רות, פרק ד׳, פסוק ז׳

To validate transactions in ancient Israel, a specific legal and symbolic process was used. The narrative pauses to explain this practice from the distant past [אבן עזרא, ביאור שטיינזלץ]. The origins of this procedure are viewed in several ways. Some see it as an ancient custom that eventually gained the force of binding law [אלשיך, אגרת שמואל], or as a regional ordinance rather than a law originating at Sinai [צפנת פענח]. In the earliest generations, a person's word was an absolute bond; verbal agreements were sufficient, and there was no need for physical acts of acquisition or witnesses. However, as times changed and trust waned, this physical, symbolic act became necessary [אגרת שמואל]. Another perspective suggests that this method was originally practiced during the days of Joshua but was later replaced by other rituals, such as a ceremony meant to publicly shame someone who sold his ancestral estate or entered an inappropriate marriage. Boaz deliberately revived this older practice to prevent any misunderstandings or offense to Ruth's honor [מלבי״ם]. Alternatively, it was a profound biblical law that had been forgotten over time due to the actions of transgressors, and Boaz took the opportunity to restore it to its former glory [אגרת שמואל].

The procedure was applied to various types of transactions, ranging from standard sales involving money to barter agreements where objects were exchanged [רש״י, תורה תמימה]. Historically, the custom began with common monetary sales, expanded to include barter, and ultimately became the standard method to finalize and make irreversible all forms of negotiation [אגרת שמואל, רלב״ג, ביאור שטיינזלץ]. The physical act itself involved one party removing his footwear and handing it to the other. This action established the legal principle that a transaction is finalized by drawing an object toward oneself. The object used only needed to meet a minimal size requirement of at least three by three fingers and could be of little monetary value, provided it was not an item from which deriving benefit is forbidden [תורה תמימה]. While the item exchanged is generally understood to be a literal shoe, some interpret it as a glove or a pouch [צאינה וראינה, אשכול הכופר].

A central point of discussion among commentators is determining which party provided the item to finalize the sale. One approach maintains that the transaction was executed using the buyer's property. In this scenario, Boaz, acting as the buyer, removed his shoe and gave it to the redeemer as a pledge. The opposing view asserts that the transfer required the seller's property, meaning the redeemer handed his shoe to Boaz to symbolize the transfer of rights [רש״י, אשכול הכופר]. It is suggested that Boaz specifically insisted on performing the act himself to establish a permanent legal precedent that acquisitions should be made using the buyer's vessel [אלשיך]. Ultimately, the process required formal testimony to confirm the action [רש״י, אבן עזרא, ביאור שטיינזלץ]. Because the redeemer was a simple man who would not rely on a verbal agreement alone and demanded a concrete act of acquisition, Boaz ensured that the entire exchange was firmly backed by witnesses [אגרת שמואל]. This final confirmation marked the transition of the practice from a mere historical custom into a permanent and binding law in Israel [אלשיך, אגרת שמואל].