A slightly more condensed version of these articles were originally written
for the online mag Examiner.com (now AXS).
My links thereto no longer work, so I am guessing they took them down.
I moved them here.|
Note: Yellow text items contain notes. Hover the mouse (or whatever the equivalent on your system) to see them.
Back to main page Article 2
So we will be looking at what is incontrovertibly the sexiest book in the Bible (Jewish, Catholic, or Protestant), the Song of Songs (also known as The Song of Solomon and Canticles).
Even a cursory glance at the Song will tell you it is about love. In 1.2-3a we read:
Part of the reason it is in the Bible, of course, could simply be that it is attributed to Solomon. This may be implied by the first verse (“The greatest of songs, which is Solomon's”). But the Hebrew here can be read, “…which is for Solomon,” and Rashi (a medieval Jewish scholar) read it as “…for the one to whom peace belongs,” (i.e. God) seeing “Solomon” not as a name, but as an attribute (from the Hebrew word, shalom=peace). Also, Solomon does appear as a character (8.11), making him less likely to have been the author.
Most modern scholars regard it as composed of several poems, probably with several authors put together into one. Some argue that at least one of these authors was likely a woman.
But authorship was not what lead Rabbi Akiva (ca.50-ca.135 CE[=AD]), a well-known rabbi from the age when the final shape of the Hebrew Bible was still being debated, to say, “All the books of the Bible are holy; but the Song of Songs is the Holy of Holies” (Yadayim 3:5). An assertion this strong suggests that not all agreed. Although their opinions have not survived for me to quote, the surface meaning of the poem, and the fact that God is never mentioned by name (only Esther shares this distinction in the Hebrew Bible), make it easy to imagine how some would feel that the Song did not deserve a place in the collection of holy scriptures. Enough people agreed with Akiva, though, that it continues to be a favorite among modern readers of scripture.
The reason for this, and the reason it is in the Bible, is that it is generally seen as a metaphor for God's love for his people, and the reverse. When the girl says wonderful things about her lover, it is the God-lover speaking of the Divine. When the boy replies with his amorous thoughts, it is God speaking to people. If this is not the original meaning, who really cares? If it speaks to our hearts read this way, then that is what it means to us!
As a side note, semiologists [‘semiology’ is the actual name for what Dan Brown and others refer to as ‘symbology’] sometimes will talk about “the tyranny of the author's intention” (I am not sure who first coined that phrase). I do think the author at least deserves a vote, and students who seek to discover that are not waisting their time, but it is still true that once something has gone public, the reader (hearer, etc.) is the final subjective voice.
However, that said, we will be looking in the next article at its closest literary parallels from the ancient world: the love songs of ancient Egypt.
The next section
Back to main page
|Return to Song of Songs page||
Page: © Copyright 1995-2011 Alan Humm.
Comments and corrections: