Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJohn Kitto Morning Bible Devotions: July 8
Today is: Saturday, April 20th, 2024 (Show Today's Devotion)
Select a Day for a Devotion in the Month of July: (Show All Months)
Ruth 4
The incident thus far has been well illustrated by Mr. Postans: Note: Journal of Sacred Literature, iv. 48.—“Natives of the East care little for sleeping accommodations, but rest where weariness overcomes them, lying on the ground. They are, however, careful to cover their feet, and to do this have a chudda, or sheet of coarse cloth, that they tuck under the feet, and drawing it up over the body, suffer it to cover the face and head. An Oriental seldom changes his position, and we are told that Boaz did so because ‘he was afraid;’ the covering of the feet in ordinary cases is consequently not disturbed. I have frequently observed the singular effect of this custom, when riding out in a native city before dawn; figures with their feet so covered lying like monumental effigies in the pathway, and in the open verandahs of the houses—a practice that at once explains the necessity for clearing the city gates when it is dark, as we read was the case at Jericho, in Jos_2:5-7. Neither men nor women alter their dress at night, and the laboring class, or travellers in a serai, where there are men, women, and children, rest together, the men with their feet covered, and the women wrapped in their veils or sarees.”
Boaz soon found that the woman was Ruth. She had come there, at the suggestion of Naomi, who informed her that Boaz was the nearest kinsman of her deceased husband, and seeing that he had died childless, on him, according to the old patriarchal practice, adopted by the law of Moses, devolved the duty of making her his wife, in order that, if she had children, the eldest should be counted the legal heir of the deceased, so that his name might not be lost in Israel, nor his heritage pass into another family. This was a public duty, which a man could not refuse to discharge without discredit; and it was of great importance to the woman, seeing that her place in the social system of the Hebrews, and all the consideration that belonged to motherhood, depended on it. We see an ancient instance of this in the anxiety which Tamar manifested that the conditions of this obligation should not be left unaccomplished. Genesis 36. To Naomi it was of special importance; for if Ruth married thus, the first child born to her would be accounted as belonging to her deceased son—therefore her grandson; and she would thus be once more restored to her place as a mother in Israel.
This was the mode in which Ruth was to claim from Boaz the discharge of this solemn duty to the living and to the dead. The act is strange and startling to us. It must be accounted for partly by the customs already alluded to; partly by the simple manners of these ancient times; and much by the consideration of the difference of ideas as to modest demeanor in different ages and nations. Thus, for instance, the exposure of the face to public gaze, is at this day regarded as the height of infamy and immodesty by an eastern woman, which yet with us is the common practice, and is consistent with the most perfect decorum. We can hardly suppose that so serious and godly a woman as Naomi would have given such counsel, had there been anything, according to the views of the times, conventionally wrong in it, or calculated to offend the moral sense of the age. Had that been so, she must have been aware of the danger of disgusting such a man as Boaz, instead of ensuring his protection; and we think that his appreciation of at least the motives of the proceeding, must be regarded as stamping its true character—when he emphatically declared, “All the city of my people do know that thou art a virtuous woman.” It shows, in every case, the perfect confidence which Naomi had in the virtue of Ruth, and in the honor of Boaz, whom indeed she regarded as already, in the eye of the law, the husband of her son’s widow.
It seems to have been necessary that the woman, in this case, should claim from the kinsman the performance of this duty in a certain form, by saying to him, as Ruth does now— “Spread thy skirt over thine handmaid, for thou art a near kinsman.” This, although essentially figurative, has some literal meaning in it; for, even to this day, it is customary among the Jews for a man to throw the skirt of his tallith or prayer-veil over his spouse, and cover her head with it. We still think, however, that the occasion for making this demand was unusual, and to a certain degree indiscreet. This may be gathered, from the anxiety which Boaz himself eventually expressed—while doing the utmost honor to her character and motives—that it should not be known a woman had been there. He must have feared that evil tongues might misconstrue, to his and her discredit, a proceeding far from evil when rightly understood. It is not unlikely that when this matter had been first suggested by Naomi, Ruth, as a stranger, had shrunk from making this claim publicly in the harvest-field, and that Naomi had, therefore, to spare her in that respect, devised this mode of enabling her to do so in private, in which she would find less difficulty, seeing that Boaz had already won her confidence by his fatherly consideration for her. It may be that desire to evade one difficulty, somewhat blinded this good woman to the danger that may have lurked in the other alternative.
