Re: Megillat Ruth
Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Re: Megillat Ruth

May 28, 1999 04:00AM
<HTML>
Dear Shalom,

I'm sorry about the delayed response. In the meantime, I noticed that two
people responded to the question. I hope that this is still relevant.

Response to Mark:

The Ramban in Bereishit seems to be addressing the question of whether the
relationship between Tamar and Yehuda (and incidentally Ruth and Boaz) is
actually Yibum. He concludes that there was an ancient Yibum-like custom
called Geulah which could take place with any family members which are not
arayot (he actually is right- Ancient Near Eastern Legal texts contain
several laws which appear to be Yibum-like, even if that was not what he
was referring to). =20

I am not sure if this Ramban is entirely relevant to the question asked,
although the Ramban does say that the family member who does geulah should
be one of the "yorshei hanahala," which may be a reference to a connection
between Yibum and the redemption of the land. In any case, the Ramban
appears to be alluding to some "secret" having to do with transmitigation
of the soul in that reference, so I am not sure if it can be entirely
understood.

As for the question itself, I believe that the two mitzvot (Yibum and
geulat hakarkah) are linked conceptually if not halachically. There is
ample evidence that the "establishment of the name" in Yibum refers to the
bearing of a son who can inherit the father's land so that the inheritance
won't be swallowed up into the larger family, thereby erasing the name of
the father which is inextricably tied up to his portion of land. [See the
expressed fears of b'not Zelaphhad in Numbers 27:4.] Actually, I am not
sure if this is explicitly noted in the rabbinic literature on Yibum, but
it certainly appears to be evident in the biblical text.=20

I don't want to make this too long, so suffice it to say that I think that
Boaz linked the two things because without Elimelech's land, the marriage
of Ruth would not accomplish the goal of providing an heir who could
inherit the land and uphold the name of the family on their land. [See
Ruth 4:5 ]

I hope that this has all been clear. If you have any questions or
comments, please let me know. Again, sorry for the delay.

Yael</HTML>
Subject Author Posted

Megillat Ruth

Sokolow May 17, 1999 04:00AM

Re: Megillat Ruth

Mark Smilowitz May 18, 1999 04:00AM

Re: Megillat Ruth

Yael May 28, 1999 04:00AM



Author:

Your Email:


Subject:


banner class does not have character 3 defined in its font.