Albert Barnes Commentary Daniel 2:34

"Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon its feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them in pieces." — Daniel 2:34 (ASV)

You saw - Chaldee, “You were seeing;” that is, you continued to behold, implying that the vision was of somewhat long continuance. It did not appear and then suddenly vanish, but it remained so long that he had an opportunity of careful observation.

Until a stone was cut out without hands - That is, from a mountain or hill (Daniel 2:45). This idea is expressed in the Latin and the Greek version. The vision appears to have been that of a colossal image “standing on a plain” in the vicinity of a mountain, standing firm, until, by some unseen agency, and in an unaccountable manner, a stone became detached from the mountain, and impinged against it.

The margin here is, “which was not in his hands.” The more correct rendering of the Chaldee, however, is that in the text, literally, “a stone was cut out which was not by hands” – בידין bı̂ydayı̂n: or perhaps still more accurately, “a stone was cut out which was not in hands,” so that the fact that it was not in or by “hands” refers rather to its not being projected by hands than to the manner of its being detached from the mountain. The essential idea is, that the agency of hands did not appear at all in the case. The stone seemed to be self-moved.

It became detached from the mountain and, as if instinct with life, struck the image and demolished it. The word rendered “stone” (אבן 'eben) determines nothing as to the “size” of the stone, but the whole statement would seem to imply that it was not of large dimensions. It struck upon “the feet” of the image, and it “became” itself a great mountain (Daniel 2:35)—all of which would seem to imply that it was at first not large. What increased the astonishment of the monarch was that a stone of such dimensions should have been adequate to overthrow so gigantic a statue and grind it to powder. The points on which it was clearly intended to fix the attention of the monarch, and which made the vision so significant and remarkable, were these:

1. The colossal size and firmness of the image;
2. The fact that a stone, not of large size, should be seen to be self-detached from the mountain, and to move against the image;
3. The fact that it should completely demolish and pulverize the colossal figure; and
4. The fact that then this stone of inconsiderable size should be itself mysteriously augmented until it filled the world.

It should be added, that the vision appears not to have been that of a stone detached from the side of a hill, and rolling down the mountain by the force of gravitation, but that of a stone detached, and then moving off toward the image as if it had been thrown from a hand, though the hand was unseen. This would very strikingly and appropriately express the idea of something, apparently small in its origin, that was impelled by a cause that was unseen, and that bore with mighty force upon an object of colossal magnitude, by an agency that could not be explained by the causes that usually operate. For the application and relevance of this, see the notes at (Daniel 2:44–45).

Which smote the image upon his feet - The word here used (מחא m^echâ') means to “strike,” to “smite,” without reference to the question whether it is a single blow, or whether the blow is often repeated. The Hebrew word (מחא mâchâ') is uniformly used as referring to “the clapping of the hands;” that is, smiting them together (Psalms 98:8; Isaiah 55:12; Ezekiel 25:6). The Chaldee word is used only here and in (Daniel 2:35), referring to the smiting of the image, and in (Daniel 4:35 (verse 32 in the Chaldee text)), where it is rendered “stay” – “none can stay his hand.” The connection here, and the whole statement, would seem to demand the sense of a continued or prolonged smiting, or of repeated blows, rather than a single concussion.

The great image was not only thrown down, but there was a subsequent process of “comminution,” independent of what would have been produced by the fall.

A fall would only have broken it into large blocks or fragments; but this continued smiting reduced it to powder. This would imply, therefore, not only a single shock, or violent blow, but some cause continuing to operate until what had been overthrown was effectually destroyed, like a vast image reduced to impalpable powder. The “first concussion” on the feet made it certain that the colossal frame would fall; but there was a longer process necessary before the whole effect should be accomplished. Compare the notes at (Daniel 2:44–45).

And brake them to pieces - In (Daniel 2:35), the idea is, “they became like the chaff of the summer threshing-floors.” The meaning is not that the image was broken to “fragments,” but that it was “beaten fine” – reduced to powder – so that it might be scattered by the wind. This is the sense of the Chaldee word (דקק d^eqaq), and of the Hebrew word also (דקק dâqaq).

See (Exodus 32:20): And he took the calf which they had made, and burned it in the fire, and ground it to powder. (Deuteronomy 9:21): and I took your sin, the calf which you had made, and burnt it with fire, and stamped it, and ground it very small, even until it was as small as dust. (Isaiah 41:15): you shall thresh the mountains and beat them small, and shall make the hills as chaff. (2 Kings 23:15): he burnt the high place, and stamped it small to powder. (2 Chronicles 34:4): and they brake down the altars, etc., and made dust of them, and strewed it upon the graves of them that had sacrificed unto them. Compare (Exodus 30:36; 2 Chronicles 34:7; 2 Kings 23:6).

From these passages it is clear that the general meaning of the word is that of reducing anything to fine dust or powder, so that it may be easily blown about by the wind.