Ruth 2:18

Ruth Returns to Naomi

2:18 She carried it back to town, and her mother-in-law saw ¹  how much grain ²  she had gathered. Then Ruth ³  gave her the roasted grain she had saved from mealtime. ⁴ 

Ruth 3:2

3:2 Now Boaz, with whose female servants you worked, is our close relative. ⁵  Look, tonight he is winnowing barley at the threshing floor. ⁶ 

Ruth 3:4

3:4 When he gets ready to go to sleep, ⁷  take careful notice of the place where he lies down. Then go, uncover his legs, ⁸  and lie down ⁹  beside him. ¹⁰  He will tell ¹¹  you what you should do.”

Ruth 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 ¹²  asked, ¹³  “How did things turn out for you, ¹⁴  my daughter?” Ruth ¹⁵  told her about all the man had done for her. ¹⁶ 

[2:18]  ¹ tc MT vocalizes ותרא as the Qal verb וַתֵּרֶא (vattere’, “and she saw”), consequently of “her mother-in-law” as subject and “what she gathered” as the direct object: “her mother-in-law saw what she gathered.” A few medieval Hebrew mss (also reflected in Syriac and Vulgate) have the Hiphil וַתַּרְא (vattar’, “and she showed”), consequently taking “her mother-in-law” as the direct object and “what she gathered” as the double direct-object: “she showed her mother-in-law what she had gathered” (cf. NAB, TEV, CEV, NLT). Although the latter has the advantage of making Ruth the subject of all the verbs in this verse, it would be syntactically difficult. For one would expect the accusative sign אֶת (’et) before “her mother-in-law” if it were the direct object of a Hiphil verb in a sentence with a double direct object introduced by the accusative sign אֶת, e.g., “to show (Hiphil of רָאָה, ra’ah) your servant (direct object marked by accusative sign אֶת) your greatness (double direct object marked by accusative sign אֶת) (Deut 3:24). Therefore the MT reading is preferred.

[2:18]  ² tn Heb “that which”; the referent (how much grain) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:18]  ³ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Ruth) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:18]  ⁴ tn Heb “and she brought out and gave to her that which she had left over from her being satisfied.”

[3:2]  ⁵ tn Heb “Is not Boaz our close relative, with whose female servants you were?” The idiomatic, negated rhetorical question is equivalent to an affirmation (see Ruth 2:8-9; 3:1) and has thus been translated in the affirmative (so also NCV, NRSV, TEV, CEV, NLT).

[3:2]  ⁶ tn Heb “look, he is winnowing the barley threshing floor tonight.”

[3:4]  ⁹ tn Heb “and let it be when he lies down”; NAB “But when he lies down.”

[3:4]  ¹⁰ 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]  ¹¹ 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]  ¹² tn The words “beside him” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons; cf. NLT “lie down there.”

[3:4]  ¹³ tn The disjunctive clause structure (vav [ו] + subject + verb) highlights this final word of instruction or signals the conclusion of the instructions.

[3:16]  ¹³ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Naomi) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:16]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “said.” Since what follows is a question, the present translation uses “asked” here.

[3:16]  ¹⁵ 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]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Ruth) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:16]  ¹⁷ sn All that the man had done. This would have included his promise to marry her and his gift of barley.