Heb “my inward parts,” “my intestines,” or “my bowels.” Alternately, “my feelings” or “my emotions.” The term מֵעֶה ( me ’ eh ) is used of the internal organs in general (“inward parts”) (e.g., 2 Sam 20:10 ; 2 Chr 21:15, 18 ; Pss 22:14; 40:9 ) or the digestive organs in particular (“intestines, bowels, stomach”) (e.g., Num 5:22 ; Job 20:14 ; Ezek 3:3; 7:19 ; Jonah 2:1-2 ). It is frequently used as a metonymy of adjunct for the emotions which Hebrew psychology associated with these internal organs (see H. W. Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testament , 63-66). These include pity ( Isa 16:11 ), lamentation ( Jer 48:36 ), distress ( Jer 4:19 ; Lam 1:20; 2:11 ), and compassion ( Isa 63:15 ; Jer 31:20 ) ( HALOT 610-11 s.v. מֵעֶה 3; BDB 589 s.v. מֵעֶה 5). Most scholars suggest that the Beloved’s feelings of love were revived – a reversal of her feelings of indifference and apathy in 5:3 . This is reflected in many translations which use equivalent English idioms: “the core of my being” (JB) and “my heart” (NIV, NJPS) over the woodenly literal “my bowels” (KJV, NEB, AV). On the other hand, the term is also used to refer to the procreative organs, both male (e.g., Gen 15:4 ; 2 Sam 7:12; 16:11 ; Isa 48:19 ; 2 Chr 32:21 ) and female (e.g., Gen 25:23 ; Ruth 1:11 ; Ps 71:6 ; Isa 49:1 ). NASB well renders the line, “my feelings were aroused for him” (NASB).


The exact meaning of this Hebrew verb is uncertain. The exact connotation of the verb הָמוּ ( hamu ) in 5:4 is debated. The verb הָמָה ( hamah , “to murmur, growl, roar, be boisterous”) is related to the noun הָמוֹן ( hamon , “sound, murmur, roar, noisy crowd”), הֶמְיָה ( hemyah , “sound, music”), and perhaps even הָמֻלָה ( hamulah , “noise, noisy crowd, crowd”). The Hebrew root המה is related to Aramaic המא (“to roar; to be agitated”). The Hebrew verb הָמָה has a basic two-fold range of meanings: (1) literal: “to make a noise” of some kind and (2) figurative: “to be in commotion, uproar” (e.g., often associated with noise or a noisy crowd). The lexicons suggest six distinct categories: (1) “to make a noise” or “to be in commotion,” particularly by a tumultuous crowd ( 1 Kgs 1:41 ; Pss 39:7; 46:7 ; Prov 1:21 ; Is 22:2 ; Mic 2:12 ); (2) “to roar,” of the sea and sea-waves ( Isa 17:12; 51:15 ; Jer 5:22; 6:23; 31:35; 50:42; 51:55 ; Ps 46:4 ); (3) “to make a sound,” e.g., bear growling ( Isa 59:11 ), dog barking ( Ps 59:7, 15 ), bird chirping ( Ps 102:8 ), dove cooing ( Ezek 7:16 ); (4) “to moan,” ( Ps 39:7; 55:18 ; Prov 1:21 ; Lam 2:18 ; Ezek 7:16 ; Zech 9:15 ); (5) “to be turbulent, boisterous” ( Prov 7:11; 9:13; 20:1 ; Zech 9:5 ); and (6) figuratively of the internal organs: “to murmur, be restless, be turbulent,” used in reference to pity ( Isa 16:11 ; Jer 4:19; 31:20; 48:36 ), discouragement ( Ps 42:6, 12; 43:5 ), and murmuring in prayer ( Pss 55:18; 77:4 ) ( HALOT 250 s.v. המה ; BDB 242 s.v. הָמָה ). HALOT suggests “to be turbulent” for Song 5:4 ( HALOT 250 s.v. 4 ), while BDB suggests “the thrill of deep-felt compassion or sympathy” (BDB 242 s.v. 2 ). Commentators offer a spectrum of opinions from the Beloved feeling agitation, pity, compassion, sexual arousal, or a revival of her love for him. A survey of the translations reveals the same lack of consensus: “my bowels were moved for him” (KJV), “my bowels stirred within me” (NEB), “my heart was thrilled within me” (RSV), “I trembled to the core of my being” (JB), “my heart trembled within me” (NAB), “my heart was stirred for him” (JPS, NJPS), “my feelings were aroused for him” (NASB), and “my heart began to pound for him” (NIV). While the precise meaning may never be agreed upon, whatever she was feeling she roused herself from her indifferent apathetic inactivity to arise and open for her beloved in 5:5 . The phrase is used similarly elsewhere in OT, rousing the subject to irresistible action ( Jer 4:19 ). The simplest course of action is to nuance this term metonymically (cause for effect), e.g., “my feelings were stirred up for him.”


The verb חָמַק ( khamaq ) occurs only in Song 5:6 (Qal: “to turn away, go leave”) and in Jer 31:22 (Hitpael: “to turn hither and thither”) ( HALOT 330 s.v. חמק ; BDB 330 s.v. חָמַק ). It is related to the noun חָמוּק (“curve, curved lines” of a woman’s hips) which appears only in Song 7:2 . This root does not appear in Mishnaic Hebrew nor has it yet been attested in any cognate language. However, it was understood in this sense by LXX παρῆλθεν ( parhlqen, “he turned aside”), and also handled in a similar manner in Aquila, Symmachus, Peshitta, and Vulgate.


The verbs עָבָר חָמַק ( khamaq ’ avar , “he turned away, he went away”) may form a verbal hendiadys. Normally, the first verb will function as an adverb modifying the second which functions in its full verbal sense. Each functions as a perfect of recent past perfect action, describing a past event that took place shortly before another past event: “I opened [past action] for my beloved, but my lover had already turned and gone away [past perfect action].”


Heb “my soul went out.” The term נַפְשִׁי ( nafshi , “my soul”) is a synecdoche of part for the whole person. The term נֶפֶשׁ ( nefesh , “soul”) is used over 150 times as a metonymy of association with feelings: sorrow and distress, joy, love, desire, passion, hatred, loathing, avarice ( HALOT 713 s.v. נֶפֶשׁ 8; BDB 660 s.v. נֶפֶשׁ 6). The phrase נַפְשִׁי יָצְאָה ( nafshi yats ’ ah , literally, “my soul went out”) is a Hebrew idiom connoting great despair (e.g., Gen 35:18 ; Jer 15:9 ). The phrase is well rendered by NIV: “my heart sank at his departure.” Verses 6-7 clearly indicate that the Beloved fell into despair when he had departed: She searched desperately for him, but could not find him; she called for him, but he did not answer.


Alternately, “spoke.” Traditionally, the term בְדַבְּרוֹ ( bÿdabbÿro ) has been related to the common root דָּבַר ( davar , “to speak”) which occurs nearly 1150 times in verbal forms and nearly 1500 times as a noun. This approach is seen as early as the LXX (although the LXX treated דָּבָר as a noun rather than an infinitive construct because it was working with an unpointed text): ἐν λογῷ αὐτοῦ ( en logw autou, “in his word”). Although they differ on whether the preposition בְ ( bÿ ) is temporal (“when”) or respect (“at”), many translations adopt the same basic approach as the LXX: “when he spake” (KJV), “as he spoke” (NASB), “when he spoke” (NIV margin), “at what he said” (JPS, NJPS). However, many recent scholars relate בְדַבְּרוֹ to the homonymic root דָּבַר (“to turn away, depart”) which is related to Akkadian dabaru D “to go away,” Dt “to drive away, push back” ( CAD 3:186ff), and Arabic dabara “to turn one’s back, be behind, depart, retreat” ( HALOT 209 s.v. II דבר ). Several examples of this root have been found ( Pss 18:48; 47:4; 56:6; 75:6; 116:10; 127:5 ; 2 Chr 22:10 ; Job 19:18 ; Song 5:6 ; Isa 32:7 ) ( HALOT 209-10 s.v. I). Several recent translations take this approach: “when he turned his back” (NEB), “at his flight” (JB), and “at his departure” (NIV). This makes better sense contextually (Solomon did not say anything after 5:2 a), and it provides a tighter parallelism with the preceding line that also describes his departure: “My beloved had turned away ( חָמַק , khamaq ); he was gone ( עָבַר , ’ avar )” (NIV).


The genitive construct חוֹלַת אַהֲבָה ( kholat ’ ahavah , “sick of love”) denotes “lovesick.” This is an example of a genitive of cause, that is, the Beloved was (physically/emotionally) sick because of her unrequited love for him. See study note on Song 2:5 .


Heb “How is your beloved [better] than [another] lover?”


The adjective אָדֹם (’ adom ) denotes either “manly” or “ruddy,” depending upon whether it is derived from אָדָם (’ adam , “man”; HALOT 14 s.v. I אָדָם ) or אָדֹם (“red”; HALOT 14 s.v. אָדֹם ). If it is “manly,” the idea is that he is the epitome of masculinity and virility. On the other hand, the emphasis would be upon his health and virility, evidenced by his ruddy complexion, or it could be a comparison between his ruddy coloring and the redness of rubies ( Lam 4:7 ).


Heb “outstanding.” The participle דָּגוּל ( dagul ) functions as a predicate adjective: “My beloved is…outstanding among ten thousand.” The verb דָּגַל ( dagal ) is relatively rare, being derived from the noun דֶּגֶל ( degel , “banner”) which often refers to a military standard which, when lifted up, was conspicuous for all to see ( Num 2:3-4; 10:14-15 ). The verb דָּגַל only occurs three other times, all referring to raising military banners for all to see ( Ps 20:6 ; Song 6:4, 10 ). Song 5:10 uses the term figuratively (hypocatastasis) to denote “outstanding” ( HALOT 213 s.v. דֶּגֶל ). This sense is closely related to the cognate Akkadian verb dagalu “to look, contemplate” and the noun diglu “eyesight, view (what is looked at).” Like a banner lifted high, he attracted the attention of all who looked at him.


Heb “from, among.” The preposition מִן ( min ) prefixed to רְבָבָה ( rÿvavah , “ten thousand”) is taken in a comparative, locative sense: “outstanding among ten thousand” (e.g., KJV, RSV, NASB, NIV, NJPS).


Heb “among ten thousand.” The numeral “ten thousand” is the highest number used in comparisons in Hebrew poetry ( 1 Sam 18:7-8; 21:12; 29:5 ; Ps 91:7 ). It is not used to mark out a specific number, but to denote an indefinite number of persons of the largest possible proportions ( Gen 24:60 ; Num 10:36 ; Deut 33:2 ; Ps 3:7 ). Her point is simply this: no other man could possibly compare to him in appearance, even if he were in a group of an infinite number of men.


Heb “his head is gold of pure gold.” In the genitive construct phrase כֶּתֶם פָּז ( ketem paz , literally, “gold of pure gold”) the genitive noun פָּז ( paz , “pure gold”) functions as an adjectival genitive modifying כֶּתֶם (“gold”), that is, “pure gold.” The repetition of two different words for “gold” suggests that the phrase should be nuanced “the most pure gold.” This phrase is a predicate nominate in a metaphorical statement: “his head is (like) the most pure gold.” In the OT gold is frequently used in comparisons to emphasize the idea of beauty, value, or rarity ( Job 28:12-19 ; Pss 19:11; 119:127 ; Prov 8:19 ; Isa 13:12 ; Lam 4:2 ). Palestine had no known sources of gold, but had to import it, making it a rare and precious commodity (Ruth V. Wright and R. L. Chadbourne, The Gems and Minerals of the Bible , 65).


Literally “his locks [of hair] are curls.” The Hebrew adjective תַּלְתָּל ( taltal ) is a hapax legomenon whose meaning is somewhat unclear. BDB suggests that תַּלְתָּל is from the root תּלל (“mound, heap”; BDB 1068 s.v. I תּלל ) which is related to Arabic tl “mound, hill, top” (E. W. Lane, Arabic-English Dictionary, 311) and Akkadian tilu “hill, mound” ( AHw 3:1358). On the other hand, HALOT suggests that תַּלְתָּל means “date-panicle” and that it is related to the Akkadian noun taltallu “pollen of date-palm” ( HALOT 1741 s.v. תַּלְתַּלִּים ). The term occurs in Mishnaic Hebrew as תַּלְתָּל “curls, locks” (Jastrow 1674 s.v. תַּלְתָּל ). It is used in the same way in the Song. The form tltl is a reduplicated pattern used for adjectives denoting an intense characteristic (S. Moscati, Comparative Grammar , 78-79, §12.9-13). It functions as a predicate adjective to the subjective nominative קוּצוֹתָיו ( qutsotav , “his locks of hair”).


