Song of Songs

← Encyclopedia

The Song of Songs is the Hebrew Bible’s book of love poetry: a sequence of lyrics between two lovers — desiring, searching, praising one another’s bodies in cascades of imagery — in which God is never plainly named and nothing is asked of the reader but attention. It is also, and for that very reason, the most allegorized book in either testament. A text this physical, canonized in scripture, demanded explanation; twenty centuries of readers have supplied it.

The book’s own title verse links it to Solomon, and tradition long counted it among his works; modern scholarship treats the attribution as honorific and the date as unsettled, with proposals ranging across much of the first millennium BCE. Its canonicity was discussed early — a saying preserved in the Mishnah has Rabbi Akiva defend the book in the strongest language available, calling it the holy of holies among the sacred writings. The defense set the pattern: the Song was holiest precisely where it looked least holy.

The readings that secured its place were allegorical. Jewish interpretation heard the lovers as God and Israel — the courtship, estrangement, and reconciliation of a people with its Lord. Christian readers received that method and changed the cast: the bridegroom became Christ, the bride the Church, or, in the tradition’s most inward turn, the individual soul. Origen built the foundational Christian commentary on it in the third century; Bernard of Clairvaux, in the twelfth, preached a famous series of sermons on its opening verses that stood unfinished at his death — by then the Song had become the central text of Christian bridal mysticism, the language in which the soul’s union with God was spoken about at all. The mystics of the Kabbalah prized it no less. An entire vocabulary of Western mysticism — union, the kiss, the wound of love, the night search for the beloved — is this book’s vocabulary, lifted whole.

Modern scholarship largely reads the Song as what it appears to be: love poetry, possibly a collection rather than a single composition, with close relatives in the love songs of the wider ancient Near East, including Egypt’s. On this reading the allegories are receptions, not recoveries — the poem meant desire, and was made to mean God. The older traditions would answer that scripture means what it is read to mean in the assembly that keeps it, and that no book teaches the grammar of longing better. Both positions are old, and the argument between them has never closed; it may be the only book of the Bible whose plain sense was the scandal and whose hidden sense was the orthodoxy.

What is not in dispute is the trajectory: a poem that never names God became the West’s primary text about loving him. The Song itself, characteristically, keeps its own counsel — it ends not with a moral but with the beloved still in motion, like a gazelle on the mountains of spices.

→ Related: Mysteries Of The Rosary