even

The Biblical Aramaic אֶבֶן is the same lexeme as Hebrew אֶבֶן, and the lexica treat it accordingly: HALOT's Aramaic section, BDB's Aramaic supplement, and DCH all gloss it simply "stone" and subdivide the eight attestations by context (building stone in Ezra 5:8; 6:4; the covering of the den in Dan 6:18 MT [English 6:17]; the material of the gods in Dan 5:4, 23; the stone of the dream in Dan 2:34, 35, 45). The noun is a primitive Proto-Semitic form (*ʾab(V)n-), attested independently as Akkadian abnu, Ugaritic ʾabn, Syriac/Aramaic ʾabnā, and in Arabic and Ethiopic; the older derivation from בנה "to build" is not maintained by comparative Semitists. The corpus attests the absolute (אֶבֶן), the determined (אַבְנָא), and the construct in the Ezra collocation אֶבֶן גְּלָל, on which commentators (Williamson, WBC; Blenkinsopp, OTL) divide between "stone of rolling," i.e. blocks so massive they were moved by rolling, and dressed ashlar of the sort attested in Achaemenid-period masonry, the phrase in either case corresponding to the Persian-chancellery description of monumental construction. For Dan 2:34-35, 45 the critical commentaries (Collins, Hermeneia; Goldingay, WBC) read the אֶבֶן דִּי לָא בִידַיִן as the divinely established kingdom of the four-kingdoms schema, with the stone-to-mountain transformation deliberately reversing the quarrying image; the disagreement there concerns the referent of the symbol within the apocalypse, not the lexical sense of the noun. TDOT's article on the Hebrew term covers the Aramaic material alongside it.