Richard M. Davidson
Translations of Dan 8:14
Daniel 8:14 reads, “Unto 2300 evening-mornings, then shall the sanctuary be nitsdaq.” A glance at major modern English versions, lexicons, and commentaries indicates a wide range of different translations of the Hebrew nitsdaq. The various translations cluster around three basic ideas:
First, there is the idea of the sanctuary being “restored to its rightful state.”1 Variations of the same idea include “have its rights restored,”2 “rights of the sanctuary be restored,”3 “declared right,”4 “put right,”5 “come into its right,”6 “reestablished within its rights,”7 “properly restored,”8 or simply “restored.” 9
A second idea conveyed by the translations of nitsdaq is the traditional one, “cleansed,” indicated already by the LXX and Theodotian katharisthsetai and the Latin mundábitur—and the Syriac and Coptic. This translation of “shall be purified/cleansed” is followed in English by major modern versions in Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish traditions.10
The third idea represented by the English translations of nitsdaq is that of vindication. Several translations read “shall be vindicated,”11 others “shall be justified”12 or “its cause vindicated,”13 or the related “emerge victorious.”14
From this brief survey, it is clear that there is no consensus on the best English translation for nitsdaq in Dan 8:14.
Methodology
This paper will seek to determine the meaning of nitsdaq within the immediate context of Dan 8:14. We will first explore the semantic range of the word-group ts-d-q throughout the Hebrew Bible, especially in settings related to the cultic motifs, as in Daniel 8. Then we will focus upon the Hebrew Bible's single occurrence of the Nifal form of this verb, namely nitsdaq in Dan 8:14, with particular attention to its immediate context in vs. 13 where the three problem situations are summarized that call forth the activity announced in vs. 14. The thesis which this study tests is that the word nitsdaq in Dan 8:14 was deliberately selected because it has a broad enough semantic range to encompass the specific solutions to each of the three problems of vs. 13.
Limitations
Within space constraints it will not be possible to present an exhaustive word study of the ts-d-q word-group, nor provide a detailed exegesis of Dan 8:9-14. I suggest that the many difficult exegetical problems do not all need to be solved in order to come to at least a tentative conclusion regarding the intended meaning of nitsdaq in vs. 14.
In this study we will also not seek to engage in the historical interpretation of the vision of Daniel 8, nor argue the case for one system of prophetic interpretation over another, whether it be historicist, preterist, futurist, idealist, or some other system. Hopefully the tentative semantic and exegetical conclusions will be of some assistance in the subsequent process of prophetic-historical interpretation.
Let us move now to the survey of the semantic range of the root ts-d-q in its many derivatives.
There have been several excellent special studies in recent years that present the basic data regarding the semantic range of the root ts-d-q.15 (Tübingen, 1881).
The root occurs in several West Semitic cognate languages (Arabic, Ugaritic, Phoenician, old Aramaic, Punic, Syriac and Ethiopic), all with the same basic general meaning as in Hebrew, namely, “just, right.”
In the Hebrew Bible the root ts-d-q occurs over 500 times, taking several forms: the masculine noun tsedeq (119x), the feminine noun tsedeqah (157x) or Aramaic its-d-qah (1x), the adjective tsadiq (206x), and the verb tstsadaq (41x). Of particular interest to us are the 41 appearances of the Hebrew verb tstsadaq, including 22x in the Qal, 5x in the Piel, 12x in the Hifil, once in the Hithpael, and once in the Nifal—this last occurrence, nitsdaq, is, as we have seen, a hapax legomenon in Dan 8:14.
The basic meaning of the verb tsadaq in the simple Qal is “to be in the right, be justified, be just or righteous.” Following this basic meaning, the lexicons give straightforward translations of the intensive (Piel) as “to justify”; the causative (Hifil) as “cause to be right or just [to do justly or declare righteous or make righteous],” and the reflexive (Hitpael) as “to make oneself right, justify oneself.”
In like manner, a simple straightforward English translation of nitsdaq, the one occurrence of tsadaq in the Nifal or passive, would be “to be made right or just, to be justified.” But as various studies have pointed out,16 this translation does not seem to fit very well the context of a sanctuary. Further it does not help us to know in what sense the sanctuary is to be made right or just. It does not take into account various extended meanings of tsadaq, one or more of which may well be implied in the use of nitsdaq in Dan 8:14.
To these extended meanings of ts-d-q we now turn our attention. My study has revealed three major extended meanings of tsadaq. The first is not far from its basic meaning of “be right” or in the Nifal “be made right.” It is the idea of being “put right” in the sense of “restored” or “restored to its rightful place.” This is the translation of nitsdaq reflected in the RSV and many other modern translations.
This extended meaning takes into account various studies of the root meaning and theological overtones of the root ts-d-q. Earlier semasiological studies pointed out how ts-d-q has a root meaning of “conformity to a norm.”17 For example, it was pointed out, in Arabic a “righteous” tsedeq fig is one in a condition which conforms to the norm of what a fig should be like. In the Bible a “tsedeq weight” (Lev 19:36, etc.) is a weight that conforms to the right standard for that weight. Later studies have shown how in its theological usages describing man and God ts-d-q also implies fulfilling the demands of a relationship.18 Thus in the case of God, ts-d-q describes Yahweh's consistency with His own character of love and His mighty acts in fulfilling the promises and threats of the covenant relationship with His people. For man, righteousness (tsedeq/tsedeqah) is entire conformity of attitude and action to the will of God within the covenant relationship.
When the tsedeq condition or relationship is removed or broken, the process of “being made right” (ts-d-q in the Nifal) would obviously involve the aspect of “restoration” to right condition or relationship. This “restoration” is not far from the basic meaning of ts-d-q in the passive voice. One of the major extended meanings, therefore, that one would expect for ts-d-q in the Nifal is “to be put right” in the sense of “restored to rightful place or relationship,” or simply “restored.”
A number of biblical passages imply this restoration to a tsedeq state or relationship without actually using the Nifal of ts-d-q:
Isa 46:13:
I will bring my righteousness [tsedeq] near;
it shall not be far off.
Isa 51:4, 5:
And I will make My justice [mishpat] rest
As a light of the peoples.
My righteousness [tsedeq] is near,
My salvation has gone forth,
And my arms will judge [š~pa] the peoples.
Isa 10:1, 2, 22 (in the context of Israel's loss of righteousness and its subsequent restoration):
Woe to those who decree unrighteous [eawen] decrees …,
To rob the needy of justice [din],
And to take what is right [mishpat] from the poor of My people … [they are taken captive …]
Yet a remnant of them will return [shub];
The destruction decreed shall overflow with righteousness [tsedeqah].
Note especially Dan 9:24:
Seventy weeks are determined … to bring in everlasting righteousness [tsedeq] …
See also Isa 45:8; 62:1, 2; Amos 5:24.
Along with the signification of “restoration,” there are two additional dominant extended meanings which emerge from a word study of ts-d-q. These also must be considered as we survey the possible semantic range of nitsdaq.
One of the procedures for discovering extended meanings of a given Hebrew word is to examine terms appearing in poetic parallelism with the word under investigation. While words in synonymous parallelism are not to be considered identical in meaning, they are certainly related even as the parallel poetic lines are related, and may be said to “embrace each other in meaning.”19
A foundational study undertaken by J. P. Justesen has shown how various derivative forms of ts-d-q are used in poetic parallelism with several different Hebrew words meaning “to be clean/pure, and to cleanse/purify.”20 First, we note how ts-d-q occurs in parallelism with zakah “to be pure”:
Job 15:14:
What is man, that he could be pure [zakah]?
And he who is born of a woman, that he could be righteous ts-d-q]?
Job 25:4:
How then can man be righteous [ts-d-q] before God?
Or how can he be pure [zakah] who is born of a woman?
Ps 51:4:
That you may be found just [ts-d-q] when You speak,
and blameless [zakah] when You judge.
Next, we point to the poetic occurrence of ts-d-q in synonymous parallelism with the term bôr “cleanness” in Ps 18:20:
The Lord rewarded me according to my righteousness [tsedeq];
According to the cleanness [bôr] of my hands He has rewarded me.
Lastly, it is to be noted that ts-d-q appears in striking parallelism with the term t-h-r “to be clean, pure”:
Job 4:17:
Can a mortal be more righteous [ts-d-q] than God?
Can a man be more pure [t-h-r] than his Maker?
It is instructive to note that the LXX translated ts-d-q in this passage by katharos, “pure, or clean,” the same Greek verb used to translate nitsdaq in Dan 8:14.
In Job 17:9 we find the same parallelism, this time with the adjectival forms of ts-d-q and hr:
Yet the righteous [tsadiq] will hold to his way,
And he who has clean [tahor] hands will be stronger and stronger.
It is important to recognize that although t-h-r can sometimes be used in a broader sense for physical or moral cleanness, this word is the typical technical OT term for cultic-ritual cleanness; it is the term employed in Lev 16:9, 30 for the cleansing of the sanctuary at Yom Kippur.
The close synonymous association of ts-d-q with zakah, bôr, and especially with t-h-r, strongly suggests that a second extended meaning of ts-d-q moves into the cultic realm with the semantic nuance of “cleansing” or “purification.” Thus the LXX translation of nitsdaq with the verb katharízÇ need not be based upon the misreading of a hypothetical Aramaic Vorlage of Daniel 8 (as has been suggested,21 but rather the LXX translators may have recognized this pronounced nuance embedded within the semantic range of ts-d-q, particularly in a cultic setting, as in Dan 8:14 and Job 4:17. In fact, as the late Gerhard Hasel has concluded, “the unaninimity of the ancient versions in translating nitsdaq in 8:14 with ‘shall be cleansed/purified’ may reflect these semantic nuances of clean/pure and cleanness/purity manifested in these synonymous terms of Hebrew poetic parallelism.”22
The third extended meaning of ts-d-q emerges from its close connection with another Hebrew root, sh-p-t, in its verbal form šapa “to judge,” and in its nominal form mishpat “judgment.” At least 18 times in the Hebrew Bible we find the nouns tsedeq/tsedeqah and mishpat in poetic parallelism. For examples:
Ps 106:3:
Blessed are those who keep justice [mishpat],
And he who does righteousness [tsedeqah] at all times!
Isa 32:1:
Behold, a king will reign in righteousness [tsedeq],
And princes will rule with justice [mishpat].
Isa 59:14:
Justice [mishpat] is turned back,
And righteousness [tsedeqah] stands afar off …
Jer 22:13:
Woe to him who builds his house without righteousness [tsedeq],
And his chambers without justice [mishpat].
Amos 5:24:
But let justice [mishpat] run down like water,
And righteousness [tsedeqah] like a mighty stream.
Amos 6:12:
You have turned justice [mishpat] into gall,
and the fruit of righteousness [tsedeqah] into wormwood.
For examples of tsedeq paralleling mishpat, see also Job 8:3; 29:14; Ps 37:6; 73:2; Ec 3:16. For tsedeqah paralleling “judgment” see also Ps 72:1; Pr 8:20; Isa 1:27; 5:16; 28:17; 32:16; Amos 5:7.
Not only do these terms appear in poetic parallelism, but they are also often inextricably linked together as part of a single phrase—”justice and righteousness” tsedeq/tsedeqah and mishpat:
Ps 97:2:
Righteousness and judgment [tsedeq umishpat] are the foundation of his throne.
Prov 21:3:
To do righteousness and justice [tsedeqah umishpat]
Is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.
Jer 22:15:
Did not your father eat and drink,
And do justice and righteousness [mishpat utsedeqah]?
Jer 23:5:
The righteous Branch will execute judgment and righteousness [mishpat utsedeqah] in the earth.
Ezek 45:9:
Execute justice and righteousness [mishpat utsedeqah].
See also Jer 4:2; 9:24; 22:3; and 33:15.
Note how many of these usages occur in Exilic literature (the time of Daniel).
