Ruth · Chapter 4

So-and-so. But his name was not written because he did not wish to redeem. — Notes: (1) The person’s name was Tov (See above 3:13). His name is omitted because he did not discharge his duty as a kinsman. He therefore did not merit to be recorded as Tov [=good]. So-and-so. פְּלֹנִי אַלְמֹנִי is rendered [into Aramaic] in the Prophets as, “concealed and secret.” So. פְּלֹנִי means] covered and concealed, [as in] the expression of, “If there be concealed יִפָּלֵא” and “Is there anything concealed הֲיִפָּלֵא from Hashem?” — Notes: (2) Devarim 17:8. (3) Bereishis 18:14. And so. אַלְמֹנִי means widowed, without a name. (Another version: [He is called] אַלְמֹנִי because he was widowed of the words of the Torah, for he should have expounded, “[only] an Ammonite [is forbidden in marriage to a Jewish woman], but not an Ammonitess [i.e., an Ammonite woman is not forbidden in marriage to a Jewish man]; a Mo’avite, but not a Mo’aviteess.” Yet he said, “for I would mar my own inheritance.”)

"He went up to the gate" — such was the custom, and [matters of] the law were [conducted] there before the assembly. "Ploni almoni" (such a one, so-and-so) — some say that "ploni" is from "mufla" (hidden/obscured), and "almoni" is from "illem" (mute) — one who has no name known to the speaker.

"Now Boaz went up" etc. — It is fitting to take note that it would have been proper to say "And Boaz went up [vaya'al Boaz] to the gate," and not "Now Boaz went up" [u'Voaz alah] etc. Furthermore, its saying "and behold, the redeemer passed by" etc., for it should have said "and the redeemer passed by" etc. Furthermore, its saying "of whom Boaz had spoken" — which is devoid of sense, for where did he speak, and what did he speak, and what need is there to tell us that Boaz had spoken of him? Furthermore, what is the reason for the change of name, to call him "a certain one, such a one" [ploni almoni], and not call him "Tov," as he was called above? Furthermore, its saying "turn aside [surah], sit down here" — for the word surah is superfluous, and even contrary [to what follows], and likewise in its saying "and he turned aside and sat down." Furthermore, in its saying "and he took ten men," etc. — since the whole Sanhedrin was there, what need was there for ten other men? And one cannot say that the Sanhedrin was not then at the gate, only those ten, for behold it says afterward, "and all the people who were at the gate, and the elders, are witnesses," which shows that, besides the elders, there were [other] men at the gate; and it is known that "the gate" is the great court [beit din ha-gadol] in which Boaz sat, who was head of the Sanhedrin. Now, our Rabbis of blessed memory said that he took ten men in order to recite the blessing of bridegrooms [birkat chatanim] — but it is fitting to know why he took them beforehand, before the matter was even resolved as to who would marry her, he or the redeemer. Furthermore, why did he not take them from the seventy men of the Sanhedrin, taking ten of them afterward, or all of them, and recite the blessing of bridegrooms in their presence — why the particular need for ten other elders? Furthermore, its saying "and he said to the redeemer," etc. — for surely this verse should properly have been stated after its saying "and I thought, I will disclose it to you," etc. Furthermore, its saying "who has returned from the field of Moab" is stated without need. Furthermore, its saying "and I thought" is devoid of sense — for if it means, "I said in my heart, to say to you, buy [it]," etc., then when it now goes on to say "buy it," etc., the matter would obviously be understood [without needing to state] that this is what had arisen in his thought to say. Furthermore, the word "to say" [le'emor] is superfluous, and moreover, it is not "to say" to others. Furthermore, its saying "before those who sit here, and before the elders of my people" — why did he make two divisions, when all of them were sitting, since even of the ten elders it says "sit here," and they sat? Furthermore, why did Boaz trouble himself with all this trouble, to gather an assembly of elders and all the people who were at the gate, rather than simply calling [the redeemer] privately, between the two of them, informing him of the matter and charging him to redeem — and if he would not redeem, Boaz would redeem her, since he was next in line after him? Furthermore, the word "redeem" [ga'al] is superfluous. Furthermore, its saying "and if he will not redeem" [yig'al, third person] — it would have been proper to say "and if you will not redeem" [tig'al, second person]. Now, regarding this difficulty, our Rabbis of blessed memory said that the court [beit din] responded and said, "and if he will not redeem, tell me" — but according to this there is no [true] answer to their question, and also its saying "that I may know," etc., does not follow well after that statement of the court. Furthermore, it is fitting to note that the word "ve'edah" ["that I may know"] is superfluous, for who would not know that if he told him, he would then know the matter? Furthermore, its saying "and Boaz said" — the mention of his name appears unnecessary, since by its saying "and he said, on the day you buy," etc., it is already known that Boaz is the one responding to the redeemer. Furthermore, its saying "on the day you buy," etc. — who requires that it be on that [same] day, rather than that he buy the field today and [take] Ruth some days later? Furthermore, why does it call her "the Moabitess," and why does it call her "the wife of the dead," for the dead have no wife, and it should have said "the widow of the dead"? Furthermore, its saying "from Ruth the Moabitess" — for surely Ruth had no right in the field, to sell it. Furthermore, it should properly have said "and Ruth the Moabitess you have taken" — behold, the buying of the field is mentioned, but the taking of Ruth is not mentioned at all, except by allusion, in its saying "to establish the name of the dead," etc. However, Samuel the Prophet has taught us, by his holy spirit, how much He, blessed be He, watched over the matter to hasten the fulfillment of that holy union, and to fulfill the word of His servant that Boaz had spoken, and Naomi's promise to Ruth when she said, "for the man will not rest, but will finish the matter today." And this was so because there were three things that followed one another in immediate succession: for right after Naomi said to Ruth, "for the man will not rest, but will finish," etc., immediately Boaz went up to the gate, etc., and immediately, "and behold, the redeemer passed by" — for Naomi, and Boaz, and — above them all — He, blessed be He, hastened to bring the matter about. And this is [the force of] "now Boaz" [u'Voaz], rather than "and Boaz went up" [vaya'al Boaz] — to say: Naomi had given her assurance, and what did Boaz do? He hurried and went up to the gate, while He, blessed be He, arranged the redeemer — for "behold, the redeemer" had been made ready there, and passed by. Now, to arrive at the resolution of these verses, I say: behold, Boaz had said to Ruth, "and it shall be in the morning, if he [Tov] will redeem you, good; but if he does not wish to redeem you, then I will redeem you" — whose implication is that immediately in the morning he would see whether Tov would redeem her, and if he would not, on that very day he himself would redeem her. And Naomi likewise explained Boaz's words to her in this sense, as Ruth had reported them to her, when she said, "sit still, my daughter," etc., "for the man will not rest, but will finish the matter today" — whose implication is the same. And I think, moreover, that Ruth herself understood from his saying "and it shall be in the morning, if he will redeem you," etc., that the matter would be concluded immediately in the morning; and Naomi told her not to despair if she saw that the matter was not concluded in the morning, but rather, "sit still, my daughter, and wait, until you know," etc. — for even if it were not in the morning, at the very least it would not extend past that day, since "he will not rest, but will finish the matter today." In this way it was in Boaz's heart to hasten the matter. He therefore thought to himself: if I speak to the redeemer privately, between the two of us alone, he may answer in one of two ways — either that he asks me to give him time to consider whether to do it or refrain, or, in a second way, that he says he will redeem the field now but consummate the marriage after a month or some days; or perhaps he will reject the whole matter, thinking that even females are included in the exclusion, "an Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter [the congregation of Hashem]," as our Rabbis of blessed memory said, for he was an ignorant man [am ha'aretz]; and even if he knew the rule that it is a male Moabite, and not a female Moabite, who is excluded, he might still say that since Machlon's marriage to her was contracted while she was still a gentile, she has no relevance to the practice of levirate marriage [yibbum], to establish the name of the dead upon his inheritance — for Machlon left no spirit within her to raise up a child in the name of the dead, as is explained in the Zohar, that from there his dead brother would be built up; and if so, the name of the dead would not be established upon his inheritance. Therefore his own conscience [lit. his kidneys] counseled him to do two things: first, to go up to the gate, to the meeting-place of the great court, so that the redeemer would be ashamed before them not to delay the matter, and so as to inform him, in their presence, of the rule of "a male Moabite, not a female Moabite," and that there is here a manner of levirate marriage, as we shall explain, please God. Second, to bring, besides the Sanhedrin sitting in session, another ten elders from among the sages of the city, who would be ready for the blessing of bridegrooms, in case the Sanhedrin should be occupied with a legal case — his intention being to tell the redeemer: behold, these are ready; either you or I will recite the blessing of bridegrooms in their presence — so that he would not delay, and so that he would have no time to deliberate, but would have to answer at once; so that as soon as he said, "redeem it for yourself, you, my right of redemption," Boaz would take her immediately and recite the blessing of bridegrooms. And this is the sense of the verses. It states, "and Boaz went up to the gate," which is the first matter; and before he came to do the second matter — to take for himself ten men from the elders of the city, to prepare them for the blessing of bridegrooms — he saw, "and behold, the redeemer was passing by." He said to himself: if I call him now, my intention is not to speak with him until the ten men arrive; and if I let him go now on his way, when will such an opportunity come again? So what did he do? He called him at once and said to him, "turn aside, sit down here, such a one" — as if to say: do not wonder that I am not speaking with you at once, nor at my telling you to sit in the seat of the Sanhedrin, especially since he was an ignorant man [am ha'aretz], as our Rabbis of blessed memory said. Therefore he said to him "turn aside" — meaning: as for my seating you in the place where the Sanhedrin sits, do not be concerned, for you will not sit in the row of the judges, but rather turn aside and separate from their session, and sit here beside me, for I have something private to tell you. And this is [the force of] "ploni almoni" [such a one] — meaning, hidden and silent, like a mute [ilem], for a little while yet. And what was that "little while" he wanted him to wait for? It was until the point where "Boaz took ten men," etc. — and then he began at once to speak to him. And the construction of the verse is: "and Boaz went up to the gate and sat there, and behold, the redeemer was passing by" — and which redeemer was this? It was the very one of whom Boaz had spoken above — he was Tov, of whom he had said to Ruth, "if he [Tov] will redeem you, good." Except that it says, "turn aside, sit down here, such a one" — he did not call him by the name Tov, but "such a one" — the reason being so that he would wait while Boaz took the ten men, etc.; therefore, in order to detain him there, he told him to wait, since he had something private to tell him, and he then recounted that he took and summoned ten men, etc., for the blessing of bridegrooms, and said, "sit here" — meaning: here you sit for now, but after the words we speak here, you shall stand up to recite the blessing of bridegrooms. And after those men sat down, he began and said, "the portion of the field," etc. Now, there are two redemptions: one, the redemption of the field; the other, the redemption of Ruth — and Ruth's marriage is called a redemption, as explained above, because she is bound by the pain of the spirit that rattles within her womb [ru'cha de-mekashkesha be-me'aha], and to the levir, and these bonds must be redeemed. He began with the first, saying, "the portion of the field... has sold, Naomi, who has returned" — meaning, from the time she returned, etc. — for it is therefore proper not to delay any longer than needed to redeem it. Now, you, the redeemer, might well ask: why did I trouble you and shame you before the Sanhedrin and the ten men, rather than speaking with you privately, between the two of us alone? But know: had the redemption been only that of the field, then, behold, I would have said in my heart — as Naomi has sold [the field] from the time she returned from the field of Moab — "I will disclose it to you," meaning, privately, between the two of us. However, there is another matter that must be stated "before those who sit here" — that is, the Sanhedrin — and also "before the elders of my people" — that is, the ten men from the elders of the city. And this is [the force of] "saying, buy," etc. And he went on to explain what requires the Sanhedrin and the ten elders: it is that "if you will redeem, redeem" — meaning, if you redeem the field, [you must] also redeem Ruth — and it was therefore that the Sanhedrin was necessary, so that it would not occur to you that the Moabitess, too, is forbidden; for behold, "those who sit" — that is, the Sanhedrin Gedolah — are the ones who hear that you shall redeem her as well; and likewise, the ten elders of my people [are witnesses] to this second redemption, which is for the blessing of bridegrooms. And by this he indicated to him that he should not put the matter off from day to day, for if you redeem at once, redeem also the second redemption. And lest you say: what if He, Hashem, does not redeem Ruth from the bondage of the rattling spirit, since she has no bond of levirate marriage [zikat yibbum], her marriage having been contracted in gentile status — and how then did I say "redeem"? — do not worry, for behold, you will tell me whether you will perform this second redemption as well, "ve'edah" — meaning, and I will know whether Hashem will redeem — whether she has no such bond, or whether she does. And the reason I made this knowledge depend on myself, and not on someone else's knowledge, is that there is no one but you to redeem, and I am next after you; and so this knowledge concerns me, even though other sages of Israel also know the matter. Now, since the matter was in fact [already] known to him — as he explains afterward — he did not say "ve'edah" like one who is yet to come to know it in the future, but rather spoke according to the redeemer's own supposition; therefore the letter heh was withdrawn from the word "ve'edah," so that its sense was not [then] entirely actual. Then the redeemer said, "I will redeem it" — which refers to the first redemption, but not the second. And it was still possible that he intended that the field be redeemed at once, while regarding Ruth he would decide for himself whether to do it or refrain, or delay a month or some days before redeeming Ruth — or that he was concerned that even females are forbidden from Moab to enter the congregation, or that levirate marriage does not apply to her at all, since Machlon left no spirit within her. Therefore, in response to all these [possibilities], Boaz spoke again and said, "on the day you buy," etc. — meaning: if your intention is one of the first two — either to decide later, or to delay until performing the second [redemption] — know that it is not so, for on the day you buy the field, on that very day you buy Ruth as well. And also, as to what might have come to your mind, that you intended that even females are included in the prohibition — it is not so, for it says only, "Ruth the Moabite" [using the excluded masculine form] — meaning, that she is called by the masculine form "Moabite" precisely because she is female [and so is not included in the prohibition]. And regarding the fourth [consideration] — lest he say that Machlon's spirit did not rest upon her, so that levirate marriage would not rightly apply to her — know in truth that even though I said "ve'edah," as though I myself were in doubt about the matter, that was only according to your own supposition; but the truth is that she is "the wife of the dead" — for her marriage to Machlon is not to be regarded as mere fornication, but as true marriage, so that it is not strange that the spirit of Machlon should remain within her. And he intended this too by saying "the wife of the dead" — meaning, that even after his death she is still called his wife, because his spirit is within her. And this is [the force of], from the very start, "and from Ruth" — for we raised the difficulty that Ruth herself was not the one selling [the field]; but he meant that he was buying that which was with her, namely, that very spirit that was with her — and this is [the force of] "and from Ruth... you have bought," meaning, that which comes from Ruth. And lest you say: shall we deny what is plainly evident, that her marriage to Machlon was contracted while she was a gentile, so how could the spirit of Machlon, an Israelite man, come to rest within the womb of a Moabite woman? — to this he said "the Moabite," meaning: this is the well-known Moabitess, she is the good parting [peridah tovah] that was destined to come out of Moab, so that from her the root of Jesse would go forth, who stands as a banner for the nations — all the more so in light of what we wrote above, that she herself was the elder daughter of Lot, and had now been reincarnated to come and receive the fruit of the deed she had done for the sake of Heaven the first time; for it was therefore that, in her returning here a second time, there was an aspect of holiness in her soul, and it is no wonder that the spirit of Machlon should cling to her. He further intended, by saying "on the day you buy," etc., to say: might you not ask me, why did I hurry to prepare ten men from the elders of the city, besides the Sanhedrin? It is because on the day you buy the field from Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of the dead, you buy her as well; and therefore I have now summoned ten men, lest the Sanhedrin be occupied with a legal case, as has been said. And it is possible that it is for this reason that it says "and Boaz said" — even though it is understood that Boaz is the speaker — to indicate that Boaz, since it was urgent for him to fulfill his word, said "on the day you buy," etc.; though by strict law he was not obligated to take the woman on that very day. But out of respect for him, they all remained silent, and the redeemer was ashamed and fell silent, leaving the matter to Boaz. And Boaz devised to do all these things in order to spare Ruth shame, for she would have been ashamed, for the sake of his honor, to have it revealed that she had uncovered his feet and said to him, "spread your wing," etc.; and he, too, had vowed to her, "all that you say to me, I will do," for she was already as good as acquired to him. And this is hinted at in its saying "kanita" [you have bought], though the ketiv reads "kaniti" [I have bought] — for the verse hints that she was already as good as acquired to him, meaning that it was for this reason that he acted with these stratagems, as has been said.

