The Torah opens with Man close to God, Who is openly
revealed in the Garden of Eden. With progressive sins of unredeemed power and
passion, he/she gets further and further away from God, drifting toward
Idolatry; man doesn't develop his Divine Image potential and begins to look
more and more like a monkey. One looking at him might even posit a common
origin. But God sets angels with flaming swords to guard the way back to the
tree of life in
The story of Ruth is read at the time of the giving of the
Torah so that we might know that the Torah Shebiktav (Written Torah) and the
Torah Shebalpeh (Oral Torah), are together one Torah, and one is not possible
without the other. For David, the anointed of G-d unto all generations, was
descended from a Moavite woman, and his legitimacy depended on the Oral Torah -
which declared that only a Moavite man was prohibited from entering the
Congregation of Israel - but not a Moavite woman. On the foundations of Torah
Shebalpeh, the House of David, the whole people of
Torah is
like “Cliff notes”, notes taken during a lecture.. The meaning comes through
only if you have attended the “lecture”. The lecture being the oral law. Without
an understanding of Mishna, Gemarah, Midrash, and Zohar, it is impossible to
mine the depth of meaning which is contained in these “Cliff notes”. Having a
teacher who is trained in the oral and written law, enables the student to make
use of Torah in the same way that attending a lecture allows you to make sense
of the “Cliff notes”. The book of Ruth, therefore, is written to those who have
the time and inclination to study the oral law. Without the proper background
and training, we come away with the understanding that this book is just a
“Fairy tale” about a poor downtrodden maiden who marries a Prince. Nothing
could be further from the truth.
R. Ze'ira said: This scroll does not have in it impurity or purity, prohibited or permitted, why was it written? To teach the great reward for those who give graciously. (Ruth Rabbah 2:14)
According to R. Zeira the book is about chesed, kindness. Ruth, the Moabite, is the character most roundly praised for her "chesed." Yet, it is the Moabite lack of kindness which leads to them being excluded from the "congregation of God" (understood to mean prohibition of marriage). An Ammonite or a Moabite is not to enter the assembly of HaShem; even to the tenth generation no one from them is to enter the assembly of HaShem, for the ages, on account that they did not greet you with food and with water on the way at your going out from Egypt.... (Devarim 23:4-5) Ruth is the one who rises above her "breeding" and displays chesed and loyalty. Because of this she is worthy of becoming a part of God's assembly.
The Torah, whose beginning and end is chesed, kindness (Sotah 14a), which was given in this season, is exemplified by the behavior of Ruth and Boaz, the main characters of Megilat Ruth
Sefer Ruth is positioned between Shir HaShirim (Song of Songs) and Eicah (Lamentations) in the Tanakh. Since Shir HaShirim is a love song between Ha-Shem and His people, while Eicha is a lament over the lack of love between Ha-Shem’s people and Ha-Shem, we get a hint that the position of Sefer Ruth alludes to the connection that connects the lack of love to wholehearted love.
Sefer Ruth is positioned between Judges and Samuel in the KJV Bible. Since Sefer Ruth begins in the period of the Judges and ends with King David who was anointed by Samuel, we get a hint that it is in chronological and subject order. There is also a hint in Sefer Ruth:
Ruth
1:1 Now it came to pass in the
days when the judges ruled …
Ruth
Sefer Ruth opens by announcing that it takes place in the time of the Judges. Sefer Ruth closes by declaring the lineage of His Majesty King David. Thus we see that Sefer Ruth is a book of transition between the time of the Judges and the time of the Kings. There is also an interesting allusion in this sequence, in that His Majesty King Saul is not mentioned. King Saul had an imperfection, in that he failed to destroy the Amalekites. In times to come this may hint to a future King who will precede His Majesty Mashiach ben David. This King, too, will have an imperfection. But, like King Saul, he will not be a part of the Messianic kingdom.
Ruth and Naomi arrive in the Promised Land, from Moav, on
Passover, and they arrived in
In the midnight meeting between Ruth and Boaz (chapter
3), the story alludes to two similar situations--
A Our Sages say that the story of the daughters of
Most folks see the encounter between Tamar and Yehudah as a sin of immorality. Torah, on the other hand, sees this encounter as a very great mitzvah. It is a mitzvah because Tamar was a childless widow, and her dead husband’s family was commanded, according to Devarim (Deuteronomy) 25:5, to raise up seed for the deceased. The family was required to raise up seed for the deceased on his land. When Yehudah failed to give his son, Shelah, to fulfill this mitzvah, Tamar enticed Yehudah himself to fulfill it. The Midrash records that Ha-Shem sent an angel, Midrash Rabbah - Genesis LXXXV:8, to “force” Yehudah, against his will, to turn in to Tamar’s tent. The angel asked Yehudah, “If you fail to turn to Tamar; from where will the Kings come?” So, Yehuda’s sin in not giving his son Shelah, the first in line for this mitzvah, was corrected when Boaz gave way to Ploni Almoni, for the same mitzvah, because he was first in line. This tikkun, this rectification, required enormous strength.
In the case of Yehuda, Yoseph was made homeless and exiled
from the land much as Elimelech and
The most prominent case of return to lost property appears in our Megillah, where the acquisition of Ruth overlaps with the purchase of the field of Machlon. "When you acquire the property from Naomi and from Ruth the Moavite, you must also acquire the wife of the deceased so as to perpetuate the name of the deceased" (Ruth 4:5). Redemption thus occurs when the name of the deceased is resurrected on his property. Parallel to this, in Parashat Behar we find the term redemption used with regard to the return of the freed slave to his property and the return of family estates in the Jubilee year.
When a slave, who sold himself to a foreigner and went out
from amongst his nation, is returned to his property, that is called
redemption. The prophet Yechezkel (chap. 36) describes the redemption of the
nation of
The land, the inheritance, gives man his connection to
eternity. The days of the land are "like the days of the world" (as
Rashi explains), and even though man's days are limited, his connection to the
land gives him eternal life. When a person is rooted in his property and passes
it to his son and grandson, only then does he taste immortality. Cain's
punishment for the murder is that "You shall become a ceaseless wanderer
on earth" (Bereshit
The same rooting in the land is described by the verse: "For the days of My people shall be as long as the days of a tree" (Yeshayahu 65:22). The tree embodies eternal existence, as described in Iyov (Job) (14:7-9): "There is hope for a tree; if it is cut down it will renew itself ... at the scent of water it will bud." Even after the tree has dried out, it can still revive itself through its attachment to the land. But the death of man, who is not attached to the land, is an eternal death.
Dr. Moshe Katz (CompuTorah) found an interesting connection between the story of Yehuda and Tamar in a Bible code. The passage about Judah and Tamar, in Bereshit 38, is linked with sefer Ruth in a Bible code. Using a 49 letter code (the number we count for Sefirat HaOmer), we discover the central figures in Sefer Ruth: Ruth, Boaz, Oved, Yishai, and David. Ruth and Boaz are found together in Bereshit 38:11 at a –49 interval. Oved, their son is found in Bereshit 38:20, also at a –49 skip interval. Yishai and David, their grandson and great-grandson, are found in Bereshit 38:28, at a –49 skip interval. A copy of this page can be found at the end of this paper.
Many folks see the encounter between
When the sun came up on the day HaShem was to destroy
Rabbi Yitzchak (Bereshit
Rabbah 41:4) says that this word is connected with the verse (Tehilim
89:21), "I have found David my servant," which refers to
Mashiach. And where did HaShem find
Mashiach? In
But how does Mashiach come from
The sin of
There is another connection to this tikkun: Just as Lot
abandoned the
Elimelech repeats the same act, and there is no doubt that
it has the same significance; as Chazal say, "One who lives outside of
In Megillat Ruth there is a meeting between the House of
Yehuda and the family of
The tie that binds these cases is that in all three stories
there is almost a total loss of family, but at the last minute a solution is
found through the act of yibum. With regard to Yehuda, the yibum is mentioned
expressly in the text. With regard to
In the third case, that of Boaz and Ruth, there is no
expression relating to yibum, but the text does state, "So as to
perpetuate the name of the deceased on his estate" (Ruth 4:5), similar to
what is written in the parsha on yibum, "... shall be accounted to his
dead brother, that his name not be blotted out in Israel" (Devarim 25:6).
Yibum in all three cases is the solution to the problem, but in all three
cases, the yibum is irregular. We do not find here a standard case of yibum
between the brother of the deceased and the widow; rather, we have a father (
With Ruth, a beautiful tapestry of tikkun, intricately woven
across the centuries, is revealed for all to see. Ruth “returns” to Eretz
Yisrael and she “returns” to the God of Abraham. She takes the disparate
threads of her ancestors and displays them as the tapestry of majesty! she
rectifies the sin of
But wait! There is much more to this tikkun! Rabbi Moshe
Alshich suggests that Ruth is a gilgul, a reincarnation, of
Man's existence depends on passing his property to his sons
or to those who come in their place due to yibum. We have mentioned three
stories: the first (
As we begin comparing the events of Sefer Ruth with the
story of
Ruth the Moabite joins the tribe of
2
Shmuel (Samuel) 8:15 "And
David reigned over all of
[Recall
that David had earlier hidden out in a CAVE (not unlike the cave when Lot
encountered his daughters) in the area of the Dead Sea (Ein Gedi), where he
performed an act of kindness by not injuring Shaul - see I Shmuel 24:1-15; note
especially 24:12-15! See also Yirmiyahu 22:1-5!]
The Kingship of David constitutes the tikkun for the
descendants of Lot: his kingdom was characterized by the performance of TZEDAKA
& MISHPAT - the antithesis of
One of the most important roles for Mashiach to fulfill, is this tikkun, this rectification:
II
Luqas (Acts) 3:19-21 Repent,
then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of
refreshing may come from the Lord, And that he may send the Christ, who has
been appointed for you--even Jesus. He must remain in heaven until the time
comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his
holy prophets.
This correction, this return to the faith and obedience of the Patriarchs is forcefully proclaimed in the closing verses of Malakhi:
Malachi
4:4-6 "Remember the law of
my servant Moses, the decrees and laws I gave him at Horeb for all
This return to the fathers is nothing less than a return to the Torah of Moses, as we can see from the context.
All of the basic soul-roots from Adam on, reincarnate in order to continue to elevate their tikkun, their rectification.
Is it logical to expect that
another reincarnation of that soul will appear just before the coming of
Mashiach?
Why did HaShem consistently look outside of the Jewish nation, when compiling the gene pool for our Savior?
What was Ruth doing in the field of Boaz? She was performing Leket, gathering ears of corn. She gleaned and picked up. Leket is a halachic and metaphysical institution, HaShem gleaned and gathered beautiful inclinations and virtues from people all over the world in order to weave the soul of the king Messiah. HaShem was preoccupied with the Messiah's personality. He disregarded race and religion and instead looked through all of mankind to find special qualities and capabilities. This is the Almighty's approach to culture, to sift and glean through the nations of the world noting outstanding moral traits and ethical accomplishments.
Ruth was chosen because of her unique heroism. She came from pagan royalty, a life intoxicated with orgiastic pleasures and unlimited luxury. Ruth sacrificed all this to identify with a strange and mysterious people, to adopt a religion that demanded superhuman discipline.
There is a question concerning another prominent woman in Tanach, Rivka, who orders Yaakov to seize deceptively the blessings intended for his brother. Convinced that Yaakov deserved the blessings, by virtue of both his character and the explicit prophecy she had received from God – "the older will serve the younger" (see Targum Onkelos and Rashbam to Bereishit 27:13), Rivka instructs Yaakov to deceive his father and take his brother's blessing. In both instances, the women felt assured of their scheme's success, despite the considerable risk entailed. The Midrash (Ruth Rabba 6:1) indeed draws a comparison between these two incidents:
"'A man's trembling becomes a trap for him' (Mishlei 29:25): This refers to the trembling Yaakov caused Yitzchak, as it says, 'Yitzchak was seized with very violent trembling.' He should have cursed him, only 'But he who trusts in the Lord shall be safeguarded' – You placed [an idea] in his heart to bless him, as it says, 'Now he must remain blessed.' [This verse also refers to] the trembling Ruth caused Boaz, as it says, 'The man trembled and pulled back.' He should have cursed her, only 'But he who trusts in the Lord shall be safeguarded' – You placed [an idea] in his heart that he would bless her, as it says, 'You are blessed to the Lord, my daughter.'"
It is doubtful, however, whether this comparison between Naomi and Rivka could justify what Naomi did. The commentaries have noted that Yaakov's deception was the direct cause of his exile – not only practically, but also on the level of reward and punishment. Many sources have also observed the clear parallel between Lavan's duplicity towards Yaakov, particularly in substituting Rachel with Leah, and Yaakov's seizing of Esav's blessing. The Midrash comments (Bereishit Rabba 70:19):
"Throughout the night, he would call to her, 'Rachel,' and she would respond. In the morning, 'Behold, she was Leah.' He said: You are a trickster, the daughter of a trickster! She said to him: Is there a teacher without students? Did your father not similarly call to you, 'Esav,' and you responded? You, too, called to me and I responded."
This Midrash clearly Yaakov's experiences with Lavan as a punishment "measure-for-measure" for deceiving his father. (For further elaboration on this subject, see Nechama Leibowitz's "Studies on Sefer Bereishit.")
In our context, too, the Midrash (Ruth Rabba 7:1) emphasizes the chillul Hashem (desecration of God's Name) that could have resulted from Ruth's visit to the threshing floor:
"Rabbi Chonya and Rabbi Yirmiya said in the name of Rav Shemuel bar Rav Yitzchak: That entire night, Boaz was spread out on the floor crying, 'Master of the worlds! It is revealed and known to You that I did not touch her. May it be Your will that it not be known that the woman came to the threshing floor, so that the Name of God not be desecrated through me!'"
The theme of geirut, or conversion, is central to the Feast of Hag Shavuot. The moment of matan Torah, the giving of the Torah, was marked by a national conversion, accentuated by the acceptance of the mitzvot when the Children of Israel said, “We will do and we will listen”. Because of this theme of geirut, we read Megillat Ruth because it chronicles, among other things, the righteous conversion of Ruth the Moabitess. Ruth's conversion is, indeed, the earliest record of a sincere conversion (in contrast to the Givonim whose conversion in Sefer Yehoshua was motivated by less than sincere motives).
The Gemara in K’rithoth 9a derives the process of geirut from the manner in which our ancestors converted at Har Sinai. Until Har Sinai, the Children of Israel had not entered the covenant. The Gemara states that the model for entering a brit (the historical covenant between the Jewish people and HaShem, Blessed be He, culminated by matan Torah) is mila (circumcision), tevila (immersion in a mikveh), and harza'at damim (a korban). These three exercises were performed by our forefathers prior to, or during, the events at Har Sinai. These same exercises are required of all converts today.
To enter the covenant requires that we fulfill the requirements of the covenant. For example: Many home sales require that the buyer agree to a covenant. When they sign the covenant, which is much like going before the Bet Din for conversion, they agree to it’s provisions. In most cases there is a monetary cost and actions that must be completed. A common covenant says that a homeowner may not have an Recreational Vehicle (RV) parked where it is visible in the yard. If one were to violate this agreement by parking an RV in the driveway, then the homeowner could be fined or lose his home. Another common covenant is a maintenance covenant. In this covenant, the homeowner is required to pay an association fee and, in return, the association arranges for all of his yard work to be completed in a timely manner. This keeps all the yards looking good.
One can not enter such a covenant simply by declaring that he would like to do so. Instead, he must buy a particular home and pay the required fee. No interlopers are allowed. In the same way, if one wants to become a part of the Sinai Covenant and become a part of G-d’s people, he must be circumcised (if a male), immersed in a mikveh, and bring his sacrifice. (In practice we can not yet bring a sacrifice.) No interlopers are allowed. One may not make up his mind to be grafted in, and then assume that he is. One who is grafted in, must perform the required steps and “sign” the contract.
The process of conversion also requires that a convert appear before a Bet Din, a Jewish court, to agree to keep the mitzvot. This is how the contract is “signed”.
Megillat Ruth we can picture Ruth’s appearance before the Bet Din using the same words she used with Naomi: “Where you go, I will go, and where you lodge, I will lodge; your people are my people, and your God is my God."
With these powerful words, Ruth would surely have been accepted before the Bet Din.
A Taste of Torah
in honor of Shabbat
from Rabbi Avi
Weiss
If a thief robs by violence, swears falsely and then confesses his guilt, the Torah tells us that he is liable to return the value of the object plus an additional one-fifth to the plaintiff. (Numbers 5:6,7) If, however, the plaintiff dies leaving no relatives, the money is returned to the Priest, the emissary of God. In the words of the Torah, "if the person has no kinsmen to whom restitution may be made for the guilt, the restitution for guilt which is made shall be the Lord's, even the Priest." (Numbers 5:8)
An obvious question emerges: Is it possible that the
plaintiff does not have any relatives?!
In the words of the great Rashi, "is there anyone in
In order to understand this idea, the special relationship between God and the proselyte must be examined. Nehama Leibowitz points out the following Midrash (Bamidbar Rabbah 8:2), "Proselytes are what they are, not by virtue of a family title, but simply through their own free will they have come to love God. He [God] therefore, responds by loving them, as it is written 'the Lord loves the righteous.'" (Psalms 146:8) For the Midrash, the righteous are converts for whom God feels a special love. Having accepted God through their own volition, God, in return, feels a unique love for them.
Hence, in our text, theft against a ger results in payment to God, as God is the closest kin of the convert. The money is then given to the kohen, God's emissary.
It is often the case in our community that the convert is mistreated and not embraced equally in the fold. Here the Torah is teaching that the ger, far from being cast aside, is the most important. Being especially loved by God, we in that same spirit should have special love for them.
No wonder this law is always read in the portion that follows the holiday of Shavuot. Shavuot celebrates God's giving of the Torah. The law of gezel ha-ger (stealing from a proselyte) reminds us that the Torah was given to all Jews-including converts.
Shavuot also features the reading of Megillat Rut, the Scroll of Ruth. Ruth is the convert par excellence. Not coincidentally, from her the Messiah will one day come, teaching once again that while we may be holy, the convert is the holy of holies.
By Rav Amnon Bazak
A. Introduction
Many have pondered over the question as to why Megillat Ruth
was written (see the introduction to the "Da'at Mikra" commentary on
Megillat Ruth, pp. 3-6). This question begs to be asked since it is an accepted
principle that all biblical texts must indicate the involvement of God in His
world. The unequivocal and recurring point in Tanakh is that every event stems
from the will of God. God causes death and life, lowers the haughty and raises
the downtrodden, repays man with kindness according to his deeds, and repays
the wicked with evil according to his wickedness. The famous exception to this
rule is Megillat Esther, within which God's name is not mentioned at all.
However, this omission is understood since Megillat Esther deals with the period
of the
With this in mind, Megillat Ruth stands out: this wonderful
story is completely brought about through the actions of man without any
involvement of God - neither in speech nor in action. (The two times God is
depicted as acting - Ruth 1:6 and
We will not be able, due to limited space, to delve into the depths of the Megillah and its hidden plots. Therefore, we will focus on one point which may shed some light upon our question. We will compare Megillat Ruth to the book of Iyov, which has many similar details to the story of Naomi. With this comparison as our background, we will be able to distinguish the essential difference between them.
B. "Iyov Lived in the Days when the Shoftim Judged"
These two stories have many points of comparison (see "Mikra Le-Yisrael," Yair Zakovitch, introduction, pp. 30-31):
1) Both stories discuss a person who has lost his/her children and possessions, and is left without any realistic chance of rebuilding his name anew.
2) Both sufferers complain about their bitter fate with the
realization that God is behind all that happens to them. The words which each
of them use are amazingly similar: Iyov said, "As God lives, Who has taken
away my right, and the Almighty, Who has embittered my soul" (27:2); and
Naomi mourns, "The Almighty has embittered my soul greatly" (
3) In both stories, society reacts in astonishment at the
tragedies, which affected even the external appearance of the sufferers: about
Iyov's friends it says - "And they lifted up their eyes from afar and they
did not recognize him, and they raised their voices and wept" (2:12), and
about the women at Beit Lechem it says - "And the whole city was astir at
their arrival, and they said: 'Is this Naomi?'" (
4) There is a "happy ending" in both stories - the
destroyed family rises to rebirth (Iyov has children, and Naomi - a grandson).
There is a parallel as well in the way in which salvation is reached: Iyov
lived to see four generations of sons and Megillat Ruth ends with the fourth
generation of Naomi - David. To Iyov seven sons were born (42:13), and
paralleling this, the women of Beit Lechem give testimony about Ruth:
"[She] is better to you than seven sons"(
5) There is no doubt that these comparisons were noticed by R. Elazar, who maintains (Bava Batra 15) that "Iyov lived in the days when the Shoftim judged." The wording of this statement is intentionally similar to the opening of Megillat Ruth.
However, these comparisons actually sharpen the essential DIFFERENCE between the two stories, which is expressed through the means of salvation in each. By explaining this difference, we can clarify the different and even opposing purposes of the two books. Firstly, let us take a look at the book of Iyov.
C. "Shall a Rebuker Contend with God? He who Reproaches God, Let Him Answer" (Iyov 40:2)
The book of Iyov deals with the classic problem of "Tzaddik ve-ra lo" (evil befalling the righteous). Throughout the majority of the book, Iyov and his companions are involved in raising philosophical ideas concerning this problem. No one in the book attempts to actively change the situation. The entire story consists of deliberations alone.
Even the solution in the end is a philosophical one. Iyov never finds out what we know from the beginning of the book: that all the troubles which befall him are only a result of the "argument" between God and the Satan as to whether Iyov would remain steadfast. God does not reveal the specific solution to Iyov concerning his plight, but rather deals with the general question: the ability of man to come with complaints before the awesome and exalted Creator. The story of Iyov is one example of many of the suffering which comes upon man without his understanding why, and God wants to clarify the general picture: even when man does not understand, he does not have the right to complain before God. After all, who is man - who comes from dust and returns to dust - that he can stand before the everlasting King? "Who is this that darkens counsel with words without knowledge ... Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth, say if you have understanding ... Have you entered into the springs of the sea, have you walked in the hollows of the depth? Have the gates of death been revealed to you or have you seen the gates of the deepest darkness? ... Have you entered the treasuries of the snow or seen the treasuries of hail? ... Do you know the laws of Heaven, can you establish its rule on earth? ... Shall a rebuker contend with God? He who reproaches God let him answer." (Iyov, chapter 38)
Only after Iyov admits that "I know that You can do everything and that no plan of Yours can be thwarted ... therefore, I have said things which I did not understand, things too wondrous for me that I knew not" (42:2-3), does the time come to complete the circle: "And God gave Iyov twice as much as he had before" (42:10). Just as there was no apparent reason for the calamity, so too, there was no apparent reason for the salvation.
