Tafsir of Yusuf 12:32

The fa is for fasihah (elucidating a preceding implicit condition). The address is to the women. The reference, according to what the apparent meaning dictates, is to Joseph—peace be upon him—by the title she used to describe him just now, characterized by a beauty and perfection that transcends human ranks, limited only to the angelic; or by the title of what was mentioned along with the reports of the hands being cut because of him.

The demonstrative pronoun is the subject (mubtada') and the relative noun (al-mawsul) is the predicate (khabar). The meaning is: "If the matter is as you have said, then this is the noble king who transcends human ranks in beauty, or the one for whom you cut your hands, about whom you spoke with such magnification and described in the way you described."

He is "the one about whom you blamed me," meaning: you reproached me for being infatuated with him. Or [it refers to him] by the title you used previously when you said, "The wife of the Aziz is infatuated with her Canaanite slave." In this reading, the demonstrative pronoun is the predicate of an omitted subject upon which the fa has entered after its omission, and the relative noun is an adjective for the demonstrative; meaning: "He is that Canaanite slave whom you pictured in your minds and spoke of as you did; so now you have known who he is, and what is your opinion of us [now]?"

It is said that she intended, "This is that Canaanite slave whom you pictured in your minds, and then blamed me for [being infatuated with] him," meaning that you did not picture him as he truly is; had you pictured him as you saw him with your own eyes, you would have excused me for my infatuation with him.

The use of the demonstrative for the distant (dhalika) despite the proximity and presence of the one referred to is said to be for the sake of elevating his status in beauty, treating his position as so far removed and rare that it is almost impossible for such as him to exist.

Others say that Joseph—peace be upon him—was not present at the time of the initial blame, but was present at the time of this speech. If the reference is made considering the first time, it remains in its original form (distance). If the second is considered, he was near, and the demonstrative was used to treat his high status as one that is distant. It is also possible that he was indeed far from them at the time of this speech so that they would not increase in astonishment and temptation; thus, he was referred to with a distant demonstrative.

Ibn Atiyyah allowed for the possibility that the reference is to the love of Joseph—peace be upon him—and that the pronoun in "fihi" (in him/it) refers to it. He treated the reference as being to someone absent, which is its standard use. However, the context of "I sought to seduce him" (which is her revealing the remainder of her secret after having presented her defense to them and clarified her excuse, for what happened to her had happened to them) makes this unlikely. It means: "By Allah, I did indeed seek to seduce him, just as you have said and heard."

"And he refused"—Ibn Atiyyah said: "He sought chastity ('isma) and held fast to it, and he disobeyed me." In Al-Kashshaf, it is mentioned that isti'sam (the verb form) is a measure of exaggeration indicating vehement refusal and intense guarding, as if he is in a state of protection ('isma) and is striving to increase in it. Examples of this measure include istamsaka, istawsa'a al-fatq (the rift widened), istajma'a al-ra'y (the opinion was gathered), and istafhala al-khatb (the matter became grave).

In Al-Bahr, it is noted that what the Sufis mentioned regarding ista'sama is that it corresponds to i'tasama. As for istamsaka, istawsa'a, and istajma'a, the istif'al form there also corresponds to ifti'al (meaning imtamsaka, ittasa'a, and ijtama'a). As for istafhala, the istif'al corresponds to tafa''ala (i.e., tafahala, similar to istakbara and takabbara). Thus, the meaning is: he refrained from what she wanted of him. Through the act of refraining, "chastity" ('isma) is interpreted as the act of seeking, for that is its linguistic meaning.

It is said that this also refers to his fleeing from her, for he first refused her with words, and when that did not avail him, he sought what would protect him from her through flight. The intended meaning of 'isma is not that which God Almighty placed in some of His prophets which prevents them from inclining toward sins, for that is a conventional meaning that did not exist before; or even if it did, it is not the intended meaning here, as is obvious. The confirmation of the sentence with an oath, even though its content—her seducing him—is what the women were already talking about, is to show her pride in it.

It is also said that it is in consideration of the conjoined verb, isti'sam, as if she organized it because of the strength of the motives to the contrary—given that he was in the prime of his youth, in constant contact with her, and she was seducing him, with what she perceived to be the absence of obstacles. She presented it in the manner of things one denies and refutes, and thus confirmed it. This is what you see. The verse is evidence that there did not issue from him—peace be upon him—that which the storytellers blackened the pages of their manuscripts with. Would that Al-Suddi had sealed his mouth regarding his statement: "He refused after his trousers were loosened."

