Introduction to Chapter 2
Chapter 2 of Shir HaShirim continues the dialogue of love between the Beloved and the Maiden - between the Holy One, Blessed is He, and the Congregation of Israel (Kenesset Yisrael). The Maiden describes herself as a rose growing in the valley, retaining its beauty even when surrounded by thorns; she describes her choice of the Beloved above all the "sons", the great days of the Ohel Moed (Tent of Meeting) and the desert, and the burning longing that grips her in her exile. The entire chapter is the perspective of a woman in her "living widowhood", recounting the history of her love and yearning to return to it. We will follow the order of the verses with the commentary of Rashi.
Verse 1: A Rose of the Sharon and a Lily of the Valleys
אֲנִי חֲבַצֶּלֶת הַשָּׁרוֹן שׁוֹשַׁנַּת הָעֲמָקִים׃ - "I am a rose of the Sharon, a lily of the valleys."
Seemingly, there is a contradiction here: first "chavatzelet" and then "shoshana" - is it a chavatzelet or a shoshana? To this Rashi explains: a chavatzelet is a shoshana. If so, what does "lily of the valleys" add after it has already said "rose of Sharon"? Rashi explains that a rose in the valley is more beautiful than a mountain rose, because it is constantly moist and the harsh power of the sun does not dominate there. In the mountains, the sun's strength is intense and the plants dry out, whereas in the valleys, water gathers, plants remain constantly hydrated, and they flourish much better. That is to say: Do not think I am like a rose on the mountain - I am like the rose of the valleys, the finest of all roses.
Verse 2: Like a Rose Among the Thorns
כְּשׁוֹשַׁנָּה בֵּין הַחוֹחִים כֵּן רַעְיָתִי בֵּין הַבָּנוֹת׃ - "As a rose among the thorns, so is My beloved among the daughters."
"Chochim" are thorns. Rashi explains: Just as a rose among the thorns is constantly pierced by them, yet nevertheless stands firm in its beauty and redness without losing its splendor, so is My beloved among the daughters - who entice her to follow them and stray as they do after other gods, yet she stands firm in her faith.
"The daughters," as explained in the first chapter, are the nations. Just as there is Jerusalem and "the daughters of Jerusalem" - the surrounding cities - so too there is the Jewish nation and the nations that surround it. The nations are like thorns that constantly prick Israel, yet despite all the persecutors, all the enemies, and all those who seek our destruction - the Jewish people live on, enduring in their beauty and vibrancy.
Yet Rashi adds an important point: they do not only pierce, they also entice. When the gentile cannot overcome by force, he comes with an embrace. Rav Finkel once said: More than Germany did to us, America has done to us. The American Holocaust is a silent holocaust, yet how many millions has it claimed from us - how many are no longer Jewish, how many intermarried and were lost forever from the Jewish people. As for those who perished in the Holocaust - who can describe their elevated stature and the greatness of their reward in Heaven; whereas those in America were lost from the Jewish nation, Heaven spare us, numbering even more than six million. The fear of the gentile's embrace has always been greater than the fear of his persecution. And this is the testimony brought by the verse: she remains preserved even among the daughters who entice her, standing firm in her faith and undeterred by the thorns.
A story is told of a Jewish wagon driver who was driving a priest. The priest saw easy prey - a simple wagon driver - and began speaking to him about that man and the gospels, trying to persuade him to convert. When he saw that the Jew was not convinced, he realized it might be wise to offer a financial reward, thinking this would convince him of the truth of the "religion of love" - that very religion that slaughtered, murdered, and butchered millions throughout the generations, and even today seeks our destruction, only preferring that others do it for them while lending their backing. Everything is done in a politically correct manner, but the intentions have not changed: the same Spain that sought to destroy us five hundred years ago is the same Spain that today recognizes the Palestinian Authority as a state. If they cannot do it themselves, they dispatch others and support them - let us have no illusions. In any case, the priest offered him five thousand dollars. The Jew said to him: "Now you have truly convinced me not to go through with this." The priest was astonished: "Five thousand dollars does not move you?" He replied: "I am a simple man; I know nothing about theology, but I know about horses. My father told me - if someone comes offering to trade his horse for yours, and even adds several thousand on top, run like fire, because he is selling you a dead horse. If you want to trade my Judaism for Christianity and offer me money to boot - it must be a dead horse."
Verse 3: Like an Apple Tree Among the Trees of the Forest
כְּתַפּוּחַ בַּעֲצֵי הַיַּעַר כֵּן דּוֹדִי בֵּין הַבָּנִים בְּצִלּוֹ חִמַּדְתִּי וְיָשַׁבְתִּי וּפִרְיוֹ מָתוֹק לְחִכִּי׃ - Like an apple tree among the trees of the forest, so is my Beloved among the youths; in His shade I delighted and sat, and His fruit was sweet to my palate.
Rashi explains: An apple tree standing among barren trees is the most cherished of them all, for its fruit is pleasing in both taste and fragrance. Note that Rabbeinu Tam in Tosafot explains that the apple mentioned in Shir HaShirim is actually an etrog, citing the Targum: "Just as the etrog is pleasing and praised among barren trees." Yet from Rashi's phrasing, it appears that he does not interpret it like the Targum, for he writes simply "an apple tree," not an etrog. As we will see shortly, there is even proof for this.
The idea is this: where all the trees are apple trees, it is difficult for a single apple tree to stand out. But where all the surrounding trees are barren, the fruit-bearing tree is immediately noticeable, like a rose among thorns, possessing both flavor and aroma. "So is my Beloved among the sons" - among the young men; and the allegorical meaning, in Rashi's words: so the Holy One, blessed be He, is chosen above all other gods, and therefore "in His shade I delighted and sat." To us this seems self-evident, but had we lived in an era when idolaters believed with complete conviction that their deity was a true god who brings benefit and to whom it is worthwhile to pray, Scripture comes and declares: No. My Beloved is like an apple tree among the trees of the forest; He alone is a fruit-bearing tree, while all the rest are barren trees devoid of substance.
Rashi adds from Midrash Aggadah: Everyone flees from this apple tree because it provides no shade; so too did all the nations flee from the Holy One, blessed be He, at the Giving of the Torah, but I - "in His shade I delighted and sat." This provides proof that the verse does not refer to an etrog: an etrog tree provides abundant shade, as citrus trees are dense with foliage, and one cannot say of them that people flee because there is no shade. An apple tree, however, has sparse and scattered leaves, offering no comfortable shade to sit beneath.
And what is the deeper meaning of having "no shade" in the allegory? One of the reasons people were drawn to idolatry and distanced themselves from the service of God - when seemingly there is no comparison between the true God and an idol that has no substance - is that serving Hashem is demanding. Look at the wilderness: with any slight deviation from the path, immediately "the fire of Hashem burned among them," here a strike, here a plague, and there twenty-four thousand dead. On the other hand, there were the Clouds of Glory, the well, the manna, the quail - but it was demanding. Idolatry, by contrast, was flexible and far less demanding. Furthermore, the Vilna Gaon notes: wherever idolatry is mentioned in the Prophets, it is described in terms of promiscuity - "their harlotries," "her adulteries from between her breasts," and the like - because idolaters drew followers through the unrestrained indulgence of desires, and in this way succeeded in attracting many adherents. Idolatry was permissive; everything was free, everything was allowed. With the Holy One, blessed be He, however, there is exactitude, there is judgment, and if one veers from the path, there is exile and punishment. This is the meaning of "it has no shade": ostensibly He does not shield and protect you from consequences, and if you deviate from the path, you will experience exile and persecution. Therefore, the nations fled from the Holy One, blessed be He, at the Giving of the Torah.
