13

The discussion is in the Talmud Sanhedrin 22a. The background is the disagreement among the Rabbis if the Torah was originally in Ivri or Ashuri. The Talmud says that according to the view that it was in Ivri, Ashuri script was first seen when the Angel wrote it on the wall, thus the Jews were not familiar with it - this is why they couldn't read it. ...


12

Rashi, a renowned 11th Century commentator on the Bible and Talmud, wrote that this "little horn" in Daniel 7:8 that is "speaking arrogantly" refers to Titus, the one who destroyed the Holy Temple and Jerusalem. He writes thus: :ממלל רברבן. דברי גאוה, הוא טיטוס שאחז"ל שחרף וגדף ונכנס להיכל בעזות פנים "Speaking arrogantly." Words of arrogance. He is ...


10

Ibn Ezra is of the opinion that it was the type of food they were eating that positively affected their appearance. He goes into detail inferring what exactly the food was, which would have the effect of filling one up (and reddening one's face?), but he concludes that any food one is eating out of desire/preference will be more likely to have these effects ...


6

Note, that there are 27 books in the Greek Testament, and NONE of them quote Daniel 9! Not any of the authors of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. Not in the letters of Paul. Not in the letters of Peter. Apparently, no one in first century Christianity thought that it was important enough to mention an alleged prophecy about the exact year their Messiah ...


5

The מצודת (and IIRC the Malbim) answers your question: "The reason they didn't include Daniel was because the king considered him a god." (Proof: The king bowed down to Daniel at the end of the previous chapter.) "How would one expect a god to prostrate himself to an idol?" ולא הלשינו על דניאל בעבור כי ראו שהמלך חשבו לאלוה ואיך ישתחוה הוא אל הצלם


5

There is a tradition that these three people had asked Ezekiel whether they would be saved, and he responded in the negative. The story is referred to in Zohar Toldos 142a but discussed at length in Midrash Rabba Shir Hashirim (sometimes called Midrash Chazis) 7:13. There, a long discussion is recorded between these three would-be martyrs and the prophet ...


5

For clarification: the anointed one in Daniel 9:25 and the other one in 9:26 are different. You seems to say that the Jewish perspective (on the entire chapter?) refers to Cyrus, but this is true only to 9:25. The one that is cutted off (in v. 26) is identified as being Agrippa per Malbim, Metzudot David and Rashi. Given that oto haish was born in 4 BCE, ...


4

To summarize from Yishai's answer, the Talmud says there was something funny about the way it was written; "in columns" is one possible interpretation. Assuming Manasseh ben Israel gave Rembrandt a sketch of what the letters should look like, I'd find it far more likely that Rembrandt was faithful to the sketch he was given (i.e. it was in columns) than that ...


4

I would think this is the same question as identifying the Man on the throne in Shemos 24:10, "“And they saw Elokei Yisrael, and under His Feet was something like sapir (sapphire or a blue marble) brick-work which was like the middle of heaven in purity.” What exactly did they see? We have a number of textual problems. Moshe later asked “Please show me your ...


4

From the plain reading of the text (Daniel 3:17-18), we see that they were unsure whether Hashem would save them. In particular, they say (3:18) והן לא (and if [Hashem does] not [save us]). In Shir HaShirim Rabbah (on 7:8, על דעת ר׳ שמעון), we see a midrash that relates how Chananiah, Mishael, and Azariah went to Ezekiel to ask whether Hashem would be ...


4

This edition of Artscroll on Daniel has a lengthy commentary on this verse which addresses, I hope, your question. Here is a summary of what they write The identity of the fourth kingdom is a topic of great controversy which transcends this verse as the theme of the four kingdoms is also found in Daniel (ch. 7), Zechariah (ch. 6) and Hosea (ch. 13) - their ...


4

In The Jewish Study Bible (2nd edition, 2014), Lawrence M. Wills asserts that the little horn is Antiochus Epiphanes. Ditto 'Daniel, Book of' in Jewish Encyclopedia (online) by Emil G. Hirsch and Eduard König: 'The little horn described in Dan. viii. 9-12, 23-25 has the same general characteristics as the little horn in vii. 8, 20; hence the same ruler is ...


4

The Gemara in Sanhedrin said (Sanhedrin 93a) ודניאל להיכן אזל אמר רב למיכרא נהרא רבא בטבריא ושמואל אמר לאתויי ביזרא דאספסתא ור' יוחנן אמר לאתויי חזירי דאלכסנדריא של מצרים איני והתניא תודוס הרופא אמר אין פרה וחזירה יוצא מאלכסנדריא של מצרים שאין חותכין האם שלה בשביל שלא תלד זוטרי אייתי בלא דעתייהו The Gemara asks: And where did Daniel go? He certainly did not ...


4

Many Christian attempts to read about their Messiah in the Jewish Bible are based on incorrect translations and misunderstandings of the Jewish way of reading the Bible (Tanakh) through its commentators. In the specific case of Daniel chapter 9 and Christians reading the text to coincide with the arrival of Jesus in Jerusalem, R Bentzion Kravitz here ...


4

The Syrian Sephardic tradition reads the taamim of Daniel and Ezra/Nehemia (as well as Job 1-2, Ecclesiates, and Chronicles) in the same melody as Ruth. This is sung in a precious Middle-Eastern scale known as Hoseni, which, among other special occasions, is used by the Syrians for the Torah reading during Shavuot. You can hear a recording of this melody, ...


3

The question posed requires an expert in Aramaic. One such expert was Sir Godfrey Rolles Driver. In 1926, in an article in Journal of Biblical Literature, Volume 45, 'The Aramaic of the Book of Daniel,' he demonstrated that the Aramaic of Daniel is certainly later than the Aramaic of the Elephantine Papyri, which date from the end of the fifth century BCE: ...


3

The Aramaic in the Book of Daniel has two purposes: (1) the Aramaic provided a perfect chiasm to the parallel Hebrew portions of the text; and (2) the Aramaic is special divine revelation to the Gentiles, who spoke Aramaic. First, there are two chiasms in the Book of Daniel: one in Aramaic and one in Hebrew. Both sets of chiasms appear to be parallel in ...


3

Daniel is in Kesuvim because it is not prophecy. There is a machlokes as to whether Daniel was or was not a prophet. However, we see that Baruch ben Neriyah (Yirmiyahu's student) never became a prophet because he went into exile before he became one (Yirmiyaho 45:3). We also see that Yechezkel (chapter 24) was given when he was already in Bavel. The point ...


3

Gesenius's dictionary has this to say: אדין - afterwards, then באדין - at the same time, ie. immediately. Thus, there seems to be a question of immediacy in the choice of whether to have the ב prefix or not. This meaning seems to be hinted at in Jastrow as well, but not as explicitly as in Gesenius.


3

The "one like a man" is no one in particular: this is a dream. But whom does the dream allude to by that character? The messiah, according to the commentaries on that verse (Rashi, ibn Ezra, M'tzudas David) and as alluded to in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 98:1).


3

Your primary complaint is over a discrepancy of only eight years, which is not a huge amount. This discrepancy could be explained by different methods of counting regnal years and does not render Daniel non-historical. In his Guide to the Bible, Isaac Asimov mentions more discrepancies and points out that these discrepancies tend to be in Daniel's past but ...


3

The answer is that when Jews stopped speaking Greek, and therefore stopped relying on the Septuagint, these books/chapters fell away and were retroactively deemed heretical/not a part of Judaism. A similar situation occurred with other books such as Sefer Hanoch (The Book of Enoch) and the book of Jubilees. Studied in antiquity, they fell out of common ...


3

As @DoubleAA says, we only read haftarot from the Prophets, not the Writings. There isn't one clear reason for this. For example, the Baer Heytev says that the reason is that you will not find a suitable matter there that fits the week's parsha, while others give other reasons. Here is an article in Hebrew about haftarot in general, which discusses this ...


3

Fundamentally, there are 2 different questions here: 1) How can Seder Olam and modern Scholarship be reconciled 2) What does the Passuk in Daniel refer to. The first question is the subject of an age old debate, often referred to as the question of the "missing 168 years." Scholars from Rav Saadiah Gaon until the modern Era have debated this. This ...


2

Perhaps the statement in the first passuk of Daniel in which says: "בא נבוכדנאצר מלך בבל ירושלם ויצר עליה the expression ויצר עליה should be translated as "and showed hostility towards it" (because צור is a byform of צרר "treat with hostility"). If we assume that this means the passuk does not necessarily says that a formal military siege against ...


2

There are various explanations among the commentators; here's the M'tzudos'. I've put in square brackets the parts that don't translate the verse. And after the sixty-two [complete] seven-year periods [from the start of the construction of the second Temple], the anointed [Agrippa] will be cut down and gone, and the nation [Rome] of the ruler ([Titus] who ...


2

Maimonides (a foremost codifier of Jewish Law) in the first chapter of his Laws of the Foundations of the Torah explains the concept of seeing a vision of G-d: Behold, it is explicitly stated in the Torah and [the works of] the prophets that the Holy One, blessed be He, is not [confined to] a body or physical form . . If so, what is the meaning of ...


2

Like avi pointed out, the Book of Daniel uses a grammatically awkward version of both Hebrew and Aramaic throughout its entirety. Thus, my translation below is that of Sefaria (with slight punctuation and spelling fixes on my part). In verses 9:1-19, Daniel describes how, in light of nearing the end of the prophecy of Seventy Years, he prayed to God for the ...


2

This is the traditional teaching from the time of the Rishonim of how the final redemption will unfold. It appears in many different places such as Midrash Talpiot starting at the 7th sign of the redemption. Machzor Vitry which was composed by Rabbeinu Simcha, one of the students of Rashi and proofed and corrected by Rabbeinu Shemaya, the grandson of Rashi. ...


2

As far as I know, classical Jewish sources do not place value on, or even refer to the 'Daniel fast', as a discrete regimen. Indeed, Daniel's diet seems to have been the result of his problem with the particular food he was served: But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the king's food, nor with the wine which he drank; ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible