Tafsir LabMethodGitHubTürkçe

Yūsuf 12:41-42

The Qurʾān · Sūra 12: Yūsuf · verses 41-42

This commentary was written by Claude (Anthropic); it carries no religious authority and should be checked against the classical sources.

12/41-42

يَٰصَٰحِبَىِ ٱلسِّجْنِ أَمَّآ أَحَدُكُمَا فَيَسْقِى رَبَّهُۥ خَمْرًا وَأَمَّا ٱلْءَاخَرُ فَيُصْلَبُ فَتَأْكُلُ ٱلطَّيْرُ مِن رَّأْسِهِۦ · وَقَالَ لِلَّذِى ظَنَّ أَنَّهُۥ نَاجٍ مِّنْهُمَا ٱذْكُرْنِى عِندَ رَبِّكَ فَأَنسَىٰهُ ٱلشَّيْطَٰنُ ذِكْرَ رَبِّهِۦ فَلَبِثَ فِى ٱلسِّجْنِ بِضْعَ سِنِينَ

"'My two companions of the prison! One of you will pour wine for his master; the other will be crucified, and the birds will eat from his head. The matter you asked about is decreed.' And to the one of them he thought would be saved he said: 'Mention me to your master.' But Satan made him forget to mention it to his master, and so he stayed in prison a few years more."

The form of the interpretation

The answer is given with the ammā … wa-ammā patternin Arabic the particle of itemisation; each time it takes its answer with a fāʾ. The pattern was treated in its threefold form at al-Wāqiʿa 56/88-94. I do not repeat it here.

And two notes must be entered. The first is an observation about the structure: the interpretation keeps the order in which the dreams were told. The second is weightier: the second interpretation is bad, and it is spoken without softening.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the wording of the verse: fa-yuṣlabu fa-taʾkulu'ṭ-ṭayru min raʾsih. The text does not cover up the bad news. And it is the same mouth that four verses earlier expounded divine oneness. That is, one sees in the same scene that the call is not altered out of a concern to please the one addressed.

قُضِىَ ٱلْأَمْرُ ٱلَّذِى فِيهِ تَسْتَفْتِيَان — "the matter on which you sought a ruling is decreed."

تَسْتَفْتِيَان — root ف-ت-ي, Form X: to seek the resolution of a difficulty. Fatwā is from this root; and fatā (a young man) is the same root — the lexicographers attach it to the sense "of renewed strength". The two men in the scene were called fatayān (two young men) at the head of the passage; now they ask with a verb from that same root. This is an overlap that is a datum of the text.

ٱذْكُرْنِى عِندَ رَبِّكَ

The word rabbika in this sentence was cited as a note on language at al-Fātiḥa 1/1: rabb can be used of a human being only in a genitive construction. I rely on that treatment.

And there is a verbal weave in the verse, worth recording:

ExpressionWord
Udhkurnī ʿinda rabbikMention me — a request
Fa-ansāhu'sh-shayṭānu dhikra rabbihMade him forget the mention — the outcome

The same root (ذ-ك-ر) twice, once as a request and once as a loss.

فَأَنسَىٰهُ ٱلشَّيْطَٰنُ ذِكْرَ رَبِّهِۦ — the disagreement over the pronoun

And in this sentence there is a disagreement in the classical commentaries: who is it that forgot?

ReadingTo whom the pronoun in ansāhu refersSense
1To the man who was savedSatan made him forget to mention Joseph before his master; rabbihi = his master
2To JosephSatan made him forget to mention his Lord — that is, his asking help of a human being is recorded; rabbihi = God

Both readings are transmitted in the classical commentaries; I do not impose a preference.

This is worth recording and, per the method (Method), must be said plainly: because the second reading implies a fault in a prophet, it is disputed in the classical commentaries too, and many exegetes take the first reading as the basis. I impose no preference; but I record that one must avoid turning the second reading into an imputation unworthy of the prophets.

And an indication supporting the first reading is in the text: in the same verse rabbika (your master) is already used of a human being. I record this as an indication, not as a preference.

بِضْعَ سِنِينthe root ب-ض-ع: to break a piece off something. Biḍʿ — in Arabic it is used for an indefinite number between three and nine. The word occurs once more in the Qurʾān: fī biḍʿi sinīn (al-Rūm 30/4) — treated at al-Rūm 30/1-5.

And it must be recorded that the indefiniteness continues: in verse 35 it was said ḥattā ḥīn (for a time); here biḍʿa sinīn (a few years). The duration is named twice, and twice it is not measured. This is a note that accords with the axis of al-Kahf.


The whole of Sūrat Yūsuf