Alternately, “towers of perfume.” The MT reads מִגְדְּלוֹת ( migdÿlot ) which yields the awkward “towers of perfume.” The term מִגְדָּל ( migdal , “tower”) is normally used in reference to (1) watch-towers, defended towers along the city wall, and individual towers in the countryside to protect the borders, (2) storehouses, and (3) a tower in a vineyard ( HALOT 543-44 s.v. I מִגְדָּל ). It is never used in OT in association with a flower garden. On the other hand, LXX reads φυουσαι ( fuousai, “yielding”) which reflects an alternate vocalization tradition of מְגַדְּלוֹת ( mÿgaddÿlot; Piel participle feminine plural from גָּדַל , gadal , “to increase, produce”). This makes good sense contextually because the Piel stem of גָּדַל means “to grow” plants and trees ( Isa 44:14 ; Ezek 31:4 ; Jonah 4:10 ) ( HALOT 179 s.v. I גדל 2). This revocalization is suggested by BHS editors, as well as the Hebrew lexicographers ( HALOT 544 s.v. 2; 179 s.v. I 2; BDB 152 s.v. גָּדַל 1). Several translations follow LXX and revocalize the text (RSV, NIV, NJPS margin): “His cheeks are like beds of spice yielding perfume” (NIV) and “His cheeks are like beds of spice producing perfume” (NJPS margin). The other translations struggle to make sense of the MT, but are forced to abandon a literal rendering of מִגְדְּלוֹת (“towers”): “banks sweet herbs” (ASV), “banks sweetly scented” (JB), “treasure-chambers full of perfume” (NEB), “banks of sweet scented herbs” (NASB), and “banks of perfume” (JPS, NJPS).


The term מֵעֶה ( me ’ eh ) is used in reference to several things in the Old Testament: (1) the womb of a woman ( Gen 25:23 ; Isa 49:1 ; Ps 71:6 ; Ruth 1:11 ), (2) a man’s loins ( Gen 15:4 ; 2 Sam 7:12 ; Isa 48:19 ; 2 Chr 32:21 ), (3) the “inward parts” of a person, such as the stomach or intestines which are used to digest food ( Num 5:22 ; Job 20:14 ; Ezek 3:3 ; Jonah 2:1-2 ), and (4) the external stomach or abdominal muscles: “abdomen” ( Song 5:14 ).


Heb “sweetnesses.” Alternately, “very delicious.” The term מַמְתַקִּים ( mamtaqqim , “sweetness”; HALOT 596 s.v. מַמְתַקִּים ; BDB 609 s.v. מַמְתַקִּים ) is the plural form of the noun מֹתֶק ( moteq , “sweetness”). This may be an example of the plural of intensity, that is, “very sweet” (e.g., IBHS 122 §7.4.3a). The rhetorical use of the plural is indicated by the fact that מַמְתַקִּים (“sweetness”) is functioning as a predicate nominative relative to the singular subjective nominative חִכּוֹ ( khikko , “his mouth”).


The term מַחֲמַדִּים ( makhmaddim , “desirable”) is the plural form of the noun מַחְמַד ( makhmad , “desire, desirable thing, precious object”; HALOT 570 s.v. מַחְמָד 1; BDB 326 s.v. מַחְמַד ). Like the plural מַמְתַקִּים (“sweetness”) in the preceding parallel line, this use of the plural is probably an example of the plural of intensity: “very desirable.”


The phrase “Tell us!” does not appear in the Hebrew but is supplied in the translation for the sake of smoothness.


Heb “And we may seek him with you.” The vav -conjunctive on וּנְבַקְשֶׁנּוּ ( unÿvaqshennu , “and we may seek him with you”) denotes purpose/result.


The verb לִרְעוֹת ( lir ’ ot , “to browse”; so NAB, NIV) is from the root רָעָה ( ra ’ ah , “to feed, graze”) which is used seven times in the Song ( 1:7, 8 a, 8b; 2:16; 4:5; 6:2, 3 ). All its uses appear to be either literal or figurative descriptions of sheep grazing. The verb is used twice in reference to sheep “grazing” in a pasture ( 1:7, 8 ). The participle is used once to designate “shepherds” ( 1:8 ), once in reference to two fawns which “which graze among the lilies” as a figurative description of her breasts ( 4:5 ), and twice as a figurative description of Solomon as “the one who grazes among the lilies” which is probably also a comparison of Solomon to a grazing sheep ( 2:16; 6:3 ). Therefore, it is likely that the usage of the term לִרְעוֹת (“to graze”) in 6:2 is also a figurative comparison of Solomon to a sheep grazing among garden flowers. Thus, there are two options: (1) nuance the term לִרְעוֹת as “to browse” (NAB, NIV) and take this as a literal action of Solomon walking through a real garden or (2) nuance the term לִרְעוֹת as “to graze” (NLT) and take this as a figure in which Solomon is pictured as a gazelle grazing on the flowers in a garden.


Or “I belong to my beloved, and my lover belongs to me.” Alternately, “I am devoted to my beloved, and my lover is devoted to me.”


He compares her beauty to two of the most beautiful and important cities in the Israelite United Kingdom, namely, Jerusalem and Tirzah. The beauty of Jerusalem was legendary; it is twice called “the perfection of beauty” ( Ps 50:2 ; Lam 2:15 ). Tirzah was beautiful as well – in fact, the name means “pleasure, beauty.” So beautiful was Tirzah that it would be chosen by Jeroboam as the original capital of the northern kingdom ( 1 Kgs 15:33; 16:8, 15, 23 ). The ancient city Tirzah has been identified as Tel el-Far`ah near Nablus: see B. S. J. Isserlin, “Song of Songs IV, 4: An Archaeological Note,” PEQ 90 (1958): 60; R. de Vaux, “Le premiere campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Far`ah,” RB 54 (1947): 394-433.


For location see Map5-B1 ; Map6-F3 ; Map7-E2 ; Map8-F2 ; Map10-B3 ; JP1-F4 ; JP2-F4 ; JP3-F4 ; JP4-F4 .


The verb רָהַב ( rahav ) should be nuanced “overwhelm” or “arouse” rather than “storm against,” “make proud,” “confuse,” “dazzle,” or “overcome” (BDB 923 s.v. רָהַב ).


Alternately, “your cheeks” or “your temple.” See 4:3 .


Alternately, “She alone is my dove, my perfect one.” The term אַחַת (’ akhat ) is used here as an adjective of quality: “unique, singular, the only one” ( DCH 1:180 s.v. אֶחָד 1b). The masculine form is used elsewhere to describe Yahweh as the “only” or “unique” God of Israel who demands exclusive love and loyalty ( Deut 6:4 ; Zech 14:9 ). Although Solomon possessed a large harem, she was the only woman for him.


Heb “the only daughter of her mother.” The phrase אַחַת לְאִמָּה (’ akhat lÿ ’ immah ) is sometimes translated as “the only daughter of her mother” (NIV, NASB) or “the only one of her mother” (KJV). K&D 18:112 suggests that she was not her mother’s only daughter, but her most special daughter. This is supported by the parallelism with בָּרָה ( barah , “favorite”) in the following line. Similarly, Gen 22:2 and Prov 4:3 use the masculine term אֶחָד (’ ekhad , “the only one”) to refer to the specially favored son, that is, the heir.


The term בָּרָה ( barah ) is sometimes nuanced “pure” (NASB) because the root ברר I denotes “to purify, purge out” (BDB 140-41 s.v. בָּרַר ). However, the root בָּרַר also denotes “to choose, select” (BDB 141 s.v. 2 ) ( Neh 5:18 ; 1 Chr 7:40; 9:22; 16:41 ). Most translations adopt the second root, e.g., “the choice one” (KJV), “the favorite” (NIV), “favorite” (JB). This is supported by the exegetical tradition of LXX, which translates בָּרָה as ἐκλεκτή ( eklekth, “the chosen one”).


Heb “daughters.”


Heb “to call blessed.” The verb אָשַׁר (’ ashar ) is used of people whom others consider fortunate because they have prospered or are to be commended ( Gen 30:13 ; Ps 72:17 ; Mal 3:12, 15 ). Likewise, the verb הָלַל ( halal , “to praise”) is used elsewhere of people who are held in high esteem by others either due to a commendable moral quality ( Prov 31:28, 31 ) or due to one’s physical beauty ( Gen 12:15 ; 2 Sam 14:25 ). The actual content of their praise of her appears in Song 6:10 in which they compare her beauty to that of the dawn, moon, sun, and stars.


Alternately, “rises” or “looks forth.” Delitzsch renders הַנִּשְׁקָפָה ( hannishqafah ) as “who rises,” while NIV opts for “who appears.” The verb means “to look down upon [something] from a height” and is derived from the related noun “ceiling, roof, sky” (BDB 1054 s.v. שָׁקַף ; HALOT 1645 s.v. שׁקף ). The verb is used of looking down over a plain or valley from the vantage point of a mountain-top ( Num 21:20; 23:28 ; 1 Sam 13:18 ); of God looking down from heaven ( Ps 14:2 ); or of a person looking down below out of an upper window ( Judg 5:28 ; 2 Sam 6:16 ; Prov 7:6 ). M. H. Pope ( The Song of Songs [AB], 571-72) suggests that this verb implies the idea of her superiority over the other women, that is, she occupies a “higher” position over them due to his choice of her. But another interpretation is possible: The verb creates personification (i.e., the dawn is attributed with the human action of looking). Just as the dawn is the focus of attention during the morning hours and looks down upon the earth, so too she is the focus of his attention and is in the privileged position over all the other women.


The term לְבָנָה ( lÿvanah ) literally means “the white one” (BDB 526 s.v. לְבָנָה ) and is always used in reference to the moon. It is only used elsewhere in the OT in parallelism with the term used to designate the sun ( Isa 24:23; 30:26 ), which likewise is not the ordinary term, but literally means “the hot one,” emphasizing the heat of the sun ( Job 30:28 ; Ps 19:6 ). Both of these terms, “the white one” and “the hot one,” are metonymies of adjunct in which an attribute (i.e., color and heat) are substituted for the subject itself. The white moon in contrast to the dark night sky captures one’s attention, just as the red-hot sun in the afternoon sky is the center of attention during the day. The use of the figurative comparisons of her beauty to that of the dawn, sun, moon, and stars is strikingly similar to the Hebrews’ figurative comparison of Simon the high priest coming out of the sanctuary to the morning star, moon, sun, and rainbow: “How glorious he was when the people gathered round him as he came out of the inner sanctuary! Like the morning star among the clouds, like the moon when it is full; like the sun shining upon the temple of the Most High, and like the rainbow gleaming in glorious clouds” (See G. Gerleman, Ruth, Das Hohelied [BKAT], 171).


Heb “pure as the sun.”


The adjective אָיֹם (’ ayom ) has been nuanced “terrible” (KJV, RSV), “frightful, fear-inspiring” (Delitzsch), “majestic” (NIV), “awesome” (NASB). In the light of its parallelism with יָפָה ( yafah , “beautiful”) and נָאוָה ( na ’ vah , “lovely”) in 6:4 , and יָפָה (“fair”) and בָּרָה ( barah , “bright”) in 6:10 , it should be nuanced “awe-inspiring” or “unnervingly beautiful.”


Heb “as bannered armies.” The term כַּנִּדְגָּלוֹת ( kannidgalot , “as bannered armies”) is used figuratively (hypocatastasis) in reference to stars which are often compared to the heavenly armies. This nuance is clear in the light of the parallelism with the dawn, moon, and sun.


The term אֱגוֹז (’ egoz , “nut”) probably refers to the “walnut” or “walnut tree” ( juglans regia ) ( DCH 1:116 s.v. אֱגוֹז ). The singular form is used collectively here to refer to a grove of walnut trees.


Most scholars agree that the Hebrew text of 6:12 is the most elusive in the entire Song. The syntax is enigmatic and the textual reading is uncertain. The difficulty of this verse has generated a plethora of different translations: “Or ever I was aware, my soul made me [like] the chariots of Ammi-nadib” (KJV), “Before I knew it, my soul made me like the chariots of Ammi-nadib” (AV), “Before I knew it, my fancy set me in a chariot beside my prince” (AT), “Before I knew…my desire hurled me on the chariots of my people, as their prince” (JB), “Before I knew it, my desire set me mid the chariots of Ammi-nadib” (JPSV), “I did not know myself, she made me feel more than a prince reigning over the myriads of his people” (NEB), “Before I knew it, my heart had made me the blessed one of my kins-women” (NAB), “Before I was aware, my soul set me [over] the chariots of my noble people” (NASB), “Before I realized it, my desire set me among the royal chariots of my people” (NIV), “…among the chariots of Amminadab” (NIV margin), “…among the chariots of the people of the prince” (NIV margin), and “Before I realized it, I was stricken with a terrible homesickness and wanted to be back among my own people” (NLT). For discussion, see R. Gordis, Song of Songs and Lamentations , 95; R. Tournay, “Les Chariots d’Aminadab (Cant. VI 12): Israel, Peuple Theophore,” VT 9 (1959): 288-309; M. H. Pope, Song of Songs (AB), 584-92; R. E. Murphy, “Towards a Commentary on the Song of Songs,” CBQ 39 (1977): 491-92; S. M. Paul, “An Unrecognized Medical Idiom in Canticles 6,12 and Job 9,21 ,” Bib 59 (1978): 545-47; G. L. Carr, Song of Solomon [TOTC], 151-53.


