Ruth #4: A Sword in the Beis Midrash -- Part 1 - By Rabbi YY Jacobson

Great achievements always necessitates great risks. Ruth does something very courageous and very risky. Following the instructions of her mother-in-law, Naomi, she waits till the night when their relative Boaz is winnowing the grain in his field. Ruth comes to the field and after Boaz winnows, eats, drinks, feels good, and lies down to relax and retire for the night in his granary. Ruth approaches him subtly and lies down near him, exposes his feet, and then the possuk describes in the third chapter how it's the middle of the night and Boaz quakes, he trembles, he's grasped as he discovers that there's a woman lying right near him. He asks her, "Who are you?" And Ruth, in her consistent dignity and inner confidence, does not lose herself, she's not terrified. She responds, "I am Ruth, your maid." And she asks him to marry her. It was a very risky moment. He could have cursed her, he could have expelled her, he could have ran, he could have been furious at her. Instead, he's overwhelmed by a positive emotion, he blesses her. And he promises her to do it, but there is one condition. He says there is somebody who is a closer relative than I am. Now, let's recall this detail because it's extremely important to be able to move on. Boaz and Ruth were relatives, first cousins. How? Let us recall, there were four brothers, there was a man named Elimelech, who was the son of Nachshon ben Aminadav from the tribe of Yehudah, from the tribe of Judah. Elimelech, the son of Nachshon, has three brothers. There were four brothers altogether, there's Elimelech, there's a man named Salmon, who is the father of Boaz, there was another man who is identified as Tov, his name is Tov, which means good. There is a fourth brother who is the father of Naomi. Elimelech marries Naomi and they have two children, Machlon and Chilion. Elimelech dies, Naomi remains a widow. Machlon and Chilion marry two Moabite women, Ruth and Orpah. Both of them die after 10 years. Orpah returns to the Moabites, Ruth follows her mother-in-law, Naomi, back to Bethlehem, back to Judea. They are poverty-stricken. We know they're poverty-stricken because Ruth offers to go and glean grain, glean barley ears and stalks from the fields since it was the time of the barley harvest, spring, Pesach time. So, this means that Naomi married her uncle, Elimelech, and Naomi was a first cousin of Boaz because Naomi's father was Elimelech's brother, Salmon's brother, and Salmon is Boaz's father. This means Machlon and Chilion, who marry Ruth and Orpah, Elimelech's children, are first cousins of Boaz. Right? Because their father is Elimelech, Elimelech's brother is Salmon, that's their uncle, and Salmon's son is Boaz, it's their first cousin. So, Naomi was both Boaz's first cousin, she was also Boaz's aunt because of her marriage to Elimelech. Ruth, because of her marriage to uh Machlon, Elimelech and Naomi's son, Ruth is a first cousin of Boaz. So, Ruth comes to Boaz in the middle of the night and she asks him to marry her. Very elegantly, she says, "Spread your cloak on your on your maid." The Medrash points it out. It says, "Look at the distinction between people. Look how the wife of Potiphar tried to inspire and arouse Joseph in a relationship in Vayeishev. She says, "Shichvi imi, lie with me." Grabs him. And look how Ruth presented herself to Boaz. "Uperasta knafcha lamah sachi, you should spread your cloak on your maid." Language, how you express yourself, which of course expresses what's behind the language, the soul behind the language. Now, as we explained, Ruth tells Boaz, "Ki goel ati, you're the redeemer, you're my redeemer." What she was suggesting here is a form of yibbum. Levirate marriage is the Torah instructs that if a man dies childless, his wife should not marry just another man, she should marry the brother-in-law and thus perpetuate the legacy of the deceased husband who died without children. The child who's born will continue, will perpetuate the name and the legacy of her first husband, and in fact, his soul is a reincarnation of the man who died. Now, yibbum refers to brothers-in-law. In other words, the woman is commanded to marry her brother if she wants and her brother-in-law wants. If not, there's a process called chalitzah, we discussed in the previous class, class three. But nonetheless, as the Ramban explains in Vayeishev, this the concept applies also to relatives. When the woman, the widow who's left without children, marries a close relative, a goel, a redeemer, this is a form of yibbum, a form of levirate marriages, where the energy of the man who died will be continued and perpetuated through the life of the new couple. The concept of yibbum, the Ramban points out in Vayeishev, is a very mystical concept, it's a soulful, completely spiritual, abstract, mystical, kabbalistic concept of how it works. The point being is that the spirit of the dead man continues to linger in the psyche of his widow. In the words of the Zohar, "Rucha hu deshavik begava." The spirit of the dead husband who died childless still lingers within the woman, and it's redeemed through the marriage to his brother, and the child that they will have, the spirit of the of the first man is released, it's redeemed, it's liberated, it comes out of the spirit of the wife, of the widow, through the child. And as I said, it's also a reincarnation of uh of his soul. Now, with Naomi, the whole concept didn't apply. You'll ask, somebody asked me, "Why didn't Naomi want to do yibbum?" It's not a question. Why is it not a question? You should know, yibbum applies only if the husband dies childless. Elimelech did not die childless. Naomi's husband died with two children, Machlon and Chilion. Tragically, they died later themselves without children, but the law of yibbum, the permission to marry a brother-in-law, which is usually forbidden, to marry your husband's brother is forbidden, even after he dies. It's only in a case when he dies childless, while he died, there's no children. Naomi had children, Elimelech had children. So, Ruth offers Boaz, asks Boaz to marry. What was Boaz's response? Boaz's response is, "I am a redeemer, I am a relative. I am a kinsman of the family. I am in that position of the person who redeems. Redemption also applies to fields, as we discussed and we'll soon see it again. The Torah did not want that people should sell their fields because everybody had plots of land that belonged organically to them, the ancestral inheritance of each tribe and family of Israel when they entered into the Holy Land under Yehoshua bin Nun in the year 2488 after creation, 40 years of traveling in the desert, they come into the land, everybody inherits their plot plot. They're not supposed to sell it. If they do sell it, there was a commandment that the closest relative should try to redeem the field so that it remains with in the family within the tribe. This is called the redeemer. So, Boaz tells Ruth, I am a redeemer, but there is a closer redeemer. There's a closer relative. Who is he referring to? He's referring to his uncle. Boaz's father wasn't alive. Salmon was not alive. Elimelech was not alive. Naomi's father was not alive probably, but there was one man alive, the fourth brother, Tov was still alive. Elimelech's brother was alive. Naomi's brother-in-law. Naomi's uncle. Mahlon's uncle. He's a closer relative than Boaz. Boaz is a first cousin of Ruth's deceased husband. Tov, Boaz's uncle, Naomi's uncle, Mahlon's uncle, is an uncle, not just a first cousin. So, Boaz says there's somebody closer. So, wait over the night, rest the night, and in the morning, if he redeems you, great. If not, I will redeem you. I will marry you. This concludes the content the theme the narrative of chapter 3. We now turn to chapter 4, perek dalet. U bat pasuk aleph, perek dalet, the fourth chapter, the last chapter