Halakhah sobre Rut 4:24

Likewise, we find that in all the great events which occurred to the Jewish people, the great virtue of women was manifested, for they preceded men in choosing the path of faith. It seems, then, that masculine intellectual analysis is sufficient under normal circumstances; however, where additional spirituality and more faith are required, it is specifically the feminine attributes which are necessary. “R. Akiva preached, ‘In the merit of righteous women, the people of Israel left Egypt’” (Yalkut Shimoni, Tehilim 795, and see Rashi on Shemot 38:8). At the giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai, the women were addressed first (Rashi on Shemot 19:3, based on a midrash). Similarly, we learn how to honor the Torah from women (below, 7:1). Men even learn Torah in the merit of women’s profound insight (see Berakhot 17a and below, 7:1). Additionally, women did not participate in the sin of the Golden Calf (Pirkei De-Rabbi Eliezer §45) or the sin of the Spies (Tanḥuma Pinḥas §7). Concerning the future, the Sages say “Generations are only redeemed in the merit of its righteous women” (Midrash Zuta, Ruth 4:11).¹It seems that from the standpoint of the human intellectual virtue, men are more universal, whereas from the standpoint of the perception of the divine idea and faith, as expressed via intuitive vitality, women are more universal. Therefore, women grasp momentous historical divine processes to a greater degree.

And there is yet another [method of] acquisition of lands and movable items on a Torah level, and that is exchange. And this acquisition was formerly common in Israel. And this matter of exchange is that a man trades his beast for his fellow's beast, or one vessel for another vessel, or vessels for land. And the Sages said about all of these (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Sales 5:5) that once the first dragged the object from his fellow; his fellow possessed the other object that he wanted to acquire from him, wherever it may be. And if anything happens that destroys the object, the loss is [absorbed by the purchaser]. And the law of acquisition by exchange is only with vessels, but not with produce; as produce cannot be used for exchange (Bava Batra 47a). As behold, we found explicitly in that verse from which we learned [about] exchange, that it is with a vessel (Ruth 4:7) - "And this was formerly common in Israel, a man would remove his shoe," meaning his glove, and this is a vessel. And nevertheless, even though produce cannot be the medium of barter, with which to acquire, produce can be acquired through barter like a vessel; i.e., a person can use a vessel to acquire produce through barter - such that he he give a vessel to his fellow, and possess the produce of his fellow wherever it may be. The same is not true of coins, which can neither be bartered with nor be acquired with barter - because the mind of people is always on the imprint, and the imprint may be cancelled by the will of the king or the great ones of the states. And people do not rely upon that which is not a firm thing, to acquire with. And so it cannot be acquired in barter, nor used for barter. But a coin the value of which is not because of its imprint is acquired in barter and can be used for barter, like all other movable items. And which one is that? That is a coin that was cancelled by the monrachy - and as Reish Lakish said in the chapter [entitled] HaZahav (Bava Metzia 46b), "Even a purse filled with coins" and "Rabbi Abba translated it as anka dinars and anigera - dinars. One is that the kingdom invalidated and one is that the province invalidated."

But [in the case of] one who gives his money to his fellow to acquire produce with it, the owner of the produce is not obligated to give it to him. As this is an ordinance of the Sages, may their memory be blessed - not to acquire with money but with dragging. Nonetheless, the Sages, may their memory be blessed, made him liable [if he does not give him the produce] to receive [the curse of] 'The One who dispenses' (Bava Metzia 44a); as he went back on his word after he did an act with his fellow and took money from him. And this acquisition of exchange - which is [just] called, 'acquisition' by the Sages, may their memory be blessed - is a strong acquisition for every matter, whether for a sale, for a gift or for all of the conditions between a man and his fellow; as it is stated about it (Ruth 4:7), "to establish any matter [...] and this is a validation in Israel." And the law of who is fitting to sell and his sale stands and who is not fitting - such as a competent person and an incompetent person; the law of one who sells things undifferentiatedly and does not explain all the things that he must explain; and the law of one who leaves anything over in his sale, whether in an item or in produce; the law of the borders that a man must mention in the selling of land and what is its status if he mentioned some of them but not all of them. And the law of one who sells property that is not his; and what is the law of the one who is forced to sell his land - and the distinction between he was hung and he sold, and he was hung and he gave. And the law of one who makes a condition with his fellow that if he will want to sell his land, he will sell it to him. And the one who sells his land with the intention to do any [particular] thing and it did not come up in his hand to do it; such as one who sells it with the intention of going to the Land of Israel, and in the end he does not go there, and all that is similar to this. And that which I say, with the intention to do any [particular] thing - it is not that the seller explicitly says the thing at the time of the sale, but rather that creatures know from his deeds and his words that this is his desire (see Kiddushin 49b and Tosefot there).