Alternately, “Before I realized it, my soul placed me among the chariots of my princely people.” There is debate whether נַפְשִׁי ( nafshi , “my soul” = “I”) belongs with the first or second colon. The MT accentuation connects it with the second colon; thus, the first colon introduces indirect discourse: לֹא יָדַעְתִּי ( lo ’ yada ’ ti ) “I did not know” or “Before I realized it….” According to MT accentuation, the fs noun נַפְשִׁי (“my soul”) is the subject of שָׂמַתְנִי ( samatni , Qal perfect 3rd person feminine singular from שִׂים , sim , + 1st person common singular suffix, “to put”): “my soul placed me….” This approach is followed by several translations (KJV, NASB, AV, AT, JB, JPSV, NAB, NIV). On the other hand, the LXX takes נַפְשִׁי (“my soul” = “I”) as the subject of לֹא יָדַעְתִּי and renders the line, “My soul [= I] did not know.” NEB follows suit, taking נַפְשִׁי as the subject of לֹא יָדַעְתִּי and renders the line: “I did not know myself.” R. Gordis and S. M. Paul posit that לֹא יָדַעְתִּי נַפְשִׁי (literally “I did not know myself”) is an idiom describing the emotional state of the speaker, either joy or anguish: “I was beside myself” (e.g., Job 9:21 ; Prov 19:2 ). S. Paul notes that the semantic equivalent of this Hebrew phrase is found in the Akkadian expression ramansu la ude (“he did not know himself”) which is a medical idiom describing the loss of composure, lucidity, or partial loss of consciousness. He suggests that the speaker in the Song is beside himself/herself with anguish or joy (S. M. Paul, “An Unrecognized Medical Idiom in Canticles 6,12 and Job 9,21 ,” Bib 59 [1978]: 545-47; R. Gordis, Song of Songs and Lamentations , 95).


While MT reads מַרְכְּבוֹת ( markÿvot , “chariots”) some medieval Hebrew mss add the locative preposition בְּ ( bÿ ) or comparative particle כְּ ( kÿ ) before מַרְכְּבוֹת to produce “in/on/among/like the chariots.” Most translations supply a preposition: “My soul made me [like] the chariots of Ammi-nadib” (KJV, AV); “My fancy set me [in] a chariot beside my prince” (AT); “My soul set me [over] the chariots of my noble people” (NASB); “My desire set me [among] the chariots of Amminadab” (JPS, NJPS, NIV margin); “My desire set me [among] the royal chariots of my people” (NIV); “My desire set me [among] the chariots of the people of the prince” (NIV margin); “My desire hurled me [on] the chariots of my people, [as their] prince” (JB). R. Gordis offers a creative solution to the enigma of שָׂמַתְנִי מַרְכְּבוֹת עַמִּי־נָדִיב ( samatni markÿvot ’ ammi-nadiv ) by redividing the text and revocalizing it as שָׁם תֵּנִי מֹרֶךְ בַּת עַמִּי־נָדִיב ( sham teni morekh ’ ammi-nadiv ) “There, give me your myrrh, O nobleman’s daughter!” This involves two steps: (1) He redivides the MT’s שָׂמַתְנִי (“it placed me”) into two words שָׁם תֵּנִי (“There, give me”); and (2) He redivides the MT’s מַרְשְּׂבוֹת (“chariots”) into מֹרךְ בַּת (“your myrrh, O daughter”). This approach is supported somewhat by the LXX, which had a difficult time with the line: “There I will give my breasts to you!” The approach of R. Gordis is explained and supported by several factors: (1) He take מֹרךְ (“your myrrh”) as a figure (hypocatastasis) for her love (e.g., 4:6, 14; 5:1, 5, 13 ). (2) The word-division of בַּת עַמִּי־נָדִיב (“O noble kinsman’s daughter”) is paralleled by the nearly identical descriptive בַּת־נָדִיב (“O nobleman’s daughter”) in 7:2 . (3) Arabs referred to a girl as bint el akbar (“nobleman’s daughter”). (4) The referent of שָׁם (“there”) is the garden/valley mentioned in 6:11 . (5) This fits into the other literary parallels between 6:11-12 and 7:12- 14 , listed as follows: (a) “I went down to the nut grove” ( 6:11 a) and “Let us go to the vineyards” ( 7:12 a). (b) “to look for new growth in the valley, to see if the vines had budded, or if the pomegranates were in bloom” ( 6:11 b) and “Let us see if the vines have budded, if the blossoms have opened, if the pomegranates are in bloom” ( 7:13 a). (c) “There…give me your myrrh = love” ( 6:12 b) and “There I will give you my love” ( 7:13 b). See R. Gordis, Song of Songs and Lamentations , 95. tn The meaning of MT נַפְשִׁי שָׂמַתְנִי מַרְכְּבוֹת עַמִּי־נָדִיב ( nafshi samatni markÿvot ’ ammi-nadiv ) is enigmatic and has spawned numerous translations: “my soul made me [like] the chariots of Ammi-nadib” (KJV, AV); “my soul set me among the chariots of my princely people” (ASV), “my soul had made me as the chariots of my noble people” (NKJV); “my fancy set me [in] a chariot beside my prince” (RSV, NRSV); “my soul set me [over] the chariots of my noble people” (NASB); “my desire set me [among] the chariots of Amminadab” (JPS, NJPS, NIV margin); “my soul made me [like] the chariots of Amminadib” (WEB); “my desire set me [among] the royal chariots of my people” (NIV); “my desire set me [among] the chariots of the people of the prince” (NIV margin); “my soul set me over the chariots of my noble people” (NAU); “my desire hurled me [on] the chariots of my people, [as their] prince” (JB); “she made me feel more than a prince reigning over the myriads of his people” (NEB); “my heart had made me the blessed one of my kins-women” (NAB); “my soul troubled me for the chariots of Aminadab” (DRA); “I found myself in my princely bed with my beloved one” (NLT); “I was stricken with a terrible homesickness and wanted to be back among my own people” (LT); “But in my imagination I was suddenly riding on a glorious chariot” (CEV).


MT vocalizes and divides the text as עַמִּי־נָדִיב (’ ammi-nadiv , “my princely people”); however, several other mss read עַמִּינָדָב (’ amminadav , “Amminadab”). This alternate textual tradition is also reflected in the LXX ( Αμιναδαβ , Aminadab ) and Vulgate.


Alternately, “Return…Return…!” The imperative שׁוּבִי ( shuvi , “Turn!”) is used four times for emphasis. There are two basic interpretations to the meaning/referent of the imperative שׁוּבִי (“Turn!”): (1) The villagers of Shunem are beckoning her to return to the garden mentioned in 6:11-12 : “Come back! Return!” R. Gordis nuances these uses of שׁוּבִי as “halt” or “stay” (“Some Hitherto Unrecognized Meanings of the Verb SHUB,” JBL 52 [1933]: 153-62); (2) In the light of the allusion to her dancing in 7:1 ( Heb 7:2 ), several scholars see a reference to an Arabic bridal dance. Budde emends the MT’s שׁוּבִי to סוֹבִי ( sovi , “revolve, spin”) from סָבַב ( savav , “to turn around”). M. H. Pope ( Song of Songs [AB], 595-96) also emends the MT to the Hebrew verbal root יָסַב ( yasav , “to leap, spin around”) which he connects to Arabic yasaba (“to leap”). These emendations are unnecessary to make the connection with some kind of dance because שׁוּבִי has a wide range of meanings from “turn” to “return.”


The article on הַשּׁוּלַמִּית ( hashshulammit ) functions as a vocative (“O Shulammite”) rather than in a definite sense (“the Shulammite”). The article is often used to mark a definite addressee who is addressed in the vocative (e.g., 1 Sam 17:55, 58; 24:9 ; 2 Kgs 6:26; 9:5 ; Prov 6:6 ; Eccl 11:9 ; Zech 3:8 ). For the vocative use of the article, see GKC 405 §126. e ; Joüon 2:506-7 §137.f; R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax , 19, §89; IBHS 247 §13.5.2c.


Heb “O Perfect One.” Alternately, “O Shunammite” or “O Shulammite.” The term הַשּׁוּלַמִית ( hashshulammit ) has been variously translated: “Shulammite maiden” (NEB); “maiden of Shulam” (JB); “O maid of Shulem” (NJPS); “the Shulammite” (KJV; NASB; NIV). The meaning of the name הַשּׁוּלַמִית is enigmatic and debated. LXX renders it ἡ Σουλαμιτἰ ( {h Soulamiti, “O Shulamite”) and Vulgate renders it Sulamitis (“O Shulamite”). A few Hebrew mss read the plural הַשּׁוּלַמוֹת ( hashshulamot ) but the Masoretic tradition reads הַשּׁוּלַמִית as the versions confirm. Eight major views have emerged in the history of interpretation of the Song. They are arranged, as follows, in order from most likely (views 1-2), plausible (views 3-5), unlikely (view 6), to bizarre (views 7-8): (1) שׁוּלַמִית is a substantival use of the adjectival form qutal שׁוּלָם ( shulam , “perfection”) with the gentilic suffix ית - from the root שָׁלֵם ( shalem , “to be complete, perfect”): “the perfect, unblemished one” (Fox). This approach is reflected in rabbinic exegesis of the 12th century: “The meaning of the Shulammite is ‘perfect, without spot’” (Midrash Rabbah). (2) שׁוּלַמִית is Qal passive participle with the feminine adjectival suffix ית - from the root שָׁלֵם (“peace”): “the peaceful one” or “the pacified one” (Andre, Robert, Joüon). This is reflected in Vulgate pacificus (“the pacified one”), and Aquila and Quinta ἡ ἐηρυνεούσα ( {h ehruneousa ) “the peaceful one” (Andre Robert, Joüon). (3) שׁוּלַמִית is an alternate form of the gentilic name “Shunammite” ( שׁוּנַמִית ) used to refer to inhabitants of Shunem ( 1 Kgs 1:15 ; 2 Kgs 4:12 ). This is reflected in LXX ἡ Σουλαμιτἰ ( {h Soulamiti, “O Shulamite”). This is supported by several factors: (a) Gentilic names are formed by the suffix ית - and the prefixed article to a place-name, e.g., הַיְּרוּשָׁלַמִית ( hayyÿrushalamit , “the Jerusalemite”) is from יְרוּשָׁלַם ( yÿrushalam , “Jerusalem”); (b) the interchange between lateral dental ל ( l ) and nasal dental נ ( n ) is common in the Semitic languages (S. Moscati, Comparative Grammar , 32, §8.26); (c) the town of Shunem was also known as Shulem, due to the common interchange between נ ( n ) and ל ( l ) in Hebrew (Aharoni, 123), as seen in Eusebius’ Onomasticon in which Shunem = Shulem; and (d) later revisions of the LXX read ἡ Σουναμωτἰ (“the Shunamite”) instead of the Old Greek ἡ Σουλαμωτἰ (“the Shulamite”). Shunem was a town in the Jezreel Valley at the foot of Mount Moreh near Mount Tabor and situated about nine miles east of Megiddo, fifteen miles northwest of Beth-shean, and five miles north of Jezreel ( Josh 19:18 ; 1 Sam 28:4 ; 2 Kgs 4:8 ). During the Roman period, the town was called Shulem. See Y. Aharoni, The Land of the Bible , 24, 152, 172, 442, 308. Some scholars suggest that “Shul/nammite” refers to Abishag, the beautiful virgin from the village of Shunem who warmed elderly King David and was sought by Adonijah ( 1 Kgs 2:13- 25 ). Other scholars argue that Abishag has been imported in the Song on too slender grounds. (4) שׁוּלַמִית is the feminine form of the masculine name שְׁלֹמֹה ( shÿlomoh , “Solomon”), just as Judith is the feminine of Judah: “Shulamith” or “Solomonette” or “Solomoness” (Lowth, Goodspeed, Rowley). The feminine ending ־ית may be suffixed to masculine personal names to transform them into feminine names. A similar form occurs in the Ugaritic designation of Daniel’s wife as Lady Daniel (e.g., mtt dnty ). An anonymous Jewish commentator of the 12th century wrote: “The Shulammite was beloved of Solomon, for she was called after the name of her beloved.” The 16th century commentator Joseph Ibn Yahya wrote: “And the calling of her ‘Shulammite’ was determined by reason of her devotion to the Holy One (Blessed be He) who is called Shelomoh.” (5) As a combination of views 1-2, שׁוּלַמִית is a wordplay formed by the combination of the feminine name שְׁלֹמִית ( shÿlomit , “Shelomite”) from שְׁלֹמֹה (“Solomon”) and the gentilic name הַשּׁוּנַמִית (“the Shunammite”) denoting a woman from Shunem: “Solomoness/Shunammite.” (6) שׁוּלַמִית is related to the Arabic root salama “consummation gift” (given to a bride the morning after the wedding): “O Consummated One” or “O Bride” (Hirschberg). (7) Those espousing a cultic interpretation of Canticles take שׁוּלַמִית as the name or epithet of the Canaanite moon goddess Ishtar, designated by the feminine form of the name Shelem, the name of her lover Tammuz, called Dod or Shelem (T. J. Meek). (8) An alternate cultic interpretation takes שׁוּלַמִית as a conflation of the name of the Assyrian war-goddess “Shulmanith” (Ishtar) and the gentilic name “the Shunammite” for a woman from Shunem (Albright). See M. V. Fox, The Song of Songs and the Egyptian Love Songs , 157-58; T. J. Meek, “Canticles and the Tammuz Cult,” AJSL 39 (1922-23): 1-14; E. J. Goodspeed, “The Shulammite,” AJSL 50 (1933): 102-104; H. H. Rowley, “The Meaning of ‘The Shulammite’,” AJSL 56 (1938): 84-91; W. F. Albright, “The Syro-Mesopotamian God Sulman-Esmun and Related Figures,” AfO 7 (1931-32): 164-69; W. F. Albright, “Archaic Survivals in the Text of Canticles,” Hebrew and Semitic Studies , 5; H. H. Hirschberg, “Some Additional Arabic Etymologies in Old Testament Lexicography,” VT 11 (1961): 373-85; M. H. Pope, Song of Songs (AB), 596-600.


