SONG OF SONGS 8:6

Importance Within the Book

If one can gauge the importance of any passage in the Bible by the amount of ink spilled in trying to explain it, then this verse (along with its continuation in v. 7) would have to be high on any list. It certainly is the most discussed verse within the Song of Songs. Below are some explanations voiced to defend this verse's significance:

    “This verse is arguably the most memorable and intense of the entire book.” (Longman)

    “The moment of epiphany toward which the Songs of Songs moves is a plea for permanence in love.” (Dictionary of Biblical Imagery)

    “These verses [vv. 6-7] mark the conclusion of the book and thus indicate to us the purpose for which it was written...she requests to be placed as a seal on a cord around his neck and as a signet ring on his arm, to be his wife forever...Thus the Shulamite woman pleads for a unique relationship, to be chosen by him and to belong to him forever.” (Kaiser)

    “It has been recognized by many commentators that the setting of Love and Passion in opposition to the power of Death and Hell in 8b is the climax of the Canticle and the burden of its message: that Love is the only power that can cope with Death.” (Pope)

    “These verses are unique in the book because they represent a clear example of reflective generalization, which is characteristic of wisdom literature...The passage functions to summarize the message of the entire book and to abstract its teaching beyond the historical instance afforded by Solomon.” (Childs)

Against the above verdict are comments by other scholars who minimize the importance of 8:6:

    “This parenthesis marks the passage of the waiting time.” (Orr)

    Tom Gledhill expresses the opinion that 8:5-14 may be seen “as a series of unrelated appendices.”

One problem with those who overwhelmingly endorse of the significance of 8:6 within the Song is that they assume, quite wrongly, that the climax of any biblical book is found in its final verses. In this particular case, my own analysis demonstrates fairly clearly that the real intended climax to the book appears in its center at Song 5:1 (see the post entitled “Song of Songs: Introduction to the Literary Structure”).

Getting back to Gledhill, he actually strikes a sort of compromise between these views: “If 5:1 represents a climax in the lovers' physical relationship, then these verses [8:6-7] represent a climax in praise of the unconquerability of love in the face of all its foes.”

Poetic Nature

    a. “Set me  as a seal upon your heart,

       (Set me) as a seal upon your arm;

    b. for love       is  strong as      death,

             passion (is) fierce as the grave.

    c. Its flashes are    flashes of fire,

      (Its flashes are) a raging     flame.” NRSV

Before going into the meaning of this verse unit by unit, it is helpful to understand the verse as Hebrew poetry. From the spacings above, you can see that all three couplets in this verse take the form of incomplete parallelism, i.e. each half of the couplet basically mirrors the other in terms of meaning, but with one or more of the key elements understood, even if not actually stated. Thus, in 8:6a, for example, the reader must supply the missing words I have added in parentheses in order to make sense of the meaning.

Since 8:6 is written in poetry rather than prose, one should not be surprised to see that figurative language is employed – both a and b are expressed as similes while c takes the form of a metaphor. This, of course, compounds the problem of understanding what these lines actually mean since it requires (1) a knowledge of the physical object or concept being used for comparison in its historical context and (2) a judgment call as to the exact characteristic of that object to which reference is being made.

Song of Songs 8:6a

Parenthetically, several commentators quote an Egyptian love song in relation to 8:6a. It goes, “Oh, if I only were your signet ring that were put on your finger. There it would guard me like something which gives you a beautiful life.”

The difficulties in pinning down the exact meaning of the verse begin with a proper understanding of the metaphor of “seal” in the present context. As Snaith considerably understates the case, “Much may be said about seals.” If we were to look for modern parallels to the use of “seal” in this verse, we might even compare it to such diverse objects as a tattoo, a wedding ring or a credit card. All would point to different aspects of the image.

