overjoyed

stevie wonder

Song of Solomon 7:4-6

Overjoyed

Song of Songs: Evangelical Exegetical Commentary Commentary

By this time in their marriage, Solomon was intimately familiar with every part of his wife’s body, whether he was actually looking at her naked form or not.

iv. It is also important to notice that this is the third extended description of the maiden’s beauty (previously also in Song of Solomon 4:1-5 and 6:4-9). These three descriptions may be compared to the single description of the beloved’s appearance (found in Song of Solomon 5:10-16), which was not even spoken to the beloved himself, but to others about the beloved. This comparison strengthens the impression that it is far more important for a woman to be assured of and confident in her beauty than it is for a man.

· The first description of beauty (Song of Solomon 4:1-5) is in the context of the wedding night; the beloved praised the beauty of the maiden before she yielded her virginity to him.

· The second description of beauty (Song of Solomon 6:4-9) is the context of restoring a relationship after a conflict; the beloved assured the maiden that she was just as beautiful to him then as she was on the wedding night.

· This third description of beauty (Song of Solomon 7:1-5) is perhaps a more public description, further assuring the maiden of her beauty.

Verse 4- Elegance

Verse 4-5 Strength

Verse 6 royalty

Song of Songs (Poem Seventeen: A Description of the Dancing Shulammite (7:1–11 [6:13–7:10]))

3 (7:2) Working up from the thigh, the poet next pauses over the attraction of the woman’s “navel” and “belly.” These words are in quotation marks because we believe that they are euphemisms for the woman’s vulva. Some scholars, notably Pope, try to identify these Hebrew words (šōr and beṭen) with the woman’s genitalia by means of philology. Pope argues that the word šōr = šurr is related to a similar Arabic word sirr, which means “secret” and “pudenda.” However, as R. E. Murphy has pointed out, there is an Arabic word surratu, which means “navel,” and the Hebrew word clearly has this meaning in its only other undisputed attestation found in Ezekiel 16:4. However, I am driven less by philology and more by the comparison. The poet says that her “navel” never lacks wine. The navel is not a particularly moist location, whereas the vulva is, at least when sexually excited. I would further argue that males are attracted to the female navel because of its proximity to the vulva and also because it is a near, but not actual, aperture; it thus reminds the male of the vulva. This indirect reference to the vulva is in keeping with the poet’s strategy of tasteful, though erotic allusions to the woman’s body. Whether literally navel or vulva, the image evokes a comparison that is based on taste. The description of the woman’s aperture as containing wine implies the man’s desire to drink from the sensual bowl. Thus, this may be a subtle and tasteful allusion to the intimacies of oral sex.The verse goes on to describe her “belly” as a heap of wheat. Some commentators, such as Murphy and O. Keel, suggest that here the image is not visual but one of fertility. Wheat (ḥiṭṭâ) is one of the main foodstuffs of ancient Israel. Yet if fertility is meant, then the allusion is more than to her belly as such. It is to her womb, again a reference to her genitalia. The heap of wheat calls to mind vaginal hair. It is a work of art to the man, framed or bordered by lilies.

4 (7:3) The verse is identical to 4:5.5

(7:4) Three body parts are praised in this verse, the neck, the eyes, and the nose. The parallelism is not symmetrical. The verse has one colon describing the neck and two each describing the eyes and the nose. It is a dubious matter to try to “fix” the parallelism, though, so we treat the verse as three separate poetic lines.The woman’s neck is likened to an ivory tower. Note again (especially 6:4, 10) the use of a martial image in reference to the woman. In the first female wasṣ, her neck was described as a tower (see commentary at 4:4). There we suggested that that the image was “not a visual correspondence, but a transfer of value.” It is not that the woman’s neck is long, fat, thick, or the like, but that it is grand, strong, dignified, and perhaps elegant. In 4:4, the tower is described as the tower of David; here it is an ivory tower. Ivory, of course, is precious material. It too suggests strength, and the tusk is an apt image for a long elegant neck.

a. Your neck is like an ivory tower: The idea with this image isn’t so much of an extremely long neck, but of one that communicate nobility and strength of character.

i. “He is probably complimenting not only the noble dignity exemplified in her posture

Dignified-

are you dignified?

precious. . do you know your value?

Song of Songs: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary Notes

5a. ivory tower. The neck has already been compared to a tower, David’s tower, in 4:4, and some critics think once is enough. Repetitions of this sort, however, are frequent and characteristic of the Canticle. In the description moving upward from foot to head, the neck is roughly in its proper place above the breasts and below the head. The material for the tower has seemed strange to some critics who would change the ivory to a proper name

ivory speaks of beauty and elegance

Her eyes are compared to pools of water, a similar, though not identical, image to that of the man’s eyes in 5:12. The woman’s moist eyes are as attractive as the pools in a particular location, specifically those of Heshbon, particularly those near the gate of Bat-rabbim. The reference seems proverbial from its context, but we have no similar references to support this idea. Heshbon, located at the east side of the Dead Sea, is a beautiful area, but we cannot be more specific than this in our exposition. Brenner, however, argues that the reference is to Rabbah, an Ammonite city near Heshbon. However, her suggestion is a conjectural emendation that has no basis in ancient manuscripts, and she uses this identification to support her mistaken theory that the wasṣ is a parody, in this case associating the woman with the Ammonites and Moabites who were hated by Israelites and linked to sexual perversities.The woman’s nose, like her neck, is tower-like. The image seems to imply a prominent nose, certainly considered attractive (otherwise why the comment?) to the original audience of the poem. Its grandness and dignity are underlined by its reference to Lebanon and its prominent role in protecting the important city of Damascus.

There could be no more important tower with which to compare her nose

Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (31. Tenor (6:13b–7:9a))

To the Western reader, the description of her nose hardly seems complementary. Pope suggests that Mount Hermon is meant and from that concludes that the woman is in fact a goddess.

.6 (7:5) The culmination of this wasṣ is the head and its hair. The poem has completed its journey from her feet to her head. The comparison here is with Carmel. Carmel is the range that juts out into the Mediterranean, just south of Acco. In this context, the reference to Carmel likely refers to the fact that she stands tall and dignified.

Royal imagery comes back into play in the second colon, where her hair is said to be purple. Purple was the most expensive dye at the time and reserved for both human (Judg. 8:26) and divine (Exod. 25–39) monarchs. She is queen-like and fit for a king. Indeed, according to the third colon, her hair (a metonymy for her whole being) ensnares or entraps a king. Her stunning beauty cannot be resisted.

7 (7:6) The wasṣ ends, typically, with a general affirmation of the woman’s beauty. Here the roots yph (to be beautiful) and nʿm (to be pleasant) are used as near synonyms. We have already encountered them together in 1:16 in reference to the woman. Yph is also found as a general acclamation in the first wasṣ, as seen in 4:10. Here, we have the second person feminine singular verbal form used. To call her beautiful and pleasant is a high compliment.The last phrase of the verse, O love, with your delights (ʾahăbâ battʿănûgîm), seems awkward in the Hebrew and has led to some proposed emendations. It may be simply a cry of ecstasy as the man contemplates a joyous union with the woman. The noun “delights” comes from the verbal root ʿng “to be delicately brought up” (pual), “to delight in” (hitpael). The verb occurs ten times and the noun five times in the Hebrew Bible. It can be used both in a theological sense of delight in God, as well as in a human sense of enjoyment, including, as here, sensual enjoyment.