Heb “we.” In ancient Near Eastern love literature, plural verbs and plural pronouns are often used in reference to singular individuals. See note on Song 2:15 .


Alternately, “What do you see in…?” or “Why should you look upon…?” The interrogative pronoun מַה ( mah ) normally denotes “what?” or “why?” (BDB 552 s.v. מָה ; HALOT 550-52 s.v. מָה ). However, Gesenius suggests that the phrase מַה־תֶּחֱזוּ ( mah-tekhezu ) is the idiom “Look now!” on the analogy of Arabic ma tara (“Look now!”) (GKC 443 §137. b , n. 1).


The MT reads כִּמְחֹלַת ( kimkholat , “like the dance”), while other Hebrew mss read בִּמְחֹלוֹת ( bimkholot , “in the dances”). The LXX’s ὠ χοροὶ ( w coroi, “like the dances”) reflects כִּמְחֹלוֹת and Symmachus’ ἐν τρώσεσιν ( en tpwsesin, “in the injury”) reflects the locative preposition but a confusion of the noun. tn Alternately, “like a dance or two camps” or “like a dance in two lines.” The phrase כִּמְחֹלַת הַמַּחֲנָיִם ( kimkholat hammakhanayim ) is difficult to translate: “as it were the company of two armies” (KJV), “as at the dance of the two companies” (NASB), “as at the dance of Mahanaim” (NIV), “in the Mahanaim dance” (NJPS). The meaning of the individual terms is clear: The noun מְחֹלָה ( mÿkholah ) denotes “dance in a ring” ( Exod 15:20; 32:19 ; Judg 11:34; 21:21 ; 1 Sam 21:12; 29:5 ) ( HALOT 569 s.v. מְחֹלָה ). The noun מַחֲנֶה ( makhneh ) denotes “encampment, camp, army” and the dual form probably means “two armies” ( HALOT 570 s.v. מַחֲנֶה ). However, the meaning of the genitive-construct מְחֹלַת הַמַּחֲנָיִם ( mÿkholat hammakhanayim ) is unclear: “dance of the two camps/armies”[?]. W. F. Albright proposed “the dance of the Mahanaim” (“Archaic Survivals in the Text of Canticles,” Hebrew and Semitic Studies , 5). LXX translates ὠ χοροὶ τῶν παρεμβολῶν ( w coroi twn parembolwn, “like the dances before the camps”).


Alternately, “noble daughter” or “magnificent daughter.” The title בַּת־נָדִיב ( bat-nadiv , “princely daughter” or “daughter of the prince”; HALOT 673 s.v. נָדִיב ; BDB 622 s.v. נָדִיב 2) suggests to some that this woman is not the Israelite country maiden of chapters 1-4 and 8 , but the daughter of Pharaoh whom Solomon later married ( 1 Kgs 11:1 ). While the term נָדִיב often denotes nobility of position (“nobleman”), it can also denote nobility of character (“noble, willing, magnificent”) (e.g., Prov 17:26 ; Isa 32:5, 8 ) ( HALOT 673-74; BDB 622 s.v. 2 ).


The term ַַחמּוּק ( khammuq , “curve”) describes the shapely curvature of her legs ( HALOT 327; BDB 330 s.v. 2 ) rather than a curving, dancing motion (Arabic bridal dance view). Although the verb חָמַק ( khamaq , “turn”) appears twice ( Song 5:6 ; Jer 31:22 ), the noun חַמּוּק is a hapax legomenon . In postbiblical Hebrew it refers to “rundles” (Jastrow 476 s.v. חַמּוּק ). The term here has been translated in various ways: “[thigh] joints” (KJV), “rounded [thighs]” (RSV), “curves [of thighs]” (NASB), “graceful [thighs]” (NIV).


The term יָרֵךְ ( yarekh , “thigh”) may refer to (1) the fleshy upper part of the thigh where the leg joins the pelvis ( Gen 32:25-32; 46:26 ; Exod 1:5 ; Judg 8:30 ) or (2) the outside of the thigh from the hip down ( Exod 32:27 ; Judg 3:16, 21 ; Ps 45:4 ; Song 3:8 ). The first usage is usually restricted to a figure for the male loins, the source of male procreation ( Gen 46:26 ; Exod 1:5 ) and the locus of an oath ( Gen 24:2, 9; 47:29 ).


The noun שֹׁרֶר ( shorer ) is a hapax legomenon , appearing in the OT only here. There is debate whether it means “navel” or “vulva”: (1) Lys and Pope suggest that שֹׁרֶר is related to Arabic srr (“secret place, pudenda, coition, fornication”). They suggest that this is contextually supported by three factors: (a) His descriptive praise of her is in ascending order, beginning with her feet and concluding with her hair. The movement from her thighs ( 7:1 b), to her vulva ( 7:2 a), and then to her waist ( 7:2 b) would fit this. (b) The descriptive comparison to a glass of wine would be grotesque if her navel were in view – her navel was moist or filled with liquid? – but appropriate if her vulva were in view. (c) The navel would be a somewhat synonymous reference to the belly which is already denoted by בִּטְנֵךְ ( bitnekh , “belly”) in the following line. Because 7:1-7 does not use synonymous parallelism, the term שֹׁרֶר would have to refer to something other than the belly. (2) The term שֹׁרֶר denotes “navel”: (a) It may be related to the bi-consonantal noun שֹׁר ( shor , “navel, umbilical cord”) ( Prov 3:8 ; Ezek 16:4 ). (b) Mishnaic Hebrew שָׁרָר ( sharar ) denotes “navel, umbilical cord” (Jastrow 1634 s.v. שָׁרָר ). For example, in a midrash on the Book of Numbers, the noun שֹׁרֶר appears in an allusion to Song 7:3 to justify the seating of the Sanhedrin in the middle of the synagogue: “As the navel ( שֹׁרֶר ) is placed in the centre of the body, so are the Sanhedrin…” ( Num. Rab. 1:4). On the other hand, the meaning “vulva” never appears in Mishnaic Hebrew. Therefore, apart from this disputed usage there is no evidence that this term was ever used in this manner in Hebrew. (c) Rather than שֹׁרֶר being related to Arabic sirr (“pudenda”), it could just as easily be related to the Arabic noun surr “navel.” It is methodologically more sound to define שֹׁרֶר as “navel” than as “vulva.” (d) The nuance “navel” is not as out of line contextually as Lys and Pope suggest. The navel would not be out of place in the ascending order of praise because the בִּטְנֵךְ (“abdomen”) which follows may be viewed as both above and below the navel. The figurative association of the שֹׁרֶר as a mixing bowl filled with wine does not imply that this bodily part must actually be moist or filled with liquid as Pope suggests. The point of comparison is not physical or visual but one of function, i.e., it is intoxicating. The comparison of the navel to a mixing bowl of wine is no more out of line than the comparison of the belly to a heap of wheat in the next line. In fact, the two go together – she is both the “drink” and “food” for Solomon. The shape of the navel is as congruent with the metaphor of the “round bowl” as the vulva; both are round and receding. (3) Since both terms are derived from the same geminate root – Hebrew שֹׁרֶר and Arabic srr – it is more prudent to take the term as a synecdoche of whole (lower region) for the parts (including navel and vulva). The attempt to decide between these two options may be illegitimately splitting hairs. See K&D 18:123; J. S. Deere, “ Song of Solomon ,” BKCOT , 199-200; D. Lys, “Notes sur de Cantique,” VTSup 17 (1969): 171-78; M. H. Pope, Song of Songs (AB), 617; G. L. Carr, Song of Solomon (TOTC), 157.


The phrase אַל־יֶחְסַר (’ al-yekhsar ) has traditionally been taken as an imperfect: “it never lacks mixed wine” (M. H. Pope, Song of Songs [AB], 619); “which wanteth not liquor” (KJV); “in which liquor is never lacking” (RSV); “that never lacks mixed wine” (JB); “with no lack of wine” (NEB); “that shall never want for spiced wine” (NEB); “that never lacks blended wine” (NIV). This is also how LXX understood it: μὴ ὑστερούμενος κρᾶμα ( mh usteroumenos, “not lacking liquor”). However, the negative אַל (’ al ) normally precedes a jussive expressing a wish or request: “May it never lack mixed wine!” (J. S. Deere, “ Song of Solomon ,” BKCOT , 202). This approach is adopted by several translations: “that should never lack for mixed wine” (NASB) and “Let mixed wine not be lacking!” (NJPS).


Alternately, “your waist.” The term בִּטְנֵךְ ( bitnekh ) probably refers to the woman’s “belly” rather than “waist.” It is associated with a woman’s abdominal/stomach region rather than her hips ( Prov 13:25; 18:20 ; Ezek 3:3 ). The comparison of her belly to a heap of wheat is visually appropriate because of the similarity of their symmetrical shape and tannish color. The primary point of comparison, however, is based upon the commonplace association of wheat in Israel, namely, wheat was the main staple of the typical Israelite meal ( Deut 32:14 ; 2 Sam 4:6; 17:28 ; 1 Kgs 5:25; Pss 81:14; 147:14 ). Just as wheat satisfied an Israelite’s physical hunger, she satisfied his sexual hunger. J. S. Deere makes this point in the following manner: “The most obvious commonplace of wheat was its function, that is, it served as one of the main food sources in ancient Palestine. The Beloved was both the ‘food’ (wheat) and ‘drink’ (wine) of the Lover. Her physical expression of love nourished and satisfied him. His satisfaction was great for the ‘mixed wine’ is intoxicating and the ‘heap of wheat’ was capable of feeding many. The ‘heap of wheat’ also suggests the harvest, an association which contributes to the emotional quality of the metaphor. The harvest was accompanied with a joyous celebration over the bounty yielded up by the land. So also, the Beloved is bountiful and submissive in giving of herself, and the source of great joy” (“ Song of Solomon ,” BKCOT , 203-204).


Heb “fenced around by.”


Alternately, “the ivory tower.” The noun הַשֵּׁן ( hashshen , “ivory”) is a genitive of composition, that is, a tower made out of ivory. Solomon had previously compared her neck to a tower ( Song 4:4 ). In both cases the most obvious point of comparison has to do with size and shape, that is, her neck was long and symmetrical. Archaeology has never found a tower overlaid with ivory in the ancient Near East and it is doubtful that there ever was such a tower. The point of comparison might simply be that the shape of her neck looks like a tower, while the color and smoothness of her neck was like ivory. Solomon is mixing metaphors: her neck was long and symmetrical like a tower; but also elegant, smooth, and beautiful as ivory. The beauty, elegance, and smoothness of a woman’s neck is commonly compared to ivory in ancient love literature. For example, in a piece of Greek love literature, Anacron compared the beauty of the neck of his beloved Bathyllus to ivory (Ode xxxix 28-29).


Heb “your head [is] upon you.”


Heb “like purple” or “like purple fabric.” The term אַרְגָּמָן (’ argaman , “purple fabric”) refers to wool dyed with red purple ( HALOT 84 s.v. אַרְגָּמָן ). It is used in reference to purple threads ( Exod 35:25; 39:3 ; Esth 1:9 ) or purple cloth ( Num 4:13 ; Judg 8:26 ; Esth 8:15 ; Prov 31:22 ; Jer 10:9 ; Song 3:10 ). NASB translates it as “purple threads,” while NIV nuances this term as “royal tapestry.” M. H. Pope ( The Song of Songs [AB], 629-30) adduces several ancient Near Eastern texts and suggests that it refers to purple hair-dye. The comparison is to hair which entangles Solomon like binding cords and therefore, it seems most likely that the idea here must be purple threads. The Hebrew noun is a loanword from Hittite argaman “tribute,” which is reflected in Akkadian argamannu “purple” (also “tribute” under Hittite influence), Ugaritic argmn “tax, purple,” Aramaic argwn “purple” ( HALOT 84). Purple cloth and threads were considered very valuable ( Ezek 27:7, 16 ) and were commonly worn by kings as a mark of their royal position ( Judg 8:26 ).


