Web www.exploremyspace.com

Daniel, Dreams, and Politics                         

How does the symbolism and meaning of dreams in the Book of Daniel enhance the political message of the Book?

        No book in the Bible, or in other religious texts for that matter, exists with any specific meaning intended for it or with any special message it desires to inspire its readers with.  All of them aim to educate, instruct, correct, warn, remind, encourage, or motivate the spiritual seekers in one way or another as to the “proper” manner of thinking and living.  The biblical Book of Daniel does not represent the exception.  It too seeks to enlighten its contemporaries in the area of right attitude and right modes of behaviour.  Its goal, and the political message at the same time, is to inspire and encourage the then oppressed nation of Israel to stand strong, loyally, faithfully and obediently by God despite the repression by the foreign reign.  Daniel guides the Jews toward the non-violent but quiet resistance to the gentile customs and beliefs.  However, the Book of Daniel does more than merely encourage the Jewish people to stand by their God not resorting at the same time to some method that would motivate their decision to actually do so.  The appearance of dreams and visions and their content perform precisely this function.  Without dismissing their validity as genuine experiences, this essay will argue that their primary aim seems to be the reinforcement and enhancement of the political message of Daniel’s book.  First, following the short introduction to the book of Daniel, it will briefly discuss what this message primarily is.  Subsequently, it will demonstrate how dreams and visions’ prophetic content strengthens the book’s overall political agenda.  

        The book of Daniel, or at least the collection of Daniel’s visions, was put together during the persecution period of the Jewish people by Antiochus IV in the second century B.C. [1]   The writer, supposedly a scribe living during the oppression time, attributes his stories and visions to an ancient Jewish sage and visionary by the name Daniel. [2]   It is generally accepted that the author lived about four hundred years later than his character [3] , which makes many of his visions ex eventu prophecies instead of them representing true predictions. [4]  Nevertheless, many Jews established his writings as the continuation of the prophetic tradition and some even regard him as the first apocalyptic author. [5]

        Structure-wise, the book divides into two parts, one being the collection of stories describing Daniel and his friends’ adventures at the royal court of the Babylonian kings during their exile whereas the second one goes on to reveal Daniel’s visions regarding the future.  The first section narrates in the 3^rd person and the visionary one shifts to the first as if it constituted Daniel’s own recounting of the events. [6]   Owing to the chronological nature of most of the stories, scholars from different centuries referred to the book as the historical guide. [7]   Others, again, regard it as a political manifesto. [8]

        Having just mentioned the political dimension that the book of Daniel allegedly contains, what is it precisely that makes this literary, after all, piece so highly political?  Perhaps some examples of Daniel’s book stories will assist in understanding this.

        In the first chapter the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar takes the Jewish people into exile.  Daniel and three of his colleagues become trainees at his royal court.  The king offers them the special meal but they boldly refuse it.  They do not wish to “defile” themselves with the gentile food and resort to their own vegetables and water instead (Dan 1:4-8).  This story presents the Jews as strong minded people who do not compromise their own values for those of the foreign nation be it merely dietary ones.

        The third chapter describes how the three Jews go into fire as the punishment of their defiance against the king’s order to worship his recently set up golden idol.  Before the king’s army men throw Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-nego into flames, the Jews first openly proclaim their religion emphasizing additionally their God’s power to deliver them from heat.

          If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the

          burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king.

                                                                                                      (Dan 3:17)

        After the event of them walking in fire not injured, the king feverously acknowledges Israel’s God and promotes them to higher positions              (Dan 3: 28-30). 

        Before venturing into the analysis of the political nature of the given stories, let us remember one more example.  In chapter six Daniel’s gentile colleagues plot against him forcing the king Darius the Mede to set up a new decree that forbids praying to any god for thirty days.  Daniel opposes the law and continues to pray three times a day as the Jewish law instructs.  As a punishment, the king throws him into the lion’s den only to find him alive and well in the morning.  Surviving the lion’s claws Daniel thus demonstrates the saving power of God of the Israel.  Consequently, Darius appraises the Jewish God , throws all Daniel’s accusers to lion’s habitat where they all die, and makes Daniel himself prosper (Dan 6:8-28).

        The political message that permeates three given stories as well as the entire book promotes and encourages the strength of the religious obedience when faced with the oppressiveness of the foreign reign.  The stories’ characters non-violently but assertively resist the king’s customs and decrees.  They openly proclaim their faith in God’s saving ability and hold on to their values with might, determination and readiness to even sacrifice their lives (Dan 3:17-18).

        Politically and metaphorically, the three Jews in the fire stand for the entire nation of Israel under diaspora.  As Lacocque says, “…the three companions are Israel in Exile saved through divine intervention.” [9]   It is a story of the nation’s endurance.  Furthermore, it illustrates what living in the exile may be like.  It guides the Jews as well as any one else thrown into the oppressive reign as to the proper conduct when faced with the loyalty tests like those that plagued Daniel and his companions. 

        The author of Daniel’s stories teaches that the passive but otherwise uncompromising and assertive attitude towards political oppressors holds the key to the survival of the national and religious integrity.  On many occasions, defying king’s orders may entail dire results.  Two Jewish women, for instance, who had their children circumcised according to the Law of Moses, are thrown down the city tower (II Macc 6:10).  However, as the book of Daniel reveals, submission to martyrdom as opposed to compromising one’s religious views might win, at the same time, special privileges and favours.  In the second chapter the king affirms the God of the Jews (Dan 2:46-9) and orders a universal recognition of His might.  Daniel himself receives a higher status and enjoys greater success (Dan 3:30, 6:28).  As Fewell observes, the irony in this situation is that “every instance of resistance to political authority, every affirmation of priorities other than the priority of political power is rewarded…with the bestowal of more political power.” [10]

        The last, but definitely not least possible political message contained in the Book of  Daniel is the special relation of God to the nation of Israel.  Daniel points to Israel as only holders of superior knowledge as to God’s plans. [11]   The access to this divine scheme should assist them in enduring the greatest times of trial.  Only the Jews know that the Kingdom of God will eventually conquer all the existing kingdoms of Earth (Dan 7:27) and the true Israel will finally enjoy its long deserved glory. [12]   To reassure the Jewish readers of the exclusive knowledge of this fact represents another political mission of the author of the Book of Daniel.

        This brings this discussion to the second part, namely the dreams and visions that Daniel so vividly describes and their role in the political scheme of the whole book.  If Daniel’s message, as stated in the above paragraphs, involves encouraging the Jews’ obedience to God, strengthening their uncompromising attitude as well as maintaining their faith in God’s secret plan, the dreams and visions serve as declarations of promise of a glorious future that Jewish people will certainly enjoy providing they follow what Daniel “prescribes”.  He uses the context of dreams and their content in order to reinforce his political appeal to the contemporary Israel nation.

        Notwithstanding the absence of great number of visions or prophets in Daniel’s times [13] and despite some dismissive attitudes towards dreams among our contemporary scientists [14] , the ancients regarded them as the carriers of divine messages.  The royal dreams in particular enjoyed the popularity as special communication bestowed upon kings by gods. [15]

        It does not seem surprising, then, that Daniel uses the imagery of dreams, the king’s and his own ones, to reinforce the message of the book.  By including the dreams and vision in his writings, he imbues this message with extra credibility, importance and authority.  The message becomes, this way, a direct address not from Daniel to the Jews, but from the mighty God Himself.

        Having stated this, how is it precisely that the dreams and Daniel’s own visions fit into and contribute to the general political manifesto flavour of his book?

        Upon the study of their content, it does not seem difficult to pick up how this happens.  In the second chapter the king Nebuchadnezzar dreams about the huge statue made of gold, silver, bronze and iron that represent, as it is generally accepted, four pagan kingdoms-the Median, Persian, Babylonian and Greek.  Eventually, the stone from a nearby mountain “comes”, destroys the statue and grows to cover the entire earth (Dan 2:31-45).  Daniel interprets the dream to the king as that of four separate kingdoms with stone representing the Kingdom of God conquering the four and establishing Itself in Its full glory (Dan 2:37-45).  With the phrase “…and the Kingdom shall not be left to other people…” (Dan 2:44), the dream may further imply that it is the nation of Israel that will enjoy the divine triumph as God’s delegated representative.

        In chapter four Nebuchadnezzar dreams about a huge tree and how it is completely cut down with the exception of its stump (Dan 4:10-17).  Daniel goes on to interpret this second dream as the king’s own future where the tree stands for the king himself.  Daniel explains that Nebuchadnezzar is bound to lose his sanity along with his kingdom but, additionally, that he will regain it if he repents and recognizes the one and true God.  Needless to say, so it happens (Dan 4: 33-37).

        The two dreams contribute greatly to the overall message of the book.  The vision of the four kingdoms conquered eventually by the mighty power of the Kingdom of Heaven bestows upon the readers not only the sense of hope but it gives them much firmer faith in future victory as well.  If the aim of Daniel’s book is to inspire and encourage the Jewish nation to remain patient, loyal and obedient to God, the dream of the four kingdoms losing eventually to the divine King puts a stamp on and affirms their decision to do so.

        The dreams remind the Jews that when faced with the oppressive regime they may only appear lost, destroyed and abandoned.  In reality, however, no matter how intrusive the foreign reign seems, it cannot prevent God’s plans from coming ultimately into effect.  As the stone from the king’s second dream shatters the statue, so will the Kingdom of Heaven finally relish its own fulfillment.  Daniel makes the Jews aware of this fact by not “preaching” about it himself but rather through the means of royal dreams, the known source of the divine communication.  This makes the political message of encouragement much stronger.  As Hartman notes, the problem of evil for Jews does not disappear, but it becomes, at least, something they can accept to live with [16] anticipating the glorious future.

        Daniel’s visions play a similar role.

The ending of the article and bibliography, unfortunately, is lost. We apologize for the inconvenience.