We are studying the sefer Zera Shimshon on Shir HaShirim, in Essay 13, examining the verse in chapter 4: "You are wholly beautiful, my beloved, and there is no blemish in you." At first glance, there appears to be a redundant repetition here, and from this question stems the wondrous explanation of the author of Zera Shimshon.
כֻּלָּ֤ךְ יָפָה֙ רַעְיָתִ֔י וּמ֖וּם אֵ֥ין בָּֽךְ׃ (ד, ז) - "You are wholly beautiful, my beloved, and there is no blemish in you" (4:7).
The Rav asks: If she is wholly beautiful, it is obvious that she has no blemish. What does "you are wholly beautiful" mean? It means that in every single part of your body you are beautiful. If so, there is automatically no defect in you, for one cannot say "beautiful" about something that is not perfect - one cannot say her leg is beautiful if it is stunted. If so, once it has been said "you are wholly beautiful," it is obvious that there is no blemish in you; why, then, did Scripture need to state this?
This can be explained based on the Gemara at the end of the ninth chapter of Nedarim (66b). There was an incident involving a man who apparently quarreled with his wife and said to her: "Konam, that you shall derive no benefit from me until you show a beautiful blemish in you to Rabbi Yishmael b'Rabbi Yose." "Konam" is an expression denoting an offering - meaning, "I and all my possessions are forbidden to you like a sacrifice." This was the terminology used in those times, just as we recite on Yom Kippur, "konam, konach, konas," and the like, which are all substitute expressions for a sacrifice. For in order to make a vow, one must link the vow to a consecrated item or a forbidden object, and here the forbidden object is a sacrifice.
And what does "a beautiful blemish in you" mean? Rashi explains: Because she had many blemishes, he spoke to her in this manner - "if there is any beautiful thing in you." Admittedly, this phrasing is slightly difficult, as he should have said, "show something beautiful in you." Rather, he meant to imply that she had nothing beautiful about her at all and was entirely comprised of blemishes, so she should at least show some blemish that is somehow pleasant. In any case, he made the condition that she must show Rabbi Yishmael b'Rabbi Yose something beautiful about her, and only then could she return to her home.
They came and asked Rabbi Yishmael b'Rabbi Yose how this woman could be returned to her home. He asked them: Perhaps her head is shapely? They replied: It is round - spherical like a ball and unsightly. Perhaps her hair is lovely? They replied: It resembles stalks of flax, coarse bunches of combed flax. Perhaps her eyes are lovely? They replied: They are bleary. Perhaps her ears are lovely? They replied: They are doubled over, so large that they bend and fold over. Perhaps her nose is lovely? They replied: It is snubbed, pinched and blocked. Perhaps her lips are lovely? They replied: They are thick. Perhaps her neck is lovely? They replied: It is sunken, short and depressed, virtually having no neck at all. Perhaps her abdomen is lovely? They replied: It is swollen, distended. Perhaps her feet are lovely? They replied: They are as broad as a goose's feet.
Finally, he asked them: Perhaps her name is pleasant? Maybe she at least has a beautiful name? They answered him: She has a "wonderful" name - her name is Lichluchit (the Dirty One).
It is hard to imagine what the father was thinking when he went up to the Torah and declared, "and her name in Israel shall be Lichluchit." Indeed, one often wonders what people were thinking when choosing names for their children. There is one who named his daughter "Grasping an Almond Branch," and another who named his daughter "Precious Soul Born on Friday at Twilight" - with a name like that, by the time she crosses the street, a traffic jam forms! Others give all kinds of names from generations past, and if one does not come from a family where this is customary, why torment the child? Just because one has a grandmother by that name? Give the child a second name. Why give a girl a name that will cause her to be ridiculed at school? The Gedolei Yisrael were opposed to this, advising that such a name should only be given as a second name, and that the child be called by a conventional name so that they do not feel tormented throughout their lives because of their name.
In any case, when Rabbi Yishmael b'Rebbi Yosi heard that her name was Lichluchit, he said to them: "Fittingly is she called Lichluchit, for she is soiled with other blemishes." In other words: here we have found something fitting about her - her name! The name suits her perfectly, for she is soiled with blemishes; the name is fitting for her and she is fitting for her name. Rashi explains: this name is fitting for her, and that was certainly the "beautiful blemish" in her. Now we can well understand the phrase "a beautiful blemish": the name itself is a blemish, but it is "fitting" because it corresponds perfectly to all her other flaws.
Therefore, Scripture states, "You are entirely beautiful, my beloved," and so that one would not mistakenly think that this beauty is like the beauty of blemishes, it adds: "and there is no blemish in you." That is to say, your beauty is genuine beauty, not merely that you possess fitting blemishes. Say, then: had it only said "You are entirely beautiful," one might have thought she has fitting aspects like the name Lichluchit; therefore, Scripture emphasizes - not so, rather there is no blemish in you at all.
However, regarding this explanation one must note: the verse speaks of beauty as it is commonly understood in human speech, so why would one ever think that "You are entirely beautiful" refers to a beauty like that of Lichluchit, requiring Scripture to negate it? That is not the simple understanding at all, so why would Scripture need to exclude something that would never have crossed our minds in the first place?
Alternatively, the author of the Zera Shimshon explains: it is well known that for one who repents out of fear, intentional sins become like unintentional errors, whereas for one who repents out of love, they are transformed into merits, as the Talmud concludes in the eighth chapter of Yoma. And since Scripture found it necessary to state that she is beautiful, we deduce that one might otherwise have assumed she was not beautiful. Why? Because she initially had transgressions, but then she repented.
From the fact that Scripture needs to say, "You are entirely beautiful, my beloved," it implies that there was reason to think otherwise - because she had been soiled by transgressions. If so, why does He now declare that she is beautiful? Perforce, it is because she repented. Once Kenesset Yisrael returns in repentance, the Holy One, Blessed be He, says to her: you no longer have transgressions, you are entirely beautiful, my beloved.
Yet one might still suppose that while she is beautiful, she does not possess ultimate perfection of beauty, for if her repentance had been out of fear, the intentional sins would have merely become unintentional errors. Therefore, Scripture immediately adds, "and there is no blemish in you" - meaning that you do not even have unintentional sins remaining, because your repentance was out of love. Repentance out of love cleanses completely and transforms intentional sins into merits, so that not even the blemish of unintentional errors remains in you; rather, everything is turned into merits.
אִתִּ֤י מִלְּבָנוֹן֙ כַּלָּ֔ה אִתִּ֖י מִלְּבָנ֣וֹן תָּב֑וֹאִי תָּשׁ֣וּרִי מֵרֹ֣אשׁ אֲמָנָ֗ה מֵרֹ֤אשׁ שְׂנִיר֙ וְחֶרְמ֔וֹן מִמְּעֹנ֣וֹת אֲרָי֔וֹת מֵהַרְרֵ֖י נְמֵרִֽים׃ (ד, ח) - "Come with Me from Levanon, my bride; come with Me from Levanon. Look from the peak of Amanah, from the peak of Senir and Chermon, from the dens of lions, from the mountains of leopards." (4:8)
And so the verse concludes. What is the repetition, "With Me from Levanon... with Me from Levanon"? Rather, Levanon hints at the whitening (libun) and cleansing of sins, as our Sages of blessed memory explained. Our Sages also state that the Beit HaMikdash is called Levanon - not only because they brought beams from the cedars of Lebanon, but also because it whitens the sins of Israel. At first, "With Me from Levanon, bride" - cleansing sins out of fear, and afterward, "With Me from Levanon come" - cleansing out of love.
That is to say: "With Me from Levanon, bride" - you, the bride, come with Me from the cleansing, for she has repented. But perhaps it was only teshuvah out of fear, and inadvertent sins still remain? Therefore, it repeats and says, "With Me from Levanon come" - you shall come with Me, in close attachment to Hashem, which is truly teshuvah out of love, binding a person directly to the Holy One, blessed be He. Truly wondrous.
We might add here what the commentaries and sources point out: from here we see that there were two types of teshuvah - "With Me from Levanon, bride," teshuvah out of fear, followed by "With Me from Levanon come," teshuvah out of love. This aligns with what is written in sacred works, such as Chovot HaLevavot and others, that one must first precede with awe and only then cultivate love, and that a person needs both attributes together. A person should not say, "I have attained love and no longer need awe," for through awe one does not rebel or cast off restraint.
When there is only love, closeness often creates too familiar an attachment that loses reverence: one loses a bit of distance and respect, and thinks, "since I love, I can take liberties." It is fascinating to note that the people one hurts most are precisely those closest to him. Whom does a person hurt most? His wife, and a wife her husband. Toward one's boss, one feels inhibited and polite, but with one's spouse there is nothing to hide, and neither has anything to hide from the other. Therefore, both awe and love are essential: "With Me from Levanon, bride" - first awe, and afterward "With Me from Levanon come" - the dimension of love; and this must unfold gradually.