Yet Knesset Yisrael declares: In His shade I delighted and sat. And why? Because I know that He is the God of truth. One who possesses the power to strike also possesses the power to bestow good. Idolatry has no substance and can grant nothing. "Did any god ever attempt to go and take for himself a nation from the midst of another nation, by trials, by signs, and by wonders...?" Did idolatry ever do anything for its adherents? Did it ever save them? Did it ever bring them redemption? Perhaps the shade is not dense, but He possesses the power to bestow and provide. With idolatry, one imagines there is comfortable shade and that he is protected - it administers no blows, but neither does it distribute gifts, for idols are futile and devoid of reality. And as Chazal explain: regarding that which idolaters imagine their worship provides, the Holy One, blessed be He, "does not destroy His world because of fools." What was destined to occur takes place naturally, and He does not disrupt the order of His world on account of their prayers to an idol.
Verse 4: He brought me to the house of wine
הֱבִיאַנִי אֶל בֵּית הַיָּיִן וְדִגְלוֹ עָלַי אַהֲבָה׃ - He brought me to the house of wine, and His banner over me was love.
Rashi explains: "To the house of wine" - this refers to the Ohel Mo'ed, the Tent of Meeting, where the details and explanations of the Torah were given. There Moshe met with the Holy One, blessed be He, as it says, "And I will meet with you there," and from there all the details and elucidations were delivered. Whenever a doubt arose, or there was a need for clarification and instruction, Moshe would say, "Stand and let me hear what Hashem will command concerning you." The Ohel Mo'ed is called the "house of wine" because the Torah is compared to wine; and wine (yayin) shares the numerical value of sod (secret) - when wine enters, secrets emerge.
"And His banner over me was love" - Rashi explains: my gathering, as He assembled me to Him, is love to me; I still remember His love and His banner. "Degel" (banner) denotes an assembly and gathering, as in "they gathered and came." This is also the concept of the banners in the wilderness, whose role was to assemble everyone into one place. Just like a tour guide who raises a tall pole with a flag at its head - among a group of fifty people, where one wanders here and another chats there, the banner is held high so that all can see where he is leading. So too, "His banner over me was love": the bond through which He assembled me and gathered me to Himself is love to me, and I still remember His love and His banner. According to Rashi, the woman is recounting here in her widowhood the history of what once was, and therefore "love over me" is stated in the present tense - these things are still beloved to me, and I remember them still.
Verse 5: Sustain me with delicacies
סַמְּכוּנִי בָּאֲשִׁישׁוֹת רַפְּדוּנִי בַּתַּפּוּחִים כִּי חוֹלַת אַהֲבָה אָנִי׃ - Sustain me with flagons of wine, cushion me with apples, for I am sick with love.
Rashi explains: Support me now in the manner of the sick, who are propped up with pillows and cushions; "with dainties (ashishot)" - with flasks of wine (ashishei anavim) or with vessels of fine flour. And what are ashishot? The Metzudat Tzion clarifies: they are the flagons in which wine is placed, as in "flagons of wine" (ashishei anavim) - vessels into which wine or fine flour is placed. And she asks: Support me, place around me flagons of wine and flagons of fine flour. Rashi does not specify what purpose this served for the sick; it is well known that a sick person lacks an appetite, and it is possible this was done to stimulate their appetite.
"Spread me (rafduni)" - carpet my bed around me with apples for a pleasant fragrance, as is done for the sick. Here Rashi does reveal the purpose: for a good fragrance. Whether the scent brings actual healing or is merely pleasant, Rashi does not say, but this was their practice - to spread apples around the sick. "For I am lovesick" - for I am sick for His love, longing and thirsting for Him here in my exile. I have become like an invalid out of the thirst to cling to Him, while I am distant and trapped in exile. And "rafidah" is an expression of bedding or carpeting, as in "spreads sharp pointed things upon the mire" (Job 41:22), and in our contemporary language as well, the root denotes a mattress or padding.
שְׂמֹאלוֹ תַּחַת לְרֹאשִׁי וִימִינוֹ תְּחַבְּקֵנִי׃ - His left hand is under my head, and His right hand embraces me.
At first glance, there seems to be a sudden leap here: we were just describing the condition in exile - "for I am lovesick" - and suddenly we jump to describing the wilderness. Therefore, Rashi explains: "His left hand is under my head" - in the wilderness; "and His right hand embraces me" - journeying three days ahead to seek out a resting place for them, and at the resting place bringing down manna and quail for them; all of this I now recall in my exile, and I am sick for His love.
This, then, is the explanation of "I am lovesick": now, in exile, I remember the connection and closeness I experienced from Him, blessed be He, when I left Egypt and during my time in the wilderness - and when I recall this, I become sick from the sheer grief over all that I now lack.
הִשְׁבַּעְתִּי אֶתְכֶם בְּנוֹת יְרוּשָׁלַ͏ִם בִּצְבָאוֹת אוֹ בְּאַיְלוֹת הַשָּׂדֶה אִם תָּעִירוּ וְאִם תְּעוֹרְרוּ אֶת הָאַהֲבָה עַד שֶׁתֶּחְפָּץ׃ - I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, by the gazelles or by the hinds of the field, that you not stir up nor awaken love until it please.
Rashi states: "I adjure you" - you, the nations; "by the gazelles or by the hinds of the field" - that you will become prey and food like gazelles and hinds. The literal meaning of the verse is perplexing: what does it mean to adjure someone by gazelles and hinds of the field? Is it like a vow, "Konam upon you the hinds of the field"? Therefore, Rashi clarifies that the oath means: if you do so, you will become defenseless prey like the hinds of the field, and whoever wishes may hunt you and devour you.
And what is the substance of the oath? "That you not stir up nor awaken love." Here, Rashi explains in a manner opposite to the simple reading. We might have understood "te'iru" in the sense of waking someone from sleep, meaning that awakening love would signify strengthening it. But Rashi says: the intention is that you must not seek to alter the love between me and my Beloved, to substitute it and entice me after you. In other words, you seek to alienate me from this love - and regarding this, I adjure you not to do such a thing.
"Until it please (ad shetechpatz)" - so long as it is firmly fixed in my heart and He desires me. "Ad she-" here does not mean "until we reach...", but rather "so long as...", as Rashi proves from the verse: "While the king was at his table (ad she-hamelech bimisibo)" - which does not mean until the king arrives at his banquet, but while the king is at his banquet. So too here: as long as love is desired and embedded in my heart and He desires me, do not attempt to undermine it.
And in what sense is "te'iru" used? Rashi explains: "if you stir up" means if you make hateful, as in "and has become your enemy (vehayah arecha)" (I Samuel 28:16) and "and the interpretation thereof to your enemies (ufishreh le'arecha)" (Daniel 4:16). Daniel said to Nebuchadnezzar: May the dream be for those who hate you, and its interpretation for your enemies - and "ar" means an enemy. Yet ostensibly, who were Nebuchadnezzar's enemies if not Israel? Would Daniel wish bad dreams upon Israel? Rather, as explained there, Daniel was not speaking to Nebuchadnezzar at all, but to the Holy One, blessed be He: Master of the Universe, let this dream and its interpretation befall Your enemy and adversary - gesturing with his hands toward Nebuchadnezzar. That is, let everything You showed him in the dream befall Nebuchadnezzar himself, who is Your enemy and adversary and who is destined to destroy the Temple. The second proof Rashi cites is "and has become your enemy (vehayah arecha)" stated in the Book of Samuel, when Samuel told Saul that the Holy One, blessed be He, had rejected his kingship and become like an enemy to him. Thus: "if you stir up" - if you cause hatred; do not attempt to make hateful the love between me and Hashem, so long as the will and desire endure between us.
And what is the meaning of "if you stir up" (im te’oreru)? Rashi explains: it is like "one who contests ownership of a field" (ha’orer al hasadeh) - a claimant who challenges legal title. So too here: if you attempt to contest and undermine this love.
At the end of his comments, Rashi adds a kind of disclaimer: there are many Midrashei Aggadah, but they do not align with the chronological sequence of events, for I see that Shlomo prophesied and spoke of the Exodus from Egypt, the Giving of the Torah, the Mishkan, the entry into the Land, the Temple, the Babylonian exile, the Second Temple era, and its destruction. Rashi senses that he interpreted the verse somewhat against its intuitive reading - for "to awaken and to stir up" sounds like an expression of encouragement or arousal, whereas he interpreted it as an expression of hatred and contestation. Although he cited scriptural proof for this meaning, it is not the initial understanding that comes to mind. To this he responds: I know there are Midrashim that fit the phrasing very well, but they do not fit the chronological progression. The book possesses an orderly framework, and there is a specific historical era it describes.
For example, consider the interpretation made famous in Satmar circles regarding the Three Oaths: "I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem" - the Holy One, blessed be He, bound the Congregation of Israel with three oaths, including that they should not ascend en masse like a wall, and He adjured the nations not to oppress Israel excessively. This interpretation speaks of the ultimate redemption, as does the teaching that one must not force the redemption before the time of Divine favor arrives and must not rush the end. These are profound interpretations in their own right, but they do not fit the chronological flow: Shlomo is speaking here of the Exodus, the Giving of the Torah, the Mishkan, the entry into the Land, the Temple, the Babylonian exile, and the Second Temple - not the future redemption. How could the text abruptly leap to the final redemption in the middle of portraying the bond between the Beloved and the Maiden from the Exodus until the Second Temple? Moreover, it is difficult to pluck a verse from one context and transpose it elsewhere. Therefore, Rashi was compelled to offer an interpretation that may seem less intuitive to the literal wording, but fits the chronological structure of the text.
The Targum explains that this was a warning directed to the Israelites during their forty years in the wilderness: "אשבעית יתכון כנשתא דישראל בה' צבאות ובתקיפי ארעא דישראל, דלא תזידון למיסק לארעא דכנען עד דיהא רעווא מן קדם ה'" - do not hasten after twenty years in the desert to decide on your own to enter the Land, until it is the will of Hashem; "ויסופון כל דרי אנשי קרבא לממת מגוא משריתא" - until that entire generation of warriors has perished from within the camp; "היכמא דזדו אחיכון בני אפרים דנפקו תלתין שנין ממצרים עד לא מטא קצא" - just as your brothers, the sons of Ephraim, acted presumptuously and left Egypt thirty years before the appointed end; "ונפלו ביד פלשתאי דיתבין בגת וקטלו יתהון" - and fell into the hands of the Philistines dwelling in Gath, who killed them; "אלא הוין אוריכו עד זמן ארבעין שנין ובתר כן תעלון בניכון ויחסנון יתה" - rather, wait until the span of forty years has passed, and afterward your children will ascend and inherit the Land. Thus, according to the Targum: do not awaken or stir up the redemption before the appointed time - a concept akin to "do not ascend like a wall" - but applied specifically while they were in the wilderness, rather than to the exiles that followed.
In summary:
Chapter 2 opens with the depiction of the Congregation of Israel as the rose of the valleys - beautiful and fresh specifically in the low, moist place; and like a rose among thorns - standing firm in her beauty and her faith among the nations that simultaneously pierce and entice her. The Holy One, blessed be He, is like an apple tree among the barren trees of the forest: the singular fruit-bearing tree. Although the nations fled from His shade at the Giving of the Torah because His service is demanding, Israel declares, "In His shade I delighted and sat," for only He Who possesses the authority to reprove also possesses the power to bestow true goodness, whereas empty idols are devoid of substance. From there, the Maiden turns to memories of the banquet house - the Tent of Meeting, where the details and explanations of the Torah were revealed, and to the banner of love that gathered her to Him. Overcome with yearning in her exile, she asks to be sustained with dainties and refreshed with apples, like one lovesick, for the memory of "His left hand is under my head and His right hand embraces me" in the wilderness now brings an even sharper pang of longing. Finally, she adjures the nations not to breed enmity and not to undermine the love between her and her Beloved, so long as it remains firmly rooted in her heart and He desires it.