"And Boaz went up to the gate and sat there" — this is a sign that Boaz was a judge, for judges sit at the gate. This also indicates that the elders of the city were subject to his command. "Such-a-one" (peloni almoni) — 'Peloni' is of the sense of concealment, similar in meaning to 'and it is wondrous [hidden]' (Judges 13:18), meaning that his name was not specified; and likewise 'almoni' is also of the sense of concealment, and the intent here is that they would not speak his name, and thus his name remained hidden.

'Now Boaz went up to the gate' — for that is where the seat of the Sanhedrin was, and his intention was to summon the redeemer by means of a court messenger (shelucha de-vei dina). But Hashem arranged for the redeemer himself to pass by there. Therefore it says, 'and behold, the redeemer was passing by' — for the word 'behold' indicates something new, since it was not his practice to pass that way; rather, because Boaz had spoken [i.e., because Boaz had a matter concerning the redeemer on his mind], Hashem arranged for him to pass by. Therefore he said, 'Turn aside, sit down here' — asking him to turn from his path, since he wished [otherwise] to keep walking rather than stop and sit. And he called him 'Ploni Almoni' [so-and-so] — meaning: there is a wondrous matter (davar pele) concerning you, similar to 'lefale neder' [to utter a distinguished vow], which indicates something set apart by deliberate intent. And the meaning of 'Almoni' is a bond or tie, similar to 'binding sheaves' (me'almim alumim) — for it concerns the tie he has with regard to his right of redemption, which is to be made wondrous and clarified in this matter.

"If you will redeem, redeem" — the Torah has already stated (Leviticus 25:25) that when a man sells part of his holding, his redeemer who is close of kin to him shall come and redeem what his brother has sold.

'And he took ten men' — our Sages, of blessed memory, expounded that he assembled them and expounded before them [the law], 'an Ammonite man, not an Ammonite woman.' And he, being a Torah scholar (talmid chacham), understood that if a person states a matter of halakhah before the fact, he is heeded, but if he states it after the fact, he is not heeded, because he then has a personal stake in the matter (noge'a ba-davar). He therefore brought them together now, beforehand, when he had no personal stake in the matter, since at that time the redemption and the levirate marriage (yibbum) belonged to Tov, and he had no personal stake in it. Moreover, our Sages, of blessed memory, said that the blessing of bridegrooms requires ten men, and he wanted them to be ready at once for the blessing of the bridegrooms, so that they would be present in any event.

"The parcel of the field" — it is possible that the field was large, and a portion of it belonged to Elimelech.

'And he said to the redeemer: "The portion of the field which belonged to our brother Elimelech, Naomi... sells"' — one should not explain this to mean that she had already sold it to another man and that he wanted him to redeem the field from the buyer's hand, for behold, an ancestral field (sedeh achuzah) cannot be redeemed in less than two years [after its sale]; and furthermore, because it says [later], 'on the day you buy the field from the hand of Naomi.' Therefore the meaning is that she had agreed to sell it, and it had already been announced that this field stood for sale, so that it was as though she had sold it to whoever wished to buy it. [Or, it means: she wanted to sell it, and I said to her that I would first inform you and tell you to buy it. And by this one can explain what is stated, 'and if he will not redeem' — in the third person — which is a report of what he had said to Naomi: that I told her I would inform you and would say to you, before the elders of my people, 'buy it; if you will redeem, redeem' — all this I promised her, that I would tell you; and I said to her, 'and if the redeemer will not redeem...' — and the rest of the statement is omitted, since there was no need to state it now; it is understood on its own.] Now, from the words 'the portion of the field,' it is implied that it was only a portion of the field, not all of it [and it is forced to say, as Ibn Ezra wrote, that Elimelech did not have a whole field] — for after the father and his sons died, Naomi took a portion of the field for her ketubah [marriage-settlement], and Ruth too took a portion for her ketubah. And he informed him first about Naomi's portion — that she wishes to sell her half of the field, her share in the field of Elimelech.

That I may know [now], for beside you there is no one. [Who is as] close [as you] to redeem.

"But if it will not be redeemed [yigga'el]" — Rabbi Jonah said that it should properly have been "ve-im lo tigga'el" [feminine, referring to the field]. And likewise, "let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth" (Malachi 2:15) [where a different form might be expected]. But this is not tenable, for "yivgod" (deal treacherously) refers back to the word "be-ruchakhem" (in your spirit) [i.e., the subject there is the man, not the wife]. And such is the meaning here as well: "But if the redeemer will not redeem it, then I will know that there is no redeemer closer than you."

'And I said' — since I do not want our brother's inheritance to fall into the hands of strangers, and you have the right of first redemption, I therefore said, I will inform you and tell you: buy it yourself; and if you do not wish to redeem it, I am after you. 'And he said: I will redeem it' — and since he had informed him only about Naomi's portion, he intended to redeem [only] this portion.

And from Rus the Mo’avitess. You must buy [the inheritance], and she is not willing [to sell] unless you marry her.

"You have also bought Ruth, wife of the dead" — the meaning of this word is like "tikneh" (you shall buy) — a past-tense verb form used in place of the future. For the wife has her ketubah [marriage-contract rights], and also the mother[-in-law] inherits what remains. And it is written [in the ketiv] "kaniti" (I have bought), meaning "so I too shall buy."

"Then Boaz said" — At this point Boaz revealed to him that it is not possible to redeem Naomi's portion alone, because the redeemer who acquires Naomi's portion will also need to redeem Ruth's portion. [And there is a difference between them: Naomi's portion is acquired by one of the standard methods of acquisition by which a field is acquired, but the portion belonging to Ruth cannot be acquired in this manner — only by way of yibbum (levirate marriage), whereby he performs levirate marriage with Ruth and thereby automatically acquires the field as well, except that then he must "raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance," after coming to acquire this portion through yibbum, whereby the inheritance is raised up in the name of the dead. This is the meaning of "on the day you buy the field" — that is, you do not [merely] buy the plot of the field, meaning only Naomi's portion alone, but rather you buy the whole field in both its portions. And there is a distinction in the manner of their acquisition: Naomi's portion you buy directly from Naomi through the standard methods of acquisition, "and you give the money of its price." However, the second portion, which you acquire from Ruth the Moabitess [regarding this it does not say "of the hand," because this is not acquired hand to hand by means of money] — "you acquire the wife of the dead" — regarding this portion, you must acquire the wife of the dead through yibbum, and through her you also acquire a share in the field. And in this there is a condition, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance: that this inheritance shall be called by the name of the wife of the dead, not by your own name, in accordance with the law of yibbum.]

For I would mar my own inheritance. נַחֲלָתִי =] my offspring, as in, “the inheritance of Hashem is children;” to give my offspring a stigma, for it is stated, “Neither an Ammonite nor a Mo’avite may enter [into Hashem’s community],” but he erred [by not interpreting it as] “an Ammonite but not an Ammonitess.” — Notes: (4) Tehillim 127:3. (5) Devarim 23:4. (6) He was not aware that the Torah prohibited only the male Mo’avites from entering the ranks of Bnei Yisroel, but the females were permitted. Alternatively, he knew that females were permitted to enter the ranks of Bnei Yisroel, but he feared that in future generations the ruling may be challenged, as it was in Dovid’s time by Do’eg.

"Lest I mar my own inheritance" — he already had a large inheritance. And some say it alludes to his wife. "Redeem it for yourself" — behold, I have given you permission, for I am not able [to redeem it].

"And the redeemer said," etc. — One should pay attention to the redundancy in his saying "for myself" (in "I cannot redeem it for myself"), and likewise the redundancy in his saying "you" (lecha) in "redeem it for yourself, you" (ge'al lecha atah), and also to what the extra word et is adding in his saying "et my right of redemption," and likewise in his saying "for I cannot redeem it," which is redundant [since it was already said]. Furthermore, in his saying "lest I mar my inheritance" — what is this "marring of an inheritance"? Now, behold, our Sages, of blessed memory, taught (in a baraita): Rabbi Chanina the son of Rabban Gamliel says: Why are converts afflicted in this world, with sufferings coming upon them? Because they did not fulfill the seven [Noahide] commandments, etc. Rabbi Yose says, etc. Now, from the words of these great sages of the world it appears that the convert is afflicted in this world and sufferings come upon him. With this we come to the matter. Behold, at the opening of Boaz's words to the redeemer it was said that Naomi, "who has returned from the field of Moab," is selling [the field that was our brother Elimelech's]. Now, beyond what was explained above [regarding] the redundancy in his saying "who has returned from the field of Moab," [Boaz's] intent was to place before the redeemer [the fact] that it was bitter for Naomi on account of taking her Moabite daughters-in-law — for she went away full and Hashem brought her back empty — so that his [the redeemer's] heart would turn sour against drawing near to Ruth, so that he would leave her for him [Boaz]. This is [the meaning of] "who has returned," etc. — that Naomi returned, meaning: alone, [bereft] of all the members of her household and her possessions. Now the redeemer — even though he did not take to heart all that had happened to Naomi, since they [her daughters-in-law] were Moabite women — at least took to heart the matter of converts, that they are afflicted in this world. Therefore the redeemer was concerned lest, on her account, days of poverty seize hold of him and he would have to sell his own inheritance — in that, along with acquiring the field of Machlon, he would also take the woman, who would be the cause of the loss of the redeemer's own inheritance. This is [the meaning of] "I cannot redeem it for myself" — meaning: the redemption that pertains to me personally, which is the woman — lest through her "I mar my inheritance," since she is a convert, and converts are afflicted in this world and sufferings come upon them; poverty would cling to me and I would have to sell and destroy my inheritance. And the extra et comes to include also the inheritance of the field that he would redeem from the house of Elimelech. Therefore, "redeem it for yourself" — meaning: the [redemption] that pertains to you, namely the woman — redeem her yourself, for I see in you [the fitness] that you will make her your main concern; "and also my right of redemption" — which includes also the field. And the reason I am relinquishing the field to you is because "I cannot redeem it," meaning Ruth — that is, you have made the one [the field] dependent on the other [Ruth].

