A New Study Series: The Book of Daniel

Henry Ossawa Tanner (United States, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, 1859-1937)

My next series of notes will cover the book of Daniel.

I believe that Daniel is my favorite prophet.  The story of his life is fascinating, and his prophecies, even by the most skeptical standards of dating, are the clearest predictors of Christ’s life that appear in the Bible.  The introductory notes will be appearing soon!

Solomon’s Song of Songs Chapter 8 Notes

Chapter 8

v. 1: See note on 2:9.  I suspect that the fear of being despised or scolded is a reference to the way her brothers treat her.  See also 8:8-10.  Hence, she wishes that her Beloved could be one of her brothers;  if he were, then she and he could be together without drawing any attention from her other brothers.

v. 5a: See note on 3:6.

v. 5b: Gordis believes that the Shulamite is the speaker and that she “reminds him [the Beloved] that she woke him from his sleep under the apple-tree…the self-same spot that he had come into the world” (73).  Murphy says, “The words about love under the apple tree could be spoken by either party [the Shulamite or the Beloved]” (195).  For help in interpreting the passage, I think one should compare it with 2:3-7.

Note first the parallels:

2:3    “Like an apple tree among the wild trees is my friend among the other young men.  I sat down in his shade with great delight.”

8:5    “Under the apple tree I awoke you….”

2:6    “His left hand is under my head, and his right hand embraces me.”

8:3    “His left hand is under my head, and his right hand embraces me.”

2:7    “I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem…do not stir up nor awaken love until it pleases.”

8:4    “I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem, do not stir up nor awaken love until it pleases.”

2:6 and 8:3, and 2:7 and 8:4 obviously link chapter two to chapter eight and justify interpreting this passage in chapter eight in light of its sibling passage in chapter two.  With this in mind, notice that the apple tree in chapter two is clearly a symbol for the man.  I believe this justifies associating the apple tree with the man in chapter eight.  Notice also that the woman describes herself as resting under the apple tree in chapter two. Therefore, I believe this justifies associating the “you” of “under the apple tree I awoke you^[1]” (8:5) with the woman, which means the speaker is the man.  To further illustrate the point, consider 2:6 and 8:3.  These passages describe the woman as being under the man and in his embrace, a literal depiction of being “…in his shade with great delight” (2:3).  Here, then, is how I think this passage ought to be read.  The speaker is the man, and he is reminiscing with the woman about the time when they first made love and he awoke her sexually, giving her delight in the shade of his embrace.  Perhaps this sexual awakening happened in her mother’s house.  If so, this would explain why he says he awoke her in the place where her mother gave birth to her.  In 3:4, the Shulamite desires to bring him into her mother’s house, “into the chamber of her who conceived” her, and in 8:2 she desires to lead him into her mother’s house, where she would “cause [him] to drink of spiced wine, of the juice of [her] pomegranate.”^[2]

vs. 8-10: Her brothers are trying to prevent her from being married, either because they are overprotective and feel she is too young or because they are spiteful and want her to continue being their servant.  (Given 1:6, I tend to favor the latter opinion.)  Either way, the Shulamite regards their interference in her life as oppressive and is glad to be free of their authority.  Note her words in v. 10 where she says, “My breasts [are] like towers” (in contradiction to their claim that she has no breasts) and “I became in [Solomon’s] eyes as one who found peace.”  I assume that this means she has found peace from her brothers’ stifling overlordship now that she is with Solomon.  See also 2:9,15; and 8:1.

Vs. 11-12: The words “my own vineyard” are the same as those spoken by the Shulamite in 1:6, but this does not necessarily mean that she is the speaker.  The man may be citing her words in a speech of his own.  In fact, the most natural way to interpret these words is to place them in the mouth of the Beloved.  He is saying, essentially, “King Solomon, you may keep your huge vineyard, which is worth thousands of silver pieces; my own vineyard (the Shulamite) is before me and is worth far more.”  I admit that this makes it more difficult to see Solomon himself as the Beloved, but I believe, based on other arguments,^[3]that Solomon is probably the Beloved in the poem; therefore, I interpret these words as though they come from the mouth of Solomon himself.  If Solomon is the speaker, then he addresses himself in the third person in v. 11 and in the second person in v. 12, but this is not so very strange.  Referring to oneself in some person other than the grammatically correct first person singular is a frequent rhetorical device used in a variety of cultures and times.  The royal or editorial “we” instead of “I” is one example; if my English translation of the Koran can be trusted, God refers to himself quite often there as “we” in spite of the Koran’s frequent refrain that God is one.  And Christ often referred to himself in the third person.  Perhaps Solomon addresses himself in the second and third person because he wants to make a distinction between the Solomon who lived before meeting the Shulamite and the one who lives afterwards.  Perhaps he wishes to bid farewell (symbolically) to the former, with all his riches, in return for this new treasure he has found in the Shulamite.  Romeo does something like this when he too offers to renounce his former self for the sake of love.  In act two, scene two, Juliet says, “Romeo, doff thy name, and for that name which is no part of thee take all myself.”  To this, Romeo responds, “I take they at thy word: call me but love, and I’ll be new baptized; henceforth I never will be Romeo.”

v. 14: This verse makes a beautiful finish to the poem.  The words allude to her earlier refusal to come to her Beloved (2:17), which was the low point of their relationship, the moment of crisis, but now she uses similar wording to urge the Beloved to come hurriedly to her.

---

^[1] Emphasis mine.

^[2] One could also understand the place “where her mother brought her forth” to be some sort of reference to sex or conception, but I do not think this explanation is as likely.

^[3] See Introduction.

Solomon’s Song of Songs Chapter 6 Notes

Chapter 6

v. 2: This seems really abrupt, but I guess one is supposed to understand that the search for the Beloved has ended happily and faster than expected.  Note also the abrupt end of the search in the parallel section: “scarcely had I passed by them [the watch] when I found the one I love…” (3:4).

v. 3: See also 2:16 and 4:5.

v. 4: Her beauty has as much power over him as an army would.  He is helpless before it.  Umberto Eco uses this line very effectively in The Name of the Rose.

v. 9: I agree with Murphy when he writes, “The point is the uniqueness of the woman, not that she is an only child” (175).  1:6 indicates that she does have brothers.  The Beloved is singling her out as special.  If Solomon is the Beloved, this is particularly poignant since he had so many wives and concubines.  In fact, he may be referring to his harem in 6:8 before he contrasts its great numbers with the Shulamite’s uniqueness.

v. 10: This rhetorical question, “Who is she who looks forth as the morning?” reminds me of the rhetorical question in 3:6.  The answer to both is the Shulamite, whose appearance is splendid.

v. 11: I’m not sure how to interpret this since the speaker is unclear.  Barnes believes the woman is speaking (133), Gordis believes it is the man (67).  Murphy simply says, “It is difficult to determine who is the speaker” (178).

v. 12: I’m not going to attempt to explain this.  According to Murphy (179) and Gordis (67), the text, as it stands, is incomprehensible.

v. 13: Whatever verses 11 and 12 mean, this verse seems to be spoken by the Beloved as well as his friends (previously mentioned in 5:1).  They are calling upon her to dance for them.  Her response is a coy and flirtatious acceptance of the call.

Solomon’s Song of Songs Chapter 5 Notes

Chapter 5

v. 1: The Beloved says he has enjoyed his garden, which means he has enjoyed the company of the girl.  The exhortation to his friends at the end of the verse must be an enthusiastic recommendation of the joys of love.  Benedick does something like it at the end of Much Ado about Nothing when he says, “Get thee a wife” to Don Pedro.

v. 2: I suspect that 2:8-3:5 and 5:2-6:3 describe the same event.  Note the parallels:

In the night, while in her home, the girl hears her Beloved approach.

