 |
|
 |
1. The Netsiv in his introduction to Sefer Breishit, differentiates between two types of text. One type distills a certain line of thought from amongst the variety of experience around us; it is limiting on purpose. We usually identify this as prose. The second type is meant to be read in a manner that makes you consider what the text intimates, calls upon the reader to read between the lines, to look for allusions. This sort of text he considers to be Shira (Song). Its clear that this refers to poetry - and in fact it may refer to music and other media beyond poetry.
In the same introduction, the Netsiv discusses how in Devarim 31:19 the Torah calls its whole text a Shira to be treated as described above. The impact of this approach is tremendous - it calls upon the reader of Torah to be sensitive to the text on many levels, to read what is written as you read poetry, assuming that each word, each line, alludes to ideas beyond the text, indeed cannot be understood without discovering those allusions since it was meant to be read exactly that way. In the case of the Torah, the text invites you to read it for its halachik content, aggadic content, and other levels of meaning. It invites you to understand it in reference to its setting and to its traditions of understanding. To not do so, to read it merely literally, would be as silly as reading Shakespeare or Yeats or Eliot without a sense of what they are alluding to when they pick a particular word or phrase.
2. If this is the case with Torah; Shira - what are we to make of a text explicitly titled Song of Songs; Shir Ha-Shirim? After all, although its clear that the text must be understood through what its words mean, the title tells us that if we want to understand what the text is getting at then its words must be ultimately understood as allusions! But allusions allude - to what does this allude?
To do justice to this question, it pays to consider what the point of such a book is. For comparisons sake, we ought to begin by considering what the point of the Torah is.
3. The point of the Torah, one that is the uniting link for all the meanings derived from it, is to establish the identity of the Jew or perhaps the Jewish people in context and in reality. Thus, all that is derived from the book relates back to this basic theme.
Books of Nevi'im and Ketuvim (Prophets and Later Writings) have narrower focuses, although they all relate back to the focus of the key book, the Torah. Thus, a book in Nevi'im and Ketuvim such as Shoftim (Judges) may focus on national reward & punishment or the evolution of the tribes into a political entity, whereas Job in Ketuvim, may focus on the issue of divine justice. Shir Ha-Shirim focuses on its own idea - the possibility and experience of close and intimate relationships between humanity and G-d. Now intimacy in any case is hard to describe in its fullness - it is not easy to do justice to the intensity of intimate experience. It is even harder to describe G-d as part of an intimate relationship, for you then attempt to describe spiritual experience itself! Only hints, allegories, and metaphors can succeed in an answering how such a relationship happens, or what it feels like. To sum up, what the text hints at is the very nature of a spiritual existence, and as such it by its nature must present its message in hints - for the experience being described defies direct explanation.
4. This need to understand the allegories and allusions of this ultimate Shira has driven interpreters of the text for millenia. Due to the nature of the book, they all have agreed to find the significance of the book in what it alludes to, and not in its literal meaning. But not every interpretation interprets the same. In the Midrash, much of the interpretation (though not all) focuses on the intimate relationship of the nation to G-d. Although many commentators follow this theme in their interpretation of the text, others such as Maimonides focus you on the intimate relationship of the true individual lover of the divine with G-d. In the 20th century, other levels of interpretation have been suggested. For example, Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik in Uvikashtem MeSham focuses the reader on the difficulties of the relationship between G-d and man, a relationship where one is driven towards G-d, longs for G-d, and yet never entirely can reach and maintain an intimate relationship - the experience is inevitably fleeting. In his interpretation one can see the struggles of a great Torah mind of the 20th century, dealing with (but not dominated by) ideas of Kantian and Existentialist background, impacted by the Holocaust, yet still grounded in the foundation of Shir Ha-Shirim.
Different eras depict the relationship in different frameworks and experiences of intensity and intimacy; different questions and perspectives arise. All is inspired by the text, a text meant to be understood as one would understand poetry. Inevitably, more interpretations will come, as long as we feel the need to understand and experience a G-d that offers intimacy, but not on our terms.
5. And so, when reading Shir Ha-Shirim one must struggle to interpret the text with requisite depth...and with experiential bravery too. One cannot be content with simple explanation - the explanation must be experiential, must convey intimacy, and so the text demands allusions.
Consistent with this, we can understand why the Talmud describes the nature of the book in an intriguing manner - Tanach is Kodesh (Holy), whereas Shir Ha-Shirim is Kadosh Kadoshim (Holy of Holies). The intent of such a comment is confusing - how could it have a status beyond all other texts? This becomes understandable if we compare these categories of holiness to other such categories. Consider the actual accessibility of the Kadosh Kadoshim in the Temple. The degree of intimacy is exclusive and unique - in the Temple it is only for the Kohen Gadol (High Priest) once a year on Yom Kippur, under particularly demanding conditions. Alternatively, we can compare the category to the most intimate sanctified personal relationships - Kidushin (marriage). Marriage permits exclusive intimacy with a spouse at appropriate times. And so our book describes intimacy, and is thus Kadosh Kadoshim - not able to be shared, unique to ones experience, filled with passion and intensity.
6. And so, no matter which level of experience it is describing, no matter which era is attempting to understand it, Shir Ha-Shirm alludes to the intimate relationship between people and G-d, an intimacy that defies direct description. That it is read on Passover, and is coupled with a Torah reading that also describes an intimate relationship with G-d, tells us something that cannot be forgotten about our relationship to Torah. We must demand a high degree of experiential intimacy in what we do, and although this intimacy may not be experienced the same way in each generation, without it there is no Geula (redemption) of the Ruach v'Neshama (Soul and Spirit), and then the Guf (body) itself is crippled. Mere freedom is not enough, it is no better than a text read literally and automatically, without insight, without depth, and without the guidance of its tradition of understanding.
|
|
