his sister- in-law : and although custom, in accordance with the spirit of the Mosaic law, acknowledged the duty even in cases of more distant relationship, the letter of the law did not reach him. On the other hand, — and this was undoubtedly a point of real weight. — his refusal to marry Ruth was itself based on regard for the law, albeit narrow and unspiritual ; fur from bis readiness to redeem the land, it is but jfuir to infer that he would have been equally ready to do his duty by her, had she been an Israelitess. Inasmuch, therefore, as he thinks it possible to separate the redemption of the land from that 'of the woman, he comes off more honorably than would under ordinary circum- stances have been the case. His language refers explicitly only to the estate, which had the effect of lessening the dishonor done to Ruth, especially as Eoaz declares himself ready to take his place Finally, according to ch. iii. 18, Ruth was not present at the negotiation, the representation of Josephus to the contrary notwithstanding.1 Ver. 9 f. And Boaz said, Ye are witnesses this day that I have acquired (do acquire), etc. The kinsman having drawn off his shoe, in token of his renunciation of his rights as nearest god, Boaz arose, and declared, fully and formally, that it e acquires everything that belonged to Elime- lech, and (as is now expressed at full length) every- thing that belonged to Chilion and Mahlon. He acquires it from Naomi ; but as he cannot acquire it without also marrying the wife of Mahlon, as Ruth is here for the first time called, — for which reason he made special mention of the possession of the sons, — he adds that he takes her " to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance, in order that his name be not cut off from among his brethren, and from the gate of his place." In these words, he thoroughly, albeit indirectly, re- futed the motive by which the anonymous kins- man was actuated in his refusal. When the name of a brother is to be rescued from oblivion among his own people, all scruples vanish. The fulfill- ment of a duty so pious, lifts a man up beyond the reach of fear. Boaz apprehends no damage to his own inheritance ; but hopes rather, while taking Ruth under his wings, to repair the evil which the migration to Moab has inflicted upon the house of Elimelech. This pious magnanimity, this humble acceptance of duty, this readiness to act where the nearer kinsman hesitates, and this true insight of faith, which looked not at the birthplace of Ruth, but at what she had done for Israel and now was in Israel, and thus dissolved all superstitious fear in the divine wisdom of love, win for him also the approbation of all present. The public voice spoke well of Ruth ; all knew how loving, virtuous, and self-sacrificing she was (cf. ch. ii. 11; iii. 11). Hence, not only the elders who had been sum- moned as witnesses, but also all the people, uni- tedly invoked the blessing of God upon him. 1 Although, singularly enough, Grotius has adopted it. In the mauuer in which the law against the recusant goel was executed in the times of the second temple, cf. the Mishna, Jebamolh, cap. xii. 2 [It is perhaps superfluous to remark, that our author ntends this as an interpretation, not as a translation. His ranslation is bracketed in the text. — Ta.] 4 Ver. 11. Jehovah make the woman that cometh into thy hou~:e, like Rachel and Leah, which two did build the house of Israel. From Rachel and Leah came the tribes of Israel. As these built the house of Jacob, so, say the peopla may Ruth build thy house. The extent of tW. general delight, may be measured by the fact that it wishes for Ruth the Moabitess a blessing equal to that of the wives of Jacob who were Israelitesses. The Jewish expositors point out that Rachel stands before Leah, although younger and less blessed with children, and although the tribe of Judah, and Bethlehem with it, descended from Leah. It is probable that the whole sentence was already at that time, the usual formula of blessing in Israel- itish marriages. However that may be, the tradi- tions of Israel made Rachel more prominent than Leah. Rachel was Jacob's first and best beloved Rachel took away her father's idol images. As she suffered many sorrows up to her death, so the prophet represents her as weeping bitterly after death for her children (Jer. xxxi. 15; Matth. ii. 18). It was Rachel, too, who after she had been long unfruitful, as Ruth in Moab, had brought forth most of those sons in whom Jacob was most highly blessed. But the people desire not merely that many children may adorn her house ; they proceed : '^D Hit'^?, may she make, produce, strength, ability, heroism.2 They wish that sons may be born, who, like Boaz, shall be heroes of strength (cf. ch. ii. 1 ), so that " great names " may proceed out of Bethlehem.3 The blessing was most abundantly fulfilled. Ver. 12. And be thy house like the house of Perez. After the general comes the special wish, which in tins instance is of peculiar impor- tance. Boaz was descended from Perez, and Perez was the son of Tatnar. Now, although the history of Tamar (Gen. xxxviii.) is not as pure as that of Ruth, it yet contained features which might have served as precedents to Boaz. Tamar's first two husbands had died on account of their sins, and Judah, their father, would not give her the third, " lest he also die as his brethren." This was the same motive as that which must have influenced the nearer kinsman. The very fact that he had this history before him, confirms the conclusion we have already reached concerning the grounds of his refusal. Tamar suffered injustice, her right being withheld from her. The same thing happened to Ruth. No one thought of her rights, until she laid claim to them. Tamar did the same, albeit not in the pure and graceful manmr adopted by Ruth. Nevertheless, Judah, when he found him- self outwitted by her, said : " She is more righteous than I," thus acknowledging his injustice. Boaz had not been guilty of any such injustice ; but he felt it his duty, in behalf of the members of his family, to see that that which had hitherto been neglected was neglected no longer. His proceed- ing involved an admission that Ruth had not received what was her rightful due in Israel. The confession of injustice draws after it a blessing; especially here in the case of Boaz, whose kind and noble conduct is beyond all praise. 3 These great names, as sprung from Boaz, would of course redound to his honor. To be nameless was to be fameless, as is illustrated in the Peloni. The Greeks alsc used dvuyv^o; as the opposite of kAcivos, t. e. in the sens* of fameless, like Dtf ^7"2. Cf. Schleussner, Lex. en tht LXX., i. 315. 50 THE BOOK OF RUTH. HOMIT.KTICAL AND PRACTICAL. " Ye are imtnesses this day that I take Ruth the Moabitess to be my wife." What a noble pair con- front each other in the persons of Ruth and Boaz ! They are types for all times of the mutual relations of man and woman. The remark of Pascal, that the Old Testament contains the images of future joy, is here especially applicable. Ruth acts to the utmost of her power out of love : Boaz is a man of unfeigned faith. Ruth takes voluntary duties upon herself from love to Naomi : Boaz meets these duties in the spirit of obedience to the commands of God. Ruth, moved by love, dares to risk the delicate reserve of woman ; and Boaz offsets her deed by a delicacy of faith which would comply, if it were but to avoid wounding, and gives all, in order to satisfy. He promises everything, if only he may relieve Ruth from fear. Ruth followed into poverty from love ; and Boaz, though rich, regarui only the duty prescribed by faith. Ruth was ignorant of the prejudices that stood in her way ; Boaz knew and overcame them. Ruth thought she had a right to claim ; Boaz was under no obli- gation, and yet acted. The nearest redeeme! retreated, most probably because Ruth was a Moabitess ; Boaz says, " Ye are witnesses that I take the Moabitess to wife." An ancient church- father says : " Boaz, in accordance with the merito- riousness of his faith received Ruth tor his wife, in order that from so sanctified a marriage a royal race might be born. For Boaz, well advanced in years, received his wife, not for himself, but for God ; not to fulfill the desires of the flesh, but to fulfill the righteousness of the law, in order to raise up a seed for his relative. He was inflamed more by conscience than by passion ; he was old by years, but youthful by faith, — and for this perhaps he was called, Boaz — ' in him is virtue.' " Veeses 13-22. The Completion of the Blessing. 13 So Boaz took Ruth, and she was [became] his wife : and when [omit : when] he went in unto her, [and] the Lord [Jehovah] gave her conception, and she bare a 14 son. And the women said unto Naomi, Blessed be the Lord [Jehovah], which hath not left thee this day without a kinsman [redeemer], that his name may be [and may 15 his name be] famous in Israel. And he shall [may he] be unto thee a restorer of thy life [soul], and a nourisher [support] : of thine old age : for thy daughter-in-law, 16 which loveth thee, which is better to thee than seven sons, hath borne him. And 17 Naomi took the child, and laid it in her bosom, and became nurse unto it. And the women her neighbors gave it a name, saying, There is a son born to Naomi ; and they called his name Obed : he is the father of Jesse, the father of David. 18, 19 Now these are the generations of Pharez : Pharez begat Hezron, and Hezron 20 begat Ram, and Ram begat Aminadab, and Aminadab begat Nahshon, and 21 Nahshon begat Salmon [Salmah],2 and Salmon begat Boaz, and Boaz begat 22 Obed, and Obed begat Jesse, and Jesse begat David. TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL. [1 Ver. 15. — Lit. " and may he support thine old age." On the form of 73 v3 (from Vl3), cf. Ges. 55, 4 ; on iti construction after TITT, which here however has the force of the jussive (optative) through its connection with the pre- ceding verb, Gea. 132, 3, Rem. 1. — On the forms TjrQilSI and Wlb?, cf. Ges. 59, Rem. 3. — Tr.] [2 Ver. 20. — Salmah (HOytt? or KDvU?, 1 Chron. ii. 11) appears in ver. 21 as Salmon, which many MSS. read here also. Originally, the name was probably used indiscriminately either with the termination ] — or ]1 cf. Gea. M, 15). By detrition of the 3, ]Obtt7 became nobjtf. — Te.] EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL. Ver. 13. And she brought forth a son. With this happy event the last shadows disappear from the checkered lives of the two women. The fears of su- perstition are shown to have been groundless. Sor- row in Moab has been changed into happiness in Israel. The reward of love has begun, and Jehovah mercifully owns the daughter of Moab, who has left Some and native land for his people's sake. Great \re the joys which surround the cradle of the child of such parents as Boaz and Ruth. The father of Nero is said to have made the terrible exclamation : " What shall come of a son who has me for his father and Agrippina for his mother ! " But here, where love had been married to piety, humility to heroism, innocence to believing insight, everybody must look for a future of blessings. A child of Ruth and Boaz had no need of goddesses and fairies to come to its cradle, in order, according to popu- lar legends, to bring wealth and good wishes. The blessing of the Almighty God, who lot ks not at th« CHAPTER IV. 13-22. 51 person, but at the heart, has spread out its wings aver the child. Ver. 14. And the women said unto Naomi. What a difference between the beginning and the end of Naomi's life in Israel since her return ! When she came back, poor and lonely, where were the women and neighbors, who ought to have com- forted, supported, and stood by her in her necessity ? Nothing is heard of them. Nobody was with her I. ut Ruth. But now they appear with their good wishes for Naomi and praises to God ; for adversity has vanished. Ruth is no longer the poor gleaner, who painfully gathers a living for her mother, but the happy wife of Boaz. A new name has been raised up for the inheritance of Elimelech. Who hath not left a redeemer to be want- ing to thee this day. It is one of the peculiar beauties of our narrative that its last words are almost wholly devoted to Naomi (vers. 14-18). And justly so ; for it was Naomi who by her exem- plary life in Moab had been the instructress of Ruth. For her sake, the noble woman had come to Israel. Upon her, affliction had fallen most se- verely (ch. i. 13), bereaving her of both husband and children. Against her, the hand of Jehovah had gone forth, so that she bade acquaintances to call her, not Naomi, but Mara. Moreover, a heart- union existed between herself and Ruth, such as is not often to be found between even natural mother and daughter. The happiness of Ruth would have been her happiness also, even if no national usages and habits had come in to make it such. How ten- der and delicate is the feeling which these usages and habits set forth, of the sacred and indissoluble character of the marriage bond. And yet modern self-conceit — that, and not Christian self-knowl- edge— perpetually talks of the inferiority of wo- man's position under the old covenant ! Boaz had married Ruth, as a blood-relative of her former husband, in order to raise up the name of the latter upon his inheritance. The childless widow did not, as happens so often among us, leave the family of her deceased husband, as if she had never become a member of it. The blood-relative obtains a son by her, and the birth of this son becomes an occa- sion for congratulations to the mother of the former husband. The child borne by Ruth to Boaz as a blood-relative, although not the nearest, of Naomi's husband, is called by the women the god of Naomi, and they praise God that he has not left Naomi without him. There is, no doubt, a legal ground for this. For the child inherits the estate of Elim- elech, because its mother was formerly the wife of his son, and with this estate the life of Naomi also is connected. Not Boaz, who has redeemed the in- heritance, but the child for whom he redeemed it, is the real god of Naomi — the person, that is, in whom her sinking house again raises itself; for he is the son of her son's wife, albeit bv another hus- band. He is the grandson of her family, though not of her blood. Ruth's god was Boaz, but Nao- mi's the son of Ruth ; for Ruth lives in the house of Boaz, but Naomi in that of the child, which be- longs to him by virtue of his birth from Ruth. These are practical definitions of the leviratical law ; but how thoroughly moral the views on which they rest ! how close the sympathy and brotherhood they seek to establish, and how indissoluble the marriage covenant which they presuppose ! Undoubtedly, the most moral law can become torpii, and receive only an external fulfillment or even be evaded. Laws are living and active among » people only so long as the spirit that gave them •>eing continues to live. The conduct of the un- known blood-relative has sufficiently shown, tha the law alone could have afforded no help to Ruth and Naomi. The whole history of Naomi in Israel, after her return from Moab and up to the interven- tion of Boaz, testifies to the inability of the letter of the law to avert misery and distress. Boaz fol- lowed, not the letter of the law, but its spirit ; ana hence did more than the letter demanded. In the persons of those with whon our narrative is mainly concerned, the doctrine vei ties itself that there is no law so strong as the law of love. It is this doc- trine which the women also have come to recognize when they say to Naomi : — Ver. 15. For thy daughter-in-law, who lov- eth thee, and who is better to thee than seven sons, hath borne him. The child, say the women, shall refresh thy soul, — the soul C?5, animus, of Naomi was bowed down with sorrow, the child will restore (^tl'n) her courage, — and support thy old age ; and this, they add. not because the law makes him heir to the estate of his mother's family, but because Ruth has borne him. The re- vivieation of Naomi's happiness through the birth of this child, was more securely guaranteed by the love of Ruth, than by friendship and blood-relation ship. True, Naomi herself is childless ; but seven sons could not have done for her what Ruth did. The women acknowledge now how far short the legal friendship of Israel towards Naomi has fallen, in comparison with the self-sacrifice of the daugh- ter of Moab. And thus there comes to view here so much the more plainly, the doctrine — in its higher sense prophetic, under the old covenant — that love, living, active, self-forgetful, self-sacrificing love, transcends all law and family considerations. Christ announces the same doctrine in its highest form.when he says : " Whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother" (Matt. xii. 50). Ruth's love for Naomi takes the place of physical descent. It engrafts her child, as it were, into the heart of Naomi. In itself the child is only the grandson of her family and estate ; on account of Ruth's love, it becomes to her a veritable grand- child of love, nearer to her heart than if a daugh- ter of her own had given birth to it. The power of pure and self-forgetful love, such as Ruth had entertained, could not be more beautifully delin- eated. Ver. 16. And she became foster-mother to it. She took it into her lap, like an actual grand- mother. She formed the child in Israelitish life and customs. She became to it what Mordecai was to Esther, an instructress in the law and Israel- itish culture. The son of Ruth became to her an actual grandchild of love. For this reason the fe- male neighbors give him a name whose significa- tion is equivalent to Naomi's son. Ver. 17. They called his name, Obed. There are several noteworthy points connected with this. The female neighbors, in order to give pleasure to Naomi, give the child a name. But beside this, he doubtless received a name from his parents, prob- ably one that belonged to the family. But that given by the women continued to be his usual name, and by it he was inserted into the family genealogy. Consequently, the idea enunciated in it must have been specially characteristic. The text says : " They gave him a name, namely, a son is born to Naomi ; " and hence they called him Obed. Now, whether the name Obed be explained as ser- vant of God or servant of Naomi, the sense in either 52 THE BOOR OF RUTH. ;ase remains insipid.1 What the women mean is, not that the child is the servant of Naomi, hut that he is to her as a son.'2 If the words of ver. 1 7 are to have a plain sense; nay, if the preservation of just that name which the female neighbors gave him is to have an explanation, the name Obed must in some way express the idea of the word " son." For in this name " son," given with reference to Naomi, there is contained the idea that the sin which lay at the base of her evil fortune had been atoned for. She who lost the children of her own body, had now a son in the spirit of true love. It is true, that from the philological stores extant in the Bible, the explanation of Obed in the sense of " son " is not possible ; but it may be done by the assistance of other languages. It is sufficiently clear that Obed is to be connected with the Greek ircudtov (irais, irmScJs), Latin putus, Sanskrit pita, putra, Persian puser." The circumstance that Obed was used in the sense of " son," justifies the conjecture that in the Hebrew of that day there were various foreign words