Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 10:6
His body also [was] like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in color to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.
6. The dazzling appearance of his person.
His body ] The word used in Eze 1:11; Eze 1:23.
the beryl ] the chrysolith (as LXX. in Ex. and Eze 28:13) said (see Smith, D. B., s. v. beryl) to be the topaz of the moderns a flashing stone, described by Pliny as ‘a transparent stone with a refulgence like that of gold.’ Comp. Exo 28:20, and especially Eze 1:16; Eze 10:9, where the wheels of the chariot in Ez.’s vision are compared to the same stone. The Heb. is tarshish: it may be so called, as Pliny says of the chrysolith, on account of its having been brought from Spain (Tarshish, Tartessus).
as the appearance of lightning, as torches of fire ] cf. Eze 1:13 (R.V. marg.), ‘In the midst of the living creatures was an appearance like burning coals of fire, like the appearance of torches and out of the fire went forth lightning.’
like the gleaming of burnished brass ] from Eze 1:7 (of the feet of the cherubic figures which supported the throne) ‘and they sparkled like the gleaming of burnished brass.’ Gleaming is lit. eye, fig. of something sparkling: so Eze 1:4; Eze 1:16; Eze 1:22; Eze 1:27; Eze 8:2; Eze 10:9; Pro 23:31 (A.V. in all ‘colour’).
the voice of his words ] or, the sound of his words: the words do not seem to become articulate until Dan 10:11.
like the voice of a multitude ] Isa 13:4 (the Heb. for ‘voice,’ ‘sound,’ ‘noise’ is the same). But the expression is perhaps suggested by Eze 1:24 (R.V.) ‘a noise of tumult’ (where the Heb. for tumult partly resembles that for multitude here). An impressive, but inarticulate, sound seems to be what the comparison is intended to suggest. With the last three clauses of this verse, comp. the description of the risen Christ in Rev 1:14 b, 15.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
His body also was like the beryl – There is a very striking resemblance between the description here given and that of the Saviour as he appeared to John in Patmos, Rev 1:13-16. See the notes at that passage. It contains, however, no description of the appearance of the body. Beryl is a mineral of great hardness, occurring in green and bluish-green six-sided prisms. It is identical with the emerald, except that the latter has a purer and richer color. – Dana, in Websters Dictionary. The Hebrew word used here is tarshysh Tarshish, Tartessus, and properly refers to a country supposed to be on the south of Spain, a place where this mineral was probably found. This was situated between the mouths of the river Baetis, or Guadalquivir, and was a flourishing mart of the Phoenicians, Gen 10:4; Psa 72:10; Isa 23:1, Isa 23:6, Isa 23:10, … – Gesenius. The name was given to this gem because it was brought from that place. The true meaning of the word, as applied to a gem, is supposed to be the chrysolite, that is, the topaz of the moderns. Tarshish, the chrysolite, says Rosenmuller (Mineralogy and Botany of the Bible, pp. 38, 39), is a crystal-line precious stone of the quartz kind, of a glassy fracture. The prevailing color is yellowish-green, and pistachio-green of every variety and degree of shade, but always with a yellow and gold luster. It is completely diaphanous, and has a strong double refraction. Most commonly the chrysolite is found solid and in grains, or in angular pieces. The Hebrew word Tarshish denotes the south of Spain, the Tartessus of the Greeks and Romans, a place to which the Phoenicians traded even in the earliest ages. Probably the Phoenicians first brought the chrysolite from Spain to Syria, and it was on that account called Tarshish stone.
And his face as the appearance of lightning – Bright, shining. In Rev 1:16 it is, And his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength. See the notes at that passage.
And his eyes as lamps of fire – Keen, penetrating. So in Rev 1:14 : His eyes were as a flame of fire.
And his arms and his feet like in color to polished brass – So in Rev 1:15 : And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace. See the notes at that passage. The meaning is, that they were bright – like burnished metal. The Hebrew here is, like the eye of brass; then, as the word eye comes to denote the face or countenance, the meaning is, like the face or appearance of brass. Complete Exo 10:5, Exo 10:15; Num 22:5, Num 22:11. It is easy to conceive of the appearance which one would make whose arms and feet resembled burnished brass.
And the voice of his words like the voice a multitude – A multitude of people – loud and strong. So in Rev 1:15 : And his voice as the sound of many waters.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 6. His body also was like the beryl] The description of this person is very similar to that of our Lord in Re 1:13-15.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Like the beryl, which is of a sea colour; others translate it the chrysolite, others the jacinth, the word in the text like the tarsis, this is a colour like the sea: the beryl, which is azure, and like the heavens, show Christ to be immortal and glorious, the Lord from heaven, heavenly, 1Co 15:47. See Eze 1:16; 10:9; 28:13. His face as the lightning quickens to succour his saints and terrify his enemies, Mat 24:27; 28:3; Rev 4:5. His eyes like lamps of fire, signify omniscience, splendour, and terror in Christ. His arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, note his incredible power and swiftness to defend or to destroy invincibly. The voice of his words like the voice of a multitude: by this the Lord would distinguish the Lord Christ from creatures, and when he comes with a noise and a sound, to show the grandeur and terror of his presence. And thus his presence is wont to be ushered in before the revelation of great things, Eze 1:24; 43:2; Act 2:2; Rev 1:10,15; 14:2; 19:1; by the example of Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the apostles; noting also the mighty power of Christ to fear.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
6. berylliterally,”Tarshish,” in Spain. The beryl, identical with thechrysolite or topaz, was imported into the East from Tarshish, andtherefore is called “the Tarshish stone.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
His body also was like the beryl,…. That is, that part of it which was not covered with the linen garment, and was seen, was like such a precious stone, said to be of an azure and sky colour, signifying he was the Lord from heaven; though, according to its name, it should be of a sea colour, greenish; and so, according to some, the beryl is. Cocceius thinks the sardonyx is meant, which is of a flesh colour, and so more fit to express the comeliness of a human body; the beryl, being of a different colour, seems not so apt to set forth the agreeable colour of a man. Braunius p is of opinion that the chrysolite is meant, a stone of a golden colour; and takes the sense to be, that such was the lustre of the golden girdle about his loins, that the rest of the parts of the body about it appeared as if all of gold:
and his face the appearance of lightning; exceeding bright, very dazzling to the eye, and striking terror to the mind; expressive of something very awful and majestic; and agrees well with Christ the sun of righteousness, whose face or countenance at his transfiguration on the mount, and when John saw him in a visionary way, was as the sun shineth in his strength, in the summer solstice, or at noonday, Mt 17:2, from whom is all the light of knowledge and truth, of joy, peace, and comfort, of grace and glory; and which darts as swiftly and as powerfully from him as the rays of the sun, or as lightning from one end of the heaven to the other; and irradiates and illuminates as brightly and clearly:
and his eyes as lamps of fire; denoting his omniscience of all persons and things; and how piercing and penetrating his eyes are into the affairs of men and states, by whom they are clearly seen, and to whom they are exactly known; and how fierce and terrible his wrath is towards his enemies, and whose looks must inject dread and terror into them; see Re 19:12:
and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass; denoting his great strength for action, his stability and firmness, and the glory of his power, in trampling upon his enemies, and subduing them; especially as displayed in the redemption of his people, when his own arm wrought salvation for them; when he came travelling in the greatness of his strength, and trod the winepress of his father’s wrath alone; when he set his feet on the necks of his and his people’s enemies, and got an entire victory over sin, Satan, and the world, under whose feet they are, and ever will be subject:
and the voice of his words; not of the law, which was a voice of words, which they that heard entreated they might hear no more, and were very sonorous and dreadful; but rather of the Gospel, of the words and doctrines of grace and truth, which proceeded out of the mouth of Christ, and were such as were wondered at; which is a voice of love, grace, and mercy, sweet, charming, and alluring, powerful and efficacious; and the words of it are the words of peace, pardon, righteousness, life, and salvation; yea, this voice of Christ may take in his voice and words of commands, his ordinances and institutions, which he requires an obedience unto; and even his threatenings of wrath and ruin to wicked men, as well as his gracious and precious promises to his people: and this voice of his is said to be
like the voice of a multitude; of a great many men together; whose voice is heard a long way off, and is very strong and powerful: or,
as the voice of noise q; which may be understood either of the noise of a multitude of men, or of the sea, or of many waters; see Re 1:15 and may intend the power and efficacy of his words, whether in his doctrines, or in his judgments, in a way of grace and comfort, or of wrath and vengeance.