Many of these uses, and other times when the nouns tsedeq/tsedeqah appear without the legal term mishpat, there is clearly a legal context, and tsedeq/tsedeqah clearly take on legal connotations (see e.g., Isa 59:14; 63:1). According to one count, of the 117 occurrences of tsedeq in the OT, 67 (or 57%) are found in a legal context. Similarly, of the 155 occurrences of tsedeqah 45x have a legal setting.23
Especially instructive for our purposes is the use of the verbal forms of this word group. As a verb in these legal contexts, tsadaq, like its counterpart š~pa,24 can often be best translated as “vindicate.”
Ps 82:3:
Defend/judge [sh-p-t] the poor and fatherless;
Do justice to/vindicate [ts-d-q] the afflicted and needy.
Isa 50:8:
He is near who vindicates Me [ts-d-q];
Who will contend [rîb] with Me?
Let us stand together?
Who is My adversary [badal mishpatti]?
Isa 43:9:
Let them bring out their witnesses,
that they may be vindicated [ts-d-q].
Isa 45:25:
In the Lord all the descendants of Israel
Shall be vindicated [ts-d-q].
Certainly in these legal settings it is clear that tsadaq takes on an extended meaning with the connotation of “vindication.”
So far we have surveyed the semantic range of ts-d-q. Along with the basic meaning of “right, just,” which in the Nifal would translate “to be made right/just,” we have seen three major extended meanings: (1) in a context of apostasy or destruction, to be “put right” or “restored to its rightful place; (2) especially in a cultic context, “to be cleansed/purified”; and (3) and in a legal context, “to be vindicated.” With these various possible extended meanings of nitsdaq in mind, let us now turn to the use of nitsdaq in the immediate context of Daniel 8.
Previous studies of nitsdaq have not given sufficient attention to the three-part question in vs. 13 which nitsdaq addresses in vs. 14.
We can literally translate Dan 8:13a as follows: “Until when is the vision: the “continuance” [hatamid]; the transgression that causes horror [hapesha‘ shomem]; and the giving over of the sanctuary and host to be trampled under foot [mirmas]?”
According to this verse, three problems exist, summarizing the description of the little horn's activities in vss. 9-12. First, there is the tamid or “continual,” which according to vs. 11 was taken away by the little horn's power. In the cultic, sanctuary context of Daniel 8, this word should be understood as broader than just the “daily sacrifice” as translated in many modern versions. A recent study by Angel Rodriguez cogently argues that hatamid here refers to more than the ‘olat tamid or “continual burnt offering,” since the limiting term ‘olat is not in Daniel and tamid does not by itself in Scripture refer to the burnt offering.25 The tamid in the OT cultus is not only used with regard to sacrifices, but also is applied to the “bread of the Presence” which is to be kept before the Lord tamid (Exod 25:30; Num 4:7), the lamps which are to be kept burning tamid (Exod 27:20; Lev 24:2), the tamid incense (Exod 30:8), and the fire kept burning tamid on the altar of burnt offering (Lev 6:13). In summary, tamid in the OT cultus referred to the many ongoing cultic activities performed and perpetuated by the priest in his intercessory ministry in the court and holy place of the sanctuary throughout the year. The articular hatamid in Dan 8:11, 13 seems to summarize the various aspects of the “continuance” or intercessory ministry of the priest in the daily services of the sanctuary. It is important to note that tamid did not refer to the priestly activities performed in the sanctuary Most Holy Place (in connection with the annual Yom Kippur.)
The mention of the tamid in Dan 8:13 harks back to the situation described in vs. 11a and b. I tentatively translate vs. 11a and b as follows: “He [i.e., the little horn] exalted [himself] even as high as the Prince of the host; and from him [i.e., the Prince of the host] the tamid or ‘continuance’ was taken away [lit. lifted up (huram, following the Qere)].” This verse has many translational difficulties but the general meaning is clear that the little horn exalted himself up to the Prince of the host, and the tamid was taken away. This first major problem summarized in Dan 8:13, the taking away of the tamid, is explicitly referred to also in Dan 11:31 and 12:11.
The second major problem summarized in vs. 13 concerns haprsha‘ shomem “the transgression of desolation” or “the transgression causing horror.” The word shomem, in light of other usages in Daniel and the immediate context, should probably here be translated “causing horror” rather than “desolation.”26 What is this horrifying transgression? The repetition of the crucial word pesha’ from vs. 12 clearly reveals that this phrase summarizes the activity described in vs. 12.
I tentatively translate vs. 12 as follows: “The host [i.e., the same host mentioned in vs. 12, belonging to the Prince] shall be given over, with regard to [or in addition to] the tamid ‘continuance,’ because of transgression [i.e., the transgression of the host, or, less likely, the transgression of the little horn.]; and he [the little horn] cast truth down to the ground. He acted [i.e., did all this] and he prospered.”
Again there are major semantic/linguistic/syntactical problems in this verse, but again a major thrust is clear: pesha‘—transgression or rebellion, is committed, and truth is cast down by the prospering little horn. Vs. 13 summarizes this second problem situation of these verses, and calls this transgression hapesha‘ shomem—”the transgression causing horror.”
The third major problem summarized in vs. 13 is the trampling underfoot of the sanctuary and host. By use of the two terms tsaba‘ “host” and mirm~s “trampling,” this reference clearly harks back to vs. 10, where we have the same two Hebrew root words. We read, “And it [the little horn] grew great up to the host [tsaba‘] of heaven, and it cast down [lit. “caused to fall”] some of the host and some of the stars to the ground, and it trampled [rms, verbal form from the same Hebrew root as the noun mirmas] upon them.” Furthermore, by use of the term “sanctuary” qodesh, vs. 13 also harks back to vs. 11c: “and the place of his sanctuary [miqdash] was cast down.”
Not only does vs. 13 summarize the actual description of the trampling of the host and the sanctuary from previous verses, but very probably also has in the background the underlying theological situation implied in this trampling. In ancient Near Eastern thought, a host or army and its sanctuary being overrun and trampled down signified that the god of the host and the god of the sanctuary was weak and undependable. (See, e.g., Isa 36:16-20; Ps 79:6-10.) Thus when the sanctuary and the host were being trampled, the clear theological message is that the God of this host and sanctuary and his system of worship were being defamed.
Now, in light of the three-fold problem brought about by the little horn, as summarized by Dan 8:13, let us turn to vs. 14 and the usage of nitsdaq. I suggest that the word nitsdaq is uniquely suited in its breadth of semantic range, to encapsulate the solution to all three of the situations summarized in vs. 13. Not only does its basic meaning of “be made right” fit in a general way as a solution to vs. 13, but its three major extended meanings—restore, cleanse, and vindicate—specifically match the three problems of vs. 13, and their respective relational, cultic, and legal contexts.
First, hatamid, “the continual” ministry of the priest in the sanctuary, which was taken away by the little horn, needs to be made right in the sense of being restored to its rightful place—our first extended meaning of nitsdaq.
Second, hapesha‘ shomem, “the transgression causing horror,” needs to be made right in the sense of purified or cleansed—our second extended meaning of nitsdaq.
Third, the God who has been defamed by the trampling down of his sanctuary and the host, as well as the sanctuary and host themselves, must be made right in the sense of vindicated—our third extended meaning of nitsdaq.
It can be noted that there are separate Hebrew terms for each of these ideas: šÛ for “restore,” t-h-r for “cleanse” and shapat for “vindicate”; but the holy one in vs. 14 utilizes a single Hebrew word that can simultaneously encompass all of these aspects of the solution within its semantic range—the word nitsdaq.
Returning now to our original question regarding the most appropriate translation of nitsdaq in Dan 8:14, it must be concluded that each of the three major ideas represented in the modern English translations is included within the semantic range of nitsdaq and is an appropriate translation in the context, but not complete by itself. We have another of the many cases in OT translation where a single English word is not sufficient to capture the breadth of meaning implied by the original Hebrew term. If one were forced to choose a single English translation of nitsdaq, probably the general basic meaning of “made right” or “put right” would be the most inclusive. But here is a case when a collage of the various modern translations is a blessing, encompassing all three extended meanings of restore, cleanse, and vindicate, that appear to be implied in the text. Perhaps—and I suggest this somewhat tongue in cheek—this should be a instance where the word becomes an untranslated technical Hebrew term like “Amen” or “Hallelujah.” We would then have the reading: “Unto 2300 evenings-mornings, then shall the sanctuary be nisdaq.ed!”
Endnotes
__________
1 As in RSV and NRSV.
2 NJB, JB.
3 Berkeley.
4 Young’s Literal translation.
5 Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1902; repr. 1962, 1966), 842 (hereafter cited as BDB).
6 H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Daniel (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1969), 354.
7 Andre Lacocque, The Book of Daniel (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1979), 158.
8 NASB.
9 TEV; Leon Wood, A Commentary on Daniel (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1973), 217.
10 Including the KJV, NKJV, Douay, NAB, and NJV (JPS Tanakh).
11 See NASB, margin; E. J. Young, The Prophecy of Daniel (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1949), 173; James Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel, The International Critical Commentary (New York: Scribner's, 1927), 342.
12 RV, margin; BDB, 842.
13 Ibid.
14 NEB.
15 Jerome P. Justesen, “On the Meaning of tsadaq,” AUSS 2 (1964): 53-61; W. E. Read, “Further Observations on tsadaq,” AUSS 4 (1966): 29-36; Gerhard Hasel, “The ‘Little Horn,’ The Heavenly Sanctuary and the Time of the End: A Study of Daniel 8:9-14,” Symposium on Daniel (hereafter cited as Symposium), ed. Frank Holbrook, DARCOM series, vol. 2 (Washington, DC: Biblical Research Institute, 1986), 448-454; Niels-Erik Andreasen, “Translation of Nitsdaq/Katharisthsetai in Daniel 8:14,” Symposium, 475-496. The conclusions in this study regarding the extended meanings of ts-d-q are very close to those of Andreasen, although they were arrived at independently. See also the lexical studies by E. R. Achtemeier, “Righteousness in the Old Testament,” Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962), 4:80-85; K. Koch, “ts-d-q,” Theologisches Handworterbuch zum Alten Testament (1971-1976), 2:508-530; E. Kautzsch, Über die Derivate des Stammes dq in alttestamentlichen Sprachgebrauch
16 E.g., Andreasen, 486.
17 Kautzsch; see also Edmond Jacob, Theology of the Old Testament (New York: Harper & Row, 1958), 94-102; Alan Richardson, An Introduction to the Theology of the New Testament (New York: Harper & Row, 1958), 79-83; Gottlob Schrenk, “dik-,” TDNT, 2:178-225; and N. H. Snaith, The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1946), 97.
18 E. R. Achtemeier, “Righteousness in the O.T.,” The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962), 4:80-85, who (I believe wrongly) denies the continuity between “conformity to a norm” and “fulfilling the demands of a relationship.” See also J. A. Ziesler, The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul (Cambridge, 1972); for a survey of current research, see J. J. Scullion, “Righteousness (Old Testament),” The Anchor Bible Dictionary (1992), 5:724-736.
19 Andreasen, 483.
20 Justesen, 58-61.
21 F. Zimmerman, “The Aramaic Origin of Daniel 8:12,” JBL 57 (1938): 258-272; H. L. Ginzberg, Studies in Daniel (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1948), 42; L. F. Hartman and A. A. DiLella, The Book of Daniel, The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1987), 227; Lacocque, 159.
22 Hasel, 451.
23 Justesen, 56.
24 For instances of the verb shapat meaning “vindicate,” see e.g., Ps 7:8; 26:1; 35:24; 43:1, where David cries out to God, “vindicate me!”
25 Angel M. Rodriquez, “Significance of the Cultic Language in Daniel 8:9-14,” Symposium on Daniel, ed. Frank Holbrook, Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, vol. 2 (Washington DC: Biblical Research Institute, 1986), 532-533.
26 See discussion in Hasel, 440-443.