Here is the end of the matter: literally “Until here, the end of the word (or thing).” Although the wording seems a bit unusual, the meaning is quite clear. The end of the matter signals a transition from Daniel’s description of his vision to a comment about his state when he regained consciousness. New Revised Standard Version makes this clearer with “Here the account ends,” and Good News Translation is similar. In many languages people say something like “That is all of what I saw in my dream.”

As for me, Daniel: as in verse 15, this combination of the emphatic pronoun followed by the proper name probably emphasizes the fact that the prophet is fully conscious and is no longer seeing the vision. The writer wishes to emphasize the fact that Daniel’s spirit is troubled, not merely by the vision itself, but by the reality he faces when he becomes conscious of his surroundings again.

My thoughts greatly alarmed me: see 4.19 and 5.6.

My color changed: compare 5.6.

But: the translation of this conjunction will depend to some extent on which interpretation of the following phrase is accepted. If the words that follow the conjunction present an idea that would be different from what people may expect in this context, then it should be translated “but.” If, however, a person would be expected to keep silent and not tell anyone else after being very frightened, then “and” will be a better translation. Or possibly it can be left untranslated.

I kept the matter in my mind: literally “… in my heart” as in King James Version. On the “heart” as the seat of intelligence, see comments on 1.8 and 2.30. The Revised Standard Version rendering of this phrase can easily be understood to mean “I did not forget about the matter.” (Compare New Jerusalem Bible “I could not put the matter out of my mind.”) But the majority of the versions seem to agree that the meaning is rather “I did not share the matter with anyone else,” “I kept these things to myself” (Revised English Bible), or “I kept the matter to myself” (New International Version, New American Bible).

With the conclusion of this chapter the Aramaic section of Daniel comes to an end. Beginning with the first word of chapter 8 until the end of the book the text is again in Hebrew (as from 1.1 to 2.4a).

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse begins with four parallel verbs followed by a fifth verb that has two dependent nouns. These five affirmations have more or less the same meaning, but it is the piling up of these verbs that results in the strong impact of the verse as a whole, rather than the precise shades of meaning of the individual forms. The following list attempts to show the shades of difference in meaning between these near synonyms:

Sinned (repeated in verses 8, 11, and 15): this is a very common term to indicate a break in a right relationship with God. The basic meaning is that of missing a target (or goal) or losing the way. To sin is to fail to meet God’s standards.

Done wrong: only this verb is not found elsewhere in this chapter. It is related to the verb meaning “bend,” “twist,” or “make crooked.” It is the opposite of doing what is right or “straight.” In 1 Kgs 8.47 it is used along with two other words in this list and is translated “acted perversely.”

Acted wickedly (repeated in verse 15): this term is especially common in the wisdom literature of the Old Testament (Job, Psalms, and Proverbs). It has to do with something that is abnormal, disjointed, or outside the realm of accepted behavior. In some cases it may have to be translated “done what we should not have done.”

Rebelled (repeated in verse 9): in the Old Testament people may rebel against unwanted human authority (Gen 14.4; 2 Kgs 18.7) or against divine authority (Num 14.9; Josh 22.16). The same word can be used figuratively of not accepting the light (Job 24.13). To translate this term some languages will use verbs or verbal expressions like “resist,” “defy,” “show no respect for,” or something similar. But it will be important in some cases to make it clear that it is God’s authority that the people had challenged. In the context of this prayer, some may translate “we have refused you (God),” or as Good News Translation puts it, “we have rejected what you commanded.”

Turning aside … (repeated in verse 11): the verb literally carries the idea of turning away from something. It is the two words that follow that make this ordinary word into a more technical expression for disobeying God.

Each of these terms portrays the idea of a break in normal relations between God and his people. If the translator cannot find five different terms more or less equivalent in the receptor language, it is possible to limit the rendering to three or four verbs. But since the cumulative effect is important, it may be worth the effort to try to find an equivalent for each one.

Commandments and ordinances: these two nouns also represent two different ways of talking about the same thing. They may be reduced to a single noun or noun phrase, or they may be rendered separately.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Behold: see verse 5 as well as 2.31 and 4.10.

A hand: there is no indication of whose hand this was. It is therefore unwise to make it “the hand of the man dressed in linen,” although it is possible that this is what was intended. It is better to leave it vague, but translators should also avoid the suggestion of a detached hand. The best solution may be to say “someone’s hand.”

Touched me: the verb thus translated is a very general term, but in this context it is probably more than a light touch, because the result was that Daniel was raised from a lying position to one on his hands and knees. Translators may wish to say “grasped me” (New English Bible) or, as in Good News Translation, “took hold of me.”

Set me trembling: literally “caused me to waver (or tremble).” Although the primary meaning of this verb is “to totter” or “to waver,” it is used in a variety of senses. Here it is taken by many scholars to mean “caused me to rise up.” This, in fact, is the same as the rendering of the ancient Greek versions. And one of the manuscripts found at Qumran has a different Hebrew word meaning “moved me.” It is therefore better in this case to translate the idea “raising me” (New American Bible) or “lifting me.” Note that New Revised Standard Version revises Revised Standard Version to “and roused me to my hands and knees.”

On my hands and knees: literally “on my knees and the palms of my hands.” On the word used twice referring to the hands, see 5.5. Daniel was apparently in a crawling position prior to getting up completely (verse 11).

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The wording of this verse is unusual, but its meaning is relatively clear. It literally reads “The arms of the overflowing will overflow before him and will be broken, and also the leader of the covenant.” But Revised Standard Version and several other English versions change the text slightly to read “utterly” in place of “overflowing.”

Armies: literally “The arms,” but used here in the sense of “the armed forces” or any opposition forces. See comments on “forces” in verse 15. On the verb “overflow” compare “flood” in 9.26 and comments on “overflow” in verse 10 of this chapter.

Be … swept away before him and broken: the two passive ideas may easily be rendered actively as “he (the king of the north) will sweep over and destroy” or something similar. Revised English Bible reads “As he advances, he will sweep away all forces of opposition.”

The prince of the covenant: or “covenant leader” (New Jerusalem Bible), “the head of the priests,” or to be quite precise, “God’s High Priest” (Moffatt as well as Good News Translation). See 9.25. This refers most probably to Onias III, the Jewish High Priest who was assassinated in 171 B.C. by order of Antiochus IV.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Said: in view of the context, this verb may be better translated “answered,” as in Good News Translation.

Go your way: this imperative does not constitute a refusal to respond to Daniel or the chasing away of a troublesome person asking difficult questions. But a literal rendering of Revised Standard Version or Good News Translation may be understood so in some languages. It is rather a word of encouragement and therefore may legitimately be rendered something like “Don’t worry, Daniel” (Bible en français courant) or “You may go in peace.” Moffatt renders it “Ask no more,” giving the reason in the following phrase. In some languages it may be better to translate “Leave the matter, because….”

Shut up and sealed: on the word sealed, see 6.17 and comments. Compare also verse 4, where Daniel is instructed to “shut up the words, and seal the book.” The two verbs may be translated as one in some languages.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

But: the transition word used in Revised Standard Version usually indicates rather strong contrast in English. However, it may be better left untranslated in other languages. In fact it is omitted by many English versions, including Good News Translation and Revised English Bible. New English Bible begins this verse with “Now…,” while Moffat (Moffatt) has “however.”

Resolved: literally “put (or set) in his heart.” For the Jews the heart was the seat of the will and intelligence of a person, rather than of the emotions and feelings. One commonly-used English idiom that reflects the meaning of the Hebrew expression is “made up his mind” (Good News Translation). Some other verbs that may be used to express the same idea are “intended,” “determined,” “resolved,” or “purposed.”

While the text speaks only of Daniel’s resolve, verse 12 shows that his friends were also determined not to be made unclean by eating the king’s food. In some languages it may be necessary to include them here in this verse.

Defile himself: this expression carries the idea of making someone ritually unclean or unworthy of being in God’s presence. This may be the result of physical uncleanness or perhaps some activity or event. In ancient times meat usually came from animals offered in sacrifice to a deity. Ordinary secular slaughtering of animals was rarely practiced. So for Daniel, a good Jew, to eat the meat of an animal that had been offered in sacrifice to Babylonian gods would constitute a serious offense against his God and would therefore make him impure or ritually unclean. It was the same with regard to the wine, since a small amount of it would have been poured out as a libation, or drink offering, to the Babylonian gods. Several English versions use the verb “contaminate” to convey this idea. New Jerusalem Bible has “incur pollution.” Even if the food was not ritually unclean for a Jew, to eat and drink the royal fare would be like a pledge of loyalty to the king instead of remaining loyal to and dependent on God.

Rich food: see verse 5.

Therefore: the word connecting the two parts of this verse is important. It is because Daniel determined in his heart not to become contaminated (in the first part of the verse) that he took the step of making the request of the chief official (later in the verse). For this reason many versions use words like “so…” (Good News Translation, An American Translation [An American Translation], New American Bible, Moffatt) or “therefore….” While “and” (New International Version) is an accurate literal rendering, in English it is weak and does not fully show the logical relationship between the two parts of the verse.

The chief of the eunuchs: see verses 3 and 7. In order to avoid repeating this title several times, it may be advisable in some languages to replace it with the proper name, Ashpenaz, as Good News Translation does in this verse.

To allow him not to defile himself: that is, not to make him eat the food and drink the wine. Another way of making this clearer may be to say “requested that he not be forced to eat the food and drink the wine that would make him ritually unclean” or “begged him to be protected from the corruption that would come to him from eating and drinking the king’s food.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Verses 20-23 constitute the first of four brief passages that may be classified as hymns of praise. The others are found at 4.3; 4.34-35; and 6.26-27. Since these are in a rather special, poetic type of language in the original, they should be rendered as poetry insofar as this is possible and natural in the translation. Good News Translation and many other modern versions set these verses off in poetic format to highlight their special character. The same devices used in translating the Psalms and other poetic passages should also be applied to these passages.

The poem in this chapter begins with the pronouncement of a “blessing” on God (compare Psa 113.2 and Job 1.21). The sense of the poem is the acknowledgment of God’s greatness or the giving of praise and honor to him. Note that the two elements of this verse have been reordered in Good News Translation, giving the reason for the praise before actually offering praises. This should be considered in the receptor language before deciding which is most natural. Note also that Good News Translation omits the words Daniel said at the beginning of this verse because they are redundant.

Blessed be: On the verb “to bless,” see the comments in the previous verse. Here the verb is used in a passive form that will have to be made active in other languages. In many cases it will be natural to say something like “Praise be to…,” or we may be forced to say “Let people praise…” or “Let us thank….”

The name of God: the use of expressions like the name of God for God himself is a common Semitic style that keeps a certain distance between the human and the divine. This was done out of a sense of respectful submission to God. But the expression actually means simply “God” and should probably be translated this way in most languages. If there are special means of showing respect for God in the receptor language, they should be considered in this context.

For ever and ever: literally “from eternity to eternity.” Revised English Bible and New Revised Standard Version render this “from age to age.” Another possible translation might be “Let people never cease praising God…,” incorporating the idea of for ever and ever in the verb phrase “let people never cease….”

To whom belong wisdom and might: the order of this phrase may well be reversed in some languages, making wisdom and might the subject of the verb “own” or “possess,” as in “wisdom and might are owned by God…,” or “wisdom and power belong to him (God).” But it may be better to restructure the whole statement by saying something like “God is the possessor of wisdom and power. Praise him (his name) eternally.” This is essentially the same as the Good News Translation solution which is even simpler from the point of view of structure.

In verses 20-22 Daniel speaks of God in the third person singular (“he” and “him”), while in verse 23 he addresses God directly in the second person singular, “you” (“thee” and “thou” in the archaic English of the King James Version, and preserved by Revised Standard Version when God is addressed). If this grammatical change of person is not clumsy in the language, it may be retained. However, in most cases it is probably better to put everything in the second person (as in Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch) or in the third person. In most English versions the pronoun shift seems to present no particular problem.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The herald: the function of this person was to speak in a loud voice on behalf of the king. In many languages it may have to be translated “a spokesman” or “a messenger for the king.” But some languages have a more technical term for the person who makes announcements for the chief. Bible en français courant translates “the master of ceremonies.” There is no definite article in the original, so it will be misleading to give the impression that a particular person is in view. Several recent translations have simply “a herald” (Good News Translation, Anchor Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Revised English Bible).

You are commanded: this passive construction may be rendered actively as “The king has commanded (or is commanding),” or it may possibly be left to be understood by using imperative verb forms for the actions required of those present. Another possibility is to say at the beginning or end of this verse something like “Listen to the king’s command.”

O peoples …: the position of this vocative form in the sentence may have to be changed in some languages. Translators should consider which is the most natural order in their language.

Peoples, nations, and languages: here again we have another list. In this case the exaggerated language serves to show that the king wanted the worship of his statue to be universal. In some cases the three terms may have to be translated “people who come from all countries and who speak all languages.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .