Song of Songs (Cantique des Cantiques) byGustave Moreau, 1893
TheSong of Songs (Biblical Hebrew:שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים,romanized: Šīr hašŠīrīm), also called theCanticle of Canticles or theSong of Solomon, is abiblical poem, one of the fivemegillot ("scrolls") in theKetuvim ('writings'), the last section of theTanakh. Unlike most books in the Hebrew Bible, it does not focus on laws, covenants, or divine worship, but instead iserotic poetry, in which lovers express passionate desire, exchange compliments, and invite one another to enjoy.[1]
Modern scholarship tends to hold that the lovers in the Song are unmarried,[2][3] which accords with its nearancient Near East context.[4] The women of Jerusalem form achorus to the lovers, functioning as an audience whose participation in the lovers' erotic encounters facilitates the participation of the reader.[5]
Marvin H. Pope described the Song as a celebration of sexual love, influenced by ancient fertility rituals, linked to death and liberation, and "suggestive of orgiastic revelry.”[6] Its authorship, date, and origins remain uncertain, with scholars debating its unity, structure, and possible influences fromMesopotamian,Egyptian, andGreek love poetry.
In modernJudaism, the Song is read on the Sabbath during thePassover, which marks both the beginning of the grain-harvest and the commemoration ofthe Exodus fromEgypt.[7] Jewish tradition interprets it as an allegory of the relationship between God and Israel. InChristianity, it is viewed as an allegory ofChrist andhis bride, theChurch.[7][8]
There is widespread consensus that, although the book has no plot, it does have what can be called a framework, as indicated by the links between its beginning and end.[9] Beyond this, however, there appears to be little agreement: attempts to find achiastic structure have not found acceptance, and analyses dividing the book into units have employed various methods, yielding diverse conclusions.[10]
The following indicative schema is from Kugler and Hartin'sAn Introduction to The Bible:[11]
Introduction (1:1–6)
Dialogue between the lovers (1:7–2:7)
The woman recalls a visit from her lover (2:8–17)
The woman addresses the daughters of Zion (3:1–5)
Sighting a royal wedding procession (3:6–11)
The man describes his lover's beauty (4:1–5:1)
The woman addresses the daughters of Jerusalem (5:2–6:4)
The man describes his lover, who visits him (6:5–12)
The introduction calls the poem "the song of songs",[12] a phrase that follows an idiomatic construction commonly found inScriptural Hebrew to indicate the object's status as the greatest and most beautiful of its class (as inHoly of Holies).[13] The work is also referred to as the "Song of Solomon", meaning the song 'of', 'by', 'for', or '[dedicated] to' Solomon.[14]
The poem proper begins with the woman's expression of desire for her lover and her self-description to the "daughters of Jerusalem": she insists on her sun-born blackness, likening it to the "tents ofKedar" (nomads) and the "curtains of Solomon". A dialogue between the lovers follows: the woman asks the man to meet; he replies with a lightly teasing tone. The two compete in offering flattering compliments ("my beloved is to me as a cluster ofhenna blossoms in the vineyards ofEn Gedi", "anapple tree among the trees of the wood", "alily amongbrambles", while the bed they share is like aforest canopy). The section closes with the woman telling the daughters of Jerusalem not to stir up love such as hers until it is ready.[15]
The woman recalls a visit from her lover in the springtime. She uses imagery from a shepherd's life, and she says of her lover that "he pastures his flock among the lilies".[15]
The woman again addresses the daughters of Jerusalem, describing her fervent and ultimately successful search for her lover through the night-time streets of the city. When she finds him she takes him almost by force into the chamber in which she was conceived.[a] She reveals that this is a dream, seen on her "bed at night", and ends by again warning the daughters of Jerusalem "not to stir up love until it is ready".[15]
The next section reports a royal wedding procession. Solomon is mentioned by name, and the daughters of Jerusalem are invited to come out and see the spectacle.[15]
Illustration for the first verse, a minstrel playing beforeSolomon (15th century Rothschild Mahzor)
The man describes his beloved: Her eyes are like doves, her hair is like a flock of goats, her teeth like shorn ewes, and so on from face to breasts. Place-names feature heavily: her neck is like theTower of David, her smell like the scent ofLebanon. He hastens to summon his beloved, saying that he is ravished by even a single glance. The section becomes a "garden poem", in which he describes her as a "locked garden" (usually taken to mean that she is chaste). The woman invites the man to enter the garden and taste the fruits. The man accepts the invitation, and a third party tells them to eat, drink, "and be drunk with love".[15]
The woman tells the daughters of Jerusalem of another dream. She was in her chamber when her lover knocked. She was slow to open, and when she did, he was gone. She searched through the streets again, but this time she failed to find him and the watchmen, who had helped her before, now beat her. She asks the daughters of Jerusalem to help her find him, and describes his physical good looks. Eventually, she admits her lover is in his garden, safe from harm, and committed to her as she is to him.[15]
The man describes his beloved; the woman describes a rendezvous they have shared. (The last part is unclear and possibly corrupted.)[15]
The people praise the beauty of the woman. The images are the same as those used elsewhere in the poem, but with an unusually dense use of place-names, e.g.,pools of Hebron, gate ofBath-rabbim, tower ofDamascus, etc. The man states his intention to enjoy the fruits of the woman's garden. The woman invites him to a tryst in the fields. She once more warns the daughters of Jerusalem against waking love until it is ready.
