(10)
No king.--A further argument of the wise men, offering a delicate flattery to the king, and, at the same time, assuming as a proof of their wisdom, that
all possibilities had been already submitted to them. "Because no king," they say, "has left any precedent for such a request, therefore the thing is impossible."
Verse 10. -
The Chaldeans answered before the king, and said, There is not a man upon the earth that can show the king's matter: therefore there is no king, lord, nor ruler, that asked such things at any magician, astrologer, or Chaldean. It is to be noted, in the first place, that we have the same Syriac form of
כַּשְׂדָיֵא. This seems to us a survival from an earlier condition of the text, when the Syriac forms were predominant, if not universal, in it. Scribes accustomed to speak and write in Chaldee would naturally harmonize the text to the language they were accustomed to use. The word "saying" ("and said," Authorized Version) is omitted from the. Septuagint, but it is found in all other versions: its omission in the Septuagint may have been due to error - the Aramaic is not complete without it.
לָא־אִתַי (
la-'itha), "there is not." The ordinary Targumic and Talmudic usage is
לַיִת (
layith), "is not." one word. This full way of writing this negative form is an undeniable proof of antiquity. Neither Levy nor Castell gives any example of the full writing which is the regular practice in Biblical Aramaic. Merx, 'Chrestomath. Targ.,' 168, 225, also gives only
לית. As a rule, the fuller a form is, the older it is.
Earth; literally,
dry groined- the same word as is used in the Targum of Genesis, "Let the
dry land appear," but not the usual word for "the world." Theodotion, in accordance, translates
ξηρᾶς; the LXX. renders merely,
ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. The Peshitta has (
ar'a). The
king's matter (
mil-lath malea); literally,
the king's word, which, consequently, Theodotion translates
ῤῆμα. The LXX renders, "to tell the king that which he has seen." It is evident that he read
milbdh, as it' derived from
melal, "to speak," as
lemallala. The rendering, "that which he has seen," is due to reading
ל (
l) into
ד (
d); the verb
heva was read
heza, and then the change in meaning be. conies intelligible.
Therefore there is no king,
lord,
nor ruler. The mote natural interpretation of the Aramaic is, "There is no king great and powerful." Some have regarded
ral,
ushlat as a title of the King of Babylon, but this does not seem to be borne out by inscriptions. The sense is rather that of 1he marginal rendering, "There is no king be he never so great and powerful." Then-dotion has this reading. The Septuagint renders, "
no king and no ruler (
πᾶς βασιλεὺς καὶ πᾶς δυνάστης...οὐκ)," reading
כול (
eol) for
רב (
rab). The Peshitta follows the Massoretic closely here. In this connection, it may be observed,
שליט (
shaleet) is not frequent in the Targums, but it occurs in the Peshitta.
That asked such things. Kidnah, "like this." This form of the demonstration, ending with
ה (
h), instead of
א, is regarded as older than the Targumic form. Theodotion inserts
ῤῆμα here. A
t any magician,
or astrologer,
or Chaldean. The first thing that strikes the reader of the Aramaic, and for that matter the other versions, is the omission of one of the classes of soothsayers - that called "sorcerers" in our Authorized Version. We saw that, according to the Septuagint, the" Chaldeans" were not a separate college of augurs or soothsayers. When we look atlentively at the Aramaic, the reason of the presence of "Chaldeans" here, and the absence of "sorcerers" becomes probable. In the first place,
כשדיא is written without the
א, as singular. When so written, its resemblance to
מְכַשֵׁפ (
mekashshaph) suggests the question whether there might not be, occupying this place, an Aramaic noun equivalent to
ashshaph, which we see is really Assyrian, and, interpreting it we find
mekashshaph put thus after
ashshaph elsewhere, but omitted here. The solution of' the omission of
mekashshaph is the likeness the latter part of the word bears to
Kusdt, especially in the script of Egypt, in which
כ and
א were very like each other. These assembled wise men protest against the test to which the king would put them as essentially unfair. They had been trained to divine the future from dreams, but never to find out dreams by what they had learned from their airs the future would be; and in proof of this they urge that no king, however great, had made such a demand of any astrologer or soothsayer. Nay, they go further, and say that no man upon the earth is able to tell the king what he wishes. They endeavour to make the king see that what he asks is an impossibility.
2:1-13 The greatest men are most open to cares and troubles of mind, which disturb their repose in the night, while the sleep of the labouring man is sweet and sound. We know not the uneasiness of many who live in great pomp, and, as others vainly think, in pleasure also. The king said that his learned men must tell him the dream itself, or they should all be put to death as deceivers. Men are more eager to ask as to future events, than to learn the way of salvation or the path of duty; yet foreknowledge of future events increases anxiety and trouble. Those who deceived, by pretending to do what they could not do, were sentenced to death, for not being able to do what they did not pretend to.
The Chaldeans answered before the King, and said,.... As follows, in order to appease his wrath, and cool his resentment, and bring him to reason:
there is not a man upon the earth can show the king's matter; or, "upon the dry land" (g): upon the continent, throughout the whole world, in any country whatever; not one single man can be found, be he ever so wise and learned, that can show the king what he requires; and yet Daniel afterwards did; and so it appears, by this confession, that he was greater than they, or any other of the same profession with them: this is one argument they use to convince the king of the unreasonableness of his demand; it being such that no man on earth was equal to; another follows:
therefore there is no king, lord, nor ruler; there neither is, nor never was, any potentate or prince, be who he will; whether, as Jacchiades distinguishes them, a "king" over many provinces, whose empire is very large; or "lord" over many cities; or "ruler" over many villages belonging to one city; in short, no man of power and authority, whether supreme or subordinate:
that asked things at any magician, or astrologer, or Chaldean; never was such a thing required of any before; no instance, they suggest, could be produced in ancient history, or in the present age, in any kingdom or court under the heavens, of such a request being made; or that anything of this kind was ever insisted upon; and therefore hoped the king would not insist upon it; and which no doubt was true: Pharaoh required of his wise men to tell him the interpretation of his dream, but not the dream itself.
(g) "super aridam", Pagninus, Montanus; "super arida", Cocceius; "super arido", Michaelis.