Daniel 7:11
"As I continued to watch, the beast was slain, and its body was destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire.
(Berean Standard Bible)
-
How do you make any real distinction between the beast and its body?– Stephen DisraeliJan 9 at 13:46
-
@StephenDisraeli I'm wondering if the beast has a body-animating soul/spirit aspect to it, something distinct from its body.– JBRJan 11 at 3:08
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
The MT for the full verse Daniel 7:11 is (Codex Leningrad):
חָזֵה הֲוֵית בֵּאדַיִן מִן קָל מִלַּיָּא רַבְרְבָתָא דִּי קַרְנָא מְמַלֱּלָה, חָזֵה הֲוֵית עַד דִּי קְטִילַת חֵיוְתָא וְהוּבַד גִּשְׁמַהּ וִיהִיבַת לִיקֵדַת אֶשָּׁא
The OP question appears to be, Should we read
...the beast was slain, and it's body was destroyed and thrown into the fire
or should we read
...the beast was slain, and it's body was destroyed, and it (the beast) was thrown into the blazing fire
The grammar is ambiguous because חֵיוְתָא (the animal), גִּשְׁמַהּ (it's body) and וִיהִיבַת (was thrown) are all feminine forms.
The answer then is from the literary style, which is triplicate emphatic style as indicated by the conjunctive waws (ands). So this clause of the verse should be read (my translation):
I kept watching until,
- the beast was slain
- and its body was mutilated
- and it [the beast] was given over to a blazing fire
IMHO, the translation of חָזֵה הֲוֵית עַד should be "I kept watching until" instead of "As I continued to watch", and וְהוּבַד should be translated as "mutilated" rather than "destroyed", and יהִיבַת לִיקֵדַת אֶשָּׁא should be translated "was given over to a blazing fire" instead of "thrown into the blazing fire". The Aramaic actually says "the blazing fire" but this is a general term and not a specific blazing fire to which there has been a reference, so either "a blazing fire" or just "blazing fire" would be closer to the sense of the verse in English.
answered Jan 9 at 17:57
-
+1 - excellent answer, especially the "triplicate emphatic style". Many thanks.– DottardJan 9 at 19:26
-
@Dottard tnx. edited slightly. חָזֵה הֲוֵית is the Aramaic verb double form indicating continuing action, similar to סחור סחור, "around in circles" (a double form in English), and similar to Hebrew forms like שמוע תשמעו that are emphatic forms. Jan 10 at 13:43
In addition to what has already been said, here is how it was rendered in Greek. Apparently both the LXX-OG and Theodotion didn't understand the Aramaic.
Dan. 7:11 OG ἐθεώρουν τότε τὴν φωνὴν τῶν λόγων τῶν μεγάλων, ὧν τὸ κέρας ἐλάλει, καὶ ἀπετυμπανίσθη τὸ θηρίον, καὶ ἀπώλετο τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐδόθη εἰς καῦσιν πυρός.
NETS OG 7:11 I was then watching the noise of the great words, which the horn kept speaking, and the beast was beaten to death, and its body perished and was given over to burning with fire.
Dan. 7:11 Theod. ἐθεώρουν τότε ἀπὸ φωνῆς τῶν λόγων τῶν μεγάλων, ὧν τὸ κέρας ἐκεῖνο ἐλάλει, ἕως ἀνῃρέθη τὸ θηρίον καὶ ἀπώλετο, καὶ τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ ἐδόθη εἰς καῦσιν πυρός.
NETS Theod. 7:11 I was then watching because of the noise of the great words, which that horn kept speaking, until the beast was taken away and destroyed, and its body was given over to burning with fire.
Whereas the OG is ever so slightly ambiguous, Theodtion isn't ambiguous at all. IMHO, this doesn't rule out the proposed rendering** offered above. The Greek translators were not infallible.
** "it [the beast] was given over to a blazing fire."
answered Jan 9 at 23:16
