|
Daniel’s “Meat” and “Wine” Issue
Many Bible expositors are suggesting that Daniel became a liberal Hebrew during his years in the courts of Babylon regarding diet and drink. This is based upon the intimation from Daniel 10:3 that he ate meat and drank wine. That view cannot be justified – and here is why. Background Daniel and his three companions were quickly assigned to the palace of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar. This followed an order by the king: “And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king’s seed, and of the princes; Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans” (Daniel 1:3-4). Some scholars have concluded that Daniel and his companions already knew Chaldean, the royal language – which was why they seemed to rapidly merge into Babylonian life and government. Daniel found special favor with Ashpenaz (1:9). He, in turn, negotiated with him a trial diet of ten days to avoid eating the king’s meat and drinking his wine. Three factors could have led to Daniel’s request:
1. Many foods eaten in the palace would be unclean, which God had specifically prohibited in Israel’s dietary laws (Leviticus 11, Deuteronomy 14). 2. They may have been prepared incorrectly (i.e., the blood was not properly drained) (Leviticus 17:13-14). 3. They may have been offered to idols (Exodus 34:15; Acts 15:29, 21:25; Deuteronomy 32:38).1
Suggesting that these influenced Daniel’s request is the phrase “Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself” (1:8). “Defile” (gaal) could come from imbibing unclean, cursed food. It would be “polluting” (Strongs 1351). Gaal is most often used in the Old Testament in connection with blood (Isaiah 59:3, 63:3; Lamentations 4:14, 1QM9:8) – but it is also associated with impure sacrifices (Malachi 1:7, 12).2 Does his special dietary request imply that he and his companions were vegetarian? The Hebrew words and context suggest such a diet. Daniel felt it was the best safeguard. Most scholars consider the noted three concerns as influencing these Hebrew men to ask for a meat-free diet. Expositor White concurred in the area of food offerings to idols: “It was provided that they should eat of the food and drink of the wine that came from the king’s table. In this the king thought to give them an expression of his favor and of his solicitude for their welfare. But a portion having been offered to idols, the food from the king’s table was consecrated to idolatry; and one partaking of it would be regarded as offering homage to the gods of Babylon. In such homage, loyalty to Jehovah forbade Daniel and his companions to join. Even a mere pretense of eating the food or drinking the wine would be a denial of their faith. To do this would be to array themselves with heathenism and to dishonor the principles of the law of God.3 Circumstances led to a permanent willingness of Daniel’s superiors to permit him and his friends to enjoy a simple diet.4 Daniel apparently retired from court duty during the first year of Cyrus’ reign (1:21). When he entered a semi-fast noted in chapter 10 during Cyrus’ third year, he said in a personal statement: “I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three whole weeks were fulfilled” (Daniel 10:3). Many use this verse rigidly to infer a meat and wine diet. They assume that it is proof he now imbibes wine and is a non-vegetarian; thus, justifying such a lifestyle. Did Daniel really change and become a “liberal” Hebrew? The Hebrew word for “meat” Daniel used in that verse is basar. This is used in the Old Testament to refer to the musculature of an animal, the part that is used most often for meat.5 It is also a linguistic expression for man’s body (Numbers 8:7, II Kings 4:34, Ecclesiastes 2:3), referring to the external form of an individual. It can be used for the total race of mankind (Genesis 6:12, Numbers 16:22, Jeremiah 12:12). David used it to idiomatically express the sinful nature of man, “sinful flesh” (Psalm 78:39). It/he is therefore in need of salvation. Daniel, however, is alluding to what he “avoided” dietary-wise during this fast. Does that imply that when he didn’t fast, he ate flesh food? One could logically conclude that it seems that way. It would, however, imply an inconsistency to the elevated imagery of Daniel that his book portrays. What then does he really mean? Daniel’s motive for his modified fast is obviously part of his preparation to receive clarification to the meaning of prior visions. He especially didn’t understand the mareh vision [2300 atonement years (8:14, 26), 490 probationary years (9:21-27a) and the issues leading to the consummation (9:27b)]. Similar types of fasting preparation have been described elsewhere (Ezekiel 8:21, Esther 4:16, II Chronicles 20:3, Jeremiah 36:9). Was this simply an idiomatic expression to reveal that he wouldn’t touch these things anyway, like his earlier Babylonian years? We aren’t told. This verse by itself permits the questions to remain a legitimate concern. The three fasting things he notes were: 1. Dainty foods – (chemdah) his usual vegetarian fare 2. Flesh food – (basar) actual meat 3. Wine – (yayin) (see below)
There are different Hebrew words for the single English word “wine.” Shekhar (Numbers 28:7) usually refers to a strong or intoxicating drink. Tirosh most often refers to the pure juice of the grape without alcohol (Numbers 6:3, Isaiah 65:8). Yayin, which Daniel uses here, could be either fermented or sweet. Thus, the drink issue is not clarified by the Hebrew word. We can now see he is referring to actual meat, a grape drink which could be sweet and likely his usual “pulse”. By itself Daniel 10:3 still presents a dilemma. There is important additional information that Daniel provided which resolves the issue. The next verse (vs 4) notes that when he fasted, it was during the month of Abib (Nissan). It covered the time of the Feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread (Exodus 12:1-20). At that time the Jewish people ate the Passover Lamb. That came from divine counsel that started in Egypt at the time of the Exodus (Exodus 12) and continued with the Jewish people right on through the first advent of Jesus. When Cyrus defeated the Babylonian Empire, he allowed the Jewish people to return to their homeland to rebuild their temple. It had been destroyed in 587-586 B.C. by Nebuchadnezzar. When it was finally completed, the people celebrated Passover: “And the children of the captivity kept the Passover upon the fourteenth day of the first month. For the priests and the Levites were purified together, all of them were pure, and killed the Passover for all the children of the captivity, and for their brethren the priests, and for themselves. And the children of Israel, which were come again out of captivity, and all such as had separated themselves unto them from the filthiness of the heathen of the land, to seek the LORD God of Israel, did eat, And kept the feast of unleavened bread seven days with joy: for the LORD had made them joyful, and turned the heart of the king of Assyria unto them, to strengthen their hands in the work of the house of God, the God of Israel” (Ezra 6:19-22). Conclusion Since Daniel is fasting at these two festival times, it would appear that he, with full access to any food, is implying, “I didn’t even take of the Passover Lamb.” Since the word for wine could also mean the sweet juice of the grape, it suggests that Daniel is saying that he didn’t even drink of that everyday juice so much a part of the Middle Eastern fare. Finally, “pleasant” (chemdah) appears to really refer to his usual “desired food,” the pulse diet talked about in chapter 1. Contextually, Daniel’s integrity is preserved. Nothing can be proven regarding a change of diet or drink other than a “fast;” nor can one justify a meat diet from these verses. The whole book represents repeated expressions of right triumphing over evil. Elevated thoughts are drawn from the great stories and visions, bringing cleansing, covenant fulfillment and everlasting righteousness. These are the themes to discover – and not the cheapening or pulling down of any standard.
References:
1 Miller, Stephen R.; The New American Commentary -- Daniel (Broadman and Holman Publishers), pp. 66-67. 2 Collins, John J.; Daniel (fortresspress.com), p. 142. 3 Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 481. 4 Ibid., p. 484. 5 Harris, Archer, Waltke, Theological Workbook of the Old Testament (Moody Press; Chicago, IL), 1980, p. 136.
|