"I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar my own inheritance" — meaning: if I pay out the money of the purchase, then in truth I will mar my own inheritance, for I will have nothing with which to hire workers of my land, and it will remain desolate; or perhaps I will need to sell from my own inheritance. And it has already been explained in the Torah that it is not proper to redeem when the matter is of this sort.

"And the near kinsman said" — In response to this he answered, "After all, I cannot redeem it for myself" — he is precise with the word "for myself," meaning that he cannot have it become his own, to be called by his own name; therefore he is afraid "lest I mar my own inheritance," since it will not be called by his name. Therefore, "redeem for yourself my right of redemption, for I cannot redeem it." And according to the words of our Sages, he did not derive [the halachah that the verse excludes] "an Ammonite" but not "an Ammonite woman" [i.e., he did not hold that the prohibition against marrying into the congregation applies only to male Ammonites and Moabites, and not to their women] — and this is why he said "lest I mar my own inheritance." And one can say that this is why he repeats "for I cannot redeem it" — corresponding to these two reasons.

Concerning redemption. This is a sale. And exchange. This is an exchange. A man would take off his shoe. This is an act of acquisition, just as we acquire title with a scarf in lieu of a shoe. And our Rabbis of blessed memory differed on this matter, as to who gave [the shoe] to whom. Some say that one acquires title with the utensil of the acquirer, and Bo’az gave [his shoe] to the redeemer, and some say that one acquires title with the utensil of the seller, and the redeemer gave [his shoe] to Bo’az. — Notes: (7) Maseches Bava Metzia 47a. This was the form of validation in Yisroel. תְּעוּדָה =] the law of testimony.

"In former times [lefanim]" — in the ancient days that have passed, related to "ha-panim," [meaning] the first, earlier part. "Concerning redemption" — if a person would redeem, or exchange field for field. "And this was the attestation [te'udah]" — from the root of "edut" (testimony) — they would testify concerning this. And some explain the word "te'udah" as meaning habit and custom. But the first explanation is correct.

"And this," etc. — From his saying "now this was [the custom] in former times in Israel," it appears that it was merely an ordinary custom (minhag); but from his saying afterward, "and this was the attestation in Israel," it appears that it was a law (din), not [merely] a custom. It is possible to say that he first said, "this was a custom in former times in Israel," and afterward, "and this was the attestation in Israel" — meaning that it became an attestation and a law in Israel, similar to the principle that whatever practice merchants adopt for making their purchases becomes the law by which the transaction is finalized. Or one might say that the verses that follow continue this thought, in line with what our Sages, of blessed memory, said — that the redeemer was an am ha'aretz (an unlearned, ignorant man). Accordingly, [the verse] would mean: behold, "now this was [the practice] in former times in Israel" — that specifically with regard to redemption, which is a sale, and with regard to exchange, which is a barter, in order to confirm any of these matters, "a man would draw off his shoe," etc. — and this, specifically concerning redemption and exchange, is "the attestation in Israel," and not concerning anything else. But that redeemer, who was an am ha'aretz, erred, and thought that Boaz would also acquire the dead man's wife as a wife through this act of acquisition. Therefore, "the redeemer said to Boaz, buy it for yourself" — meaning, buy what is yours for yourself, by means of the shoe. But Boaz, because he knew that a woman is not acquired through chalifin (a symbolic exchange-transaction), drew off his own shoe instead, and said to the elders, "You are witnesses today that I have bought all that was Elimelech's" — meaning, through this act of chalifin — "but I do not say that I have bought all that was Elimelech's, and Ruth as well," but rather, "and also Ruth" — meaning: and also Ruth, but not by means of an act of acquisition; rather, through acquiring the inheritance, she becomes to me, as it were, a zekukah (a widow bound for levirate marriage), so as to establish the name of the dead upon his inheritance. It is also possible that the dispute between Rav and Levi — as to whether the acquisition [by chalifin] is made with the vessel of the buyer or the vessel of the seller — existed also between the opinion of the redeemer and that of Boaz. Accordingly, the verses would mean: "now this was [the practice] in former times in Israel" — before this incident — that with regard to redemption, etc., they were not precise and did not distinguish between the vessel of the buyer and the vessel of the seller, but rather, in every case, "a man would draw off his shoe and give it to his fellow," whether the one giving it was the buyer or the seller — for they would follow both opinions: when it was the vessel of the buyer, the acquisition worked on the reasoning that the acquisition takes effect according to Rav; and when it was the vessel of the seller, it worked on the reasoning that the acquisition takes effect according to Levi. But the law did not remain so; rather, "and this was the attestation in Israel." And what is this attestation? Behold: "the redeemer said to Boaz, buy it for yourself" — that is, he gave the vessel to Boaz and told him, "buy it for yourself," which follows [the opinion of] the vessel of the seller. But Boaz did not want this; rather, he himself, the buyer, drew off his own shoe, so as to establish the law [as being] with the vessel of the buyer. This is the meaning of his saying, "and this was the attestation in Israel" — that this is what Boaz ruled and established, and it is akin to the "this" mentioned above, "now this was [the practice] in former times" — namely, the "this" that would go on to be stated: "a man drew off his shoe."

"Now this was the custom in former times in Israel, etc." — meaning: this was the law from ancient days concerning acquisition and exchange, to confirm every matter in a manner that could not afterward be retracted, namely, that the buyer would draw off his shoe and give it to the seller, as if the seller were acquiring the shoe, and by his acquiring the shoe, he would transfer to the buyer that item of the acquisition or exchange. And this served as a kind of attestation to the validity of the acquisition or the exchange.

"Now this was [the custom] in former times in Israel" — It says in the Midrash: At first they used to acquire [property] by means of a shoe and a sandal, as it says, "a man drew off his shoe." They then reverted to acquiring by means of ketzatzah (a symbolic 'cutting-off' ceremony). And what is the law of ketzatzah? Rabbi Yose bar Avin said: whoever sold his field ("to a heathen" — [apparently] a scribal error), his relatives would bring a barrel full of parched grain and nuts and break it before the children, and the children would gather [the pieces] and say, "So-and-so has been cut off from his ancestral holding." Likewise, one who married a woman unfit for him — his relatives would bring a barrel full of parched grain and nuts and break it before the children, and the children would gather [the pieces] and say, "So-and-so is lost from his family." They then reverted to acquiring by means of a shoe and a sandal: "a man drew off his shoe and gave it to his fellow." They then reverted to acquiring with money, with a document, and with chazakah (an act establishing possession). Accordingly, [Malbim] explains the statement "Now this was [the custom] in former times in Israel" to mean: in ancient days, such as in the days of Joshua, they used to acquire by chalifin (the exchange-act, i.e., the shoe), for only afterward did they begin to acquire by ketzatzah. For there is a difference between the term "l'fanim" (in former times) and "milfanim" (from former times): the word "milfanim" indicates that a practice current now has been practiced since ancient days, but the word "l'fanim" indicates that it was practiced in ancient days but not afterward — as in "the Emim dwelt therein aforetime [l'fanim]" (Deuteronomy 2:10). Accordingly it is clear that this method of acquisition [by shoe] was later abolished. And one can explain the reason for this in light of what the Tosafot say in [tractate] Arachin (44a): that anything which reverts to its [original] owner — such as a gift given on condition that it be returned, or a loan, or a rental — is not acquired by chalifin. But this raises a difficulty: for we derive the law of kinyan chalifin (acquisition by exchange-act) precisely from Boaz, from "and a man drew off his shoe" — and there [the field in question] was an inheritance, destined to revert at the Yovel (Jubilee), as Rabbi Yochanan said, that brothers who divided [an inheritance] are considered purchasers from one another and revert [the property] to each other at the Yovel — and at that time the Yovel was in effect. And one can explain this in light of what is stated in [tractate] Gittin (48a): Rabbi Chisda said, the dispute applies to the second Yovel, but in the first Yovel, all agree that he brings it and reads it [as valid], since at that point his mind does not yet rely upon [the assumption of its permanence]. Therefore, throughout the time of the first Yovel, they used to acquire by kinyan sudar (the formal act of acquisition performed by the exchange of a garment, here enacted through the shoe), but after the first Yovel they could no longer acquire by this means, since by then they knew that [the property] would revert at the Yovel, and their minds relied on this, and therefore they instituted the kinyan of ketzatzah. However, in this acquisition of Boaz's, they could not acquire by means of ketzatzah — for the first redeemer did not wish to redeem, and said, "lest I mar my own inheritance," since he did not derive [the halachah] "an Ammonite" but not "an Ammonite woman" [i.e., he held Moabite women likewise forbidden] — and had they brought a barrel and broken it before the children, people would have said that it was not because she [Naomi] had sold her ancestral holding, but because he married a woman unfit for him, for that too a ketzatzah would be performed, as stated in the Midrash, and as stated in [tractate] Ketubot (28a): "How is ketzatzah performed? [When] one of the brothers married a woman unfit for him," etc. Therefore they reverted to practicing the kinyan chalifin that had been practiced in former times in Israel, in the era of the first Yovel — for even though the present time was after the first Yovel, nevertheless the field which he acquired through yibbum likewise does not revert at the Yovel, as stated in [tractate] Bechorot (52a): "and these do not revert at the Yovel... and the one who performs yibbum." This is the meaning of what is stated: "Now this was [the custom] in former times in Israel... and this was the attestation in Israel" — meaning, since this method of acquisition was practiced in former times, in the era of the first Yovel, therefore they established this attestation now as well, since he could not acquire by means of ketzatzah.

"And he drew off his shoe" — Boaz drew off his own shoe and gave it to the redeemer. And this is what our Sages of blessed memory called chalipin (a symbolic exchange). The meaning is: you have received this shoe, and in its place you have given over your right of redemption. And the reason for [using] a shoe is that it is always at hand, whereas it would not be feasible to remove a shirt or trousers, lest one be left naked. And some say that it was the redeemer who drew off his shoe and gave it to Boaz, meaning: just as I have given you this shoe, so [I transfer to you] the redemption.

"And the redeemer said to Boaz, buy it for yourself" — [meaning] this redemption. "And Boaz drew off his shoe" — and gave it to the so-and-so (peloni almoni), and by means of the shoe he transferred to him this redemption. And it appears that he returned his shoe to him afterward, for it is not conceivable that a judge would remain barefoot on one foot; and therefore this acquisition applied to the shoe among them, so as to transfer to him something other than [the shoe itself]. And from this passage we learn that even land is acquired by this form of acquisition, namely, by drawing off a shoe and giving it to the seller.

"So the near kinsman said to Boaz" — After granting him permission to redeem, he transferred title to him by kinyan sudar (the formal act of acquisition performed by exchange of a garment). And the Rashba wrote in [tractate] Kiddushin (21a) — see there — as Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said: "the nearer relative takes precedence" [in the order of redemption] — but does not the precedence of the nearer relative already require no verse, since we derive it from "his kinsman who is near to him" [Leviticus 25:25]? And he answered that the essential point of the verse comes to insist specifically on this order: that if the uncle is not wealthy [enough to redeem] and the cousin is wealthy, [the field] is not redeemed [by the cousin out of turn]. And this contradicts what is said regarding Boaz, that his uncle did not wish to redeem, and yet it was redeemed through his cousin. And one must say that this itself is the reason he accepted the kinyan (act of transfer): that by accepting this transfer, he came to stand in his [the closer kinsman's] place, with his legal power equal to his.

"And he said, etc." — Behold, his saying "you are witnesses" is unnecessary, for after he had already said, at the time of the acquisition, "I have bought all, etc.," there would be no need to say "you are witnesses to me"; and likewise the word "today" is superfluous. Furthermore, his saying "and also Ruth, etc." — since she is not acquired by the kinyan sudar (the symbolic act of acquisition by the exchange of a garment) by which the fields were acquired, why does he mention her acquisition together with the acquisition of all that belonged to Elimelech? Furthermore, why does he now call her by the title "the Moabite"? Furthermore, why does he say that she is "the wife of Mahlon" — and all the more so, since after Mahlon's death she is not his wife, nor is he her husband; she ought to be called "the widow of Mahlon," not "the wife of Mahlon." Furthermore, his saying "so that the name of the dead shall not be cut off, etc." — is it not already included in his saying "to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance" that the name of the dead shall not be cut off? Furthermore, his saying "and from the gate of his place" — what does the name of the dead have to do with the gate of his place? Furthermore, why does he repeat a second time and say "you are witnesses this day"? Furthermore, in the verse that follows, it repeats and says "and the elders, witnesses" — why does it say that they are witnesses, especially since it then goes on to say "may Hashem grant, etc.," which, being a blessing, bears no relation to testimony? However, it appears, from the words of our Sages of blessed memory, that "the people who were in the gate" are the Great Sanhedrin, and "the elders" are the ten men among the elders of the city; and there is no doubt that the light of the holy spirit shone upon them, for indeed their blessing bore fruit, and not one of their words fell to the ground. Now let us come to the matter, paying attention to the verse's wording, where it says, "And all the people that were in the gate, and the elders, said: We are witnesses" — whereas what they actually said was, "May Hashem grant the woman, etc." It would have been fitting to say "and all the people... blessed [him]," and [then quote] their words, "May Hashem grant, etc.," since it is a blessing and not a statement (amirah). Furthermore, their saying "witnesses" is devoid of sense, whether we take it that this was said by "the people who were in the gate" — who are the Sanhedrin — or that it was said specifically by "the elders," who were designated as witnesses. For that is not so: they were designated only to recite the blessing of bridegrooms in the presence of ten. And moreover, what is added by telling us that the elders are witnesses — for regarding a blessing, what more or less does it accomplish whether it comes from the mouth of witnesses or from the mouth of others? Rather, here is the matter: when this match was about to be realized in fact, Boaz reflected in his heart and said: Who knows whether, at such a time, all the people in the gate, or others, will whisper about me, and think ill of me, saying: "What is this, that the greatest man of the generation, the head of the Sanhedrin, should come and take for himself a daughter from among a nation that Hashem separated from entering into the congregation of Hashem — for even though the daughters born to them [Moabite men] are excluded from the general prohibition, should he not still look and see who their father is, and should not his soul be revolted by their conception? Is there, then, a lack of daughters in Israel, whose conception was preceded by circumcision and immersion, and whose birth was in holiness and purity, that instead he went off to the daughters of Putiel, whose father and mother fattened calves for idol worship? And if he is a lord, where is his honor? For what lord in Israel — what prince and great man like him — would marry a woman in whom Mahlon stumbled and died at her hand; and shall this stumbling-block, now in the hand of Boaz, be well-pleasing to Hashem?" And who would keep the leaders of the people of the land from speaking, and saying, and pressing the matter further: "This is nothing other than [the fact] that, from the time he came from Bethlehem and said to the reapers, 'Hashem be with you,' peace was on his lips, but his eyes looked directly at Ruth; and a swift witness, from the arrangements of the heart, was the answer of his tongue, in the midst of speaking: 'Whose young woman is this?' — for this shows that he desired her. Yet he kept silent until he found the occasion" — this was on account of the hardship of the three months' waiting period required of the [female] convert, which came to an end with the completion of the barley harvest and the wheat harvest, as discussed above. Therefore, in order to remove a stumbling block from the path of the people of Hashem, so that no insolent word should come out of their mouths, and so that no resentment should remain in their hearts, he answered and said to the elders, etc., "witnesses," etc. And this was in order to make known, and to have it be known, that this woman is not like [other] women among the daughters who convert — for she is not lowly, as other converts are, but rather raised up on high, and happy is he who holds fast to her. For behold, this is the woman whom Hashem has shown should come to build for herself a royal house in Israel a second time, for she has, in effect, a levirate path (derech yibbum): just as, when brothers dwell together, and one of them dies, having been married to an Israelite woman, does he not leave behind something of his spirit within her, so that his name will be raised up in Israel through his brother? So also in this case, the spirit of Mahlon clung to her, and the son she will bear will arise in the name of her dead husband, and will be great in Israel — in such a way that what I have done is indeed a good deed. Now, to strengthen this matter before the eyes of all who heard him, he answered and said to the elders and all the people: Behold, without doubt, "you are witnesses this day," for before your eyes I have bought all that belonged to Elimelech, etc.; just as you are witnesses to this visible matter, so be witnesses also to what I now speak in your ears, that it is true, even though it is not visible in this way. And this is [the meaning of] his saying, "and also Ruth, etc." — that is, also bear witness that I have likewise acquired Ruth, etc., for it is as though I have a levirate bond (zikah) with her, like a daughter of Israel bound to await a levir (a shomeret yavam). For behold, she is "the Moabite" — that is, the known one, who was destined to come from Moab, who has truly made a good departure [from her people]. And she has yet a second virtue: that she is called "the wife of Mahlon" — that is, and not "the widow of Mahlon" — because his spirit is still within her, to raise up his name, in a manner resembling levirate marriage (me-ein yibbum); and this is [the meaning of] "to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance." And I add further, by his holy spirit, that also "the name of the dead shall not be cut off" — for it is stated in the Book of the Zohar that, because Job was the son of a yevamah (a woman married through levirate marriage), he had troubles; and likewise David, because he descended from a yevamah, was destined to be stillborn, had not his forebears — Adam and the Patriarchs — come before him [to intercede on his behalf]. And in this manner he says: Know, then, that the child who will be born, raising up Mahlon, will remain among his people, and will not be cut off from among his brothers — for he will not die, but live; and moreover, he will be a halachic authority (moreh hora'ot) in Israel, who likewise will not be cut off from being "of the gate of his place," that is, from the Sanhedrin that is in the gate. Or, in a similar vein, this is [what is meant by] the statement of our Sages, of blessed memory, in Midrash Bemidbar Rabbah, as follows: "'God settles the solitary in a house' (Psalms 68:7) — anyone who marries a fitting wife, the Holy One, blessed be He, makes them into houses, as it is said, 'God settles the solitary in a house'; and He brings forth from them sons who are masters of Torah, who prohibit and permit, as it is said, 'He brings out the prisoners into prosperity' (Psalms 68:7), etc." Behold, one who marries a fitting wife thereby gains two things through this marriage: first, that his house will be a faithful house whose seed will not be cut off; second, that from him will emerge halachic authorities in Israel. And this is what Boaz says: See now, how fitting this woman is for me — for behold, the two things unique to one who marries a fitting wife are found here, and will be realized here. Regarding the first — that he will have a faithful house whose seed will not be cut off — he said, "and the name of the dead shall not be cut off from among his brothers." And regarding the second — that from them emerge sons who prohibit and permit, masters of halachic ruling — he said, "and from the gate of his place," meaning that his seed will also not be cut off from being among the men of the gate, who are the Sanhedrin, who prohibit and permit. And concerning all of this, which he said by the holy spirit, Boaz said to them, "you are witnesses this day" — that is, you testify concerning me that it is so, in accordance with everything I have spoken — that you should be witnesses to the matter, that it will indeed come to be, and I will not be ashamed, for the truth of all this will, in the course of time, come to be revealed. Then "all the people that were in the gate, and the elders" — the two groups to whom Boaz spoke — [responded]; and what did they say? Behold, it was "witnesses" — meaning: we are witnesses, in accordance with your word, which you spoke to us, "you are witnesses this day"; we acknowledge, and say, "witnesses." Or the sense of the matter is: You said that we should be witnesses, [in the sense] that you spoke thus by your holy spirit; and we say "witnesses" — meaning, actual witnesses — that it is indeed so, in accordance with your words. For indeed Hashem has spoken through us as well, by His holy spirit, and we are witnesses from this time forth that your word is true. And besides the fact that you have judged rightly, [Hashem] will add still further, "and may Hashem grant the woman, etc.," as we shall explain, with Hashem's help.

"And Boaz said to the elders" — Accordingly, he summoned them all as witnesses that he had bought from the hand of Naomi the entire field. And this he acquired with money, with a document, and with chazakah, as [Malbim] stated, that they had reverted to acquiring with money and a document — meaning, when yibbum was not applicable. And [he summoned them as witnesses] also that he had acquired Ruth, who was still the wife of Machlon — for her husband still "rattles" [i.e., his bond to her still stirs and lingers] within her, as stated in the Zohar, and this is the concept underlying the mitzvah of yibbum. "And I have acquired her as a wife" with the intent to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance. And for this he summoned them as witnesses a second time — for the sale and acquisition of the field is one matter, while the acquisition of the wife and her betrothal is another, separate matter, requiring its own distinct testimony.

To perpetuate the name of the deceased upon his inheritance: Since his wife goes and comes on the estate and brings in and takes out [items], people say, “This is Machlon’s wife,” and thereby his name is remembered upon it.

"To raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance" — meaning: they will say that the wife of the deceased maintains a hold on it, and if she has offspring, [that offspring] will inherit this inheritance.

Like Rachel and like Leah. Even though they were from the tribe of Yehudah and of the descendants of Leah, they conceded that Rachel was the mainstay of the household and they mentioned Rachel before Leah. — Notes: (8) Alternatively, the blessing was for (Naomi)[Ruth] who was the daughter of idolaters. They blessed her that she should be in her own righteousness like Rachel and Leah who also were daughters of an idolater [Lavan], but because of their marriage to a great and righteous man [Yaakov], they created the House of Yisroel. And be famous. I.e., may your name become great.

"Like Rachel and like Leah" — he mentioned Rachel first, because she was Jacob's [intended] wife in his original intention. "And do valorously [va-aseh chayil]" — like "asah li et ha-chayil ha-zeh" (who has made me this wealth, Deuteronomy 8:17), for you did not take her for the sake of money.

"And they said, etc." — the beginning of the verse was explained above. To arrive at the intent of the rest, let us pay attention to the following: First, his saying "Hashem make the woman, etc." — why does he speak by way of hints and not say outright, "Hashem make Ruth like Rachel," etc.? Second, his saying "who has come" — for it is possible that she would come to the house of her own accord, without Boaz sending her companions or young women after her to bring her to him. Third, his saying "like Rachel and like Leah" — what comparison should be drawn between her and these two, rather than the rest of the women, seeing that only the two of them built [the house of Israel]? Fourth, his saying "the two of them" (shteihem) — for is not the word superfluous, and its last letter switched from a nun to a mem [i.e., spelled with a mem rather than the expected feminine form with a nun]? Fifth, what need was there to compare her to specific women rather than simply blessing her with their blessing, without naming them? Sixth, his saying "and do worthily, etc." — for just as the matter was attributed to Ruth up to this point by saying "Hashem make the woman, etc., that she be like Rachel and Leah who, the two of them, built [the house of Israel]," he then concludes concerning her by saying "and do worthily, etc." Seventh, why did he make two separate blessings, when they appear to be one, and also called the town by both its names, dividing them so that each blessing had its own name? Eighth, his saying "and let your house be like the house of Peretz" — is it a small thing that she be like Rachel and Leah, who built the house of Israel, that they went on to bless him further that it should be like Peretz? Ninth, his saying "whom Tamar bore to Judah" — who does not know that Peretz is the one whom Tamar bore to Judah? Tenth, his saying "of the seed which Hashem shall give you, etc." — would it ever occur to anyone that the seed in question was one that Hashem would give her from another man, that he needed to specify "which He shall give you"? Eleventh, his saying "of this young woman" — who does not know that the seed spoken of would be from this young woman? Twelfth, why did he change her description — above he called her "the woman" (ishah), and now he calls her "young woman" (na'arah) — and more than that, it appears she went backward, for she had been a grown woman, and by the end of the blessing she has become a young woman? Now, these blessers were uncertain whether this match was a case of yibbum (levirate marriage) — that the spirit of Machlon was within her, [destined] to return to be built up and to have his name called in Israel — or whether perhaps no such spirit was within her, for they had merely been married and the spirit of her husband had not attached itself to her, but she was simply a righteous woman, a soul set apart for good, destined to come from Moab. Therefore they divided their blessing into two parts, saying: even if she has no aspect of yibbum, but was only a woman like the multitude of women who convert for the sake of Heaven — behold, this is our blessing, "may He give... the woman, etc." For there was room for Boaz's heart to be struck, with people saying to him, "What is this you have done? Is it for lack of daughters in Israel that you have desired a daughter of Moab?" — that was the first difficulty. Second, [there was room for his heart to be troubled] because the way of a man is to pursue the woman, not the reverse, yet here it was she who was pursuing to come to your house. This is [the meaning of] "the woman who has come to your house" — for as to the first point he said "the woman," meaning the known woman who is the daughter of idol-worshippers, and as to the second he said "who has come to your house," for she was the one seeking and pursuing you — all the more so if it had become known to them that she came to him and uncovered his feet, so that she came and pursued to come to your house. For as to the first point, do not be troubled — for this is our blessing, that Hashem make her like Rachel, for she too was the daughter of an idolater, and for her sake Jacob served for several years, through scorching heat by day and frost by night. And as to the second point he said "and like Leah," for she too went to Jacob's bed in place of Rachel, and afterward too she was pursuing him, going out to say to him, "Unto me you must come," etc. And this was nothing but the goodness of their intent — to build, the two of them together, the house of Israel, not that one of them should build the house of Esau. For what they shared in common was that all their aspiration and desire was to build the house of Israel, and that neither of them should fall into the portion of Esau lest she build the house of Esau. That is why Leah's eyes were tender — she wept continually, night and day, that she not fall to the lot of Esau. Concerning Rachel, our Sages, of blessed memory, said — and Rashi, of blessed memory, cites it — that this is why she said, "Give me children, or else I am dead" — for she feared lest Jacob divorce her and Esau take her; and concerning this Rashi, of blessed memory, brought the words of the paytan (liturgical poet): Edom (Esau) gazed upon her — it was not because she was ill that he desired to take her for himself, and she was overcome with terror. This is [the meaning of] "the two of them (shteihem) built" [the house of Israel] — for thus they took upon themselves the way of men, namely, pursuing the woman, while they themselves were pursuing the man. Hence he writes shteihem with a mem, to hint that the two of them adopted the way of males and pursued the man — except that, since their intent was good, there is no need for concern, and so too here. And you might say: even granting she is cleared of the two aforementioned impediments, are there not two other troubling matters still holding back the blessing? These are: first, that you [Boaz] had thirty married sons and thirty married daughters, and all of them died in Bethlehem, and who knows whether the reason is that "children depend on fate (mazal)" or some other cause that you do not merit children, or perhaps the place itself is the cause, and it would be well for you to change your place a second time. And second, there was room for Boaz to ponder and say: which way [should I choose] — will it be good in Hashem's eyes to grant me success in this match, especially since this is a case of yibbum, meant to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance and bring forth from it holy seed, if the root of the matter was a transgression? For when Machlon took her she was a Moabite, and moreover the transgression occurred through that very woman — how could holy seed emerge from her to restore the soul of one who sinned through guilt incurred with her, such that his heart and innards would be embittered? Therefore, as to the first [difficulty], they said "and do worthily in Ephrath," etc., meaning: in that very place where his loss was known, there he would do worthily through the offspring of his loins, and his seed would be exalted, men of renown. And it is possible that this reasoning is hinted at by the mention of two names, dividing the blessing so that the first concerns doing worthily and the second concerns proclaiming a name. This is because the Targum renders the verse "and Salmon begot Boaz" as: "and Salmon begot Ivtzan the leader — he is Boaz the righteous, through whose merit the people of Israel were delivered from their enemies, and through whose merit and prayer the famine departed from the land of Israel" — end of quotation. And it is possible that his two benefactions are hinted at in the two names of the place: the first good — that he saved the strength of Israel from the enemy's sword — is hinted at in "Ephrath," which relates to fruit of the womb and increase, the opposite of destruction by the enemy's sword; and the second good — deliverance from famine to bread — is hinted at in "Beth-lehem" (house of bread). Therefore he blessed him with these two goods: for the first, that he saved the strength of the people of Israel, he said "and do worthily in Ephrath," since that name hints at that matter, as stated; and for the second, that they be prosperous, possessors of renown and abundant good, corresponding to his having saved them from the degradation caused by famine, he said "and be called by name in Beth-lehem" — for from the very place where he set them on their feet by giving them bread, there he shall be called by name in Beth-lehem. This is [the meaning of] "and do worthily, etc." — he did not say "and may Hashem give you might in Ephrath, and may you be called by name in Beth-lehem," but rather "and do (va'aseh)," as though it were commanded to him, and he did it as a thing that happens of its own accord, by his own choice — meaning that through his two merits he would attain it as though it occurred by itself. Now, these three things which they set right in their blessing apply if the matter was not a case of yibbum, but merely [a marriage to] a proper convert, righteous in her deeds. But if it is a case of yibbum, with the intent of bringing forth Machlon himself into the world, to be repaired, perfected, and to ascend in levels, then this final difficulty presses hard: by what means could Machlon be repaired and acquire so much good through the very woman with whom he committed a transgression? Regarding this too, do not fear, for "let your house be like the house of Peretz" — namely, like Er, the firstborn of Judah, who, even though he committed a transgression through Tamar, nevertheless Tamar herself bore Peretz — [a rectification] for Er — to Judah. This is [the meaning of] "whom Tamar bore to Judah" — for just as then the merit of Judah and Tamar combined to repair the impediment that beset Er, so too now your merit shall combine with the merit of Ruth to bring about benefit. This is [the meaning of] "of the seed which He shall give you" — that is, through your merit; "of this young woman" — the one known to be righteous, for her merit too shall serve to help bring about the rectification. Or, [the verse] "may Hashem make the woman, etc." may allude to the saying of our Sages, of blessed memory, in the Midrash, which states: Rabbi Abba bar Kahana opened [his exposition] with the verse "Tremble, and sin not" (Psalms 4:5) — David said before the Holy One, blessed be He: How long will they rage against me, saying, "Is he not of a disqualified family? Is he not descended from Ruth the Moabite?" [Hashem replied to them:] "Commune with your own heart upon your bed" [continuing the verse] — you too are not free of the prohibition of [marrying] two sisters; look to your own origins, and be silent, Selah — end of quotation. Now, they said that in response to their reviling him for coming from a disqualified family, David's answer was that they should recall their own origin — that they descend from two sisters — and be silent, Selah. That is to say: the thoughts belong to Hashem [alone], and He knows by which way to bring forth the seed of Israel into the world; and even though that matter appears strange, it is good to acknowledge that everything is from Him, blessed be He, for God knows that His thoughts are not our thoughts — for it is in this way that the house of Israel would be built. So too with the matter of Ruth: He, blessed be He, saw and arranged that the house of the kingdom of Israel be built in this way, and they should be silent, [recognizing] that none can come after the King of the universe regarding what He has already done. Now let us come to the matter itself: it is possible that these consummate blessers were well aware that this was a case of yibbum, meant to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance, and their blessing was founded upon this knowledge. It states that they divided their blessing into three parts: one blessing for Ruth, the second for Boaz, and the third for the seed that Hashem would give him from that young woman. For they perceived, and so were astonished at, an objection to the success of each of these three things, and they came with a blessing of good to remedy each one. As regards Ruth, the objection was the insult by which they insulted David, saying that he was of a disqualified family, descended from Ruth the Moabite — for even granting that they were aware that the law disqualifies only a male Moabite, not a female Moabite [from entering the congregation], nevertheless they insulted him as coming from a disqualified family, since it cannot be denied that her father, and every male in that family, were disqualified from entering the congregation. His response to them was that they should consider that they themselves descend from two sisters, and be silent, Selah. And this, I believe, is the point of the verse — that these blessers intended to raise the very same extended difficulty that King David, peace be upon him, raised. This is their saying: "may Hashem make the woman, etc." — that is, even though she is of a disqualified family, it cannot be denied that a good blessing should come through her, that she be built up from it, for behold, they [Rachel and Leah] — even though the two of them together constituted the forbidden union of two sisters — nevertheless built the house of Israel. So too, though an observer might see in this match a matter not [fully] rectified, she too shall build her house like Rachel and Leah, for all is by His providence, blessed be He; and just as through what appeared to be a strange matter, good emerged, so too here — for the thoughts belong to Hashem, and He knows that this is the good and fitting thing. This is exactly David's response to those who provoked him with that insult, to teach that the intent is not to cast disqualification upon those in Israel who were born through a forbidden union, but rather to say that just as He, blessed be He, did not build the house of Israel in a manner free from the argument concerning two sisters, for a reason revealed before Him, blessed be He, so too in this matter. But in truth, Jacob committed no sin in the matter, for this occurred before the giving of the Torah. And to hint at this, Samuel the Prophet, [author of] this book, wrote shteihem with a mem instead of a nun — for the numerical distance from mem to nun is ten, hinting that the two of them built the house of Israel at a time when the world lacked ten things, namely the Ten Commandments — that is, that it occurred before the giving of the Torah. Rather, this hints at proof from that precedent, that the One who blessed the house of Israel despite that same argument will [also] bless Ruth, as stated. And as regards the objection delaying the blessing on Boaz's part — namely, that there is room for hesitation, since Boaz had not merited to build a household in that town, having buried thirty sons and thirty daughters there — therefore they said: the first son will not be reckoned as your seed, but only [exists] to raise up the name of the dead; but the sons you beget afterward are your own, called by your name, and so we bless you that, aside from the first son, you shall "do worthily" for yourself — that is, wealth of your own, in your own name. And as for the fact that you did not merit to be built up there previously, there will therefore be a slight change in the name of the place, calling it "Ephrathah" — for the essential name of the place is Beth-lehem, as it is written, "And you, Beth-lehem Ephrathah" (Micah 5:1), where Ephrathah serves as a kind of byname for its essential name; likewise where it says, "on the way to Ephrath, that is Beth-lehem," meaning that its essential name is Beth-lehem. And if you were to beget only the one son meant to raise up the name of the dead, there would be no need for any change in the name of the place, but simply "and be called by name in Beth-lehem," its principal name. Or, it may mean: you fear that your children will die here as they did before, or that you will not achieve renown like the name of the great, since you have fallen in the eyes of the common people — do not worry, for our blessing is that in the very place where you lost the strength of the sons and daughters you had there, you shall return and do worthily; this is [the meaning of] "and do worthily in Ephrath." And as concerns your loss of reputation from the slanderous talk over this marriage, do not worry, for "be called by name in Beth-lehem" — the very place where that slanderous talk occurred, there you shall be called by a great name, for nothing shall hold you back. And as regards the third matter, concerning the seed: there was room for Boaz to think to himself, "How can I expect to see success in the seed to come to me from this young woman? Is it not a kal vachomer (a fortiori argument): if from the woman I took for myself, of the seed of Israel, in a fully legitimate marriage, I did not succeed in her seed, but begot in haste and buried sixty sons and daughters, great and good — how then from this one, whose father and mother fattened calves for idol worship, and who came to me not through chuppah, kiddushin (betrothal), or the wedding blessings, but [merely] uncovered my feet and lay down — shall I succeed in the fruit of her womb?" Therefore they answered and said: "and let your house be like the house of Peretz, whom Tamar bore to Judah" — for just as Judah buried his two sons, whom his wife bore him through a fully legitimate marriage, and he succeeded only through Peretz, whom Tamar bore to Judah, who came about through her sitting at the crossroads to lie beside him, saying, "let me be with you" — so shall it be for you, from the seed which Hashem shall give, etc. This is [the meaning of] "and let your house be like the house of Peretz, whom Tamar bore to Judah" — for even Shelah, who remained to Judah from his own wife, did not attain one part in a thousand of the stature of Peretz and his seed. And do not be amazed at this, for it comes from this young woman, who is the one singled out to bring forth the kingdom of Israel from her, for she came to receive the reward of the deed she performed with her father for the sake of Heaven — and her reward will surely not be in vain. Or, in a vein similar to the preceding: it is stated in the Zohar that everyone born by way of yibbum (levirate marriage) is destined for suffering and death, up to and including David himself — for had not those who benefited him come before him, he would have been stillborn. Therefore it was possible for Boaz to ponder and say: if this is a case of yibbum for me, woe — who will even live, of the seed I would beget from her? To this he answers: "let your house be like the house of Peretz" — for on the contrary, he and all his seed lived, and kindness and a throne of glory were theirs. Or, it may mean: "let your house be," etc. — that is, will not Boaz consider that his whole aspiration and desire in this matter is a case of yibbum, meant to raise up the name of the dead? Yet this need applies only when the wife of the deceased was an Israelite woman and her husband an Israelite man, so that some of his spirit attaches itself to her — a spirit that stirs (lit. "rattles") within her womb, as stated in the Zohar — from which the dead man is established, to raise up his name in Israel. But if an Israelite man married a Moabite woman, as Machlon did, and died — by what path could the spirit of the Israelite son travel and attach itself to the womb of a foreign woman, so as to leave behind him a blessing to be built up from her, that his name be called in Israel? If so, there is no bond of levirate obligation (zikah) here, there is no yibbum here. To this they answered: "let your house be" — whose origin, through Machlon's marriage, was not through [a valid] marital bond — "like the house of Peretz, whom Tamar bore to Judah" — whose origin, through Er (that is, Peretz), was through a fully legitimate marriage. For the fact that Machlon was married to a Moabite woman does not fit together with yibbum, so as to say that the spirit of Machlon did not settle within her — since not all women are the same. For had a different soul been in place of Ruth's soul — say, one who had married Reuben, and Reuben died, and she converted and married Simeon his brother — the law of yibbum would not apply, for Reuben's spirit is not within her, to raise up his name through his brother. But Ruth's portion was not like this, for she is the one singled out to come from Moab, to bring forth from her the kingdom of the house of David. And from the time she was [descended, through] the daughter of Lot, [and] her [union] with her father, He, blessed be He, had already ordained to bring her to all this greatness; and there is no doubt that from the day of her birth she was prepared for this, and from then she was, in some respect, purified from an external standpoint, drawn close to holiness — and all the more so, according to what we said above, that she herself was Lot's firstborn daughter, for from then merit was already accounted to her, and He, blessed be He, brought her to receive her reward — for she surely came in a state prepared in purity, and through this she found, more than all the other Moabite women, a place for the spirit of Machlon to rest within her. This is [the meaning of] his saying "of the seed," etc. — meaning what we said, that it will be from the seed that Hashem shall give you, from this young woman — for this one is singled out from all the rest, as stated. Or, his saying "of the seed" may mean: from your kind and from her kind shall the child be, like Peretz, of great quality — that is, "from the seed which Hashem shall give you," and "from her," that is, "from this young woman" — meaning, from what is within the young woman, namely the spirit within her womb, for the spirit was not lacking from her, since she is this one in particular, as stated. Or, it may mean: "let your house be," etc. — that is, do not say, O Boaz, why should this yibbum (levirate marriage) come about by a roundabout way? For had He, blessed be He, desired [an ordinary] yibbum, He would have left Kilion alive, and he [Kilion] would have built up the house of his brother [Machlon], or their younger brother [would have] — as our Rabbis, of blessed memory, said concerning the verse "I went out full," etc., that when they came to the fields of Moab, Naomi was pregnant, and that child too died. Why did He, blessed be He, not leave that child, to raise up seed for his brother, so that the yibbum might proceed by a straightforward path? To this he answers: "let your house be," etc., meaning: had this yibbum been performed through his brother, the child born would not have been of the great quality of Peretz, but only like Zerach or similar, and the kingdom of Israel would not have arisen from his seed. But now, since it comes about through you, "let your house be like the house of Peretz" — of great quality and stature — just as happened with Judah, who could have performed the levirate marriage through Shelah his son, yet He, blessed be He, wanted only that Judah himself perform it. And the reason, which we have written in our commentary on the Torah, please God, is this: it is known that Peretz and Zerach are [the rectifications of] Er and Onan. Therefore, had Shelah performed the levirate marriage, he would have brought forth only Onan, but not Er — for one only builds a single house, not two; and it is known that it is the second [most recently deceased brother] alone that he builds up. But Hashem desired that Er, too, come into the world, to bring forth from him much good for the house of Israel, since his soul was of great inherent quality. Therefore He, blessed be He, devised a plan so that Er should not be lost — for had Shelah performed the levirate marriage, only Onan would have been restored, not Er — but He directed the levirate marriage into the hand of Judah, since Judah, being the stock from which Er and Onan were hewn, had the strength to bring back both of them and build two houses — namely, Er and Onan, that is, Peretz and Zerach. This is [the meaning of] here, "like the house of Peretz, whom Tamar bore to Judah" — meaning that Tamar's bearing of Peretz was in order to belong to Judah, which would not have been so had it been through Shelah, in which case she would have borne only Zerach, not Peretz. And the purport and content of the verse is to say: let it not seem strange to you why Hashem did not perform this levirate marriage through a brother — for since it will be your house, and not the house of Machlon's brother, it shall be "like the house of Peretz, whom Tamar bore to Judah" — meaning that Tamar's bearing of Peretz was to belong to Judah, which would not have been so had she borne to Shelah, in which case she would have borne only Zerach — so too, the one you shall beget shall be reckoned like Peretz, and this must come about through you. This is [the meaning of] "of the seed which Hashem shall give you" — that is, to you — which would not have been so had it come through a brother of his, for it would not have brought him forth in such completeness as when you bring him forth and raise him, since your merit is great; otherwise he would resemble Zerach and the like, whose seed did not succeed to kingship. And the reason such preparation was needed is that it must come "from this young woman" — for ultimately she was of an external root [i.e., of gentile origin], and in order for [what she bears] to be like Peretz, it needed to come about through you. And according to the statement of our Rabbis, of blessed memory, in the Zohar, that Boaz is Judah himself, our statement here fits even better. His saying "of the seed," etc. may also hint at the statement of our Rabbis, of blessed memory, in Bereishit Rabbah and in Midrash Chazit (Song of Songs Rabbah), on the verse "that we may preserve seed of our father" (Genesis 19:32) — that they said: that seed destined to come from another place, namely the King Messiah — "that we may preserve life from our father." And this is what is meant by "of the seed" — the known one that Hashem shall give you, for you are from Peretz, and to his seed this matter is uniquely designated — and it is "from this young woman," for she is the one singled out to come and fulfill the statement of her ancestress [Lot's elder daughter], who spoke of that future seed, etc. — all the more so since she herself is the very firstborn daughter [of Lot], such that his saying "from this young woman" is precisely fitting, as stated.