Then, after she confessed to them what they had heard and discussed, and showed the extent of his turning away from her and his refusal, she mentioned that she would continue as she was, unmoved by blame or refusal. She said, "And if he does not do what I order him," meaning what she orders him to do in the future, just as he did not do what was ordered in the past. Ma is a relative noun, the sentence following it is the conjunctive, and the referent is the pronoun ha (in amuruhu), with the preposition omitted, thus attaching directly to the verb—a common phenomenon with amr (to order).

The object of the first "order" is either left out because her intent is the necessity of obeying what she orders absolutely, or it is omitted due to the indication provided by yaf'alu (he does), which is a pronoun returning to Joseph—meaning "what I order him to do." It is also permitted that the existing pronoun is the one returning to Joseph, and the referent to the relative noun is omitted—meaning "in it." This omission is considered gradual, as they stipulate for the omission of a referent governed by a preposition that it be governed by the same thing that governs the relative noun in phrasing, meaning, and connection. When gradation is considered in omission, the omitted [element] is in the accusative position, and the same is said for such cases.

Ibn al-Munir said in his exegesis that this preposition is among those that feel natural to omit, so the referent is not estimated except as accusative and separated, as if it were said: "Ordered Joseph him," to avoid the connection of two pronouns of the same type. It is also permissible that ma is the infinitive masdariyyah, in which case the mentioned pronoun belongs to Joseph—meaning: "If he does not perform my ordering of him." The meaning of "doing the order" is the performance of its requirement and implication; it is either metaphorical attribution or the estimation of a noun in the genitive (mudaf). She expressed her seduction as an "order" to manifest her exercise of authority over him and to require compliance with her command.

"He shall surely be imprisoned"—using the emphatic nun (the heavy nun). She preferred the passive voice for the verb in accordance with the custom of kings. It is also suggested that this was to imply the speed of this consequence following his failure to comply with her order, as if no actor enters between them.

"And he shall be of the humiliated"—with the light nun. This means the disgraced and debased. It is from sighara (to be small), like fariha (to be happy). The noun is sighar with two fathahs, or sighran with damma and sukun, or sighar with fathah (this is regarding rank). As for body and frame, the verb is sighara like karuma, and its noun is sighar like inan. Some made sighar the noun for this as well, and likewise sighar with the harakah. The most famous is the first.

She emphasized the imprisonment with the heavy nun because it is certain, and the following [the state of humiliation] with the light nun because it is not yet certain. It is also said: because that state of being is a consequence and necessity of the imprisonment, so she sufficed with the light nun for its confirmation after having confirmed the first with the heavy nun. A group recited both with the heavy nun, which contradicts the script of the Mushaf, because the nun there rose with an alif, like lasfa'an (96:15), according to the rule of stopping; it is stopped upon with an alif, as in the saying of Al-A'sha: "And do not worship Satan, by God, so worship [Him]," which is in reality due to its phonetic similarity to tanwin, as it is a single quiescent nun that attaches to the end.

The lam entering the conditional particle is the muwatti'ah (preparatory) for the oath, and its answer occupies the place of the two answers. It is not hidden how severe her threat was, for humiliation has a great effect on the souls of the free, and they may prefer death over it and what it leads to. It is said she did not mention the "painful torment" mentioned in "What is the recompense of one who intended evil for your family..." because she was then in the freshness of her rage and was disavowing that she was the one who seduced him, so it was appropriate there to emphasize the punishment. Here, however, she is in a state of longing, hope, and presenting her excuse before the women, so she felt mercy for him and threatened him only with prison and its consequences.

Others say that her saying "he shall be of the humiliated" was brought in place of her saying there "painful torment," [meaning] his humiliation by chains, by proximity, or otherwise. Perhaps she intended by humiliation and painful torment that which is only by whipping, or that which is by it or something else, or she intended by humiliation that which is by whipping, and by painful torment that which is by it or something else, or vice-versa. In any case, what she sought here is greater than what she hinted at seeking there, due to the waw here and the aw (or) there. Perhaps she exaggerated this in the presence of those women because of the increase of her rage at the exposure of her lie and his truthfulness, and his persistence in not quenching her thirst; and so that Joseph—peace be upon him—would know that she is not in her command under fear or in secrecy from anyone, so that excuses are narrowed for him and causes are blocked for him, and they (the women) might advise him and guide him to comply with her. So ponder this.