Alternately, “captivated.” The verb אָסַר (’ asar , “to bind, capture, hold captive, put in prison”) is commonly used of binding a prisoner with cords and fetters ( Gen 42:34 ; Judg 15:10-13; 16:5-12 ; 2 Kgs 17:4; 23:33; 25:7 ; 2 Chr 33:11 ) ( HALOT 75 s.v. אסר ). It is frequently used as a figure to depict absolute authority over a person ( Ps 105:22 ). The passive participle סוּר means “to be bound, held captive, imprisoned” ( 2 Sam 3:34 ; Jer 40:1 ; Job 36:8 ). Like a prisoner bound in cords and fetters and held under the complete control and authority of his captor, Solomon was captivated by the spellbinding power of her hair. In a word, he was the prisoner of love and she was his captor. Similar imagery appears in an ancient Egyptian love song: “With her hair she throws lassoes at me, with her eyes she catches me, with her necklace she entangles me, and with her seal ring she brands me” (Song 43 in the Chester Beatty Cycle, translated by W. K. Simpson, ed., The Literature of Ancient Egypt , 324). J. S. Deere suggests, “The concluding part of the metaphor, ‘The king is held captive by your tresses,’ is a beautiful expression of the powerful effect of love. A strong monarch was held prisoner by the beauty of his Beloved” (“ Song of Solomon ,” BKCOT , 206-207). This is a startling statement because Solomon emphasizes that the one who was being held captive like a prisoner in bonds was the “king”! At this point in world history, Solomon was the ruler of the most powerful and wealthy nation in the world ( 1 Kgs 3:13; 10:23-29 ). And yet he was held totally captive and subject to the beauty of this country maiden!


Alternately, “O beloved one.” Consonantal אהבה is vocalized by the Masoretes as אַהֲבָה (’ ahavah , “love”). However, a variant Hebrew ms tradition preserves the vocalization of the passive form אֲהֻבָה (’ ahuvah , “beloved one, one who is loved”), as is also reflected in the Vulgate and Syriac. The term אַהֲבָה (“love”) usually refers to sexual ( 2 Sam 13:15 ; Prov 5:19 ) or emotional love between a man and a woman ( 2 Sam 1:26 ; Song 8:6-7 ) ( HALOT 18 s.v. I אַהֲבָה ).


The MT preserves a syntactically difficult reading בַּתַּעֲנוּגִים ( batta ’ anugim , “in/with delights”). A variant Hebrew textual tradition preserves the alternate reading בַּת תַּעֲנוּגִים ( bat ta ’ anugim , “daughter of delights” or “delightful daughter”). The textual variant is either due to haplography (mistakenly writing ת once instead of twice) or dittography (mistakenly writing ת twice instead of once). The alternate textual tradition is reflected in Aquila θυγάτηρ τρυφῶν ( qugarhr trufwn, “daughter of delights”). However, the MT reading אַהֲבָה בַּתַּעֲנוּגִים (’ ahavah batta ’ anugim , “O love, in your delights”) is אַהֲבָה בַּתַּעֲנוּגִים (“O love, in your delights”) is supported by LXX (Old Greek) ἀγάπη , ἐν τρυφαῖς σου ( agaph, en trufais sou, “O love, in your delights”). tn The term תַּעֲנוּג ( ta ’ anug , “luxury, daintiness, exquisite delight”) is used in reference to: (1) tender love ( Mic 1:16 ); (2) the object of pleasure ( Mic 2:9 ); (3) erotic pleasures ( Eccl 2:8 ); (4) luxury befitting a king ( Prov 19:10 ). The term may have sexual connotations, as when it is used in reference to a harem of women who are described as “the delights” of the heart of a man ( Eccl 2:8 ) (BDB 772 s.v. תַּעֲנוּג ).


The term קוֹמָתֵךְ ( qomatek , “stature”) indicates the height of an object, e.g., tall person ( 1 Sam 16:7 ; Ezek 13:8 ), tall tree ( 2 Kgs 19:23 ; Isa 10:33 ; Ezek 31:3-5, 10-14 ), a towering vine ( Ezek 19:11 ).


Alternately “clusters of figs.” The term אַשְׁכֹּלוֹת (’ ashkolot , “clusters”) usually refers to (1) clusters of grapes, that is, the stalk on which the bunch of grapes grow and the bunch of grapes themselves ( Gen 40:10 ; Num 13:23-24 ; Deut 32:32 ; Isa 65:8 ; Mic 7:1 ) or (2) the berry on a cluster of henna bush ( Song 1:14 ) ( HALOT 95 s.v. I אַשְׁכּוֹל ). It is possible that this is an anomalous usage in reference to a cluster of dates rather than to a cluster of grapes for three reasons: (1) the תָּמָר ( tamar , “palm tree”) referred to in 7:7 is a date palm, (2) the term סַנְסִנִּים ( sansinnim , “fruit stalks”) in 7:8 a refers to the fruit stalk of dates ( Rademus dactylorum ), being related to Akkadian sissinnu (“part of the date palm”), and (3) the reference to climbing the palm tree in 7:8 a is best understood if it is a date palm and its fruit are dates. The comparison between her breasts and clusters of dates probably has to do with shape and multiplicity, as well as taste, as the rest of this extended metaphor intimates. M. H. Pope ( The Song of Songs [AB], 634) notes: “The comparison of the breasts to date clusters presumably intended a pair of clusters to match the dual form of the word for ‘breasts.’ A single cluster of dates may carry over a thousand single fruits and weigh twenty pounds or more. It may be noted that the multiple breasts of the representations of Artemis of Ephesus look very much like a cluster of large dates, and it might be that the date clusters here were intended to suggest a similar condition of polymasty.”


Heb “I said, ‘I will climb….’” The verb אָמַר (’ amar , “to say”) is often used metonymically in reference to the thought process, emphasizing the spontaneity of a decision or of an idea which has just entered the mind of the speaker moments before he speaks ( Gen 20:11; 26:9; 44:28 ; Exod 2:14 ; Num 24:11 ; Ruth 4:4 ; 1 Sam 20:4, 26 ; 2 Sam 5:6; 12:22 ; 2 Kgs 5:11 ). M. H. Pope renders it appropriately: “Methinks” ( Song of Songs [AB], 635).


Heb “of the vine.”


The Hebrew noun תַּפּוּחַ ( tappukha ) has been traditionally been translated as “apple,” but modern botanists and the most recent lexicographers now identify תַּפּוּחַ with the “apricot” (BDB 656 s.v. I תַּפּוּחַ ). This might better explain the association with the sweet smelling scent, especially since the term is derived from a Semitic root denoting “aromatic scent.” Apricots were often associated with their sweet scent in the ancient world ( Fauna and Flora of the Bible , 92-93).


The term חֵךְ ( khek , “palate, mouth”) is often used as a metonymy for what the mouth produces, e.g., the mouth is the organ of taste ( Ps 119:103 ; Job 12:11; 20:13; 34:3 ; Prov 24:13 ; Song 2:3 ), speech ( Job 6:30; 31:30; 33:2 ; Prov 5:3; 8:7 ), sound ( Hos 8:1 ), and kisses ( Song 5:16; 7:10 ) ( HALOT 313 s.v. חֵךְ ; BDB 335 s.v. חֵךְ ). The metonymical association of her palate/mouth and her kisses is made explicit by RSV which translated the term as “kisses.”


The MT reads שִׁפְתֵי יְשֵׁנִים ( shifte yÿshenim , “lips of those who sleep”). However, an alternate Hebrew reading of שְׂפָתַי וְשִׁנָּי ( sÿfata vÿsinna , “my lips and my teeth”) is suggested by the Greek tradition (LXX, Aquila, Symmachus): χείλεσίν μου καὶ ὀδοῦσιν ( ceilesin mou kai odousin, “my lips and teeth”). This alternate reading, with minor variations, is followed by NAB, NIV, NRSV, TEV, NLT. tn Or “his lips as he falls asleep.” Heb “the lips of sleepers.” Alternately, “over lips and teeth” (so NIV, NRSV, NLT).


Heb “his desire is for me” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV).


The imperfect יִתֶּנְךָ ( yittenka ) may denote a desire or wish of the subject, e.g., Gen 24:58 ; Exod 21:36 ; 1 Sam 21:10 ( IBHS 509 §31.4h). The optative particle מִי ( mi ) with an imperfect expresses an unreal wish, e.g., Judg 9:29 ; 2 Sam 15:4 ; Mal 1:10 . The construction יִתֶּנְךָ מִי ( mi yittenka ) is an idiom expressing an unreal wish in the optative mood ( HALOT 575 s.v. מִי ), e.g., “Would that it were evening…Would that it were morning!” (KJV) or “If only it were evening…If only it were morning!” (NIV) ( Deut 28:67 ); “Oh that I knew where I might find him” (KJV, NASB, NJPS), “I wish I had known,” “If only I knew where to find him; if only I could go to his dwelling!” (NIV) ( Job 23:3 ); “I wish that all the LORD’s people were prophets!” (NIV), “Would that all the LORD’s people were prophets” (NASB) ( Num 11:29 ). Evidently, the LXX did not understand the idiom; it rendered the line in wooden literalness: Τίς δώῃ σε ἀδελφιδόν μου ( Tis dwh se adelfidon mou, “Who might give/make you as my brother?”).


Heb “you were to me like a brother.”


Heb “found” or “met.” The juxtaposition of the two imperfects without an adjoining vav forms a conditional clause denoting a real condition (GKC 493 §159. b ). The first imperfect is the protasis; the second is the apodosis: “If I found you אֶמְצָאֲךָ (’ emtsa ’ aka ) outside, I would kiss you ( אֶשָּׁקְךָ , ’ eshshaqÿkha ).” The imperfects are used to express a condition and consequence which are regarded as being capable of fulfillment in the present or future time (GKC 493 §159. b ). The simple juxtaposition of two verbal clauses without any grammatical indicator, such as vav or a conditional particle, is rather rare: “If you rebel ( תִּמְעָלוּ , tim ’ alu ), I will disperse you ( אָפִיץ , ’ afits ) among the nations” ( Neh 1:8 ); “If I counted them ( אֶסְפְּרֵם , ’ esppÿrem ), they would be more numerous ( יִרְבּוּן , yirbun ) than the sand!” ( Ps 139:18 ); “If a man has found a wife ( מָצָא , matsa ’), he has found ( מָצָא ) a good thing” ( Prov 18:22 ) (Joüon 2:627 §167.a.1). On the other hand, LXX treated the imperfects as denoting future temporal sequence: εὑροῦσά σε ἒξω , φιλήσω σε ( eurousa se exw, filhsw se, “I will find you outside, I will kiss you”). Ordinarily, however, vav or a temporal particle introduces a temporal clause (Joüon 2:627 §167.a; GKC 502 §164. d ). The English translation tradition generally adopts the conditional nuance: “If I found you outdoors, I would kiss you” (NASB), “Then, if I found you outside, I would kiss you” (NIV). However, a few translations adopt the temporal nuance: “When I should find thee without, I would kiss thee” (KJV), “Then I could kiss you when I met you in the street” (NJPS).


The particle גַּם ( gam , “surely”) is used with לֹא ( lo ’, “no one”) for emphasis: “yea, none” ( HALOT 195 s.v. גַּם ). Similar examples: לֹא...גָם אָחַד ( lo ’… gam ’ ekhad , “not even one”; 2 Sam 17:12 ); גַּם אֵין ( gam ’ en , “yet there is no one”; Eccl 4:8 ).


The MT reads אֶנְהָגֲךָ אֶל־בֵּית אִמִּי תְּלַמְּדֵנִי (’ enhagakha ’ el-bet ’ immi tÿlammÿdeni , “I would bring you to the house of my mother who taught me”). On the other hand, the LXX reads Εἰσάξω σε εἰς οἶκον μητρός μου καὶ εἰς ταμίειον τῆς συλλαβούση με ( Eisaxw se eis oikon mhtpos mou kai eis tamieion ths sullaboush me ) which reflects a Hebrew reading of אֶנְהָגֲךָ אֶל־בֵּית אִמִּי וְאֶל חֶדֶר הוֹרָתִי (’ enhagakha ’ el-bet ’ immi vÿ ’ el kheder horati , “I would bring you to the house of my mother, to the chamber of the one who bore me”), followed by NRSV. The LXX variant probably arose due to: (1) the syntactical awkwardness of תְּלַמְּדֵנִי (“she taught me” or “she will teach me”), (2) the perceived need for a parallel to אֶל־בֵּית אִמִּי (“to the house of my mother”), and (3) the influence of Song 3:4 which reads: עַד־שֶׁהֲבֵיאתִיו אֶל־בֵּית אִמִּי וְאֶל חֶדֶר הוֹרָתִי (’ ad-sheheve ’ tiv ’ el-bet ’ immi vÿ ’ el kheder horati , “until I brought him to the house of my mother, to the chamber of the one who bore me”). The MT reading should be adopted because (1) it is the more difficult reading, (2) it best explains the origin of the LXX variant, and (3) the origin of the LXX variant is easily understood in the light of Song 3:4 . tn The verb תְּלַמְּדֵנִי ( tÿlammÿdeni ) may be rendered in two basic ways: (1) future action: “she will teach me” or more likely as (2) past customary action: “who would instruct me” (KJV), “who used to instruct me” (NASB), “she who has taught me” (NIV), “she who taught me” (NJPS). This is an example of casus pendus in which the subject of the verb serves as a relative pronoun to the antecedent noun (“my mother”). The JPS parses תְּלַמְּדֵנִי as 2nd person masculine singular (“that you might instruct me”) rather than 3rd person feminine singular (“she would teach me”). However, this would obscure the imagery: The Beloved wished that Solomon was her little brother still nursing on her mother’s breast. The Beloved, who had learned from her mother’s example, would bring him inside their home and she would give him her breast: “I would give you spiced wine to drink, the nectar of my pomegranates.”