"Like Rachel and like Leah" — They mentioned Rachel before Leah, because it was for Rachel's sake that the essential purpose of Jacob's service to Laban was. "And do worthily in Ephrath, and be famous in Bethlehem" — They blessed him that he should do worthily in her, just as Caleb did in Ephrath, who bore him Hur, who was the firstborn of Ephrath and was the father of Bethlehem, as is mentioned in the Book of Chronicles. And they said this to him because he was descended from Hezron and dwelt in Bethlehem, and because the deceased was an Ephrathite of Bethlehem in Judah, as mentioned at the beginning of this scroll. "And let your house be like the house of Perez" — They blessed him with the blessing of their forefather Perez, who came from Tamar for a reason similar to this one.

"And all the people that were in the gate" — witnesses, and they also blessed them with a wedding blessing, and there were three blessings: 1) A blessing to the woman — that although she is the daughter of idol-worshippers, since she has come into your house, the house of a righteous man like you, she will become, in her righteousness, like Rachel and like Leah, who were likewise daughters of Laban the Aramean, and through being joined to Jacob the two of them built the house of Israel; so too a faithful house will be built from her — a house of royalty, for on this depends the success of the entire house of Israel. 2) A blessing to Boaz — thus it says, "and do worthily in Ephrathah," for Beth-lehem is the name of his city and Ephrath is the name of his family, who were of distinguished lineage — [the blessing being] that you do worthily, which includes every perfection, until they become a glory to the whole family of Ephrathah; "and be famous in Beth-lehem" — that through the spreading of your name, the name of your city will be spread abroad for praise and glory, for a man like him was born in it.

Like the house of Peretz. From whom they were descended. — Notes: (9) Otherwise they should have blessed Bo’az to be like Ephrayim and Menashe.

"And let your house be" — 3) A blessing regarding the sons you will father: that although they are sons of a levirate marriage (yibbum) and are called by the name of the deceased, nevertheless the house of Perez, whom Tamar bore, was likewise a matter of levirate marriage, and Perez came forth from her and is attributed to Judah, and upon him hangs all the honor of his father's house; so too will this house be, that it will be built up from the seed which Hashem will give you from this young woman.

"And Boaz took..." (etc.) — In order to make known the righteousness of Hashem (Micah 6:5), God caused His spirit to shine upon Samuel the prophet, so as to make known and have known the righteousness of the righteous. For who could tell of Boaz's mighty deeds, or proclaim his praise (cf. Psalms 106:2)? For he did not draw near to her even when she came to the place where he was lying, and "uncovered his feet, and lay down" (Ruth 3:7). For whoever hears this will laugh and will not truly believe it when told, for indeed, would not everyone call him a liar and dismiss his statement, saying that a person is a relative unto himself (i.e., inherently partial regarding his own affairs)? Therefore the words of the living God, through His holy spirit, testify and declare that he did not draw near to her on that night, but only afterward, once he had taken her through chuppah (bridal canopy) and kiddushin (betrothal) and the blessing of the bridegrooms. And this is [the meaning of] "Boaz took Ruth" — that is the kiddushin, and also the chuppah. And this is [the meaning of] "and she became his wife" — that is, she became his, his alone, which is the seclusion (yichud) called chuppah, through which he acquired her as a wife. And then, "he went in to her" — meaning, after these things, namely the kiddushin and the chuppah, only then does "he went in to her" apply. But before this, on that night when Boaz's sleep fled and "the man trembled," etc. (Ruth 3:8), he did not come to her. And this testimony of His, may He be blessed, teaches us for our benefit, that the honor of our fellow should be precious to us — for [Scripture] made a kal va-chomer (an a fortiori argument): if the God of all the worlds is concerned for the honor of a man of the earth (adam, from adamah, "earth"), how much more so now should a man be concerned for another man of similar standing, that he should adorn him with crowns [of honor] and be mindful of his honor. And it says: just as Ruth did her part for the sake of Heaven, and went to Boaz to cling to holiness, and not after the young men — so too Boaz did his part, and took an oath against his own [evil] inclination, and did not draw near to her until he had performed a complete acquisition [of marriage] — Hashem, too, did His part: "and Hashem gave her conception" — and He showed her even greater regard at that time, to accomplish the essential thing for her sake, because she had humbled herself for the sake of Heaven, so that all would understand that God saw the goodness of her heart — that she should not go away empty-handed, without holy seed. Therefore Hashem gave her conception, "and she bore a son." It is also possible that the intent is this: behold, the mitzvah of yibbum (levirate marriage) is [fulfilled through] the first act of intercourse, and yet there are women who do not conceive from a first act of intercourse. It is as if to say: See now how Hashem, too, hastened to bring that holy seed into the world, and to bring it about specifically through the very act of intercourse that constitutes the mitzvah — for behold, from the first act of intercourse she was immediately given conception, and bore through it. And this is [the meaning of] "he went in to her, and Hashem gave her..." etc. — for immediately upon his coming to her, Hashem gave her conception, and also no daughter preceded it, but rather "she bore a son." Or it may be said that although she was young and her husband old — and his way is to emit seed first, thereby producing a female — Hashem gave her conception [in such a way] that she emitted seed first, and thereby "she bore a son" and not a daughter. This is like what our Sages, of blessed memory, said regarding the verse "and may God give you (ve-yitten lekha ha-Elohim)" etc. (Genesis 27:28) — that it means He shall give, and give again (yitten ve-yachazor ve-yitten), which is derived from the extra vav [in ve-yitten]. In the same way it may be said that, in addition to the spirit of Mahlon rattling within her insides, He, may He be blessed, added of His own — "and gave her conception" — to complete the matter, "and she bore a son." Now, it appears from the book of the Zohar that the reincarnated one (ha-megulgal) derives from the "world of death" (alma de-mota), and therefore the birth is attributed to [follows] the woman, as it is written, "and the firstborn that she shall bear..." (Deuteronomy 25:6) — and therefore the son of the yevamah (the levirate widow) is predisposed toward death. Therefore I think that in order to give a complete and enduring gift, He, may He be blessed, gave her a gift different from that given to other levirate widows: for "Hashem gave" — this is the Great Name from the "world of the male" (alma de-dechura) — [that gave] her the conception, so that, since it was He, may He be blessed, who gave her the conception through this Name, and not [merely] from the Name of the "world of the female" (alma de-nukva), its outcome would be to endure in substance. And in the Midrash: "'Hashem gave her conception' — all women give birth according to the reckoning of pregnancy." [End of Midrash quotation.] This statement of theirs appears to be the opposite of the verse, for from the verse it appears that Hashem gave her something unique, whereas according to their words it is something common to all women — and if so, how can it say "Hashem gave her"? And I think the answer is this: since she had come alone with Naomi from the fields of Moab, and had also been in Boaz's fields gleaning until the end of the barley harvest and the wheat harvest — is it not so that no one could remove from the mind of the common people (am ha-aretz) the suspicion, so that they might say: who knows whether, when they came to Bethlehem from the fields of Moab, or when she walked along the road in the evening coming from the field to the town, or in the morning when she returned to the field, wicked men did not encounter her and abuse her? Therefore, what did He, may He be blessed, do? From the time Boaz took her and "went in to her," He, may He be blessed, gave her conception in exact measure, so that the days that passed matched precisely the count of pregnancy, which is 271 days — the exact gestation period for all women — and then "she bore a son," so that they would place a hand over their mouths and all the people would say: for had wicked men abused her beforehand, and she had conceived from them, she would not have given birth in exact measure, matching the full reckoning of the term of pregnancy that applies to all women, from Boaz's intercourse until her giving birth — not less and not more.

"So Boaz took" — this tells us that he did not proceed as one who performs levirate marriage (yibbum) with a brother's wife, where the levir cohabits with her [without prior betrothal], for in that case betrothal by money or by document does not effect an acquisition — one only performs ma'amar (a formal declaration), which is a rabbinic institution; for this levirate union was only a matter of custom alone, and so he betrothed her with betrothal by money or by document. This is why it says, "So Boaz took Ruth, and she became his wife," before it says he came to her, and only afterward, "and he went in to her"; "and Hashem gave her conception" — by His providence she conceived immediately, even though with her first husband, who was a young man, she had not borne children.

"Who has not left you this day without a redeemer" — the meaning is that the name of the dead will be raised up over his inheritance.

