Rut 3:3

3:3 So bathe yourself, ¹  rub on some perfumed oil, ²  and get dressed up. ³  Then go down ⁴  to the threshing floor. But don’t let the man know you’re there until he finishes his meal. ⁵ 

Rut 1:13

1:13 surely you would not want to wait until they were old enough to marry! ⁶  Surely you would not remain unmarried all that time! ⁷  No, ⁸  my daughters, you must not return with me. ⁹  For my intense suffering ¹⁰  is too much for you to bear. ¹¹  For the Lord is afflicting me!” ¹² 

Rut 2:10

2:10 Ruth ¹³  knelt before him with her forehead to the ground ¹⁴  and said to him, “Why are you so kind ¹⁵  and so attentive to me, ¹⁶  even though ¹⁷  I am a foreigner?” ¹⁸ 

Rut 1:21

1:21 I left here full, ¹⁹  but the Lord has caused me to return empty-handed. ²⁰  Why do you call me ‘Naomi,’ seeing that ²¹  the Lord has opposed me, ²²  and the Sovereign One ²³  has caused me to suffer?” ²⁴ 

Rut 2:15

2:15 When she got up to gather grain, Boaz told ²⁵  his male servants, “Let her gather grain even among ²⁶  the bundles! Don’t chase her off! ²⁷ 

Rut 3:16

3:16 and she returned to her mother-in-law.

Ruth Returns to Naomi

When Ruth returned to her mother-in-law, Naomi ²⁸  asked, ²⁹  “How did things turn out for you, ³⁰  my daughter?” Ruth ³¹  told her about all the man had done for her. ³² 

Rut 3:14

3:14 So she slept beside him ³³  until morning. She woke up while it was still dark. ³⁴  Boaz thought, ³⁵  “No one must know that a woman visited the threshing floor.” ³⁶ 

Rut 4:8

4:8 So the guardian said to Boaz, “You may acquire it,” and he removed his sandal. ³⁷ 

Rut 1:14

1:14 Again they wept loudly. ³⁸  Then Orpah kissed her mother-in-law goodbye, ³⁹  but Ruth ⁴⁰  clung tightly to her. ⁴¹ 

Rut 3:6

Ruth Visits Boaz

3:6 So she went down to the threshing floor and did everything her mother-in-law had instructed her to do. ⁴² 

Rut 3:8

3:8 In the middle of the night he was startled ⁴³  and turned over. ⁴⁴  Now ⁴⁵  he saw a woman ⁴⁶  lying beside him! ⁴⁷ 

Rut 4:11

4:11 All the people who were at the gate and the elders replied, “We are witnesses. May the Lord make the woman who is entering your home like Rachel and Leah, both of whom built up the house of Israel! May ⁴⁸  you prosper ⁴⁹  in Ephrathah and become famous ⁵⁰  in Bethlehem. ⁵¹ 

Rut 1:4

1:4 So her sons ⁵²  married ⁵³  Moabite women. (One was named Orpah and the other Ruth.) ⁵⁴  And they continued to live there about ten years.

Rut 1:6

1:6 So she decided to return home from the region of Moab, accompanied by her daughters-in-law, ⁵⁵  because while she was living in Moab ⁵⁶  she had heard that the Lord had shown concern ⁵⁷  for his people, reversing the famine by providing abundant crops. ⁵⁸ 

Rut 3:4

3:4 When he gets ready to go to sleep, ⁵⁹  take careful notice of the place where he lies down. Then go, uncover his legs, ⁶⁰  and lie down ⁶¹  beside him. ⁶²  He will tell ⁶³  you what you should do.”

Rut 3:7

3:7 When Boaz had finished his meal and was feeling satisfied, he lay down to sleep at the far end of the grain heap. ⁶⁴  Then Ruth ⁶⁵  crept up quietly, ⁶⁶  uncovered his legs, ⁶⁷  and lay down beside him. ⁶⁸ 

Rut 4:6

4:6 The guardian said, “Then I am unable to redeem it, for I would ruin my own inheritance ⁶⁹  in that case. You may exercise my redemption option, for I am unable to redeem it.” ⁷⁰ 

[3:3]  ¹ tn The perfect with prefixed vav (ו) consecutive here introduces a series of instructions. See GKC 335 §112.aa for other examples of this construction.

