ذَٰلِكَ لِيَعْلَمَ أَنِّى لَمْ أَخُنْهُ بِٱلْغَيْبِ وَأَنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِى كَيْدَ ٱلْخَآئِنِينَ · وَمَآ أُبَرِّئُ نَفْسِىٓ إِنَّ ٱلنَّفْسَ لَأَمَّارَةٌۢ بِٱلسُّوٓءِ إِلَّا مَا رَحِمَ رَبِّىٓ إِنَّ رَبِّى غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ
"'This is so that he may know that I did not betray him in his absence, and that God does not bring the scheming of the treacherous to success. I do not declare my own soul innocent; the soul is indeed a persistent commander of evil, save where my Lord shows mercy. My Lord is indeed forgiving, merciful.'"
This is one of the best-known disagreements of the sūra, and it must be given in a table. I do not impose a preference.
| Reading | The speaker | How it is construed | Ground |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Joseph | Verse 51 ends; 52-53 are Joseph's words. Li-yaʿlama — "that he (the vizier) may know"; lam akhunhu bi'l-ghayb — "I did not betray him in his absence" | In verse 54 it is said fa-lammā kallamahu — that is, the conversation continues; and the word rabbī in verse 53 accords with Joseph's other uses of it (23, 33, 50) |
| 2 | The vizier's wife | The admission in verse 51 continues; 52-53 are part of the same speech. Li-yaʿlama — "that he (Joseph) may know"; and wa-mā ubarriʾu nafsī is the continuation of the admission | The speech in verse 51 flows without a break, and ana rāwadtuhu and wa-mā ubarriʾu nafsī stand like two sentences from the same mouth |
This is worth recording and is verifiable from the text: the wording of the verse does not name the speaker. In verse 51 qālati'mraʾatu'l-ʿazīz was written plainly; in verse 52 there is no new qāla/qālat. This is the source of the disagreement.
And per the method (Method) a further note must be entered: neither reading requires an unfavourable verdict on a prophet. On the first reading the sentence is a declaration of humility; on the second it is the continuation of an admission. Both lie within the bounds of the text.
The construction was tabulated at al-Qiyāma 75/2 (the Qurʾān's descriptions of the nafs) and treated in detail at al-Shams 91/7-8. What was recorded there:
The direction of the inclination within a human being. In the story of Joseph: "The soul is a persistent commander of evil" (Yūsuf 12/53). Three states of the soul are often named in the tradition: ammāra (commanding evil — Yūsuf 12/53), lawwāma (self-reproaching — al-Qiyāma 75/2), muṭmaʾinna (at rest — al-Fajr 89/27). All three are expressions that occur in the Qurʾān; but the Qurʾān does not present them as a "system of stages". The systematising is the work of a later period.
I rely on that treatment and repeat the note here as well: in this commentary too the threefold scheme is not presented as a system belonging to the Qurʾān.
أَمَّارَة — the feminine of the faʿʿāl pattern: intensive. Not "commanding" but "commanding much". The pattern conveys continuity and intensity.
On one reading, fujūr is the direction the soul will incline in if left to itself; taqwā requires an intervention. Water runs downhill of itself; to raise it a pump is needed. This reading accords with Yūsuf 12/53.
| Reading | What the exception refers to |
|---|---|
| 1 | To the soul — "save the soul on which my Lord has mercy" |
| 2 | To the time or the case — "save at the time when my Lord shows mercy" |
And I record the following as my own reading, its ground being the presence of the exception: read without the exception, the sentence would be a verdict of destiny; read with it, it is a statement of an inclination. The verse chooses the second — and this accords with verse 24 of the sūra: there too the protection was tied to an intervention from outside (lawlā an raʾā burhāna rabbih).