2:8 “There is the voice of my friend…”

5:2 “There is the voice of my friend…”

From outside the house, the Beloved invites her to be with him.

2:10 “Get up my friend, my beautiful one, and come here…”

5:2 “Open up for me, dear friend, my sister…”

He tries to establish some contact with her beyond speaking.

In 2:9, he looks through the window

In 5:4, he puts his hand by the latch of the door.

But the girl does not grant his request.

In 2:17, she sends him away until morning.^[1]

In 5:3, she (coyly?) does not immediately open the door for him, saying things like “I’ve already washed my feet; how shall I make them dirty again [by going out with you]?”

The Beloved leaves, which is very distressing to the girl, and she begins to search for him.

3:1  “By night on my bed I sought the one I love; I sought him, but I did not find him.”

5:6  “But my beloved had turned away and was gone.  I sought him, but I could not find him; I called him, but he gave me no answer.”

In her distress, she leaves the house and enters the city streets by night where she encounters the night watchmen and asks them if they have seen her beloved.  They mistake her for a harlot, beat her, and take her veil from her.

3:3  “The watchmen who go about the city found me, to whom I said, ‘Have you seen the one I love?’”

5:7  “The watchmen who went about the city found me.  They struck me, they wounded me; the keepers of the walls took my veil away from me.

Finally, she finds him.

3:4  “Scarcely had I passed by them [the watchmen] when I found the one I love.”

6:2  “My beloved has gone to his garden, to the beds of spices.”

There are a few differences in these two narratives, and some interpreters might take this fact to mean that 2:8-3:5 and 5:2-6:3 describe two separate events, but I believe the differences may be harmonized.  For instance, one difference is the involvement of the daughters of Jerusalem in the second narrative.  In my reconstruction of the first narrative (2:8-3:5) the Shulamite has not married Solomon yet, and the city she wanders in at night is one in her native area, not Jerusalem.  Yet one might assume that these “daughters of Jerusalem” are in Jerusalem, and one could reasonably expect that the Shulamite would only be in Jerusalem after marrying the king.  However, I would explain this difference by seeing her call to the daughters of Jerusalem as a rhetorical/poetic device added by the poet, not a literal account of a historical moment when the poor girl actually asked a group of women in Jerusalem for help.  Viewing these daughters of Jerusalem as a kind of chorus compliments this idea.^[2] Other differences are fairly easily harmonized.  For instance, in the first narrative the poet may simply have omitted the fact that the watch beats her.

The two narratives seem so similar that I believe they should be viewed as describing the same occasion.  In any case, I am fairly convinced that they do not describe the events of 4:1-5:1.  If 2:8-3:5 and 5:2-6:3 do describe separate events, then perhaps the first is a dream that foretells the events of the second, or perhaps both are separate dreams inspired by the same fear: separation from the beloved.

---

^[1] 2:15 also seems like a denial of his invitation.  See notes there.

^[2] See note on 1:4.

Solomon’s Song of Songs Chapter 4 Notes

Chapter 4

Vs. 4:1-5:1: These verses seem to be a unit.  The Beloved lavishly praises the girl’s physical beauty and invites her to come with him, for he desires and expects to enjoy her company.  His desires (and the girl’s) are fulfilled.

v. 5: See also 2:16 and 6:3.  4:5-6 obviously allude to 2:16-17, but I do not believe these two sections refer to the same event.  I do believe that 2:8-3:5and 5:2-6:3 refer to the same event, but verses 4:1-5:1 describe a scene where the lovers come together, whereas those in 2:8-3:5 (as well as 5:2-6:3)describe a scene when the lovers are parted.  Therefore, I suspect that this allusion to 2:16-17 is intended to remind the girl of the time when she and he were parted earlier, but also to contrast that parting by mentioning their present togetherness.  See also notes on 4:6.

