Chapter Three. Solomon—His Actions and Books: Prefiguration, Typology, and His Teachings

Though Solomon did not figure in the genealogy of Jesus, he was nonetheless regarded as a prefiguration of the Christian Messiah. Despite Solomon’s negative image as a sinner, the three books attributed to him were a rich source of allegorical readings that treated them as a demonstratio evangelica of both the coming of the Messiah and of the Church itself. Such readings resulted from the Christian view of the Old Testament as a Christian asset, the correct interpretation and true meaning of which only the New Testament could supply.289 This implies that without the Old Testament there is no New Testament. This perception spawned a polemic and a sense of competition concerning the rightful owners, and the true interpreters, of the Bible.290 From a Christian point of view, the historical role of the Jewish people was merely to preserve the Bible for the Christians until they appeared—in other words, to act as custodes librorum nostrorum. Augustine formulated this

dogma in the following way: "In the Old Testament the New is concealed, in the New the Old is revealed" (Novum Testamentum in Vetere latet, VetusT estamentum in Novo patet).²⁹¹ The Byzantine Emperor Justinian's Novella 146 (issuedi n 553)²⁹² described Jews as adhering to ad enuded, literal interpretation of the Bible because they did not believeinthe final judgment of Jesus, in the resurrection, or in the creation of the angels. Thus, they were unable to comprehend the spiritual meaning of God'swords²⁹³-i. e., the "correct",Christian wayofreading the Bible, which made use of typological, symbolic, and allegorical interpretation.²⁹⁴ Accordingt oT homas Aquinas, "certain things de Christo are prefigured in the Old Testament through, e. g. David or Solomon, the Old Testament is a figura of the New Testament and the Church, and the Church is a figura of heaven"²⁹⁵-hence Christianity'sc laim of figurative validity.I na ny case, Justinian's above-mentioned Novella was aimed against those who soughtt he exclusive use of Hebrew and allows the liturgicalr eading "in all the other languages, changingl anguagea nd readinga ccordingt ot he different places… there shall be no license to the commentators they have,who employ the Hebrew language to falsify it at their will…";t he reasoningw as that Jews' knowledge of Hebrew would allow them an advantage in interpretation.²⁹⁶ In doing so, Justinianinterferes in an inter-Jewish Kulturkampf wherer adicals want to imposet he Hebrew readinge veni nt he diaspora.
Chapter Three: Solomon-HisA ctions and Books imbuing them in this manner with new meaning.Their selection and combination of verses were not undertaken randomly.A ne xegete had predefined goals; he searched out-and found-those verses thats uited and affirmed his goals. Thus, while Jewisha nd Christian exegetes read the same verses, they used them to support entirely different meanings.²⁹⁷ Medieval Christian polemicists, who encountered mainlyJ ewish midrashim, scarcelyunderstood the hermeneuticaltechniquesormeanings that Jewish Midrashic literature employed up to the end of the seventh century (ninth, if we include texts like Pirqe de-Rabbi Eliezer or SederE liyahu); these weref undamentallyd ifferent from the hermeneutical techniques of Christian biblical commentators and theologians.²⁹⁸ At anyrate, the prodigious amount of writing devoted to interpretations and allegorizationso fS olomon'sl ife and, even more so, of the books said to be his, testify to his central place in the correspondence that took place between Christianitya nd Judaism over the centuries.
The first Christian allegorist was Origen. Lawson writes that he was "the first Christian scholartosystematize allegoricalinterpretations of Scripture based on the mystic concept that it has avisiblea nd invisiblee lement and that in the invisibleithas hiddenmeaning and has asoul".²⁹⁹ Based on this belief, Christian allegorical readings accorded Solomon the statusofapraefiguratio-apresaging of Jesus; sections of Solomon'sbiographywerethus subjecttotypological, symbolic, and allegorical interpretation. The kingso fm anyn ations who traveled to Jerusalem to hear Solomon'sw isdom prefigureda nd symbolized the ultimate Dayo fJ udgment and Jesus' universal, atemporal message.I sidore, Archbishop of Seville, found that by constructingt he First Temple, Solomon "prefigures the imageo fC hrist who raised the house of God in the heavenlyJ erusalem, not with stone and wood, but with all the saints".³⁰⁰ Speculum Humanae Salvationis (The Mirror of Human Salvation), awork of popular late-medieval theology,s tated that Solomon enthroned was an imageo fC hrist seated in the Virgin's  Modern commentators and exegetes continue in this manner and interpret ancient midrashim consideringtheir own views and modern concepts, and, in this way, endow them with new meaning.  On this point Ihavelearned agreat deal from the insights of Daniel Boyarin's Intertextuality and the Reading of Midrash (Boyarin 1990).  Origen (1957,pp. 8 -9). On Origen'se xegetical methods, see Daniélou (1973,pp. 273 -281). Aristotle influenced biblicalcriticism and oriented it towardarationalist approach. See Smalley (1983, pp. 292-295). Ambrose, whor ead Origen, showed Augustinus the wayo fa llegoric interpretation of scriptures as aw ay to conceal its hidden meanings.  Isidore, Allegoriae quaedam sanctae Scriptura,M igne,P atrologia Latina,Vol. 98, lap: "The Throne of the true Solomon is the most Blessed Virgin Mary,i nwhich sits Jesus, the True Wisdom".
Though the canonizationo ft he three books attributed to Solomon once attracted af air amount of controversy,C hristian tradition did not,f or the most part,doubtthe idea of his authorship or of Solomon'sdivineinspiration in composing them.T ertullian, for example, stated thatt heir "supreme antiquity endows these books with the highest authority".³⁰¹ As to whether it was fitting to grant authority (auctoritas)t oEcclesiastes-its author being givent ow ickedness and sin-the consensus was positive,asSolomon alsoexemplified the penitent sinner.³⁰²

Solomon'sT emple ³⁰³
Rabbinic Judaism regarded the construction of the Temple as Solomon'sgreatest deed-an eternal and even cosmic act.S omes ources describe the buildinga nd inauguration of the Temple as second in importance onlyt ot he theophanya t Mount Sinai. The Sages even viewed the construction of the Temple as an act that ensured Solomon aplace in the next world. The MidrashSong of Songs Rabbah says: "all assist the king;a ll the more then do all assist for the glory of the king of kings, the HolyO ne, blessed be He, even spirits, even ministering angels".³⁰⁴ Accordingt oR.B erekiah, duringi ts construction, stones carried themselvest ot he Temple and arranged themselvesr ow by row.The Sages weren ot, however,universallyc omplimentary about Solomon'sg reat creation: though he spent seven yearsbuilding the Temple,hedevoted thirteen to the construction of his extravagant palace. Not onlyt hat, but upon completion of the Temple, he married the Pharaoh'sd aughter,c elebratingt heir marriage with an elaborate feast.³⁰⁵ Several rabbinic midrashim,i nf act,e venh oldS olomon responsible for the Temple'sd estruction.³⁰⁶ Jewish (and Muslim) legends refer frequently to the Temple,i ts construction, and the role of demons therein.³⁰⁷  "Auctoritateml itteris praestat antiquitas summa". Apologeticum,X IX. F1.  Minnis (2009,p p. 109 -111).  GeorgS alzberger ( 1912). On the Temple in the New Testament,s ee Hogeterp (2012).  I.1,5. The Midrash was compiled in the seventh or eighth century CE.  Leviticus Rabbah 12:5, wheret he feast and its aftermath relates to the destruction of the Temple.  Gilad Sasson, Kinga nd Layman (Hebrew).  Masonic fantasy had it that the buildingp lan on which Solomon based the Temple had been givent oM oses at Sinai. The Temple has,s incet he seventeenth century,s ymbolized the In medieval Jewish thought, the Temple was described as the 'imageo ft he world',as(in conjunction with its vessels) asymbol of the heavens, and even as ameans of influencingearthly events, foreseeing the future,and more.³⁰⁸ Christian tradition, in contrast,assigned less importance to Solomon'sTemple than to the Second Temple built by Herod, whereJesus preached. The Gospels depict the Temple'sd estruction in the revolt against the Romans as the result of the Jews' stubborn refusal to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah: "Did ye never read in the scriptures,The stone which the builders rejected, the sameisbecome the head of the corner: this is the Lord'sdoing,and it is marvelous in our eyes?Thereforesay Iunto you, The kingdom of God shallb et aken from you, and givent oanation bringingf orth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shallf all on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it willgrind him to powder".³⁰⁹ The rejection of Jesus' teachingsl ed to the Temple'sr uin; when his disciples showed him its buildings, Jesus said to them: "Yous ee all these,d oy ou not?T rulyI tell you, not one stone will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down".³¹⁰ According to the Gospelo fJ ohn, the temple of Jesus' bodyw as the true Temple,³¹¹ and the Christian church the truerealization of Haggai'sprophecy.³¹² Similarly,inCorinthians, the Church is the Temple in spirit,and Christians are the temple of the living God: "What agreement has the temple of God with idols?F or we are the temple of the living God; as God said, 'Iw ill live in them and walk among them, and Iwill be their God,and they shall be my people'".³¹³ In Acts, we find that "the Most Highdoes not dwell in houses made with human perfect building, which embodies cosmic and supernatural forces.O nt he idea that at Mount Sinai God showed Moses the designf or the building, which had been kept in Paradise, see Lost Vision of Baruch 1:4, pp. 6 -7, ed. Stephen Pidgeon (2015). On the Masonic order,see Stevenson (1988). As an example of bizarreliteratureonthe Temple, see Christopher Knightand Alan Butler (2007). According to Masonic tradition, Solomon possessed Moses' secret plans for the Temple. Theree xists ap seudo-tradition that the Templars discoveredt he HolyA rk in the ruins of the Temple and found therein ancient secrets from the time of Moses, including information that helped Columbus find his waytoAmerica. See Pellech (1997). Medieval legend had it that the Temple was builtofcedars takenfromthe Garden of Eden and carried into this world by flood waters that deposited them on Mount Lebanon, fromwhencethey werebrought to Jerusalem.  Schwartz (2005), Studies on Astral Magic in Medieval JewishT hought,2 nd ed.  Matthew 21:44 -46 and similar verses.  Matthew 24:2.  John 2:21.  Haggai 2:9: "The glory of this temple shall be greatert han the former".  2Corinthians 6:16,and see 2Corinthians 5:1. "Forweknow that if the earthlytent we live in is destroyed, we have ab uildingf romG od, ah ouse with hands,e ternal in heavens". hands"³¹⁴;i nt he Book of Revelation, that the new Jerusalemwill descend from the heavens "prepared as abride adorned for her husband".³¹⁵ The Epistle of Barnabas,written between 70 -200C .E., quotes Isaiah-"Theh eaveni sm yt hrone, and the earth is my footstool: wherei st he house thaty eb uild unto me? And wherei st he place of my rest?"-as evidence thatt here can be aT emple to God onlyw hereh eh imself tells us that He is building it and perfecting it. Such aT emple will be erected onlyw hen we werem ade new men, created all over again from the beginning;and as aconsequence of that, God is at this moment actuallydwelling in us".³¹⁶ In his Dialogue with Trypho,Justin Martyr taunts his Jewish interlocutor,claiming that there are no grounds for the Jewish contention that Solomoni st he subjectofP salm2 4( " Who shalla scend into the hill of the LORD?O rw ho shall stand in his holyp lace? […]W ho is this King of glory? The LORD strongand mighty,the LORD mighty in battle")and thatthe "Kingof glory" is, in fact,J esus.³¹⁷ In the Byzantine era, the hymns of the Jerusalem Christian liturgy for the eve of Palm Sundayincluded the words: "Corrupt and adulterous synagoga,you who have not kept faith with your husband, whyhaveyou held on to an inheritance to which youd on ot merit?"³¹⁸ The fourth-centuryp oet Aurelius Prudentius Clemens, an ative of Spain, wrote in his Tituli Historiarum (Scenes from History) that "Wisdom built aT emple by Solomon'so bedient hands, and the Queen from the South [i. e., the Queen of Sheba] piles up ag reat weight of gold. The time is at hand when Christ shallb uild his Temple in the hearts of man".³¹⁹ In Capistrum Iudaeorum,his polemic against the Jews, the 13 th century Dominican friar Raymond (Raimundus) Martini addressed av erse in Haggai according to which "The latter splendor of this house shall be greater than the former"³²⁰;a ccordingt oM artini, the prophecyw ould be fulfilled by the Messiah himself-"the treasureofall nations".³²¹ Forthis argument Martini cited putative evidence from the Bible and the Talmud Eusebius'sv iew was that while Solomon constructed am aterial Temple, Jesusc reated aT emple of believers-the bodyo fC hrist.³²³Augustine expressed as imilar sentiment: "Jesus built aT emple, not with wood and stone, but with human beings"³²⁴; "Now we build this house by living good lives, and God also buildsi tb yh elping us to live".³²⁵ HenceP salm 127-"AS ong of Ascents, of Solomon: Except the Lordb uild the house, they labour in vain that build it"-refers not to Solomon, who presagedJ esus, but to Jesus himself, who from the hearts of his faithful built aT emple destined to become eternal.³²⁶ The poem "Das Lob Salomons" (In Praise of Solomon), written in 1150,i sapaean to the greatness of Solomon, the Rex pacificus (peace-loving king). Itsa nonymous author attributes the tale related to am an by the name of Heronimus who discovered it in ab ook called Archely,p erhapsareference to the Ancient History of Pseudo-Eusebius. The poem depicts Solomonasagreat king,the predecessor of Jesus, and the bridegroom of the Song of Songs;verses 23-24 allegoricallyd escribe Solomon, the Queen of Sheba, and the Church and bishopsa s the teachers of Christianity,concluding with aprayerthatSolomon'scourt be receivedi nt he Kingdom of Heaven. The poem tells of how Solomonc aught at errifying dragon who threatened the supplyofwater to Jerusalem; the dragon having fallen asleep,Solomon fettered it,and the captured serpent then revealedto the king how he might build the Temple in asingle year by trappingagreat beast that inhabited Lebanon and fashioning from the beast'sveins acordthatwould cut marble in two as cleanlya sarazor. "Thus," the story concludes, "was the house at Jerusalemb uilt without the use of iron [ani allizi sin]".³²⁷ Thus, the earthlyTemple symbolized Synagoga and the heavenlyTemple, Ecclesia.³²⁸ YetChristianity found asymbol for its victory over Judaism in the earthly Templesa sw ell. "We have triumphed over you, Solomon [nenikekas eS olomon]",t he Byzantine EmperorJ ustin Ib oasted (according to the historian Procopius of Caesarea) upon the final construction of the Hagia Sophia in Con- Quaestiones Evangelicae, Supplementaa dS tephanum,9-10.  xvii:8i nA ugustine (1984 stantinople, abasilica largerand more elaborate than Solomon'sT emple.³²⁹ Ahimaaz ben Paltiel (1017-1069?), aJ ewishchronicler and poet from Capua, would certainlyhavebeen familiar with that claim when he related the storyofR.Shefatia, who was ordered to travel to Constantinople and meet with the Emperor in order to debate with him about which edifice was more glorious. R. Shefatia requested that aBible be brought to him, and therein located proof that Solomon's Temple far surpassed the new church. The Emperor wasc onvinced and admitted: "R. Shefatia has triumphed over me in his wisdom";towhich Shefatia modestlyr eplied: "My Lord, the Scripturep revailed against thee,n ot I".³³⁰ Perhaps Judaism's "triumph" here related less to the relative magnificence of the Temple than to the fact that the Church, unsatisfied with its own spiritual offerings, resorted to emulating Solomon's "earthly" Temple in constructingelaborate edifices of stone-churches,c athedrals, and basilicas.

*
In Nahar me-Eden-ashort history of the Jewishpeople for young readers adapted and translated from aL utheran Christian collection of 52 tales from each of the Old and New Testaments³³¹-the writer David Samostz (1789 -1864) adapted the original'smoral regarding the Temple: "Forthe LordofHosts Solomon built our Temple /Suchamagnificent edifice had never been built by aking:but Iam apoor man, asimple weaver/Icannot build youahouse for your eternal praise /T ake insteadm yh eart,w hereIwill sacrifice my gratitude and offeringso f peace".³³² Like Christian tradition (and Isaiah), Samostz wishedf or the reconstruction of the earthlyT emple; nor wash ea lone in that desire.  (1994,pp. 47-63). The book was based on Hübner.Samostz did not translatethe fifty-two New Testament tales.

The Queen of Sheba'sV isit as aT ypological Event
The event in Solomon'sbiographyperhaps most popularinthe Christian, Jewish, and Muslim traditions, as well as in Ethiopiant radition³³³ and in folktales and belles lettres,isthe story of the Queen of Sheba'svisit to Jerusalem, as described in 1K ings1 0:1-13 and 2C hronicles 9:1-12.³³⁴ According to commentators, the story wasm entioned in both the prophecies of Isaiah-"all those from Sheba shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall proclaim the praise of the Lord"-and in Psalms-"Mayt he kingso fT arshish and of the isles renderh im tribute, mayt he kingso fS hebaa nd Seba bring gifts".³³⁵ In Christian literature,the visit serves to foretell Jesus' universal mission; it is mentioned in Mark 10:1 -11, Luke 11:29 -32, and Matthew 12:42.I nt he latter verse, Jesust ells the Pharisees: "The queen of the South will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it,b ecause she came from the ends of the earth to listen to the wisdom of Solomon, and see, something greater than Solomon is here!"³³⁶ Christian tradition holds that the Queen'sv isit presagedt he comingo ft he Magi³³⁷ to the manger in Bethlehem, wheret hey brought to the infant Jesus "gifts of gold,f rankincense, and myrrh"³³⁸-clearlyaparallel to Psalms 72:10 and to the prophecyinIsaiah. Her visit furthermore foretold the future acknowledgement of Jesus and his teachingsbyother nations,³³⁹ and her pronouncement that God had appointed Solomon "to execute justicea nd righteousness"³⁴⁰ was read as intended for Jesus. Bede the Venerable described the visit in his Quaestiones super Regum Libros (Questions on the Books of Kings), as did Isidore of Seville, who wrote: "The queen from the south who came to hear the wisdom  See Silberman (1974); Schechter (1890); Stein (1993).  Lassner (1993); Milstein (1995,p p. 115 -117).  Isaiah 60:6 and Psalms 72:10.  Matthew 12:42.  According to later tradition, these were three( because of the three gifts) "wise men" or "kings" (a trio appears in amosaicinthe sixth-century Basilica Di St.A pollinareNuovo, in Ravenna); the traditions around them noted the various countries from which they came and their race or the color of their skin in order to underscore the universality of Jesus' teachings. Legendary biographies for the threewerealso composed, such as that by the Carmelitefriar Johannes of Solomonistobeunderstood as the Church, which assembles from the utmost limits of the world to hear the voice of God".

The Theological and Allegorical Interpretationso fS olomon's Books
The three bookso fSapientia Salomonis-biblical books ascribed to Solomonare the Song of Songs, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes. All three have served, in every historical period, as ab ottomless sourcef or myriad commentaries,a daptations, and other uses. They have been employed by diverse authors to express diverse worldviews in numerous and varied contexts, including the conflict between Judaism and Christianity. The threeb ooksw eref urthermore believed to complement Solomon'sb iographya nd reflect the process of his spiritual development.Ishallcite onlyahandful of the countless interpretations and commentaries on the subject, while noting that these commentaries wereoften forced to grapple with severali nternal contradictions, such as the different connotations of the Hebrew word "chokhmah" (wisdom) in the Song of Songs versus Ecclesiastes.
The Sages, characteristically, wered ivided in theiro pinions about the three books, supplying diverse arguments for-and against-their canonization in the HolyScriptures.SomeSages drew distinctions between the books, divided on the question of which of the three should be considered holyorprofane. Theaccepted view,h owever,was that all three werew ritten in the divine spirit.
Rabbi Benjamin ben Levi stated that "the Sages wished to suppress the book of Ecclesiastes,for they found in it ideas that leaned towardheresy.They argued, was it right that Solomon should have said the following: 'Rejoice, youngm an, while youa re young,a nd let your heart cheer youi nt he days of your youth'.³⁴¹ Moses said, 'and not follow the lust of your own heart and your own eyes (Num 15:39) but Solomon said, 'Follow the inclination of your heart and the desire of your eyes'.³⁴² What then?A re there neither judgesn or justice? Is all restraint to be removed? When, however,h es aid, 'But know then that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment,' they admittedt hat Solomon had spoken well".³⁴³ R. Yudan said […]t hat all who teach the Toraht ot he public….t he holys pirit rests upon him". Song of Songs Rabbah continues: "Said the Holy  Ecclesiastes 11:9.  Ecclesiastes 11:9.  Leviticus Rabbah 28:1.

The Theological and Allegorical Interpretations of Solomon'sB ooks
One, blessed be He, to [Solomon]: 'Thou dost seek out words of Torah; Is wear that Iw ill not withhold thyr eward. Because Ic ause the holys pirit to rest on thee'.F orthwith the HolyS pirit rested on him and he composed these three books".³⁴⁴ And: "So the heart of Solomon was full of wisdomb ut no one knew what was in it but when the holys pirit rested on him he composed three books".³⁴⁵ Avot de Rabbi Nathan provides abrief description of the controversy: "it is said, Proverbs, SongofSongs, and Ecclesiastes weresuppressed; for since they wereheld to be mere parables and not part of the HolyW ritings, [the religious authorities] arose and suppressed them;[ and so they remained] until the men of Hezekiah [the Men of the Great Assembly³⁴⁶]c ame and interpreted them".³⁴⁷ EarlyChristianity accepted the attribution of all threebookstoSolomon with scarcereservations³⁴⁸;they proved awellspring of references to Jesus, his teachings, and the Church, and af ount of prophecies, moral teachings, and cosmology. AccordingtoOrigen, each of the booksdealt with adifferent area of knowledge:Proverbs taught moral science,orethics; Ecclesiastesexamined the natural sciences;a nd, in the Songo fS ongs, Solomon "instills into the soul the loveo f thingsd ivinea nd heavenlyu sing for his purpose the figure of the Bridea nd Bridegroom".³⁴⁹ Solomon-Ecclesiastes presagedJ esus, the "true Ecclesiastes", who would gather the Church into aunifiedf lock. The Cappadocian Church Father and mystic Gregory of Nyssa (c.335-c.394) believed he had deciphered the philosophyh idden in Solomon'sb ooks, which conveyeda" philosophical way of life".³⁵⁰ Thomas Aquinas relied on Plotinus when he wrotet hat the three books might be classified accordingt ot he three grades of virtue.The first was the political virtues, expressed in Proverbs; the second was the purgative virtues, described in Ecclesiastes; and the third was the purgeds oul, whereby am an, whollyc leansed of worldlyc ares,d elights in the contemplations of wisdom   Origen (1957,p .41).  Pelikan (1993, pp. 180 -181). Forf urther discussions ee ChapterS even. alone; that virtue Aquinas identifiedi nt he Songo fS ongs.³⁵¹ Isidore of Seville believed thatE cclesiastes taught naturalp hilosophy( that is, physics) while the Song of Songs dealt with rational philosophy, or logic.³⁵²

The Song of Songs
Of the three books attributed to Solomon, the Song of Songsseems to have been the subject of the largest number of commentaries.³⁵³ It would be no exaggeration to speak of as ea of commentaries,d ivided on the issue of whether the text should be considered "literally",a samere loves ong,o ra llegorically; and if the latter,asanallegory of what?Inany event,bothJewish and Christian commentariese mployed similar hermeneutical principles and exegetical methods, and both consider the book as at heological and mystical allegory.³⁵⁴ It was R. Akiva,inthe second century,who decreed that the book should not be read literally.³⁵⁵ In the Mishnah, we find that "R. Akiva said: Heavenforbid, no man of Israel has ever disputed about the Song of Songs,claiming that it did not defile the hands. The whole worldisnot worthyofthe dayonwhich the Song of Songswas giventoIsrael, for all the Scriptures are holy, but the Song of Songis HolyofH olies".³⁵⁶ The saying: "Hadthe Torahn ot been granted us, the Song of Songsw ould have sufficed to managet he world" was furthermore attributed to him. Sanhedrin 101a also expresses aview of the text as possessing religious significance: "He who recites averse of the Song of Songs and treats it as asecular air,and one who recites averse at the banqueting table unseasonably,bringsevil upon the world. Because the Torahg irds itself in sackcloth, and standsb efore the HolyO ne, blessed be He,a nd laments before Him, 'Sovereign of the Universe! Thyc hildren have made me as ah arpu pon which they frivolously play'".³⁵⁷  "Inaugural Sermons of 1256",i nA quinas (1998( , p. 11).  Minnis (2009. See also Smalley (1983).  See Bartal (2009,p p. 113 -154).  In Ashkenazi synagogues,t he Songo fS ongs is read on the Sabbath of the intermediate days of Passover,a nd in Sephardic synagogues on every Sabbath eve.  On the hypothesis that the Song of Songsisbased on earlier writings,which also preceded Kings,s ee Zakovitch (2015).  Mishna Yadayim 3,5.  Modern Hebrew literatureh as violated this rule, having "secularized" Song of Songsa nd used its words as lyrics for popular songs.

