Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Daniel 4:19 - 4:19
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
(4:16-24)
The interpretation of the dream.
As Daniel at once understood the interpretation of the dream, he was for a moment so astonished that he could not speak for terror at the thoughts which moved his soul. This amazement seized him because he wished well to the king, and yet he must now announce to him a weighty judgment from God.
Daniel 4:16 (Dan 4:19)
The punctuation אֶשְׁתּוֹמַם for אִשְׁתּוֹמֵם is Syriac, as in the Hebr. Dan 8:27; cf. Winer's Chald. Gram. §25, 2. חֲדָא כְָּשׁעָהmeans, not about an hour (Mich., Hitz., Kran., etc.), but as it were an instant, a moment. Regarding שָׁעָה, see under Dan 3:6. The king perceives the astonishment of Daniel, and remarks that he has found the interpretation. Therefore he asks him, with friendly address, to tell him it without reserve. Daniel then communicates it in words of affectionate interest for the welfare of the king. The words, let the dream be to thine enemies, etc., do not mean: it is a dream, a prophecy, such as the enemies of the king might ungraciously wish (Klief.), but: may the dream with its interpretation be to thine enemies, may it be fulfilled to them or refer to them (Häv., Hitz., etc.). The Kethiv מַרְאִי is the regular formation from מָרֵא with the suffix, for which the Masoretes have substituted the later Talmudic-Targ. form מָר. With regard to שַׂנְאָיךְ with the a shortened, as also הַשְׁחִין (Dan 3:16) and other participial forms, cf. Winer, Chald. Gram. §34, III. That Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 4:16) in his account speaks in the third person does not justify the conclusion, either that another spake of him, and that thus the document is not genuine (Hitz.), nor yet the conclusion that this verse includes an historical notice introduced as an interpolation into the document; for similar forms of expression are often found in such documents: cf. Ezr 7:13-15; Est 8:7-8.
Daniel 4:17 (Dan 4:20)
Daniel interprets to the king his dream, repeating only here and there in an abbreviated form the substance of it in the same words, and then declares its reference to the king. With vv. 17 (Dan 4:20) and 18 (Dan 4:21) cf. vv. 8 (Dan 4:11) and 9 (Dan 4:12). The fuller description of the tree is subordinated to the relative clause, which thou hast seen, so that the subject is connected by הוּא (Dan 4:19), representing the verb. subst., according to rule, with the predicate אִילָנָא. The interpretation of the separate statements regarding the tree is also subordinated in the relative clauses to the subject. For the Kethiv רְבַיִת = רְבַיְתְּ, the Keri gives the shortened form רְבַת, with the elision of the third radical, analogous to the shortening of the following מְטַת for מְטָת. To the call of the angel to “cut down the tree,” etc. (Dan 4:20, cf. Dan 4:10-13), Daniel gives the interpretation, Dan 4:24, “This is the decree of the Most High which is come upon the king, that he shall be driven from men, and dwell among the beasts,” etc. עַל מְטָא = Hebr. עַל בֹּוא. The indefinite plur. form טרְדִין stands instead of the passive, as the following לָךְ יְטַעֲמוּן and מְצַבְּעִין, cf. under Dan 3:4. Thus the subject remains altogether indefinite, and one has neither to think on men who will drive him from their society, etc., nor of angels, of whom, perhaps, the expulsion of the king may be predicated, but scarcely the feeding on grass and being wet with dew.
Daniel 4:23 (Dan 4:26)
In this verse the emblem and its interpretation are simply placed together, so that we must in thought repeat the פִשְׁרָא דְּנָה from Dan 4:12 before מַלְכוּתָךְ. קַיָּמָא, קָאֵם do not in this place mean to stand, to exist, to remain, for this does not agree with the following דִּי-nim; for until Nebuchadnezzar comes to the knowledge of the supremacy of God, his dominion shall not continue, but rest, be withdrawn. קוּם, to rise up, has here an inchoative meaning, again rise up. To שַׁלִּיטִין (do rule) there is to be added from Dan 4:22 (25) the clause, over the kingdom of men. From this passage we have an explanation of the use of שְׁמַיָּא, heaven, for עִלָּיָא, the Most High, God of heaven, whence afterwards arose the use of βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν for βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ.
Daniel 4:24 (Dan 4:27)
Daniel adds to his interpretation of the dream the warning to the king to break off his sins by righteousness and mercy, so that his tranquillity may be lengthened. Daniel knew nothing of a heathen Fatum, but he knew that the judgments of God were directed against men according to their conduct, and that punishment threatened could only be averted by repentance; cf. Jer 18:7.; Jon 3:5.; Isa 38:1. This way of turning aside the threatened judgment stood open also for Nebuchadnezzar, particularly as the time of the fulfilment of the dream was not fixed, and thus a space was left for repentance. The counsel of Daniel is interpreted by Berth., Hitz., and others, after Theodotion, the Vulgate, and many Church Fathers and Rabbis, as teaching the doctrine of holiness by works held by the later Jews, for they translate it: redeem thy sins by well-doing (Hitz.: buy freedom from thy sins by alms), and thy transgressions by showing mercy to the poor.
(Note: Theodot. translates: καὶ τὰς ἁμαρτίας σου ἐν ἐλεημοσύναις λύτρωσαι καὶ τὰς ἀδικίας σου ἐν οἰκτιρμοῖς πενήτων. The Vulg.: et peccata tua eleemosynis redime et iniquitates tuas misericordiis pauperum. Accordingly, the Catholic Church regards this passage as a locus classicus for the doctrine of the merit of works, against which the Apologia Conf. August. first set forth the right exposition.)
But this translation of the first passage is verbally false; for פְּרַק does not mean to redeem, to ransom, and צְדָקָה does not mean alms or charity. פְּרַק means to break off, to break in pieces, hence to separate, to disjoin, to put at a distance; see under Gen. 21:40. And though in the Targg. פרק is used for גָּאַל, פָּדָה, to loosen, to unbind, of redeeming, ransoming of the first-born, an inheritance or any other valuable possession, yet this use of the word by no means accords with sins as the object, because sins are not goods which one redeems or ransoms so as to retain them for his own use. חֲטָי פְּרַק can only mean to throw away sins, to set one's self free from sins. צְדָקָה nowhere in the O.T. means well-doing or alms. This meaning the self-righteous Rabbis first gave to the word in their writings. Daniel recommends the king to practise righteousness as the chief virtue of a ruler in contrast to the unrighteousness of the despots, as Hgstb., Häv., Hofm., and Klief. have justly observed. To this also the second member of the verse corresponds. As the king should practise righteousness toward all his subjects, so should he exercise mercy toward the oppressed, the miserable, the poor. Both of these virtues are frequently named together, e.g., Isa 11:4; Psa 72:4; Isa 41:2, as virtues of the Messiah. חֲטָייָךְ is the plur. of חֲטָי, as the parallel עֲוַיָּתָךְ shows, and the Keri only the later abbreviation or defective suffix-formation, as Dan 2:4; Dan 5:10.
The last clause of this verse is altogether misunderstood by Theodotion, who translates it ἴσως ἔσται μακρόθυμος τοῖς παραπτώμασιν σου ὁ Θεός, and by the Vulgate, where it is rendered by forsitan ignoscet delictis tuis, and by many older interpreters, where they expound אַרְכָּא in the sense of אֶרֶךְ אַפִּים, patience, and derive שְׁלֵוְתָךְ from שְׁלָה, to fail, to go astray (cf. Dan 3:29). אַרְכָּא means continuance, or length of time, as Dan 7:12; שְׁלֵוָא, rest, safety, as the Hebr. שַׁלְוָה, here the peaceful prosperity of life; and הֵן, neither ecce nor forsitan, si forte, but simply if, as always in the book of Daniel.
Daniel places before the king, as the condition of the continuance of prosperity of life, and thereby implicite of the averting of the threatened punishment, reformation of life, the giving up of injustice and cruelty towards the poor, and the practice of righteousness and mercy.