On Reading and Translating Shir Ha-Shirim

The allegorical reading of Shir Ha-Shirim (SHS) runs through our tradition.  But I believe it is important -- as bnei Torah -- to acknowledge the natural reading (peshat) of the book, permeated by a love of nature and praises of earthly love. 

The tension between peshat and derash in SHS has been addressed over the centuries by our greatest exegetes; Rashi is a fascinating example.  Aside from his commentary, we are fortunate to have Rashi's methodology spelled out with great clarity in his introduction to the commentary.  This text should be required reading for any ben Torah who has struggled with Shir Ha-Shirim.

Rashi's introduction is translated and quoted at length within the introductory paragraphs to SHS in the ArtScroll Stone Chumash (pp. 1263ff.), but only partially.  The opening, and most critical, lines have been omitted by the editor, apparently for ideological reasons.  The omission is glaring and surprisingly brazen, considering that the full text of Rashi's introduction is printed in standard editions of Chumash Mikraot Gedolot, at the back of Vayikra.  

Here is my translation of the "missing" portion of Rashi's introduction:

"God has spoken once; twice have I heard it (Ps. 62:12):  This means that a single verse of Scripture may have multiple interpretations" (Sanhedrin 34a).  After all is said and done, there is no verse in Scripture whose interpretation may deviate completely from its simple and literal meaning.  Although the prophets spoke allegorically, one must interpret their allegories according to the structure of the text and the sequence of the verses, one following another . . . I have endeavored to preserve the literal meaning of the text and to interpret the verses in sequence.  I shall also cite the midrashim of our Sages, each in its appropriate place . . .

Rashi's loyalty to peshat and textual context is as strong as his loyalty to midrash.


For example, on the verse below (2:12), Rashi first provides a completely literal commentary, followed by a midrashic one.

 הַנִּצָּנִים נִרְאוּ בָאָרֶץ עֵת הַזָּמִיר הִגִּיעַ וְקוֹל הַתּוֹר נִשְׁמַע בְּאַרְצֵנוּ:

Below is my translation of the literal portion of Rashi's commentary on this verse:

הַנִּצָּנִים נִרְאוּ בָאָרֶץ  -- Spring is arriving, when trees bloom and travelers delight in seeing them.

עֵת הַזָּמִיר הִגִּיעַ  -- The birds are singing, providing pleasing sounds to travelers.

וְקוֹל הַתּוֹר -- Read this literally . . . birds normally sing and chirp in the spring.

Compare Rashi's literal commentary to the ArtScroll Stone translation of this verse:

The righteous blossoms are seen in the land, the time of your song has arrived, and the voice of your guide is heard in the land (emphasis added).

Now, the Stone translation purports to be "allegorical, based on Rashi's commentary."  But this is misleading.  The translator should have said, "based on the allegorical portion of Rashi's commentary."  I do not believe that this translation is a faithful reflection of Rashi's commentary.  The critical thrust of Rashi's method has been ignored throughout the translation and omitted from the presentation of Rashi's introduction.  I further believe that had Rashi himself translated SHS into Old French, he would have based it on the literal thread of his commentary. 

This is not to say that the peshat and derash layers are equivalent or interchangeable for Rashi.  The peshat, no doubt, is a means to the deeper level of derash.  Yet, Rashi insists on a precise knowledge of the means, the literal text, as a prerequisite for reaching the end.

The editor of the Stone Chumash, like Rashi, justifies his methodology: 

". . .The Song is an allegory.  It is a duet of love between God and Israel.  Its verses are so saturated with meaning that nearly every one of the major commentators finds new themes in its beautiful but cryptic words.  All agree, however, that the true and simple meaning of Shir HaShirim is the allegorical meaning.  The literal meaning of the words is so far from their meaning that it is false. . . . Has it been misinterpreted by fools and twisted by scoundrels?  Most assuredly Yes! . . ." 

(R. Nosson Scherman, The Chumash, ArtScroll Series, Stone Edition, Mesorah, Brooklyn, 1998, pp. 1263-1267.  The last sentence appears verbatim in the "Overview" of the original ArtScroll edition; see R. Nosson Scherman, Shir haShirim, Mesorah, New York, 1977, p. lxvi.  This edition also includes the truncated version of Rashi's introduction, on p. 67).

This statement is, at best, inaccurate.  "All" do not agree, certainly not Rashi, "that the true and simple meaning of Shir HaShirim is the allegorical meaning."  The "literal meaning" is not "false"; it is part of a "true" reading of SHS.  (I am playing along with ArtScroll's terminology -- "true" and "false" are inappropriate categories in this context).  There is no doubt that the literal layer of meaning in SHS was critically important to Rashi, as it should be to us.  And if those who have "misinterpreted and twisted" SHS (presumably, those who have interpreted it literally) are "fools and scoundrels" then, has ve-shalom, the second-century tanna R. Yonatan is one as well.  R. Yonatan appears to have read SHS literally, calling it "divre zemer" (poetry or song) and attributing it to a young Solomon, as stated in Shir Ha-Shirim Rabba (1:10):

ר׳ יונתן אמר שה״ש כתב תחלה ואח״כ משלי ואח״כ קהלת. ומייתי לה ר׳ יונתן מדרך ארץ. כשאדם נער אומר דברי זמר, הגדיל אומר דברי משלות, הזקין אומר דברי הבלים.

An approach more faithful to the spirit of Rashi's method, in a contemporary format, can be found in the introduction and commentary of Amos Hakham, in Mossad Harav Kook's Da'at Mikra series.  The rest is commentary (and translation).  Go and learn.