Redemption is Possible
Leon Kass and Hannah Mandelbaum, Reading Ruth: Birth, Redemption, and the Way of Israel. Paul Dry Books, 125pp., $17 paper.
The book Reading Ruth is indeed about reading, but there is reading and reading. Some books can be swallowed whole, as it were, while others demand our closest attention. Since this book is written by Leon Kass and his granddaughter, Hannah Mandelbaum, it is no surprise that it fits into the latter category.
While Kass’s magisterial books on Genesis and Exodus each represent decades of engagement with those texts, with explication line by line, this book is written in havruta style—a discussion of the text in which two students engage it as a sacred document. While different texts might have different levels of this quality, this kind of engagement means at least one important thing: that the text is thought of as a living document. That is to say, these stories engage our sensibilities and are expected to affect our present and future behavior. A useful analogy is a musical one. When one hears a Bach partita being played, it is as if the composer’s spirit is in the room. And as in music, silence counts for much, and in this commentary those silences are explored.
Ruth is a short book and has only three main protagonists. They include Ruth herself, a Moabitess whose name might be related to either “to befriend, “to see,” or “to vision”; Naomi (“my delight”), her mother-in-law, who traveled out of Bethlehem with her husband and two sons to Moab ten years previously at a time of famine; and Boaz, a clansman (who encounters Ruth upon her return with Naomi to the land of Israel, and eventually redeems her through marriage, and together they have a child). After the death of all the men in the family, including Naomi’s husband and two sons, Naomi decides to return to her ancestral community, and bids that her Moabite daughters-in-law remain in theirs. But Ruth, in her great love for Naomi, determines that she will return with Naomi to the land of the Jews. She does this even knowing, or so it would seem, that the Jews despise the Moabites as a pagan and untrustworthy people, who were considered the “very embodiment of everything anti-Israelite.”
The text is encountered on many levels. What does it tell us about familial relations and duty? What is the nature of love, in varying categories, and its responsibilities: between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law, husband and wife, and family members? Why would the line of Ruth eventuate in King David? Is it important that David came from someone who was from a despised people? What is the relationship of the individual and her free will as opposed to group characteristics and the historical understanding of such groups? What is the importance of marriage and procreation? What do the authors glean from this story, and what do they consider the most fascinating discoveries in their plowing of this field?
The experience of Moab has been a barren one for Naomi and her family. Her husband and two sons die, the latter two childless. Hearing that Bethlehem is no longer experiencing famine, she decides to return, to this, her hometown. She suggests to her two daughters- in-law that they return to their mothers’ homes, to seek new husbands, and with it, the possibility of motherhood. For make no mistake, at least at this stage of civilization, a young woman “is unsettled and incomplete until she is married and, especially, only a mother of her own children. Only if settled into marriage and motherhood, protected by her husband and fulfilled by giving birth and renewing life out of her own substance, can a woman, according to Naomi, be fully at peace with herself.” While Orpah, the other daughter-in-law, does the sensible thing and returns to her own people, Ruth doesn’t just stay, but “clings” to Naomi, and refusing to part with her, sets herself up for being a stranger in a strange land. Like the Jews who left Egypt, is she aware just how difficult her life’s journey could become. She, like that first generation of Israelites, could die a-wandering. But she goes all in with Naomi, whom she loves, and perhaps, with no understandable reason given the tragic family history, with Naomi’s God.
Ruth is considered by the rabbis to be the paradigmatic convert, but this is very much only after the fact.
Ruth is considered by the rabbis to be the paradigmatic convert, but this is very much only after the fact. At the time of the book, she only wants to remain with Naomi, and perhaps find a way to assimilate into her family and people, very much like those fellow travelers who followed the Jewish people out of Egypt. Ruth loves Naomi, and in her refusal to leave her, says: “and entreat me not to leave you, and to return from following after you: for wherever you go, I will go; and where you lodge, I will lodge: your people shall be my people, and your God my God: where you die, I will die and there will I be buried: Yahweh do so to me and more also, if anything but death part you and me.” This statement is about a profound sense of love and friendship, based on nothing so much as virtue. After all, Ruth’s expectations for herself and her future life are not addressed. This is about her admiration for Naomi, her very being and soul. And yet, there is also the matter of religious identification with Naomi’s God. How much of Jewish practice she knows is unclear. We know nothing of how she and her husband functioned together, in what today we would call a mixed marriage. That said, it would appear that Ruth wishes to identify with YHWH through Naomi, if not for Naomi’s sake, as they would become even closer, but because of recognizing that the greatness of this woman, is in part or in whole, because she is a Jewess, and not a Moabite.
