The final section of Chapter 1 deals with the parting between Naomi and her daughters-in-law, and her return to Beit Lechem. Before delving into the explanation, we must raise three difficulties that arise from the plain meaning of the verses, upon which the entire explanation will be built.
The first difficulty: Naomi's actions appear perplexing. Ruth wants to convert, yet Naomi turns her away. Consider how much effort is demanded of her: "Wherever you go, I will go," "Your people shall be my people, and your God my God," "And there I will be buried." Is this much truly demanded of every prospective convert? Certainly not. Here is a soul yearning to attach herself to the heritage of Hashem, yet Naomi insists on turning her away.
The second difficulty: Naomi says to Ruth, "Behold, your sister-in-law has returned to her people and to her gods; return after your sister-in-law." Is a non-Jew permitted to worship idols? Idol worship is, after all, one of the Seven Noahide Laws. Is it conceivable that Naomi would tell her: Behold, your sister-in-law has returned to her people and to her gods - all honor to her, go as well? How could she say such a thing to her?
The third difficulty: "And she saw that she was determined to go with her, so she ceased speaking to her." What exactly did she see? Note the precise wording: it does not say, "and she heard her arguments," but rather "and she saw" - seeing, not hearing. She saw something tangible, saw that she was exerting herself, and therefore ceased speaking to her. What was that decisive turning point, the final stroke from which she understood that she could now remain silent and accept her, and that Ruth was indeed worthy of joining the heritage of Hashem?
It is well known that every person has aspirations. If we reflected our aspirations, we would all be the greatest sages of the generation today. A person says: Tomorrow, God willing, I will wake up at sunrise, then sit and learn for two hours, then go to the mikveh. But in reality? At ten in the morning he is still rolling over in bed. Where is the sunrise? Where are the two hours of study? Where is the mikveh? Nothing. In our aspirations, we are all great tzaddikim; the problem begins when translating that aspiration into the world of action. It is there that aspirations shatter against the rock of reality.
When does a person truly demonstrate his divine service? When he serves the Holy One, blessed be He, amid hardship. When he faces a trial and withstands it - that is the proof of his love of Hashem. But if he serves only when it is convenient and everything is easy and smooth, there is still no proof that he truly loves Hashem and is a genuine servant of Hashem. This was precisely the argument of the Satan against Iyov: Master of the Universe, "Does Iyov fear God for nothing?" It pays off for him, it is comfortable, You showered him with every blessing - why wouldn't he serve God?
What has characterized and distinguished the Jewish people from the dawn of history, from Avraham Avinu until today, is self-sacrifice, exertion, and serving Hashem not out of comfort and tranquility, but out of hardship and struggle. The Gemara in Sanhedrin 96a states: If for the reward of four steps that I paid to that wicked man who ran for My honor - Nevuchadnezzar - he received four generations of kingship, are you surprised when I reward Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov, who ran before Me like horses? Notice how the Holy One, blessed be He, defines the Patriarchs: they ran before Me like horses. Have you ever seen a horse after a sprint, sweating and panting? That is how the holy Patriarchs were.
Yaakov Avinu sought to dwell in tranquility, yet the ordeal of Yosef pounced upon him. Why? Because this world is not meant for the tranquility and rest of the righteous. All spiritual levels are acquired through effort, self-sacrifice, and struggle. The entirety of Am Yisrael was forged through struggle, battles, and exertion. Yaakov testifies about himself: "Thus I was: by day scorching heat consumed me, and frost by night, and sleep fled from my eyes" - his entire life was hardship and pain. Closeness to the Holy One, blessed be He, is not acquired through rest and quiet, but solely through toil and struggle.
And so, a non-Jew arrives and wants to join as a full-fledged member of the "club" known as the Jewish people. We ask him: Sir, are your intentions sincere? Do you truly want to join us? Prove it. Prove that you are willing to exert effort for this; prove that you are ready to face the challenges. Perhaps you are coming only because it is pleasant and comfortable here, and that is why you seek to convert.
It is well known that converts were not accepted in the days of Shlomo, because life was exceedingly comfortable for the Jewish people then, every man under his vine and under his fig tree - and thus there was no proof that the convert came to take shelter under the wings of Hashem's heritage; perhaps he merely saw the exalted state of Israel and sought comfort. Likewise in the future, in the Messianic era, converts will not be accepted: when times are good for us, joining requires no great virtue. We want him to demonstrate self-sacrifice, for the very foundations of the Jewish people rest upon self-sacrifice, upon facing challenges, and upon toil and exertion.
וַתִּשֶּׂנָה קוֹלָן וַתִּבְכֶּינָה עוֹד, וַתִּשַּׁק עָרְפָּה לַחֲמוֹתָהּ, וְרוּת דָּבְקָה בָּהּ׃ - And they lifted up their voice and wept again; and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Rut clung to her.
וַתֹּאמֶר: הִנֵּה שָׁבָה יְבִמְתֵּךְ אֶל עַמָּהּ וְאֶל אֱלֹהֶיהָ, שׁוּבִי אַחֲרֵי יְבִמְתֵּךְ׃ - And she said: "Behold, your sister-in-law has returned to her people and to her gods; return after your sister-in-law."
How does Naomi test Rut? She says to her: Return to your people and to your gods. It is as if she were saying: I suspect you might be like those people whose declarations of intent are very impressive - "I want to," "With Hashem's help I will do it," "I have resolved" - yet it is all talk, with nothing of substance in action. And how can I verify this? Look at your sister-in-law. Just a moment earlier, she too said, "We will return with you to your people"; she spoke just like you, yet a moment later she returned to her people and to her gods as well. Do you see how swift the fall can be? I am not moved by talk alone. Perhaps you are just like her.
Therefore, when she says to her, "Return after your sister-in-law," her intention is certainly not, Heaven forbid, to tell her to go and worship idols, nor to reject a prospective convert. Rather, her intention is: Perhaps you, too, are like her, and if so, follow your sister-in-law. It is an examination. Let us see if you are truly sincere, or if you actually wish to follow her back and are merely embarrassed to say so. And then Naomi truly sees that Rut is exerting herself, and from this she realizes that her intentions are genuine. But what was that exertion she observed?
The Vilna Gaon offers a wonderful explanation, and these are his words: The matter is that the yetzer hara resembles a fly and sits between the portals of the heart. This means that the yetzer hatov advises only toward a mitzvah, whereas the yetzer hara incites toward sins. That is to say, the yetzer hatov comes and advises you: Perform a mitzvah, it is worthwhile for you. But the yetzer hara does not merely advise; it also entices a person to commit sins. And if it sees that it cannot overcome him, it entices him to perform a mitzvah wrapped in several transgressions.
In other words: it suggested a sin to you, saw that you refused, and then said: Forget about sins, that does not work with you; I have a mitzvah for you instead. And it finds you mitzvot through which you embarrass this person, cause harm to that person, and arouse resentment from another, all under the cloak of a mitzvah, all wrapped in the guise of doing the will of Hashem. This is the way of the yetzer hara.
If so, how can a person know whether the mitzvah he is about to perform originates from the yetzer hara dragging him into sin under the guise of a mitzvah? For example, it tells you to wake up early in the morning - and by doing so, you wake up the entire household, rob them of sleep, and leave everyone unable to function later, all supposedly for the sake of a mitzvah.
Regarding this, the Vilna Gaon shares a profound insight: One who wishes to test his advisor, whether it stems from the yetzer hatov or the yetzer hara, should examine himself at the moment of performing the mitzvah. If his limbs move with spontaneous eagerness and alacrity at that time to perform the mitzvah, it is presumably from the counsel of the yetzer hara. For how could it be that the heavy bodily limbs, whose foundation is dust and whose nature is to follow bodily desires that pull ever downward like the nature of earth, should suddenly be clothed in enthusiastic willingness to act? This can only be the counsel of the yetzer hara so that he will later be caught in its net. But if, despite the inner yearning of his soul to draw close to its Maker through the performance of mitzvot, the limbs of the body feel heavy and sluggish, it is apparent that this is the natural course, as the yetzer hara clothes itself within the physical limbs, seeking to hold them back from fulfilling the mitzvah.
A practical example: You are on your way to a two-hour shiur followed by a chavrusa, and someone suggests driving right now to visit the graves of tzaddikim; your wife agrees, and time-wise everything fits. Which is preferable - the graves of tzaddikim or the shiur? On one hand, Torah study, and how could one neglect Torah? On the other hand, prayer and salvation for the community and the individual. How should one decide? Ask yourself one question: What do I feel like doing? If you feel like going to the graves of tzaddikim, stay and sit in the shiur. That is a sign it is coming from the yetzer hara. If you feel drawn to do one thing, go and do the other, for the feeling of "what I feel like" comes from the yetzer hara. If it were truly a mitzvah, where would this sudden enthusiasm come from? After all, when a person realizes that a mitzvah is at hand, the yetzer hara suffuses his body: suddenly he is tired, he has no desire, he has no strength, and it feels difficult. The yetzer hara sits between the two chambers of the heart and spreads throughout his body - so if you suddenly feel a burst of enthusiasm, examine very carefully whether it is truly a mitzvah.
A story is told about Rav Chaim of Volozhin. When he sought to establish his yeshivah, he approached the Vilna Gaon with great enthusiasm, telling him about the idea, the yeshivah, his plans, and what it would look like. He noticed that the Gaon did not share his excitement. He asked: What does the Rav say? The Gaon replied: I suggest that you drop it. Rav Chaim was deeply pained by this - why could the Gaon not see what he saw, what an incredible opportunity this was to magnify Torah?
A year later, he returned to him: I spoke with the Rav a year ago about the yeshivah; I am still thinking about it, perhaps it is worthwhile after all. The Gaon said to him: Go, do it, and may you succeed. And so he founded the great Yeshivah of Volozhin, the mother of all yeshivos, the blueprint for all subsequent yeshivos down to this day.
Afterward, he asked his rebbe, the Gra: Why did the Rav tell me no the first time, but today said yes? What changed? The Gaon replied: Last time you came with immense enthusiasm and tremendous passion, and that is not natural for a mitzvah. A person setting out to perform a mitzvah does not feel that kind of natural passion and fervor, and so I was doubtful whether it stemmed from a holy source, whether it was purely for the sake of Heaven. Generally, a mitzvah does not come with easy enthusiasm; a mitzvah comes with heaviness, with difficulty, where a person must exert effort and break the body's resistance in order to perform it. I suspected that this fire might not be a holy fire. But the second time, you came with composure, with contemplation, thoughtfully considering the challenges and difficulties the yeshivah would face - and when I saw that you approached it with sober deliberation, I knew you were acting from the power of the Yetzer Tov.
Based on this principle, the Gra also explains the story of Reish Lakish. The Gemara relates that while he was still a bandit, he possessed extraordinary athletic strength. There was a river, and he would run and leap from one bank to the other in a jump that an ordinary person could never accomplish. Rabbi Yochanan saw this and was astonished, saying to him: "Your strength is suited for the Torah!" - your power belongs in the study of Torah.
And why did Reish Lakish jump? Because he saw Rabbi Yochanan, who was extraordinarily handsome and had no beard, and mistook him for a woman, leaping across believing there was a beautiful woman there. When he arrived and saw it was a man, he was disappointed. Rabbi Yochanan said to him: "Your strength is suited for the Torah." Reish Lakish replied: "Your beauty is suited for women." Rabbi Yochanan then realized what occupied the mind of this bandit chief and said to him: "I have a sister who is more beautiful than I am; if you come and immerse yourself in Torah, I will give you my sister in marriage." There are opinions cited in Seder HaDorot that Reish Lakish had once learned and then abandoned it - that he originally studied Torah, later left and became a bandit, and Rabbi Yochanan brought him back.
Either way, the Gemara states: he accepted upon himself. But when he subsequently attempted to leap back to the other side of the river, he fell short in the middle and could not make it across. What happened? What you did effortlessly for thirty years, suddenly you cannot do? The well-known explanation is that Torah weakens a person's physical strength, and once he accepted the yoke of Torah, it sapped his strength. Yet according to the Gra, there is no need for that explanation: all those leaps from bank to bank - where did the power come from? From the Yetzer Hara. The evil inclination provides tremendous strength. But the moment he needed to jump back - and jump back for what? For a mitzvah. Where would a person get easy strength for a mitzvah? A mitzvah demands exertion, struggle, hardship, and the investment of all one's power. He reached the midpoint and fell; he was unable to cross. Now it was a matter of a mitzvah, and the Yetzer Hara was no longer propelling him; on the contrary, the Yetzer Hara pours lead into one's limbs, making it impossible to move.
