
Zoroaster is far older than Daniel. If anything, one could claim that,
in a sense, Daniel is a descendant of Zoroaster; as Daniel, though being
Hebrew, has assimilated into Zoroastrianism and has successfully
introduced the religion into the Tanakh of Judaism. [However, the majority 
of the book is in Hellenistic Aramaic (not Babylonian Aramaic) and only has
Kethuvim or Writing status.]

Ref: Encyclopedia of Religion, Mircea Eliade:

DANIEL, or, in Hebrew, Daniyye'l; hero of the biblical book that bears his name.
Daniel is presented as a Jew in the Babylonian exile who achieved notoriety in
the royal court for his dream interpretations and cryptography and for his
salvation from death in a lion's pit. He also appears in the last chapters of
the book as the revealer of divine mysteries and of the timetables of Israel's
restoration to national-religious autonomy. As a practitioner of oneiromancy in
the court, described in Daniel 1-6 (written in the third person), Daniel per-
forms his interpretations alone, while as a visionary-apocalyptist, in Daniel
7-12 (written in the first person), he is in need of an angel to help him
decode his visions and mysteries of the future. It is likely that the name
Daniel is pseudonymous, a deliberate allusion to a wise and righteous man known
from Ugaritic legend and earlier biblical tradition. (Ez. 14:4,28:3).
  The authorship of the book is complicated not only by the diverse narrative
voices and content but by its language: Daniel 1:1-2:4a and 8-12 are written in
Hebrew, whereas Daniel 2:4b-7:28 is in Aramaic. The language division parallels
the subject division (Daniel 1-6 concerns legends and dream interpretations;
7-12 concerns apocalyptic visions and interpretations of older prophecies). The
overall chronological scheme as well as internal thematic balances (Daniel 2-7
is chiliastically related) suggest an attempt at redactional unity. After the
prefatory tale emphasizing the life in court and the loyalty of Daniel and some
youths to their ancestral religion, a chronological ordering is discernable: a
sequence from King Nebuchadrezzar to Darius is reported (Dn. 7-12). Much of
this royal dating and even some of the tales are problematic: for example,
Daniel 4 speaks of Nebuchadrezzar's transformation into a beast, a story that
is reported in the Qumran scrolls of Nabonidus; Belshazzar is portrayed as the
last king of Babylon, although he was never king; and Darius is called a Mede
who conquered Babylon and is placed before Cyrus II of Persia, although no such
Darius is known (the Medes followed the Persians, and Darius is the name of
several Persian kings). Presumably the episodes of Daniel 2-6, depicting a
series of monarchical reversals, episodes of ritual observances, and reports of
miraculous deliverances were collected in the Seleucid period (late fourth to
mid-second century BCE) in order to reinvigorate waning Jewish hopes in divine
providence and encourage steadfast faith.
  The visions of Daniel 7-12, reporting events from the reign of Belshazzar to
that of Cyrus II (but actually predicting the overthrow of Seleucid rule in
Palestine), were collected and published during the reign of Antiochus IV prior
to the Maccabean Revolt, for it was then (beginning in 168 BCE) that the Jews
were put to the test concerning their allegiance to Judaism and their ancestral
traditions, and many refused to desecrate the statues of Moses and endured a
martyr's death for their resolute trust in divine dominion. All of the visions
of Daniel dramatize this dominion in different ways: for example, via images of
the enthronement of a God of judgment, with a "son of man" invested with rule
(this figure was interpreted by Jews as Michael the archangel and by Christians
as Christ), in chapter 7; via zodiacal images of cosmic beasts with bizarre
manifestations, as in chapter 8; or via complex reinterpretations of ancient
prophecies, especially those of Jeremiah 25:9-11, as found in Daniel 9-12.
  The imagery of the four beasts in chapter 7 (paralleled by the image of four
metals in chapter 2), representing four kingdoms to be overthrown by a fifth
monarchy of divine origin, is one of the enduring images of the book; it sur-
vived as a prototype of Jewish and Christian historical and apocalyptic schemes
to the end of the Middle Ages. The role and power of this imagery in the
fifteenth and sixteenth century work of the exegete Isaac Abravanel, the
scientist Isaac Newton, and the philosopher Jean Bodin and among the Fifth
Monarchy Men of seventeenth century England, for example, is abiding testimony
to the use of this ancient topos in organizing the chiliastic imagination of
diverse thinkers and groups. The schema is still used to this day by various
groups predicting the apocalyptic advent.
  The encouragement in the face of religious persecution that is found and
propagandized in Daniel 11-12 contains a remarkable reinterpretation of Isaiah
52:13-53:12, regarding the suffering servant of God not as all Israel but as
the select faithful. Neither the opening stories about Daniel and the youths nor
the final martyrological allusions advocate violence or revolt; they rather
advocate a stance of piety, civil disobedience, and trustful resignation.
Victory for the faithful is in the hands of the archangel Michael, and the
martyrs will be resurrected and granted astral immortality. Persumably the
circles behind the book were not the same as the Maccabean fighters and may
reflect some proto-Pharisaic group of hasidim, or pietists. The themes of
resistance to oppression, freedom of worship, preservation of monotheistic
integrity, the overthrow of historical dominions, and the acknowledgement of
the God of heaven recur throughout the book and have served as a token of
trust for the faithful in their darkest hour.