The woman compares love to death andSheol: love is as relentless and jealous as these two, and cannot be quenched by any force. She summons her lover, using the language used before: he should come "like a gazelle or a young stag upon the mountain of spices".[15]
The poem seems to be rooted in festive performance, and connections have been proposed with the "sacred marriage" ofIshtar andTammuz.[16] It offers no clue to its author or to the date, place, or circumstances of its composition.[17] The superscription states that it is "Solomon's", but even if this is meant to identify the author, it cannot be read as strictly as a similar modern statement.[18] The most reliable evidence for its date is its language:Aramaic gradually replaced Hebrew after the end of theBabylonian exile in the late 6th century BCE, and the evidence of vocabulary,morphology, idiom and syntax clearly point to a late date, centuries after King Solomon to whom it is traditionally attributed.[19] It has parallels with Mesopotamian and Egyptian love poetry from the first half of the 1st millennium, and with the pastoral idylls ofTheocritus, a Greek poet who wrote in the first half of the 3rd century BCE;[20][5][21] as a result of these conflicting signs, speculation ranges from the 10th to the 2nd centuries BCE,[17] with the language supporting a date around the 3rd century.[22] Other scholars are more skeptical about the idea that the language demands a post-exilic date.[23]
Debate continues on the unity or disunity of the book. Those who see it as an anthology or collection point to the abrupt shifts of scene, speaker, subject matter and mood, and the lack of obvious structure or narrative. Those who hold it to be a single poem point out that it has no internal signs of composite origins, and view the repetitions and similarities among its parts as evidence of unity. Some claim to find a conscious artistic design underlying it, but there is no agreement among them on what this might be. The question, therefore, remains unresolved.[24]
The consensus among contemporary scholars of the Bible is that the Song of Songs is an erotic poem, and not an elaborate metaphor.[25][26][27][28]
In his commentary for theAnchor Bible Series, Marvin H. Pope quotes scholars who believe that the Song described a fertility cult liturgy, rooted in the fertility cults of the ancient Near Eastern cultures of Mesopotamia and Canaan, as well as their sacred marriage rites and funeral feasts.[6]
J. Cheryl Exum wrote: "The erotic desire of its protagonists, everywhere evident in the Song, leads me, in conclusion, to the Song's unique contribution to the conceptualization of love in the Bible: its romantic vision of love".[29]
Song of Songs [is a] collection of love poems sung by him to her and her to him: [– –] While authorship is ascribed to Solomon in its first verse and by traditionalists, [modern Bible scholarship] argues that while the book may contain ancient material, there is no evidence that Solomon wrote it.