Alternately “wine, that is, spiced mixture.” The term רֶקַח ( reqakh , “spice mixture, spices”) refers to ground herbs that were tasty additives to wine ( HALOT 1290 s.v. רֶקַח ). tc The Masoretic vocalization of מִיַּיִן הָרֶקַח ( miyyayin hareqakh ) suggests that הָרֶקַח (“spiced mixture”) stands in apposition to מִיַּיִן (“wine”): “wine, that is, spiced mixture.” However, several Hebrew mss read the genitive-construct vocalization מִיַּיִן הָרֶקַח (“spiced wine”). This alternate vocalization tradition is reflected in the Targum and other versions, such as the LXX. The genitive noun הָרֶקַח (“spices, spiced mixture”) functions as an adjective modifying the preceding construct noun יַיִן (“wine”).


See the notes on 2:6 , which is parallel to this verse.


Heb “daughters of Jerusalem.”


Heb “Why arouse or awaken …?” Although the particle מָה ( mah ) is used most often as an interrogative pronoun (“What?” “Why?”), it also can be used as a particle of negation. For example, “How ( מָה ) could I look at a girl?” means “I have not looked at a girl!” ( Job 31:1 ); “What ( מַה ) do we have to drink?” means “We have nothing to drink” ( Exod 15:24 ); “What ( מַה ) part do we have?” means “We have no part” ( 1 Kgs 12:16 ); and “Why ( מַה ) arouse or awaken love?” means “Do not arouse or awaken love!” ( Song 8:4 ). See HALOT 551 s.v. מָה C.


Or “went into labor.” The verb חָבַל ( khaval , “become pregnant”) is repeated in 8:6 b and 8:6 c, and has a two-fold range of meaning: (1) transitive: “to conceive [a child]” and (2) intransitive: “to be in travail [of childbirth]” ( HALOT 286 s.v. IV חבל ). In 8:6 b it denotes “to conceive,” and in 8:6 c it is “to be in travail [of childbirth].”


The term לֵבָב ( levav , “heart”) is used figuratively here as (1) a metonymy (container for the thing contained) for his chest over which the cylinder seal was hung or (2) a metonymy (concrete body part for the abstract emotions with which it is associated) for his emotions, such as love and loyalty to the Beloved (e.g., Judg 16:25 ; Ruth 3:7 ; 1 Sam 25:36 ; 2 Sam 13:28 ; 1 Kgs 8:66 ) ( HALOT 514-15 s.v. לֵב ) (see H. W. Wolff , Anthropology of the Old Testament , 40-58). sn There were two kinds of cylinder seals in the ancient Near East, namely, those worn around one’s neck and those worn around one’s wrist. The typical Mesopotamian seal was mounted on a pin and hung on a string or necklace around one’s neck. The cylinder seal hung around one’s neck would, figuratively speaking, rest over the heart (metonymy of association). The Beloved wished to be to Solomon like a cylinder seal worn over his heart. She wanted to be as intimate with her lover as the seal worn by him (W. W. Hallo, “‘As the Seal Upon Thy Heart’: Glyptic Roles in the Biblical World,” BRev 2 [1985]: 26).


Literally “cylinder-seal” or “seal.” The term חוֹתָם ( khotam , “cylinder-seal”) is repeated in 8:6 for emphasis. The translation above uses the terms “cylinder seal” and “signet” simply for the sake of poetic variation. The Beloved wanted to be as safe and secure as a cylinder seal worn on the arm or around the neck, hanging down over the heart. She also wanted to be placed on his heart (emotions), like the impression of a cylinder seal is written on a document. She wanted to be “written” on his heart like the impression of a cylinder seal, and kept secure in his love as a signet ring is worn around his arm/hand to keep it safe.


Alternately, “wrist.” In Palestine cylinder seals were often hung on a bracelet worn around one’s wrist. The cylinder seal was mounted on a pin hanging from a bracelet. The cylinder seal in view in Song 8:6 could be a stamp seal hung from a bracelet of a type known from excavations in Israel. See W. W. Hallo, “‘As the Seal Upon Thy Heart’: Glyptic Roles in the Biblical World,” BRev 2 (1985): 26.


Alternately, “jealousy.” The noun קִנְאָה ( qin ’ ah ) has a wide range of meanings: “jealousy” ( Prov 6:34; 14:30; 27:4 ), “competitiveness” ( Eccl 4:4; 9:6 ), “anger” ( Num 5:14, 30 ), “zeal” ( 2 Kgs 10:16 ; Pss 69:10; 119:139 ; Job 5:2 ; Sir 30:24), and “passion” ( Song 8:6 ). The Hebrew noun is related to the Akkadian and Arabic roots that mean “to become intensely red” or “become red with passion,” suggesting that the root denotes strong emotion. Although קִנְאָה is traditionally rendered “jealousy” (KJV, RSV, NASB, NIV), the parallelism with אַהֲבָה (’ ahavah , “love”) suggests the nuance “passion” (NJPS). Coppes notes, “This word is translated in the KJV in a bad sense in Song 8:6 , ‘jealousy is as cruel as the grave,’ but it could be taken in a good sense in parallel with the preceding, ‘ardent zeal is as strong as the grave’” ( TWOT 2:803).


Heb “harsh” or “severe.”


Heb “Its flames are flames of fire.”


The noun שַׁלְהֶבֶתְיָה ( shalhevetyah , “mighty flame”) is related to the nouns שַׁלְהֶבֶת ( shalhevet , “flame”), לֶהָבָה ( lehavah , “flame”), and לַהַב ( lahav , “flame”), all of which are derived from the root להב “to burn, blaze, flame up” ( HALOT 520 s.v. לַהַב ). The form שַׁלְהֶבֶתְיָה is an unusual noun pattern with (1) a prefix ־שׁ that is common in Akkadian but rare in Hebrew; it has an intensive adjective meaning, (2) a feminine ־ת ending, and (3) a suffix ־יָה whose meaning is debated. The suffix ־יָה has been taken in three ways by scholars and translators: (1) יָה is an abbreviated form of the divine name יהוה (“Yahweh”), functioning as a genitive of source: “the flame of the Lord ” (NASB). The abbreviated form יָהּ is used only in poetic texts as a poetic variation of יהוה (e.g., Exod 15:2; 17:16 ; Pss 68:5, 19; 77:12; 89:9; 94:7, 12; 102:19; 104:35; 105:45; 106:1, 48; 111:1; 112:1; 113:1, 9; 115:17, 18; 116:19; 117:2; 118:5, 14, 17-19; 122:4; 130:3; 135:1, 3, 4, 21; 146:1, 10; 147:1, 20; 148:1, 14; 149:1, 9; 150:1, 6 ; Isa 12:2; 26:4; 38:11 ). However, the Masoretes did not point the text as שַׁלְהֶבֶת־יָהּ ( shalhevet-yah ) with maqqep and daghesh in the הּ , as would be the case with the divine name. (2) Thomas suggests that, just as אֱלֹהִים (’ elohim ) and אֵל (’ el ) are sometimes used to express superlatives or intensive ideas, so יָה expresses the superlative/intensive: “a mighty flame” (D. W. Thomas, “A Consideration of Some Unusual Ways of Expressing the Superlative in Hebrew,” VT 3 [1953]: 209-24). Examples of אֱלֹהִים (’ elohim ): “a mighty wind” ( Gen 1:2 ), “a mighty prince” ( Gen 23:6 ), “a great struggle” ( Gen 30:8 ), “a great fire” ( Job 1:16 ), “an exceeding great city” ( Jonah 3:3 ). Examples of אֵל (’ el ): “the mighty mountains” ( Ps 36:7 ) and “the mighty cedars” ( Ps 80:11 ). Examples of יָה ( yah ) suffixed: “darkest gloom” ( Jer 2:31 ), “mighty deeds” ( Jer 32:19 ), and “mighty deeds” ( Ps 77:12 ). (3) The most likely view is that יָה is an intensive adjectival suffix, similar to – iy and – ay and – awi in Aramaic, Akkadian, and Arabic: “a most vehement flame” (KJV), “a mighty flame” (RSV, NIV), and “a blazing flame” (NJPS). This also best explains “darkest gloom” ( Jer 2:31 ), and “mighty deeds” ( Jer 32:19 ) (see S. Moscati, Comparative Grammar , 81, §12.18, and 83, §12.23).


Heb “rivers.”


Heb “all the wealth of his house.”


Heb “for love.” The preposition בְּ ( bÿ ) on בָּאַהֲבָה ( ba ’ ahavah , “for love”) indicates the price or exchange in trading ( HALOT 105 s.v. בְּ 17), e.g., “Give me your vineyard in exchange for silver [ בְּכֶסֶף , bÿkhesef ]” ( 1 Kgs 21:6 ).


Heb “he/it.” The referent (the offer of possessions) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Some English versions take the referent to be the man himself (ASV “He would utterly be condemned”; NAB “he would be roundly mocked”). Others take the offer as the referent (cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV “it”).


The root בּוּז ( buz , “to despise”) is repeated for emphasis: בּוֹז יָבוּזּוּ ( boz yavuzu ). The infinitive absolute frequently is used with the imperfect of the same root for emphasis. The point is simply that love cannot be purchased; it is infinitely more valuable than any and all wealth. Love such as this is priceless; no price tag can be put on love.


Heb “a board.” The singular noun לוּחַ ( lukha , “board, plank”) may denote a singular of number or a collective.


Heb “peace.” An eloquent wordplay is created by the use of the noun שָׁלוֹם ( shalom , “peace, favor”) in 8:10 b and the name שְׁלֹמֹה ( shÿlomoh , “Solomon”) in 8:11 a. The Beloved found “favor” ( שָׁלוֹם ) in the eyes of Solomon ( שְׁלֹמֹה ). She won his heart because she was not only a beautiful young woman (“my breasts were like fortress towers”), but a virtuous woman (“I was a wall”).


Heb “Then I became in his eyes as one who finds peace.”


Heb “gave.”


Each of the three terms in this line has the 1st person common singular suffix which is repeated three times for emphasis: כַּרְמִי ( karmi , “my vineyard”), שֶׁלִּי ( shelli , “which belongs to me”), and לְפָנָי ( lÿfana , “at my disposal”). In contrast to King Solomon, who owns the vineyard at Baal-Hamon and who can buy and sell anything in the vineyard that he wishes, she proclaims that her “vineyard” (= herself or her body) belongs to her alone. In contrast to the vineyard, which can be leased out, and its fruit, which can be bought or sold, her “vineyard” is not for sale. Her love must and is to be freely given.


Heb “[it is] before me.” The particle לְפָנָי ( lÿfana ) can denote “at the disposal of” (e.g., Gen 13:9; 20:15; 24:51; 34:10; 47:6 ; Jer 40:4 ; 2 Chr 14:6 ) ( HALOT 9 s.v. פָּנֶה 4.f; BDB 817 s.v. פנה 4.a.f). Similar to Akkadian ana pan “at the disposal of” ( AHw 2:821.a, paragraph 20), the term is used in reference to a sovereign (usually a land-owner or king) who has full power over his property to dispose of as he wishes, e.g., “The whole country is at your disposal [ לְפָנֶיךָ , lÿfaneka ]” ( Gen 13:9 ). In Song 8:12 the form לְפָנָי has the 1st person common singular suffix: “My vineyard, which belongs to me, is at my disposal.”


The term מַקְשִׁיבִים ( maqshivim ) is in the Hiphil stem which denotes an intense desire to hear someone’s voice, that is, to eagerly listen for someone’s voice (e.g., Jer 6:17 ) ( HALOT 1151 s.v. קשׁב 1). The participle functions verbally and denotes a continual, ongoing, durative action.


The editors of BHS suggests that גַם אָנִי ( gam ’ ani , “me also”) should be inserted. Although there is no textual evidence for the insertion, it seems clear that the 1st person common singular referent is emphatic in MT הַשְׁמִיעִינִי ( hashmi ’ ini , “Let me hear it!”).


The imperative הַשְׁמִיעִינִי ( hashmi ’ ini ) functions as a request. The lover asks his beloved to let him hear her beautiful voice (e.g., Song 2:14 ).


For location see Map5-B1 ; Map6-F3 ; Map7-E2 ; Map8-F2 ; Map10-B3 ; JP1-F4 ; JP2-F4 ; JP3-F4 ; JP4-F4 .


Heb “The vision of Isaiah son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, [and] Hezekiah, kings of Judah.” sn Isaiah’s prophetic career probably began in the final year of Uzziah’s reign (ca. 740 b.c. , see Isa 6:1 ) and extended into the later years of Hezekiah’s reign, which ended in 686 b.c.


Or “sons” (NAB, NASB). sn “Father” and “son” occur as common terms in ancient Near Eastern treaties and covenants, delineating the suzerain and vassal as participants in the covenant relationship. The prophet uses these terms, the reference to heavens and earth as witnesses, and allusions to deuteronomic covenant curses ( 1:7-9, 19-20 ) to set his prophecy firmly against the backdrop of Israel’s covenantal relationship with Yahweh.


Heb “and the donkey the feeding trough of its owner.” The verb in the first line does double duty in the parallelism.


Although both verbs have no object, the parallelism suggests that Israel fails to recognize the Lord as the one who provides for their needs. In both clauses, the placement of “Israel” and “my people” at the head of the clause focuses the reader’s attention on the rebellious nation (C. van der Merwe, J. Naudé, J. Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar , 346-47).


Heb “Woe [to the] sinful nation.” The Hebrew term הוֹי , ( hoy , “woe, ah”) was used in funeral laments (see 1 Kgs 13:30 ; Jer 22:18; 34:5 ) and carries the connotation of death. In highly dramatic fashion the prophet acts out Israel’s funeral in advance, emphasizing that their demise is inevitable if they do not repent soon.


Or “sons” (NASB). The prophet contrasts four terms of privilege – nation, people, offspring, children – with four terms that depict Israel’s sinful condition in Isaiah’s day – sinful, evil, wrong, wicked (see J. A. Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah , 43).


Heb “Why are you still beaten? [Why] do you continue rebellion?” The rhetorical questions express the prophet’s disbelief over Israel’s apparent masochism and obsession with sin. The interrogative construction in the first line does double duty in the parallelism. H. Wildberger ( Isaiah , 1:18) offers another alternative by translating the two statements with one question: “Why do you still wish to be struck that you persist in revolt?”


Heb “all the head is ill”; NRSV “the whole head is sick”; CEV “Your head is badly bruised.”


Heb “there is not in it health”; NAB “there is no sound spot.”


Heb “pressed out.”


Heb “softened” (so NASB, NRSV); NIV “soothed.”


Heb “As for your land, before you foreigners are devouring it.”


Heb “and [there is] devastation like an overthrow by foreigners.” The comparative preposition כְּ ( kÿ , “like, as”) has here the rhetorical nuance, “in every way like.” The point is that the land has all the earmarks of a destructive foreign invasion because that is what has indeed happened. One could paraphrase, “it is desolate as it can only be when foreigners destroy.” On this use of the preposition in general, see GKC 376 §118. x . Many also prefer to emend “foreigners” here to “Sodom,” though there is no external attestation for such a reading in the mss or ancient versions. Such an emendation finds support from the following context (vv. 9-10 ) and usage of the preceding noun מַהְפֵּכָה ( mahpekhah , “overthrow”). In its five other uses, this noun is associated with the destruction of Sodom. If one accepts the emendation, then one might translate, “the devastation resembles the destruction of Sodom.”


Heb “daughter of Zion” (so KJV, NASB, NIV). The genitive is appositional, identifying precisely which daughter is in view. By picturing Zion as a daughter, the prophet emphasizes her helplessness and vulnerability before the enemy.


Heb “like a city besieged.” Unlike the preceding two comparisons, which are purely metaphorical, this third one identifies the reality of Israel’s condition. In this case the comparative preposition, as in v. 7 b, has the force, “in every way like,” indicating that all the earmarks of a siege are visible because that is indeed what is taking place. The verb form in MT is Qal passive participle of נָצַר ( natsar , “guard”), but since this verb is not often used of a siege (see BDB 666 s.v. I נָצַר ), some prefer to repoint the form as a Niphal participle from II צוּר ( tsur , “besiege”). However, the latter is not attested elsewhere in the Niphal (see BDB 848 s.v. II צוּר ).


Traditionally, “the Lord of hosts.” The title pictures God as the sovereign king who has at his disposal a multitude of attendants, messengers, and warriors to do his bidding. In some contexts, like this one, the military dimension of his rulership is highlighted. In this case, the title pictures him as one who leads armies into battle against his enemies.


The translation assumes that כִּמְעָט ( kim ’ at , “quickly,” literally, “like a little”) goes with what follows, contrary to the MT accents, which take it with what precedes. In this case, one could translate the preceding line, “If the Lord who commands armies had not left us a few survivors.” If כִּמְעָט goes with the preceding line (following the MT accents), this expression highlights the idea that there would only be a few survivors (H. Wildberger, Isaiah , 1:20; H. Zobel, TDOT 8:456). Israel would not be almost like Sodom but exactly like Sodom.


Heb “to the instruction of our God.” In this context, which is highly accusatory and threatening, תּוֹרָה ( torah , “law, instruction”) does not refer to mere teaching, but to corrective teaching and rebuke.


Heb “Why to me the multitude of your sacrifices?” The sarcastic rhetorical question suggests that their many sacrifices are of no importance to the Lord. This phrase answers the possible objection that an Israelite could raise in response to God’s indictment: “But we are offering the sacrifices you commanded!” sn In this section the Lord refutes a potential objection that his sinful people might offer in their defense. He has charged them with rebellion (vv. 2-3 ), but they might respond that they have brought him many sacrifices. So he points out that he requires social justice first and foremost, not empty ritual.


The verb שָׂבַע ( sava ’, “be satisfied, full”) is often used of eating and/or drinking one’s fill. See BDB 959 s.v. שָׂבַע . Here sacrifices are viewed, in typical ancient Near Eastern fashion, as food for the deity. God here declares that he has eaten and drunk, as it were, his fill.


Heb “When you come to appear before me, who requires this from your hand, trampling of my courtyards?” The rhetorical question sarcastically makes the point that God does not require this parade of livestock. The verb “trample” probably refers to the eager worshipers and their sacrificial animals walking around in the temple area.


Or “worthless” (NASB, NCV, CEV); KJV, ASV “vain.”


Heb “sin and assembly” (these two nouns probably represent a hendiadys). The point is that their attempts at worship are unacceptable to God because the people’s everyday actions in the socio-economic realm prove they have no genuine devotion to God (see vv. 16-17 ).


Heb “I close my eyes from you.”


The precise meaning of this line is uncertain. The translation assumes an emendation of חָמוֹץ ( khamots , “oppressor [?]”) to חָמוּץ ( khamuts , “oppressed”), a passive participle from II חָמַץ ( khamats , “oppress”; HALOT 329 s.v. II חמץ ) and takes the verb II אָשַׁר (’ ashar ) in the sense of “make happy” (the delocutive Piel, meaning “call/pronounce happy,” is metonymic here, referring to actually effecting happiness). The parallelism favors this interpretation, for the next two lines speak of positive actions on behalf of the destitute. The other option is to retain the MT pointing and translate, “set right the oppressor,” but the nuance “set right” is not clearly attested elsewhere for the verb I אשׁר . This verb does appear as a participle in Isa 3:12 and 9:16 with the meaning “to lead or guide.” If it can mean to “lead” or “rebuke/redirect” in this verse, the prophet could be contrasting this appeal for societal reformation (v. 17 c) with a command to reorder their personal lives (v. 17 a-b). J. A. Motyer ( The Prophecy of Isaiah , 47) suggests that these three statements (v. 17 a-c) provide “the contrast between the two ends of imperfect society, the oppressor and the needy, the one inflicting and the other suffering the hurt. Isaiah looks for a transformed society wherever it needs transforming.”


This word refers to a woman who has lost her husband, by death or divorce. The orphan and widow are often mentioned in the OT as epitomizing the helpless and impoverished who have been left without the necessities of life due to the loss of a family provider.


Traditionally, “let us reason together,” but the context suggests a judicial nuance. The Lord is giving the nation its options for the future.


The imperfects must be translated as modal (indicating capability or possibility) to bring out the conditional nature of the offer. This purification will only occur if the people repent and change their ways.


Heb “though your sins are like red, they will become white like snow; though they are red like scarlet, they will be like wool.” The point is not that the sins will be covered up, though still retained. The metaphorical language must be allowed some flexibility and should not be pressed into a rigid literalistic mold. The people’s sins will be removed and replaced by ethical purity. The sins that are now as obvious as the color red will be washed away and the ones who are sinful will be transformed.


Heb “listen”; KJV “obedient”; NASB “If you consent and obey.”


Heb “for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.” The introductory כִּי ( ki ) may be asseverative (as reflected in the translation) or causal/explanatory, explaining why the option chosen by the people will become reality (it is guaranteed by the divine word).


Heb “How she has become a prostitute, the faithful city!” The exclamatory אֵיכָה (’ ekhah , “how!”) is used several times as the beginning of a lament (see Lam 1:1; 2;1; 4:1-2 ). Unlike a number of other OT passages that link references to Israel’s harlotry to idolatry, Isaiah here makes the connection with social and moral violations.


Heb “filled with.”


Or “assassins.” This refers to the oppressive rich and/or their henchmen. R. Ortlund ( Whoredom , 78) posits that it serves as a synecdoche for all varieties of criminals, the worst being mentioned to imply all lesser ones. Since Isaiah often addressed his strongest rebuke to the rulers and leaders of Israel, he may have in mind the officials who bore the responsibility to uphold justice and righteousness.


The pronoun is feminine singular; personified Jerusalem (see v. 21 ) is addressed.


Or “dross.” The word refers to the scum or impurites floating on the top of melted metal.


Or “stubborn”; CEV “have rejected me.”


Heb “and companions of” (so KJV, NASB); CEV “friends of crooks.”


Heb “pursue”; NIV “chase after gifts.”


Heb “the master, the Lord who commands armies [traditionally, the Lord of hosts].” On the title “the Lord who commands armies,” see the note at v. 9 .


Heb “the powerful [one] of Israel.”


Heb “console myself” (i.e., by getting revenge); NRSV “pour out my wrath on.”


Heb “turn my hand against you.” The second person pronouns in vv. 25-26 are feminine singular. Personified Jerusalem is addressed. The idiom “turn the hand against” has the nuance of “strike with the hand, attack,” in Ps 81:15 HT ( 81:14 ET); Ezek 38:12 ; Am 1:8 ; Zech 13:7 . In Jer 6:9 it is used of gleaning grapes.


Heb “I will purify your dross as [with] flux.” “Flux” refers here to minerals added to the metals in a furnace to prevent oxides from forming. For this interpretation of II בֹּר ( bor ), see HALOT 153 s.v. II בֹּר and 750 s.v. סִיג .


Heb “I will restore your judges as in the beginning; and your counselors as in the beginning.” In this context, where social injustice and legal corruption are denounced (see v. 23 ), the “judges” are probably government officials responsible for making legal decisions, while the “advisers” are probably officials who helped the king establish policies. Both offices are also mentioned in 3:2 .


Heb “Zion will be ransomed with justice.” Both cola in this verse end with similar terms: justice and righteousness (and both are preceded by a בְּ [ bet ] preposition). At issue is whether these virtues describe the means or result of the deliverance and whether they delineate God’s justice/righteousness or that of the covenant people. If the righteousness of Israelite returnees is in view, the point seems to be that the reestablishment of Zion as a center of justice (God’s people living in conformity with God’s demand for equity and justice) will deliver the city from its past humiliation and restore it to a place of prominence (see 2:2-4 ; cf. E. Kissane, Isaiah, 1:19). Most scholars conclude that “righteousness and “justice” refers to God alone (J. Ridderbos, Isaiah [BSC], 50; J. Watts, Isaiah [WBC], 1:25; E. J. Young, Isaiah [NICOT], 1:89; cf. NLT, TEV) or serves as a double reference to both divine and human justice and righteousness (J. A. Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 51; J. N. Oswalt, Isaiah [NICOT], 1:10; H. Wildberger, Isaiah , 1:72). If it refers to both sides of the coin, these terms highlight the objective divine work of redemption and the subjective human response of penitence (Motyer, 51).


The Hebrew text has, “her repentant ones/returnees with righteousness.” The form שָׁבֶיהָ ( shaveha , “her repentant ones”), as pointed in MT, is a masculine plural Qal participle from שׁוּב ( shuv , “return”). Used substantivally, it refers to the “returning (i.e., repentant) ones.” It is possible that the parallel line (with its allusion to being freed by a ransom payment) suggests that the form be repointed to שִׁבְיָהּ ( shivyah , “her captivity”), a reading that has support from the LXX. Some slightly emend the form to read וְשָׁבָה ( vÿshavah , “and will return”). According to this view, the verb from the first line applies to the second line as well with the following translation as a result: “she will be released when fairness is restored.” Regardless, it makes best sense in the context to regard this as a reference to repentant Israelites returning to the land of promise. This understanding provides a better contrast with the rebels and sinners in 1:28 .


Heb “and [there will be] a shattering of rebels and sinners together.”


person) in the middle of his sentence.


The second person pronouns in vv. 29-30 are masculine plural, indicating that the rebellious sinners (v. 28 ) are addressed.


Or “gardens” (so KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV); NAB “groves.”


Or “a garden” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV).


Heb “will become” (so NASB, NIV).


For location see Map5-B1 ; Map6-F3 ; Map7-E2 ; Map8-F2 ; Map10-B3 ; JP1-F4 ; JP2-F4 ; JP3-F4 ; JP4-F4 .


Heb “the word which Isaiah son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.”


Heb “in the end of the days.” This phrase may refer generally to the future, or more technically to the final period of history. See BDB 31 s.v. ַאחֲרִית . The verse begins with a verb that functions as a “discourse particle” and is not translated. In numerous places throughout the OT, the “to be” verb with a prefixed conjunction ( וְהָיָה [ vÿhayah ] and וַיְהִי [ vayÿhi ]) occurs in this fashion to introduce a circumstantial clause and does not require translation.


