| D | e | dicati |
|---|
(11) And Naomi said, Turn again, my daughters ; why will ye go with me?... (12) .. .go your way... (14) And they lifted up their voice, and wept again, and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law; but Ruth clave unto her. (15) And she said, Behold thy sister-in-law is gone back unto her people, and unto her gods ; return thou after thy sister-in-law. (16) And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave them ; or to return from following after thee; for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge ; thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God.
(17) Where thou diest, will I die, and there will be buried; the LORD do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me. ”
I know how, when we used to read the Bible together, you would be affected by the sweetness and pathos of this passage. While you will be glad to read it again you will, I am sure, ask me what made me recall it in this connection. I wonder if you remember the occasion when we fell into discussion about the value of Ruth’s statement “ Thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God.” I have a clear memory of it and can well recall our difference of opinion. You maintained that its value lay in giving expression to the true sentiments appropriate to a perfect wife. I put forth the view that the passage had a sociological value and its true interpretation was the one given by Prof. Smith, namely, that it helped to distinguish modern society from ancient society. Ruth’s statement “Thy people shall be my people and thy God my God” defined ancient society by its most dominant characteristic namely that it was a society of man plus God while modern society is a society of men only (pray remember that in men I include women also). My view was not then acceptable to you. But you were interested enough to urge me to write a book on this theme. I promised to do so. For as an oriental I belong to a society which is still ancient and in which God is a much more important member than man is. The part of the conversation which is important to me at this stage is the promise I then made to dedicate the book to you if I succeeded in writing one. Prof. Smith’s interpretation had opened a new vista before me and I had every hope of carrying out my intention. The chances of developing the theme in a book form are now very remote. As you know, I am drawn in the vortex of politics which leaves no time for literary pursuits. I do not know when I shall be out of it. The feeling of failure to fulfil my promise has haunted me ever since the war started. Equally distressing was the fear that you might pass away as a war casualty and not be there to receive it if I were to have time to complete it. But the unexpected has happened. There you are, out of the throes of death. Here is a book ready awaiting dedication. This happy conjunction of two such events has suggested to me the idea that rather than postpone it indefinitely I might redeem my word, by dedicating this book which I have succeeded in bringing to completion. Though different in theme it is not an unworthy substitute. Will you accept it ?
B. R. A.
To,
B.R.A.F. F.
In Thy Presence is the Fulness of Joy.