Daniel 4:9

Dan 4:9 O Belteshazzar, master of the magicians, because I know that the spirit of the holy gods [is] in thee, and no secret troubleth thee, tell me the visions of my dream that I have seen, and the interpretation thereof.

Ver. 9. Because I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee.] The spirit of divination and prophecy.

And no secret troubleth thee.] Chald., Puts thee to business. Now he who had slighted Daniel before, to get what he desired, abaseth himself below the dignity of a king to him.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

[Daniel 4:9] Its foliage (עׇפְיֵ֤הּ): Yefet [ben Ali] says [this means] its branches (עֲנָפָיו - anafayv). And similar to it [using a related word for foliage/branches] is: “from among the foliage (עֳפָאיִם) they give voice” [Psalms 104:12]. He [Yefet] also interpreted “and its visibility” (vachazoteh, from the previous verse [Daniel 4:8]) as its thickness/density (עֳבִיּוֹ - ovyo), and similarly [interpreted] “a conspicuous horn” (keren chazut, from Daniel 8:5) [in terms of its thickness or prominence rather than branching structure as Ibn Ezra preferred]. And some [other commentators] say that “its foliage” (ofyeh) means its leaves (עָלָיו - alav).

And its fruit (וְאִנְבֵּ֣הּ): [Means] and its fruit (וּפִרְיוֹ - u’piryo).

Found shade (תַּטְלֵ֣ל): [Meaning] like shade/shadow (כִּדְמוּת צֵל - kidmut tzel). [From the root צ.ל.ל - shade].

And on its branches (וּבְעַנְפ֙וֹהִי֙): [Means] its branches (עֲנָפָיו - anafayv).

Birds (צִפְּרֵ֣י): [Means] fowl/birds (עוֹף - oph).

Fed (יִתְּזִ֥ין): [This word] is derived from [the word/root for] food (מִגִּזְרַת מָזוֹן - mi-gizrat mazon).

Ibn Ezra on the Tanakh — English translations: “Sefaria Community Translation” (CC0 1.0 (public-domain dedication)); “Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009” (CC BY 4.0); and “Commentary of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah - trans. by M. Friedlander, 1873” (public domain). Text via Sefaria.

spirit of the holy gods--Nebuchadnezzar speaks as a heathen, who yet has imbibed some notions of the true God. Hence he speaks of "gods" in the plural but gives the epithet "holy," which applies to Jehovah alone, the heathen gods making no pretension to purity, even in the opinion of their votaries (Deu 32:31; compare Isa 63:11). "I know" refers to his knowledge of Daniel's skill many years before (Dan 2:8); hence he calls him "master of the magicians."

troubleth--gives thee difficulty in explaining it.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

9. O Belteshazzar, master of the Magi, since I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee, and no secret can escape thee — or overcome thee, as I shall soon explain the word — relate the visions of my sleep which I saw, and their interpretation We yesterday shewed King Nebuchadnezzar to be a suppliant to Daniel, when reduced to extremity. He did not seek him at first, but consulted his Magicians, and he is now compelled to venerate the person whom he had despised. He calls him Belteshazzar, and doubtless the name severely wounded the Prophet’s mind; for another name had been imposed upon him by his parents from his earliest infancy; whence he could recognize himself as a Jew, and could draw his origin from a holy and elect nation. For his change of name was doubtless made by the tyrant’s cunning, as we have previously said, as to cause him to forget his own family. King Nebuchadnezzar wished, by changing his name, to render this holy servant of God degenerate. Hence, as often as he was called by this name, he was clearly offended in no slight degree. But this evil could not be remedied, since he was a captive, and knew he had to deal with a people victorious, proud, and cruel. Thus, in the last verse, Nebuchadnezzar had used this name according to the name of his god. Since then Daniel had a name of his own, which his parents had given him by God’s appointment, Nebuchadnezzar wished to blot out that sacred name, and so called him as a mark of respect Belteshazzar, which we may believe to have been deduced from the name of an idol. Hence this doubled the Prophet’s grief, when he was stained with that base spot in bearing an idol’s mark on his name; but it was his duty to endure this scourge of God among his other trials. Thus God exercised his servant in every way by enduring a cross.