"And the women said," etc. — In the Midrash, our Sages, of blessed memory, said: "Just as this day dominates in the firmament, so shall your seed dominate and rule over Israel forever." End of quote. It is fitting to consider: who led them to this exposition, since there is nothing in the verse to support it at all? Moreover, if the intent is that just as the day rules forever, so will he rule over Israel forever, this cannot be, for from the destruction of the First Temple the kingship of the House of David ceased. Furthermore, how can the statement "as this day rules in the firmament" be correct? Rather, what troubled them was the word "today" [hayom] — a superfluous and imprecise word. For if, according to the plain sense, "redeemer" [go'el] refers to the redemption of the field or of the woman, it is not said regarding the child. If so, if the intent is that He did not withhold Boaz from redeeming her, then it should not say "today" but rather "from the day" that he redeemed the field and the woman. And if it means that now his being a redeemer became known, no proof would be needed for that; and in any case, that concerns the giving of a name — one is not called "redeemer" on that account. Moreover, the phrase "and let his name be called" — if it means that he will establish the name of the deceased over his inheritance, it should have said "let his name be called over his inheritance." Therefore they explained it as referring to the Messiah-King, of whom it is said, "And he shall have dominion from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth" (Psalm 72:8) — that he will rule over the whole sphere [of the earth]. This is [the meaning of] "this very day" — that it rules in the firmament over the whole sphere: for the daily celestial sphere [galgal yomi] dominates and compels all the other spheres to circle the world in twenty-four hours, even reversing the movement of each sphere — whose own natural movement is from west to east, over a long period, each according to its own measure — and it compels them to circle the world with it, once each day, from east to west. So too will your seed dominate the sphere and rule over Israel forever — meaning that when the time of his reign comes, he will dominate the sphere over all the nations, to subdue them, for "he shall decide with equity for the ends of the earth" (cf. Isaiah 11:4); but over Israel he will not rule by subjugation, for all who remain in Zion will be righteous (cf. Isaiah 4:3), etc.; rather, he will simply be a ruler in Israel forever from then on. This, in their view, is the meaning of "and let his name be called in Israel": that his dominion over the sphere applies only to the idolatrous nations, but for Israel it will only be that his name is called in Israel — that he is uniquely their king forever, even while ruling over all. And along their approach, "the secret of Hashem is for those who fear Him" (Psalm 25:14) is hinted at — but concealed in a hint, in the manner of our Sages, of blessed memory, who conceal a matter. This is in the phrase "so shall it be with your seed" — for surely it is not through her (Naomi's) seed that the ruler and dominion will come, but through the seed of Boaz and Ruth. Rather, they hinted that the matter of Ruth and Boaz was by way of yibbum (levirate marriage), for Oved is in fact Machlon, reincarnated through the spirit that remained from him in Ruth — so that the future redeemer is genealogically attributed to the seed of Naomi. And according to these words, he explains, by way of the plain sense, paying attention to the phrase "has not left you without a redeemer" — for this wording would not be accurate unless she had had a redeemer who then became lost to her, so that she was as one who had despaired, and [now the verse says] Hashem did not withhold a redeemer for him from elsewhere — but this does not fit Naomi's actual situation. Rather, it means: behold, blessed is Hashem, for He has performed wonders of kindness for the whole multitude of Israel, and for Machlon whose name is called in Israel, and for you, Naomi. This is because our Sages, of blessed memory, said: why was he called Elimelech? Because he would say, "to me [elai] shall kingship come" — for he foresaw, by the holy spirit within him (as appears from the words of our Sages), that kingship would emerge from his seed, since he was from the lineage of Peretz — meaning that it was more fitting for kingship to come through him than through Salmon or his brother Tov. But when he died there in Moab, all his seed ceased, and his name became like a dried-up spring [achzav; cf. Micah 1:14], and the redeemer descended from David did not emerge from him but from Boaz, who is from Salmon. Therefore wise women came and comforted her, for the holy spirit had appeared also in them, her kinswomen and companions — all the more so in light of their statement, of blessed memory, that "were it not for the blessing of the women, the shoots of the seed of David would have been uprooted in the days of Athaliah." This is the meaning of their statement, "Blessed be Hashem": that which Elimelech thought — that kingship would come through him, that is, through you — and it appeared that this had already been nullified, since your whole seed, your name, had ended — behold, this day we praise Hashem, for He has not withheld from you the future redeemer, since even now he comes forth from you, for it was by way of yibbum: this is Machlon your son, from the spirit he planted in her. Behold, in general, good has come forth from you for all Israel, and Machlon himself benefits from this too, for "his name shall be called in Israel." And also for you, in this world, for surely "he shall be to you a restorer of the soul," etc. This is connected to their statement, of blessed memory, in the Gemara, that a woman is not obligated in the commandment of procreation [peru u-rvu], but she may say, "I want a staff for my hand and a spade for my burial" — that is, support in life and someone to bury her. This means: behold, this child will be to you like a son, for through him you have a spade for burial — that is [the meaning of] "he shall be to you a restorer of the soul": for the soul of the dead has no rest and repose unless it is buried, so that, through her having someone to bury her, she has a restorer, one who grants peace of spirit to her soul. And regarding "a staff for the hand," they said, "and to sustain your old age." Now, should you object that this was said only regarding a son born of a woman's own womb, but not regarding the son of her daughter-in-law by another man — the response is: what we concluded, "he shall be to you a restorer of the soul," etc., we correctly said, for it is as if you yourself bore him — since surely "your daughter-in-law who loves you has borne him." This means: behold, ordinarily in the world, regarding a daughter-in-law and her mother-in-law, we find a mother-in-law refusing to reconcile with her daughter-in-law, and all the more so — by a kal va-chomer (an inference from the lesser to the greater) — a daughter-in-law with her mother-in-law. But behold, we have seen that "your daughter-in-law who loves you" — the opposite of the way of all other women — "has borne him"; this can only be because the two of you are considered as one, and "her son shall be called your son." This accords with what we wrote above on the verse "and Ruth clung to her" (Ruth 1:14): for from the time Naomi kissed her two daughters-in-law, it was meant to bond spirit to spirit — in kissing Ruth, like found its like, and it was awakened to cling to her, unlike what happened with Orpah. Therefore they are considered as one, as has been said. Or he gives two reasons for the phrase "your daughter-in-law who...," for there are two respects in which the two of them are considered as one: first, that from then on the spirit of Machlon her son was within her (Ruth); second, the love that comes to be between equals, which existed between them through the bonding of spirit to spirit. Both reasons are included in the phrase "your daughter-in-law who loves you has borne him" — meaning: your daughter-in-law who loves you was still so even when she bore him, for the description of her as your daughter-in-law was not removed from her until she bore him. For as long as the spirit of Machlon was within her, she is still called your daughter-in-law, as if her first husband's authority over her still remained until the time of giving birth, since only then was the spirit of her son removed from her — this is the first reason. And also the second reason: she who has loved you all along is the one who bore him — for even though she married another man and bore a child to him, her love for you remains bound up in her soul. And regarding what they opened with, saying "who has not left you without a redeemer," they then say, "who is better to you," etc. — meaning: let it not seem difficult to you that I have attributed the full benefit of the redeemer to you, even though the essential beneficiary is your husband (Elimelech), for Machlon is a shoot from the stock of Elimelech, and all the good that comes forth from Machlon gladdens his father. For surely this matter is attributed to you as well — for surely "she is better to you," since what she has merited through you is a greater good and benefit to you than if you yourself had borne seven sons. This is because you brought her under the wings of the Shechinah, and all the greatness destined to emerge from her — the essential merit is yours, for everything is from you, since everything she has came about through your hand. Or he says: "Blessed be Hashem, who has not left you without a redeemer" — for you thought that this good fortune had ceased from you, but Hashem did not let it cease, as explained previously. And this blessing that we bless is given "today," for we did not expect to bless for it until the future redeemer would come into the world — for from now on we are obligated to bless, since God hastened to grant conception, and that the child be a distinguished male, for he is a great good for the House of Israel, since from him will emerge the branch of the Messiah of Hashem [tzemach mashiach Hashem]. And since not all of Israel are righteous and worthy of redemption, what good will the redeemer accomplish for us? Therefore our blessing is that "his name" — namely the Name of Hashem — "shall be called" and mentioned in Israel, meaning that they will all be righteous through the help of Shaddai, so that they will all be called by the Name of Hashem. This is in line with their statement, of blessed memory: "The righteous are destined to be called by the Name of the Holy One, blessed be He, as it is said, 'All who are called by My Name, and whom I have created for My glory'" (Isaiah 43:7), etc. So that the statement "and let his name be called in Israel" is as if to say that they will all be righteous, for Hashem will help them, and then the goodness of the redeemer will be complete — and this is a general good fortune for all of Israel. And as for what pertains to you specifically, we bless you that he will be to you "a restorer of the soul" — meaning that this very child will be to you, yourself, a restorer, one who grants your soul renewed life. This is comparable to what He, may He be blessed, announced to Daniel, saying to him, "But go your way till the end; for you shall rest, and shall stand up [to your allotted place, at the end of the days]" (Daniel 12:13) — meaning that he shall rest from further reincarnation, since he has already been completed, and shall rest and stand at his lot in the resurrection. In this manner they said to her, regarding what pertains to your soul: this child, who has come by your hand — since out of him shall emerge for Israel the whole fullness of good fortune — he shall be to you "a restorer of the soul," for this merit shall be reckoned to you to complete the whole perfection you are meant to attain, so that you will have rest and repose, and need not be reincarnated further. This is what pertains "to your soul." And what pertains to your body is "and to sustain your old age" — this is because "your daughter-in-law who loves you has borne him," but not your daughter-in-law who did not love you, namely Orpah — for this one (Ruth) clung to you, and through her love for you she merited this. It follows that you are the essential cause, and "her son shall be called your son," for you accomplished everything; therefore he will sustain your old age like a son to you. And as for what we said — that he will be to you "a restorer of the soul" — do not be puzzled, saying: "Had this child been from my own womb, or from the womb of a daughter of mine, would my merit not have benefited me so much more?" All the more so, since the entire merit of a son in providing benefit belongs to the soul of the father — for surely "she who is better to you" is better than seven sons, since it is as if you bore her yourself, for you brought her under the wings of the Shechinah. And this rule applies to every ordinary convert in general; but she (Ruth), beyond all of them, is singular, for through her the emergence of great good for the House of Israel was arranged and prepared, as is known to those who stand in the counsel of Hashem [sod Hashem]. And how fitting in this regard is their statement, of blessed memory, that she is better than seven sons — these being the ones mentioned just below, from Peretz to Boaz — meaning that there was greater rectification for the kingship of the House of David in the birth of this child, coming in the manner that he did, than in all that was rectified through the seven who preceded him. This is the matter of their statement, of blessed memory: "I have found David My servant" (Psalm 89:21) — where did I find him? In Sodom — for it was necessary that David be found so that he would come by way of that chain of descent. This is also their statement, of blessed memory, regarding her saying, "that we may preserve seed through our father" (Genesis 19:32) — that seed which is destined to come from another place, namely the Messiah-King: "that we may preserve life through our father." If so, this child, who has come by your hand, is indeed worthy to be to you "a restorer of the soul." And by these approaches that we have taken in this verse, many difficulties that would trouble a person's heart have been settled and quieted — difficulties which we have not mentioned, for the sake of brevity.

"And the women said," etc., "Blessed be Hashem, who has not left you this day without a near kinsman" — meaning: as for what pertains to today, a blessing to Hashem is due for not having left you without a redeemer (goel), for your son is the one born in this child, as is known from the foundation of levirate marriage (yibbum), that he [the child] is the deceased himself, and he is your redeemer, so that you should not die childless; and as for what pertains to the future, "let his name be famous in Israel" — he will be among the great ones of Israel and among men of renown.

"And he shall be to you a restorer of life" — meaning that he restored the soul of Machlon a second time into this world, and his soul is the soul of Machlon, your son; and he will also sustain your old age, since he was born of your daughter-in-law, who loves you, and they will strive to sustain your old age.

"And [became] nurse to it [u-lekhalkelo]" — in the sense of "va-yekhalkel Yosef" (and Joseph sustained/provided for, Genesis 47:12). And some say: like "u-mi mekhalkel et yom bo'o" (and who can endure the day of his coming, Malachi 3:2).

