Ruth 4:7

It was an old custom that if a groom wished to divorce his bride he took off his sandal and this was the sign of the divorce. Consequently, he was ordered to take off his sandals, lest he approach the church wearing sandals like a …

All things - That is, in all alienation of lands. So that it is no wonder if this ceremony differ a little from that, Deut. xxv, 9, because that concerned only one case, but this is more general.

The ceremony here used was, he that surrendered plucked off his shoe (the Chaldee says it was the glove of his right hand ) and gave it to him to whom he made the surrender, intimating thereby that, whatever right he had to tread or go upon the land, he conveyed and transferred it, upon a valuable consideration, to the purchaser: this was a testimony in Israel,

Now this was the manner in former time in Israel concerning redeeming,....

A man plucked off his shoe - The law of such a case is given at large in Deu 25:5-9. It was simply this: If a brother, who had married a wife, died without children, the eldest brother was to take the widow, and raise up a family to the brother deceased; and he had a right to redeem the inheritance, if it had been alienated. But if the person who had the right of redemption would not take the woman, she was to pull off his shoe and spit in his face, and he was ever after considered as a disgraced man. In the present case the shoe only is taken off, probably because the circumstances of the man were such as to render it improper for him to redeem the ground and take Ruth to his wife; and because of this reasonable excuse, the contemptuous part of the ceremony is omitted. See the note on Deu 25:9.