Catholic Commentary
The Conspiracy Against Daniel Begins
4Then the presidents and the local governors sought to find occasion against Daniel as touching the kingdom; but they could find no occasion or fault, because he was faithful. There wasn’t any error or fault found in him.5Then these men said, “We won’t find any occasion against this Daniel, unless we find it against him concerning the law of his God.”
Daniel 6:4–5 describes how the Persian officials investigated Daniel's administrative conduct for any fault but found him entirely faithful and incorruptible in every official capacity. Unable to locate any grounds for accusation in his governmental duties, they concluded they could only prosecute him based on his religious devotion to God's law, revealing his integrity stems wholly from his faith.
Daniel's enemies conduct an exhaustive investigation and find him utterly blameless—his only "fault" is his refusal to compromise his faith for the state's approval.
Daniel 6:4 — The Exhaustive Search for Fault
The phrase "sought to find occasion against Daniel as touching the kingdom" reveals a deliberate, organized campaign of opposition. The Aramaic term underlying "occasion" (ʿillâ) connotes a pretext or legal charge — something that could be brought before a royal tribunal. These are not private grudges vented in whispers; these officials are conducting what amounts to a formal investigation into Daniel's administrative conduct, probing for bribery, misuse of royal funds, abuse of authority, or dereliction of duty — any of the corruptions endemic to ancient Near Eastern court life.
What they find is nothing. The narrator is emphatic, almost rhythmic in his repetition: "no occasion or fault," and then again, "no error or fault found in him." The doubling is not accidental. It mirrors the rigor of the search: they looked hard, from every angle, and came up empty twice over. The word "faithful" (Aramaic meheymān) is the moral key of the verse. It carries connotations of trustworthiness, reliability, and integrity — the quality of a man whose inner life and outer conduct are perfectly aligned. Daniel is not merely competent; he is incorruptible. His integrity is total because it flows from a single, unified source: his relationship with God.
This is a portrait of what the book of Daniel has been building since chapter 1: a man who resolved in his heart not to defile himself (Dan 1:8) and whose every subsequent act flows from that foundational commitment. His public holiness is the fruit of his private faithfulness. There is no gap between the Daniel who prays three times a day (v. 10) and the Daniel who administers the kingdom.
Daniel 6:5 — The Admission That Changes Everything
Verse 5 is one of the most remarkable confessions in all of Scripture — and it comes from Daniel's enemies. "We won't find any occasion against this Daniel, unless we find it against him concerning the law of his God." Notice the involuntary testimony: these hostile, calculating men are compelled by the evidence to admit that Daniel is beyond reproach in every sphere of life except the sphere of his religious devotion. They have not found a lesser Daniel hiding beneath the official one. There is only one Daniel, and he is entirely ordered toward God.
The phrase "the law of his God" (dāt ʾĕlāhēh) is freighted with significance. The conspirators frame Daniel's faithfulness to Torah not as personal piety but as a systemic loyalty that supersedes his loyalty to the state — and they are correct. What they intend as a prosecution strategy is, from the biblical narrator's viewpoint, the highest praise. The "law of his God" is precisely the foundation of Daniel's integrity in verse 4. His enemies have stumbled onto the theological truth of his life.
The Typological and Spiritual Senses
At the typological level, Daniel here prefigures Christ — the one in whom "no fault" could be found (John 18:38; 19:4, 6). Just as Pilate and the Sanhedrin exhausted legal and political avenues before resorting to a charge rooted in Jesus's identity as Son of God, so Daniel's enemies exhaust administrative channels before turning to his relationship with God. Both trials are engineered by envy (cf. Matt 27:18), and both result in a condemnation that is simultaneously an involuntary declaration of innocence.
In the moral sense, Daniel models the integrity the Church calls "the unity of life" — the seamless coherence between faith professed and life lived. In the allegorical sense, he represents the Church herself, whose enemies throughout history have repeatedly found that her ultimate "vulnerability" is her obedience to divine law rather than human expediency.
Catholic tradition sees in Daniel's blameless conduct a vivid embodiment of what the Catechism calls the unity between moral and religious life. The CCC teaches that "the virtue of religion disposes us to have the right attitude toward God" (CCC 1807) and that integrity — the coherence of inner conviction and outward act — is inseparable from genuine holiness. Daniel's enemies are confounded because they encounter a man in whom this coherence is absolute.
St. Jerome, commenting on this passage in his Commentarii in Danielem, marvels that Daniel's virtue is attested not by his friends but by his bitterest adversaries: "Laudatur a persecutoribus quod laudari a martyribus solet" — "He is praised by his persecutors for what is usually praised in martyrs." Jerome explicitly connects Daniel's trial to the pattern of martyrdom: the saint's sole indictable offense is fidelity to God.
St. Thomas Aquinas, drawing on Aristotle's ethics but transposing them into a theological key, would recognize in Daniel the vir prudens — the practically wise man — whose prudence is rightly ordered because it is rooted in the fear of the Lord rather than in self-interest (ST II-II, q. 47). The conspirators' own logic confirms this: they cannot find fault in Daniel's prudentia as a governor, only in his religio as a worshipper.
Pope John Paul II, in Veritatis Splendor (§93), invokes the witness of martyrs who refuse to separate their moral lives from their faith even under lethal pressure — a dynamic enacted proleptically in Daniel 6. The passage also resonates with Vatican II's Gaudium et Spes (§43), which calls the faithful to a seamless integrity between their faith and their professional lives — precisely the integrity Daniel embodies and his enemies cannot crack.
Daniel's enemies effectively conduct a background check and find nothing — no financial irregularity, no abuse of power, no hypocrisy between private behavior and public office. The only "problem" is his religion. Contemporary Catholics face an increasingly analogous situation: in professional, academic, and civic life, fidelity to Church teaching on marriage, life, or conscience is routinely identified as the sole disqualifying liability of an otherwise capable person.
These verses issue a pointed challenge: Would the same investigation of my life find the same results? Is there such a coherence between my stated faith and my actual conduct that my faith would be the only thing anyone could use against me? Or do we compartmentalize — faithful in the pew, compromised in the workplace — in ways that actually give our critics far more material to work with?
Daniel's pattern invites a concrete examination: in contracts, in speech, in how we treat employees or colleagues, in the accuracy of our work — is there anything that would shame the faith we profess? The goal is not a self-righteous perfectionism but the simple, radical coherence of a life ordered entirely toward God, so that when the world looks for a crack, the only crack it finds is the Cross.
Commentary