Chapter One
- In their commentary on 1:1, Kravitz and Olitzky suggest that the author of the Book of Ruth attempted to express “the difference in time between when events ostensibly occurred and when they were written down.” That is, the story was written well after it took place. In spite of this, how does the Book of Ruth achieve a certain timelessness? How does this text, in ways either like or unlike other biblical texts, manage to transcend time?
- While commenting on 1:3, Kravitz and Olitzky note that according to Rashi, Elimelech died as a result of divine punishment, leaving Naomi with their two sons. Rashi must explain Elimelech’s seemingly premature death. Kravitz and Olitzky note that while this “may have helped Rashi,” it “does not resonate for the modern reader.” How does this relate to your own views on the idea of divine punishment?
- How do Naomi’s misfortunes, and her response to these misfortunes, compare to other biblical tales of misfortune, such as those seen in the story of Job? Is Naomi’s reaction to the deaths of her husband and sons, similar to Job’s response to losing family and possession? Do either of these biblical models resonate with you? Why or why not
- Verses 1:9–14 relate a strong bond between Naomi and her two daughters-in-law, a bond surely made stronger by the losses they have endured together. Naomi bids them to “go on back” to their lands and attempt to begin anew. In verse 14 readers observe as Orpah leaves, but Ruth remains with her mother-in-law. How are both of these acts respectful toward Naomi, their grieving mother-in-law?
- Verses 1:16–18 demonstrate Ruth’s intention to remain with her mother-in-law. As Kravitz and Olitzky make clear, these lines have taken on particular significance for Jews-by-choice. Why is this? In what way does Ruth’s speech manage to harness some of Judaism’s most core values? In what way might this speech provide a model not only for potential Jews-by-choice, but for Jews-by-birth as well? Finally, how does verse 1:19 speak to the idea that conversion entails both a willingness to join a community and a community’s willingness to welcome others?
Chapter Two
- At the beginning of this chapter, Ruth seeks the gleanings of a nearby field. This speaks not only to Ruth’s demonstrated boldness, but the apparently preexisting practice of leket, which allows the poor and the stranger to partake of the edges of agricultural fields. How does Ruth’s uncompromising behavior here relate to other actions of hers in the story? In these terms, to which other biblical figures, male or female, might we compare her? How does the practice of gleaning relate to other instances of charity as found in the book? What form does this practice take today?
- In verses 2:8–10, how does Boaz’s willingness to help Ruth, imploring her not to “leave this place, but stick close to my female fieldworkers” and inviting her to “drink whatever [water] the young men have drawn,” recall Ruth’s earlier decision to “stick close” to Naomi and try to support her? To what extent is “welcoming the stranger,” a concept that pervades Jewish tradition, evident in moments such as these? How do we as a Jewish community, or how do we as individuals, work today to welcome strangers? In what way are those even within our community sometimes cast as strangers?
- Boaz’s willingness to assist Ruth seems to humble her. How does she manage to balance her boldness, as witnessed earlier, and her modesty, as seen here? What message does this leave us with, as modern readers of the text?
- It becomes clear that the compassion Boaz has for Ruth does not mean he will simply grant her what she wishes. Verses 2:17–18 demonstrate that she must procure her own gleanings. Other than physical sustenance, what does Ruth gain in this sense? How does this relate to other notions of charity as perpetuated by Jewish tradition?
- To what extent are the exchanges between Ruth and Naomi at the end of the chapter reminiscent of exchanges that might occur between a mother and daughter? The “mother” is clearly concerned for her “daughter’s” well-being and safety. Ibn Ezra suggests that Naomi’s seeking to protect Ruth from Boaz’s male workers points directly to “the sexual undercurrents of the story.” Do Naomi and Ruth behave toward one another like a mother and daughter might? If so, what are the characteristics of their relationship that reveal this? To what extent do Boaz’s advances carry, as Ibn Ezra suggests, “sexual currents”?
- In the gleanings section to this chapter, Deborah Dash Moore, Arthur Waskow, and others refer to “today’s Ruth” and the challenges she would face. Waskow asks if Ruth would even be admitted to America, whether she would have to show a “green card” in order to work here. Similarly, Moore notes that today’s born Jews and Jews-by-choice consistently grapple with borders: geographic, cultural, language, background, and tradition. She argues that the Ruth of the story, like today’s Ruth, indeed contended with numerous borders. Do you agree with this? Why or why not? Which version of Ruth faced greater challenges? In what way have you, regardless of your background, encountered the challenges that Ruth did? In what way has the Jewish community eased today’s Ruth’s entrance and helped her overcome some of the borders she might face?
Chapter Three
- How do verses such as 3:3–9 alter assumptions regarding biblical literature? Do the sexual underpinnings of these verses surprise you? Is any particular element of the sexuality expressed surprising or unusual? Why or why not?
- To what extent does Naomi now, more than earlier, play a motherly role to Ruth? How does their brief discussion of sexuality meet our modern sensibilities? How does their conversation relate to conversations we do or do not have with our children today? Do you agree with Naomi’s approach?
- In verses such as 3:8–10, Boaz seems very much surprised by Ruth’s actions. To readers it would seem that she is both younger and far more forward than he is. How do we react to her behavior here and to Boaz’s reaction to her behavior?
- How might we apply the various developing relationships (e.g., Ruth-Naomi, Boaz-Ruth) to similar relationships in our own lives? How does Naomi’s approach as a mother-in-law compare to modern-day mothers-in-law? What do we make of Ruth’s reaction to Boaz, her potential boyfriend? Daniel Gordis suggests, as do others, that “a relationship cannot exist in a vacuum.” He notes that human relationships, fashioned in the image of one’s relationship to God, have the power to “further the classic Jewish goal of investing human life with sanctity.” Do you feel that the relationships in the Book of Ruth appear to be fashioned in God’s image and thus take on near divine characteristics?
Chapter Four
- Kravitz and Olitzky argue that Boaz’s legal actions in chapter 4, his acquisition of all that had belonged to Elimelech, Chilion, and Mahlon, are “primarily altruistic—to ensure that the family name does not disappear.” He is thus praised by those who witness these proceedings. Later, in 4:13, Boaz and Ruth marry, and in time, “God allowed her to conceive and she had a son.” Other biblical stories equate fecundity with righteousness. With Ruth and Boaz conceiving of a child, are we to believe that, in addition to the witnesses at the city gates, the “witness” above likewise approves of the actions of Ruth and Boaz? Are they truly blessed?
- In the text itself, Ruth is equated with the likes of Rachel, Leah, and Tamar, other strong biblical women. Why is it that she conjures these three particular figures? How is she like or unlike these three women?
- At verse 4:17, Kravitz and Olitzky refer again to commentator Ibn Ezra, who explores a possible link between Oved, Ruth’s newborn son, and “the eventual King David, who is thought by the Jewish tradition to be the predecessor of the Messiah.” Though Ibn Ezra struggles somewhat to justify such thinking, readers are left with the idea that there may be a connection between Oved and the great King David. Why would Ruth in particular be seen by tradition as, to borrow language from Kravity and Olitzky, “a progenitor of the Messiah”?
- What are we to make of the end of the Book of Ruth, which likewise suggests that the seed to Jewish redemption was planted not by someone born into Judaism, but by one who chose Judaism later in life? What does this teach us regarding not only our need to welcome the stranger, but all that Jews-by-choice stand to offer our community and our conceptions?
|