[3:3]  ² tn For the meaning of the verb סוּךְ (sukh), see HALOT 745-46 s.v. II סוך, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 150. Cf. NAB, NRSV “anoint yourself”; NIV “perfume yourself”; NLT “put on perfume.”

[3:3]  ³ tc The consonantal text (Kethib) has the singular שִׂמְלֹתֵךְ (simlotekh, “your outer garment”), while the marginal reading (Qere) has the plural שִׂמְלֹתַיִךְ (simlotayikh) which might function as a plural of number (“your outer garments”) or a plural of composition (“your outer garment [composed of several parts]).”

[3:3]  tn Heb “and put your outer garment on yourself”; NAB “put on your best attire.” The noun שִׂמְלָה (simlah) may refer to clothes in general (see R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth [NICOT], 197, n. 7) or a long outer garment (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 150-51). Mourners often wore mourning clothes and refrained from washing or using cosmetics (Gen 38:14, 19; 2 Sam 12:20; 14:2), so Ruth’s attire and appearance would signal that her period of mourning was over and she was now available for remarriage (see Bush, 152).

[3:3]  ⁴ tc The consonantal text (Kethib) has וְיָרַדְתִּי (vÿyaradtiy, “then I will go down”; Qal perfect 1st person common singular), while the marginal reading (Qere) is וְיָרַדְתְּ (vÿyaradt, “then you go down”; Qal perfect 2nd person feminine singular) which makes more much sense in context. It is possible that the Kethib preserves an archaic spelling of the 2nd person feminine singular form (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 144-45).

[3:3]  ⁵ tn Heb “until he finishes eating and drinking”; NASB, NIV, NRSV, TEV, CEV “until he has finished.”

[1:13]  ⁶ tn Heb “For them would you wait until they were grown?” Some understand הֲלָהֵן (halahen) as an interrogative he (ה) with an Aramaic particle meaning “therefore” (see GKC 301 §103.b.2 [n. 4]; cf. ASV, NASB), while others understand the form to consist of an interrogative he, the preposition ל (lamed, “for”), and an apparent third person feminine plural pronominal suffix (CEV, NLT “for them”). The feminine suffix is problematic, for its antecedent is the hypothetical “sons” mentioned at the end of v. 12. For this reason some emend the form to הלתם (“for them,” a third person masculine plural suffix). R. L. Hubbard raises the possibility that the nunated suffix is an archaic Moabite masculine dual form (Ruth [NICOT], 111, n. 31). In any case, Naomi’s rhetorical question expects a negative answer.

[1:13]  ⁷ tn Heb “For them would you hold yourselves back so as not to be for a man?” Again Naomi’s rhetorical question expects a negative answer. The verb עָגַן (’agan, “hold back”; cf. KJV, ASV “stay”; NRSV “refrain”) occurs only here in the OT. For discussion of its etymology and meaning, see HALOT 785-86 s.v. עגן, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 79-80.

[1:13]  ⁸ tn The negative is used here in an elliptical manner for emphasis (see HALOT 48 s.v. I אַל; GKC 479-80 §152.g).

[1:13]  ⁹ tn Heb “No, my daughters.” Naomi is not answering the rhetorical questions she has just asked. In light of the explanatory clause that follows, it seems more likely that she is urging them to give up the idea of returning with her. In other words, the words “no, my daughters” complement the earlier exhortation to “go back.” To clarify this, the words “you must not return with me” are added in the translation.

[1:13]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “bitterness to me.” The term מָרַר (marar) can refer to emotional bitterness: “to feel bitter” (1 Sam 30:6; 2 Kgs 4:27; Lam 1:4) or a grievous situation: “to be in bitter circumstances” (Jer 4:18) (BDB 600 s.v.; HALOT 638 s.v. I מרר). So the expression מַר־לִי (mar-li) can refer to emotional bitterness (KJV, NKJV, ASV, RSV, NASB, NIV, NJPS, CEV, NLT) or a grievous situation (cf. NRSV, NAB, NCV, CEV margin). Although Naomi and her daughters-in-law had reason for emotional grief, the issue at hand was Naomi’s lamentable situation, which she did not want them to experience: being a poor widow in a foreign land.

