Tafsir of Yusuf 12:12

(Send him with us tomorrow): [The word "tomorrow"] is in the accusative case as an adverb of time. It refers to the day following your current day, and it is used for the future in general. Its root is ghuduw; its final letter (the waw) was elided. The meaning here is: "Send him with us tomorrow to the desert."

(To graze/revel): That is, to expand in eating fruits and the like. The root meaning of ra-ta-ʿa is to eat and drink whatever you wish in abundance and ease. It is said: "He rataʿa," meaning he stayed in prosperity and lived in luxury. Prosperity is called ratʿah (with the ta either quiescent or vocalized). Al-Raghib mentioned that ra-ta-ʿa literally applies to the eating of beasts, and it is metaphorically applied to humans when the intent is abundant eating. Based on this is the saying: "When the tribe is absent for him, he revels."

(And play): That is, by racing, target practice, and similar activities used for training to fight the enemy. It does not refer to aimless play, otherwise Yaʿqub (peace be upon him) would not have approved it for them. Rather, they expressed it as such because it matches his state, confirming what they aimed for by bringing Yusuf (peace be upon him) along, by depicting him in a manner that suits his condition—namely, his young age.

The majority recite (yartaʿ wa yalʿab) with the ya, the jazm (jussive), and the two yas. Ibn Kathir and Abu Amr recite with the nun, the jazm, and the kasrah on the ʿayn. There is disagreement regarding Qunbul concerning the inclusion or elision of the ya, and it is narrated from Ibn Kathir: nartaʿ with the nun and (yalʿab) with the ya (which is the recitation of Jaʿfar ibn Muhammad). Al-ʿAla’ ibn Sayabah recited (yartaʿ) with the ya, a kasrah on the ʿayn, in the jussive mood with the final letter elided, and (yalʿab) with the ya as well, with a dammah on the ba as a new sentence or the predicate of an omitted subject (i.e., "and he is playing").

Mujahid, Qatadah, and Ibn Muḥayṣin recited nartaʿ with a dammah on the nun and a quiescent ʿayn, derived from artaʿna (we let graze), and nalʿab with the nun as well. Abu Raja’ did the same, except with the ya in both. Both recitations are based on the elision of the object (i.e., we let the livestock graze, or something else). In all these recitations, the two verbs are in the active voice.

Zayd ibn ʿAli (may Allah be pleased with them both) recited (yurtaʿ wa yulʿab) with the ya and both verbs in the passive voice. This is explained by the agent of the passive verb being the pronoun of "tomorrow" (the time). The origin is yurtaʿu fihi (he is made to revel in it) and yulʿabu fihi (he is made to play in it). Then the preposition was elided, and the verb was extended to take the pronoun directly, becoming yartaʿuhu and yalʿabuhu. Then it was put into the passive voice, and the pronoun that was in the accusative (as the object) became the deputy of the agent. As for the one who vocalized the ʿayn with a kasrah in the first verb, it is, in his view, from muraʿah (mutual care), as narrated from Mujahid—meaning: we watch over and guard one another.

Ibn Zayd said: It is from raʿy (tending) of camels, meaning: we train in shepherding and guarding wealth, or from grazing on plants and forage; the intent being "we graze our livestock," but he attributed this to them metaphorically, or used "grazing" as a euphemism for their eating. Ibn ʿAtiyyah considered the recitation with the inclusion of the ya to be weak, saying: Its inclusion in such a position is not permissible except in poetry, like the saying: "Does not the news reach you, and the reports spread regarding what the milch camels of the Banu Ziyad met?" It has been said that the estimation of the elision of the vowel in the ya and its likes due to the jazm is a dialect, and is not a matter of necessity at all. Abu al-Shaykh narrated from Muqatil ibn Ḥayyan that he used to recite nalhu wa nalʿab (we divert ourselves and play).

(And we are indeed guardians for him): That is, against any harm reaching him. The sentence is in the position of a state (ḥal). The factor governing it is the imperative verb or the response. This does not belong to the category of al-aʿmal (the governing of two factors over one) as Abu Ḥayyan claimed, because a state cannot be implied; in that category, implication is necessary if the first factor is made to govern. They emphasized their statement with various forms of affirmation: by presenting the sentence as a nominal one, adorning it with inna and the lam, attributing the guardianship to all of them, and placing "for him" before the predicate as a ruse to achieve their goal.