c. Naomi’s reaction (2:18–23)
c. Naomi’s reaction (2:18–23)
18. Ruth took up the result of her toil and went to the city. Depending on how we supply vowels to the consonantal text we may read her mother in law saw … (AV, Berkeley) or she showed her mother-in-law … (RSV, Moffatt). The absence of ’ēt, the sign of the accusative, before mother in law, perhaps slightly favours the former. On the other hand, Ruth is the subject of the verbs before and after and would naturally be taken as the subject of this one also (yet Hebrew is not averse to abrupt changes of subject). Nothing much depends on our choice, for either way the writer is telling us how Naomi came to learn what Ruth had secured for her day’s work. Ruth also produced the food she had kept after her hunger was satisfied (verse 14). Boaz had not simply passed her some food as part of the general meal, in which case what remained would have been gathered up. He had evidently presented her with a quantity of food so that she was now able to bring what she had not eaten to Naomi.
19. Naomi asks Ruth where she has been gleaning. It is difficult to see what difference is meant between Where hast thou gleaned today? (AV, RV) and where wroughtest thou? (AV, RV) for there is no hint that she has been doing any work other than gleaning. We should probably take the words as poetic and see an example of parallelism. Naomi proceeds to pronounce a blessing on the man who noticed Ruth (the verb is that used in 2:10). From this it seems that the result of Ruth’s gleaning was rather more than might have been expected. Naomi deduces that some special favour has been shown Ruth, and she looks for the source. Ruth replies that the name of the man is Boaz. Notice the repetition, where with whom I wrought today (AV, RV) takes up in direct speech the with whom she had wrought (AV, RV) of indirect report. It is perhaps worth noticing that the Hebrew behind the latter expression is ambiguous. It could mean ‘what she had wrought with him’. But the following words make it clear that AV and RV are correct.
20. This news causes Naomi to break out in praise of God. She first bespeaks a blessing for Boaz, thus recognizing his kindness. But the bulk of her exclamation is concerned with rejoicing in God. Grammatically, it is possible to take who hath not left off his kindness … (AV, RV) with he, i.e. Boaz. But the whole drift of the passage shows that Naomi is thinking of God (cf. Gen. 24:27). He has not ceased his loving-kindness (the word is that used in 1:8; it denotes both kindness and faithfulness) and she makes specific mention of the dead as well as the living (though living refers to Ruth and Naomi the form of the word is masculine; cf. 1:8, where see note). There is a strong sense of family, so that any kindness that God might show to Ruth and Naomi is a kindness to their dead relatives as well as to themselves. Then Naomi goes on to tell Ruth the reason for her expression of pleasure. Boaz is a relative. For the expression rendered one of our next kinsmen (AV) see Additional note (pp. 272f.). The use of this term plus the reference to the dead may indicate that already Naomi had in mind the way events were to turn out.
21. It is curious that after all this time our author still refers to his heroine as Ruth the Moabitess (see on 2:2). He does not wish us to miss her nationality, i.e. if this is the true text. It is omitted by LXX, Vulg. and Syriac. The word rendered also in AV and Besides in RSV does not follow naturally on Naomi’s previous remark, nor on Ruth’s last reported words. We should probably take it as denoting an addition to all the good things that had gone before. The list of blessings had not yet been completed, for in addition to what had been mentioned there was the further point that Boaz had told her to stay by his servants until the harvest was done. Or we might take it simply as a general word of assent (Moffatt, Yes). The word rendered young men in AV and RV is indeed masculine in form, but it may include the feminine also. In other words, it may well include the ‘maidens’ mentioned in verse 8 (this appears to be the case with this word in Job 1:19). My young men … my harvest (AV, RV) in this verse employ, not the usual Hebrew forms, but a construction meaning literally, ‘the young men which are to me’ and ‘the harvest which is to me’. It is curious to find this construction repeated within such a short space. No satisfactory explanation appears to have been put forward.
22. So Naomi told Ruth (here qualified as her daughter in law; note that Ruth is often qualified in some way, most commonly as ‘the Moabitess’, see on 2:2, and once as ‘thine handmaid’, 3:9, AV, RV) that the advice was good. She speaks of Ruth’s going out with his maidens which strengthens the view that ‘young men’ (AV, RV) in the previous verse is really a word embracing both sexes. The expression rendered that they meet thee not in any other field (AV, RV) is variously understood. Knox renders, in some other field they might say thee nay, and Moffatt, so that the reapers may not attack you in some other field. The verb pāga‘ means ‘to meet, encounter’ so that AV and RV are quite justified. It is true that in some contexts the verb means ‘meet with hostile intent’ (e.g. Josh. 2:16). But in the present context what Naomi has in mind is the kindness of Boaz (cf. verses 8f.). It would not be well in the face of this for Ruth to be found in another field. It would indicate that she did not appreciate very highly what Boaz had done for her. AV and RV are to be preferred.
23. Ruth did as she was told. She stayed with Boaz’ maidens to glean right up to the end of harvest. Our author particularizes barley and wheat harvest. She stayed right through the whole, and not simply to the end of one section of the harvest. But her working with the servants of Boaz did not mean any wavering in her determination to remain with Naomi. She still lived with her.