He now calls him Prince of the Magi, and this doubtless wounded the holy Prophet’s feelings. He wished nothing better than separation from the Magi, who deceived the world by their impostures and soothsaying. For although they were skilled in the science of astrology, and knew some principles worthy of praise, yet we are sure they corrupted all the sciences. Hence Daniel did not willingly hear himself included among them; but he could not free himself from this infamy. Thus we see his patience to have been divinely proved in various ways. Now, Nebuchadnezzar adds, because I know the spirit of the holy gods to be in thee. Many understand this of angels; and this interpretation is not objectionable, as I have hinted elsewhere. For the existence of a supreme God was known to all the nations, but they fancied angels to be inferior deities. Whatever be the true meaning, Nebuchadnezzar here betrays his own ignorance, since he had made no real progress in the knowledge of the true God; because he was entangled in his former errors, and retained many gods, as from the beginning he had been imbued with that superstition. This passage might have been translated in the singular number, as some do, but it would be too forced, and the reason for such a translation is too weak; for they think Nebuchadnezzar to have been truly converted; but the vanity of this is proved by the whole context; and being occupied by this opinion, they wish to relieve him from all fault. But since it is clear that in this edict of Nebuchadnezzar many proofs of his old ignorance are comprehended, there is no reason why we should depart from the simple sense of the words. Hence he attributes a divine spirit to Daniel, but meanwhile imagines many gods. Since, therefore, the spirit of the holy gods is in thee, he says, and no secret overcomes thee Some translate אנס, anes, to be troublesome; it properly signifies to compel, or to force; for those who translate “there is no secret which can surpass thee,” depart from the correct sense. Others translate it, “to be troublesome.” This would be a more tolerable translation, but they would do better by translating, “no secret renders thee anxious or perplexed.” If the rules of grammar would allow the א aleph, to be a servile letter, the sense would be more suitable. For נסה, neseh, signifies to try, or prove, and also to elevate. We may translate it, “No secret is loftier than thy understanding;” or, “No secret proves thee;” if he had said, — Daniel was endued with a divine spirit; — he does not examine any proposition, and has no need to make an experiment in any science, since his answer is easy and at hand. But. it is necessary to remember what I said,—No secret renders thee anxious, or confounds thee. Nebuchadnezzar knew this. Then why did he not directly call him to himself in his perplexity? As Daniel could free him from all perplexity, the king’s ingratitude is proved, because he admitted the Magi to his counsels, and neglected Daniel. We see then how he always endeavored to avoid God, till he was drawn along by a violent hand, and thereby displayed the absence of conversion. For repentance is voluntary, and those only are said to repent, who willingly return by a change of mind to the God from whom they had revolted; and this cannot be done without faith and the love of God. He then asks him to relate his dream and its interpretation But the dream was not unknown, and he relates it to Daniel. There is, therefore, something superfluous in these words, but no doubt about the sense — as Nebuchadnezzar only asks for the explanation of his dream. It follows: —

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(9) Troubleth thee.—Literally, goadeth thee, or, causeth thee this difficulty.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

9. master of the magicians] see Dan_2:48.

troubleth thee] forceth, constraineth thee, i.e. reduces thee to straits.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

O Belteshazzar, master of the magicians,.... So he called him, either because he excelled them in knowledge, and was greater than they, as Jacchiades; though not of their rank and order, which Daniel would have scorned to have been among, and reckoned of; so that this would have been no compliment, but a grief unto him; or because he was appointed by the king chief over them, and even over their governors; See Gill on Dan 2:48,

because I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee; See Gill on Dan 4:8;

and no secret troubleth thee; any ways perplexes thy mind to find it out; it is easy to thee to come at; it gives thee no manner of trouble to get knowledge of it; there is no secret hidden from thee; all is plain before thee, and with the utmost facility canst thou reveal it:

tell me the visions of my dream that I have seen; that is, the meaning of them; for the king remembered this his dream, and afterwards tells it very particularly:

and the interpretation of it; it may be rendered, "that is, the interpretation of it" (h); for that only was what the king wanted.

(h) "id est, interpretationem ejus", Junius & Tremellius, Broughtonus, Michaelis.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

O Belteshazzar, master of the magicians - “Master,” in the sense that he was first among them, or was superior to them all. Or, perhaps, he still retained office at the head of this class of men - the office to which he had been appointed when he interpreted the former dream, Dan 2:48. The word rendered “master” (רב rab) is that which was applied to a teacher, a chief, or a great man among the Jews - from where came the title “rabbi.” Compare Dan 2:48; Dan 5:11.

Because I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee - This he had learned by the skill which he had shown in interpreting his dream on former occasion, Dan. 2.

And no secret troubleth thee - That is, so troubles you that you cannot explain it; it is not beyond your power to disclose its signification. The word rendered “secret” (רז r̂az) occurs in Dan 2:18-19, Dan 2:27-30, Dan 2:47. It is not elsewhere found. It means what is hidden, and has reference here to the concealed truth or intimation of the Divine will couched under a dream. The word rendered “troubleth thee” (אנס 'ânas) means, to urge, to press, to compel; and the idea here is, than it did not so “press” upon him as to give him anxiety. It was an easy matter for him to disclose its meaning. Greek, “No mystery is beyond your power” - ὀυκ ἀδυνατεῖ σε ouk adunatei se.