in use, probably introduced through Aramaic influences, without postulating a closer contact of the so-called Semitic with the Indo-germanic tongues than is usually assumed. He is the father of Jesse, the father of David. In these words the doctrine of the whole Book reaches its point of culmination. They point out the completion of the blessing pronounced on Ruth by Boaz. The name of the superstitious kinsman, who thought that marriage with the Moabitess would endanger his inheritance, is forgotten ; bnt from Boaz descends the Hero O^n 1133), the King of Poets, David, the Prophet, and type of the Messiah. From him Christ comes through the promise, even as Obed was the son of Naomi through the love of Ruth.4 The doctrine of the whole narrative is expressed in the words of the Apostle, " Love is the fulfilling of the law." Note. — Verses 18-22 are an addition from the genealogi- cal tables of the House of David. The chronological ques- tion involved in them must be considered in connection with the other analogous data, for which reason we refer here to 1 Chron. ii. 8 ff. HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. " Naomi took the child." Whoever was once capable of true love, preserves its power forever af- ter. Throughout her history, until the close of the narrative, Naomi's name is truly descriptive of her character. Her love is the cause of the bless- 1 The subterfuge of he Clerc, who proposes to read 121S, in the sense of K unfortunate, poor one,'' with reference to the poverty once suffered by Ruth, is entirely wrong, to say nothing of the fact that the word itself does not have the sense which he assigns to it. ■2 [But is not the emphasis to be laid on ,f to Naomi " rather than on " son ? " It is true, that analogy leads us to expect the name to contain specifically the same idea ex pressed by the women (cf. however Gen. xxix. 32); but it must also" be admitted (with Berth.) that Obed in the sense of " one that serves," sc. Naomi, harmonizes well with the »ords in ver. 16 : " May he be to thee a soul-restorer, and i support of thine old age." — Tb,.] 8 As regards the 'J in "OV, its value (best compared perhaps with a spiritus asper) is exactly the same as in V\v to be compared with Itztari and talus, vQJ? with moliri, pD3? with ixqicos, etc. ing that finally ensues, for by it she won love. It sustained her in suffering, — it prompted her to ao tion in behalf of her daughter-in-law. Now in the end she enjoys its blessing, and becomes the loving foster-mother of the child of her who was better to her than seven sons. Naomi is everywhere an image of the Church of Christ, which wins, confesses, and fosters through love. Men whose natural hearts are hostile to her, become her obedient children. When there is apostasy and misery in the church, it is for priests and preachers to repent, as Naomi did, and not to excuse themselves. If they really have the spirit of love, they cannot but feel that they have to blame themselves first of all. When the church does not make converts among heathen and Jews, the attempt to lay the guilt of this judgment on them, and to excuse ourselves, is a sign of a hard heart. Alas ! God alone knows what heavy loads of guilty responsibility rest on the church for hav- ing herself given the impulse by which thousands were kept from coming to the Saviour. And how greatly she sins, when she does not rightly foster those who do come, exhibiting neither love, nor wisdom, nor faith in her treatment of them, — that too will one day be made manifest. Impatience is not in love ; and a little money does not make amends for the coldness of consummate self-right- eousness. They are children, who are laid in the lap of the church, — children according to thft spirit, that is to say real children, who, by God'? grace, bring a greater blessing to the church thar seven sons according to the flesh. Pascal : " Two laws are sufficient to regulati the whole Christian Church more completely thai all political law could do : love to God, and love to one's neighbor." " They said, there is a son born to Naomi, and called his name Obed ; he is the father of Jesse, the father of David." Boaz predicted a blessing for Ruth, and the faith through which he did it was rewarded by his being made a sharer in it. All he did was to utter a word of prophecy, prompted by his faith in the grace of his God, and lo, he was made the progenitor of David, the prophet ! He who firmly relies on the love of God, is always i. seer. Boaz had faith enough to bring about, in due time, the fulfillment of his own benediction, and became the ancestor of Him in whom all the prophecies of David are fulfilled. Of Boaz him- self no warrior deeds are known, and yet the great- est of Israel's heroes, the conqueror of Goliath,5 sprang from him. He conquered himself, and on that account became the ancestor of Him who tri- umphed over sin and death. Similarly, Buth had 4 The reference of Grotius to the traditionary history of Ocrisia, who became the mother of Servius Tullius, is very unfortunate. Ocrisia was a slave. Her story has no eth- ical background. The legends concerning her were only designed to glorify the derivation of the king. Cf. Niebuhr, BUtn. fiesch. i. 375 (2d edit.). 