The book of Iyov thus considers human tragedy from God's viewpoint. "He is a faithful God, never unfair, righteous and moral is He" (Devarim 32:4). Man with his limited perspective and short life span cannot judge God. Man's actions will not always directly determine his destiny. Even when he does not understand, he must recognize his place. "What is man that You remember him and the son of man that You are mindful of him ... God, our master, how mighty is Your name in all the earth" (Tehilim 8:5,10).
D. "Kindness Builds the World" (Tehilim 89:3)
How different is the picture in Megillat Ruth, the same Megillah in which God does not act directly at all! In Ruth, it is people with THEIR acts of kindness who bring about the redemption and the building of the house of David. The whole essence of the Megillah is the chain of acts of kindness brought about by people of chesed:
1) The first kindness we find is when Ruth and Orpah remain with lonely Naomi after her husband's and sons' deaths. For this, Naomi thanks her daughters-in-law: "May God do kindness with you as you have done with the dead and with me" (1:8).
2) Ruth, by leaving her nation and god in order to live with her mother-in-law Naomi in a strange land and strange surroundings, without any practical chance of building a family, does an amazing kindness: "It has been fully told to me all that you have done for your mother-in-law after your husband died, and how you left your father and mother and the land of your birth, and have come to a nation whom you did not know before" (2:11).
3) Boaz gladly accepts Ruth into his field and allows her to
glean with a generous hand. This brings Naomi to bless him, "Blessed is he
to God who has not abandoned his kindness to the living and the dead" (
4) Naomi's turn arrives to do kindness for her daughter-in-law: "Shall I not seek a home for you that I may be good for you?" (3:1), and therefore she initiates the meeting between Boaz and Ruth, which brings about their marriage.
5) Ruth's agreement to marry Boaz, who was older than her by
many years, is seen in the eyes of Boaz as a kindness: "For you have shown
greater kindness in the end than at the beginning, that you did not follow
after the young men whether poor or rich" (
6) There is no doubt as well that the readiness of Boaz to marry Ruth was an act of kindness. This is obvious, based on the refusal of her kinsman to marry her - "I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I harm my own inheritance" (4:6).
We shall not continue to prove this point, because the motif of kindness is interwoven throughout the entire Megillah. "The characters of the Megillah contribute their part to an ideal atmosphere; there are no negative characters. Similarly, the heroes of the Megillah compete amongst themselves over doing good; everyone helps one another, everyone is striving to see their fellow man in a state of abundant goodness" (Y. Zakovitch, page 3).
In contrast to the book of Iyov, Megillat Ruth reveals
another facet in the way the world runs: man through his actions can fix,
build, establish, expand and redeem. "Olam chesed yibaneh" - the
world can be built through kindness. Man has a significant form of power.
"You gave him dominion over the works of Your hands, You put everything at
his feet" (Tehilim 8:1). Through the power of acts of kindness, the world
MUST (as it were) be repaired. It is impossible that a person of kindness such
as Ruth would not come to the fields of Boaz, a man of kindness, exactly on the
day that he arrives at the field. It is impossible that the kinsman would not
pass by the gate of the city at the exact moment that Boaz was trying to
complete the circle of kindness. This is the power of kindness. All the deeds
of Naomi, Boaz and Ruth and all the rest of the good people along the way,
shout out for themselves: "We have done that which have decreed upon us,
do with us that which you have promised us" (Sifri Devarim 26:15).
"Boaz did what he had to do, and Ruth did what she must do, and Naomi did
what she was supposed to do, God said also: I shall do My part" (Midrash
Ruth Rabba 7:7). God has no choice, as it were, but to look down from His holy
dwelling place, and to complete the work - "And God gave her a pregnancy
and she bore a son" (Ruth
E. "And in the days when the Shoftim Ruled" (Ruth
1:1) ... "And Yishai Fathered David" (Ruth
We began with the question of the purpose of Megillat Ruth, and discussed the message that arises from its plot, namely, the abundance and influence of acts of kindness. It still remains for us to discuss one detail: the framework within which all of these events occurred - the passage from the time period of the judges to that of the kings.
It seems as if the text wished to express the message of man's responsibility and his ability to be active in the world specifically at this point in time, when the Israelite monarchy is about to commence. There is no one like the king to represent the highest level that man is capable of reaching, in terms of his authority and power to act. It is specifically at this time period, then, that it must be stressed that man must invest all his efforts in doing kindness, and then he will be able to build worlds, rebuild ruins, and redeem.
There are two ways in which God rules the world. One way is fixed from the beginning according to a hidden plan, and man must come to terms with it and accept it as absolute truth. The other is placed in the hands of man and he is given almost unlimited powers to influence his world. Megillat Ruth, then, comes to stress man's ability and obligation to do good; this is the power which brought about the lineage of King David and eventually the Mashiach, may he redeem us speedily.
"R. Ze'ira said: This Megillah does not discuss purity or impurity, commandments or prohibitions; so why was it written? To teach how great the reward is for the bestowers of kindness." (Ruth Rabba 2:15)
Translated by Sara Krengel
"Megillat Ruth" is Hebrew for "The Scroll of Ruth". Traditionally, the book of Ruth is scribed on its own scroll (separate from the other books of the Bible) and usually is affixed to a single post (aytz chayim, or "tree of life").
'Megillat Ruth was written by the Prophet Samuel, to indicate the genealogy of Kind David for Ruth the Moavite. We learn from the writing of this Megillah that there was Divine assent in the matter, for the end of the Megillah recounts David's ancestry and David was born on Shavuot and died on Shavuot' [Jerusalem Talmud - Chagigah 2,3, Talmud Bavli - Shabbat 30b].
Samuel the prophet, the author of the Megillat Ruth, was the
one who anointed His Majesty King David and proclaimed him king. Samuel saw
first hand how weak the knowledge of the nation of
It's 85 psukim is the least of all books, accounting for less than 0.4% of the psukim in Tanakh. (Contrast this with Tehilim, with 10.9% of the psukim in Tanakh.)
Its 4947 letters are also the least in Tanakh, but its 1294 words are more than Shir HaShirim. Ruth's psukim average about 50% longer than Shir HaShirim's.
Of the 85 Psukim in Megilat Ruth, all but 8 begin with the letter VAV. That's 90.5% of its psukim begin with a VAV.
Exactly what
is the significance of this fact?
This story starts in
Moav was the son of
Devarim
(Deuteronomy) 23:3-4 An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the
congregation of HaShem; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter
into the congregation of HaShem for ever: Because they met you not with bread
and with water in the way, when ye came forth out of Egypt; and because they
hired against thee Balaam the son of Beor of Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse thee.
By the time the Bnei Yisrael
came out of Mitzrayim, ungratefulness and immorality had become part and parcel
of the national character of Moav (Bamidbar 25:1-9).
Moavites, therefore, are a picture of those who rebel against Ha-Shem. They are ungrateful for what He has given them and turn instead to false gods.
It is therefore quite remarkable to encounter a Moavitess, Ruth, who was the epitome of kindness. Ruth was a princess, the daughter of Eglon, King of Moav, according to our Sages (Nazir 23b). Moav typifies an immoral people who have left the ways of God and lack kindness. Because of their apostasy, the Sages decreed that it was forbidden for an Israelite to marry a Moavite man (Yevamoth 76b). Ruth, though a Moavitess, demonstrated kindness par excellence! So great was this kindness that she merited becoming an ancestor of King David and an ancestor of the Kingly line.
The commandment, of Devarim 23:3-6, will play a pivotal role in the story of Ruth.
The major theme of this book is famine, as we can see from the first verse.