p De Vestitu Sacerdot. Hebr. l. 2. c. 17. sect 10, 11, 12. p. 721, 722. q “ut vox tumultus”, Montanus, “[vel] strepitus”, Piscator, Michaelis.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
His body shone like , i.e., the chrysolite of the Old and the topaz of the New Testament (see under Eze 1:16); his countenance had the appearance of lightning, his eyes as lamps of fire, his arms and the place of his feet like the sight of polished brass ( , see under Eze 1:7). , place of the feet, does not stand for feet, but denotes that part of the human frame where the feet are; and the word indicates that not the feet alone, but the under parts of the body shone like burnished brass. The voice of his words, i.e., the sound of his speaking, was like , for which in Eze 1:24 ( the voice of noise), and by (Eze 1:24) the noise of a host is denoted.
This heavenly form has thus, it is true, the shining white talar common to the angel, Eze 9:9, but all the other features, as here described – the shining of his body, the brightness of his countenance, his eyes like a lamp of fire, arms and feet like glistering brass, the sound of his speaking-all these point to the revelation of the , the glorious appearance of the Lord, Ezekiel 1, and teach us that the seen by Daniel was no common angel-prince, but a manifestation of Jehovah, i.e., the Logos. This is placed beyond a doubt by a comparison with Rev 1:13-15, where the form of the Son of man whom John saw walking in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks is described like the glorious appearance seen by Ezekiel and Daniel.
The place where this heavenly being was, is not here specially stated. In Dan 12:6 he appears hovering over the waters of the river, the Tigris. This agrees also with the verse before us, according to which Daniel, while standing on the banks of the river, on lifting up his eyes beheld the vision. Hence it further follows, that the seen here by Daniel is the same heavenly being whose voice he heard, Dan 8:16, from the waters of the Ulai, without seeing his form.
When now he whose voice Daniel heard from thence presents himself before him here on the Tigris in a majesty which human nature is not able to endure, and announces to him the future, and finally, Dan 12:6., with a solemn oath attests the completion of the divine counsel, he thereby shows himself, as C. B. Michaelis ad Daniel p. 372, Schmieder in Gerlach’s Bibelw., and Oehler (Art. Messias in Herz.’s Realenc. ix. p. 417) have acknowledged, to be the Angel of Jehovah , as the “Angel of His presence.” The combination of this angel with that in the form of a son of man appearing in the clouds (Dan 7:13) is natural; and this combination is placed beyond a doubt by the comparison with Rev 1:13, where John sees the glorified Christ, who is described by a name definitely referring to Dan 7:13, as .
On the other hand, the opinion maintained to some extent among the Rabbis, which even Hengstenberg has in modern times advocated ( Beitr. i. p. 165ff.; Christol. iii. 2, p. 50ff.), namely, that the angel of the Lord who here appears to Daniel in divine majesty is identical with the angel-prince Michael, has no support in Scripture, and stands in contradiction to Dan 10:13, Dan 10:21, where he who speaks is certainly distinguished from Michael, for here there is ascribed to Michael a position with reference to the people of God which is not appropriate to the Angel of the Lord or the Logos. It is true, indeed, that Hengstenberg holds, with many old interpreters, that he who speaks with Daniel, Dan 10:11, and reveals to him the future, is different from him who appears to him, Dan 10:5, Dan 10:6, and is identical with the angel Gabriel. But the reasons advanced in support of this are not sufficient. The latter supposition is grounded partly on the similarity of the address to Daniel, , Dan 10:11, Dan 10:19, cf. with Dan 9:23, partly on the similarity of the circumstances, Dan 8:17-18, cf. with Dan 10:10 and Dan 12:5. But the address to Daniel proves nothing, because it does not express to Daniel the relation of the angel to him, but of the Lord who sent the angel; and Gabriel in Dan 9:23 does not address the prophet thus, but only says that he is , i.e., a man greatly beloved of God. The similarity of circumstances with Dan 8:17-18 proves nothing further than that he who appeared was a heavenly being. More noticeable is the similarity of Dan 8:13 with Dan 12:5, so far as in both cases two angels appear along with him who hovers over the waters, and the voice from above the waters in Dan 8:16 directs the angel Gabriel to explain the vision to the prophet. But from the circumstance that in Daniel 8 and also in Daniel 9 Gabriel gives to the prophet disclosures regarding the future, it by no means follows, even on the supposition that he who is represented in the chapter before us as speaking is different from him who appears in Dan 10:5, Dan 10:6, that the angel who speaks is Gabriel. If he were Gabriel, he would have been named here, according to the analogy of Dan 10:9, Dan 10:21.
