ובשנת - אמר הספר שהוא שנת שתים למלכות נבוכדנצר על ירושלים אחר שמרד בו צדקיהו והחריבה. ור' משה אמר: כי ב' שנים נשארו למלכותו. ולא מצאנו כדבר הזה בכל המקרא. והנכון בעיני: למלכותו על כל הגוים שהזכיר ירמיה שיכבשם, אז שקט וחשב מחשבות על משכבו מה יהיה באחרית הימים כאשר הזכיר דניאל, והזכיר חלומות בעבור שיש בצלם זהב וכסף ונחשת וברזל וכלי חרס, ומנהג החולם לראות דבר אחד. [Daniel 2:1] Uvishnat (וּבִשְׁנַת - And in the... year): One interpretation (lit. "says the book," possibly referring to an interpretation of the book) is that this was the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign over Jerusalem, after Zedekiah rebelled against him and he [Nebuchadnezzar] destroyed it. And Rabbi Moshe [perhaps Ibn Gikatilla] said: that [only] two years remained of his reign [at this point]. But we have not found anything like this [latter interpretation] in all of Scripture. And the correct [interpretation] in my eyes is: [It refers to the second year] of his reign over all the nations that Jeremiah mentioned he would conquer [cf. Jeremiah 25:9, Jeremiah 27:6]. Then [after achieving this dominion] he became tranquil and thought thoughts upon his bed about what would be in the end of days, as Daniel mentioned [later, Daniel 2:29]. And it mentions dreams [plural] because in the statue there is gold, silver, bronze, iron, and earthenware – whereas the [usual] way of a dreamer is to see one thing [a singular object].
ותתפעם - כמו: נפעמתי ולא אדבר וגזרתם את הולם פעם, כאדם שידוכה וידוכה. אמר הגאון: כי פרעה ידע החלום ולא ידע פתרונו ע"כ כתוב בפרעה ותפעם רוחו שהוא מבנין נפעל, ונבוכדנצר שלא ידע החלום והפתרון כתוב עליו ותתפעם רוחו. א"כ מה יעשה כי הוא אומר ותפעם רוחי?! ויתכן היות דגשות פ"א ותפעם תחת נו"ן בנין נפעל כי הפועל שהוא עובר הוא נפעל כמו וילחם בישראל או דגשות הפ"א להתבלע תי"ו התפעל והנה יהיה ותפעם רוחו כמו ותפעם כחו כדרך וכבס המטהר את בגדיו ופירוש נהיתה עליו הפך ושנתי ערבה לי כענין שבוש, וכמוהו נהייתי ונחליתי וקרוב הוא מטעם כמו נהי נהיה. [Daniel 2:1] Vatitpaʿem (וַתִּתְפָּעֶם - His spirit was agitated): [This root פ-ע-ם relates to being struck or agitated,] like [David says]: “I was agitated (nifʿamti - נִפְעַמְתִּי) and could not speak” [Psalms 77:5)]. And their derivation is [related to the striking action in] “striking (holem - הוֹלֵם) the anvil (paʿam - פַּעַם)” [Isaiah 41:7] – like a person who is struck/crushed and struck/crushed again. The Gaon [Saadia Gaon] said: that Pharaoh knew the dream but did not know its interpretation, therefore it is written concerning Pharaoh “and his spirit was agitated” (vattippaʿem rucho - וַתִּפָּעֶם רוּחוֹ, Genesis 41:8), which is from the Nifal conjugation. But [regarding] Nebuchadnezzar, who did not know the dream or the interpretation, it is written concerning him “and his spirit became agitated” (vatitpaʿem rucho - וַתִּתְפָּעֶם רוּחוֹ, Daniel 2:1), [using the Hitpael conjugation]. If so [Ibn Ezra challenges Saadia], what will he do [with the fact] that he [Nebuchadnezzar himself later] says “my spirit was agitated” (vatipaʿem ruchi - וַתִּפָּעֶם רוּחִי) [Daniel 2:3], [using the Nifal form even though he didn't know the dream]? And it is possible that the dagesh [doubling dot] in the Pey [פ] of vatipaʿem (וַתִּפָּעֶם - Nifal form) is instead of the Nun [which typically characterizes] the Nifal conjugation [indicating assimilation]. Because a verb which is transitive [in Qal/Piel] can be [expressed passively/reflexively in the] Nifal – like “and he fought (vayilachem - וַיִּלָּחֶם, Nifal) against Israel” [Numbers 21:1]. Or [alternatively, explaining the Hitpael form וַתִּתְפָּעֶם in this verse, Daniel 2:1], the dagesh in the Pey is due to the assimilation of the Tav [ת] of the Hitpael conjugation [a common feature of this conjugation with certain root letters]. And thus, “his spirit became agitated” (vatitpaʿem rucho) would be like [saying] “his strength became agitated/stirred” (vatipaʿem kocho - וַתִּפָּעֶם כֹּחוֹ). [This is perhaps] in the way of [the grammatical structure in] “And the one being purified (ha-mitaher - הַמִּטַּהֵר, Hitpael participle) shall wash (v'kibbes - וְכִבֶּס, Piel) his clothes” [Leviticus 14:8]. [Regarding the phrase] And his sleep was upon him (וּשְׁנָתוֹ נִהְיְתָה עָלָיו - u-shnato nihyetah alav): The meaning of “was upon him” (nihyetah alav - נִהְיְתָה עָָלָיו) is the opposite of “and my sleep was sweet (arvah - עָרְבָה) to me” [Jeremiah 31:26]; [meaning] in the sense of being disturbed/disrupted (shibbush - שִׁבּוּשׁ). And similar to it is [Daniel's statement]: “I was undone/faint (nihyeiti - נִהְיֵיתִי) and sick” [Daniel 8:27]. And it is close in meaning to [the concept expressed by the similar-sounding root for lamentation, as in] “a lamentation shall be” (n'hi nihyah - נְהִי נִהְיָה) [cf. Micah 2:4].