Song of Songs/ Song of Solomon

This is an essay I wrote in university (2004?) while studying from my BA. 

       

     The Song of Songs has been enigmatic since its introduction into the canon of the Hebrew Bible. When Rabbi Akiva was questioned about the Song’s holiness he gave a surprising response;

“Heaven forbid that any man in Israel ever disputed that the Song of Songs renders the hands unclean (i.e. is holy), for the whole world is not worth the day on which the Song of Songs was given to Israel, for all the Writings are holy, and the Song of Songs is the Holy of Holies. (Mishnah Yadaim 3.5)”[1]   

In the Song there is no mention of God.  Furthermore, the Song seems to be a sexually suggestive love song, making no reference to the couple even being married.  So, questioning the ‘holiness’ of the book appears to be appropriate.  One might expect the Rabbi to say “no it is not holy, do not read it”, or at most, that it barely qualifies.  Many modern scholars also hold the belief that the Song is a secular love song, perhaps even foreign to Israel, though the dichotomy between secular and religious may be a modern convention. Brenner states that the Song of Songs “appears to be a completely secular collection of love lyrics. [… It] appears to be neither theological nor even religious”.[2] Meyers echoes this response viewing the Song as “fundamentally secular in [its] celebration of human love”.[3] The question is still being posed to Rabbi Akiva.  Despite its possible foreign secular origins, the Song contains many biblical themes that make it at home in the Hebrew Bible. 

            The Song is a short book with mysterious origins. Its attribution to Solomon, whose name is mentioned numerous times in the text, is not supported by the majority of scholars. This is justified by the fact that the first line can be better translated as the Song being “offered to Solomon”.[4] Its reference to northern locations (2:1; 3:9; 4:8; 6:4; 7:5-6), Transjordan (4:1), and Judah (1:14; 3:5) may reflect a northern Israelite source and a later southern edition.[5]  The appearance of a Persian word for orchard park (4:13) suggests a postexilic date5, though oral tradition always poses a possible problem. Also, the unusual erotic genre makes the Song unusually difficult to date.[6]  

 Part of its mystery is the fact that it has the largest number of hapax legomenon[7] of any book in the bible, which makes accurate translation even more difficult.[8]  Even comparing the Septuagint, Vulgate, and the Peshitta, sheds no light on the meanings of these words, suggesting that they may have been just as mysterious to those ancient translators.[9]  Finding a way to read the Song in a constantly understandable way has also been elusive, as it seems to jump from one subject matter, or point of view to the next with little apparent logic.  The style may reflect Egyptian love poetry[10], Arabian Wasf[11], Syrian/Canaanite wedding rites,[12] or perhaps a common ancestor to these genres.  The nineteenth century brought discoveries of Mesopotamian myths that seemed to have parallels in the Hebrew Bible. This caused some to interpret the song as being about the goddess Ishtar and Shulmanu, or Tammuz, while others, sighting Sumerian myths imposed Innana and Dumuzi on the lovers.[13]  Theophile Meek reconstructed the Song as a fertility ritual in which Babylonian deities escape the netherworld.[14]  

The presence of the Song in the bible forces interpreters to use allegory in reading it, which was quite common from the Hellenistic period to the first century.    The twelfth century saw a rise in mystical interpretations, and this trend continued into the eighteenth century.[15] 

            Despite the apparent foreign origins of the Song, it also has many references that tie it to the land and people of the Hebrew Bible. The greater part of the topography described in the Song points to northern Israel of the divided kingdom.  However, Engedi (Song 1:14) is in Judah on the west side of the Dead Sea.  The Plain of Sharon, of which the female lover is a lily (Song 2:1), is on the west coast of Israel stretching from Joppa to Mount Carmel.  The female lover adjures the Daughters of the city of Jerusalem (Song 3:5; 3:11; 5:8; 5:16; 8:4), while King Solomon (Song 1:1; 3:9; 3:11; 8:11, 12) and his valiant men of Israel are referred to as well (Song 3:7). The tower of King David is also made reference to (Song 4:4) and Jerusalem itself is mentioned as a thing of beauty (Song 6:4). So despite the evidence that convinces many that the book is foreign, it also has much to tie it to the land and people of Israel. Of course this may be because of later editing, but we have to deal with the book we have.  

            Though the Song never mentions God, and its author may have never intended it to be used as a religious text, the use of human relationships as an allegory describing Yahweh as the male of a relationship, with Israel as the female allows the book to sit in the  canon rather comfortably.  In Hosea, the prophet is instructed by God to take a wife and have children with her (Hosea 1-3:5).  The woman is described as an adulteress (Hosea 2:12), who serves Baals (Hosea 2:10, 15), and who will be punished if she does not stop (Hosea 2:4).  The prophet in this book is described as representing God while the woman represents an idolatrous and faithless Israel. Yahweh desires the people to be faithful to him alone, as a wife should be to a husband (Hosea 2:18).  The picture painted in Hosea is extremely patriarchical and crude in describing the punishments for unfaithfulness (Hosea 2:5, 12).  The woman is presented as completely passive and relying on the man for everything, yet still being unfaithful.[16] God desires for her to return so he can give her back the things he has taken away from her (Hosea 2:17). 