[1:13]  ¹¹ tn Heb “for there is bitterness to me exceedingly from you.” The clause כִּי־מַר־לִי מְאֹד מִכֶּם (ki-mar-li me’od mikkem) is notoriously difficult to interpret. It has been taken in three different ways: (1) “For I am very bitter for me because of you,” that is, because of your widowed condition (cf. KJV, NKJV, ASV, RSV, NJB, REB, JB, TEV). This does not fit well, however, with the following statement (“for the LORD has attacked me”) nor with the preceding statement (“You must not return with me”). (2) “For I am far more bitter than for you” (cf. NASB, NIV, NJPS, NEB, CEV, NLT). This does not provide an adequate basis, however, for the preceding statement (“You must not return with me”). (3) “For my bitterness is too much for you [to bear]” (cf. NAB, NRSV, NCV, CEV margin). This is preferable because it fits well with both the preceding and following statements. These three options reflect the three ways the preposition מן may be taken here: (1) causal: “because of, on account of” (BDB 580 s.v. מִן 2.f; HALOT 598 s.v. מִן 6), not that Orpah and Ruth were the cause of her calamity, but that Naomi was grieved because they had become widows; (2) comparative: “more [bitter] than you” (BDB 581 s.v. 6.a; HALOT 598 s.v. 5b), meaning that Naomi’s situation was more grievous than theirs – while they could remarry, her prospects were much more bleak; and (3) elative, describing a situation that is too much for a person to bear: “too [bitter] for you” (BDB 581 s.v. 6.d; HALOT 598 s.v. 5a; IBHS 267 §14.4f; e.g., Gen 4:13; Exod 18:18; Deut 17:8; 1 Kgs 19:17), meaning that Naomi’s plight was too bitter for her daughters-in-law to share. While all three options are viable, the meaning adopted must fit two criteria: (1) The meaning of this clause (1:13b) must provide the grounds for Naomi’s emphatic rejection of the young women’s refusal to separate themselves from her (1:13a); and (2) it must fit the following clause: “for the hand of the LORD has gone out against me” (1:13c). The first and second options do not provide adequate reasons for sending her daughters-in-law back home, nor do they fit her lament that the LORD had attached her (not them); however, the third option (elative sense) fits both criteria. Naomi did not want her daughters-in-law to share her sad situation, that is, to be poor, childless widows in a foreign land with no prospect for marriage. If they accompanied her back to Judah, they would be in the same kind of situation in which she found herself in Moab. If they were to find the “rest” (security of home and husband) she wished for them, it would be in Moab, not in Judah. The Lord had already deprived her of husband and sons. She could do nothing for them in this regard because she had no more sons to give them as husbands, and she was past the age of child-bearing to raise up new husbands for them in the future – as if they could wait that long anyway (1:13a). For a discussion of these three options and defense of the approach adopted here, see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 80-81.

[1:13]  ¹² tn Heb “for the hand of the Lord has gone out against me” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NIV all similar). The expression suggests opposition and hostility, perhaps picturing the Lord as the Divine Warrior who is bringing calamity upon Naomi. See R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth (NICOT), 113.

[2:10]  ¹³ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Ruth) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:10]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “she fell upon her face and bowed to the ground” (KJV, NASB similar).

[2:10]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “Why do I find favor in your eyes…?” The expression מָצַא חֵן בְּעֵינֶי (matsa’ khen bÿ’eney, “to find favor in the eyes of [someone]”) is often characterized by the following features: (1) A subordinate or servant is requesting permission for something from a superior (master, owner, king). (2) The granting of the request is not a certainty but dependent on whether or not the superior is pleased with the subordinate to do so. (3) The granting of the request by the superior is an act of kindness or benevolence; however, it sometimes reciprocates loyalty previously shown by the subordinate to the superior (e.g., Gen 30:27; 32:6; 33:8, 10, 15; 34:11; 39:4; 47:25, 29; 50:4; Num 32:5; Deut 24:1; 1 Sam 1:18; 16:22; 20:3, 29; 27:3; 2 Sam 14:22; 16:4; 1 Kgs 11:19; Esth 5:8; 7:3; BDB 336 s.v. חֵן). While Boaz had granted her request for permission to glean in his field, she is amazed at the degree of kindness he had shown – especially since she had done nothing, in her own mind, to merit such a display. However, Boaz explains that she had indeed shown kindness to him indirectly through her devotion to Naomi (v. 11).

