Difficult Conversation #6: Naomi and Ruth

Ruth: From Alienation to Monarchy by Dr. Yael Ziegler
Why Does Naomi Send Away Her Daughters-in-Law?
Why does Naomi exert so much effort to convince her daughters-in-law not to accompany her back to Bethlehem? In examining the question of Naomi’s motivation, three distinct approaches emerge in rabbinic sources: Naomi’s compassion for her daughters-in-law, Naomi’s genuine desire that they not accompany her, and Naomi’s contrived scenario, concocted to prepare the women for potential conversion.

1. Approach A: Compassion

One approach regards Naomi’s actions as altruistic, stemming from her affection and concern for her daughters-in-law. Indeed, the content of her speech indicates this, as she bestows multiple blessings upon them, wishing them all the best in their anticipated new homes. Naomi’s tone likewise conveys fondness, as may be evidenced by her threefold use of the word, “benotai” (or venotai), “my daughters,” to refer to her daughters-in-law. Indeed, it is possible that Naomi treats her daughters-in-law as though they are her own beloved children, sending them home to find husbands out of concern for their future.
A midrash displays this approach, assuming that Naomi sends them away for altruistic reasons:
“Do not my daughters (al benotai).” [This means:] Woe to my daughters (alelai benotai). “For I am very bitter for you (mikem),” meaning, on your behalf. “For [the hand of God] has gone out against me,” and [against my] sons and my husband. (Ruth Rabba 2:17)
The Targum (1:13) adopts a similar approach:
Please my daughters, do not embitter my soul, for it is more bitter for me than for you, for the blow has gone out against me from before the Lord.
2. Approach B: Distance
Nevertheless, as noted previously, Naomi’s assumption that her daughters-in-law are acting in a self-serving manner could be an indication that the relationship is not altogether loving. This may be supported by a careful reading of Naomi’s final words, those that precipitate Orpah’s acquiescence to return to Moav:
For I am very bitter from you (mikem), for the hand of God has gone out against me. (Ruth 1:13)
These two statements appear to be connected. Naomi may be claiming that her bitterness has been caused by her daughters-in-law, who are somehow responsible for the divine punishment.
We have already seen two different translations of the word mikem, “for you,” and “more than you.” The Zohar suggests a third possibility: “because of you.”[6]
Why does it say mikem? R. Kronia said in the name of R. (Kahana): I am bitter in my heart because of you, for you caused my sons to die. (Zohar Chadash, Ruth 37a)
In the final moments, in a bid to convince her daughters-in-law not to accompany her, Naomi hurls a bitter accusation at them. She blames them for her wretched situation. Had they not married Machlon and Khilyon, God would not have become angry at her sons, killing them and engendering her miserable state.[7]
Another midrash likewise assumes that Naomi genuinely does not want her daughters-in-law to accompany her, albeit for different reasons:
“And Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law, [‘Go, return’].” Why is she sending them back? So that she should not be embarrassed by them. (Ruth Zuta 1)
This midrash continues by explaining that foreigners were easily recognizable by their dress. Naomi’s return to Bethlehem with two Moavite daughters-in-law in tow certainly could have made her homecoming more difficult. It may be for this reason that Naomi objected so strenuously to the company of her daughters-in-law upon her return to Bethlehem.
The possibility that Naomi genuinely did not want her daughters-in-law to return with her may be supported by Naomi’s reaction to Ruth’s unwavering declaration that she intends to remain with her mother-in-law at all cost. Naomi does not embrace Ruth or utter words of kindness or support. In fact, she remains totally silent in the wake of Ruth’s dramatic pronouncement of loyalty. Instead, the verse states that “she ceased to speak with her.” The word to cease, chadal, suggests a deliberate action on Naomi’s part, a cessation of communication.
In the final scene of the chapter, it is clear that Ruth’s presence in no way alleviates Naomi’s bitterness, as evidenced by Naomi’s second description of herself as bitter (Ruth 1:20). Strikingly, Naomi describes the emptiness of her return without a single reference to Ruth. In fact, no one pays any attention at all to Ruth: “And the entire city converged upon them and they said, ‘Is that Naomi?’” (Ruth 1:19). It is possible that the townspeople ignore Ruth deliberately, motivated by xenophobia. Alternatively, Ruth simply goes unnoticed in the excitement and confusion of Naomi’s return. Perhaps, however, the townspeople simply pick up on Naomi’s cue, and do not regard Ruth as particularly connected to Naomi, given the manner in which Naomi ignores her companion.
3. Approach C: Naomi’s Bid to Convert Ruth
Many midrashim regard the entire scenario in which Naomi dissuades her daughters-in-law from accompanying her as a halakhic formality, a trial to see whether or not the women really intend to join the Jewish nation. This is a prelude to the process of conversion.
“Return, my daughters, go.” R. Shemuel bar Nachmani said in the name of R. Yudan Bar Hanina: In three places, it is written here, “return, return, return.”[8] This is parallel to the three times that one pushes away the potential convert. If he persists more than that, one accepts him. (Ruth Rabba 2:16)
Another midrash reverses the meaning of Naomi’s thrice repeated use of the word “return”:
Naomi says, “Return, my daughters.” Return, return in repentance (shuvu, shuvu be-teshuva). (Zohar Chadash, Acharei Mot 78a)
In this interpretation, the entire scenario is contrived to facilitate the conversion of the daughters-in-law. Indeed, as we shall see in the next shiur, this is the way in which several midrashim regard Naomi’s conversation with Ruth following Orpah’s departure. Rashi views the phrase, “And she ceased to speak with her,” as a legal component of the conversion process. He concludes that there is a point at which Naomi no longer has a right to continue to dissuade Ruth from converting:
“And she ceased to speak to her” – From here they said: You should not be excessive with [the convert] and you should not be too strict with [the convert]. (Rashi, Ruth 1:18)
Conclusion
We have seen three different approaches as to why Naomi attempts to dissuade her daughters-in-law from accompanying her. The first approach suggests that Naomi is motivated by genuine concern for the welfare of Orpah and Ruth. The second approach proposes that Naomi genuinely does not want her daughters-in-law to accompany her, whether because she is angry with them or embarrassed by them. The third approach regards this as a scenario, designed to test the sincerity of Ruth and Orpah in order to facilitate their conversion.
The ambiguities regarding Naomi’s incentive for discouraging her daughters-in-law are as striking as the previously noted ambiguities regarding Naomi’s desire to return to Bethlehem. They present competing perceptions of Naomi’s character, her piety, and her inner world.[9] This complexity exists both in the biblical portrayal of Naomi as well as the rabbinic representation. In fact, these biblical and rabbinic texts depict Naomi as a three-dimensional character, defined by the intricacies and multiple motivations inherent in all people.