v.6: The phrase “until the day breaks and the shadows flee away” links this passage to 2:17, as also does the reference to a mountain, but here the mountain is “the mountain of myrrh and the hill of frankincense.”  In 2:17 the mountain is “the mountain of separation.”  Verses such as 4:16-5:1 suggest that being on the mountain of myrrh and the hill of frankincense means enjoying the company of the girl (sexually or otherwise) “until the day breaks and the shadows flee away.”  However, being on the mountain of separation suggests being apart from the girl “until the day breaks and the shadows flee away.”  Thus, while I do believe 4:6 alludes to 2:17, I do not believe these two verses describe the same event.  See also notes on 4:5.

v. 8: Concerning this passage, Barnes writes, “Four peaks in the same mountain-system are here named as a poetical periphrasis for northern Palestine, the region in which is situated the native home of the bride.”  I agree with Barnes, and I believe that the Beloved is calling the girl to leave her home and join him, which she does in 3:6.  Perhaps this also is an allusion to 2:10 where the Beloved calls her to join him.  However, there she does not come with him; thus, I suspect that v. 8 here describes a later time, a time when she accepts his invitation.

Solomon’s Song of Songs Chapter 3 Notes

Chapter 3

Vs. 1-4: Note that this scene takes place at night; I believe it is the sequel to the previous one.  The girl has coyly refused the invitation of her Beloved and has sent him away, but afterwards, as she is lying in her bed, she misses him horribly and regrets sending him away.  Vs. 2-4 either recall a dream in which she goes to search for him, or they tell of her actual nighttime search for him in town.  In either case, she finds him and is so unwilling to be parted from him anymore that she immediately proposes to take him to meet her mother in anticipation of marrying him.

v. 5: See note on 2:7.

Vs. 6-11: Concerning this passage, Barnes writes, “Two or more citizens of Jerusalem, or the Chorus of youths, companions of the bridegroom, describe the magnificent appearance of the bride [the Shulamite girl] borne in a royal litter, and then that of the king in festive joy wearing a nuptial crown.”

Gordis writes that “the court poets” describe  “the ceremonies connected with King Solomon’s marriage to a foreign princess, perhaps from Egypt, across the desert.”

Murphy does not believe that Solomon is the Beloved in the poem.  Rather he believes that the beloved is just a regular man and that “the mention of Solomon is to be interpreted in line with the king fiction that dominates the entire work.”  In other words, the verses describe a marriage, but a marriage between a regular man and woman.  The royal references are fictional: the author calls the groom “Solomon” and portrays the bride as riding in a royal litter to emphasize the spiritual dignity and wonder of the real ceremony, however simple it might have been.

I am inclined to believe Barnes’s interpretation.  I do not believe that this girl is a princess of Egypt^[1] or any other realm.  True, she is called a prince’s daughter in 7:2, so one could justifiably make the argument that she is literally a princess, but I suspect that the appellation “prince’s daughter” is a poetic flourish, the same type of flourish that Murphy sees in the references to Solomon.  Why do I believe that the descriptions of her as a common shepherdess and vineyard dresser are factual while the one that describes her as a princess is figurative?  My main reason for believing this is that the descriptions of her as a commoner include the detail about her burnt skin (1:6).  Such an unflattering feature sticks out in a poem so occupied with sumptuous descriptions of beauty and idyllic sensuality; thus, that particular feature has the tone of realism.  The only other reason one might believe that the girl is an actual princess is derived from the fact that she rides in a royal litter, but this is clearly Solomon’s, not hers, so it should not be taken as a sign of her royal status.  As for why I interpret the references to Solomon as literal, see my notes in the Introduction.

Thus, the scene follows naturally from the previous one, in spite of Murphy’s claim that it “has nothing to do with the woman’s search in vs. 1-5” (151).  Verses 1-5 describe the woman’s desperate search for her Beloved Solomon and end with her bringing him to meet her mother, presumably in anticipation of marrying him.  Verses 6-11 then begin by describing the royal wedding procession from the girl’s home to Jerusalem, where the ceremony will take place, and end with the ceremony itself, wherein Solomon’s mother crowns him with a nuptial garland.  The thematic link of the two mothers and the easily deduced narrative thread are good arguments for connecting the two sections.

v. 6: According to Barnes, the word rendered “wilderness” or “desert” here need not be a wasteland.  It could simply be pasture land, as distinct from city land, and pasture land would describe the Shulamite’s home.  Thus, I believe this verse describes the procession from the girl’s home to Jerusalem in a litter provided by Solomon for this very purpose.

v. 8: I cannot help but wonder if the “fear in the night” here alludes to the girl’s earlier fear of separation (vs. 1-5).  She did experience the fear at night, and the purpose of this escort is to see her safely to her wedding, where such fears will be put to rest.

v. 11: Barnes calls this a “nuptial crown,” and Gordis says that “crowns were worn even by ordinary grooms and brides, until the defeats sustained in the War against Rome in 70….”  Thus, this crown should not be confused with Solomon’s kingly one.  It is a crown which his mother places on his head on the day of his wedding to the Shulamite.  I also think that Solomon, as the author of this poem, means to connect this short narrative (vs. 6-11) with the previous one (vs. 1-5) by ending each with a reference to mothers, first the Shulamite’s (v. 5) and then his own (v. 11).

---

^[1] Solomon does marry a princess of Egypt (1^st Kings 3:1); I just do not believe that the bride in  the Song of Solomon is that princess.

Solomon’s Song of Songs Notes: Introduction

Introduction:

The purpose of this poem is to celebrate the divine gift of erotic love by focusing on the romance between two characters:  the Shulamite and the Beloved.  Commentators often refer to the woman as “the Shulamite” because she is called this in 6:13.  Her home was probably the town of Shunem in northern Palestine.  Robert Gordis says this town was famous for having beautiful women (68).  The Beloved is the man; I use this term to refer to him because this is the term that the NKJ translation uses.

As for exactly who these two were, that is not clear to me.  What obscures their identities is the poetic nature of the work, which presents a variety of interpretive challenges in its frequent use of metaphor and its non-linear structure.  For instance, the Shulamite is often referred to as a shepherdess and a vinedresser, but she is also called a prince’s daughter in 7:1.  The Beloved seems sometimes to be King Solomon himself, but then in 8:11-12, the Beloved appears to be addressing Solomon as though he were someone else.  A similar difficulty is the fact that it is not always clear who the speaker is.  For instance, the NKJ translation has The Daughters of Jerusalem say, “We will run after you” in 1:4, but Gordis has the Shulamite girl say, “let us hasten” in the same place.  The non-linear structure adds to the difficulty of determining the identities of the lovers by breaking up the  narrative history of their romance. ^[1] The Song of Solomon is a collection of scenes and dialogues describing the love between the Shulamite girl and the Beloved.  It must assume an underlying storyline from which these scenes are taken, but the details of that storyline are difficult to sort out because some of the scenes may be fantasies or dreams^[2]of the lovers (as opposed to actual events in the lovers’ history).  Nevertheless, I will present my best attempt to reconstruct the linear narrative as a short prose summary at the end of this Introduction.

Having said all that, I will be assuming in these notes that the Beloved is King Solomon and that the Shulamite is a commoner, a shepherdess and vinedresser with whom Solomon falls in love.  My main reason for believing that Solomon is the Beloved is the description of his marriage in 3:6-11.  Why should a description of Solomon’s marriage appear in the midst of this love poem unless the king himself were the Beloved?  Those who do not believe Solomon is the Beloved have difficulty explaining the purpose of this section.  Ronald Murphy, for example, says that it has no connection to the verses preceding it or following it, concluding that “3:6-11 seems to be a somewhat foreign body within the Song” (151-152).  However, when one assumes that Solomon is the Beloved, this section fits very smoothly with its surrounding verses.  See notes on 3:6-11.  Murphy and others believe that titles like “King” and “Shepard” are lover’s fancies or poetic conventions.  Perhaps they are right, but the titles might just as easily describe literal reality.  In fact, the title of “vinedresser” strikes me as a literal description of the Shulamite.  Note that the descriptions of her as a vinedresser include the detail about her burnt skin (1:6).  Such an unflattering feature sticks out in a poem so occupied with sumptuous, hyperbolic descriptions of beauty and idyllic sensuality; thus, that particular feature has the tone of realism.

The authorship of the poem is unclear to many scholars as well.  Since the opening line attributes the poem to Solomon, I am content to assume that he is the author.  It seems that the primary objection to believing Solomon wrote the poem is the fact that it contains some foreign loan words (Persian and Aramaic).  These loan words, so the theory goes, would not have been in use among Hebrews living in Solomon’s time, but this seems like a weak argument to me.  Persia and Aram existed when Solomon was king, and Solomon’s economic connections extended as far as Africa and India.^[3] Is this not enough to explain the presence of foreign loan words in a poem that intentionally seeks out such terminology to achieve the effect of exoticism?  In fact, the presence of these terms could be seen as a support for Solomon’s authorship.  He was a writer of songs (1 Kings 4:32) and renowned as the most learned man of his day, always eager for knowledge.  Is it so very strange, then, to believe that he would know and make use of some Persian and Aramaic terminology?

There is a long-standing tradition of interpreting this poem as an allegory of God’s love for his people.  In as much as God’s ideal relationship with humanity is analogous to the love of a husband for his wife,^[4] I believe such an interpretation is easily applicable to the poem, even if its overt purpose is to describe the love between the Shulamite and the Beloved.  See note on 7:10 in particular.

Summary of the Love Story of the Shulamite and the Beloved…

Once there was a beautiful young girl who lived with her mother and brothers in Shunem, a town in northern Palestine.  Her brothers often bullied her and made her work for them by tending their sheep and vineyards, but one day she met a handsome shepherd as she was in the fields minding the flocks.  (This shepherd was none other than King Solomon in disguise.  He had learned of her from afar and wished to meet with her without all his royal pomp.)  She fell in love with this shepherd, and he with her.  Then, on a certain spring night, he came to her house and invited her to come out with him that they might share the joys of love together.  However, she hesitated to leave because of what her brothers might say; she only flirted coyly with him, and he left without ever having entered the house.  Later that night, she could not sleep.  She grew so upset about not accepting her Beloved’s invitation that she eventually got up to search for him in the town.  While out searching, she asked the night watchmen if they had seen him, but they mistook her for a prostitute and beat her.  Nevertheless, she eventually found her Beloved and swore never to let him go again.  She took him back to her mother’s house and openly declared her love for him to her brothers.  They tried to argue against her, but she put them off.  Then, the shepherd revealed his true identity and escorted the Shulamite to Jerusalem in a royal litter with an armed escort.  In Jerusalem they were married and enjoyed each other for the rest of their days, often reminiscing about the times when they first fell in love.

Solomon’s Song of Songs Chapter 2 Notes

Chapter 2

v. 1: Murphy believes this is a modest statement on the part of the girl, something like, “I’m just a common girl, one of the many lilies of the valley.”  Perhaps he is right.  I am not sure.  To me, she seems to be praising her own beauty, but I do not think this should necessarily be interpreted as arrogance on her part.  The conventions of the love poetry might have allowed her to praise herself in this way without coming across as conceited.  After all, she has defended her beauty before this in 1:5.  Solomon’s answer certainly accentuates the metaphor in v. 2.  The girl returns the favor in v. 3.

v. 6: This describes her as being under him and in his embrace, “…in his shade with great delight” (v.3).

v. 7: The interpretation of this is difficult.  My best reading of the NKJ translation could be paraphrased as “You can’t hurry love….”  If part of the underlying history of these two lovers is that they were parted from each other for some period of time (perhaps by the girl’s brothers) then this sentiment would make sense in the context of the poem.  The beginning of chapter three describes a period of separation, and, immediately after the lovers are reunited, the girl repeats this same advice as a kind of refrain to the Daughters of Jerusalem (3:5).  Gordis, however, paraphrases this section differently: “She adjures the daughters of Jerusalem by a solemn oath to leave the lovers undisturbed, till their desire be spent.”

vs. 8-17: These verses describe a scene in which the Beloved comes in the night (v. 17) to the girl’s home (v.9) and invites her to “come away” (v. 13) with him or at least to let him see her beautiful face and hear her sweet voice (v. 14).  She, however, because her brothers are taskmasters (v. 15), sends him away “until the day breaks” (v. 17).

v. 9: I believe this scene takes place at the girl’s home where she lives with her brothers^[1] and mother^[2] before she is married.  I say it is before she is married because the lovers are prevented from coming together.  Note the difference between their interaction here and in 1:4, which reads, “The king has brought me to his chambers.”  There is no family in 1:4 to get in the way of the lovers’ desires.  See also v. 15, 8:1, and 8:8-10.

v. 13: He invites her to share in the delights of love and of love’s season: spring.

v. 15: Nobody is very confident about what this passage means.  As Murphy says, “This verse has always been recognized as enigmatic” (141).  Many believe it is the girl’s response to the Beloved’s invitation, but it is spoken in the plural first person and addresses a plural group: “Y’all catch us the foxes.”  The NKJ translation assumes that the speakers are the girl’s brothers.  Murphy calls the response “a song or ditty,” and Barnes basically agrees, labeling it a “fragment of a vine dresser’s ballad.” I take this passage, therefore, to be the girl’s response to the Beloved’s invitation.  She is saying she cannot go with him right now because her brothers keep her working and will not allow her to court anybody.  It is their voices she is mocking^[3] when she sings, “Catch us the foxes…” by way of explaining her situation to him.  Perhaps she is making the song up on the spot, or perhaps she is referring to a familiar ballad and applying it to her situation.  Somebody might do the same today by applying the following ditty to herself:  “Cinderelly, Cinderelly/ Night and day it’s Cinderelly/ Make the fire, fix the breakfast/ Wash the dishes, do the mopping….”

It is also possible that she is being a little coy and flirtatious in this denial.  At least she seems to be so in 5:3, which I believe is a parallel passage.^[4] There, she mentions other reasons for not accepting his invitation.

vs. 16: See also 4:5 and 6:3.

v. 17: Gordis believes that in this verse the girl accepts the Beloved’s invitation and that the lovers “taste the joys of love until dawn.”  I do not believe this is the proper interpretation, however.  In Gordis’s translation, the girl says, “Until the day breaks…Turn my love, and be like a gazelle…Upon the mountain of spices^[5].”  The mountain of spices, then, would be a metaphor for the girl’s body, as it is in 8:14.  But the problem with his version is that the Hebrew word which he translates as “spices” (bether) here in 2:17 really means “separation,” not “spices.”  Murphy, who seems to agree with Gordis, explains:  “The etymology of [bether^[6]] suggests ‘separation.’  Another possibility is to understand [bether] in light of 8:14, where [besem^[7]] occurs in its place” (139).  So the mountain that she asks the Beloved to turn to is literally the mountain(s) of separation, the mountain(s) of Bether.  This name seems to suit the idea that she is asking him to depart from her more than the idea that she is inviting him to spend the night tasting “the joys of love” with her.  In addition to this, the very next chapter opens with the girl’s frantic search for her Beloved, from whom she is obviously apart.

Concerning the Hebrew word for “turn” here (cabab^[8]), Murphy writes, “[Cabab] is ambiguous; it could mean also mean ‘return’ or ‘turn aside’” (139).  Thus, the word could mean either “turn to me” or “turn away from me.”  However, in order for her use of the word to mean “turn to me,” her Beloved would have to be already turned away from her, and I see no reason to believe that he is turned away from her in any sense of the expression.  He has just invited her to come away with him and certainly is not turned away from her at this point.  Thus, when she says, “Turn,” she must mean, “Turn away” until the dawn.  The poet definitely intends for Calab to have this sense in 6:5, the only other place it appears in the Song of Solomon:  “Turn your eyes away from me.”

