Covering one's feet

[Vort]

Just reading the following LDS.net article:

http://lds.net/blog/faith/scripture/women-in-the-scriptures/abigail-stood-david/#comment-65256

It occurs to me that most people don't realize that "covering one's feet" is a euphemism for defecating. To perform the act, one would squat down, thus making his robes (which normally fell to mid-calf or sometimes to the ankles) touch the ground and cover his feet, while he did his business. This was Saul's position, humiliating and essentially helpless, that David did not take advantage of, but instead cut off part of his robe to show that he could have slaughtered Saul, had that been his intent (as Saul kept endlessly claiming to justify his own paranoid and murderous rage against David).

So, for the record: Saul's "covering his feet" did not involve taking a nap in a cave. It involved going into a cave for a bit of privacy in order to poop.

[Guest]

I can't disagree, and yet I can't agree either.  I believe it is undefined.

While it is indeed, as you say, a euphemism for relieving oneself, it is also a literal phrase.  And when one went to sleep in the wild, one had to cover the feet so critters wouldn't eat them.  Having flashbacks to The Other Side of Heaven.

So, in this instance,  was it literal or was it the euphemism?  I might lean towards the euphemism, but why would one go into a cave to relieve himself?  When camping, it's usually done outside where rain and weather can get rid of the evidence.  If a cave was used, and an entire army were present, that cave would get pretty smelly pretty fast without any natural means of cleaning up.

Further, if Saul were simply relieving himself, wouldn't he have noticed that his robe had been cut?  Wouldn't he have heard all that was said in the cave?  Instead, David had to point it all out to him and show the piece of cloth in his hand that came from Saul's robe.

*************

We also have the issue of Boaz, where Ruth "uncovered his feet".  What was that about?

 

Edited May 10, 2016 by Guest

[mordorbund]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

It occurs to me that most people don't realize that "covering one's feet" is a euphemism for defecating.

I will see to it that any that pisseth against the wall knows.

[Guest]

Well, this is an enlightening thread. And a welcome detour from all of the political merry-go-rounding that's been happening here lately. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Eowyn said:

Well, this is an enlightening thread. And a welcome detour from all of the political merry-go-rounding that's been happening here lately. 

That's only because the government ... Oh.  wait.

[Just_A_Guy]

I don't think there's a consensus on what the idiom means.  Some biblical scholars posit "feet", in certain contexts, as a euphemism for (ahem) genitalia.

[Sunday21]

So Ruth uncovered Boaz's .... and then he had to marry her?

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

So Ruth uncovered Boaz's .... and then he had to marry her?

Yeah, you should hear some of the theories about what was actually going on with that passage.  But most tend to agree that whatever "uncovering his feet" meant, some kind of flirting was going on because the message was clear that Boaz understood that she wanted him to marry her.

As for the other implications, there are some interpretations that simply don't make sense given the seriousness with which the Law of Moses punished sins of chastity.

I tend to believe that she literally took his shoes off and lay near them as a sign of humbling herself before this older, wealthy, and powerful man.  Such was a similitude of washing the master's feet.  This task was left to the lowest of servants and slaves.  This gesture basically told him that she was offering herself as his handmaid in every sense.

Then there was obviously a conversation that was not recorded because Boaz recognized his relation to her to the point that he knew there was a nearer kinsman.  So, it goes to the fact that much of the story was skipped over.

Edited May 11, 2016 by Guest

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I don't think there's a consensus on what the idiom means.  Some biblical scholars posit "feet", in certain contexts, as a euphemism for (ahem) genitalia.

So, covering one's feet means letting it go.  Uncovering one's feet means uncovering something else.  How does that work?  Yeah, I don't know if we can come to a certain conclusion about what was actually happening in either case.

[Sunday21]

7 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Yeah, you should hear some of the theories about what was actually going on with that passage.  But most tend to agree that whatever "uncovering his feet" meant, some kind of flirting was going on because the message was clear that Boaz understood that she wanted him to marry her.

As for the other implications, there are some interpretations that simply don't make sense given the seriousness with which the Law of Moses punished sins of chastity.

I tend to believe that she literally took his shoes off and lay near them as a sign of humbling herself before this older, wealthy, and powerful man.  Such was a similitude of washing the master's feet.  This task was left to the lowest of servants and slaves.  This gesture basically told him that she was offering herself as his handmaid in every sense.

Then there was obviously a conversation that was not recorded because Boaz recognized his relation to her to the point that he knew there was a nearer kinsman.  So, it goes to the fact that much of the story was skipped over.

I prefer this version of the story! And it makes more sense. Thanks!