"And she took..." — It is fitting to pay close attention to what this comes to teach us of value: that she [Naomi] took the child and placed him in her bosom — and not only that, but this is also the way of gentile women, to do so; how much more so now, with Naomi, who was like the mother of the woman giving birth (i.e., of Ruth). Likewise, its statement "and she became a nurse to him" — what does this add or contribute to us, whether she was his nurse or someone else was? Further, its statement "and the neighboring women named him..." — for if these are the same women mentioned above, why is this attributed specifically to "the neighbors" and not to "the women," as in the earlier statements, which said "the women"? And if they are the same, why did it change their designation? Further, its statement "saying" is not correct, for there is no one else to say it to. Further, why these two acts of naming? And further, why did they call him Oved? And further, it says "a son is born to Naomi," when he is not her son but only Ruth's. And further, its statement "he is the father of Yishai, the father of David" — since the text is destined to relate the genealogy afterward and say, "these are the generations of Peretz..." and "Boaz fathered Oved, and Oved fathered Yishai, and Yishai fathered David" — who would not know from this that Oved is the father of Yishai, the father of David? If so, why does it anticipate this now and say, "he is the father of Yishai, the father of David"? Now, in order to arrive at the matter, let us recall the words of our Sages, of blessed memory, on the verse "and he was foster-father to Hadassah..." (Esther 2:7) — that upon the death of Esther's mother, He, may He be blessed, put milk into the breasts of Mordechai and he nursed her, and this is the meaning of "and he was foster-father to Hadassah"; and therefore it is said, "Mordechai took her to himself as a daughter." [End of citation.] And with this we come to the matter: it is His way, may He be blessed, when the need of the hour requires it, to bring forth milk for a male to nurse a child — how much more so now for a female. And they meant to say that, behold, in the matter of Ruth there were two things: one, the beneficial parting, which Hashem had shown and promised, to bring forth from her the kingdom of the House of David and King Messiah; the second, that this was also a case of yibbum (levirate marriage), for the spirit of Machlon was within her, and from it the child was established, and she bore Oved. Now, we established above that it was in Naomi's heart that this matter was certainly by way of yibbum, for the spirit of Machlon was within her, as explained above. And the wise women mentioned above knew the first thing, but not the second — for, on the contrary, it would have seemed strange in their eyes to say that this was by way of yibbum, since Boaz was not the brother of the deceased; and also it seemed unlikely that the spirit of Machlon would cling to Ruth, seeing that she had not yet converted at the time she was married to him — by what path could the spirit of Machlon enter into the inward being of a Moabite woman, to cling to her? Therefore, the women whose hearts prompted them to speak, spoke up — and they were the women who came from outside at the time Ruth gave birth, as is the way of women to visit, and they said to her all the things stated above. Now, in all their words, they mentioned only the first matter — that He, may He be blessed, had not withheld a redeemer, and that from this a redeemer would emerge for Israel, who would be for Naomi a restorer of the soul and would sustain her old age — but they did not reckon with the second matter for her. But behold, He, may He be blessed, wished to show that the matter was also by way of yibbum, and that this was Naomi's son. And this is it: when Naomi came and took the child and placed him in her bosom — in the manner of elderly women who bring children in from outside to soothe them, and not to nurse them, since there is no milk in their breasts — immediately she became a nurse to him, for He, may He be blessed, caused milk to flow into her breasts, and she became his nurse. And this is the meaning of "and she took...," in order to place him in her bosom; and immediately, "she became a nurse to him," for she nursed him from her own breasts. Then, when the neighboring women, seeing this great miracle — for they knew her to be, like all elderly women, with shriveled breasts — saw that in a moment she was nursing him, immediately "the neighboring women gave him a name." And this means that they said: He, may He be blessed, did not perform this miracle for nothing — is it for lack of nursing-women in Israel that Hashem performed a miracle like this today? Rather, they said, this is only to indicate that this is Naomi's son, for he is the son of Machlon, and he came by way of yibbum through Boaz. Therefore, to make this matter known, they gave the child "a name" — to hint that he was raised up to stand in the name of the deceased over his inheritance, as the verse states, "that he may stand up in the name of his dead brother" (Deuteronomy 25:6). This is why they gave him "a name" — and the verse then explains that what they "gave him a name" for was in order to say, "A son is born to Naomi" — meaning, there is now born the one who is Naomi's son, that is, Machlon's. That is to say, in order to indicate this, He, may He be blessed, gave her milk in her breasts, to nurse this child, to hint that he is her true son, for this fills the place of the name of her son, and he is indeed he. Now, in calling him "a name," the intent was not to make this the essential, permanent name, for it was only for the moment, to hint that the matter was by way of yibbum and that he is in truth Machlon's son. But what they made essential in naming him concerned the good fortune that would come forth from him, which is the first matter — for this is the beneficial parting that was destined to bring forth from it the glory of Israel. And concerning this, "they named him" — meaning his essential name — "Oved," to say that he would be like one who works the soil (oved ha'adamah) to bring forth fine, beautiful fruit; so too was this one a servant of Hashem (oved et Hashem), to the degree that he was "the father of Yishai" — meaning, the father of the one who died only through the instigation of the serpent, for he himself never sinned, having merited this through his complete service of Hashem. And through the preparation that came about through him, it was arranged that he would be the forebear of Yishai, the father of David — for since He, may He be blessed, who chose David, wished to bring forth holy seed from him, so that it is therefore said, "and He chose David, His servant" (Psalms 78:70) — and this is David: for through the service of this Oved, he merited to father Yishai, who was fit to father David. This is also hinted at in their numerical value: for "Oved" spelled in full, as it is written, comes out — by the reduced count (mispar katan) — to the same value as "Yishai David." And this is what "they named him Oved" hints at: that he is the father of Yishai, the father of David — beyond their own conscious intention, as discussed. Also, since the signs of his righteousness were cast into this name from Heaven, it hinted at the presence within it of an allusion to Yishai and David — this is for the reason stated.

"And Naomi took the child" — accordingly she became a nurse to him, for he is truly her own son, and she carried him as a mother who nurses her son; and the neighboring women said that a son was born to Naomi, for this is indeed the truth, that he is Naomi's son by virtue of the levirate marriage, and so they proclaimed his name, that he is Naomi's son. But his own proper name they called Oved (Obed), for he was destined to serve (la'avod) Hashem, and he is the father of Jesse, from whom the kingship of the house of David sprouted. And the Arizal, of blessed memory, already explained in Sefer HaGilgulim (commenting on "a time when man had power over man, to his hurt" [Ecclesiastes 8:9]) that souls held captive in the hand of their captors — by the power in "the scale that ensnares souls" (be-tikla de-ashkit nishmatin) — cannot be extracted from them, for they [the captors] draw sustenance through them; so they are deceived, being shown a defective place and thinking that the soul will remain there in their hand, but in the end the soul overcomes those who seized it. So too the souls of the tribes were placed in Rachel and Leah, who were sisters, and [the forces of impurity] thought that the souls would remain in impurity since they [Jacob] had married them in violation of a prohibition [two sisters]; and likewise the soul of Perez was placed in Tamar, and the souls of Ruth and Naomi in Ammon and Moab. And therefore David said, "O sons of man, how long shall my glory be put to shame" (Psalms 4:3). And it is stated in the Midrash that they used to say that he descended from Ruth the Moabite, and he would say to them: "commune with your own heart upon your bed" (Psalms 4:5) — but did you yourselves not descend from the prohibition of two sisters? So be silent. And this the people and the elders sensed, and they said, "Hashem make the woman... like Rachel and like Leah," and "let your house be like the house of Perez, whom Tamar bore" — for all of this was necessary in order to extract these souls, by this deception, from the hand of those with power to seize them.

"There is a son born to Naomi" — like [the phrase] "and he became a son to her." "The father of David" — It is possible that this refers back to both Jesse and to Oved, like the phrase "God of my father Abraham, and God of my father Isaac." By way of reasoning, [we conclude] that Nachshon died in the wilderness, for it is not possible that he was a young man when he was the chief of a [tribal] division and traveled first, ahead of [the rest of] Israel. Furthermore, Scripture would have mentioned him as having entered the land, and there would not have been a different prince of the tribe. Now, there are only three hundred and sixty-six years between the entry into the land and the birth of David, for Scripture states: "And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year... it was the fourth year of King Solomon's reign." And David lived seventy years. And forty years the Children of Israel walked in the wilderness. Now if we say that Salmon, when he entered the land, was one year old — then there are four [generations]: Salmon, Boaz, Oved, and Jesse — and each one fathered his son at the age of ninety-one. And if an objector should arise and say that Nachshon, when he left Egypt, was less than twenty years old — then he would be reckoned to have been eighteen years old, and he would not be diminished on account of the years Israel walked in the wilderness. Then there would be five [generations], and each would have fathered his son at the age of eighty-four — and this is correct in my eyes. For behold, Boaz was indeed old, and we learn this from the fact that he told Ruth not to go after the young men; and Jesse, too, was old when he fathered David, for he was the eighth of his sons. And it is possible that he was named "Oved," because he [Boaz] fathered him in old age, and had taken the woman only for the sake of the honor of Hashem. And also the mother had abandoned her religion and the land of her birth, and had taken refuge under the wing of Hashem — therefore the son would be "a servant (oved) of Hashem," for most sons resemble their father and mother, for they are the roots.

These are the generations of Peretz. Since [Scripture] traced Dovid’s lineage to the name of Rus the Mo’avitess, it returned and traced his lineage to Yehudah’s name. — Notes: (10) The symbol of royalty.

"Now these are the generations of Perez," etc. — One ought to pay attention to why [the text] brings and names all the generations of Perez, when it would have sufficed to go from Boaz to David. Furthermore, Yishai and David were already stated when it said, "he is the father of Yishai, the father of David" (Ruth 4:17) — why does it repeat and say, "and Oved begot Yishai, and Yishai begot David"? Furthermore, what does the vav of "ve-eleh" ("and these") come to add? Now, as for the doubling — that it states the name of each of the ten generations mentioned here twice — behold, our Sages of blessed memory said that this teaches that anyone whose name is doubled [in Scripture] has a portion in this world and in the World to Come; this shows that all of them are equally worthy of good. It further appears from our Sages that they ascend in rank according to their order, for they said that up through Salmon [Scripture] counts them as nesi'im (tribal princes), and from him onward it counts them as kings; this shows that they ascend by degrees. And so they said that all of them are like one who sifts with a sieve until he finds the pearl — so [Scripture] counted all of these until it found David, and then it set all of them down, as it is said, "I have found David My servant" (Psalms 89:21). Let us come to the matter. After [Scripture] recounted the whole story of Ruth — her marriage and her giving birth to Oved — there was room for a mistaken person to speak up and say, "How was the silver cord severed? For from Perez to Boaz the chain of lineage went on growing ever greater, but once Boaz's offspring was mixed with a Moabite girl, it was like mixing the profane with the holy, and the lineage retreated backward." Therefore it says: let no such thought enter your mind, for behold, I will inform you of two things. First: that "[now] these are the generations of Perez" comes to say that these whom I mentioned — namely Yishai and David, in the preceding verse — are themselves also the generations of Perez. This is known from the Zohar, that Oved is Perez himself; hence Yishai and David are his very own generations. If so, one must say that it is not in order to diminish his standing that the Blessed One brings him back now a second time, but rather that he was reincarnated (gilgul) in order to improve him. That is to say, [Scripture] therefore states decisively that, on the contrary, the generations from Oved to David improved (akhshar darei — "the generations became better") compared to how they had been at first, for the womb of Ruth the righteous served them like a furnace of gold. This may also be what the wise neighboring women intended in calling him "Oved" (Ruth 4:17) — to hint that he is Perez himself, since the reduced numerical value (mispar katan) of "Peretz" equals the reduced numerical value of "Oved." And it states a second proof: that, on the contrary, the matter of Ruth was meant to raise [the line] to a level even greater than what it had had at first. This is conveyed by its saying "Perez begot..." etc., to the end of the passage, in that it changes its pronunciation from "Salmah" to "Salmon" — something it does for no other name, by adding or altering its letters — but this is to indicate the difference in ascent, as our Sages of blessed memory said: "up to here [Scripture] counts for nesi'im, from here on it counts for kings." And the indication of this, in changing its pronunciation from "Salmah" to "Salmon," is that there is a numerical difference of fifty-one, which is what the two words "lehatzliach lemalkhut" ("to succeed to kingship") come to in reduced numerical value — to hint that from him onward they go on adding preparation to succeed to kingship, generation after generation, whereas in the generations that preceded, their ascent reached only the level of nesi'im. And this will be the point of the verses: to say, behold, the matter of Ruth was not to diminish the rank of the lineage, but rather, on the contrary, to enhance it — and this for two reasons. First, that Oved is Perez himself, for behold, "these" — the sons of Oved, namely Yishai and David mentioned [earlier] — are themselves also the generations of Perez, and [the verse] repeats them only to complete the account. Second, that behold, "Perez begot Hezron," etc., up to Salmon, which is the dividing point, hints that at first they went on ascending until they reached the level of nesi'ut (princedom), and from then until they attained kingship, as has been said. And from the outcome of the matter we have found a decisive answer: that, on the contrary, one need not say merely that they did not diminish, but rather that they added ever-increasing, very great perfection. If so, say from now on that the great, supreme levels, up to the splendor of kingship, came from her, in accordance with her deeds, even though she came from Moab — for "Hashem is a God of knowledge" (1 Samuel 2:3), and "out of the strong came forth sweetness" (Judges 14:14), and from the sweet, the good. The work is finished and complete — praise to God, Creator of the world.