(This was one of the ten famines.) This famine was the result of “everyman
doing what was right in his own eyes”. (7 Laws of Hillel - "as is in
another place") The reaction of the people to this famine is what drove
Elimelech, a judge, to move to the
This book comes to teach us about:
1. Marrying within the proper class: Ruth, as a convert of the royal class (Eglon, King of Moab, was her father), was able to marry Judges (Kings and other ruling class). This ensures that the ruling class will be able to rule without letting friendship or love with another class, cloud their decisions. This is why army officers are not allowed to fraternize with the troops. So, a convert is allowed to a judge as Ruth is allowed to Boaz.
A convert, in general, is eligible
to a Kohen to a Judge and to any
“So, the laws of intermarriage for
us as Nazareans go further in that we are not allowed not only to marry outside
with a Gentile, but we are further not to marry anyone that does not belong to
the Royal family.”
“I think that the clue is that we
are Royal Consorts and by "we" I mean Nazareans we will rule and
judge with Mashiach, thus any and every true Nazarean belongs ipso facto to the
Royal Household of Yisrael, every Nazarean belongs to the Royal Family of
Yisrael.”
Machlon and Kilion married within the ruling class, but they married the wrong ruling class: Moabite as opposed to Israelite. Now the sin against the Memra (Logos) was that they did not marry either a Jewish woman of the Royal House of Israel, or a convert.
“The so called Ten Commandments are
nothing else nor less than the ten attributes of Mashiach.”
The tikkun, rectification, of this sin was found when Naomi helped Ruth to convert. When Ruth married Boaz, the ultimate rectification has taken place: The royal convert has married the judge of the generation. This tikkun is made complete when the text says:
Ruth
4:9-10 Then Boaz announced to the
elders and all the people, "Today you are witnesses that I have bought
from Naomi all the property of Elimelech, Kilion and Machlon. I have also
acquired Ruth the Moabitess, Machlon's widow, as my wife, in order to maintain
the name of the dead with his property, so that his name will not disappear
from among his family or from the town records. Today you are witnesses!"
The Sages teach us that Ruth and Naomi arrived in Beit Lechem in Nisan 16, when the Omer is reaped. It is, therefore, instructive to examine this period of 50 days leading from Pesach to Shavuot.
We can see that the days of Sefirat ha-omer as having some value in and of themselves. While this seven-week period in Jewish history served as the build-up to the giving of the Torah, it also served as the time when the Jewish people coalesced into a nation and raised themselves up from the depths (the forty-ninth level) of impurity to which they had plunged. While this is also connected to the giving of the Torah, it has independent significance as well, from both a national and a religious point of view. Through the counting of the Omer, we highlight the path from the offering of the Omer, which was made of barley (animal food), to the offering of the two loaves (shtei ha-lechem), which represents food fit for man. We thus celebrate the rise of spiritual man above the animal kingdom, and above the animal nature that is part of man as well. Within this perspective, the focus of Sefirat ha-omer is on the Jewish people themselves, and no one day in more important than any other day.
The counting of the forty-nine days of the Omer represents a lack of intelligence and spiritual sleep. The Omer offering that was offered on the second day of Passover consisted of barley which is considered to be mainly animal food, nourishing the animal intellect. This means that barley and the Omer period resonates with animal intelligence which represents a lack of knowledge. For the animal mind is very limited in what it can comprehend. A lack of knowledge and awareness enables the forces of evil to create barriers to a person's goals, thus throwing him into a spiritual sleep.
Barley is traditionally regarded in the
Talmud as animal food, while wheat is the staple of humans. The Omer brought on
the Festival of Freedom, Pesach, comes from barley because we achieved only
physical freedom with our Exodus from
The bringing of the omer is in many ways
parallel to the separation of Terumah. Like
Terumah, the omer is called "reishit"
- the first (Vayikra
Now, one of the things which characterizes Terumah is that it must be brought from the best part of the crop (see Mishna Terumot 2:4). We would likewise expect that the omer, which makes ALL grains of the wheat family permissible, should come from the choicest grain - namely wheat. But this is not so - actually, the omer comes from barley, which is generally animal food and (except for the offering of the sota and the omer itself) is never permitted for Temple offerings! What can we learn from this commandment?
There are many fine punctilious Jews whom
we could characterize as "shtei ha-lechem" Jews. Every
aspect of God's service must always be in “the best possible
way”. Any other kind of service has no value in their eyes.
According to this approach, we would never dare bring mere barley as a
Yet what can we do - "first" means not only "best" but also the temporal first, and barley just happens to ripen months before wheat. In commanding the bringing of the omer, the Torah seems to be telling us: Don't be a "shtei ha-lechem Jew." Of course, God's service demands the best, but the best is determined in practice according to what is possible and practical. If the only grain available at Pesach is barley, then by all means bring barley to the altar! But does this mean that we should be "omer Jews" - settling for second best, reconciling ourselves to a bedi'avad situation? The Torah rejects this extreme also. We ARE allowed, and even commanded, to bring barley -on the condition that we IMMEDIATELY begin counting the days towards the time when we will be able to fulfill the mitzvah of bringing the new grain crop to the Temple in its fullest glory - the "first fruits" of the wheat crop represented by the two loaves. God's forbearance towards us should never be an excuse for indolence.
Elimelech – To me the King - THE NAME OF THE MAN WAS
ELIMELECH, since he used to say, ‘To me shall the kingdom come. A
descendant of Nachshon ben Aminadav, prince of the tribe of
Husband of Naomi, father of Machlon and Kilion. He was a
prince of
Said Rav Hanan bar Rava in the name of Rav: Elimelech,
Salmon, Ploni Almoni, and the father of Naomi were all descended from Nachshon
ben Aminadav. What does he come to teach us by this statement? That even the
merit of one’s ancestors is of no avail when one leaves eretz
Rashi informs us of the rest of the story. Elimelech was
among the richest people alive at the time, and when the famine hit the
Naomi - (no’am, pleasant) "Her actions were pleasant and sweet" – Ruth Rabbah 1. Her name also carries within it a significant word: Ami – (my people) – a word which will play a crucial role in her relationship with Ruth.
Elimelech's wife, and the mother of Machlon and Kilion. She
is the only female to leave the
Machlon ben Elimelech - "blotted out", sickness.
The son of Elimelech and Naomi, and Ruth's husband. That
Ha-Shem forgave him is indicated by the fact that Ruth and Boaz raised up his
seed. He was one of three (3) males and one of two (2) sons who left the
Machlon comes from the word "Mechila" meaning forgiveness.
Machlon – from halal, meaning profane. Because he profaned his body.
Another interpretation: Machlon and Kilion – because they were completely wiped out and disappeared from the earth – Bava Bathra 91a; Ruth Rabbah, Yalkut Shim’oni 600.
Kilion ben Elimelech - "perished from the world”, destruction.
The son of Elimelech and Naomi. He was Orpah's husband. He
was one of three (3) males and one of two (2) sons who left the
In Scripture, Machlon and Kilion are also called Yoash and
Saraph (1 Chronicles
Bava Bathra 91b
Kilion is derived from kelayah, extinction. – Yalkut Shim’oni 600
Kilion – From Caliyah, meaning destroyed. Because he was judged worthy of destruction.
Another interpretation: Machlon and Kilion – because they were completely wiped out and disappeared from the earth – Bava Bathra 91a; Ruth Rabbah, Yalkut Shim’oni 600.
Orpah bat Eglon - She turned her back, the "nape of the neck", on her Mother-in-law. Daughter of Eglon, king of Moav.
Kilion's wife and the daughter of Eglon, King of Moav. She
represents the wife who yields no fruit. She turned away from the God and the
The Midrash (Ruth Rabbah
When a potential convert, with genuine intentions, is distanced from the Jewish people by being made to feel unfit, the consequences for the Jewish people can be disastrous. The same occurred to Orpah. When she was discouraged from joining the ranks of the Jews, her children were given vast powers over the Jewish people. One of these children was Goliath, another was Yishbi; both of them were massive warriors who focused their efforts on fighting against the Jewish people.
For forty days Goliath blasphemed HaShem, challenging the Jews to try to stop him. All were terrified until David, a descendent of Ruth, became so incensed that he marched forth and slew his cousin with a sling shot.
Ruth bat Eglon - ‘Saw’, i.e. ‘Considered Well’, similar to the Aramaic translation of the word "to inherit" (Hebrew "yarash" = Aramaic "yarat," see the Targum to Numbers 24:18; apparently Moavite was similar to Aramaic in this respect as the Moavite stone also has the word "yeruta.")
RUTH is from the Hebrew meaning "friendship".
Machlon's wife and the daughter of Eglon, King of Moav. Ruth carried with her the inheritance of Elimelech. ,ur is derived from vur to saturate, which R. Johanan connects together. Daughter of Eglon, king of Moav. Ruth represents Gentile converts who were former Idolaters, but are now Jews by choice. 'When we received the Torah, we were all converts' (Agan). This means that at Sinai, when we received the Torah, we were all converts. That is why the rules of conversion are based on the events that led to the giving of the Torah. So, as a convert, Ruth represents the House of Israel when they were all of one mind and one purpose, the day they received Torah. The House of Israel stood that day as one man, and as one man they had a whole heart dedicated to Ha-Shem and a total dedication to His Word, His Torah, His Messiah.
According to the Gemara (Bava Batra 14b) she was called Ruth, because her descendant David 'saturated' HaShem with songs and praises. (Ruth can be read "ravat" which mean saturate.)
Ruth is from the Hebrew meaning "friendship."
Gematria of ‘Ruth’ is 606. Add the 7 Noachide and we get 613, the number of mitzvoth in Torah.
Ploni Almoni – Ploni = hidden, Almoni = nameless.
Another name for Tov the brother of Elimelech. He was the
nearest kin and potential redeemer of Ruth. He was the first (nearest) of the
two (2) Kinsman-Redeemers. He represents Messiah
ben Yoseph in the story.
Boaz ben Salmon – “In Him there is strength”. He was also known as Judge Ivtzan, the 11th "Shofet". [Ibn Ezra, Judges 12:8]. Now Ivtzan already had 30 sons and 30 daughters, all of whom had died before this story took place. Ivtzan died in the year 2793 (Rashi).
“Strength or rod of iron” [Ken]
The Sages agree that Boaz is another name for Ivtzan. Two reasons, for the name change, are given in the Targum, according to Rabbi Moshe Alshich:
“Zg means strength”. The letter c has the numerical value of 2 which is added to Zg to signify that he had been strong two ways, thus his name became Zgc.
Boaz combines two words "Bo" and "Az," which means "he comes with strength"
Boaz was Elimelech’s nephew and second closest redeemer. He
was the Rosh Bet Din, the head, of the Sanhedrin. He was the second of the two
(2) Kinsman-Redeemers. Boaz represents Messiah
ben David.
Concerning
Boaz it will documented that he was the Rosh Bet Din in Bet Lechem see Midrash
on Sefer Ruth. As to Yachin, I do not have any authoritative Jewish
commentaries on Sefer Divre HaYamim (Chronicles) nor on Sefer Melachim (Kings).
I have only a small Judaica Library and hope and pray that it is enlarged soon
because of the need in this research. From memory I can recall once hearing at
Yeshivah that Yachin (which name means "G-d will establish")
personified courage, and Boaz (composed of two words Bo = in Him, and Az =
strength, personified strength, the pillars therefore testifying that through
G-d's Temple (Theocratic Governance), G-d would supply Yisrael with strength
and courage. That is all I can say from this land down under poverty stricken
in Judaica:-)
However
if he wants me to let him into a secret I shall do so. In Sefer Revelation
10.
|1536| If anyone |0161| captivity |4863| gathers |1519| into |0161| captivity
|5217| he goes. |1536| If anyone |1722| by |3162| a sword |0615| will kill,
|1163| must |0846| he |1722| by |3162| a sword |0615| be killed. |5602| Here
|2076| is |3588| the |5281| patience |2532| and |3588| the |4102| faith |3588|
of the |0040| holy ones.
The
Catholic New Jerusalem Bible translates:
10.
Those for captivity to captivity; those for death by the sword to death by the
sword. This is why the saints must have perseverance and faith.
Similarly
also Dr. David G. Stern's Jewish New Testament
The
Revised Standard Version translates:
10. If any one is to be taken captive, to
captivity he goes; if any one slays with the sword, with the sword must he be
slain. Here is a call for the endurance and faith of the saints.
The New
American Bible translates:
10.
Anyone destined for captivity goes into captivity. Anyone destined to be slain
by the sword shall be slain by the sword. Such is the faithful endurance of the
holy ones.
The New
Revised Standard Version translates:
10. If
you are to be taken captive, into captivity you go; if you kill with the sword,
with the sword you must be killed. Here is a call for the endurance and faith
of the saints.
I am
most sorry if I am confusing him too much but bear with me please. Does Your
Eminence see what I see?
Let us
go back to the New Revised Standard Version translation:
"If
you are to be taken captive, into captivity you go;"
In
other words any resistance to captivity and the Diaspora is futile if Ha-Shem
so has foreordained.
"if
you kill with the sword, with the sword you must be killed."
Again
military resistance against the powers that be in order to make a country Torah
observant a la Bar-Kochba is also futile.
"Here
is a call for the endurance and faith of the saints."
What about
if I complicate things and translate this phrase as: "Here is a call from
Yachin and Boaz of the saints." Not so crazy after all? no? In fact, we
could render this verse as "Here is a call for the strength (Boaz) and
courage (Yachin) of the Tzaddikim" and thereby a perfect allusion of these
two columns at the entrance of the
I was
going to share this with Your Excellency on Yom Rishon in the Shiur but I was
pressed of time since I had an appointment after class with His Honour Adon
Yochanan regarding a small yet most interesting essay he wants to publish
before the 17th of Tammuz. I am exceedingly glad Your Eminence keeps me on my
toes, and well guesses that it possible that this Hakham is not telling the
whole story for some reason or another :-)
Now if
he goes to Revelation 14:12 there is further elucidation:
|5602|
Here |9999| {the} |5281| patience |3588| of the |0040| holy ones |2076| is.
|5602| Here |3588| those |5083| keeping |3588| the |1785| commands |3588| of
|2316| G-d |2532| and |3588| the |4102| faith |2424| of Yeshuah.
Now the
Greek word used here for patience is "hupomone" and pronounced as in
Spanish "hoop-om-on-ay" means "cheerful (or hopeful)
endurance," or "constancy over time." This is not "Yachin =
Courage" but "Boaz = Strength." And what was the strength of
Hakham Boaz who married to Rut? Was it not his great strength in "the
keeping of the commandments of G-d and the guarding of the faith of Yeshuah
(David)" as a Rosh Bet Din in Bet Lechem whilst the rich and powerful
would no share with their people their great wealth in times of drought and
hunger but fled to Moab?
Similar
allusions are found in Sefer Revelation 1:9; 2:2;
O.K. I am confused here somewhat and do not follow the cast
of characters and their roles. Who does the third kinsman represents? I mean he
has identified two of them as Mashiach ben Yosef and Mashiach ben David, who is
the third Mashiach?
So, Boaz has an uncle who started this whole story. Strong’s defines an “uncle” as:
1730 dowd, dode; or (short.) dod, dode; from an unused root mean. prop. to boil, i.e. (fig.) to love; by impl. a love-token, Beloved, friend; spec. an uncle:-(well-) beloved, father's brother, love, uncle.