    “A seal signified an association with, even an ownership of, the object being sealed.” (Longman)

    “The seal (hotam) was a very personal possession worn on a cord almost as an identity tag..., a precious object worn constantly...and so a metaphor for the lover.” (Millard)

    A seal “was symbolic of something intimately dear.” (Balchin)

    “The woman's request for permanence in love thus implies both proximity (like the seal that is always present) and the action of being claimed (as her lover stamps his beloved like an official signature on his heart).” (DBI)

    “The woman desires to be bound closely and always to her lover.” (Dobbs-Allsopp)

    “In 8:6 the girl, under the metaphor of the seal, is seen to be seeking the security of that public affirmation of their intimacy.” (Gledhill)

    The commentary in the Jerusalem Bible jumps right to the allegorical understanding of the Song when it states: “The seal, attesting the wishes of the owner, here symbolizes the wishes of Yahweh, i.e. the Law.” I think we can safely ignore such a fanciful interpretation.

    The Message paraphrases this couplet as “Hang my locket around your neck, wear my ring on your finger.”

This last version above reminds us that 8:6a consists of two lines, not just one. And although the two are closely related, some scholars have attempted to show the unique meaning attached to each one:

    Orr calls it “an avowal that your heart and arms are for me alone. For love demands all, and will have all.”

    TEV renders 8:6a as “Close your heart to every love but mine; hold no one in your arms but me.”

    “Perhaps the first refers to his inner being, his personality, what makes him tick; and his arm refers to his actions. Taken together, heart and arm signify the whole person.” (Longman)

    “So the young shepherd is to own her privately (the heart) and publicly (the arm).” (Balchin)

Song of Songs 8:6b

Now things begin to get a bit more murky. It was mainly due to these lines that prompted Marvin Pope to propose that Song of Songs was a collection of funeral songs, a view that thankfully few other scholars share. We should first start with line 1 of this unit to determine in what manner love and death are equally strong.

    In discussing the concept of “strength,” DBI points out first of all: “Strength can characterize not only humans themselves but also elements of our experience, as we sense the strength of sin (I Cor 15:56), love and death (Song 8:6).”

    Kaiser explains the similarity between the two: “Its [love's] power is as unbreakable and as irresistible as death itself. One cannot withstand it or deny it, so that it can be compared only with death – who has ever successfully withstood that power?”

    “Love is as strong as death stresses the inevitability, the utter givenness of the woman's love in all of its manifestations.” (Dobbs-Allsopp)

    “Love (the genuine kind that is undivided, unfeigned, complete, and enduring)...is as strong / irresistible as death, which is an unrelenting, overpowering, and destructive power from which no one escapes.” (Wakely)

    “Love holds it victims under its sway in exactly the same way as death does. Once smitten there is no escape.” (Gledhill)

    “Love is as irresistible as death is unavoidable.” (Johnston)

    “Love is as irresistible as death. Who can resist the power of true love, for its compulsion is all-conquering? This is supremely so with the love of Christ.” (Balchin)

Despite the consensus above, there are still some who chose to see, against the seemingly plain reading of the Hebrew text, some sort of distinction in the strength of love and death:

    The Message paraphrases it to say “Love is invincible facing danger and death. Passion laughs at the terrors of hell. The fire of love stops at nothing – it sweeps everything before it.””

    “Love ('ahaba) is stronger than floods, stronger event than death, i.e. irresistible and inevitable.” (Els)

    “Here the woman boldly asserts that love, her love, is even stronger than death. It is, in other words, irresistible, resolute, and unshakable.” (Longman)

    Bullock states that “love, unlike life, cannot be cancelled out by death.”

The following line of poetry is difficult due to two main translation issues, the meaning of the two underlined words in: “Passion is fierce as the grave.” The noun is especially hard to pin down to one concept only. Peels explains: “The root qn' appears 85 times in the Old Testament and has a wide range of meanings. The word can occur both in a positive sense (advocate zealously for the benefit of someone else) and in a negative sense (bear a grudge against, resent). Similarly, the human qin' a can appear in various guises, e.g., passion (S of Songs 8:6), anger (Prov 14:30, 27:4), jealousy (Gen 26 14; Ezek 31:9), competition (Eccl 4:4), devotion (Num 11:29).”

