ציטירנדיקער פּירוש אויף דניאל 8:8

וּצְפִ֥יר הָעִזִּ֖ים הִגְדִּ֣יל עַד־מְאֹ֑ד וּכְעָצְמ֗וֹ נִשְׁבְּרָה֙ הַקֶּ֣רֶן הַגְּדוֹלָ֔ה וַֽתַּעֲלֶ֜נָה חָז֤וּת אַרְבַּע֙ תַּחְתֶּ֔יהָ לְאַרְבַּ֖ע רוּח֥וֹת הַשָּׁמָֽיִם׃

און דער ציגנבאָק האָט זיך זײער געגרײסט; אָבער אין זײַן רעכטער שטאַרקײט, האָט זיך אָפּגעבראָכן דער גרױסער האָרן, און דאָס אױסזען פֿון פֿיר איז אַרױסגעװאַקסן אױף זײַן אָרט, אַקעגן די פֿיר װינטן פֿון הימל.

Rashi

and it will be divided to the four directions of the heavens It is written in the book of Ben Gorion (ch. 14) that he divided his kingdom between the four heads of his family; they are the four heads of the leopard that Daniel saw (above 7:6): “And behold another one, like a leopard, and it had four wings of a bird on its back, and the beast had four heads.” He gave this one dominion in the east, this one in the west, this one in the north and this one in the south, and so in the first vision (8:8): “an appearance of four sprouted in its stead,” concerning the horns of the he-goat.
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy

Radak

ועז ואיל, and a she-goat and a ram; these two species are symbolic of the exile to Babylonia and the exile initiated by the Romans. Even though the Jewish people were badly suppressed by the Greeks, this happened while they were and remained on their own land. They are, however included in the parable shown by G’d to Avram. In Daniel’s dream (Daniel 8,8) the Greeks are referred to as a she-goat. Seeing that they were the first oppressors of the Jews during the period of the second Temple, the parable alluded to them in second place. The Romans completed what the Greeks had started and exiled the Jewish people from their homeland. The איל, ram, is an allusion to the Persian-Medes exile Seeing that their dominion was based on Babylon, they are referred to in the parable as the איל, the ram, even though eventually they allowed the exiles to return to their land. Several kings of the Persian-Medes empire had prolonged the Jews’ stay in captivity before allowing them to return home, so that they were also guilty of “exiling” them in the interval. The allusion to the second exile, that in Babylonia is called in the feminine mode i.e. עז, instead of שעיר, to indicate that the Babylonians never allowed the Jews to return, whereas the third exile is represented by the species איל in the masculine mode, the Persians-Medes being the only ones allowing the exiles to return to their homeland. The Persians-Medes possessed the merit of believing in the existence of the Jewish G’d, Cyrus having had a dream as a result of which he allowed the Jews to return to their homeland and build a new Temple. (Chronicles II 36,23) Among other merits he attributed his glory to the G’d in heaven Who had made him such a mighty ruler This compares favourably with the king of Ashur who had attributed his success to his own efforts (Isaiah 10,13) Similarly, Titus, conqueror of Jerusalem in Roman times, blasphemed against the G’d of the Jews. The Persians and Medes therefore are represented by a female animal in the parable G’d shows Avram here, as opposed to the arrogant kings who are represented by the male specimens of their species.
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy

Ibn Ezra

[Daniel 4:17] The tree (אִֽילָנָא֙): Rabbi Yeshua [ben Yehuda] said: that “and its visibility” (vachazoteh, from Daniel 4:8) is from the root/language (מִלָּשׁוֹן - mi-lashon) of “vision/see” (chazah - חָזָה), meaning it is visible/seen (שֶׁהוּא נִרְאֶה - shehu nir'eh). And similarly [he explains] “a conspicuous horn” (keren chazut) [from Daniel 8:5] derives its meaning [from being easily seen]. [However, Ibn Ezra challenges this interpretation:] And if so, how will he [Rabbi Yeshua] explain [the phrase in Daniel 8:8]: “and four chazut came up in its place” (וַתַּעֲלֶ֛ינָה חָז֥וּת אַרְבַּ֖ע תַּחְתֶּֽיהָ - vata'alena chazut arba tachteha)? [Ibn Ezra implies that if chazut merely means 'visible,' then 'four visibles' coming up in place of the horn doesn't make clear sense, suggesting chazut must carry a more substantial meaning related to the horn/branch structure itself, supporting Ibn Ezra's own earlier interpretation in his commentary on Daniel 4:8].
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy