Kaisipang Hudyo sa Daniel 7:3: Derashot HaRan, Ner Mitzvah & Guide for the Perplexed

And the Blessed One superadded to this the factor of primogeniture. For it is well known that the transference of legacies and the appropriation of what is due another by cause of it is often a strong cause of estrangement between brothers. And because this factor was not yet so pronounced (Esau having acceded in selling the birthright), the Blessed One superadded the factor of the blessing, engineering it in such a way that Esau would attempt to obtain it and Isaac intend to bless him, notwithstanding which it would be fully bequeathed to Jacob, as we have explained. This was a strong, enduring cause furthering the Blessed One's aim of generating hatred between the two brothers and between their children, a hatred that would last until the end of days. For the seed of Esau will not cease from nationhood until the days of the Messiah, as indicated in the words of Daniel. Daniel saw four creatures, three of which were interpreted to him as symbolizing Media, Persia, and Greece, respectively, as indicated there (Daniel 8:20-21), the fourth being identified by our sages as Amalek [=Edom=Esau]. And Daniel prophesied that Israel would be given over into his hands until the end of the time period alluded to there in five places. And, as seems to be indicated from the plain meaning of the verses, the time in question was not made clear even to Daniel's satisfaction. For in the first vision it is stated (Daniel 7:25): "And he [the fourth] shall wear out the holy ones of the most High and think to change times and laws. And they shall be given into his hand for a season, and seasons, and half a season." And Daniel did not understand this, as it is written (Ibid 28): "My thoughts greatly confounded me and my color changed, but I kept the matter in my heart." And in the second vision it is asked (Ibid 8:13): "How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice and the transgressions of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden underfoot?" — and answered (Ibid 14): "For two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings then the sanctuary shall be restored." And here, too, it is written (Ibid 27): "And I, Daniel, fainted and was sick for days … and I was astonished at the vision, but no one understood it." And at the end it is written (Ibid 12:6): "And one said to the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river: 'How long shall it be until the end of the wonders?'" And he answered (Ibid 7): "For a time, times, and a half; and when the crushing of the power of the holy people shall have been completed, all these things shall be finished." And here, too, he says (Ibid 8): "And I heard, but I did not understand." And here, too, the response is (Ibid 9): "Go, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed until the time of the end."

And these four winds beget these four animals from the sea, because each nation is considered next to Yisrael like the sea, for they are not from a settled domain, and Yisrael is compared to dry land [which is settled]. It says in the Midrash (Vayikra Rabbah: 13,5) ' "And four might beasts different from each other emerged from the sea" - If you [the Jews] are meritorious, from the sea, and if not from the forest. The beasts from the sea, for when they rise from the sea they already begin to die, whereas if they rise from the forest they aren't weak from the outset.' This is the explanation, the sea is far from the dry land, and if Yisrael are meritorious, so the nations will lack true existence, like any entity within the sea which lacks true existence. It's for this reason that fish, which are from the sea, do not require Shechita [any ritual slaughtering], and this is because they lack existence, for existence is found within being settled. Therefore if Yisrael merit, the empires don't have strength, and they arise from the sea. As it is said, if from their beginning of their existence they lacked strength and power, so it must be that they arose from the sea. And if [Yisrael] do not merit, so they will arise from the forest, which is settled. Even if the forest is separate from settlement as well, for within a forest one doesn't find human beings, only wild animals, but still in any event it [forest] is not entirely separate from settlement. Therefore it says [in Daniel] "And four winds stirring upon the sea". And it is such that when Daniel sees the empires, he sees four beasts, for in this manner it is appropriate that that the four empires possess dominion. And this is, because Man has the power and dominion over beasts, as it is written in the Torah [Bereshit 1, 28, 2 19]. And therefore it is appropriate that the empires of the world should appear in image and depiction of man. It's just that the dominion of these four empires are lacking the virtue of G-dliness which is distinct to Man, and from this aspect that they are lacking the virtue of G-dliness, their power is without G-dliness. Therefore, they [the empires] appear in the depiction of animals, for beasts lack this power of transcendent G-dliness. But power without transcendent G-dliness is actually stronger [in terms of brute force], which is something we also see within these empires. Therefore Daniel sees these them in the image and depiction of beasts. And when [Daniel] sees the Kingship of the King the Messiah, he sees him in the image and depiction of a human. For after he sees the empires in the form of four beasts, he sees the Kingship of Yisrael in image and depiction of a human, as it is said (Daniel, 7,13) "One like a human being came" for the Kingship of the King the Messiah, will be entire G-dly, therefore it [Yisrael] is called "The Son of Man".

You must further know that the prophets see things shown to them allegorically, such as the candlesticks, horses, and mountains of Zechariah (Zech. 4:2; 6:1-7), the scroll of Ezekiel (Ezek. 2:9), the wall made by a plumb-line (Amos 7:7), which Amos saw, the animals of Daniel (Dan. vii. and viii.), the seething pot of Jeremiah (Jer. 1:13), and similar allegorical objects shown to represent certain ideas. The prophets, however, are also shown things which do not illustrate the object of the vision, but indicate it by their name through its etymology or homonymity. Thus the imaginative faculty forms the image of a thing, the name of which has two meanings, one of which denotes something different [from the image]. This is likewise a kind of allegory. Comp. Makkal shaked, “almond staff,” of Jeremiah (i. 11-12). It was intended to indicate by the second meaning of shaked the prophecy, “For I will watch” (shoked), etc., which has no relation whatever to the staff or to almonds. The same is the case with the kelub. kayiẓ, “a basket of summer fruit,” seen by Amos, by which the completion of a certain period was indicated, “the end (ha-ḳeẓ) having come” (Amos 8:2).