Judges 12:7-11
Jephthah (He will open) led
The ten elders (Ruth 4:2) – These ten represent the
Congregation, which is the body of Messiah. In a previous study, I found that
the Word of God was found in the number 10. This is also the minimum number of
men required to form a congregation (Numbers
1 Corinthians 12:27
Now you are the body of Messiah, and each one of you is a part of it.
Avraham Avinu left eretz
Bereshit (Genesis) 12:10
And there was a famine in the land: and Abram went down into
Notice the similarity of the words that Torah uses to describe these two departures:
Ruth
1:1 Now it came to pass in the
days when the judges ruled, that there was a famine in the land. And a certain
man of Beth-lehem-judah went to sojourn in the country of
They both left because of a famine. They both “sojourned” in a foreign land.
However, there are certain differences between these two verses. The famine in the days of Avraham Avinu is described as “grievous”. There is no such modifier used to describe the famine in the days of Elimelech. The Torah mentions that Elimelech took his family, while no such mention is made, initially, for Avraham Avinu.
Avraham Avinu chooses Mitzrayim, most likely because that
land is watered by the
The ending for these two stories is quite different. Elimelech
never return from the
Avraham Avinu, on the other hand, returns from Mitzrayim with fabulous gifts and his wife Sarah returns with Paro’s daughter as her maid.
Why is the outcome of these two stories so different? Why does Ha-Shem bless Avraham Avinu and smite Elimelech?
A very poignant portion of Sefer Ruth involves the mitzvah of the forgotten sheaf:
Devarim
(Deuteronomy) 24:19-22 When you
cut down your harvest in your field, and have forgotten a sheaf in the field,
you shall not go again to fetch it; it shall be for the stranger, for the
orphan, and for the widow; that the Lord your God may bless you in all the
work of your hands. When you beat your olive tree, you shall not go over the
boughs again; it shall be for the stranger, for the orphan, and for the
widow. When you gather the grapes of your vineyard, you shall not glean it
afterward; it shall be for the stranger, for the orphan, and for the widow.
And you shall remember that you were a slave in the
In this short passage, we note that HaShem is emphasizing “the stranger, the fatherless and the widow”.
This is has considerable significance for our subject, because Ruth is going to glean in the role of all three of them!
Masechet Soferim records the practice of reading Megilat
Ruth with a blessing "al miqra Megillah" on Shavuot. Ruth is read on
the end of the first day of "gathering", until half the book and it
is completed at the end of the second day. And there are those who say that all
(the Megillah readings) are begun on the night after Shabbat before the holiday
and thus the people have practiced.... (
The popular custom as recorded above is not practiced anywhere today. Currently, there are four customs concerning the reading of Megilat Ruth on Shavuot. The Sephardic custom is not to read the Megillah during prayer services at all. Rather, it is read as part of the "tikkun lel Shavuoth", on the night of Shavuot, and half is read on the first afternoon of the holiday and half on the second afternoon (perhaps similar to the first custom that Masechet Soferim recorded.)
The Galician Hassidic groups read the Megillah before the
second day's Torah reading (in the diaspora). They read from a Chumash and not
from a scroll and they read individually. The custom of the Mitnagdim is to
have the cantor read publicly from either a scroll, if one is available, or
from a Chumash, without a prior blessing. Some groups in
Since in many communities, it is customary to read Megillat Ruth on Shavuot. What are the reasons for this?
1.'Ruth is read Shavuot because the timing of its events occurred 'at the beginning of the barley harvest,' and this period is also the time of Shavuot' (Abudraham).
2.'The reading of Ruth on Shavuot is a reminder of the stand at Mt. Sinai, when the people of Israel received a total of six hundred and thirteen mitzvoth - six hundred and six mitzvoth in addition to the seven previous Noachide Laws. The numerical value of Hebrew letters which comprise the word Ruth is six hundred and six' (Teshu'ot Chen).
Ruth is the archetype of a convert and Shavuot (=Mattan Torah) represents the “mass conversion” of Am Yisra’el (see BT Keritut 9a, MT Issurei Bi’ah 13:1-4). This explanation is also found in the Mahzor Vitri.
3.'From her very birth, Ruth was worthy of accepting upon herself the yoke of mitzvoth; and the very letters of her name bear witness to it. The letters for Ruth add up to six hundred and six which together with the seven Noachide Laws add up to six hundred and thirteen' (the Gaon of Vilna).
4.'Our fathers had the status of converts when they
accepted the Torah (in order to enter the covenant they were required to
undergo circumcision and immersion as is the case with converts). In honor of
Ruth who was a convert and became the mother of
5.'Megilat Ruth was written by the Prophet Samuel, to indicate the genealogy of Kind David for Ruth the Moabite. We learn from the writing of this Megillah that there was Divine assent in the matter, for the end of the Megillah recounts David's ancestry and David was born on Shavuot and died on Shavuot' (Bechor Shor).
"King David died on Atzeret, that is Shavuot. (
6.The story of Ruth is read at the time of the giving
of the Torah so that we might know that the written Torah and the Oral Torah,
are together one Torah, and one is not Possible without the other. For David,
the anointed of G-d unto all generations, was descended from a Moabite woman,
and his legitimacy depended on the Oral Torah - which declared that only a
Moabite man was prohibited from entering the fold of
Ruth was the ancestor of King David, and he is the ancestor of Mashiach. The book of Ruth concludes with the connection between King David and Ruth. King David died on Shavuot (Jerusalem Talmud, Chagigah, 2:3), and since the Gemara (Rosh Hashanah 11a) says "HaShem completes the years of the righteous from day to day," it follows that David was born on Shavuot. Hence, it is customary to read Megillat Ruth in his honor.
7. The reading of Megilat Ruth serves as a perfect focus for the two themes of Shavuot - Torah & Eretz Yisrael.
8. “What does Megillat Ruth have to do with Shavuot, the season of the giving of the Torah? To teach you that the Torah was given through afflictions and poverty.” (Midrashic collection Ruth Zuta 1:1)
Ruth is a prime model of an individual who made a completely
sincere commitment to G-d, Torah, and a Torah Life. When we think of Matan
Torah at Sinai, we tend to see the whole if
Using a typical Jewish approach, an individual is equivalent to a whole nation. Shavuot is a celebration of both historic conversions.
The original intention of HaShem, that the Torah should be the property of every human being is steadfast and has not been terminated. The tactics have changed, not the goal. The Torah was not given to the non-Jewish community directly, but it was given indirectly to the entire mankind as an eschatological reality. The ultimate destiny of human fulfillment, in the messianic age, is for everybody to embrace the Torah, our faith. Our task has been and still is to teach the torah to Man kind, to influence the secular world, and by that, save the world from destruction. We are the executers and messengers for the entire world; our task is to represent the moral outlook on life to which the Jew has committed himself. The gentile world should be able to watch the Jews and admire our way of living, for we bear witness to the unique relationship man has with God.
Contrary to what many might think, the Jew has a mission. Since we have not yet perfected ourselves, it is inappropriate to act on our mission, but the idea of this mission is still correct. We must be a "beacon of light" for all the nations to follow. This mandate, however, can not be attained in terms of teaching or writing Judaic philosophy; the mere publication of ethical books, no matter how brilliant, will not bring the world closer to God. People are not attracted to abstract morality. Traditional Judaism says we do the teaching by example.
It is now clear how the redemption of the world (Messianic age) is connected to man inheriting the Torah. Matan Torah initiated the Messianic process of universal conversion. Judaism predicts that at some period in the future all man kind will not only come close to God and embrace our faith, but they will also join the sacred community dedicated to the service of God!
Har Sinai represents the private covenant between the Jew and the all-mighty, while King David represents the Messianic age, where the giving of the Torah is a universal affair. His Majesty King David will fulfill what was anticipated by the Almighty at Sinai. The full realization to the giving of the Torah will be achieved at the time of the Mashiach. It is no wonder we read Megilat Ruth on Shavuot, announcing the birth of His Majesty King David and the realization that the Torah will be the property of all mankind.
The tapestry like connections between King David and
Shavuot, King David and
* * *
Spiritually, there is a relation between a baal teshuva ("returnee") and a convert, even though the baal teshuva is born a Jew. His spiritual service of being lost and reestablishing his identity is a process which is similar to conversion. This is the general state of being of our generation prior to the coming of Mashiach. When Mashiach comes he will cause all righteous Jews to become baalei teshuva.
Everyone must experience "conversion." On Shavuot, the giving of the Torah, the entire Jewish People are called converts. This is why we read Megilat Ruth on Shavuot.
There is definitely something unique about female converts.
This is not only with regard to
My method for studying Sefer Ruth, is to identify words of symbolic significance, typically the nouns and verbs in each verse, and define those words according to their true meaning. After we have discovered their meaning, I will rephrase the verse by substituting the meaning rather than the actual word. This rephrasing I will call “Translation”.
Armed with this “translation”, I am going to interpret this “translation” in the light of the wisdom of the Sages and of the Nazarean Codicil to understand a deeper meaning. This “deeper meaning” will be called “Translation”.
Thus we will examine each verse individually to discern the overall meaning of Sefer Ruth.
Note: I am using the translation provided by Yalkut Me’am Lo’ez “The Torah Anthology – The Book of Ruth”, for each verse in this study.
[Most of this material is based on Zakovitch’s introduction to his commentary on Ruth in the Mikra l’Yisra’el series]
The four chapters of the Megillah (even though this division is a Christian one and only shows up in Jewish sources with the first printed editions of Mikra’ot G’dolot in the early 16th century, the division is quite helpful in understanding the literary and thematic structure of Ruth) divide in a symmetric fashion:
Chapter 1: Moving from Beit Lechem to Moav (the loss of Elimelech’s field stands as the background to their self-imposed exile) and returning to Beit-Lechem; the painful losses along the way
Chapter 2: One day in Boaz’s field
Chapter 3: One night in Boaz’s granary
Chapter 4: The redemption of the field (and Ruth); the glorious gains of acceptance among the community of the townswomen and the legacy of the family – leading to the birth of David
CHAPTERS 1 & 4
1. The first and fourth chapters both have “female choruses” whose words are related to the designation of a name (we will yet revisit the issue of names in the Megillah; a fascinating subject which properly belongs to the fourth chapter) associated with Naomi. Note the difference: In the first chapter, their role is negative and their words are brief; the opposite holds true (in both regards) in the final chapter.
2. Each chapter mentions God’s blessing (the harvest 1:6;
Ruth –
3. In both the first and final chapters, a protagonist
“shines” when compared to another positive character. In the first chapter, it
is only Ruth’s outstanding devotion that makes Orpah’s loyalty pale; in the
final chapter, the Goel (redeemer) who is prepared to act with kindness, is
seen as a lesser benefactor when compared with Boaz. Indeed, each of the
“lesser” personalities here is prepared to “go the distance” until the
“ultimate” test is presented. Orpah will not follow Naomi to the dreary
existence she portrays in
4.The first chapter begins with the lineage (such as it is)
of Elimelech’s family (Ephratim – 1:2) and the fourth chapter ends with the
lineage from Peretz to David (
5.The opening phrase of the Megillah: Vay’hi biY’mei Sh’fot haShof’tim the beginning events in the era of the Shoftim; the final step in the line of Boaz (Peretz) is David, leading us into the monarchic period.
CHAPTERS 2 & 3
Some of the differences between the second and third chapters are natural results of the different settings. Since the second chapter takes place out in the field, there are several secondary actors present – which is, of course, not the case during that fateful night on the threshing floor of chapter 3.
Several interesting parallels/contrasts:
1. Each chapter begins with a conversation between Naomi and Ruth, embodying a suggestion towards action that will set further events into motion. In the first case (Chapter 2), it is Ruth who makes the suggestion (we will discuss this next week), whereas the suggestion of Chapter 3 belongs to Naomi. In both cases, however, it is Ruth who is going to take the action.
2. In Chapter 2, Ruth appears in the field in advance of Boaz; in Chapter 3, it is Boaz who is on the threshing floor before Ruth arrives.
3. In both cases, when Boaz “discovers” Ruth, he first asks (either the harvesters or her herself) who she is. The common v’Hinei which serves to accentuate the beginning of their interaction appears in 2:4 and 3:8.
4. Note how the roles of Ruth and Boaz intertwine between these two chapters. In 2:8-9, Boaz suggests a course of action to Ruth which involves him (and his field); in 3:9, Ruth directs Boaz how to act towards her.
5. In both chapters, Boaz demonstrates great concern for
Ruth’s dignity (compare
6. Each chapter concludes with Ruth returning to Naomi’s house; in each case, they wait until the end (the verb Kaleh is used in the final verse of each chapter) of a process – in Chapter 2, it is the end of the harvest season; in Chapter 3, they wait for Boaz to conclude his dealings at the city gates.
* * *
The name Boaz appears 18 times in the Megillah, and Ruth's 12 times. (Both of these counts ignore the genealogy at the end of the Megillah which is not, properly, part of the story). Note that both of these counts are divisible by six (6). the number six has some association with the house of David. Therefore, Megillat Ruth, which is really the "prologue" of the Davidic narratives, has several structural (as well as over textual) "sixes". This is likely the reason that when Jews in the Middle Ages adopted a (somewhat universal) figure with six points, they named it Magen David (there is no immediate connection between this mystical symbol and David that appears in either Biblical or Rabbinic texts).
Besides the introductory verses, which establish the premise of the story, the first chapter is made up of 17 verses (6-22) which are made up of two even subsections of 8 verses each, with the fulcrum-verse (14) in the middle:
1.vv. 6-13: Naomi, Orpah and Ruth
2.v. 14: “Orpah kissed her mother-in-law and Ruth cleaved to her”
3.vv. 14-22: Naomi and Ruth
Note that the “keyword” (Shuv - “return”) appears a total of twelve times in this brief chapter. Note how evenly the use of this verb is distributed in the chapter:
6 times: “Shuv” appears in the first half of the section (vv. 6,7,8,10,11,12)
6 times: “Shuv” appears in the second half of the section (vv. 15,15,16,21,22,22)
6 times: “Shuv” indicates a return to Beit-Lechem (vv. 6,7,10,21,22,22)
6 times: “Shuv” indicates a return to Moav (vv. 8, 11,12,15,15,16)
4 times: “Shuv” refers to Naomi (always returning to Beit Lechem) (vv. 6,7,21,22)
4 times: “Shuv” refers to both of the Kalot (vv. 8,10,11,12)
4 times: “Shuv” refers to one of the Kalot (vv. 15,16,17,22)
Naomi speaks four times in the chapter: twice in the first section (vv. 8-9, 11-13), twice in the second (v. 15, 20-21). Note the parallels between her first speech in the first section (vv. 8-9) and her first speech in the second section (v. 15); both adjure the daughter(s) to return to their homes, emphasizing the positive in what awaits them. The second speeches in both sections are also parallel to each other – both stress the bitterness (and use that word – Mar ) which Naomi has experienced at the hand of God.
Note also how the second section ends (v. 22) with an echo of the first verse of the first section (v. 6):
v.
6: Then she arose with her daughters-in-law, to return from the country of
Moav; for she had heard in the country of Moav that HaShem had visited his
people and given them bread.
v.
22. So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moavite, her daughter-in-law, with her, who
returned from the country of Moav; and they came to Beit-Lechem at the
beginning of the barley harvest.
The symmetry of the chapters sets up our story as the bridge
between the period of the Judges (when “there was no King in