A. Song 3:1-2: The Dear One Seeks the Loved One (pages
20,
21)
Here begins the first of two so-called "dream sequences" (verse 1-4; cf. Song 5:2-7) -- or is this a dream?
Verse 1 says, literally: "Upon my bed in the nights" ('al - mischkavi
baLélot). Haïk-Vantoura translates this: "On my bed night
after night..." Some translations have "every night", others "by" or "at night".
(The NIV has "all night long".) The word baLelot also appears in Psalm 92:3 (92:2, English versification). Here too, it is translated "every
night", "by/at night", or "night after night" by different exegetes.
In Song 3:8, baLélot is used in
the phrase "fear in the night" (KJV). The emphasis is not on a threat occurring every night, but on the
time of day when a threat is most likely. "Terror in the night" seems the obvious translation here. So
then, "on my bed in the night" is a reasonable translation for this phrase in Song 3:1.
This verse, at least, obviously refers to a dream. The melody is in minor with the 4th degree augmented; it gives
a wonderful sense of restlessness in sleep (the melodic line itself is reserved). This restlessness builds (with
the mode) to the end of verse 4. Does the dream build with it?
Let us look a little further. Haïk-Vantoura translates verse 2a: "I arose then to go about the city...",
even though, in Hebrew, the Dear One tells herself what she will do. The RSV puts Song 3:2 in quotes for this reason.
Is this self-deliberation part of the dream, or the result of it?
Here is where a detailed examination of the musical syntax can be edifying. If we cannot give one (for reasons
of space) in every place that might justify it, this example will show how musical and verbal analyses combine
to give our conclusions.
Verse 1 has a melody composed of small intervals; no great leaps occur as in the following verses. The range is
reserved: mostly within a third above or below the tonic -- again, unlike the following verses. The melodic motives
it introduces are used and varied in the following verses. Verse 1 is not separate from what follows it, even though
its melody is more reserved in toto than that of the following verses. All this defines a progression of action through time (i.e., of "state") starting
from verse 1, rather than of a summary in verse 1 followed by a description of the dream in verse 2-4.
"I will now arise" is marked by melismas (here, leaps of a second or third) which themselves rise from
the tonic.1 "And I will go
about the city, in the streets and in the squares" has a melody which suggests the Dear One's movement: a
rise from the tonic to the 5th degree on "I will go about"; a brief melodic turn (departing from the
5th degree) on "the city";2
a rise, then a fall of one degree from the 5th on "in the streets and in the squares" -- all on just
the right degrees of the mode required to suggest the painful longing behind the Dear One's search.
"I sought him who my soul loves" (verse 1) has the same series of musical signs as "I will seek
him whom my soul loves" (verse 2). The musical sign on biKashTi and avakscha is the
same.3 In verse 1, however, the
melisma it represents departs from the tonic, giving a feeling of relative calm, even somnolence. In verse 2, it departs from the augmented 4th degree, denoting a greater agitation (as of
direct action). Verses 3-4 build to a climax (in part through the use of a motif beginning verse 3 varied at the
beginning of verse 4), then resolve to a conclusion. Thus is the sense of progression of state built.4
We conclude that verse 1 refers to the Dear One's anxious dreams, occurring "night after night" (Haïk-Vantoura),
or (as we prefer) "in the night".5
"I will now arise," she says to herself in verse 2 -- not so much with determination as with deep longing
-- and does so, literally.
B. Song 3:3: The Watchmen of Mahanaim (pages
21,
22)
Where is Shulamith when this is happening? In verse 1, the Dear One is sleeping on her own bed; in verse 4, she
returns to her mother's house. Evidently she is still in Mahanaim, where we left her in Song 2:17. When Shulamith
encounters another group of watchmen, it will be in another city: Jerusalem (Song 5:7).
The watchmen of Mahanaim apparently receive her with some surprise. There is a touch of agitation in her description
of their encounter ("The watchmen found me as they went about the city..."). Her request, "Have
you seen him who my soul loves?" is gentle and plaintive. One can believe Shulamith is someone the watchmen
know, someone they will treat with compassion. She will not be so kindly treated in Jerusalem, where she is a stranger!
Here again, this confirms that the action in the two so-called "dream sequences" is literal.
C. Song 3:4: The Dear One Finds the Loved One (pages
22,
23)
A little while after she leaves the watchmen, she discovers her Loved One. The phrase "him who my soul loves"
(ét schéahava nafschi) has
the same melody here as in verse 1 and 2.6
Its use in verse 1-3 is part of the foundation on which the poetic and musical structure is built.
