Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] verb forms--perfect as future

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
  • To: michaelabernat9001 AT sbcglobal.net
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] verb forms--perfect as future
  • Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:26:17 +0100

On 13/04/2007 21:45, michaelabernat9001 AT sbcglobal.net wrote:
Peter,

I'm not sure that it was possible for Naomi to have sold the property in the manner which you are describing for two reasons. First, as I understand the inheritance rights given in Numbers 27:8-11, Naomi did not have any personal claim to the property.

This objection applies equally to the immediate future as to the past, so it can't help us decide one way or the other. The point of the law in Numbers 27:8-11 was to prevent permanent transfer of land outside the clan, but temporary sale was possible until the Year of Jubilee, compare Leviticus 25:23-25. Although the Torah may not explicitly say that widows could temporarily sell their husband's property in this way, this is surely implied by "If anyone among you becomes poor" in verse 25. It actually makes more sense to say that Naomi had sold the property earlier than to make her the seller at this time, for if the land was simply Elimelech's land left unsold since his death and Naomi had no inheritance rights, then the nearest relative would not have had to buy it as it would have been his already by inheritance.

It looks to me like Ruth 4:5 states that he had to marry Ruth to acquire the property.

Indeed. This was a kind of levirate marriage, the buyer having the duty to raise up children for Elimelech and his sons.

Second, Ruth 4:9 tells us that Boaz purchased the property directly from Naomi.

Indeed! And in 4:5. But that proves that she had inherited it! But what does MIYYAD mean in this verse? Could it mean "on behalf of"? BDB glosses QNH MIYYAD here as "acquire at the hand of", which whatever it might mean seems to be different from "buy from". Also there is the puzzle in 4:5 that MIYYAD NA`OMI is followed by UME'ET RUT, which can hardly mean "and from Ruth". Something odd is going on here which can probably be understood only in terms of now obscure rules of inheritance and redemption of property. Also there is an anomalous non-past QATAL QANITA in 4:5, but there is some textual doubt here.

--
Peter Kirk
E-mail: peter AT qaya.org
Blog: http://www.qaya.org/blog/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page