[– –] What is a collection of erotic poems doing in the Hebrew Bible? Indeed, some ancient rabbis were uneasy about the book’s inclusion in the canon.[30]
Several scholars have also argued that, alongside its condition as love poetry, the Song of Songs also shares a number of features withWisdom literature.[31] For instance, Jennifer L. Andruska argues that the Song employs a number of literary conventions typical of this didactic literature and that it combines features of both ancient Near Eastern love song and wisdom genres to produce a wisdom literature about romantic love, instructing readers to pursue what she describes as a particular type of 'wise love' relationship, modelled by the lovers of the poem.[32][33] Likewise, Katharine J. Dell notes a number of Wisdom motifs in the Song such as parallels between the lovers and the advices and conduct of Woman Wisdom and the Loose Woman ofProverbs, among others.[34]
A page of Rashi's interpretation of the megillot, National Library of Israel
The Song was accepted into the Jewish canon of scripture and was understood as "an allegory for the love between God and Israel", a view "dominant for a thousand years and more". However, according to Catholic priest Fr. Andrew Greeley, Song of Songs is "secular love poetry, a collection of love songs gathered around a single theme" and scholarship has "routed the allegorical interpretation".[35] Although "there is a tradition that even this book was considered as one to be excluded", as stated inAboth d'Rabbi Nathan A1, a 700-900 CE work, the Song of Songs was not only included but regarded as "especially meritorious". Reformed Jewish Solomon Freehof notes that one must think "if the book is so gross ... unlike all other books of the Bible tradition ... why accept it at all?"[36]
Canonicity was tied to its attribution to Solomon, and based on an allegorical reading where the subject matter was taken to be not sexual desire but God's love for Israel.[37][38][39] For instance, the famed first and second centuryRabbi Akiva forbade the use of the Song of Songs in popular celebrations. He reportedly said, "He who sings the Song of Songs in wine taverns, treating it as if it were a vulgar song, forfeits his share in the world to come".[40] However, Rabbi Akiva famously defended the canonicity of the Song of Songs, reportedly saying when the question came up of whether it should be considered a defiling work, "God forbid! [...] For all of eternity in its entirety is not as worthy as the day on which Song of Songs was given to Israel, for all the Writings are holy, but Song of Songs is the Holy of Holies."[41]
Other rabbinic scholars who have employed allegorical exegesis in explaining the meaning of Song of Songs areTobiah ben Eliezer, author ofLekach Tov,[42] andZechariah ha-Rofé, author ofMidrash ha-Hefez.[43] The French rabbiRashi did not believe the Song of Songs to be an erotic poem.[44]
Song of Songs is one of the overtly mystical Biblical texts for theKabbalah, which gave an esoteric interpretation on all the Hebrew Bible. Following the dissemination of theZohar in the 13th century, Jewish mysticism took on a metaphorically anthropomorphic erotic element, and Song of Songs is an example of this. In Zoharic Kabbalah, God is represented by a system of tensephirot emanations, each symbolizing a different attribute of God, comprising both male and female. TheShechina (indwelling Divine presence) was identified with the feminine sephiraMalchut, the vessel of Kingship. This symbolizes the Jewish people, and in the body, the female form, identified with the woman in Song of Songs. Her beloved was identified with the male sephiraTiferet, the "Holy One Blessed be He", a central principle in the beneficent heavenlyflow of divine emotion. In the body, this represents the male torso, uniting through the sephiraYesod of the malesign of the covenant organ of procreation.
Through beneficent deeds andJewish observance, the Jewish people restore cosmic harmony in the divine realm, healing the exile of the Shechina with God's transcendence, revealing the essential unity of God. This elevation of the world is aroused from above on the Sabbath, a foretaste of the redeemed purpose of Creation. The text thus became a description, depending on the aspect, of the creation of the world, the passage ofShabbat, the covenant with Israel, and the coming of the Messianic age. "Lecha Dodi", a 16th-century liturgical song with strong Kabbalistic symbolism, contains many passages, including its opening two words, taken directly from Song of Songs.
In modern Judaism, certain verses from the Song are read onShabbat eve or atPassover, which marks the beginning of the grain harvest as well as commemoratingthe Exodus from Egypt, to symbolize the love between the Jewish people and their God. Jewish tradition reads it as an allegory of the relationship between God and Israel.[7] The entire Song of Songs in its original Hebrew is read in synagogues during the intermediate days of Passover. It is often read from a scroll similar to aTorah scroll in style. It is also read in its entirety by some at the end of the PassoverSeder and is usually printed in mostHagadahs. Some Jews have the custom to recite the entire book prior to the onset of the Jewish Sabbath.