of Ruth, verse 1. U Boaz al ha-sha'ar. Boaz, this is the morning. Boaz goes up to the gate of the city. Vayashev sham, and he sits there. As the commentators explain, the gate of the city was the place where the masses would pass. They would convene. They would gather. It was also the place where the local court, every city had a Sanhedrin. A court that was the large Sanhedrin of 71 members, like the Jewish Supreme Court. But every city at its gate had a Sanhedrin, a court, usually 23 members. And we see in the Torah in a several places that the Sanhedrin, the courts, are identified with the gate of the city. So, Boaz goes to the gate. Vayashev sham, he sits there. Vehinei. And behold, guess what? Ha-go'el over asher dibber Boaz. The redeemer about whom Boaz was talking to Ruth. Boaz spoke to Ruth about a redeemer who's a closer relative to her than he is passing. What a coincidence. Vayomer, Boaz tells him, "Sura, turn away. Shva poi ploni almoni. Come sit down here, whoever you are." He doesn't say a name. Ploni almoni means that anonymous person, that some type that particular person whose name so-and-so. Ploni almoni, he specifically doesn't say a name. Vayasor, he turns from his path. Vayashev, and he sits down. The Midrash Rabbah here says a beautiful thing. The Midrash Rabbah says God said, Boaz asah sheli. Naomi asesa sheli. Ruth asesa sheli. Af ani asesa sheli. God, Hashem, says, "Boaz did what he was supposed to do. Naomi did what she was supposed to do. Ruth did what she was supposed to do. Now, I will do what I'm supposed to do." And he makes sure that this ploni almoni, that this redeemer, the uncle of Boaz, should pass by right at that time so that Boaz can offer him the proposition, and the story can develop. It's a very profound Midrash because what's this coincidence that a man passed by right then and there, right in the morning? And the answer is, and this is this is a a description of life. We don't see the full picture. We can do what we have to do. I can do what I'm supposed to do, and you can do what you're called to do. Each of us who said, "Life is a powerful Whitman said, "Life is a powerful play, and you may contribute your verse. I must contribute my verse. You must contribute your verse. And sometimes to contribute your verse, you have to take risks. You have to have courage. You have to have confidence. You do what you have to do. And this is what happens. Boaz did what he did, what he was supposed to do. He didn't run. He could have hollered. He could have screamed. He could have cursed. He could have called his his hosts of maids and servants and guards and what's this? Boaz did what he had to do. He rose up to the occasion. He realized the sacredness, the preciousness, the depth of the moment. Naomi did what she had to do. An old, broken, poverty-stricken widow. But nonetheless with unwavering vision of what has to be done. And Ruth, our hero, did certainly what she had to do. She went in the middle of the night as a widow of the grain, and she asked Boaz to marry her. So, God says, "It's now time for me to do what I got to do." Now, why is he called ploni almoni? In the previous chapter, Boaz identified him as Tov. So, some commentators, like Ibn Ezra, say it's not true. His name is not Tov. Tov there just means Boaz says it's good. It's not a name. But many say his name was Tov. Rashi says that he didn't Ultimately, he would not man want to marry Ruth. So, the the the Torah the Tanakh doesn't mention his name. We'll see almoni also comes to word ilem, mute. As we'll see, he was mute from the words of Torah. There's also a a deeper interpretation. Ploni almoni is a classical term that's still used very often. Ploni almoni means so-and-so without saying a name. It's like It could be anybody. Ploni almoni means, you know, the guy in the street. And it's really it really captures who he was. What Boaz would be asking from him is to do something out of the ordinary. Boaz was called here to do something out of the ordinary. Here is a woman who comes from Moab, a non-Jewish woman who converted, somehow cast her fate with a family that left the Jewish people, that deserted their people. Boaz is a leader, is a judge. Why get involved in this? So, I spoke last week that Boaz recognized because of what Ruth did what was at stake. But ploni almoni was just a regular person. And ordinary people follow an ordinary lifestyle. They go in the middle of the road. They don't go too much right. They don't go too MUCH LEFT. PLONI ALMONI. TO achieve greatness, you have to often be ready to take great risks and to be able to fail. But ploni almoni didn't want to achieve greatness, nor did he want to fail. He wanted to live an ordinary life. So, he really captures the ordinary person who may live a life of quiet desperation. So, Boaz asks him to sit down. He comes and sits down. Pasuk bet. Vayikach asarah nashim miziknei ha'ir. Boaz gathers 10 men of the elders of the city. Not just 10 ordinary people, from the elders of the city. Vayomer, he tells them, "Shvu poi. Sit down here." Vayashev vayeshev, and they sit. This immediately tells us about the stature of Boaz. I mean, he summons 10 of the elders, and he tells them to sit, and they sit. Why does he think Why does he feel justified to give them instructions? Apparently, Boaz was a very important person. He was a powerful person. He was a great leader. He was a man of great influence, and therefore, they looked up to him, and he commanded that respect. Why did he gather 10 people? It's unclear. Why would he gather 10 people? So, the Gemara in Kesuvos daf zayin amud bet offers an argument between Rav Nachman and Rav Avuha. Rav Nachman says something very interesting, that this is the halakhic source that birkas chasanim is ba'asarah. Sheva brachot, the seven blessings we make as we celebrate the wedding of a groom and a bride, the sheva brachot are done only with a minyan, and that's why Boaz, who's about to witness a marriage here, gathers 10 people. Rav Avuha says the reason is completely different. And that is because Boaz has to do something else. He has to publicize here a law. And I'm going to ask you here to look at source number one in your curriculum. Right below the video, there is a PDF document with a curriculum. Please open it up. You can print it out. You can look at it as you wish. And we see the famous pasuk in Deuteronomy in parshas Ki Seitzei. Lo yavo Ammoni u'Moavi bikaal Hashem. An Ammonite and a Moabite, a member of these two nations, cannot enter into the congregation, the community of God. Gam dor asiri lo yavo lahem bikaal Hashem ad olam. Even a 10th generation cannot come into the community of God forever. And the Torah gives two reasons. One is they did not greet you with bread and water when you left Egypt on the route out of Egypt. And not only that, the king of Moab rented the prophet Balaam the son of Beor to curse the Jewish people. As we all know the famous story in Parshas Balak, the curses were transformed into blessings. But they rented him to curse the Jewish people. As a result of this, there is something in the Ammonite and Ammonite and Moabite nation that does not allow them to join the Jewish people. What's by the way the connection between these two reasons? So I once saw an interesting explanation that the Moabites could explain the reason we didn't greet the Jews with bread and water is we didn't have money. There was a recession. We didn't have money. One second, the Torah says, to rent a prophet and offer him a house filled with gold and silver to curse the Jewish people, you had money. Suddenly, suddenly you had money when you wanted to destroy the Jewish people. Suddenly, there was no recession. The economy was great. There was a flow of cash. So don't tell me that you couldn't offer bread and water to nomads who left decades of torturing and savage suffering and you couldn't offer them bread and