After these most eloquent words, quite astonishingly, Naomi utters no response. She is silent. She doesn’t thank Ruth for the compliments. Maybe she is so distraught that she is without the emotional reserves to even register what she has just heard. The authors offer the possibility that “further argument would be useless” with someone that is so utterly convinced of the right path for themselves. In any event, Naomi remains silent until their arrival in Bethlehem. There she makes a public declaration of her miserable state, and by the way, Ruth isn’t even acknowledged. While the text does say “the city was astir concerning them,” the focus is solely on Naomi. The response of the women of the community to their arrival and Naomi’s speech? Complete and utter silence, the same as Naomi’s response to Ruth’s declaration of love and fidelity. Maybe another reason for these parallel silences is that these statements are both overpowering emotional outpourings of a person’s soul, to an individual and a community. It is rarely done, and to find an immediate response is at best problematic. When Joseph revealed himself to his brothers, they were speechless. Only after some time were they able to respond both to his declaration of who he actually was in his heightened emotional state.
The beginning of the second chapter introduces Boaz, a kinsman, it turns out, of Naomi. And he is not only family, but a leading member of the community, and it would appear a rich man. (Or whatever a rich man would be after a famine.) From a dramatic standpoint, he is a new character who injects new possibilities into the dramatic landscape, and he initiates this by being a significant landowner. At the same time it is unclear why he hasn’t taken note of the these women’s plight and come to their assistance. Nevertheless, since the women have no food, Ruth suggests to Naomi that she go to glean. This is of course a practice at harvest time, in which the poor are allowed to comb the fields after their contents have already been harvested, and in which the corners have been left just for this purpose. It is not clear how Ruth would know of this Israelite practice. Our writers remind us that this action demonstrates that while the offerings of the land result from human labor, this is done in tandem with God’s beneficence at creating a world that provides for our needs. Gleaning is a direct method of providing sustenance for the poor, less demeaning than a monetary exchange, and close to the top of Maimonides’ eight levels of charity.
We are taught about the nature of true charity: Boaz “offers Ruth deliberate gifts… while taking pains not to humiliate the recipient.”
The next occurrences seem providential. Ruth ends up gleaning in Boaz’s field. And Boaz happens to arrive during this time and takes note of her. We don’t know how many fields there are, so her being in his field (or a communal field that is divided) may not be so strange. And that Boaz should be present to oversee the harvest also may or may not be so peculiar. Doesn’t a man need to go to work, and whatever else would engage him? Be this as it may, we don’t know what it is about Ruth that engages his attention. Is the town so small that he would know all of its inhabitants, and thus she would be marked as a foreigner, and if so, is she also distinguished by her foreign looks; or is she distinguished by her physical beauty? Boaz asks his overseer who the maid is, and he responds only that she has been there all day, working very hard, and taking just a small break, and that she is gleaning not only for herself but her mother-in-law as well. What we can understand from this, it would seem, is that Ruth is a good and diligent worker. But he also notes that this is the Moabite woman who came back with Naomi. Is he chiding Boaz in a subtle way, that this woman is left to glean for Boaz’s kin? Is he so uncaring as not to provide them with food, as it seems unlikely that he does not know of their return?
Boaz’s next comments are laden with meaning, although they are pithy and short. He addresses Ruth as “my daughter.” He bids her glean only in his fields and informs her that his men servants will not touch her. He is supremely protective and solicitous. It is a complete change of behavior, as if a veil has been removed from his eyes and heart. Ruth’s next comments express just these thoughts, asking Boaz why she, a foreigner, has suddenly found his favor. His response is that he knows the entirety of her story, and most importantly, he ascribes all of this to the hand of YHWH in tandem with her own righteousness.
At lunch, Boaz welcomes her to sit with him and the men, rather than separate and apart. When she goes back to glean, he tells the men that they should leave extra stalks for her to find. We are taught about the nature of true charity: “he offers deliberate gifts… while taking pains not to humiliate the recipient.” He is besmitten by her story and demeanor, if not by her physical appearance as well. Ruth works until evening and returns to Naomi, who is overwhelmed by the amount of barley that Ruth brings with her. Asking Ruth where she gleaned such a bounty, Ruth tells her that it is the field of Boaz. Naomi is quite amazed and recognizes this as a providential occurrence. Boaz will hopefully redeem them, which is to say, put their situation right. Ruth continues to glean with the maidens and dwell with her mother-in-law.
And here there is one of those pregnant silences. Naomi’s response or demeanor is not mentioned. What might she be thinking? Is she working out a further course of action, as to better the situation for her daughter-in-law and herself? “Naomi’s silence here should not be taken for acquiescence or weakness. As Act Two comes to an end, Naomi, patient and prudent, keeps her own council and continues to bide her time.”
The deepest love is not a painful lack seeking satisfaction for oneself, but a bountiful overflow, seeking the good for one’s beloved, in generative acts both large and small.
Chapter three begins at the end of the harvesting season, and Boaz has still not yet made any move, as it were, with Ruth. Many possibilities are suggested as to why this might be the case, the traditional one being that Boaz himself is a recent widower. Maybe he considers himself too old for the youthful Ruth. Our writers think it is because there may be another relative who could or should redeem Ruth, and Boaz wishes to find a way to make sure that this doesn’t happen. But he sure is taking his time, and Naomi therefore takes the initiative, and concludes that Ruth must “lie” with Boaz, and sets out to make this happen. And we assume lie in this case does in fact mean have sex, to cement the relationship as a marriage.
Addressing Ruth as “my daughter,” Naomi mentions to Ruth that she needs to find “rest”, suggesting a marriage, husband, and children; that this is a true form of rest for a woman. Or what we might call a state of satisfaction, a place of meaning for one’s life. Naomi proposes that Ruth go to the threshing floor, after having prepared herself to be as beautiful as possible, and go to “the place where he (Boaz) shall lie, and you shall go in and uncover his feet, and lay you down; and he shall tell you what you shall do.” She goes to the threshing floor. Maybe Boaz sees her, or maybe not. He drinks and eats, and goes to sleep “merry” but not drunk. Ruth then lies down next to him, and it would seem, literally at his feet. He awakens in the middle of the night and is surprised to find someone in such close proximity. When he asks who she is, she responds “I am Ruth your maidservant: spread therefore your skirt over your maidservant: for you are a kinsman-Redeemer.”
It would seem that in taking the initiative, she is asking him to take her under his protection, by fulfilling his duty to “take her” as his kinsman. And speaking with regard to Biblical practice, she asks him to provide a shelter of peace. While the scene is sexually charged, as certainly Ruth’s request is at best ambiguous, Boaz immediately defuses it in his response, which begins with a blessing: “Blessed be you of the Lord, my daughter: you have shown more chesed [steadfast love, or lovingkindness] in the end than at the beginning, inasmuch as you did not follow the young men, whether poor or rich.”
Boaz acts as a gentleman, which is to say that his surprise, maybe even followed by flickerings of passion, is followed by a holy response, as he acknowledges that this woman is acting in a righteous manner. It also would seem that he acknowledges a certain jealousy of those “young men” to whom he assumes Ruth might have been more attracted to than to him. At this moment, we find out that there is indeed a redeemer closer than he, and Boaz promises to right the situation the next day, so that one way or another, Ruth will be redeemed. Ruth and Boaz go back to sleep, and the situation is defused, but now with a plan. Before her taking leave, before dawn when anyone might be able to see her, Boaz gives her a bounty of barley to take back to Naomi.
In the morning, Boaz goes immediately to the gate, which means the plaza or an area near the city gate, where business is transacted and where elders may meet to engage in legal proceedings. There he sits, we can assume to meet the other redeemer who, lo and behold, turns up pronto. Boaz asks him to sit, which he does, and then also convenes a group of ten elders. He proposes to the Mr. So and So (his name is not revealed) that he redeem Naomi’s property, which he agrees to do. But then Boaz adds to the bargain that he must also redeem Ruth the Moabite. When he refuses to do so, Boaz agrees to take on both obligations, and the deal is formally sealed with the giving of Mr. So and So’s sandal to Boaz.
Why the anonymity of Mr. So and So? Perhaps because he is an average Joe, or because the text refuses to embarrass him by giving his name. Or maybe it is “the perfect retribution for his refusal to ensure ‘that the name of the dead not be cut off from among his brethren.’” And Boaz now declares his purchase of the land and his right and intention to marry Ruth to “raise up the name of the dead”, her previous husband, Mahlon. In so doing, he makes her part of the community. While it may seem that his statement regarding Ruth is only a legal matter, it would seem that he has truly “fallen” for this righteous woman, and had done so from his first encounter with her. But it would seem that his love, while perhaps partially erotic, is mostly propelled by her nature of chesed, or goodness. “Just so: it is love and loyal devotion.” “The deepest love is not a painful lack seeking satisfaction for oneself, but a bountiful overflow, seeking the good for one’s beloved, in generative acts both large and small.”
Ruth’s story is an assertion of the Jewish principles of loyalty, family, and love.
All those at the gate erupt with delight at Boaz’s declaration. Although Ruth is not mentioned, they place her in the company of Rachel, Leah, and Tamar, matriarchs of the Jewish people. “God willing, she, too, will build up the nation of Israel.” And so she does, as after their marriage, a son is born. While her name will not be mentioned again, it is Ruth who provides continuity of the family, which finally leads to David. The women’s chorus then praises the birth of the child, and adds that “your daughter-in-law, who loves you, who is better to you than seven sons, has borne him.” It is only a daughter-in-law, or a wife, who can provide a child, as it is only in her nature to give birth. The child is not only a son to Ruth, but a grandchild to Naomi, and also a child of the community. It is the women of this community that give him his name, Obed, which means “serving”, and it is he who links the generations through Jesse to David.
Oddly enough, the story then ends with a genealogy; and not just any kind of genealogy, but one of ten generations; the only others of similar length are found in Genesis, with Noah and Abraham, one the progenitor of people, and the other of the Jewish people. It is suggested that perhaps this is then all about getting us to the kingship of David, who united the Jewish people into one kingdom, and thus, began the People anew.
Having concluded this line-by-line review, some of the larger, overriding themes are then explored. This is a straightforward story, that takes place in a particular land, and the particular city of Bethlehem, and is about all those components of a nation: family, clan, townsmen, the interaction of citizens and foreigners, and all of these components acting in relationship to the law, or to God’s words. “It is a prosaic story of ordinary life… whose raison d’etre is to enact the sanctification of everyday life in the home, on the land, with one’s neighbors.” It is about family, marriage, and procreation, as these result in the continuity of holy actions taking place in a holy land, and so praise God. Responsibility is also of the essence; not just to one’s family, but to those other groups of which one is a part. In this, it demands that a man live in a relationship to other groups, not as an isolated individual: we have responsibilities to others. We are “perpetuating not just life but a way of life [italics in the original]…. Openhanded generosity… Is the celebrated cultural ideal, in gratitude for the Lord’s bountiful gifts.”
The final comments are about our protagonist. It is thought that the book was written in the fifth century BCE, against the exclusion of foreign wives promulgated by Ezra and Nehemiah, a time when intermarriage was rife. Ruth is a good and righteous woman, and one who wished not just to integrate, but almost fuse with the Jewish community. Her story is one of an assertion of the Jewish principles of loyalty, family, and love. She, a foreigner—and a Moabitess no less!—is responsible for the wonderful kingship of David. Like others in the Tanach, it is someone from the outside who provides guidance, or an example of the correct path. It is a demonstration that “(N)atural origins and bloodline identity are not destiny”… and also that “(H)istory is not destiny; redemption is possible, even after the worst of sins.”