[2:10]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “Why do I find favor in your eyes by [you] recognizing me.” The infinitive construct with prefixed לְ (lamed) here indicates manner (“by”).

[2:10]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “and I am a foreigner.” The disjunctive clause (note the pattern vav + subject + predicate nominative) here has a circumstantial (i.e., concessive) function (“even though”).

[2:10]  ¹⁸ sn The similarly spelled Hebrew terms נָכַר (nakhar, “to notice”) and נָכְרִי (nokhriy, “foreigner”) in this verse form a homonymic wordplay. This highlights the unexpected nature of the attentiveness and concern Boaz displayed to Ruth.

[1:21]  ¹⁹ sn I left here full. That is, with a husband and two sons.

[1:21]  ²⁰ tn Heb “but empty the Lord has brought me back.” The disjunctive clause structure (vav + adverb + verb + subject) highlights the contrast between her former condition and present situation. Cf. TEV “has brought me back without a thing.”

[1:21]  sn Empty-handed. This statement is highly ironic, for ever-loyal Ruth stands by her side even as she speaks these words. These words reflect Naomi’s perspective, not the narrator’s, for Ruth will eventually prove to be the one who reverses Naomi’s plight and “fills” her “emptiness.” Naomi’s perspective will prove to be inaccurate and the women will later correct Naomi’s faulty view of Ruth’s value (see 4:15).

[1:21]  ²¹ tn The disjunctive clause structure (vav [ו] + subject + verb) here introduces either an attendant circumstance (“when the Lord has opposed me”) or an explanation (“seeing that the Lord has opposed me”).

[1:21]  ²² tc The LXX reads “humbled me” here, apparently understanding the verb as a Piel (עָנָה, ’anah) from a homonymic root meaning “afflict.” However, עָנָה (“afflict”) never introduces its object with בְּ (bet); when the preposition בְּ is used with this verb, it is always adverbial (“in, with, through”). To defend the LXX reading one would have to eliminate the preposition.

[1:21]  tn Heb “has testified against me” (KJV, ASV both similar); NAB “has pronounced against me.” The idiom עָנַה בִי (’anah viy, “testify against”) is well attested elsewhere in legal settings (see BDB 773 s.v. עָנָה Qal.3.a; HALOT 852 s.v. I ענה qal.2). Naomi uses a legal metaphor and depicts the Lord as testifying against her in court.

[1:21]  ²³ sn The divine name translated Sovereign One is שַׁדַּי (shadday, “Shaddai”). See further the note on this term in Ruth 1:20.

[1:21]  ²⁴ tn Or “brought disaster upon me”; NIV “brought misfortune (calamity NRSV) upon me”; NLT “has sent such tragedy.”

[2:15]  ²⁵ tn Or “commanded” (so KJV, NASB, NCV).

[2:15]  ²⁶ tn Heb “even between”; NCV “even around.”

[2:15]  ²⁷ tn Heb “do not humiliate her”; cf. KJV “reproach her not”; NASB “do not insult her”; NIV “don’t embarrass her.” This probably refers to a verbal rebuke which would single her out and embarrass her (see v. 16). See R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth (NICOT), 176-77, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 126.

[3:16]  ²⁸ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Naomi) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:16]  ²⁹ tn Heb “said.” Since what follows is a question, the present translation uses “asked” here.

[3:16]  ³⁰ tn Heb “Who are you?” In this context Naomi is clearly not asking for Ruth’s identity. Here the question has the semantic force “Are you his wife?” See R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth (NICOT), 223-24, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 184-85.

[3:16]  ³¹ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Ruth) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:16]  ³² sn All that the man had done. This would have included his promise to marry her and his gift of barley.

[3:14]  ³³ tc The consonantal text (Kethib) has the singular מַרְגְּלָתַו (margÿlatav, “his leg”), while the marginal reading (Qere) has the plural מַרְגְּלוֹתָיו (margÿlotayv, “his legs”).

[3:14]  tn Heb “[at] his legs.” See the note on the word “legs” in v. 4.