To this is to be added, that the assumed difference between him who speaks, Dan 10:11, and him who appears, Dan 10:5, Dan 10:6, is not made out, nor yet is it on the whole demonstrable. It is true that in favour of this difference, he who speaks is on the banks of the river where Daniel stands, while he who appears, vv. 5, 6, and also at the end of the vision, Dan 12:1-13, is in the midst of the Tigris, and in Dan 10:5 of this chapter (Dan 12:1-13) two other persons are standing on the two banks of the river, one of whom asks him who is clothed with linen, as if in the name of Daniel, when the things announced shall happen. Now if we assume that he who is clothed in linen is no other than he who speaks to Daniel, v. 11, then one of these two persons becomes a , and it cannot be at all seen for what purpose he appears. If, on the contrary, the difference of the two is assumed, then each has his own function. The Angel of the Lord is present in silent majesty, and only by a brief sentence confirms the words of his messenger (Dan 12:7). The one of those standing on the banks is he who, as the messenger and interpreter of the Angel of the Lord, had communicated all disclosures regarding the future to Daniel as he stood by the banks. The third, the angel standing on the farther bank, directs the question regarding the duration of the time to the Angel of the Lord. Thus Hengstenberg is in harmony with C. B. Michaelis and others.
But however important these reasons for the difference appears, yet we cannot regard them as conclusive. From the circumstance that, Dan 10:10, a hand touched Daniel as he was sinking down in weakness and set him on his knees, it does not with certainty follow that this was the hand of the angel (Gabriel) who stood by Daniel, who spoke to him, Dan 10:11. The words of the text, “a hand touched me,” leave the person whose hand it was altogether undefined; and also in Dan 10:16, Dan 10:18, where Daniel is again touched, so that he was able to open his mouth and was made capable of hearing the words that were addressed to him, the person from whom the touch proceeded is altogether indefinite. The designations, , like the similitude of the sons of men, Dan 10:16, and , like the appearance of a man, Dan 10:18, do not point to a definite angel who appears speaking in the sequel. But the circumstance that in Dan 12:1-13, besides the form that hovered over the water, other two angels appear on the banks, does not warrant us to assume that these two angels were already present or visible in Dan 10:5. The words, “Then I looked and saw other two, the one,” etc., Dan 12:5, much rather indicate that the scene was changed, that Daniel now for the first time saw the two angels on the banks. In Daniel 10 he only sees him who is clothed with linen, and was so terrified by this “great sight” that he fell powerless to the ground on hearing his voice, and was only able to stand up after a hand had touched him and a comforting word had been spoken to him. Nothing is here, as in Dan 8:15, said of the coming of the angel. If thus, after mention being made of the hand which by touching him set him on his knees, it is further said, “and he spake to me … “ (Dan 10:11), the context only leads to this conclusion, that he who spake to him was the man whose appearance and words had so overwhelmed him. To suppose another person, or an angel different from the one who was clothed with linen, as speaking, could only be justified if the contents of that which was spoken demanded such a supposition.