water. Not only that, all you could think about is how to destroy them when they completely did not threaten you in any way. Here we have a major issue as Halacha the Rambam points out clearly, an Ammonite and a Moabite. Moab is today's Jordan. It was a country, it was a nation in today's Jordan on the east of Israel. Ammon was also to the east but more down south. Down south, Moab is more up north in today's Jordan. Now, an Ammonite and a Moabite can convert, they can become converts and and as the Rambam says in Hilchos Issurei Bi'ah Perek Yud Bet, they're full-fledged Jews. But they can't marry. They cannot marry another Jew. And even if they stay within the Jewish people and they marry, the children cannot marry Jews. Unlike for example, an Egyptian. An Egyptian who converts, the third generation can already marry an ordinary Jew. If an Egyptian man or Egyptian woman convert, let's say, and they marry each other, their children's children can already marry any Jew. Any other gentile who converts according to Jewish law can immediately marry any Jew. Ammon and Moab, even a 10th generation, even a 100 generations of them being among the Jewish people, of them converting, they could never marry an ordinary Jew. Here's the problem. Ruth is a Moabite. Ruth asks Boaz to marry her. Even if she converts, she's a Moabite woman. Ruth a Moabite is not allowed to. So Rabbeinu Bachya says in Maseches Yevamos page 7 that's why Boaz gathered the 10 people from the elders of the city. It wasn't just regular people, it was the elders. Why was it the elders? It was the great scholars. It was members of the court. To publicize and discuss and give the verdict that the Torah law applies only to men who are from Ammon and Moab, not women who are from Ammon and Moab. And now we understand why he does it right now, why he gathers the 10 people right now. Later, the Malbim says this, later Boaz is going to become biased. You can't trust him. Because once he wants to marry this girl, you could say, "Oh, of course you're Of course you're saying you're allowed to." But at this point, Boaz was not sure he's going to marry her because there was somebody else. There was somebody else first. So it was a much It was an objective discussion. And the conclusion was, um it says in the masculine. The prohibition applies only to a male Ammonite, a male Moabite, not to a female Ammonite and Moabite. So anyway, there are 10 people here gathered. Possible Boaz in front of the 10 elders turns to the goel, turns to the redeemer. Who is the redeemer? That man, whoever his name is, who Boaz encountered that morning, who came to sit down. He tells him, We have to listen to these words. The plat part of the field which belonged to our brother Elimelech, Naomi, who returned from the fields of Moab, has sold. We now learn here for the first time that Naomi had a field. Naomi had a part of a field. It belonged to Elimelech. It was Naomi's and she sold it. But I want to ask you a question. Where did Naomi have a field from? Soon we're going to see that Ruth also had a field. Where did she have a field from? So you might answer, "Oh, simple answer. What type of question is this? Her husband died. Elimelech died, right? Elimelech certainly had a field in the Holy Land. So Naomi inherited Elimelech's field." But let's understand the Halachic and ancient laws of Yerusha, of inheritance. When a man dies, who inherits the man? His sons. If he has no sons, his daughter or daughters, as in the case of the daughters of Zelophehad. If he has no daughters, if he has no children, who inherits him? It goes up from son to father. His father inherits him. What if he has no father? Then it goes from his father to his father's children. His brothers inherit him. What if he has no brothers? If he has no brothers, the man who died has no father and he has no brothers, then it goes to his grandfather. It goes to his father's father. And if his father's father is not alive, it goes to his father's father's children. In other words, to his uncles, to his father's brothers. Now, those are the laws of inheritance. A person could give a gift to whoever he wants before he dies. But according to the laws of Yerusha, laws of inheritance, this is the system. It goes to his sons. It goes to sons, it doesn't go to his wife, it doesn't go to his daughters. However, there's an obligation to support the wife till she marries somebody else, if she marries somebody else, and the daughters. There's also an obligation to pay up what's called her Kesubah, which is the husband has an obligation when he marries the wife that if he divorces her or he dies, there is a significant amount of money that goes to her. And if that money is not available, she can take it from his real estate, from his assets. After he dies, the money that's owed to her in the Kesubah, the stipulation that if he dies first, she gets a certain bulk of money, she can take it from his assets if there's no money. And she has to be supported, the daughters have to be supported. But the laws of Yerusha go to the sons or their sons. If there's no sons, it goes to the daughters or their children. Again, if they're not here, it goes to the father. If he's not here, it goes to his children, the brothers or their children. And then it goes back to the grandfather. And if the grandfather is not here, it goes to his children, the deceased man's uncles and or their children, their descendants. And if not, it goes to the great-grandfather, all the way back. And that's why everybody has a Yerusha. So when Elimelech died, who inherited his fields? His children, right? He had two sons, Machlon and Chilion. Now when they died, they died. So who did the inheritance go to? It didn't go to Naomi. When Elimelech died, it didn't go to Naomi. Who did it go to? It went either to Elimelech's father. And if he was not alive, it went to Elimelech's brothers. So how did Naomi have a field? Also, it says in Pasuk Gimel, look in Pasuk Gimel, the part of the field. Why a part of the field? So the Even Ezra says it was a big field and Elimelech had only a part of it. The Malbim says it's a very difficult answer. So it seems, and this is what the Malbim explains and many other commentators explain, that the reason Naomi had a field was because of the Kesubah. Which means, we know when somebody dies, there is an obligation to nurture and take care of his wife and his daughters after his death until they marry somebody else. There's also the obligation of the Kesubah. The wife, as I said, has to be paid money and the assets of the husband go to the Kesubah. Now, Elimelech died. Naomi had a right to collect her Kesubah. So the field of Elimelech in the Holy Land, Naomi had a lien on it. She had a lien on his field that belonged to her, the assets of it, in order to pay for her Kesubah. Whatever the amount of her Kesubah was that Elimelech stipulated with her on the day of their marriage. Now Naomi needed the money, so she went to sell this field. So that's what it's He's telling the redeemer. The part of the field that belonged to our brother Elimelech, which Naomi has a lien on, she now wants to sell. And the reason she wants to sell it is she needs the money. So she wants to sell her field and get her money. Now, we know the Torah says in Parshas Behar, in ancestral in the ancestral homeland of Israel, when somebody wanted to sell a field because of poverty, there was an obligation on the relatives to redeem the field of the buyer so that it remains within the family. Who is the obligation on? A relative. The closest relative has the first obligation. If he can do it, then it goes on the next closest relative and then on the next closest relative. So therefore, who is Boaz offering this mitzvah to? His uncle. Elimelech's brother, he says, "You are the one who's supposed to buy the field from Naomi." It's Elimelech's field, it's your brother's field. He