The literal subject of the Song of Songs is love and sexual longing between a man and a woman, and it has little (or nothing) to say about the relationship of God and man; in order to find such a meaning it was necessary to turn to allegory, treating the love that the Song celebrates as an analogy for the love between God and Church.[8] The Christian church's interpretation of the Song as evidence of God's love for his people, both collectively and individually, began withOrigen.[45] SaintGregory of Nyssa wrote fifteenHomilies on the Song of Songs, which are considered the pinnacle of hisbiblical exegesis. In them, he compares the bride to the soul and the invisible groom to God: the finite soul is incessantly reaching out towards the infinite God and remains continually disappointed in this life due to the failure to achieveecstatic union with the beloved, a vision which enraptures and can be achieved fully and perfectly only in life after death.[46][47] Similarly, following theallegoricinterpretation ofAmbrose of Milan,[48] SaintAugustine of Hippo stated that the Song of Songs represents the wedding between Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church, pure and virgin, within anascetic context.[49] However, going against the prevailing opinion,Theodore of Mopsuestia, influenced by theSchool of Antioch, interpreted the Song of Songs literally, understanding it as an erotic poem written by Solomon to the daughter of Pharaoh. But, since the allegorical view was so predominant, his interpretation was condemned at theSecond Council of Constantinople. As a result, his writings on this book were lost, and only his literalist position is known, which would later (from the 18th century onwards) become predominant among biblical scholars.[50][51]
Over the centuries the emphases of interpretation shifted, first reading the Song as a depiction of the love between Christ and Church, the 11th century adding a moral element, and the 12th century understanding of the Bride as theVirgin Mary, with each new reading absorbing rather than simply replacing earlier ones, so that the commentary became ever more complex.[52] These theological themes are not found explicitly in the poem, but they come from a theological reading. Nevertheless, what is notable about this approach is the way it leads to conclusions not found in the overtly theological books of theBible.[53] Those books reveal an abiding imbalance in the relationship between God and man, ranging from slight to enormous; but reading Songs as a theological metaphor produces quite a different outcome, one in which the two partners are equals, bound in a committed relationship.[53]
In modern times the poem has attracted the attention of feminist biblical critics, withPhyllis Trible's foundational "Depatriarchalizing in Biblical Interpretation" treating it as an exemplary text, and the Feminist Companion to the Bible series edited byAthalya Brenner andCarole Fontaine devoting two volumes to it.[54][55]
Several Islamicapologists contend that the wordmahmaddim in Song of Songs 5:16 mentionsMuhammad.[57] Whereas most translators will render the first words of that verse in terms such as "His mouth is most sweet, he is altogether lovely (mahamaddim)." In his bookDemystifying Islam, Muslim apologist Harris Zafar argues that the last word (Hebrew:מַחֲּמַדִּים,romanized: maḥămaddîm,lit. 'lovely'), with the plural suffix "-im" (which is occasionally used to indicate intensity, and is normally understood to do so for both of the adjectives in this verse),[58][59][60] expressing respect and greatness (as the plural form seems to do in the common Hebrew appellation of God,Elohim (pl. maiestatus)), should be translated "Muhammad", for the translation "His mouth is most sweet; he is Muhammad".[44][b] Some Christian apologists, however, have countered this claim.[61][62][63]
A'l Mishkavi Baleylot for soprano and harp (1992) andSpring Calls for soprano and ensemble (2006) byLior Navok
Alex Weiser'sAfter Shir Hashirim (2017) draws its inspiration from the text and cantillation of the Song of Songs.[64]
Andrew Rose Gregory ofThe Gregory Brothers released the albumThe Song of Songs, with words and music based on the biblical text, with The Color Red Band in 2011.[65]
Eliza Gilkyson's "Rose of Sharon" on her 2007 albumYour Town Tonight is based on her reading of "Song of Songs" in a hotel room Gideon Bible, as explained in her intro to the song.
Flos Campi byRalph Vaughan Williams, a suite for solo viola, small chorus and small orchestra (1925), each movement headed by a verse from the book
John Zorn's "Shir Ha-Shirim" premiered in February 2008.[69] The piece is inspired by the "Song of Songs" and is performed by an amplified quintet of female singers with female and male narrators performing the "Song of Solomon". A performance at theGuggenheim Museum in November 2008 featured choreography for paired dancers from the Khmer Arts Ensemble bySophiline Cheam Shapiro.[70] In 2013 a new version featuring the five singers without the two narrators premièred in NYC at Alice Tully Hall and at the Jerusalem Sacred Music Festival and released on the albumShir Hashirim.
Kate Bush's "Song of Solomon" from her albumThe Red Shoes (1993) includes lyrics which quote and reference the Song of Songs.[71]
S. Ansky's 1916 playThe Dybbuk contains a recitation of the "Song of Songs" by Khanan's father when he is a young yeshiva boy. This becomes a major plot point in the play as it allows for the two lovers to identify the promise of marriage that their fathers made as classmates before departing.
