قَالَ مَا خَطۡبُکُنَّ اِذۡ رَاوَدۡتُّنَّ یُوۡسُفَ عَنۡ نَّفۡسِہٖ ؕ قُلۡنَ حَاشَ لِلّٰہِ مَا عَلِمۡنَا عَلَیۡہِ مِنۡ سُوۡٓءٍ ؕ قَالَتِ امۡرَاَتُ الۡعَزِیۡزِ الۡـٰٔنَ حَصۡحَصَ الۡحَقُّ ۫ اَنَا رَاوَدۡتُّہٗ عَنۡ نَّفۡسِہٖ وَ اِنَّہٗ لَمِنَ الصّٰدِقِیۡنَ ﴿۵۲﴾
قَالَ مَا خَطۡبُكُنَّ إِذۡ رَٰوَدتُّنَّ يُوسُفَ عَن نَّفۡسِهِۦۚ قُلۡنَ حَٰشَ لِلَّهِ مَا عَلِمۡنَا عَلَيۡهِ مِن سُوٓءٖۚ قَالَتِ ٱمۡرَأَتُ ٱلۡعَزِيزِ ٱلۡـَٰٔنَ حَصۡحَصَ ٱلۡحَقُّ أَنَا۠ رَٰوَدتُّهُۥ عَن نَّفۡسِهِۦ وَإِنَّهُۥ لَمِنَ ٱلصَّـٰدِقِينَ
a. 12:32. (close)
1388. The words seem to show that the incident of the cutting of their hands by the women did actually take place; otherwise Joseph could not have referred to it. Either in amazement or being absorbed in conversation, some of them did inadvertently cut their hands. Or the words might mean that by bringing a false accusation against Joseph the women had cut their own hands, i.e. they had landed themselves into a false position. But if nothing actual had happened, Joseph could not have referred to 'the cutting of the hands.' Hasha Lillahi also means, God forbid; or how far is Allah from every imperfection (Lane). (close)
1555. Important Words:
ماخطبکن (what was the matter with you) خطب (khatbun) is the noun-infinitive from خطب (khataba). They say خطب القوم i.e. he addressed the people and delivered to them an exhortation or admonition. خطب المرأة means, he asked or demanded the woman in marriage. خطب means, a thing, an affair, or a business, small or great, that one seeks or desires to do or that may be a subject of discourse; a great thing or affair; or the cause or occasion of a thing or an event; or an affliction or calamity. They say ماخطبك i.e. what is the thing or affair or business that thou seekest or desirest to do; or, what is the cause of thy coming? (Lane).
This verse shows that the King had become so convinced of the righteousness of Joseph that, on hearing of the accusation against him, he at once believed it to be false. This is why the women, judging from the way in which the King questioned them, realized that he looked upon Joseph as a righteous man, and so they confessed the truth. But by so doing they only bore witness to the innocence of Joseph, without in any way accusing Potiphar’s wife. The latter, however, fearing lest after exonerating Joseph of all blame the women might proceed to testify to her misconduct, hastened to confess her guilt, although she had not yet been questioned by the King. She did this to escape the greater shame of being condemned out of the mouth of others and perhaps also to win some credit for speaking the truth without being questioned. (close)
ذٰلِکَ لِیَعۡلَمَ اَنِّیۡ لَمۡ اَخُنۡہُ بِالۡغَیۡبِ وَ اَنَّ اللّٰہَ لَا یَہۡدِیۡ کَیۡدَ الۡخَآئِنِیۡنَ ﴿۵۳﴾
ذَٰلِكَ لِيَعۡلَمَ أَنِّي لَمۡ أَخُنۡهُ بِٱلۡغَيۡبِ وَأَنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يَهۡدِي كَيۡدَ ٱلۡخَآئِنِينَ
The words of this and the following verses were uttered by Joseph and not by the seducing woman as supposed by some commentators. The pronoun "him" in the clause لم اخنه (I was not unfaithful to him) refers to Potiphar. The verse shows Joseph as stating the object for which he had caused this enquiry to be held, which was to clear himself of the possible charge that he had behaved faithlessly towards his master, Potiphar.