The Song of Songs
The rule established by R. Akiva opened the gates to ap lethorao fa llegorical, historical, and mystical interpretationso ft he book that created common ground with Christian³⁵⁸ allegoristic and mystical commentaries.H owever,t hat is not the main point in the Midrash, accordingtowhich the legitimacy and authority of the SongofS ongsd erived from its utilityasagatewayt ounderstanding the Bible.
The Jewish allegorical readingo ft he Song of Songs describes the eternal covenant between God and the People of Israel and conveys am essagea bout the redemption of the Jewish people and the construction of the Temple.M ishnah Ta'anit³⁵⁹ interprets the verse "come out.L ook, Od aughters of Zion, at King Solomon"³⁶⁰ thus: "Go out,m aidens of Jerusalema nd look on KingS olomon and on the crown with which his mother crowned him on the dayo fh is wedding, and on the dayofthe gladness of his heart"-"'the dayofhis wedding' that is 'the giving of the Torah'".AccordingtoMaimonides, "Solomon, of blessed memory,inspired by the HolySpirit,foresawthatthe prolongeddurationofexile would incite some of our people to seek to terminate it before the appointed time, and consequentlythey would perish or meet with disaster.Thereforeheadmonishedt hem in metaphorical languaget od esist, as we read: Ia djurey ou, O daughters of Jerusalem, by the gazelles or the wild does: do not stir up or awaken loveuntil it is ready!"³⁶¹ The Epistle to Yemen (1172) aimed to hearten the Jews that they might avoid succumbingt oeither their oppressors or to messianic delusion. He further added that in the Song of Songs,Solomon metaphoricallydescribed the people of Israel as Shulamit,awoman of perfect beauty,m arred by no defect.³⁶² In his own commentary on the Song of Songs,R ashi (R.S hlomo Yitzhaki, 1040 -1105) regarded the book as an allegory of God'slovefor the Jewish people, wheret he latter is likened to aw idow yearning for the loveo fh er youth; Solomon, made prophetic through the divine spirit,f oresees ah arsh future before her,u ntil her redemption at the End of Days.T hus, for example, "Leth im kiss me with the kisses of his mouth" expressest he bride'sl onging for the bridegroom, in contrast to Origen'si nterpretation in which the Church yearns for union with Jesus. (Origen also interpreted "for thyl ovei sb etter than wine" as referring to the love( ubera)o ft he groom [Jesus]; replete in wis-  Yonah Frankel (1994);Urbach( 1961).  ChapterF our, Mishnah 8.  Song of Solomon3 :11.  Song of Solomon 3:5; Maimonidesbases himself on b.Ketubbot 111a where the verse is quoted, but without namingS olomon.  Maimonides'"The Epistle to Yemen",inHalkin and Hartman (1985;pp. 104-105,130), Kellner (1991). dom and knowledge,itissuperior to the earlier wine of the Torahand the prophets.³⁶³ The Middle Ages sawthe developmentofaJewishrationalist and allegorical exegesis, universal in nature.That exegesis read the SongofSongsinlight of the "doctrine of intelligence; the "bride",for example, was understood as representing the soul, housed within am aterial form.³⁶⁴ In "Sefer Sha'ar ha-Ceshek",t he introduction to his book Ceshek Shlomo (The Delight of Solomon), the Jewish-Italian neo-Platonic scholara nd biblical exegete Johanan ben Isaac Alemanno (c. 1434-1503)³⁶⁵-to whom Iw ill return in forthcomingc hapters-depicted the Song of Songsasaspiritual biographyofSolomonand aparallel to his intellectual biographya sahomo universalis: as cholar of wide-ranging pursuits, wellversed in manyo ft he "natural sciences" and in religious law, magic, alchemy, and astrology.
Christian interpretations³⁶⁶ held thatif, in fact,KingSolomon was the author of the Song of Songs,then he foretold the covenantbetween the Christian faithful (the Ecclesia)a nd Jesus. Origen wrote: "In this [book]h e[ Solomon] instills into the soul the loveo ft hingsd ivine and heavenly, using for his purpose the figure of the Bride and Bridegroom, and teaches us that communion with God must be attained by the path of charity and love".³⁶⁷ Solomon'sb ride in Song of Songs³⁶⁸ is the Ecclesia,g athered from among the nations (Haec sponsa, quae loquitur ecclesiae personam tenet ex gentibus congregatae); and the "lily of the valleys"³⁶⁹ represents the Church of the gentiles. The Torahb rought no man to as tate of perfection, and hence the wordo fG od could not advance beyond the flower and achieve the perfection of the fruit; onlyi nt he valley of the gentiles did it become alily. "But what sort of lily? Surelyjust such aone as that of which He Himself says in the Gospels that the heavenlyF ather clothes it,and that not even Solomon in all his glory was arrayed as one of these".³⁷⁰ The Song  Ib ase this on an article by Sarah Kamin, "Rashi'sC ommentary on the SongofS ongsa nd Jewish-Christian Polemics" (Kamin 2008a). See also Kamin (2008b).  Schwartz (1993;2016). However,asweshall see further on, no description was givenofthe content of Solomon's "wise soul" or of the nature of the "wisdom" that he meant to disseminate to humanity.  See Chapter Seven.  See Astell (1990).  Commentary,P rologue. See Origen (1957,p p. 31-41).  Song of Solomon 3:11: "[…]c omeo ut.L ook, Od aughters of Zion, at KingS olomon, at the crown with which his mother crowned him on the dayofhis wedding,onthe dayofthe gladness of his heart".  Song of Solomon2 :1.  Commentaryi nC anticum (Commentaryo fS ong of Songs),1 77.
The Song of Songs of Songs, accordingtoOrigen, depicts the mystical ascension of the soul and the soul'sr elationship to Jesus: "[It] singsb yt he spirit the song of the marriage whereby the Church is joined and allied to Christ the heavenlyb ridegroom, desiring to unite with him through speech".I td escribes the union with perfection that occurs after everythingi ss ubjugated to God, who will then be called Solomon-He in whom lies Peace. Accordingt oA mbrose,³⁷¹ the words "Ia mb lack, but comely, Oy ed aughters of Jerusalem" symbolized the Synagoga as black because it livedi ne rrora nd disbelief; yeti tw as still comelys ince, in the end, it would find faith. Augustine too considered the Song of Songsarepresentation of the marriage of Jesus and the Church; it expressed, he felt, "akind of spiritual delight felt by holym inds in the marriageo ft he king and queen of the city, namelyChrist and his Church".³⁷² Gregory of Nyssa maintained thatthe book expressed asublime philosophy-the unification of all mankind, joined in yearning for ac ommon goal. In the Song,Solomon appears "in the persona of the Bridegroom, the Word of God who, as Gregory sawthe matter,bringsthe Bride step by step to ever greater and higher attainment.I ndeed, Gregory sawt he Song'ss uccessive praises and characterization of the believing soul (i. e., the Bride) as marking as eries of steps or "ascents"".³⁷³ And the Carolingian exegete Haimo of Auxerre (d. 875) wrotei nh is popularc ommentary Commentarium in Cantica Canticorum that the words "Return, return Shulamite, that we mayb ehold you" are the words of Ecclesia to Synagoga,b idding her to accept the true doctrine.³⁷⁴ Scholastic and monastic commentaries differed onlyo nt he question of whether the connection in question existed between Jesusand the entire Church, or on am ore personal level between Jesus and each believings oul. Bernard of Clairvaux (1090 -1153), who wrote eighty-six sermons on two chapters of the Song of Songs,s tressed its moral-tropological nature. The book, in his view, was an account of Jesus as the bridegroom of the soul by inspiration from heaven. In it,S olomon sang the praises of Christ and his Church, the grace of holy love, and the sacraments of eternal marriage, at the same time giving voice to the deepest desire of the holys oul.³⁷⁵ ForB ernard, the Song of Songss erved as evidence that the truth layi nt he allegorical, tropological, and anagogical reading, while the Jewish "literal" readingw ronglyi nterpreted it as dealing with 'worldlym atters' on the level of unripe figs( ar eference to Song of Songs 2:13: "The figt reep uts forth its figs").
One exception to such commentary is Theodore of Mopsuestia (350 -428), who belonged to the school of Antioch, active between the third and fifth centuries. Theodore rejected the allegorical interpretation; Lawson called him ajejune rationalist since he believed thatSolomon had composed the book as aresponse to criticism of his marriagetoP haraoh'sd aughter.Theodore was condemned by the Second Council of Constantinople in 553a nd was regarded as the father of Nestorianism.³⁷⁶ His work was echoed am illennium laterw hen William (Guillaume) of St.Thierry (c. 1330) also wrotet hat the Song of Songs was Solomon's celebration of the marriagei nq uestion.