וַתֹּאמֶר רוּת: אַל תִּפְגְּעִי בִי לְעָזְבֵךְ לָשׁוּב מֵאַחֲרָיִךְ, כִּי אֶל אֲשֶׁר תֵּלְכִי אֵלֵךְ וּבַאֲשֶׁר תָּלִינִי אָלִין, עַמֵּךְ עַמִּי וֵאלֹהַיִךְ אֱלֹהָי׃ בַּאֲשֶׁר תָּמוּתִי אָמוּת וְשָׁם אֶקָּבֵר, כֹּה יַעֲשֶׂה יְהֹוָה לִי וְכֹה יוֹסִיף כִּי הַמָּוֶת יַפְרִיד בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵךְ׃ - And Ruth said, "Do not urge me to leave you, to turn back from following you; for wherever you go, I will go, and wherever you lodge, I will lodge; your people are my people, and your God is my God. Where you die, I will die, and there will I be buried; may Hashem do so to me and more, if anything but death separates me from you."
וַתֵּרֶא כִּי מִתְאַמֶּצֶת הִיא לָלֶכֶת אִתָּהּ, וַתֶּחְדַּל לְדַבֵּר אֵלֶיהָ׃ - And she saw that she was exerting herself to go with her, and she ceased speaking to her.
This is what is written here: "And she saw that she was exerting herself to go." Naomi said to herself: How can this be? I, Naomi, am an old woman, while Ruth, my daughter-in-law, is young - yet I walk with ease, while she is straining with every step; the journey is so hard on her. Therefore it says, "And she saw": she observed her closely and saw that the walking was difficult for her. And if the journey is difficult for her, it must be that this is a matter of a mitzvah. There must truly be a pure will and intention here to attach herself and join the heritage of Hashem. And if so, "she ceased speaking to her." If there is real exertion, if it comes with difficulty, it is a sign that it is truly a mitzvah.
As is well known regarding the ram of Avraham Avinu, "and behold, behind him a ram caught in the thicket by its horns." Chazal ask: How did Avraham know that this was the ram? Avraham reasoned: If this ram is from the realm of holiness - it gets tangled, it is caught in the thicket by its horns. Had it been a ram from the sitra achra (the side of impurity), it would have already come and stood right beside me, its neck bared for slaughter. Everything holy always involves difficulties; it always comes with struggles. Something impure goes easily.
Therefore, the holy Zohar states: A matter of holiness costs money, while the sitra achra comes free of charge. A holy endeavor requires investing money; it requires effort. The Zohar further says: If they bring you a mitzvah for free, do not take it, for the external forces hold sway over it - pay for it. If someone comes and tells you, "Here is an etrog from the tree, take it," tell him: "I do not want it for free. Take even ten shekels, but not for free." Why? Because over what is free, the external forces hold sway; free comes easily. A mitzvah, on the other hand, demands investment and struggle. This is how the Vilna Gaon explains it.
וַתֵּלַכְנָה שְׁתֵּיהֶם עַד בּוֹאָנָה בֵּית לָחֶם, וַיְהִי כְּבוֹאָנָה בֵּית לֶחֶם וַתֵּהֹם כָּל הָעִיר עֲלֵיהֶן וַתֹּאמַרְנָה: הֲזֹאת נָעֳמִי׃ - So the two of them went until they came to Beit Lechem. And it came to pass, when they came to Beit Lechem, that all the city was stirred up concerning them, and they said: "Is this Naomi?"
The Midrash notes: Since she resolved to convert, Scripture equated her to Naomi. What is meant by "the two of them" (shteihem)? In full equality and alignment. Whenever the Torah writes "both of them" or "the three of them" - as in "and the two of them went together" - the intention is like one person with one heart, demonstrating complete equality. Here too, "So the two of them went" comes to teach that Scripture equated them in their shared intention for the sake of Heaven.
The Malbim adds another explanation: It is possible that "the two of them" comes to explain why "all the city was stirred." In the past, whenever Naomi went anywhere, she was accompanied by manservants and maidservants, members of her household and attendants; she never walked alone. And here, suddenly they are walking and people look: only the two of them, just two solitary women, without any of the retinue that had always accompanied them. "So the two of them went" - and that in itself caused "all the city to be stirred."