Snaith says, “Commentators differ on the exact significance here of qin' ah,...there seems little doubt that the bad sense of the word – 'jealousy' – occurs more frequently; the ancient versions agree on that sense here. Indeed, some claim that the word is used only in the pejorative sense. But here there is no third party introduced to provide jealousy...”

By contrast, Longman states, “Jealousy in this context denotes a single-minded devotion to something...I think it is important to understand that the Bible affirms a proper type of jealousy, a desire for someone else that tolerates no rivals.”

“But let not love be treated falsely for jealousy as its close associate is cruel as the grave. Both are all-devouring.” (Balchin)

“'Jealousy' may not be the best English translation because of the negative meaning we normally attach to this word. In this context the idea...means a strong emotional attachment to a particular person. This type of love is possessive and exclusive.” (Akin)

But Dobbs-Allsopp disagrees with Akin and says that the word jealousy “better conveys the image's violence.”

“The word jealousy has both positive and negative meaning in the Bible. When used positively..., it suggests an undivided devotion to its object, an ardent love that brooks no rivals and demands undivided attention in return. It is used in this sense in Song of Songs, pointing to a love that is jealous for someone, not of someone.” (Kaiser)

Related to the issue as to whether jealousy or passion is the best rendering is the question of the exact definition of the Hebrew word translated as “fierce” (NRSV) or “cruel” (REB)

    Kaiser calls it “unyielding and resolute in its desire to be with the loved one. In the lengths to which this love will go, it is as deep, inexorable and hard as the grave.”

    Longman renders the word as “tenacious” – “the idea in the context...is positive and basically means that it is tough or long lasting in spite of obstacles.”

    Snaith says, “RSV's 'cruel' translates the Heb qasah, which means 'hard, severe' without any emotional connotation. Here it probably describes the compelling power of love – the way in which love, sometimes considered gentle, pushes people in an unrelenting way – as unrelenting as death or the grave.”

Song of Songs 8:6c

Two key Hebrew words in this couplet deserve comment. The first is resep, found in the opening line and translated as “flashes of fire” in NRSV. Both Longman and Snaith note that the word is related to the Ugaritic plague god Resheph, who was pictured as holding weapons. The noun appears in the Bible in Psalm 78:48 where it refers to thunderbolts and in Job 5:7 where it indicates fiery sparks.

The next word appears in the second line of the couplet and is a little more controversial. As F.F. Bruce explains, since there are generally no word divisions indicated in ancient Hebrew, the letters salhebetyah may in fact be divided into two words – salhebet (meaning “flame”) plus Yah (a shortened form of Yahweh = God). Thus, according to this understanding, the proper translation would be “the very flame of the LORD” (NIV) or “the very flame of Jehovah” (Living Bible). Some scholars who take this approach are quoted below:

    Balchin calls it “a divine flame of supernatural power. No human power can put it out.”

    “Its fire is not simply, to use our worn-down phrase, awfully hot; it is aweful, as carrying the divine imperative and sanctions (Mal. 2:14f).” (Orr)

    Kaiser says that “this love burns flames of fire given by the Lord himself...This love, then does not originate solely from some carnal instinct; it emanates from the Lord himself!”

But there is a second interpretive possibility. Snaith explains that yah “is occasionally used to create a superlative expression, since Heb. lacks adjectival forms of the superlative.” Other examples appear in Jeremiah 2:31 and Psalm 118:5. Thus, if salhebetyah is taken as one word, then its meaning may be expressed as an adjective of intensity: “raging flame” (NRSV), “vehement flame” (Price), “mighty flame” (Oswalt), or “blazing fire” (NEB).

Longman prefers this superlative sense “chiefly because God's name has not been mentioned: as a matter of fact, it has been avoided by circumlocutions in previous places (2:7; 3:5).” Oswalt observes this unusual phenomenon in light of the fact that “both Jews and Christians have taken this book to be an allegory of the love of God for Israel and/or the church.”

Personally, I like Falk's translation which incorporates both of these options: “a fierce and holy blaze.”