Ruth Chapter 3 verse 15 Holy Bible

Pulpit Commentary

Pulpit CommentaryVerse 15. - And he said, Allow me the wrapper which is upon thee, and hold on by it; and she held on by it; and he measured six measures of barley; and he put it on her, and went to the city. The expression "Allow me," literally, "Give (me)," was a current phrase of courtesy. The verb employed - יָהַב - was common Semitic property, ere yet the mother-tongue was subdivided into Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, Arabic. The wrapper which is upon thee. The word for wrapper occurs nowhere else except in Isaiah 3:22, where it is translated, in King James's version, "wimple." Here it is rendered "vail," and, in the margin, "sheet or apron," - all of them unhappy translations. So is the rendering of the Targumist, סוּדְרָא, i.e. sudarium, or "napkin." N.G. Schroder discusses the word at great length in his masterly 'Commentarius Philologico-Criticus de Vestitu Mulierum Hebraearum,' pp. 247-277. He would render it pallium or palla In consequence of national peculiarities in articles of dress, especially in ancient times, it is best to avoid a specific, and to employ a generic translation. When Boaz said, "Give me the wrapper," he did not ask that it should be handed to him. He had already put his hand upon it, and was engaged in hollowing out a scoop or cavity. Hence he said, on the one hand, "Allow me," and, on the other, "Hold on by it." And he measured six measures of barley. The particular measure referred to is unspecified. It is not only mere dream on the part of the Targumist, but it is dream involving almost sheer impossibility, that the measures were seahs, i.e. two ephahs. The Targumist had to bolster up his dream by adding another, viz., that Ruth got miraculously strength to carry the load. Load, indeed, there undoubtedly was; and no doubt it would be as great as she could conveniently carry. And likewise, in accordance with the primitive simplicity of manners, the magnitude of the burden would be demonstration to Naomi of Boaz's satisfaction with the "measures" which, in full motherliness of spirit, she had planned. And he went to the city. The Vulgate and Syriac versions, as also Castellio, Coverdale, and various other translators, but not Luther, have assumed that we should read וַתָּבְלֺא, "and she went," instead of וַיָּבְּלֺא, "and he went." So too Wright. But there seems to be no good reason for making the change. If there had been no division into verses, then the departure of both Boaz and Ruth on their respective routes, or in their respective order of sequence, would have been recorded close together: "and 'he' went to the city, and 'she' went to her mother-in-law" - each, let us bear in mind, with the heart elate.

Ellicott's Commentary

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers(15) Vail--Rather a mantle, so in Isaiah 3:22.She went.--This should be, if we follow the current Hebrew text, he went. The verb is masculine (yabho), and the distinction is shewn in the Targum, which inserts the name Boaz as the nominative. It must be allowed that a fair number of Hebrew MSS., as well as the Peshito and Vulgate, take the verb in the feminine. The LXX. is from the nature of the Greek language unable to mark the distinction. The clause. if we accept the current reading, will mean that Boaz went to the city to find the kinsman whose claim lay before his own, while Ruth, laden with six measures of barley, goes to her mother-in-law.