Aggadot from Hamivtar

by
Rabbi Yitzchak Blau

Optimism and the Song of Songs

The background needed for the first source is that people were keeping their Terumah produce in Torah scrolls and mice were coming on the scrolls to get to the food. To prevent this, the sages declared that touching these scrolls is metame (ritually defiles) hands. There was then a question regarding whether or not some of the ketuvim, such as Kohelet and Shir haShirim, were included in this edict. In this context, causing defilement is actually a sign of sanctity.

R. Akiva says: "God forbid! No one ever claimed that Shir haShirim does not defile the hands because the entire world is not as worthwhile as the day that Shir haShirim was given to Israel as all scripture is holy but Shir haShirim is the holiest of the holy. If there was a debate, it was only about Kohelet." (Yadayim 3:5)

On another occasion, they [R. Gamliel, R. Elazar, R. Yehoshua and R. Akiva] were going to Yerushlayim and when they came to Mount Scopus, they rent their clothes. And when they came to the Temple Mount, they saw a fox coming out of the Holy of Holies. The first three wept but Akiva laughed. (Makkot 24b)

R. Hiyya taught that only in his elder years did the holy spirit reside on Shlomo and he said the three works of Mishle, Kohelet and Shir haShirim. R. Yonatan said that he wrote Shir haShirim first and then Mishle and then Kohelet. He brought a proof from the way of the world. A young man sings, a middle aged fellow tells parables and the elderly person sees the vanities of the world. (Shir haShirim Rabbah 1:10)

R. Moshe Avigdor Amiel, former Chief Rabbi of Antwerp and Tel Aviv (Derashot El Ami 2:15) sees the two statements of R. Akiva as related. Why was there a question about the ritual status of Shir haShirim and what was R. Akiva's argument that it surely defiles hands. One possibility is that the parable of Shir haShirim could mistakenly be taken for a secular love song and R. Akiva is strongly contesting that interpretation. R. Amiel sees the issue differently. Shir haShirim, the powerful love song between God and the Jewish people, represents the great spirit of optimism and hope. Some sages questioned the continuing significance of such a work when the Temple has been destroyed and the Jews had been exiled. Does optimism still have a place in such a world? R. Akiva forcefully asserted that our aspirations and hopes have become no less relevant in our broken world. This same spirit enabled R. Akiva to laugh when foxes roam the Temple mount. He sees this as the confirmation of a biblical prophecy and this fills him with hope that more positive prophecies of consolation will also be fulfilled. This spirit enables R. Akiva to maintain that Shir haShirim, the great love song between God and the Jewish people, remains the holy of holies even when we are confronted with destruction.

According to Rav Amiel, Judaism incorporates more of the optimism of Shir haShirim than the pessimism of Kohelet. Kohelet is read once a year but Shir haShirim appears in the siddur for every Friday night. However, this optimism should not be confused with the notion that religion quickly solves all human problems and that religious life consists of resting by still water in a green pasture (R. Soloveitchik attacks this pollyannaish view of religion in the fourth footnote of Halkhic Man). Rather, religion understands the unfortunate truth that life includes tragedies, difficulties and frustrations and that we can not easily deal with these things or confidently understand their place in the cosmic scheme. At the same time, our faith in the Divine promise and in a life of Torah u'mizvot does enable a certain ongoing optimism even as we acknowledge the existence of suffering. R. Akiva certainly mourned the loss of the temple even as he continued to look forward to a better future. This last idea may emerge from the third source cited above. R. Yonatan identifies the time of composition of Shlomo's works based on the stages of a person's life. This seems eminently reasonable. Why does R. Hiyya argue? R. Amiel suggests that all of life must jointly include elements of both the optimism of Shir haShirim and the pessimism of Kohelet. In fact, it is only Kohelet's ability to balance the youthful ardor of song than enables the song to continue through the ripeness of advancing years. It is only the more realistic optimism that sees effort and difficulty as unavoidable that will survive the vicissitudes of human life. May we all merit to share in this more complex optimism and experience the love and rapture of a realationship with the Divine.