---

^[1] See note on 2:15.

^[2] See 3:4.

^[3] See 1:6.  The brothers have asked her to keep their vineyards, and this is not metaphorical, as her sunburned skin testifies.

^[4] See notes on 5:2.

^[5] Italics mine.

^[6] Strong’s entry 1335.

^[7] Strong’s entry 1314.

^[8] Strong’s entry 5437.

Solomon’s Song of Songs Chapter 1 Notes

Chapter 1

v. 4: “The Daughters of Jerusalem” may or may not be the speakers here (see Introduction), but they certainly do exist in the song.^[5] The NKJ translation seems to treat them as a kind of chorus (as in a Greek play) that have a collective personality which is positive and helpful.^[6]

v. 6: The Shulamite girl with whom Solomon is in love seems to have been a kind of Cinderella.  Instead of cruel stepsisters, the Shulamite had bullying brothers who were angry with her and made her keep their vineyards without giving her time to look after her own interests.^[7] Also, her constant hard work gave her a rough appearance.  Just as Cinderella was dressed in rags and covered in ashes, so this girl has been tanned by her long exposure to the sun.  This darkness is not a mark of beauty.  Notice that she seems a little insecure about it, saying things like “I am dark but^[8] lovely” (v.5) and “Do not look upon me, because I am dark.”

v. 7: We are not given much in the way of a detailed narrative here, but I imagine this conversation (7-10) taking place under the following circumstances.  While passing through the Shulamite’s native land, Solomon learns of her and is interested in courting her.  Disguising himself as a shepherd, the king approaches this girl among her flocks and wins her heart.  Then, when she asks where his flocks are (so she will not waste time searching fruitlessly for them in her attempt to rendezvous with him later), he directs her…

a) to his royal pavilions, which he has set up out of sight.  Perhaps they are near where the shepherds’ tents are typically set, or perhaps “beside the shepherds’ tents” is an example of litotes and refers to his royal pavilions.

Or

b) to a place she knows in the countryside where they can have a romantic tryst.^[9] That, I assume, is her purpose in asking where he rests his flocks at noon.  If they are resting, then he need not watch them so closely and can attend to her.

v. 13: The whole poem is filled with vivid, exotic, and sensuous imagery.  Some of it (this verse for instance) is overtly erotic, and I suspect that there are many more erotic images in it than are obvious to me.  See note on 7:2.

---

^[1] Nevertheless, the poem does have short narrative elements which are linear. See, for instance, 3:1-4.

^[2] Gordis, for instance, entitles 3:1-5 as “The Dream of the Lost Lover,” (55) but Ronald E. Murphy, addressing the same passage, writes, “whether this is a dream or not remains open” (146).

^[3] Gordis notes that the words for “apes” and “peacocks” in I Kings 10:22 are derived from Sanskrit, which suggests that “India was the point of origin of these luxuries” (22).

^[4] See notes on Genesis 2:18.

^[5] See 2:7, 3:5, and 5:8.

^[6] See 1:11 and 5:8-6:1.

^[7] Thus, she says, “But my own vineyard I have not kept.”  The vineyard is used as a metaphor for the girl’s body throughout the poem, and it may be so here.  If so, the quotation may be paraphrased as “I have not been able to care for my body as I would have liked,” which could allude to things like her dark, sunburned skin.

^[8] Emphasis mine.

^[9] Vs. 16 and 17 describe a moment of intimacy that takes place outdoors.

A New Study Series: Solomon’s Song of Songs

Last year, I thought I would post a chapter by chapter study of the book of Isaiah over the course of the summer.  This turns out to have been a bit ambitious since I have only just finished that study, but I am now embarking on a more manageable summer study:  Solomon’s Song of Songs.  It only has eight chapters (rather than sixty-six) so my hopes are high.  Chapter one will be coming soon!