Boaz cordially responded to the claim; but he informed Ruth, that Naomi had labored under a mistake. There was a kinsman, nearer than himself, on whom the right devolved. If, as was possible, that kinsman should decline to assume the obligation, then, said Boaz, “will I do the part of kinsman to thee, as the Lord liveth.”
The next day he accordingly took the necessary measures for bringing the matter to a close. All the circumstances of the process are interesting and suggestive; but we must forbear to dwell upon more than one or two of them. In those days, and in the absence of lawyers and written documents, public business was, as we have before had occasion to observe, transacted in the gates of towns, both for convenience of attendance, and to ensure the presence of witnesses. The elders of the town seem to have been in the habit of repairing thither to transact such business in the early morning, when the people would be going forth to their business at the market, or in the fields. So Boaz went to the gate, and when the nearer kinsman passed by, he called him aside, and requested ten of the elders present to give particular attention, as witnesses, to the proceedings.
Knowing the man he had to deal with, Boaz began with the circumstances involved in the transaction, instead of with what was really its main feature. He apprized him that Naomi meant to sell, for her present necessities, such right as remained with her in the lands of her husband; the right of purchase, he added, belonged to the person he addressed as nearest of kin; but if he declined, Boaz himself stood next, and was ready to make the purchase. The man liked the land, and declared himself ready to do what was expected from him. But on being apprized that it was clogged with the condition of marrying the widow of Naomi’s son, in order that the first-born might take the heritage of this land in the name of the deceased, the land lost all value in his eyes, and he declined, lest he should “mar his own inheritance.” Some have thought from this, that he was married and had children already, and disliked the increased burden and divided inheritance. We think otherwise; because the law relieved one who had already children from the obligation of taking the widow of his deceased kinsman—Deu_25:5-6; and therefore it would rather seem that he objected, that his first-born son, with the uncertainty that there would be any other, should be counted the son and heir of a dead man.
In the law itself, the course directed to be taken was this—When a man’s brother refused to marry the widow, she was to go up to the gate and complain to the elders—“My husband’s brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel.” Then the elders were to call the man, and if he persisted his refusal, the woman was to come forward, and “loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face,” and was to say—“So shall it be done unto that man that will not build up his brother’s house”—Deu_25:5-10. It would seem, however, that when the man was not a brother, the more ignominious part of this ceremony were omitted; for, in the case before us, the man took off his own shoe, and delivered it to Boaz, to signify that he transferred his right to him.
Except in a recent work, Note: Urquhart’s Pillars of Hercules, i. 305. Lond. 1850. which contains much notice of the Jews in a country (Barbary) where their simple ancient customs are perhaps better preserved than in many other parts, we have not seen any notice of the subsisting use of the shoe in connection with Jewish marriage ceremonies: “At a Jewish marriage, I was standing beside the bridegroom when the bride entered; and, as she crossed the threshold he stooped down, and slipped off his shoe, and struck her with the heel on the nape of the neck. I at once saw the interpretation of the passage in Scripture, respecting the transfer of the shoe to another, in case the brother-in-law did not exercise his privilege. The slipper being taken off indoors, or if not, left outside the apartment, is placed at the edge of the small carpets upon which you sit, and is at hand to administer correction, and is here used in sign of the obedience of the wife and the supremacy of the husband. The Highland custom is to strike for ‘good luck,’ as they say, the bride with an old slipper. Little do they suspect the meaning implied. The regalia of Morocco is enriched with a pair of embroidered slippers, which are, or used to be, carried before the Sultan, as among us the scepter or sword of state.”