Or “be established” (KJV, NIV, NRSV).


Heb “as the chief of the mountains, and will be lifted up above the hills.” The image of Mount Zion being elevated above other mountains and hills pictures the prominence it will attain in the future.


The prefixed verb form with simple vav ( ו ) introduces a purpose/result clause after the preceding prefixed verb form (probably to be taken as a cohortative; see IBHS 650 §39.2.2a).


Heb “his ways.” In this context God’s “ways” are the standards of moral conduct he decrees that people should live by.


The cohortative with vav ( ו ) after the prefixed verb form indicates the ultimate purpose/goal of their action.


Heb “walk in his ways.”


Heb “for out of Zion will go instruction.”


Heb “house,” referring to the family line or descendants (likewise in v. 6 ).


Heb “let’s walk in the light of the Lord.” In this context, which speaks of the Lord’s instruction and commands, the “light of the Lord” refers to his moral standards by which he seeks to guide his people. One could paraphrase, “let’s obey the Lord’s commands.”


The words “O Lord” are supplied in the translation for clarification. Isaiah addresses the Lord in prayer.


Heb “they are full from the east.” Various scholars retain the BHS reading and suggest that the prophet makes a general statement concerning Israel’s reliance on foreign customs (J. Watts, Isaiah [WBC], 1:32; J. de Waard, Isaiah , 12-13). Nevertheless, it appears that a word is missing. Based on the parallelism (note “omen readers” in 5:6 c), many suggest that קֹסְמִים ( qosÿmim , “diviners”) or מִקְסָם ( miqsam , “divination”) has been accidentally omitted. Homoioteleuton could account for the omission of an original קֹסְמִים (note how this word and the following מִקֶּדֶם [ miqqedem , “from the east”] both end in mem ); an original מִקְסָם could have fallen out by homoioarcton (note how this word and the following מִקֶּדֶם both begin with mem ).


Heb “and omen readers like the Philistines.” Through this line and the preceding, the prophet contends that Israel has heavily borrowed the pagan practices of the east and west (in violation of Lev 19:26 ; Deut 18:9-14 ).


Heb “and with the children of foreigners they [?].” The precise meaning of the final word is uncertain. Some take this verb (I שָׂפַק , safaq ) to mean “slap,” supply the object “hands,” and translate, “they slap [hands] with foreigners”; HALOT 1349 s.v. I שׂפק . This could be a reference to foreign alliances. This translation has two disadvantages: It requires the conjectural insertion of “hands” and the use of this verb with its object prefixed with a בְּ ( bet ) preposition with this meaning does not occur elsewhere. The other uses of this verb refer to clapping at someone, an indication of hostility. The translation above assumes the verb is derived from II שׂפק (“to suffice,” attested in the Qal in 1 Kgs 20:10 ; HALOT 1349 s.v. II שׂפק ). In this case the point is that a sufficient number of foreigners (in this case, too many!) live in the land. The disadvantage of this option is that the preposition prefixed to “the children of foreigners” does not occur with this verb elsewhere. The chosen translation is preferred since it continues the idea of abundant foreign influence and does not require a conjectural insertion or emendation.


Or “treasuries”; KJV “treasures.”


Or “bow down to” (NIV, NRSV).


Heb “men bow down, men are low.” Since the verbs שָׁחָח ( shakhakh ) and שָׁפַל ( shafal ) are used later in this discourse to describe how God will humiliate proud men (see vv. 11, 17 ), some understand v. 9 a as a prediction of judgment, “men will be brought down, men will be humiliated.” However, these prefixed verbal forms with vav ( ו ) consecutive appear to carry on the description that precedes and are better taken with the accusation. They draw attention to the fact that human beings actually bow down and worship before the lifeless products of their own hands.


Heb “don’t lift them up.” The idiom “lift up” ( נָשָׂא with לְ , nasa ’ with preposition lamed ) can mean “spare, forgive” (see Gen 18:24, 26 ). Here the idiom plays on the preceding verbs. The idolaters are bowed low as they worship their false gods; the prophet asks God not to “lift them up.”


Heb “from the dread of the Lord,” that is, from the dread that he produces in the objects of his judgment.” The words “get away” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.


Heb “and the eyes of the pride of men will be brought low, and the arrogance of men will be brought down.” The repetition of the verbs שָׁפַל ( shafal ) and שָׁחָח ( shakhakh ) from v. 9 draws attention to the appropriate nature of the judgment. Those proud men who “bow low” before idols will be forced to “bow low” before God when he judges their sin.


Or “elevated”; CEV “honored.”


Heb “indeed [or “for”] the Lord who commands armies [traditionally, the Lord of hosts] has a day.”


Or “against” (NAB, NASB, NRSV).


Heb “the ships of Tarshish.” This probably refers to large ships either made in or capable of traveling to the distant western port of Tarshish.


Heb “desirable”; NAB, NIV “stately”; NRSV “beautiful.”


On the meaning of this word, which appears only here in the Hebrew Bible, see H. R. Cohen, Biblical Hapax Legomena (SBLDS), 41-42. sn The ships mentioned in this verse were the best of their class, and therefore an apt metaphor for the proud men being denounced in this speech.


Heb “and the pride of men will be brought down, and the arrogance of men will be brought low.” As in v. 11 , the repetition of the verbs שָׁפַל ( shafal ) and שָׁחָח ( shakhakh ) from v. 9 draws attention to the appropriate nature of the judgment. Those proud men who “bow low” before idols will be forced to “bow low” before God when he judges their sin.


Or “elevated”; NCV “praised”; CEV “honored.”


The verb “pass away” is singular in the Hebrew text, despite the plural subject (“worthless idols”) that precedes. The verb should be emended to a plural; the final vav ( ו ) has been accidentally omitted by haplography (note the vav at the beginning of the immediately following form). tn Heb “will completely pass away”; ASV “shall utterly pass away.”


The identity of the grammatical subject is unclear. The “idols” could be the subject; they will “go” into the caves and holes when the idolaters throw them there in their haste to escape God’s judgment (see vv. 20-21 ). The picture of the idols, which represent the foreign deities worshiped by the people, fleeing from the Lord would be highly polemical and fit the overall mood of the chapter. However it seems more likely that the idolaters themselves are the subject, for v. 10 uses similar language in sarcastically urging them to run from judgment.


Heb “dust”; ASV “into the holes of the earth.”


Heb “from the dread of the Lord,” that is, from the dread that he produces in the objects of his judgment.” The words “trying to escape” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.


Or “land.” It is not certain if these verses are describing the judgment of Judah (see vv. 6-9 ) or a more universal judgment on all proud men.


Or “in that day” (KJV).


Or “bow down to.”


, most scholars suggest that the MT mistakenly divided a noun (a hapax legomenon ) that should be translated “moles,” “shrews,” or “rodents.”


Or “land.” It is not certain if these verses are describing the judgment of Judah (see vv. 6-9 ) or a more universal judgment on all proud men. Almost all English versions translate “earth,” taking this to refer to universal judgment.


Heb “the master, the Lord who commands armies [traditionally, the Lord of hosts].” On the title “the Lord who commands armies,” see the note at 1:9 .


For location see Map5-B1 ; Map6-F3 ; Map7-E2 ; Map8-F2 ; Map10-B3 ; JP1-F4 ; JP2-F4 ; JP3-F4 ; JP4-F4 .


Heb “support and support.” The masculine and feminine forms of the noun are placed side-by-side to emphasize completeness. See GKC 394 §122. v .


Heb “all the support of food, and all the support of water.”


Heb “elder” (so ASV, NAB, NIV, NRSV); NCV “older leaders.”


Heb “the ones lifted up with respect to the face.” For another example of the Hebrew idiom, see 2 Kgs 5:1 .


Heb “and the wise with respect to magic.” On the meaning of חֲרָשִׁים ( kharashim , “magic”), see HALOT 358 s.v. III חרשׁ . Some understand here a homonym, meaning “craftsmen.” In this case, one could translate, “skilled craftsmen” (cf. NIV, NASB).


The words “the Lord says” are supplied in the translation for clarification. The prophet speaks in vv. 1-3 (note the third person reference to the Lord in v. 1 ), but here the Lord himself announces that he will intervene in judgment. It is unclear where the Lord’s words end and the prophet’s pick up again. The prophet is apparently speaking again by v. 8 , where the Lord is referred to in the third person. Since vv. 4-7 comprise a thematic unity, the quotation probably extends through v. 7 .


תַעֲלוּלִים ( ta ’ alulim ) is often understood as an abstract plural meaning “wantonness, cruelty” (cf. NLT). In this case the chief characteristic of these leaders is substituted for the leaders themselves. However, several translations make the parallelism tighter by emending the form to עוֹלְלִים (’ olÿlim , “children”; cf. ESV, NASB, NCV, NIV, NKJV, NRSV). This emendation is unnecessary for at least two reasons. The word in the MT highlights the cruelty or malice of the “leaders” who are left behind in the wake of God’s judgment. The immediate context makes clear the fact that they are mere youths. The coming judgment will sweep away the leaders, leaving a vacuum which will be filled by incompetent, inexperienced youths.


Heb “man against man, and a man against his neighbor.”


Heb “and those lightly esteemed those who are respected.” The verb רָהַב ( rahav ) does double duty in the parallelism.


Heb “[in] the house of his father” (so ASV); NIV “at his father’s home.”


The words “and say” are supplied for stylistic reasons.


Heb “your hand”; NASB “under your charge.” sn The man’s motives are selfish. He tells his brother to assume leadership because he thinks he has some wealth to give away.


Or “in that day” (KJV).


Heb “he will lift up [his voice].”


Heb “wrapper [of wounds]”; KJV, ASV, NRSV “healer.”


Heb “for their tongue and their deeds [are] to the Lord.”


Heb “to rebel [against] the eyes of his majesty.” The word כָּבוֹד ( kavod ) frequently refers to the Lord’s royal splendor that is an outward manifestation of his authority as king.


Heb “answers against them”; NRSV “bears witness against them.”


Heb “their sin, like Sodom, they declare, they do not conceal [it].”


Heb “woe to their soul.”


Or “the righteous” (KJV, NASB, NIV, TEV); NLT “those who are godly.”


Heb “that it is good.”


Heb “for the fruit of their deeds they will eat.”


Heb “for the work of his hands will be done to him.”


The Hebrew text appears to read literally, “My people, his oppressors, he deals severely, and women rule over them.” The correct text and precise meaning of the verse are debated. The translation above assumes (1) an emendation of נֹגְשָׂיו ( nogÿsayv , “his oppressors”) to נֹגְשִׂים ( nogÿshim , “oppressors”) by moving the mem ( ם ) on the following form to the end of the word and dropping the vav ( ו ) as virtually dittographic; (2) an emendation of מְעוֹלֵל ( mÿ ’ olel , a singular participle that does not agree with the preceding plural subject) to עֹלְלוּ (’ olÿlu ), a third plural Poel perfect from עָלַל (’ alal , “deal severely”; note that the following form begins with a vav [ ו ]; the text may be haplographic or misdivided); and (3) an emendation (with support from the LXX) of נָשִׁים ( nashim , “women”) to נֹשִׁים ( noshim , “creditors”; a participle from נָשַׁא , nasa ’). Another option is to emend מְעוֹלֵל to עוֹלְלִים (’ olÿlim , “children”) and read, “My people’s oppressors are children; women rule over them.” In this case the point is the same as in v. 4 ; the leadership void left by the judgment will be filled by those incompetent to lead the community – children and women. (The text reflects the ancient Israelite patriarchal mindset.)


Heb “and the way of your paths they confuse.” The verb בָּלַע ( bala ’, “confuse”; HALOT 135 s.v. I בלע ) is a homonym of the more common בָּלַע (“swallow”; see HALOT 134 s.v. בלע ).


The Hebrew text has “nations,” but the preceding and following contexts make it clear that the Lord is judging his covenant people. עָמִים (’ amim ) should be changed (with support from the LXX) to עמו . The final mem ( ם ) on the form in the Hebrew is either dittographic or enclitic. When the mem was added or read as a plural ending, the vav ( ו ) was then misread as a yod ( י ).


The words “he says” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.


The pronominal element is masculine plural; the leaders are addressed.


The verb בָּעַר ( ba ’ ar , “graze, ruin”; HALOT 146 s.v. II בער ) is a homonym of the more common בָּעַר ( ba ’ ar , “burn”; see HALOT 145 s.v. I בער ).


Heb “the plunder of the poor [is] in your houses” (so NASB).


Heb “the master, the Lord who commands armies [traditionally, the Lord of hosts].” On the title “the Lord who commands armies,” see the note at 1:9 . sn The use of this title, which also appears in v. 1 , forms an inclusio around vv. 1-15 . The speech begins and ends with a reference to “the master, the Lord who commands armies.”


Heb “daughters” (so KJV, NAB, NRSV).


Heb “with an outstretched neck.” They proudly hold their heads high so that others can see the jewelry around their necks.


Heb “walking and skipping, they walk.”


Heb “and with their feet they jingle.”