And what is meant by "all the city"? How did the entire town become stirred up on their account? The Midrash explains: The town was astir because everyone had gathered to bury the wife of Boaz, who died on that very day. Boaz's wife had passed away that day, and there was a massive funeral. Cemeteries were typically located outside the town. As everyone was walking out, they suddenly saw Rut and Naomi. After all, realistically, could Naomi have made the rounds to every house in town for everyone to be astonished? Rather, everyone was already gathered together for the funeral, and right at that moment, they saw them.
Chazal further explain: What is the meaning of "all the city was stirred"? They said: "Is this Naomi, who was accustomed to travel in covered litters and on mules? Look at what happened to her because she left for outside the Land!" In other words, she had always traveled with an honor guard, and now look at what leaving the Land of Israel brought upon her.
וַתֹּאמֶר אֲלֵיהֶן: אַל תִּקְרֶאנָה לִי נָעֳמִי, קְרֶאןָ לִי מָרָא, כִּי הֵמַר שַׁדַּי לִי מְאֹד׃ - And she said to them: "Do not call me Naomi; call me Mara, for the Almighty has dealt very bitterly with me."
אֲנִי מְלֵאָה הָלַכְתִּי וְרֵיקָם הֱשִׁיבַנִי יְהֹוָה, לָמָּה תִקְרֶאנָה לִי נָעֳמִי וַיהֹוָה עָנָה בִי וְשַׁדַּי הֵרַע לִי׃ - "I went out full, and Hashem has brought me back empty; why should you call me Naomi, when Hashem has testified against me, and the Almighty has brought misfortune upon me?"
These two verses are deliberately read together, as the second verse appears to duplicate and repeat the first: "Do not call me Naomi" - which she then echoes with "Why should you call me Naomi?" and "For the Almighty has dealt very bitterly with me" - which corresponds to "and the Almighty has brought misfortune upon me." Why does she repeat her words?
The Malbim explains this through a parable: Consider a person who was immensely wealthy and became merely wealthy - he had fifty billion and was left with half a billion. Of such a person we say that he lost his fortune and collapsed. But I cannot say this without first mentioning how much he was once worth, for half a billion is a very respectable fortune, would that any of us had it. To understand the magnitude of the fall of someone who still has something left, one must mention what he had beforehand. In contrast, someone who has reached the point of utter destitution and has literally nothing - there is no need to mention his former wealth to understand his plight, for by any standard and every metric, what he has is meager, because he has nothing at all.
And this is what the Malbim explains: When they saw her arriving on foot, without even a donkey to ride upon and without servants to attend to her, coming with only the clothes on her back in terrible poverty, the townspeople thought: Perhaps the situation is not so dire, for perhaps she had previously possessed hundreds of thousands, and today only tens of thousands remain; perhaps she still retains jewelry, diamonds, and silver, for she was once a woman of great wealth. Therefore they said, "Is this Naomi?" - meaning, to understand her situation today one must mention who she was in the past, for even if she still has something today, her status has fallen relative to what it once was.
Naomi comes and corrects them: Do not be mistaken, and do not think that I brought diamonds and jewelry, silver and gold with me, and do not think that I am poor only in relation to my former state. Know that today I am poor by every parameter and every measure, in a condition where there is no need to recall my former state to describe who I am today. Therefore: "Do not call me Naomi" - there is no need to recall my previous standing to grasp my current state. "Call me Mara [bitter]" - it is enough to mention that today I am in bitterness and utmost poverty, and that suffices, "for the Almighty has dealt very bitterly with me." And the proof: "I went away full, and the Lord has brought me back empty" - empty, having nothing in hand. Does one need to mention my former wealth to understand the tragedy of my fate? I have neither diamonds nor jewelry in my pocket. Therefore, "Why should you call me Naomi?" - you can call me Mara, poor and destitute, even without mentioning the name Naomi that belonged to me in the time of my success.
Thus far Naomi argued that there is no need to recall her former condition. Now she adds further: Not only is there no need, but it is entirely inappropriate to call me by the name Naomi, for even my former state, that wealth and success, if I reflect upon it today - calling it success is simply incorrect.