In this verse the melody rises to the highest pitch (and emotional tension) in this section, and right where it
should: when the Dear One brings the Loved One home -- not in happiness, but in desperate need of comfort! On "until
I had brought him" ('ad - schéhavêtiv),
the sign for the 6th degree is introduced below the words, followed by a melisma which raises the melody to the
7th degree. Only when the Lovers reach Shulamith's home, then the chamber of
her mother, does the melody
resolve to the tonic (and the Dear One's anxiety to relative calm).
One might expect a dream to begin with a nightmare, but to resolve to a happy ending. Fruchtenbaum thinks so.7 In real life, one should expect what we actually
find: even when Shulamith finds Solomon, it takes time for her to calm down. Yet only the Song's melody could have
indicated this to us (cf. Song 3:2 below):
How very different is the original melody of the Song from that used in the modern
Ashkenazi synagogue! The verse in the Ashkenazi rite (with its rather different verbal pronunciation) begins
charmingly enough:
The "tropes" used are ornate, infused with a "breath of spring".
Some elements of the "tropes" attached to the te`amim do suggest their original musical function (such as the sustained 5th degree on vaaçovva, for example). As the chant proceeds,
however, its arbitrary imposition of melodic
motives suggests to us "spring fever" rather than spiritually-based romantic love! In Song 3:2 (and 2:17)
especially, it lacks the connection with the words, the trueness to human experience so neatly expressed by Haïk-Vantoura's
restitution, despite the much greater simplicity and gravity of the restituted melody.
Many commentators have remarked in various ways on how Shulamith's feelings might relate to the Divine Dear One's
responses to her Loved One. One analogy may be safely drawn: it is only natural for the Dear One (whether the typical
or the antitypical) to be anxious as she sees "the day drawing near" (cf. Hebrews 10:25, etc.).
D. Song 3:5: The Dear One's Second Admonition (page
23)
We saw the Dear One's first admonishment in Song 2:7, when Shulamith was in Jerusalem. Song 3:1-4 describe events
happening to the Lovers in Mahanaim. Why then does the Dear One address the Daughters of Jerusalem in verse 5?
Throughout verse 1-4, the Dear One describes a past event (as the verbal grammar makes clear in context). Verse
5, though it ends this poetic section, is in the present, sometime after the events in verse 1-4 occurred. (Its
musical theme sets it off slightly from the thematic structure of the preceding four verses.) All these verses
are addressed to a listening audience: not just those listening to the work, but to someone in the dramatic structure.
Does all this mean that Shulamith has already returned to Jerusalem, where she addresses the Daughters face-to-face?
Have some of Solomon's "ladies-in-waiting" accompanied Solomon to Mahanaim? Or is this adjuration strictly
rhetorical (along perhaps with at least two of the other three)?
This question is tied to whether the preceding section describes a dream or a real event. If Solomon has returned
to Jerusalem, one could still expect anxious dreams of separation on the part of Shulamith -- even to the strange
logic of her asking for, then finding him in Mahanaim.8 Were he still in Mahanaim, Shulamith could of course actually find him there (and the "texture"
-- the sequence of melodic notes -- confirms the latter). Even so, it is hard to explain the Daughters' literal
presence in Mahanaim.
We think nevertheless that Shulamith's adjuration is not strictly rhetorical. The melos, here and in the other three adjurations, has too much of a "sense of reality" (thanks
to the integrated musical and verbal syntaxes). All that remains is to explain why this should be so.
Obviously, Shulamith needed to make her own preparations for the wedding (which could have been quite involved).
Then, too, Solomon needed to escort her officially to Jerusalem. Some of the "daughters of Jerusalem"
-- some of Shulamith's new friends, Solomon's court women, or both -- would have been present also in Solomon's
party. This would only be natural, as the groom normally went to the bride's home to escort her to the site of
the wedding (cf. Matthew 25:1-13; Psalm 45:14-16, Hebrew versification). Surely the maids of the wedding party
would have been included, and certainly Solomon could afford to bring them. Shulamith would naturally express her
wish that they one day share her happiness -- and tells them to wait for Love's own time.9
The musical theme, despite its slight separation from the preceding verses, flows consequentially out of them (this
is, again, a matter of melodic "texture"). This supports our idea that the Daughters (some of them) have
come to Mahanaim to assist with wedding preparations.
E. Song 3:6-11: The Loved One's Wedding
(pages
23,
24,
25,
26,
27)
Virtually every translator assigns these verses to a narrator. The NIV proposes Shulamith narrates these verses;
a very few commentators think a chorus does. Is this a wedding of Solomon and a less-than-willing Shulamith (who
allegedly dreams of her shepherd lover in 3:1-4)? Or is this wedding the natural consequence of their mutual love?
The melody thus far has confirmed the latter point of view. The musical link between 3:1-4 and 6-11 (created by
verse 5) puts the wedding in the context of the Lovers' relationship. The mode used in verse 6-11 marks an emotional
and spiritual high point in the Song -- as one should expect if this be a story of a couple, not a triangle.
Are these verses to be recited by a soloist or single choir? Not at all. The alternating melodic-verbal phrases indicate alternating male and female choirs. The existence
of this structure has never been inferred from the words alone; indeed, it would be difficult (if not impossible)
to do so.
Verses 6, 9 and 10 are sung by the female choir: the Daughters of Jerusalem (or "of Zion" -- cf. verse
11) The melody remains mostly on and above the 4th degree. Verses 7, 8 and 11 are sung by the male chorus, the
Sons of Jerusalem. Their melody remains mostly on the 4th degree and below. Not only do these ranges fit the natural
characteristics of the average male and female voice; they increase the contrast between the choirs' performances.
The subjects of these verses confirm Haïk-Vantoura's assignment of choirs. The women sing, "What is this...perfumed
with myrrh and frankincense, with all powders of the merchant?" (KJV).10 The men respond by describing Solomon's "litter", surrounded by an honor guard of
Israel's finest soldiers (verse 7-8) -- something conforming to male interests. The women notice the luxury and
beauty of Solomon's "palanquin", made of the finest materials: cedar of Lebanon, silver, gold, and cloth
no doubt dyed with Tyrian purple (verse 10). Finally, the men commend Solomon's wedding, with all of its royal
majesty, to the daughters of Zion (verse 11).
The mode in these verses is Hypophrygian (Mixolydian in "church mode" terminology), with a variable 4th
degree. The 4th degree is augmented in verse 6, 8, 9 and 10, natural in 7 and 11. Though the modality used here
is reminiscent of medieval music, the character of the melody is completely its own.
The words mi zot `ola min - haMidbar ("Who
[or what] is this that comes up from the wilderness...?") are found (with the same melody) in 8:5. There,
"Who is this...?" is sung by the Sons of Jerusalem; in 3:6, "What is this...?" is sung by the
Daughters.
We translate here (contrary to Haïk-Vantoura) "What is this...?" rather than "Who...?" Our decision is only partly arbitrary. This phrase describes Shulamith, carried
by a litter, in the midst of a procession.11
The Dear One is the center of attention in this verse, even if we do not hear her name or voice!
The words "like pillars of smoke, mixed with...all scented powders of the merchant", draws an analogy
between the clouds of incense which rises from the procession, and the dust raised by the procession coming through
haMidbar -- the desert. The verbs "coming
up" and "perfumed" are both in feminine form, as zot and miTa ("litter")
are of feminine gender.12
Here we watch the Lovers arriving at Jerusalem, after being brought from Mahanaim through the Arabah and the Wilderness
of Judea to Jerusalem. The procession comes up to Jerusalem from the eastern lowlands (probably up the ancient
road from Jericho, between Mt. Scopus and the Mount of Olives), not from the north (from Shunem) through the hill
country.13 The wedding itself is
outside the city (perhaps in the Valley of Jehosaphat14), for the Daughters "go forth" to see it (verse 11).
Some speculate that King Solomon's honor guard betrays his insecurity as king. Exactly
the opposite is true; the melody shrugs off the "terror by night"
almost casually.15 An interval of
a perfect fourth followed by a major third (the 6th degree followed by the 3rd degree, itself followed by the tonic)
accents the words mipahad baLelot ("against
terror in the night"). The soldiers are not armed merely for show -- but their presence is protection enough.
Solomon's royal security force impresses the Sons of Jerusalem, as the concern it shows no doubt impresses Shulamith.
Are the "litter" and "palanquin" (KJV "chariot", verse 9) the same thing? If so,
why use two different words? Most commentators realize these mean two separate items. The "litter" (a
feminine word, as we have said) likely bears Shulamith (which explains in part why the Sons mention it); but does
it also bear Solomon? No. This would not
be appropriate before the wedding, and the rest of this section confirms our supposition.
King Solomon's palanquin is 'apiryon in
Hebrew, a masculine word (see Appendix 1). (This fits with its description by the Daughters rather than the Sons,
which description also implies Solomon's presence in it.) It is not a canopied
marriage bed as some allege.16 Its description in verse 10b is problematic to translators, especially the word ratsuf (cf. Appendix 1). Haïk-Vantoura translates
this hemistich "its interior lovingly adorned by the daughters of Jerusalem". The BDBG translates this
phrase "its interior fitted out (?) with love".
