In Middle of the Night

Usually we do not know. we would need a "soul expert" to be able to recognize this. In this case, however, the great Kabbalists and mystics revealed to us the reincarnation of Ruth, as explained in class 2 and 3.
By the way, the 15th century Kabbalist, the Arizal, Rabbi Isaan Luriah from Sefad, has two works "sefer hagelgulim" and "shaar hagelgulim" where he reveals many many reincarnations over the generations.

Right below the video you will notice a PDF document.

See Talmud Nedarim 37b, that it is "halacha lemoseh mesenei," part of the teachings we received orally from Moses. This means that when Moshe wrote the Sefer Torah and gave it to the Jewish people he also gave them the tradition of "keri" and "kesiv."

No, this story occurs only a few days after their arrives in Eretz Israel, from Moav. As chapter one concludes they arrive at the onset of the barley harvest and that is when Ruth chances upon the field of Boaz where they encounter each other and enjoy this conversation. It is around this time she converts to Judaism. She is thus still steeped in the vernacular of Moav.
As for earlier times, remember that her Jewish husband married a gentile woman, and the fact that Noami had to teach her the basic laws of Judaism on their way to the Holy Land (as discussed in class one), means that her home and life style was not fully Jewish.

We will explore this in upcoming classes on Ruth. Stay tuned.

You can go to "archive" section and search for your video. Or, on top of each video where the internet link is, you will see a number for the video. The numbers are in order of the videos. Type in a number you want and that video will show up.

Malka, you answered your own questions nicely. Lot’s daughter and Tamar were before Matan Torah and there was no mitzvah of mikvah. Even if you will insist that Tamar observed the Torah (as did the Avos), she may have immersed prior to the union with Yehuda.

As far as Ruth: In addition to what you have suggested, you must remember the main point, that during the night in the field Ruth and Boaz did not have intimacy. Ruth just lied near him, exposed his feet, and asked Boaz to marry her. It is clear from the reading of the verses that there was no physical relationships that night. That is why Boaz promises that the very next morning he will be able to let her know if he can marry her.

In Midrash Rabah on Ruth and in Talmud Sanhedrin 20b our sages extol Boaz for his moral integrity during the night, that despite the intense emotions that clearly existed, Boaz did not cross the boundaries of moral conduct.

The only questions may be based on the interpretation of some commentaries on the word “vayelafes” (Ruth 3:8), he was grasped, which some explain to mean that Ruth grasped Boaz. Yet they were both single at the time, and biblically speaking it was not forbidden for them to touch each other. (Even rabbinicaly it may be permitted, especially in this case where Boaz quacked from fear and Ruth held on to him. So it was not for intimate reasons.) The only issue would be if Ruth was a Niddah, yet even then, holding on to Boaz because he quacked and trembled was probably completely permissible according to Jewish law.

Yes, Sam, that is part of the answer. The remainder of the answer will be addressed in great detail in class 5.

1. The prohibition of “yechud” with a single woman, unmarried, was instituted through David and his beis din, in the aftermath of the tragic story of Amnon and Tamar (Talmud Sanhedrin 21b. Rambam Hilchos Isurei Biah 22:3).
2. Even the prohibition of Yechud with a married woman or a Nidah, the Rembam states (ibid. 22:2) that it is “bekabalah,” which some interpret to mean that it is not biblical. Yet Ruth was probably not even in this category as discussed in a previous comment.
3. They were laying together outside, in a granary, not behind closed doors. I am not sure that is included in Yechud at all.

It is a very good question—there is a seeming contradiction between two Midrashim. For both ideas are stated in Midrash Rabah on Ruth.
My answer would be this: on a conscious level she has graduated Moav culture and studied and internalized the behavior of modesty. Yet on a sub-conscious level, Moav was still part of her. Hence, in her natural conversation she gave us a “slip” which was revealing that due to her upbringing and youth something of the Moabite culture still remained in her. The fact that her casual speech she did not get that distinction was telling for the Rabbis.
If this is true, this Midrash would be another source for the concept of the subconscious emerging via verbal slips in the midrashic literature.

I am looking into your question and will answer them shortly.