Proverbs
Jesus' proverbs differ from Solomon's; the latter are aphorism wrapped in metaphor,a nd more greatlyr esemble the Sages' midrashim (homiletic interpretations), which are studded with proverbs themselves.³⁷⁷ The MidrashS ong of Songs Rabbah interprets Ecclesiastes 12:9a sf ollows: "And moreover,b ecause the preacher was wise,h es till taught the people knowledge;y ea, he gave good heed, and soughto ut,a nd set in order manyp roverbs. Andm ade ears [handles] for the Torah".³⁷⁸ In other words, the proverbs are akin to handles on ap ot or jug, that one mayg rasp in order to examine the contents.³⁷⁹ Other Sages compared Solomon to one who has discovered the entrance to avast palace: "Until Solomona rose there wasn oo ne who was able to comprehend the words of the Torah, but as soon as he arose, all began to comprehendt he Torah".H ei ss imilarlyl ikened to am an making his wayt hrough ag roveo f cane stalks or lowering ab ucket into ap ool of deep water; thus "from proverb to proverb, Solomonu ncovered the secrets of the Torah".R .Y udana ttributed ad ifferent order to the process: "Anyone who speaks Torah[ to others], receives the blessing of beingi mbued by the holys pirit.A nd from whom do we learn this?F romS olomon, who, having spoken Torah, wasi mbued by the holys pirit and was moved to speak his books".³⁸⁰ Thus,

Proverbs
the small worms to the tree, right so annoyeth sorrowtothe heart of man';When the condition of man is pleasant and liking to God, he changeth the heart of the man'sa dversaries, and constrains them to beseech him of peace of grace".³⁸⁹ The saying in Proverbs 22:6: "Train children in the right way, and when old, they will not stray" was widelya ccepted as ap edagogicalp rinciple and given various interpretations in Jewishand Christian societies. One example is the sermon by the humanist Thomas Horn of KingsC ollege-Cambridge,g iven in 1679 before the graduates of Eton: "When Solomon says,t rain up ac hild in the wayh es hould go,w eu nderstand thata sc atechizinga nd informing him in the wayo fR eligion in which everyone should go…".³⁹⁰

Ecclesiastes ³⁹¹
Ecclesiastes has always been an exegetical challenge,³⁹² interweaving as it does words of heresy,words of piety,a nd practical wisdom. Accordingt oJ ewish and Christian traditions, the book-the last ascribed to Solomon-was composed in the king'sold ageand reflects his life experience: "But in his old age, king Solomon was near to his death. Then the holyspirit rested upon him and spokethree books-Proverbs, Songo fS ongsa nd Ecclesiastes",³⁹³ though "[as] he aged he babbled foolishly".³⁹⁴ Several verses were thus interpreted as supplementing what was known of his biographya nd explicating the lessons he derived from his life.
The question of whether the book merited canonization was controversial because it contained "matters that lead toward heresy" and "words thatcontradict each other".According to Rabbi Samuelben Naḥman, the Sages intended to suppress the book of Ecclesiastes because they found ideas in it that leanedto- Chaucer'stale is an adaptation of aF rench "treatise" in prose: "Le LivredeMe'libe'eetde Dame Prudence".Also see "The Merchant": "It was onlythat youare so full of wisdom \that in your exalted prudenceitdoes not please you\to depart from the proverb of Solomon".Chaucer (1971,p .2 53).  See in Heyd (2011). According to Hattaway, Erasmus uses ammunitiont exts from Ecclesiastes and Proverbs for his virtuoso paradoxest hat opposed the childlikes implicity of Christ to the sophistical wisdom of the schoolmen.H attaway ( 1968, p. 508).  The Hebrewappellation "Kohelet" [Ecclesiastes] derives, according to Kohelet Rabbah,from the fact that "[Solomon] spokei nt he kahal [assembly]".  Bolin (2017).  Song of Songs Rabbah 1:1.10 (Neusner'stranslation counts it as 1:1. 6.17), and Yalkut Shimoni Kohelet, §965.  Yalkut Kohelet §965. and skepticism in their attacks on the schools (scholasticism)".⁴⁰¹ One could arguet hat the words "The end of the matter;a ll has been heard. Fear God, and keep his commandments; for thatisthe whole duty of everyone"⁴⁰² demonstrate that faith is superior to wisdom and that there is no room for speculation on God'sn ature and deeds, or thatf aith and wisdom are intertwined.
Christianityl inks the prefiguration of Jesus in Solomon onlyt op ositive aspects of Solomon'sb iography, and one might arguet hat the canonization of the three books attributed to him, which became af ount of allegories, symbols, moral instruction, and world-views, was not necessarilyanoutcomeofthis attribution, but that they achieved immortality in their ownr ight.N onetheless,h ad the books not been attributed to Solomon they might not have attained such a lofty status. Nor would they have been perceiveda sg uides in three separate spheres:i nm ysticism and esoterica (the Song of Songs), ethics (Proverbs), and philosophy( Ecclesiastes),which werep utativelym ergedi nt he work of as ingle man-who was at once aking,poet,and philosopher.Insuch acontext,the negative aspects of the author'sbiographywereofnoimportance. Wheneveraneed existed for the formulation of ac ompletea nd unified theological or philosophical doctrine, Solomon'st hree books weret he essential sources.⁴⁰³ This brief overview thus leadsustoanineluctable contradiction: Solomon, a king who sinned, nonetheless was perceivedbyChristianityasaprefiguration of Jesus, and the three books attributed to him revered as canonicala uthority and inexhaustible wellspringo fw isdom.
 Minnis (2009,p .5 04).  Ecclesiastes 12:13.  In his Solomon Among the Postmoderns Peter J. Leithart (2008) goes so far to arguethat the passage "Vanity of Vanities,a ll is vanity" should be translated "Vapor of Vapors,a ll is Vapor", and in the entireb ook of Ecclesiastes indicatet hat Solomon "resonated with the themes of today'sp ostmodernism".