InCarl Theodor Dreyer'sDay of Wrath, a 1943 film about sexual repression in a puritanical Protestant family, the first few verses of "Song of Songs" chapter 2 are read aloud by the daughter Anne, but soon after her father forbids her to continue. The chapter's verse paraphrases Anne's own amorous adventures and desires.[77]
^The action of the conception is attributed specifically and exclusively to the woman's mother.
^Zafar claims that this word is otherwise translated "altogether lovely", which is not correct. The wordmahamaddim represents "lovely" and is part of the phraseve-kullo mahamaddim, whereve-kullo represents "altogether". Zafar does not explain how to read the wordve-kullo, and translatingmahamaddim as he suggests would result not in "His mouth is most sweet; he is Muhammad" but "His mouth is most sweet; all of him is Muhammad."
^Exum, J. Cheryl (2016)."Unity, Date, Authorship and the 'Wisdom' of the Song of Songs". In Brooke, George J.; Hecke, Pierre van (eds.).Goochem in Mokum, Wisdom in Amsterdam: Papers on Biblical and Related Wisdom Read at the Fifteenth Joint Meeting of the Society for Old Testament Study and the Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap, Amsterdam July 2012. BRILL. p. 57.ISBN978-90-04-31477-1.
^Barton, John (1998).How the Bible Came to be. Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. p. 54.ISBN978-0-664-25785-9. Retrieved3 October 2023.For example, most scholars think that the Song of Songs originated as a set of erotic poems of very high quality, which were only later treated as scriptural: this was achieved by regarding the lovers in the poems as representative, allegorically, of God and Israel (Jesus and the Church, in the Christian version of the allegory).
^Exum, J. Cheryl (2022)."Conceptualizing Love in the Song of Songs". In Van Hecke, Pierre; Van Loon, Hanneke (eds.).Where Is the Way to the Dwelling of Light?: Studies in Genesis, Job and Linguistics in Honor of Ellen van Wolde. Brill. p. 335.ISBN978-90-04-53629-6.
^Avot of Rabbi Natan 1:4, "At first they buried [Song of Songs], until theMen of the Great Assembly arrived to explain it . . . as it says, 'Come my beloved, let us go forth to the field . . .'" Cf.b.Eruvin 31b for the Rabbinic homily on this verse, "'Come my beloved' - so the congregation of Israel said to the Holy One, blessed be He . . ."
^Jacobs, Jonathan (2015). "The Allegorical Exegesis of Song of Songs by R. Tuviah ben 'Eli'ezer—"Lekaḥ Tov", and Its Relation to Rashi's Commentary".Association for Jewish Studies (AJS) Review.39 (1). University of Pennsylvania Press:75–92.doi:10.1017/S0364009414000658.JSTOR26375005.S2CID164390241.
^Qafiḥ, Yosef (1962).The Five Scrolls (Ḥamesh Megillot) (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: ha-Agudah le-hatsalat ginze Teman. pp. 13–ff.OCLC927095961.
^Gregory of Nyssa; Claudio Moreschini.Homilies on the Song of Songs(PDF) (in Italian). Archived from the original on 2024-01-09. Retrieved2024-01-12.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
^Asiedu, F. B. A. (2001). "The Song of Songs and the Ascent of the Soul: Ambrose, Augustine, and the Language of Mysticism".Vigiliae Christianae.55 (3): 299.JSTOR1584812.
^De Civitate Dei, XVII, 20. As quoted in Nathalie Henry,The Lily and the Thorns : Augustine’s Refutation of the Donatist Exegesis of the Song of Songs, inRevue des Études Augustiniennes, 42 (1996), 255-266 (ivi p. 255)
Andruska, Jennifer L. (2022)."The Song of Songs". In Dell, Katherine J.; Millar, Suzanna R.; Keefer, Arthur Jan (eds.).The Cambridge Companion to Biblical Wisdom Literature. Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-1-108-66581-0.
Exum, J. Cheryl (2012)."Song of Songs". In Newsom, Carol Ann; Lapsley, Jacqueline E. (eds.).Women's Bible Commentary. Westminster John Knox Press.ISBN978-0-664-23707-3.
Phipps, William E. (1974). "The Plight of the Song of Songs".Journal of the American Academy of Religion.XLII (1):82–100.doi:10.1093/jaarel/xlii.1.82.ISSN0002-7189.
_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg)
.jpg)