6 It is on the ground of this contrast that Jewish tradi- tion homiletically advanced the idea that Goliath descended from Orpah. who returned to Moab, as David from Ruth The early teachers of the church were acquainted with this tradition, and Prudentius even introduced it into his poem, Hamartigenia, ver. 782 : — " Sed pristinus Orphss Fanorum ritus prseputia barbara suasit Malle, et semiferi stirpem nutrire Golias. Ruth, dum per stipulas agresti amburitur sseta Fulcra Booz meruit, castoque adscita cubili Christigenam fecunda domum, Davldica regna Edidit atque deo mortales miscuit ortufl." CHAPTER IV. 13-22. 53 nothing but a heart fall of love, and jret to her, once a daughter of Moab, there was given what neither Deborah nor Jael obtained, — to become the mother of Him bj whom all the nations are re- deemed. Jerome (on Is. xvi. 1 ) : "0 Moab ! out of thee shall come forth the unspotted Lamb, which bears the sins of the world, and rules over the whole earth ! From the rock of the wilderness, i. e. from Ruth, widowed by the death of her husband, Boaz derived Obed .... and from David came Christ." Geklach : " Thus the coming of the great King is prepared for, upon whom the Lord had deter- mined to confirm the dominion over his people for evermore ; and the converted Moabitess, who en- tered as a worthy member into the commonwealth of the people of God, became the mother of David and of Christ." The Jewish tradition which makes Ruth a descendant of Eglon, the Moabitish king who oppressed Israel as a punishment for its sins, contains an allegory worthy of notice. The daughter of the op- pressor, becomes the mother of the Liberator, the Redeemer out of the House of David. According to the Jewish expositors the name Ruth is derived from a root which signifies to give drink, to assuage thirst [Berachoth, 7 a) ; and from her, say they, David came, who with his songs and psalms supplied the wants of those who thirst after God. And from David, we may add, came the Saviour who gave to the Samaritan woman when she thirsted, of that fountain which springs up unto everlasting life. The ancient church selected the sixteenth of July as the day on which to commemorate Ruth.1 The reason for this is probably to be found in the following considerations : In Deut, xxiii. 3, it is said : " An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of Jehovah ; even to their tenth gen- eration they shall not enter." This was supposed to have been fulfilled in Ruth. In the genealogy of the Gospel according to Matthew, Boaz, through whom Ruth was received into the congregation of Jehovah, is the tenth from Abraham. But it was the Lord and Saviour, whose day Abraham saw, and who according to the flesh descended from Ruth, who first took away the curse from Moab also. This was announced by Isaiah, when in addressing Moab, he says (ch. xvi. 5) : "In mercy shall a throne be prepared, that one sit upon it in truth, in the tabernacle of David, and judge, and seek judg- ment, and hasten righteousness." Now, as the ancient church set apart the sixth of July for Isaiah, because he prophesied of Christ, who suffered on the sixth day of the week, and whose incarnation was celebrated on the sixth of January, it fixed the anniversary of Ruth ten days later, on the sixteenth of July. Thus her name and the number of her day are symbolical of prophecy and grace. But ten days farther on, the twenty-sixth, is the day of Anna, whom tradition makes to be the mother of the Virgin Mary. Thus the name of Ruth stood ten days after the prophecy and ten days before its ap- proaching fulfillment, equally distant from him who prophecied of the Virgin and from her who was the Virgin's mother. The Moabitish stranger finds herself in the middle between the seer who beheld the wilderness of Moab become fruitful, and the nearest ancestress of Him who delivers Moab and all the world from barrenness and thirst. Pictorially, the ancient church represented Ruth with a sheaf in her hand. As was natural, she was always conceived as youthful. She might be represented with a rose, in accordance with what may be the meaning of her name (see on ch. i. 4). The Rose of Bethlehem was the ancestress of the Rose of Jesse (Mary), whom ancient pictures represent sitting- in a rosebush. Both rose and sheaf are symbols of the truth that though love may sow in tears, it will through God's compassion reap in joy. l CI my article In the Btrt. Wochinblatt, 1863, Num. 32 Date Due \Z/ r ^^s 'yj-M$ * W^SrA 3~ AG 2 6 '4g 1 f******* pjj. ai iiri «mi*m : '* <§)