[3:14]  ³⁴ tn Heb “and she arose before a man could recognize his companion”; NRSV “before one person could recognize another”; CEV “before daylight.”

[3:14]  ³⁵ tn Heb “and he said” (so KJV, NASB, NIV). Some translate “he thought [to himself]” (cf. NCV).

[3:14]  ³⁶ tn Heb “let it not be known that the woman came [to] the threshing floor” (NASB similar). The article on הָאִשָּׁה (ha’ishah, “the woman”) is probably dittographic (note the final he on the preceding verb בָאָה [va’ah, “she came”]).

[4:8]  ³⁷ tc The LXX adds “and gave it to him” (cf. TEV, CEV), which presupposes the reading ויתן לו. This seems to be a clarifying addition (see v. 7), but it is possible the scribe’s eye jumped from the final vav (ו) on נַעֲלוֹ (na’alo, “his sandal”) to the final vav (ו) on לוֹ (lo, “to him”), accidentally omitting the intervening letters.

[1:14]  ³⁸ tn Heb “they lifted their voice[s] and wept” (so NASB; see v. 9). The expression refers to loud weeping employed in mourning tragedy (Judg 21:2; 2 Sam 13:36; Job 2:12).

[1:14]  ³⁹ tc The LXX adds, “and she returned to her people” (cf. TEV “and went back home”). Translating the Greek of the LXX back to Hebrew would read a consonantal text of ותשׁב אל־עמה. Most dismiss this as a clarifying addition added under the influence of v. 15, but this alternative reading should not be rejected too quickly. It is possible that a scribe’s eye jumped from the initial vav on ותשׁב (“and she returned”) to the initial vav on the final clause (וְרוּת [vÿrut], “and Ruth”), inadvertently leaving out the intervening words, “and she returned to her people.” Or a scribe’s eye could have jumped from the final he on לַחֲמוֹתָהּ (lakhamotah, “to her mother-in-law”) to the final he on עַמָּהּ (’ammah, “her people”), leaving out the intervening words, “and she returned to her people.”

[1:14]  ⁴⁰ tn The clause is disjunctive. The word order is conjunction + subject + verb, highlighting the contrast between the actions of Orpah and Ruth.

[1:14]  sn Orpah is a literary foil for Ruth. Orpah is a commendable and devoted person (see v. 8); after all she is willing to follow Naomi back to Judah. However, when Naomi bombards her with good reasons why she should return, she relents. But Ruth is special. Despite Naomi’s bitter tirade, she insists on staying. Orpah is a good person, but Ruth is beyond good – she possesses an extra measure of devotion and sacrificial love that is uncommon.

[1:14]  ⁴¹ sn Clung tightly. The expression suggests strong commitment (see R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth [NICOT], 115).

[3:6]  ⁴² tn Heb “and she did according to all which her mother-in-law commanded her” (NASB similar). Verse 6 is a summary statement, while the following verses (vv. 7-15) give the particulars.

[3:8]  ⁴³ tn Heb “trembled, shuddered”; CEV, NLT “suddenly woke up.” Perhaps he shivered because he was chilled.

[3:8]  ⁴⁴ tn The verb לָפַת (lafat) occurs only here, Job 6:18, and Judg 16:29 (where it seems to mean “grab hold of”). Here the verb seems to carry the meaning “bend, twist, turn,” like its Arabic cognate (see HALOT 533 s.v. לפת, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 163).

[3:8]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, NASB). The narrator invites the reader to view the situation through Boaz’s eyes.

[3:8]  ⁴⁶ sn Now he saw a woman. The narrator writes from Boaz’s perspective. Both the narrator and the reader know the night visitor is Ruth, but from Boaz’s perspective she is simply “a woman.”

[3:8]  ⁴⁷ tn Heb “[at] his legs.” See the note on the word “legs” in v. 4.

[4:11]  ⁴⁸ tn Following the jussive, the imperative with prefixed vav indicates purpose or result.

[4:11]  ⁴⁹ tn The phrase וַעֲשֵׂה־חַיִל (va’aseh-khayil, literally, “do strength”) has been variously translated: (1) financial prosperity: “may you become rich” (TEV), “may you be a rich man” (CEV), “may you achieve wealth” (NASB), “may you prosper” (NKJV, NJPS); (2) social prominence: “may you become powerful” (NCV), “may you have standing” (NIV), “may you be great” (NLT), “may you do well” (NAB); (3) reproductive fertility: “may you produce children” (NRSV); and (4) social activity: “may you do a worthy deed” (REB).