died. He owed the ketubah to his wife. You're the first one to redeem it. She's going to sell it to a stranger. It's our ancestral homeland, it's part of our family. You have the obligation to redeem it. Go and buy buy it from Naomi instead of her selling it to somebody else. The same is true about Ruth. We're soon going to see that Ruth also had property. Why? When Elimelech died, Mahlon and Chilion inherited it, his property, his field. Whatever else he owned. He had two sons. Besides the part of the ketubah of Naomi, which she had a lien on. Now, when Mahlon died, he probably had a ketubah with Ruth, too. So part of what he inherited from Elimelech, she had a lien on because of her ketubah. And now she wanted to sell it in order to get her ketubah. And therefore, Boaz offers to the redeemer, "You redeem the field of Naomi. You redeem the field of Ruth." This is how the Malbim explains it here. The question is is a famous Midrash Rabbah in Ruth in the first chapter. Naomi tells that her daughters-in-law, she says, "God should give you kindness just as you have done kindness with the dead and with me." What type of kindness did they do with the dead? So that's one of the explanation And with me? So one of the explanations in Midrash says that they forgave the ketubah. Both Ruth and Orpah, they forgave the money of the ketubah. They didn't pressure Naomi for the mother for the money of the ketubah. So then Ruth would not have a lien on the field. There is a book I saw today, it's called Chesed Le Meshiach. It's a commentary on Ruth that was authored by a man who lived in the 20th century. He died in 1917. Rabbi Eliyahu Akiva Rabinowitz, who was the rabbi of Poltava. He was also a great polemicist. He wrote a book against secular Zionism called Sea and Ba Mishpat. He was a well-known rabbi, a prolific writer, a great scholar. And he wrote a book on Ruth called Megillas called Chesed Le Meshiach. There he comes up with a a a brilliant and simple interpretation how Ruth and Naomi had fields, had properties. Which also answers the above question. And you can look now at source number two. We made a little diagram so you should appreciate it, although by now you should already know this. Let's remember right? Tov, who was supposed to redeem, Salmon, the father of Boaz, and the father of Naomi. Naomi was married to her uncle Elimelech. Now, Elimelech dies. According to the laws of inheritance, who inherited who inherited the field? His fields, his assets, his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion. They didn't have children. So when they died, it couldn't go to their children. Who did it go to? It goes back up. It can't go to their father Elimelech cuz he's dead. So who does it go to? From Elimelech, who's in the grave, it goes to his other children. In other words, it goes to his brothers. He has three brothers, Tov, Salmon, and the father of Naomi. So all the properties of Elimelech, all the goods of Elimelech, whatever Elimelech owned that went down to his children after he died, now go back to their uncles. Elimelech has three brothers, so it gets split up between three. So Tov gets a third, Salmon, the father of Boaz, gets a third. And who gets the other third? Naomi's father. Naomi's father is Elimelech's brother. So she gets a He gets a third of Elimelech's property. Now, when her father died, who inherited him? His daughter. There's no sons, the daughter gets the property. So Naomi had a third of her first husband of her husband's properties. That's how she had the fields. And the Chesed Le Meshiach, he tries to prove that Naomi sold part of her field to Ruth. She didn't want to take all the stalks that she was bringing her for free. Generally, righteous people don't like to get fa- take favors from others. They want to pay. How did Naomi pay her back? She gave her part of her property cuz she had a third of Elimelech's property that she inherited from her father. So Ruth had fields, Naomi had a field, and it didn't have to do anything with the ketubah. According to the Malbim's explanation that it was the ketubah, we understand very well why it's chelqas asad, a part of the field, cuz the lien was only on a part of the field. So according to the Malbim, the word chelqas is explained. Okay. Regardless, so now we know that Naomi has a field, she wants to sell it. And Boaz turns to his uncle, to the goel, to Ploni Almoni, and says, "The part of the field that belonged to Elimelech, Naomi is selling it." He says, "She sold it." But the Malbim says it means she's about to sell it. She wants to sell it. According to the Chesed Le Meshiach, actually it means maybe that she already sold it to Ruth. But in any case, here is the situation. We're going to lose our plots of land. It's going to leave our family. And as we know, the Torah does not want that a family should lose plots of land that were given to it by Yehoshua when he divided the land among the 12 tribes of Israel. Pasuk Daled. Vani amarti, so Boaz said, "I said, egla oznecha leima. I will reveal your ears saying." In other words, "I will talk to you to your ears to tell you. Knei neged hayoshvim. Buy. Buy the field from Naomi in front of all those who are sitting here at the gate of the city. V'neged ziknei ami. And in the presence of the elders of my nation. Because remember, Boaz gathered 10 elders. Plus, this was a public thoroughfare. It's the gate of the city. So there were many people. So buy the field from Naomi in the presence of the people, in the presence of the elders. Im tigal goel. If you redeem the field, in other words, you purchase the field from Naomi and you redeem it from the would-be foreigner buyer, stranger buyer. You redeem it. Veim lo yigal. And if he won't redeem it, and now suddenly he shifts from second person to third person, talking to the court, talking to the Sanhedrin, talking to the elders. Veim lo yigal. And if this man, my uncle, will not redeem it, hagidali, let me know. Ve'eida, and I will know. Ki ein zulasi goel. There's nobody besides you to redeem the field. Va'anohi acharecha, I come after you. I am not on your level of kinsman, of of of closeness, but I am after you. He is an an uncle of Mahlon, an uncle of Ruth. I am a first cousin. So if you're not going to do it, there's nobody else left. I come after you. The first responsibility, the first opportunity is on you. The first mitzvah is on you because you are a closer relative to Naomi. You're Naomi's brother-in-law. You're Naomi's uncle. You're Ruth's uncle. You're Mahlon's uncle. If not you, then I come. Vayoimer, the man told him, "Anohi ego, I will redeem it. I am ready to buy the plot of the field that belonged to Elimelech that Naomi is now about to sell." When Boaz hears that he's about to buy it, Boaz says, "There's one more point." Pasuk K. Vayoimer Boaz. Boaz tells him, B'yom knoscha sademiyad Naomi. Now, let's listen. On the day that you buy the field from the hands of Naomi, from the hand of Naomi. Umei Eis Rus Hamoaviya. And from Ruth the Moabitess. And I'm going to stop right away and note that here it doesn't say from the hand. By Naomi, he says, "Miyad Naomi." By Ruth, he just says, "Mei Eis, from Ruth." And any serious student has to ask the question, why the change from Naomi to Ruth? She has a hand, she doesn't have a hand. But let's go again. Vayoimer Boaz. B'yom knoscha sademiyad Naomi Eis Rus Hamoaviya. The day you buy the field from the hand of Naomi and from Ruth the Moabitess. In other words, he's buying a field also from Ruth. Ruth also owns property? Eishes Hames. The wife of the dead man. Suddenly, he identifies Ruth as the wife, the spouse of somebody who died, her husband, Mahlon. Kanisa. You have acquired it. La hakim shema mesa na halosa. To erect the name of the deceased man on his inheritance, on his plot. What is he telling her? It's a little bit cryptic. So, Rashi explains he's telling her I'm sorry, he's telling him you will buy the field from Naomi. On the day that you buy the field from Naomi, you also must buy the field from Ruth, redeem her field as well. But as Rashi says, here's the clinch. Ruth agrees to sell her field only if you marry her. She's not just selling her field to a relative. She's going to sell her field to somebody who's going to marry her. Because that way the name of the dead man Mahlon, who left the world without children, will remain alive on some level through the inheritance, through the field. Because if she just sells the field to a relative, it becomes his field. But if the person who buys the field also marries the widow of Mahlon, so then as Rashi points out later in the chapter, when she's walking around that field, they say, "Ah, she is the first wife of Mahlon." So, somehow this field remains a little bit in the domain of Mahlon, in the property of Mahlon. So, Ruth agrees to marry the Ruth agrees to sell the field to somebody who's going to marry her. Because she wants the name of the dead man to remain on his nahala, on his inheritance. Since this was the property of Elimelech and it was the property of Mahlon according to any interpretation you're going to choose. The ketubah, the other interpretation of Rabbi Rabinowitz in Chesed L'Avraham. The Malbim explains the pasuk beautifully. The Malbim says that what Boaz is explaining to this redeemer is there's two types of acquisitions. One type of acquisition is from Naomi. From Naomi you're going to purchase a field according to the legal laws of acquisition and purchase. There's ways how we purchase real estate according to Torah law. You can purchase it through money, through a document, or through building in it. Hazakah. Kesef, shtar, hazakah. Money, document, hazakah. That's how you're going to purchase the field from Naomi, through a regular acquisition between a buyer, Naomi, and a seller, a man Tive, who happens to be her uncle and her brother-in-law. How are you going to purchase the field from Ruth? Not by buying it through one of the instruments and methods of acquisition, but rather by marrying her. And by marrying Ruth, automatically her field will be in your property. Says the Malbim, this is what Boaz is intimating to this goel, to this redeemer in the pasuk. So, look again in pasuk hey, we're going to read it now the way the Malbim interprets it. Vayomer Boaz, Boaz says, "Beyom knois hasa demeyad nami." The day you're going to buy the field from the hand of Naomi. Here he says a hand because how are you going to buy it through from Naomi? Through money that transfers from hand to hand. Kesef anikna meyad leyad. Or a document that goes from hand to hand. It's a regular acquisition. You give me money and you get my field. You give me money and you get my house. You give me money, you get my real estate. Meyad nami. So, the day you're going to buy it from the hand of Naomi, "Umei aishes Ruth amoyevian." From Ruth amoyevian. By Ruth it's not coming from her hand. She's not transferring you something with her hand. On the contrary, you're marrying her. You're becoming one with her. You're marrying her. She becomes your wife. You become her husband. You actually give her something. Or however you're going to perform the marriage. There's three methods how to create a marriage in halakha. So, from Ruth amoyevian, you're going to marry her. And that's what he continues, "May aishes Ruth amoyevian." From Ruth amoyevian, "Aishes hamays konnisa." You're going to acquire the wife of the dead man. You're not going to acquire the field. You're going to acquire the wife of the dead man. Why does he say aishes hamays? Because it's part of yibbum. It's a form of yibbum. What's yibbum? Yibbum is she's not just marrying any stranger. She's marrying a relative. Why is she marrying a relative? So, when she marries a relative, so then the child who's born from that union is considered a continuation of the first husband who passed away. It's only if she marries in the family, her brother-in-law, or somebody else in the family. So, you're going to acquire aishes hamays, the wife of the dead man. It's going to be you're you're being you're getting married to her as the wife of this man who died. And she wants to continue his life because he died childless. And therefore the field is going to become yours. It's through aishes hamays konnisa. You have to be kind to the aishes hamays. And that's why it's la hakim shema mesa na halosa. That's the objective. The objective is that his name will continue through this inheritance, both in the field and also through children. Pasuk vav, vayomer hagoel, when he heard this, the goel, the potential redeemer said, "Lo ukhal ligol li." I can't redeem the fields for me. And I can't marry Ruth. Pen ashchis es nahalosi. I might destroy my inheritance. Gaal lekha ata es gulosi. You redeem my redemption. Ki lo ukhal ligol. I cannot redeem. Why not? Source number three, Rashi. Take a look in Rashi. Rashi explains. Pen ashchis es nahalosi, zar'i. I might destroy my children. Ki mi nahalas Hashem banim. The pasuk says in Tehillim, the inheritance of God are children. In other words, children are called our nahala. So, when he says I might destroy my nahala, he means my children. Loses gam bazari. I will create a blemish in my children. Shenemar, lo yavo Amoni u Moavi The man told Boaz, the pasuk says an Ammonite and a Moabite cannot come into the community of God. So, you want me to marry Ruth? I can't marry Ruth. I'm happy to buy Naomi's field. I'm happy to buy Ruth's field. But this condition, this stipulation that it must come together WITH A MARRIAGE, WHOA, NOW YOU'RE PUSHING IT. What's the problem? The problem is you want me to blemish my children. I marry Ruth, we have children. These children are coming from a Moabite woman. My children ARE BLEMISHED. THEY CANNOT marry Jews. Forever. Why can't they marry Jews? Because the Torah says lo yavo Amoni u Moavi bakahal Hashem, even 10 generations ad olam. Even 10 generations from now, my great great great grandchildren cannot marry other Jews. Why not? I married a Moabite. That's what he says, "Pen ashchis es nahalosi." I'm destroying the children that are going to be born from her. So, Rashi vetov baAmoni velo yaAmonis. He made a mistake. Because it's Amoni, not Amonis, as we spoke earlier, we discussed earlier. Amoni in the masculine, Moavi in the masculine, not in the feminine. By the way, the Medrash says that's why he was called Almoni. Almoni comes from the word ilem. He's mute, he was mute from the words of Torah because he made a mistake in this halakha. Not only that, the Medrash Rabbah says he told Boaz, "You know why Mahlon and Chilion died? It was a punishment because they married Moabite women. You're not allowed to marry Moabite women even if they convert." So, he says, "I'm not going to do this." And he refuses the offer. He's not going to marry Ruth. He's going to destroy his children. And here we must ask a great question on Rashi. Why did he talk about his children? Say he would never have children with Ruth. It's really irrelevant. He should have spoken about himself. He's a Jew. Elimelech's brother is a Jew. Ploni Almoni is a Jew. Whoever he is, it's really irrelevant to this question if he was a relative, if he was where exactly in the family he was. But a Jew he was, a full-fledged Jew who lived in Bethlehem, in the community of Boaz, who was a closer relative than Boaz. Is he allowed to marry a Moabite woman? If he believes that even a female Moabite is not allowed to come into the community of God, why does he discuss HIS CHILDREN? PEN ASHCHIS es nahalosi, azari. Let's say he and Ruth would never have children. He is forbidden to do it. That's what he should say. If he made this mistake and believed that the prohibition applies not only to Moabite men, but also to Moabite women, and a Moabite woman is not allowed to marry an ordinary regular Jew, lo yavo Amoni u Moavi bakahal Hashem, how can he marry Ruth? But he doesn't mention anything about himself. He only talks about his children. Why? He should have told BOAZ SOMETHING MUCH MORE POWERFUL. FORGET CHILDREN. EVEN IF I'LL never have a child with Ruth. I'm not allowed to marry her. She's a Moabite woman. A Moabite woman could convert, but she can't marry a Jew. The Maharsha asks this question. One of the great commentators in the Talmud. What does the Maharsha answer? Maharsha says a big chiddush. What? That this man said, "Maybe I am allowed to marry her." Why am I allowed to marry her? Because of yibbum. Because of the law of yibbum. What's the law of yibbum again? A man dies without children. Usually a woman is not allowed to marry her brother-in-law even after her husband's death. Her husband died, she cannot marry his brother. But if he dies without children, there's a mitzvah to marry her brother, if she wants. But if she if she or if she wants and if he wants, if not, there's something called chalitzah and then she can marry anybody else. So yibbum actually overrides the prohibition of marrying a brother-in-law. So this man was telling Boaz, "Perhaps I'm allowed to marry her because of yibbum." As an act of yibbum. So even though she's a Moabitess, the mitzvah of yibbum overrides the prohibition of marrying a Moabitess. But the problem is the children are still not fully Jewish. Our children are the problem. AND THAT'S WHY HE TOLD BOAZ, "You could marry her cuz you're not going to have children." Boaz was already an old man, according to most commentaries, was a very old man, as we'll see in later classes. This is what the Maharsha explains. But the explanation of the Maharsha is very difficult to understand. There's no mitzvah of yibbum only with a brother-in-law. Before the Torah was given, the Ramban writes in Vayeishev, the tradition of yibbum was practiced with any kin. Which is why Tamar went to have a relationship with her father-in-law, Yehudah. But after the Torah is given, it's clear that yibbum is only a brother-in-law. Now, this man, Ploni Almoni, was not Ruth's brother-in-law. He was not Machlon's brother. Machlon's brother was gone. He was an uncle. So there's no law of yibbum. The reason we're referring it to yibbum is because the concept of yibbum was applied even to relatives, but not as a mitzvah. It was not an obligation. It was relatives that you're anyway allowed to marry, whether with yibbum or not yibbum. There was the concept of marrying them in the case where the husband died childless. So to say that yibbum should override a Moabitess, the prohibition of a Moabitess doesn't make sense. So in order to understand this, the answer to this, what Rashi is saying, we have to introduce another story. Open up source number four. It takes us to Shmuel Aleph, chapter 17. This is the story we discussed this in class one on Ruth, David's war with Goliath. David's war with Goliath. And we know, of course, that this is very deeply connected to our story because who is Goliath? Goliath was the son of Orpah, Ruth's sister-in-law. Now, take a look. Shmuel Aleph, perek yud zayin, pasuk nun hey. Vayikra Shaul es David yotzei likras Plishtim. When Shaul, the king, saw David going out against the Philistine, omer el Avner sar hatzava, he tells his commander-in-chief, Avner, "Ben mi zeh Avner?" "Whose son is this lad, Avner?" Vayomer Avner, "Chai nafshicha, melech, im yadati." Avner says, "I swear by your soul, the king, that I don't know." Nun vav, vayomer hamelech, "The king says, "Sha'al atah ben mi zeh alam." Go ask whose son is this young lad." Nun zayin, uk'shuv David mehakos es haPlishti. When David returned from striking the Philistine, so Avner, the commander-in-chief, brought him to the king, to Shaul, to King Saul. Vayomer elav Shaul, "Ben mi atah, na'ar?" Shaul asks him, "Whose son are you, lad?" Vayomer David, David says, "Ben avdecha Yishai Beis Lechem." "I'm the son of your servant, Yishai, from Bethlehem." The questions here, the two major questions. Shaul asks Avner, "Who's this young man?" Avner says, "I swear that I don't know." Why are you swearing? The king just asked you a simple question. Who is he? Who's this Who's Who's his father? Why do you start swearing that you don't swears, which means he understood the question to be faithful and profound. Question number one. Question number two is in pasuk nun hey, Shaul refers to him as a na'ar, ben mi zeh na'ar. In pasuk nun vav, he refers to him as ben mi zeh ha'elem, ha'elem. Both mean a young lad, but why the change of terminology? On this, there's a famous Gemara, a shocking Gemara in Maseches Yevamos, page 76b, Yevamos daf ayin vav. Take a look at source number five. We're going to learn the piece of Gemara together. Zag demishna, Mishnayos Yevamos daf ayin vav. Ammonim u'Moavim asurim, ve'isurim isurei olam. Aval nekveihem nekveihem mutarim miyad. Ammonites and Moabites are forbidden to marry Jews for eternity. But their wife their female members are immediately permissible. I should just mention parenthetically that this law is not relative already for a very long time. And the reason is the Assyrian king, Sennacherib, around 150 years before the destruction of the first Temple, came and relocated all of the nations in the Middle East. And therefore, he took all of the Moabites and he placed them elsewhere. He took all of the and Ammonites and he placed them elsewhere. He took the 10 tribes of Israel and he dispersed them. And till today, we don't know where they are. So therefore, today, if you go to Moab or you go to Ammon and there's a convert from them, we don't assume that it's a convert from the ancient Moabite nation. They have been, as we say, buttled, nullified in the majority of humanity and civilization. And therefore, today, any gentile who converts sincerely is accepted and can marry any Jew. So the law of Ammon and Moab applied only in ancient times till Sennacherib came and confused the whole world, as our sages put it, "Bas Sennacherib bilbel es ha'olam." Till then, the Moabites were native Moabites. The Ammonites were native Ammonites who lived there from the time when the Jews left Egypt. But now, already since Sennacherib, already before the destruction of the first Temple, this law is over. It doesn't Not that the law is over, the circumstances don't apply. So But even then, it didn't apply to females. That's what the Mishnah says in Yevamos. Now, look further. Zag degemara minan u'minan, how do we know? Omer Rebbi Yochanan, Rebbi Yochanan says, diyoma kra, the pasuk says, "Vayikra Shaul es David yotzei likras Plishti." When Shaul saw David go out against the Philistine, omer el Avner sar hatzava, "Ben mi zeh na'ar, Avner?" He asked Avner, "Who is Whose lad is he?" Vayomer Avner, "Chai nafshicha, melech, im yadati." "I swear that I don't know." Fleg degemara, "Did my other lawyer daley?" Did Shaul not know who David is? A few chapters earlier, Shaul was overtaken by melancholy. And he was advised to get somebody to play beautiful music to calm his soul. And who did they bring? They brought David to play his harp. And Shaul took a liking to him. So Shaul didn't know who he was. How much did he change? Zag degemara, "No, hachi kama Shaul." Shaul meant something much deeper. He did know who he was. But he asked his commander-in-chief, Avner, "Im mi Peretz o hachi kama Shaul, im mi Peretz o im mi Zerach hosi." "I know who he is, and I know that he comes from the tribe of Yehudah. But Yehudah and Tamar gave birth to twins, Peretz and Zerach. Does David come from Peretz or Zerach?" "Im mi Peretz hosi, if he comes from Peretz, malka hava." "I know that he is a king in his blood." "Sh'ha'melech poreitz lasos derech bein machaneh beyado." The word Peretz is very telling. The word Peretz means a breach. A king is permitted to make a breach in the path, and nobody could protest him. If he needs to cut through a certain path, he can make any breach. He can remove any building, and nobody can protest him. This is part of the authority of the king. He's a Peretz. He can make a breach. He can destroy regular boundaries and remove structures. So if David comes from Peretz, there is royal blood flowing in his sinews. "Im mi Zerach hosi, if he comes from Zerach, ish ba'al ma'aveh." He's just a prominent person. Shaul wanted to know, in other words, if David has within him the potential, the destiny, the energy, the royalty, the character that makes him suitable to be a melech, to be a king. As the Gemara continues there, which we're not quoting here, you could look it up if you want, that he saw some symptoms, he saw some signs which showed him that David was a king. This was, of course, crucial for Shaul to know, on many different levels, including deep spiritual levels. What's the future of the Jewish people if he's the next king? This was the question. Now you understand why Avner took an oath, "I don't know." It wasn't a question about simple identity, "Who is he?" It was a very deep question, "Is he a king?" So Avner said, "I swear I don't know." Now you understand his response. The response is proportionate. It's commensurate with the question. And the The continues, this is what happened. Om my loy doyeg ha doy me. Doyeg the Edomite turns to the King Saul and tells him. Who was Doyeg? We have to know Doyeg is defined in the Tanakh as abir haro'im asher l'Shaul, the most powerful of Shaul's shepherds. As the sages explain, he was the reish Sanhedrin, he was the leader of the supreme court of the Jewish people, one of the greatest scholars of his day. But as far as character, he was very flawed. And he didn't like David. Om my loy doyeg ha doy me, Doyeg the Edomite tells Shaul, and you know, one of the reasons he's called Adoymi, which means red, one explanation is he came from Edom. Another explanation is Adoymi, when he spoke in Torah, everybody blushed. And when he asked David or anybody else a question, they blushed because nobody can answer. Doyeg says, "Achat umashal lo vem hogin ul hamalkhut um lo." You're asking if he's worthy for the throne or not. "Sha'al lo vem royi ul vem b'khalim lo." Why don't you ask if he's worthy to enter into the community of Israel or not? "Mai ta'ama?" What's the reason? "D'kha asi Rut hamoyaviya." David comes from Rut the Moavite. David's father was Yishai, Yishai's father was Oved, Oved's mother was Rut. David's great-grandmother was Rut, she's a Moavite. "Shaul, your majesty, you're asking if David is worthy for kingship. If he comes from Peretz or Zerach, why don't you ask a more important question? Is he Jewish? Can he be a full Jew?" So yes, Rut converted, she could be a Jew. But uh is is he worthy of marrying a gidisha what a yidisha froi? A kasha d'yidisha erla k'froi, can he marry a Jewish family? Can he build a Jewish family? Can he marry a regular Jew or ordinary Jewish woman? Or not? That's the question. Om my loy Avner, Avner tells Doyeg, "Taneina, we have learnt it." "Amoyni veloy amoynis, moyavi veloy moyavis." It says an Ammonite man, not an Ammonitess, Moavite veloy Moavitess. The Torah says "Loy yavo Amoyni u'Moyavi" in the masculine, not in the feminine. Men, not women, yeah, Rut was a woman. Doyeg tells Avner, "Ela meyata mamzer veloy mamzeres." It says "Loy yavo mamzer b'khal Hashem." A bastard boy, so a child who was born from a very promiscuous relationship, say a woman commits adultery and lives with another man while she's married before she gets a divorce. And she has a baby from the second man, the boy is a mamzer. He can't marry an ordinary Jew. So maybe you're going to say "Mamzer veloy mamzeres" that only applies to a male mamzer, not a female mamzer, just as you did with Amoyni u'Moyavi, and we never heard such a law. Avner said, "No, mamzer k'siv mum zar." The word mamzer has a meaning. Mamzer is a combination of two words, mum zar, the blemish of being alien. So mamzer doesn't mean a masculine mamzer and not a female mamzer, mamzer denotes the concept that this person has a blemish that he or she is alien. Amoyni u'Moyavi is the name of a nation, and it says in the masculine to exclude the feminine. Mamzer has a meaning, and that meaning applies both to the man or the woman, the boy or the girl. Doyeg did not remain mute. So Doyeg continues, "Mitzri veloy Mitzris." Later it says an Egyptian who converts can't marry an ordinary Jew only in third generation. Maybe it's only an Egyptian man, not an Egyptian woman. Same as you did with Ammon and Moab, by mamzer you FOUND AN EXCUSE, BY MITZRI? So Avner said, "Shani ancha, here is different. The m'farish ta'ama d'kra." The pasuk explains the reason. "Al asher loy kidmu eschem b'lechem u'mayim." The reason a Moavite and Ammonite cannot marry Jews is because they did not greet you with bread and water. "Darko shel ish l'kadem u'lelo darko shel ish l'kadem." It's the custom of a man to go out and greet them with bread and water, it's not the custom of a woman. By an Egyptian, the Torah doesn't give a specific reason that applies to men. The reason is because of what they did to the Jews as an enslavement, probably. The Torah just says an Egyptian can't come in to the community of God till the third generation. So we don't distinguish between a man and a woman. But by an Amoyni and a Moyavi, the Torah gives a reason why they can't. And that REASON APPLIES TO MEN, NOT to women. The men's culture and nature is to go out. The women's nature is not to go out. So you can blame the men for not greeting the Jews with bread and water, you can't blame the women, it's not their fault, they're not guilty. So they're exonerated from this prohibition that they can't enter into the community of God. So Doyeg continues, "Halochem l'kadem anashim k'vatz anashim, venashim k'vatz nashim." Why? The Moavite men should have gone out to greet the men, and the Moavite women should go out to greet the women. You're telling me tznius, modesty, borders, boundaries, it's not for the women to go out? THEY COULD HAVE MADE A CHITZONUS. LET THE MEN GO TO THE MEN, LET THE WOMEN GO to the women. And since the women did not go, they're equally guilty, so why are you excluding the women from the prohibition? Ishtik. Avner was silenced, he didn't have what to say. In front of the king, this takes place as they're discussing David who's going out to fight Goliath. Going out to fight his cousin who went back to Moab cuz his mother didn't convert, Arpa became a Moavite. Now the question is, doesn't David belong on that side as well? Miyad, right away, "Vayomer hamelech, Shaul ata ben Yishai ha'ela?" The king tells Avner, "Go ask whose son is this elem, is this young lad?" "Hasam karilei naar ha'kha karilei elem." The beginning he calls him a naar, then an elem. "Hakhi kamalei was telling him halakha in his alma k'tzalu shatz shatz u'shatz u'shatz u'shatz u'shatz u'shatz u'shatz." "A halakha was concealed from you, go ask in the base medrash." That's why it says elem. Elem doesn't only mean young lad, elem also comes from the word concealment, "l'ha'alim helem." Telling Avner, "There was a halakha concealed from you, you don't know the law. Who's right, you or Doyeg? Was Rut allowed to marry Boaz, or was she not allowed to marry Boaz? Are her children full Jews, or are they not full Jews? You don't know. Elem, you're you're confused, go to the base medrash, go to the study hall, go to the yeshiva and find out." Shaul. Avner left the king, he went to the base medrash and he asked the question. "Amru lei." They told him, "Amoyni veloy amoynis, moyavi veloy moyavis." They repeated this tradition, it the prohibition applies only to males, not to females. "Achshilu hu Doyeg kol ha'ni kushyasa." Doyeg asked all of the above questions, the questions that he asked Avner, he posed in the base medrash to all of the