Why did the man called “So-and-so” say it would “ruin” his own inheritance if he married Ruth? (Ruth 4:1, 6)

If a married man in Bible times died childless, some questions needed answering: What would happen to any land he owned? Would his family name be lost forever? The Mosaic Law addressed such questions.

What happened to the land of a man who died or who became poor and sold his land? A brother or a close relative could redeem, or repurchase, that land. This would keep it within the family.​—Lev. 25:23-28; Num. 27:8-11.

How was the deceased man’s family name preserved? By means of levirate, or brother-in-law, marriage, which was used in the case of Ruth. A man would marry his brother’s widow to produce an heir who would take on the dead man’s name and inherit his property. This loving arrangement also cared for the widow.​—Deut. 25:5-7; Matt. 22:23-28.

Consider the example of Naomi. She was married to a man named Elimelech. When he and their two sons died, she was left without a breadwinner to care for her. (Ruth 1:1-5) Once back in Judah, Naomi directed her daughter-in-law Ruth to ask Boaz to act as a repurchaser of the land. He was a close relative of Elimelech. (Ruth 2:1, 19, 20; 3:1-4) But Boaz realized that another relative, whom the Bible calls “So-and-so,” was a closer relative. He thus had first claim to act as a repurchaser.​—Ruth 3:9, 12, 13.

Initially, “So-and-so” was willing to help. (Ruth 4:1-4) Although it would involve some expense, he realized that Naomi would be unable to bear a child who would inherit the land from Elimelech. The land would, in effect, be added to So-and-so’s land inheritance, so this could appear to be a good investment.

But So-and-so changed his mind when he realized that Ruth was available for remarriage. He said: “I am unable to repurchase it, for I may ruin my own inheritance.” (Ruth 4:5, 6) Why did he change his mind?

If So-and-so or someone else married Ruth and she gave birth to a son, that son would inherit Elimelech’s land. How would this “ruin” So-and-so’s “inheritance”? The Bible does not say, but here are some possible ways.

• First, the money he spent would seem to be a waste, for Elimelech’s land ultimately would not be his. It would go to Ruth’s son.

• Second, he would have the responsibility to feed and care for both Naomi and Ruth.

• Third, if Ruth bore other children by So-and-so, they would share the inheritance with any children he had.

• Fourth, if So-and-so did not have other children of his own, a son Ruth bore would have rights to both Elimelech’s and So-and-so’s land. He would thus lose his land to a child who bore Elimelech’s name, not his. So-and-so was not willing to risk his inheritance to help Naomi. He preferred to allow the next repurchaser in line, Boaz, to take on that responsibility. Boaz did so because he wanted “to restore the name of the dead man to his inheritance.”​—Ruth 4:10.

So-and-so was apparently more interested in maintaining his own name and inheritance. Selfishness dominated his thinking. But rather than preserve his name, So-and-so’s name became lost to history. He also missed out on the special privilege that Boaz received, to be listed in the line of descent leading to the Messiah, Jesus Christ. What a sad result for So-and-so because he selfishly avoided the opportunity to help someone in need!​—Matt. 1:5; Luke 3:23, 32.