We think Roberta Kells Dorr (in her book Solomon's Song)
has the right idea.17 One may render
the phrase more literally: "its interior being inlaid: 'Love from the Daughters of Jerusalem'". This
is essentially Dorr's rendering.
In the Letteris Edition, the 5th degree on ratsouf
is immediately followed by the tonic on 'ahava
(love) -- which puts special emphasis on "love". One might just as easily connect the word "love"
with "from the Daughters of Jerusalem" as with "being inlaid". Haïk-Vantoura translates
the words accordingly. We think the punctuation we suggest is preferable, even if the sequence of te`amim used here more commonly links words than divides
them. It is the musical "texture" leading up to the verbal ambiguity that decides.18
A few commentators, seizing upon the wording "for the daughters of Jerusalem" found in the KJV, think
that Solomon seeks to impress the Daughters of Jerusalem with his furnishings. Not
so! The lavish appointments of the palanquin are a gift "from (mi-) the Daughters of Jerusalem". They are how they choose to honor him, not how he chooses
to impress them (and the melody, once again, confirms this).
We see the only two references to "King Solomon" here, at his wedding (aside from "the king"
in Song 1:4 and "a king" in Song 7:5). Does this mean (as some allege) that Solomon was only called "king"
in the sense any groom would supposedly be called "king"? (This refers to traditional Syrian wedding
practices, which we discuss in Appendix 3.)
No. We are told King Solomon "made
for himself" the palanquin in preparation for the wedding. Naturally, "the crown with which his mother
crowned him" was specifically made for his wedding
(hatouNato).19
Finally, some exegetes (especially some "love-triangle" theorists) accuse Solomon of betraying gross materialism throughout the Song -- and nowhere more
than at his wedding. This scene, they say, contrasts Solomon's opulence and the simplicity of the shepherd (which
simplicity is nearer to Shulamith's heart). Some allege the wedding took place rather late in Solomon's life --
when he already had a sizable harem as well as great wealth -- and some naturally connect it to the Queen of Sheba's
visit.
The music of the Song denies Solomon's
materialism throughout -- and nowhere more emphatically
than here. It gives the wedding of the Lovers a highly spiritual tone. The chant is lyrical, yet noble; the wedding, resplendent with royal
pomp -- but also with holy idealism. This wedding must have occurred in Solomon's youth, while Bathsheba was still alive (verse
11), long before his polygamy and his materialistic experiments as the Preacher (and long before the Queen of Sheba
visited him as well).
The fact this is Solomon's wedding (verse
11) is one reason why the Song is a type of God's covenant relationships with the kehal
ha'Elohim (the Old Covenant with national Israel, the New Covenant with the
Church). These covenants are described as marriage agreements (e.g., Jeremiah 3:13, KJV; Revelation 19:7-9; cf.
Psalm 45). In them, the royal Loved One (God), not the Dear One chosen by grace (His beloved people), is given
the chief honor. They are His weddings.
"A voice cries in the wilderness (baMidbar):
'Prepare ye the way of the Lord; make ye straight in the desert (ba'arava) a highway for our God'" (Isaiah 40:3, translation ours). The original melody preserved
by the te`amim so punctuates this verse.
It denies the punctuation given both by post-Christian rabbinic teaching and the grammatical rules imposed upon
the te`amim by the Masoretes and their
successors. The original melody confirms the punctuation (and therefore the sense) given by the Septuagint and
the Gospels. It also allows us to connect this verse indirectly with the Song of Songs.
Several prophecies indicate that the LORD -- in New Testament terms, the Divine
Messiah -- shall enter Jerusalem from the east, from the desert, at His return
to earth. The New Testament Bride, the Church, shall meet Him and come to Jerusalem with Him. Israel shall know
Him and be strong in Him (Zechariah 12; 14). Is is any wonder that Solomon, described several times in both Testaments
as a type of the Messiah (Psalms 45, 72; 2 Samuel 7:12-16; 1 Chronicles 17:11-14; Hebrews 1:5), comes from Mahanaim
through the araba, then the desert (haMidbar) east of Jerusalem to the Holy City? Or that
Shulamith apparently weds him outside the city, then enters it with him after the wedding (cf. Revelation 19:7-9,
11ff)?
Haïk-Vantoura adds a few notes of accompaniment after the vocal melody of this chapter ends. Perhaps something
like this indeed ended the chapter in the original performance. We are left deeply touched by the purity and holiness
of this marriage, and by the mutual love which inspires it.
|
