4. Draw me.—Abraham was drawn after God, and therefore left his native place (Gen. xii. 1). The king has brought me, &c.—God has brought Abraham into the land of Canaan; or it may mean, God has made him wise in his secrets, and the words, we will praise thy love, denote the altars and groves which Abraham erected and planted wherever he came. 5. I am swarthy.—This refers to the Egyptian bondage. Although I (i.e. Israel) am swarthy because of some evil deeds committed there; yet I am comely because of my adhesion to the covenant and to the belief in the unity of God. It has generally been overlooked that Ibn Ezra distinctly states in the second gloss, in which he professes to give the literal meaning of the narrative, that the lovers are a shepherd and a shepherdess, and that the king is a separate and distinct person from the beloved shepherd. Thus he explains Ch. i. 4, “I rejoice in THEE (the shepherd) more than if THE KING had brought me into his apartments.” Again, verse 12, the shepherdess says to the shepherd, “Though my fragrance is so sweet that THE KING, whilst reclining, desires to smell my nard, yet MY BELOVED (the shepherd), who is a bundle of myrrh, diffuses a still sweeter fragrance.” Compare also Ch. iii. 6–11, Ch. vi. 8, Ch. viii. 11, 12. This is an important step to the right understanding of the Book. Ibn Ezra also mentions that “The philosophers explain this book to refer to the mysterious harmony of the universe, and to the union of the divine soul with the earthly body; and that others, again, explain it literally.” [56] In reference to the last mentioned mode of interpretation, he exclaimed, “Far be it! far be it! to think that the Song of Songs is an amatory composition.” [57] 1200–1250. The frequent mention made by the preceding commentators of the different views entertained respecting this Song, will have prepared the reader for the philosophical interpretation which has been adopted and defended by a large and influential portion of the Jewish community. Joseph Ibn Caspe, a learned author, who lived in the beginning of the thirteenth century, and who wrote expositions on several portions of the Scriptures, maintains that “this book represents the union between the ACTIVE INTELLECT (intellectus agens) and the RECEPTIVE MATERIAL INTELLECT (intellectus materialis),” typified by the beloved and loved one. As Caspe’s commentary is short and exceedingly rare, we give a translation of it, and subjoin the original in the footnote:— THE COMMENTARY OF IBN CASPE. [58]