The words "the unfaithful" here refer to those who had plotted against Joseph. As Joseph was a Prophet of God, the plotters against him could not succeed, and hence God caused their plot to be exposed and defeated. (close)
وَ مَاۤ اُبَرِّیٴُ نَفۡسِیۡ ۚ اِنَّ النَّفۡسَ لَاَمَّارَۃٌۢ بِالسُّوۡٓءِ اِلَّا مَا رَحِمَ رَبِّیۡ ؕ اِنَّ رَبِّیۡ غَفُوۡرٌ رَّحِیۡمٌ ﴿۵۴﴾
۞وَمَآ أُبَرِّئُ نَفۡسِيٓۚ إِنَّ ٱلنَّفۡسَ لَأَمَّارَةُۢ بِٱلسُّوٓءِ إِلَّا مَا رَحِمَ رَبِّيٓۚ إِنَّ رَبِّي غَفُورٞ رَّحِيمٞ
1389. The clause Illa ma Rahima Rabbi (save that whereon my Lord has mercy) may have three different interpretations: (a) Save the Nafs (soul) whereupon my Lord has mercy, the particle ma standing for Nafs. (b) Save him upon whom my Lord has mercy; ma here meaning, man. (c) Yes, but it is God’s mercy which saves whom it chooses. These three meanings refer to the three stages in the spiritual development of man. The first meaning refers to the stage when man has attained the stage of spiritual perfection—the stage of Nafs-e-Mutma’innah (the soul at rest—89:28). The second meaning applies to man when he is yet in the stage of Nafs-e-Lawwamah (self-accusing soul— 75:3) when man is struggling against sin and his evil propensities, sometimes overcoming them and at others being vanquished by them. The third meaning applies to man when the animal in him predominates. This stage is called Nafs-e-Ammarah (the soul prone to evil). (close)
As stated in the preceding verse, the words I do not hold my own self etc., were uttered by Joseph. The verse thus constitutes a striking commentary on the purity and nobility of mind of God’s Prophets and His Elect. Joseph, as stated above, had demanded an enquiry to be held about the imputation made against him. In this verse he disclaims any intention to establish his own purity or attribute any good to himself by that enquiry. His object, he says, is to show by this means that God does not allow the machinations of dishonest people to succeed against His Prophets and also that no one can tempt into sin those to whom God gives His protection. Joseph declares that he had caused this inquiry to be made, not to make a show of his own purity but to indicate that nobody can lead astray the man whom God Himself protects from evil. As for himself, he admits in the verse that human nature alone—unaided by Divine mercy, which manifests itself through revelation, religious law and Divine grace—cannot protect itself from evil. Man, by nature, is apt to fall into evil and it is God’s connection alone which can lead him to the right path.
The clause الا ما رحم ربی (save that whereon my Lord has mercy) is capable of three different interpretations: (a) save the نفس (soul or spirit) whereupon my Lord has mercy; in this case the particle ما stands for; نفس (b) save that man upon whom my Lord has mercy; in this case ما will be taken as meaning من i.e. that person; and (c) yes, but it is God’s mercy which saves whom it chooses; in this case the particle will be taken as مصدریة and the expression ما رحم would mean رحمة (mercy). These three meanings refer to the three stages in the spiritual growth of man. The first meaning refers to the stage when man has attained the stage of spiritual perfection. At this stage he is known by the name نفس مطمئنة (i.e. the soul at rest or the soul in peace). The second meaning is applied to man when he is yet in the stage of نفس لوامة (i.e. self-accusing soul) viz. when a man is struggling against sin and
his evil propensities, sometimes overcoming him and at others being vanquished. The third meaning applies to a man when his evil inclinations have the better of him. At this stage he is described by the term; نفس امارة (i.e. the soul prone to evil). All these kinds of نفس(soul) have been mentioned in the Quran (89:28; 75:3; 12:54) and have been fully discussed in the Teachings of Islam by Ahmad, the Promised Messiah. (close)