Tell me the visions of my dream - The nature of the vision, or the purport of what I have seen. He seems to have desired to know what sort of a vision he should regard this to be, as well as its interpretation - whether as an intimation of the Divine will, or as an ordimary dream. The Greek and Arabic render this, “Hear the vision of my dream, and tell me the interpretation thereof.” This accords better with the probable meaning of the passage, though the word “hear” is not in the Chaldee.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

This argued he was convinced of Daniel’s great abilities, and that he truly deserved the title and dignity the king had honoured him with; and by this persuasion and confidence he had of him, Daniel would show he answered both the opinion and expectation the king had of him.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

9. Daniel is here recognized as master of the magicians. (See note Dan_2:48.) The otherwise unaccountable failure of the king to call on him first of all, instead of sending out a decree (Dan_4:6) to bring before him all the other magicians, may perhaps be explained as a mere matter of literary form on the part of the narrator, the effect of Daniel’s success being heightened by the previous unsuccessful attempts of all the other wise men. However, if the king, through an attempt to centralize the worship (Sayce) or for any other reason, was at this time an enemy of the priests (Dan_2:5; Dan_2:24-26), this might possibly have been a scheme of his. It should also be remembered that one version, which was probably the original LXX., omits Dan_4:6-7, which were evidently, therefore, not in the original text which it translated. This version says that immediately upon having his dream the king called Daniel and told it to him. It also gives an entirely different address to Daniel, although the phrase “the spirit of the holy gods is in thee” is not unnatural in a heathen ruler. (Compare Gen_41:38, Hebrews)

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

O Belteshazzar, master of the magicians, because I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee, and no secret troubleth thee, tell me the visions of my dream that I have seen, and the interpretation thereof. This verso is also omitted in the Septuagint. Theodotion and the Peshitta both have this passage, but with slight variations from the Massoretic text. Instead of "No secret troubleth snea; anays, "compel," (Est_1:8) thee," Thedotion renders, "No secret (musthrion) baffles (ajdunatei) thee." The Peshitta renders. "And no secret is hid (ethcasee) from thee," reading, instead of snea; probably ysikthi. Behrmann, who translates the word by verborgen, thinks the choice of the word occasioned by: Eze_28:3, No secret is hid from thee" ( this last word, he thinks, occasioning the use of sna; but is used in Aramaic. (see Lev_13:6, "dark" of the spot of leprosy) It seems more probable that there is some mistake in the reading.

The Massoretic reading of the last clause seems modelled on the situation in the second chapter, where Nebuchadnezzar demands of the magicians that they not only give the interpretation of the dream, but tell the dream itself. The versions here do not agree with the Massoretic. Theodotion renders, "Hear the vision (orasin) of the dream which I saw, and tell me its interpretation." The Peshitta has, "In the vision of my dream I was seeing visions of my head, and tell me the interpretation." The Massoretic reading contradicts the situation, and the variety of reading in the two versions confirms the suspicion of this verse induced by its absence from the Septuagint. "Master of the magicians" (rob-hartum-maya ). There is nothing in Dan_2:48 about the promotion of Daniel over the "magi-clans," but only over the "governors (signeen) of the wise men (hakaymeen) of Babylon" This is not to be in itself regarded as a proof of antagonism between these verses and the earlier portion of the, book, as Daniel might have been promoted in the interval. The Peshitta calls Daniel rab-hahmeen, "chief of the wise men;" Theodotion, arcwn twn ejpaoidwn. It is also to be observed that the writer of these verses does not make Daniel rab-mag, which so generally was anciently understood to mean "master of the magicians." Avoiding an alluring blunder is often as clear a proof of knowledge as a directly correct statement. "Spirit of the holy gods;" not the Spirit," but a spirit." The Authorized Version is here correct in translating "gods," not "God," as the adjective is plural; not as Theodotion, who renders, "a holy spirit of God," reading, hv; wOdq hla jWr.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

its branches were beautiful [as translated,] its branches were beautiful.

and its fruit was plentiful [as translated,] and its fruit was plentiful.

and on it was sustenance for all On it was enough sustenance for all

took shade Aram. תַּטְלֵל, an expression of shade.

dwelt Aram. יְדֻרָן, an expression of dwelling and lodging.

was nourished Aram. יִתְּזִין, an expression of food.

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.