            Isaiah continues this motif speaking to Israel “for he who has become your husband is your Maker; his name is the Lord of hosts” (Is 54:5); “the Lord calls you back, like a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit, a wife married in youth and then cast off, says your God. For a brief moment I abandoned you, but with great tenderness I will take you back” (Is 54:6-8).  Again Yahweh takes on the role of a husband viewing Israel as his wife.  Though the Song does not speak in terms of a marriage, it does speak in terms of people in love.                  

 Isaiah’s vineyard also parallels another metaphor in the Song by stating that “the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah are his cherished plant” (Is 5:7). Isaiah describes the Lord’s vineyard, which he set up perfectly, but despite the ideal conditions, the crop of grapes grew up wild (Is 5:1-2). A good grape farmer uses a bad crop for grazing, letting it be trampled and overgrown with weeds (Is 5:4-7).  Again we see the feminine metaphor (the vineyard) used to describe Israel, with God as its master and caretaker.  In the Song, the woman regrets her appearance because she has been working hard on vineyards and has had no time to take care of herself; “[her] own vineyard [she] has not cared for” (Song 1:6).  Again she describes herself as a vineyard, surprisingly independent as “[her] vineyard is at [her] own disposal” (Song 8:12). She is also described similarly as a garden (Song 4:12-16; 5:1). The Song again seems to fit this metaphor well.     

            Jeremiah also uses this allegory.  Speaking for God the prophet says, “I remember the devotion of your youth, how you love me as a bride, following me in the desert, in a land unsown. Sacred to the Lord was Israel, the first fruits of his harvest” (Jeremiah 2:2-3).  Again we see the image of Israel as a female lover of the Lord, and again we see it used with the context of a faithful people who have abandoned their God; “does a virgin forget her jewelry, a bride her sash? Yet my people have forgotten me days without number” (Jeremiah 2:32).    

            Ezekiel 16 again describes Israel as a faithless female spouse.  Israel was an unwanted child thrown out on the ground, when God passed by and took care of her, covering her nakedness and swearing an oath to her (Ez 16:5-9).  She became exceedingly beautiful with the dignity of a queen (Ez 16:13-14).  But, she abandoned the Lord, becoming a harlot, and lavishing her harlotry on every passer-by, whose she became (Ez 16:15).  She became an idolater setting the Lord’s incense before the male images she made from the gold the Lord gave her, setting the Lord’s food before them, and sacrificing his children to them (Ez 16:16-21).  Israel plays the harlot “spreading [her] legs for every passer-by” (Ez 16:25).  The woman is seen as a prostitute, but even worse, one that pays her numerous clients (Ez 16:30-34).  Here Hosea is very similar in the punishment of the adulteress, exposing her nakedness for all to see (Ez 16:37).  Yet, God remembers the covenant he made with the girl, and promises to set up an everlasting covenant with her (Ez 16:60).  Then, she will remember and be ashamed (Ez 16:61-63).

            Ezekiel 23 is again similar, presenting two sisters, Oholah (Samaria) and Oholibah (Jerusalem), who “played the harlot” (Ez 23:3).  They both became the Lord’s, but were not faithful to him, even though they bore him sons and daughters (Ez 23:4). They commit adultery with their idols, and feed them their immolated children (Ez 23:37).  He abandoned the elder to her lovers, who killed her and exposed her nakedness (Ez 23:10).  The Lord became disgusted with the younger as well as she outdid her sister. He also abandons her to her lovers, who strip and rob her (Ez 23:26).  The Lord summons an assembly against the women (the elder sister is apparently alive again) who then find them guilty, stoning them, and cutting them to pieces with their swords (Ez 23:47). 

            The Song of Songs also presents a relationship, but a very different one from the those previously described.  The story described in the Song is one that is successful.  If this Song came after those described above, one might ask, “what if the woman remained faithful?”  If the Song came first then the prophets might have asked, “what if the woman was not faithful?” The Song presents a story of two lovers who desire desperately to be with each other, even when separated.  Fokkelein Van Dijk-hemmes argues that Hosea may have actually been using the song as the ideal relationship, posing Israel’s faithlessness as the breakdown (she also presents the Song as one of the adulterous relationships of Gomer).[17]  She supports her argument by sitting parallel expressions referring to the “mother… she who was pregnant with me” because that expression only occurs in Hosea and the Song.[18]  Whether it was the author’s intent or not, the Song, as part of the canon, is set up as a positive relationship against the prophets’ harlots. With these texts to set up the Song, even without any reference to God, the male lover will naturally be seen as God.  So, perhaps the allegorical readings it has been given through the years by those such as Origen, St. Bernard of Clairvaux, and St. Teresa of Avila, are not so far-fetched.     