Why? The Malbim explains: Often the Holy One, blessed be He, elevates and magnifies a person, bringing him to immense wealth, so that afterwards, when He casts him down, the fall will be all the more painful and severe. "He makes nations great, and destroys them" - Hakadosh Baruch Hu exalts a nation in order to cast it down afterward. So too it says: "Though his stature mount up to the heavens, and his head reach unto the clouds, like his dung he shall perish forever," and Ovadiah said: "Though you set your nest among the stars, from there will I bring you down" - so that the downfall will be all the greater.
If so, Naomi tells them: Now I understand that all the exaltation with which Hashem elevated me before was not for the sake of my success, neither pleasantness nor a high level of happiness and honor, but on the contrary - so that the fall that followed would be more agonizing. "I went away full" - why? So that "Hashem has brought me back empty." Now I understand that all the happiness and honor that Hashem gave me previously was only so that He would afterward bring me back empty, and I would feel the stark difference between what was then and what is now.
It emerges that the progression of the two verses is as follows: The first verse comes to say that there is no need to recall the past to understand the tragedy of my situation today, for my situation is terrible in its own right, even without mentioning the past. And the second verse comes to say: And if you nonetheless wish to mention the past, to say that once things were truly good for me - there is no point in that, for it has now become clear to me that even then it was not truly good for me, for all that prosperity was not for my benefit, but to cast me down now, so that the fall would be that much harsher.
"And Hashem has testified against me" - what does this mean? That elevating me only to cast me down was intended to rebuke me; Hashem rebuked me and chastised me through this. As if to say: I lifted you higher and higher in order to cast you down from on high, so that you would take mussar and realize that your conduct toward the poor was corrupt. And from this follows, "and the Almighty has brought misfortune upon me" - for has it now become clear that the goodness He bestowed upon me was truly for good? No, the Almighty brought misfortune upon me, for all of that earlier goodness was only for the sake of the fall that would follow, so that it would be far more agonizing.
Chazal further comment on her statement, "Call me Mara" - Mara is spelled with an alef (מרא), whereas ostensibly it should have been written with a heh (מרה). This teaches that she was bereft of four things: her husband, her two sons, and the miscarried fetus, as we mentioned earlier.
וַתָּשָׁב נָעֳמִי וְרוּת הַמּוֹאֲבִיָּה כַלָּתָהּ עִמָּהּ הַשָּׁבָה מִשְּׂדֵי מוֹאָב, וְהֵמָּה בָּאוּ בֵּית לֶחֶם בִּתְחִלַּת קְצִיר שְׂעֹרִים׃ - So Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabitess her daughter-in-law with her, who returned from the country of Moab; and they came to Beit Lechem at the beginning of the barley harvest.
Here Scripture clarifies why Ruth went to gather the gifts of the poor. After all, Naomi had a field - as we noted, which she was meant to inherit. Therefore, the verse specifies that this was at the beginning of the barley harvest. At the beginning of the barley harvest, it is impossible to sow the field, for it is not the planting season but on the contrary, the harvest season. Consequently, even though she owned a field, she had nothing to eat from it. She therefore had no choice but to go and glean in the fields of Israel, so that she would have a means of sustenance.
The conclusion of Chapter 1 teaches us two major foundations. First: Naomi did not push Ruth away, Heaven forbid, but rather tested her. For the entire edifice of the Jewish people is built upon self-sacrifice, exertion, and struggle - "they ran before Me like horses" - and therefore converts are not accepted in times of ease and prosperity. When Naomi saw with her own eyes, and not merely with her ears, that the walking was arduous for the young Ruth while she, the elderly woman, walked with ease, she understood, based on the principle of the Vilna Gaon, that matters of holiness come with heaviness and difficulty, and that Ruth's intentions were completely pure - and "she ceased speaking to her." Second: Naomi's words to the women of Beit Lechem teach that there was no need to recall her past to recognize her utter poverty, and moreover, that even that former "success" was not truly good, but rather a preparation for her downfall and a rebuke from Hashem. All of this brings us to the beginning of the barley harvest, to the field from which there is nothing to eat, and to Ruth's gleaning in the fields of Israel, from which the salvation will open up.