[4:11]  ⁵⁰ tc Heb “and call a name.” This statement appears to be elliptical. Usually the person named and the name itself follow this expression. Perhaps וּקְרָא־שֵׁם (uqÿra’-shem) should be emended to וְיִקָּרֵא־שֵׁם (vÿyiqqare’-shem), “and your name will be called out,” that is, “perpetuated” (see Gen 48:16, cf. also Ruth 4:14b). The omission of the suffix with “name” could be explained as virtual haplography (note the letter bet [ב], which is similar to kaf [כ], at the beginning of the next word). The same explanation could account for the omission of the prefixed yod (י) on the verb “call” (yod [י] and vav [ו] are similar in appearance). Whether one reads the imperative (the form in the MT) or the jussive (the emended form), the construction indicates purpose or result following the earlier jussive “may he make.”

[4:11]  ⁵¹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map7 E2; Map8 E2; Map10 B4.

[1:4]  ⁵² tn Heb “they.” The verb is 3rd person masculine plural referring to Naomi’s sons, as the translation indicates.

[1:4]  ⁵³ tn Heb “and they lifted up for themselves Moabite wives.” When used with the noun “wife,” the verb נָשָׂא (nasa’, “to lift up, carry, take”) forms the idiom “to take a wife,” that is, to marry (BDB 673 s.v. Qal.3.d; 2 Chr 11:21; 13:21; 24:3; Ezra 9:2,12; 10:44; Neh 13:25).

[1:4]  ⁵⁴ tn Heb “the name of the one [was] Orpah and the name of the second [was] Ruth.”

[1:4]  sn The name Orpah (עָרְפָּה, ’orpah) is from the noun עֹרֶף (’oref, “back of the neck”) and the related verb (“to turn one’s back”). The name Ruth (רוּת, rut) is from the noun רְעוּת (rÿ’ut, “friendship”), derived from the root רֵעַ (rea’, “friend, companion”). Ironically, Orpah will eventually turn her back on Naomi, while Ruth will display extraordinary friendship as her life-long companion (see 1:14). Since they seem to mirror the most definitive action of these women, perhaps they designate character types (as is the case with the name Mara in 1:21 and Peloni Almoni in 4:2) rather than their original birth names.

[1:6]  ⁵⁵ tn Heb “and she arose, along with her daughters-in-law, and she returned from the region of Moab.”

[1:6]  ⁵⁶ tn Heb “in the region of Moab”; KJV, NRSV “in the country of Moab.” Since this is a repetition of the phrase found earlier in the verse, it has been shortened to “in Moab” in the present translation for stylistic reasons.

[1:6]  ⁵⁷ tn Heb “had visited” or “taken note of.” The basic meaning of פָּקַד (paqad) is “observe, examine, take note of” (T. F. Williams, NIDOTTE 3:658), so it sometimes appears with זָכַר (zakhar, “to remember”; Pss 8:4 [MT 5]; 106:4; Jer 14:10; 15:15; Hos 8:13; 9:9) and רָאָה (ra’ah, “to see”; Exod 4:31; Ps 80:14 [MT 15]; NIDOTTE 3:659). It often emphasizes the cause/effect response to what is seen (NIDOTTE 3:659). When God observes people in need, it is glossed “be concerned about, care for, attend to, help” (Gen 21:1; 50:24, 25; Exod 4:31; Ruth 1:6; 1 Sam 2:21; Jer 15:15; Zeph 2:7; Zech 10:3b; NIDOTTE 3:661). When humans are the subject, it sometimes means “to visit” needy people to bestow a gift (Judg 15:1; 1 Sam 17:18). Because it has such a broad range of meanings, its use here has been translated variously: (1) “had visited” (KJV, ASV, NASV, RSV; so BDB 823-24 s.v. פָּקַד); (2) “had considered” (NRSV) and “had taken note of” (TNK; so HALOT 955-57 s.v. פקד); and (3) “had come to the aid of” (NIV), “had blessed” (TEV), and “had given” (CEV; so NIDOTTE 3:657). When God observed the plight of his people, he demonstrated his concern by benevolently giving them food.