He who spake said, among other things, that he was sent to Daniel (Dan 10:11); that the prince of the kingdom of Persia had withstood him one and twenty days; and that Michael, one of the chief angel-princes, had come to his help (Dan 10:13, Dan 10:21). These statements do not indicate that he was an inferior angel, but they are suitable to the Angel of the Lord; for he also says (Zec 2:13, 15; Zec 4:9) that he is sent by Jehovah; cf. also Isa 48:16 and Isa 61:1. The coming to his help by the angel-prince Michael, also, does not denote that he who speaks was an angel subordinated to the archangel Michael. In Zec 1:15 denotes help which men render to God; and in 1Ch 12:21. it is related that Israelites of different tribes came to David to help him against his enemies, i.e., under his leadership to fight for him. Similarly we may suppose that the angel Michael gave help to the Angel of the Lord against the prince of the kingdom of Persia.
There thus remains only the objection, that if we take the angel clothed with linen and him who speaks as the same, then in Dan 12:5 one of the angels who stood on the two banks of the Tigris becomes a ; but if we are not able to declare the object for which two angels appear there, yet the one of those two angels cannot certainly be the same as he who announced, Daniel 10 and 11, the future to the prophet, because these angels are expressly designated as two others ( ), and the excludes the identifying of these with angels that previously appeared to Daniel. This argument is not set aside by the reply that the angels standing on the two banks of the river are spoken of as with reference to the Angel of the Lord, Dan 10:6, for the reference of the to that which follows is inconsistent with the context; see under Dan 12:5.
Thus every argument utterly fails that has been adduced in favour of the supposition that he who speaks, Dan 10:11, is different from him who is clothed in linen; and we are warranted to abide by the words of the narrative, which in Daniel 10 names no other angel than the man clothed with linen, who must on that account be the same as he who speaks and announces the future to the prophet. The hand which again set him up by touching him, is, it is true, to be thought of as proceeding from an angel; but it is not more definitely described, because this angel is not further noticed. But after the man clothed with linen has announced the future to the prophet, the scene changes (Dan 12:5). Daniel sees the same angels over the waters of the Tigris, and standing on the two banks of the river. Where he who was clothed in linen stands, is left indefinite in the narrative. If from the first it is he who hovers over the water of the river, he could yet talk with the prophet standing on its banks. But it is also possible that at first he was visible close beside the banks.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
(6) Beryl.Heb., Tarshish, a variety of the topaz.
His feet.More correctly, the place where his feet were, or the lower extremities of his limbs. We are not told in what position the man was when Daniel first saw him. Later on (Dan. 12:6) he is described as being upon or above the waters. In this position he symbolises God as supreme over the nations who are represented by the Tigris.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Dan 10:6 His body also [was] like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.
Ver. 6. His body also was like the beryl. ] Of an azure colour, like the heavens. The “second Adam is the Lord from heaven.” 1Co 15:47 Some render it the chrysolite, which is of the colour of the sea; to note, say they, his power to purge the Church by his Word, Spirit, and judgments, as by the water of the sea.
And his face as the appearance of lightning.
And his eyes as lamps of fire.
And his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass.
And the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
His body The theophanies. Dan 10:10; Dan 10:18; Eze 40:3; Gen 12:7; Rev 1:9. (See Scofield “Dan 10:10”).
beryl Chrysolite. Cf. Eze 1:16.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
like the beryl: Exo 28:20, Eze 1:16, Eze 10:9, Rev 21:20
his face: Eze 1:14, Mat 17:2, Luk 9:29, Rev 1:13-17, Rev 19:12
his arms: Eze 1:7, Rev 1:15, Rev 10:1
like the voice: Eze 1:24, Rev 10:3, Rev 10:4
Reciprocal: Isa 6:5 – said I Eze 1:13 – General Eze 40:3 – whose Dan 7:16 – one Dan 10:16 – like Dan 12:5 – other two Dan 12:6 – man Mat 14:26 – they were Mat 28:3 – countenance Mar 16:5 – a young Rev 1:14 – and his eyes
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Dan 10:6. All of these descriptive words were used for the same purpose that was stated in the preceding verse. Whether the person was directly from heaven, sent to the earth in the form of a man, or was a being of the earth and especially adorned and qualified to serve the present purpose, I do not know. In either case we may regard him as a person being used by the Lord to accomplish certain ends with conditions on earth.