            The Song also presents the male lover[19] as a shepherd. The woman inquires about where he pastures his flock so she might know where to find him (Song 1:7).  This can be paralleled by the well known Psalm 23, which begins, “the Lord is my shepherd”.  Continuously in the Hebrew Bible God is described as a shepherd with Israel as his flock (Ps 80, Is 40:11, Ez 34:11-12, etc.). Though, in the Song there is no reference to the woman as a sheep beyond her following the tracks of the flock (Song 1:8), the description of the male lover as a shepherd does lend itself to identifying him as God.            

            The male lover of the Song is also presented as a king, often as Solomon (Song 1:4, 12; 3:6-11), whose reputed splendor and wisdom leaves him open to becoming a metaphor as the king of kings; the greatest of kings.  Similarly, God is also described in the Hebrew Bible as a king (Job 41:34; Malachi 1:14; Daniel 4:37, Zec 14:16-17). The Psalms cry, “hear my cry for help, my king, my God” (Psalm 5:2); “the Lord is king forever” (Ps 10:16); and “who is this king of glory? The Lord” (Ps 24:8).  Once again the praise issued in the Song associates the male lover with God, when approaching the Song in its canonical context.         

            Another element within the Song of Songs aids its assimilation into the Hebrew canon (assuming it is acceptable to read the Song with the chapters in chronological order).  There is a continuous flux between the lovers in the Song.  It starts with the woman desiring the kisses of the male lover (Song 1:2) and the two engage in a dialogue (Song 1:7-2:7).  But, the lovers are soon separated and the woman leaves her room searching for him (Song 3:1-3).  She finds him and exclaims that she will not let him go (Song 3:4), only to lose him again. She awakens to hear her lover knocking on the door, but when she goes to open the door her lover is gone (Song 5:2-6); soon they are united again, flattering each other and describing their love for one another (Song 6:4). This flux is also seen as a literary device that intensifies the connection between the lovers.[20]

            This flux is echoed through the Hebrew Bible as well.  In the Garden of Eden the first couple begin with a good relationship with God, which is broken when the forbidden fruit is eaten and they are expelled from the Garden (Genesis 2:4-3:21).  (A few have also read the Song as a midrash on Genesis 2-3,[21] presenting the Song as the ideal relationship).    Cain and Abel seem to have a relationship with God that works, but this is ruined when Cain kills his brother (Gen 4).  The human race moves further away from God and the flood wipes life from the face of the earth, to try and start again (Gen 6-9:17).  But, Noah and his sons continue the separation (Gen 9:18-28).  This flux continues throughout the bible. In the Exodus the Hebrews fluctuate between faith, and faithless as they wander in the wilderness. When they establish the kingdom of Israel, they eventually move away from God desiring a king like other nations (1 Samuel).  This pattern even shows itself with the kings themselves, Saul is God’s choice as king, but soon he fails, and becomes an enemy of God’s new chosen, David.  David brings Israel close to God again, but his son Solomon allows his wives to practice idolatry (among other things), and Israel is eventually split in two (2 Samuel, and Kings). King Josiah discovers the lost law and brings the people back (2 Kings 22). The prophets recognize this flux as well, attempting to call the people back to God and his ways.  The images the prophets use are often images of human relationships as shown above.  With this flux running through both the Song and throughout the Hebrew Bible, it seems natural to read the song in a similar way.  The separation of the lovers, read through the lens of the canon, is seen as Israel’s separation from God.                   

            Even though there are common themes throughout the Song and the Hebrew Bible, there are still major differences. The song does not mention God, like Esther. The Song begins and ends with a feminine voice, in the first person.  The Song is highly egalitarian, the man and woman seem to be equal (except perhaps where the brothers appear to be her keeper (Song 8:8-10).[22]  The woman often initiates the meetings of the lovers.  Also, whereas usually a woman’s sexuality is highly related to her ability to bear children for her husband, the song does not view this as the goal of the couple’s love.[23]  Their love is center stage. Also, a woman’s sexuality is often a symbol of evil[24], but the Song celebrates the lover’s union.  Furthermore, there is a sense of matrilineality with the focus on the mother, which is mentioned numerous times; a father is never mentioned.[25]        

Though it may not have been the author’s original intent, the Song has found a comfortable home in the Hebrew Bible.  With numerous common themes and metaphors this book relates well to the rest of the bible as a goal of God’s loving relationship with his people.  Since at least Rabbi Akiva’s time people have been pointing at the apparent secular origins of the Song.  But, when viewed through the eyes of the rest of the canon, the song becomes the Holy of Holies, showing the people of Israel what can be, and what kind of relationship God desires to have with his people.  The Song may have been written as a secular love song, but the Song of Songs has become the Holy of Holies in the Hebrew Bible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

Brenner, Athalya, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993.

 

 Landy Francis. Paradoxes of Paradise: Identity and Difference in the Song of Songs.  Sheffield: Almond Press, 1983.

 

Pope, Marvin. The Anchor Bible: Song of Songs: a New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Garden City: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1977.

 

Lucinio, Jeanette (commentator). The Catholic Bible: Personal Study Edition (NAB). New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.

 

Alter, Robert.  “The Song of Songs: An Ode to Intimacy.”  Bible Review 18:04 (2002)

 

Sasson, Jack. “Unlocking the Poetry of Love in the Song of Songs” Bible Review 01:01(1985)

 

Landy, Francis. “The Song of Songs and the Garden of Eden.” Journal of Biblical Literature 98:4 (1979)

 

Fox, Michael. The Song of Songs and the Ancient Egyptian Love Songs. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1985

 

Boadt, Lawrence. Reading the Old Testament. New York: Paulist Press, 1984.

 

Sanford LaSor, William, and David Hubbard, et al. Old Testament Survey. Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996.

 

Cainion, Ivory. “An analogy of the Song of Songs and Genesis Chapters Two and Three” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 14:2 (2000).

---

[1] Francis Landy. Paradoxes of Paradise: Identity and Difference in the Song of Songs.  (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1983),13

[2] Athalya Brenner in Athalya Brenner, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 28

[3] Meyers in Athalya Brenner, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 198

[4] Jack Sasson. “Unlocking the Poetry of Love in the Song of Songs” Bible Review 01:01(1985):

[5] Jeanette Lucinio (commentator). The Catholic Bible: Personal Study Edition (NAB). (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), RG 210

 

[6] Jack Sasson. “Unlocking the Poetry of Love in the Song of Songs” Bible Review 01:01(1985):

[7] “A thing said only once” designating words that are said only once in scripture. There are 49 of these in the Song (see note 5).

[8] Jack Sasson. “Unlocking the Poetry of Love in the Song of Songs” Bible Review 01:01(1985):

[9] Jack Sasson. “Unlocking the Poetry of Love in the Song of Songs” Bible Review 01:01(1985):

[10]Jack Sasson. “Unlocking the Poetry of Love in the Song of Songs” Bible Review 01:01(1985):

Michael V. Fox. The Song of Songs and the Ancient Egyptian Love Songs. (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1985)

[11]Jack Sasson. “Unlocking the Poetry of Love in the Song of Songs” Bible Review 01:01(1985):

Lawrence Boadt. Reading the Old Testament. (New York: Paulist Press, 1984), 485

[12] Sanford LaSor, William, and David Hubbard, et al. Old Testament Survey. (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996), 516

Lawrence Boadt. Reading the Old Testament. (New York: Paulist Press, 1984), 485

[13] Jack Sasson. “Unlocking the Poetry of Love in the Song of Songs” Bible Review 01:01(1985):

William Sanford LaSor. and David Hubbard, et al. Old Testament Survey. (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996), 516

Jeanette Lucinio (commentator). The Catholic Bible: Personal Study Edition (NAB). (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), RG 212

[14] Jack Sasson. “Unlocking the Poetry of Love in the Song of Songs” Bible Review 01:01(1985):Songs

[15] Jack Sasson. “Unlocking the Poetry of Love in the Song of Songs” Bible Review 01:01(1985):

[16] Fokkelien Van Dijk-Hemmes in Athalya Brenner, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 166-168.

[17] Folkkelein Van Dijk-hemmes in Athalya Brenner, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993)

[18] Fokkelien Van Dijk-Hemmes in Athalya Brenner, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 162-163

[19] Some see two lovers in the Song, a shepherd, and a kingly lover;

Jeanette Lucinio (commentator). The Catholic Bible: Personal Study Edition (NAB). (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), RG 211

[20] Robert Alter.  “The Song of Songs: An Ode to Intimacy.”  Bible Review 18:04 (2002):

[21] Francis Landy. “The Song of Songs and the Garden of Eden.” Journal of Biblical Literature 98:4 (1979):

Ivory Cainion. “An analogy of the Song of Songs and Genesis Chapters Two and Three” SJOT 14:2 (2000)

[22] Marvin Pope in Athalya Brenner, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 125

[23] Meyers in Athalya Brenner, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 208

Landy  in Athalya Brenner, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 129

[24] Fokkelien Van Dijk-Hemmes in Athalya Brenner, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 157.

[25] Philis Trible  in Athalya Brenner, ed. A Feminist Companion to the Song of Songs. (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 115.