scholars. "Ishtiku." They were all silenced. Nobody had a response to Doyeg. Doyeg had a great question. He had not one great question, but many great questions, proving supposedly that Amoyni and Moyavi refers both to males and to females, and hence Rut could not marry a Jew, and hence Rut's children cannot marry Jews, and even if they're Jew, they convert, they could never enter into the congregation of God as Jews. "Boi l'harug z'ei alei." Said the Gemara. They wanted to declare David at that moment as somebody who's not royi l've b'khal, as somebody who cannot be a full-fledged Jew and marry a Jew. Miyad, what happens now? Immediately something happens. And here the Gemara quotes a pasuk in Shmuel. Pasuk says "Va'amasa ben Yishai Yisraeli asher ba l'Avigail bas Nachash." Amasa, the son of a man whose name was Yisra, the Jew, the Israelite, who married a woman named Avigail, the daughter of Nachash. And by the way, who's Avigail, the daughter of Nachash? Avigail was a sister of King David. "Bas Nachash." The Gemara explains elsewhere, Nachash refers to Yishai, because Yishai died without sins, the only reason he died was because of the serpent who made Adam and Chava who made Chava eat from the tree, and that's when death was decreed on all of humanity. So Amasa was the son of a man named Yisra who married Avigail, David's sister. He's His father is identified as Yisra Yisraeli. "U'khsiv b'Divrei Hayamim" in Chronicles, he's called Yeser ha'Yishmaeli. Yeser the Arab, the Ishmaelite, he comes from Yishmael, and he's identified as the same person who married Avigail. Was he a Jew, or was he a Yishmaeli? "Amar Rava." Rava says, "M'lamed she'khagar charbo k'Yishmael." This teaches us that he girdled his sword like a Yishmael, like a Yishmael, like like an Arab, he girdled his sword, he he girded his sword. "Va'amar." And he declared, "Kol mi she'eino shomeya halakha zu, yeduker b'cherev." Somebody who does not listen and obey to this halakha will be stabbed by a sword. This is what I have accepted from the court of Shmuel HaNavi, Shmuel from the city of Rama, Shmuel HaNavi, Shmuel the prophet, Ammi Ne'eman, Ammi is my Ammi Ne'eman, my office. From the Beis Din of Shmuel I accepted that it's only an Ammonite man and not an Ammonite woman, only a Moabite man, not a Moabite woman. So he takes a sword like a Yishmaeli, really he was a Jew, but the reason we call him Yishmaeli girdled his sword like a Yishmaeli and he said, "Whoever does not accept this halakha will be pierced, will be stabbed with a sword. I have accepted from the Beis Din of Shmuel." From the court, the Sanhedrin of Shmuel, that prohibition applies only to an Ammonite man, to a Moabite man, not to a woman. Fregt die Gemara, "Mei Ma'amin?" Does he believe? Va'amar Rabba bar bar Rav Huna said in the name of Rav Kahana, "Talmid chacham she'amar halakha u'ba, any scholar who teaches a halakha, im kedei mai'aseh umar she'eino umar, im umar ein umar." If he taught it before he became involved in the story, you can listen to him, if not, don't listen to him cuz he's biased. If he taught the halakha before, it affected him personally, you could accept it. If it's after, you can't accept it, he's a he's not a subjective, he's he's not objective, he's subjective. Yishai married David's sister. In other words, his sister WAS YISHAI'S DAUGHTER. AMASA WAS THEIR SON. IF THE MOABITE WOMAN WOULD BE prohibited from marrying a Jew, IT WOULD AFFECT HIS CHILDREN, TOO. IT WOULD affect Amasa and all the children. How could you listen to him? And for the Gemara Shani ach it's different our Shmuel who Beis Din Kayim, Shmuel was alive, his Beis Din was alive, you could go ask him. I CAN'T TRUST somebody when he's giving me a law that he's biased about if he's the exclusive source. I can't trust him because he may just want to cover for himself. But in this case, how can he lie? Go to Shmuel HaNavi, go to his Beis Din and find out. And that's why we can trust him. Fregt die Gemara, "Mi kol makom kasha." But Doeg has good questions. Shmuel's Beis Din says that it doesn't apply to women, but Doeg asks, "Why not?" Women should have also gone to greet the Jews. So the Gemara says two answers. Hacha, here in Babylonia, Targum U'v'Yom they explained it based on the pasuk in Tehillim, "Kol kvudah bas melech penimah." The respect of a princess is to remain inside. But Mar bar Rav Ashi in the West in Israel, Be Teima Rabbi Yitzchak bar Rabbi Yitzchak said, "Kera, the pasuk Am Be Teima Rabbi Yitzchak or some people say Rabbi Yitzchak said, "Amar kera, the pasuk says, 'Vayomeru el Avraham, 'Ayek Sarah ishtecha?' The three guests asked Avraham in the beginning of a year, 'Where is Sarah, your wife?' And what would he answer? 'Hinei ohel, she's in the tent.'" She's inside. So therefore the women of Moab were not responsible to come out and greet the Jews because a princess affects the world from within. "Hinei ohel, Sarah is in the tent." So therefore they weren't obliged to come out to the highway to greet the Jews, so therefore they're not responsible for not coming out, and therefore the prohibition on the Ammonite and the Moabite does not apply to them. And this concludes this story of the Gemara. Which at first glance the whole story is deeply, deeply enigmatic. How will a sword help us determine the law? He says, "Whoever doesn't accept this law will be stabbed with a sword." Can a sword determine what's true, what's not true? IF IT'S A SWORD THAT DETERMINES IT, IT'S A BUSH, IT'S A SHAME, IT'S A DISGRACE. IF THE SWORD IS THAT WHICH DETERMINES TRUTH, IT'S NOT TRUTH, IT'S VIOLENCE, IT'S AGGRESSION, IT'S BLOOD, IT'S NOT TRUTH. I say, "IF YOU DON'T ACCEPT THIS LAW, I'M GOING TO STAB YOU." AND YOU ACCEPT IT BECAUSE of fear of death, that's law, that's justice? THAT'S NOT LAW, IT'S TERRORISM. MEMON NAFSHACH, IF THE argument is good, what do they say? What do they What do the lawyers say? If the law is on your side, then emphasize the law. If the story is on your side, if the story that happened supports your version, emphasize the story. And if neither, then just pound on the wall and holler. If the law is true, if Shmuel says this is the halakha, what do you need a sword for? And if it's not the halakha and it's they're going to accept it because of the sword, it's not a halakha, that's not a law. Since when? We never heard such a thing in Judaism. Law is established because he's standing with a sword, he says, "Whoever doesn't accept it will be stabbed." What's the meaning of this? He wanted to convey an idea, but what's the idea? And the great question, the big question, even a bigger question is, what did he say? He said, "I have accepted from the Beis Din of Shmuel." They knew it already in Beis Medrash. In Beis Medrash they said, "Ammi Ne'eman, Ammi is my Ammi Ne'eman, MY OFFICE." AVNER TOLD SHAUL, "TANEINA, we learned this." BUT DOEG ASKED ALL THESE QUESTIONS. So why suddenly when Shmuel is quoted, the questions are gone? Why? Doeg could have asked his questions on Shmuel's Beis Din, too. They already said, "Taneina, we learned that this is a tradition." BUT DOEG TRIED TO REFUTE the tradition, to disprove it. So he could have asked the question now on Shmuel, too. Furthermore, Boaz, who was a judge according to most opinions, already gave out a verdict that Ruth could come into the Jewish people, and he did it publicly in front of 10 elders. So why was Doeg Why would Doeg's questions generations later valid? And also, why couldn't Boaz be quoted? Why they have to quote Shmuel? But these are major questions. What is the Gemara trying to say? But the how based on how we understand this Gemara, we we answer all these questions. We'll be able to see the meticulousness in Rashi's words of why the goel, why Toiv, why the redeemer refused to marry Ruth, not because of himself, but because of his children. As we will discuss next Monday night. Stay tuned to the Yeshiva.net. Good night. Hey.