وَ قَالَ الۡمَلِکُ ائۡتُوۡنِیۡ بِہٖۤ اَسۡتَخۡلِصۡہُ لِنَفۡسِیۡ ۚ فَلَمَّا کَلَّمَہٗ قَالَ اِنَّکَ الۡیَوۡمَ لَدَیۡنَا مَکِیۡنٌ اَمِیۡنٌ ﴿۵۵﴾
وَقَالَ ٱلۡمَلِكُ ٱئۡتُونِي بِهِۦٓ أَسۡتَخۡلِصۡهُ لِنَفۡسِيۖ فَلَمَّا كَلَّمَهُۥ قَالَ إِنَّكَ ٱلۡيَوۡمَ لَدَيۡنَا مَكِينٌ أَمِينٞ
In the words, I may take him specially for myself, the King seems to administer a veiled rebuke to Potiphar, hinting that, whereas he (Potiphar) had failed to treat with honour a man like Joseph, he himself would now bestow on him the honour he deserved by admitting him to his special favour. This was the attitude of the King before he had spoken to Joseph. But when he had talked with him, he became still more enamoured of him and hastened to confer high rank upon him. In the Bible we read: And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, "According unto thy word shall all people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou"… "and he made him to ride in the second chariot which he had" (Gen. 41:40-43). (close)
قَالَ اجۡعَلۡنِیۡ عَلٰی خَزَآئِنِ الۡاَرۡضِ ۚ اِنِّیۡ حَفِیۡظٌ عَلِیۡمٌ ﴿۵۶﴾
قَالَ ٱجۡعَلۡنِي عَلَىٰ خَزَآئِنِ ٱلۡأَرۡضِۖ إِنِّي حَفِيظٌ عَلِيمٞ
1390. Joseph preferred charge of the finance department. His choice seems to have been dictated by the desire to give his single-minded attention to the successful running of the department which so deeply concerned the fulfilment of the King’s dream. (close)
Most probably the King offered Joseph the post of Prime Minister, but Joseph preferred charge of the finance department. His choice seems to have been dictated by the desire to enjoy comparative freedom from the material cares and court intrigues which are incidental to premiership and also to give his single-minded attention to the successful running of the department with which the fulfilment of the King’s dream was so deeply concerned. (close)
وَ کَذٰلِکَ مَکَّنَّا لِیُوۡسُفَ فِی الۡاَرۡضِ ۚ یَتَبَوَّاُ مِنۡہَا حَیۡثُ یَشَآءُ ؕ نُصِیۡبُ بِرَحۡمَتِنَا مَنۡ نَّشَآءُ وَ لَا نُضِیۡعُ اَجۡرَ الۡمُحۡسِنِیۡنَ ﴿۵۷﴾
وَكَذَٰلِكَ مَكَّنَّا لِيُوسُفَ فِي ٱلۡأَرۡضِ يَتَبَوَّأُ مِنۡهَا حَيۡثُ يَشَآءُۚ نُصِيبُ بِرَحۡمَتِنَا مَن نَّشَآءُۖ وَلَا نُضِيعُ أَجۡرَ ٱلۡمُحۡسِنِينَ
a. 12:22. (close)
b. 2:106; 3:75. (close)
a. 12:22. (close)
The words, And thus did We establish Joseph in the land, also occur in 12:22, where they are followed by the expression, that We might also teach him the interpretation of things, while in the verse under comment they are succeeded by the sentence, We bestow Our mercy upon whomsoever We please. This is because in the former case Joseph’s mettle was yet to be tried. But now that he had emerged triumphant from the ordeal, he was henceforward to enjoy uniform honour and prosperity.
This verse contains the thirteenth point of resemblance between Joseph and the Holy Prophet. Just as the brethren of Joseph, being jealous of his father’s regard for him, sought to remove him from their way and bring him to grief and dishonour, similarly, the Holy Prophet was compelled to leave his native city by his own kith and kin; but God conferred on him, as on Joseph, honour and distinction; with the difference that, whereas Joseph received his authority and honour from a king, the Holy
Prophet was indebted to no earthly potentate for all the power and glory that came to him. Indeed, the difference in the way in which these two Prophets rose to power and eminence is symbolic of the difference in their spiritual status. (close)
وَ لَاَجۡرُ الۡاٰخِرَۃِ خَیۡرٌ لِّلَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا وَ کَانُوۡا یَتَّقُوۡنَ ﴿٪۵۸﴾
وَلَأَجۡرُ ٱلۡأٓخِرَةِ خَيۡرٞ لِّلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ وَكَانُواْ يَتَّقُونَ
وَ جَآءَ اِخۡوَۃُ یُوۡسُفَ فَدَخَلُوۡا عَلَیۡہِ فَعَرَفَہُمۡ وَ ہُمۡ لَہٗ مُنۡکِرُوۡنَ ﴿۵۹﴾
وَجَآءَ إِخۡوَةُ يُوسُفَ فَدَخَلُواْ عَلَيۡهِ فَعَرَفَهُمۡ وَهُمۡ لَهُۥ مُنكِرُونَ
a. 12:16. (close)
The incident related in this verse pertains to the time when there was famine in the country and Joseph was at the height of his power.
The verse also provides the fourteenth point of resemblance between Joseph and the Holy Prophet. Joseph had risen to such eminence that his brothers could not recognize him because they could not imagine that he whom they had cast into a well and who was sold as a slave could rise to so eminent a position. Much in the same way, the Meccans marvelled at the power and prestige that the Holy Prophet had gained. This is apparent from the spontaneous expression of amazement and surprise by Abu Sufyan, a Meccan chief, at the remarks which Heraclius, the Christian Emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire, made when he received the Prophet’s epistle inviting him to accept Islam. Heraclius, after making some enquiries about the Holy Prophet from Abu Sufyan who then happened to be in Syria, said that if what AbuSufyan had said regarding the Prophet was true, the latter would one day become master of the land under his feet. This remark about the Prophet spontaneously uttered by a mighty monarch filled Abu Sufyan with surprise and he exclaimed, 'The affair of the son of AbuKabshah has indeed become great' (Bukhari, ch. on Jihad). Ibn Abi Kabshah was a term of contempt applied to the Holy Prophet by the Meccans. (close)
وَ لَمَّا جَہَّزَہُمۡ بِجَہَازِہِمۡ قَالَ ائۡتُوۡنِیۡ بِاَخٍ لَّکُمۡ مِّنۡ اَبِیۡکُمۡ ۚ اَلَا تَرَوۡنَ اَنِّیۡۤ اُوۡفِی الۡکَیۡلَ وَ اَنَا خَیۡرُ الۡمُنۡزِلِیۡنَ ﴿۶۰﴾
وَلَمَّا جَهَّزَهُم بِجَهَازِهِمۡ قَالَ ٱئۡتُونِي بِأَخٖ لَّكُم مِّنۡ أَبِيكُمۡۚ أَلَا تَرَوۡنَ أَنِّيٓ أُوفِي ٱلۡكَيۡلَ وَأَنَا۠ خَيۡرُ ٱلۡمُنزِلِينَ
1390A. Jacob had twelve sons, two sons––Joseph and Benjamin, from his wife, Rachel, and ten other sons from other wives. (close)
1562. Important Words:
جھزھم (he provided them) and جھازھم (their provision) are both derived from جھز which means, he fitted out, equipped, furnished or supplied (a bride, a traveller, a corps or an army) with requisites. جھاز means, requisites or equipment, etc. It also means, excellent goods that are conveyed to another (Lane).
کیل (measure) is derived from کال. They say کال له الطعام or کاله الطعام i.e. he measured out the food to him. اکتال علیه الطعام means, he measured for himself the food from him. This is why the Arabs say کال المعطی و اکتال الآخذ i.e. for the giver the word used is کالand for him who receives the word used is اکتال. کیل means, a measure with which corn etc., is measured, whether of wood or iron. Sometimes the word کیل is used in the sense of weighing also, as they say کال الدراھم i.e. he weighed the dirhams (Aqrab & Taj).
According to the Bible, Joseph said to his brethren, "And bring your youngest brother unto me; then shall I know that ye are no spies" (Gen. 42:34). This shows that Joseph declared his brothers to be spies and threatened to take action against them. The Quran, on the other hand, represents Joseph as showing kindness to them. It is possible that, from the way in which Joseph put so many searching questions to his brothers regarding their family and parents, they might have themselves thought that he had taken them for spies. Otherwise, a Prophet of God such as Joseph could not condemn them as spies, when he knew they were his brothers. Such a statement on his part would have amounted to a lie. The Bible seems only to have reported what Joseph’s brothers thought and has not described the facts as they actually happened. Joseph could not possibly accuse his brothers of espionage simply because they failed to bring Benjamin with them. (close)
فَاِنۡ لَّمۡ تَاۡتُوۡنِیۡ بِہٖ فَلَا کَیۡلَ لَکُمۡ عِنۡدِیۡ وَ لَا تَقۡرَبُوۡنِ ﴿۶۱﴾
فَإِن لَّمۡ تَأۡتُونِي بِهِۦ فَلَا كَيۡلَ لَكُمۡ عِندِي وَلَا تَقۡرَبُونِ