[1:6]  ⁵⁸ tn Heb “by giving to them food.” The translation “reversing the famine and providing abundant crops” attempts to clarify the referent of לֶחֶם (lekhem, “food”) as “crops” and highlights the reversal of the famine that began in v. 1. The infinitive construct לָתֵת לָהֶם לָחֶם (latet lahem lakhem) may denote (1) purpose: “[he visited his people] to give them food” or (2) complementary sense explaining the action of the main verb: “[he visited his people] by giving them food.” The term לֶחֶם (lakhem) here refers to agricultural fertility, the reversal of the famine in v. 1.

[3:4]  ⁵⁹ tn Heb “and let it be when he lies down”; NAB “But when he lies down.”

[3:4]  ⁶⁰ tn Some define the noun מַרְגְּלוֹת (margÿlot) as “the place for the feet” (see HALOT 631 s.v.; cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT), but in Dan 10:6 the word refers to the legs, or “region of the legs.” For this reason “legs” or “lower body” is the preferred translation (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 152). Because “foot” is sometimes used euphemistically for the genitals, some feel that Ruth uncovered Boaz’s genitals. For a critique of this view see Bush, 153. While Ruth and Boaz did not actually have a sexual encounter at the threshing floor, there is no doubt that Ruth’s actions are symbolic and constitute a marriage proposal.

[3:4]  ⁶¹ tc The consonantal text (Kethib) has וְשָׁכָבְתִּי (vÿshakhavtiy, “then I will lie down”; Qal perfect 1st person common singular), while the marginal reading (Qere) is וְשָׁכָבְתְּ (vÿshakhavt, “then you lie down”; Qal perfect 2nd person feminine singular) which makes more sense. It is possible that the Kethib preserves an archaic spelling of the 2nd person feminine singular form (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 144-45).

[3:4]  ⁶² tn The words “beside him” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons; cf. NLT “lie down there.”

[3:4]  ⁶³ tn The disjunctive clause structure (vav [ו] + subject + verb) highlights this final word of instruction or signals the conclusion of the instructions.

[3:7]  ⁶⁴ tn Heb “and Boaz ate and drank and his heart was well and he went to lie down at the end of the heap”; NAB “at the edge of the sheaves.”

[3:7]  ⁶⁵ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Ruth) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:7]  ⁶⁶ sn Ruth must have waited until Boaz fell asleep, for he does not notice when she uncovers his legs and lies down beside him.

[3:7]  ⁶⁷ tn See the note on the word “legs” in v. 4.

[3:7]  ⁶⁸ tn The words “beside him” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons. Cf. TEV “at his feet”; CEV “near his feet.”

[4:6]  ⁶⁹ sn I would ruin my own inheritance. It is not entirely clear how acquiring Ruth and raising up an heir for the deceased Elimelech would ruin this individual’s inheritance. Perhaps this means that the inheritance of his other children would be diminished. See R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth (NICOT), 245-46.

[4:6]  ⁷⁰ tn Heb “redeem for yourself, you, my right of redemption for I am unable to redeem.”

[4:6]  sn Here it appears that the acquisition of Ruth along with the land was an obligatory package deal (“When you acquire the field from Naomi, you must also acquire Ruth…”). On the other hand, Boaz viewed marriage to Ruth as voluntary in 3:13 (“If he does not want to redeem you, I will redeem you”), and presented the acquisition of the field as voluntary in 4:4 (“If you want to exercise your right…but if not, tell me!”). Initially, Boaz makes the transaction appear to be a mere land deal in 4:4. When the nearest relative jumped at the land offer, Boaz confronted him with the attendant social/family obligation of marrying Ruth to raise up an heir for the deceased to inherit this very land. By conducting the transaction in public where the close relative would need to save face, Boaz forced him either to reject the offer entirely or to include Ruth in the deal – but he could not take the land and reject Ruth. Either way, Ruth would be cared for and Elimelech’s line continued. But if he took Ruth, the acquisition of the land would be more economically burdensome than beneficial, so he yielded his purchase option to Boaz. For discussion, see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 229-33.