Tafsir of Yusuf 12:37

{ قَالَ لَا يَأْتِيكُمَا طَعَامٌ تُرْزَقَانِهِ } in the prison, according to your consistent habit, { إِلَّا نَبَّأْتُكُمَا بِتَأْوِيلِهِ } – an exception from the most general of states; meaning, no food comes to you in any state whatsoever, except the state in which I inform you of it by clarifying its nature, its form, and all its circumstances, { قَبْلَ أَن يَأْتِيَكُمَا }. The summary is: No food comes to you except that I inform you before its arrival that food of such-and-such description is coming to you. Applying the term "interpretation" (ta’wil) to this—even though its literal meaning in common usage is the explanation of words whose intended meaning differs from the apparent meaning—is done by way of metaphor, as this resembles the explanation of a difficult matter. Or, it is relative to the ambiguous food, like the interpretation of what is seen in a dream, and similar to it.

This metaphor is enhanced by the congruity with what occurred in their statement: "Inform us of its interpretation," and because the intended meaning of ta’wil is the affair that leads to an end (ma’al), based on the fact that it originally means causing a thing to lead to another. Just as it is permissible to intend the second meaning, it is permissible to intend the first; and the meaning would be: "Except that I inform you of the speech and news that corresponds to reality, which leads to it." However, this is extremely remote and hardly worthy of attention, as is not hidden from the fair-minded.

It is as if he—peace be upon him—wished to present Monotheism to them, adorn it for them, and make polytheism toward Allah the Exalted appear repugnant to them before answering their request to interpret their dreams, and then answer them regarding that. This is a method that every person of intellect must follow with the ignorant and the corrupt: if one of them asks for a religious ruling, he should prioritize guidance and counsel, inviting them to what is more worthy and obligatory for them than what they asked about, and only then issue the ruling. Perhaps this was incumbent upon him—peace be upon him—so he first described himself with that which is beyond the knowledge of scholars, namely informing of the unseen, and made it a transition to what he intended, like the well-known transitions used by rhetoricians. Informing of the unseen is appropriate for what they asked regarding the interpretation of their dreams; for whoever is like this is undoubtedly truthful in other matters. The appropriateness is strengthened by the specification of "food" from among all other unseen things, as is clear. It is also appropriate for his goal of inviting them to Monotheism, because his truthfulness, his prophethood, and his status as one of the chosen by Allah in their words and deeds have been established. In Allah’s recounting of this is guidance for whoever has a heart, and it incorporates that a scholar’s description of himself—for the sake of benefit—is not forbidden, nor is it considered the prohibited self-praise (tazkiyah).

Many of the prominent scholars held the opinion mentioned above, that the "arrival" refers to arrival while awake. Ibn Jurayj narrated that, while others interpreted it as arrival in a dream. Al-Suddi and Ibn Ishaq said: When he—peace be upon him—knew from the baker's dream that he would be killed, he used another form of speech to distract them from the dream, hoping for their faith so that the one to be killed might receive his share of belief and save his afterlife. So, through his profound knowledge of interpretation, he said: "No food comes to you in your sleep—which you see yourselves being provided with—except that I inform you of what its affair leads to in wakefulness before it manifests." It is not hidden that the motive of hope mentioned is unobjectionable, but the claim of distraction (tansiyah) is not free from objection.

In another narration from Ibn Jurayj, which Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, and others recorded, there is something close to this: he—peace be upon him—disliked interpreting for them, so he answered them by saying he had knowledge of the food that comes to them, without explicitly stating what their dreams indicated, out of compassion for the one among them who was to perish. For when the King wanted to kill someone, he would have specific food prepared and sent to him. When they did not suffice with that and demanded the interpretation, he invited them to Monotheism, again due to his dislike of the interpretation. When they still did not suffice, he interpreted for them and clarified what their dreams indicated.

Whatever the case, the pronoun in "its interpretation" refers to the food, or it is permitted that it refers to what they recounted to him of the two dreams, in the sense of: "No food comes to you as you are accustomed to, except that I inform you of the interpretation of what you recounted to me before that specific food arrives." The intent here is to expedite the notification. As for the claim that the pronoun refers to what they recounted, and the "food" refers to what they saw in their dream, the defect is obvious. On these two interpretations, there is no need for figurative interpretation; rather, the intent is the same as the intent of its interpretation in both cases. Likewise, the hidden pronoun in "it comes to you" refers to the food; its return to "interpretation," though closer, is far-fetched.

Furthermore, he—peace be upon him—informed them that this is not from the sciences of the soothsayers or astrologers, but rather a divine grace He bestows upon whom He wills. Thus he said: { ذَلِكُمَا }. It is narrated that they asked him: "Where did you get this knowledge you claim, and that you are not a soothsayer or an astrologer?" It is also said that they said: "This is soothsaying or astrology," so he said: "That is the interpretation and the unveiling of the unseen." The meaning of "remoteness" in that is to indicate the remoteness of his station and the loftiness of his rank, for what my Lord taught me through revelation or the like—from which knowledge is attained, as it is for the saints and the people of unveiling—may Allah be pleased with them. Some limited it to the first [revelation] and claimed the verse is evidence that he—peace be upon him—was a prophet at that time. In any case, the meaning is that this is some of what Allah the Exalted taught me, or from that category which only the chosen ones attain. He thereby indicated to them that he possesses vast sciences, of which they had heard not even a drop from the torrent, nor a blossom from its flowers.

His saying: { إِنِّي تَرَكْتُ مِلَّةَ قَوْمٍ لَّا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ } is a new clause that serves as an answer to a question arising from what preceded, and as a justification for it. It is as if it were said: "Why did your Lord teach you those sciences of high rank?" He replied: "Because I abandoned the religion of disbelief upon which they gathered: polytheism and idol worship." It is also said that it is a justification for the teaching that occurred (in the previous verse), though this leads to the meaning that "My Lord taught me for this reason and no other," which is not intended. Others say it refers to the content of the declarative sentence. The objection is that what is mentioned is not the cause for the fact that the aforementioned interpretation is "some of what my Lord taught me," nor for it being of that category, but rather for the teaching itself. The "abandonment" implies abstention, as he was never defiled by them at all, as his own words clarify shortly, if Allah wills. He expressed it thus to induce them to abandon the creed they were upon in the best possible manner. The expression of their disbelief in Allah by negating faith in Him—Glorified is He—is to explicitly state that their worship of Him while worshipping idols is not faith in Him, as they claim. By "those people," he intended those described by the title of his people wherever they were; it is also said: the people of Egypt, as they were idolaters at that time.

{ وَهُم بِالْآخِرَةِ هُمْ كَافِرُونَ } specifically, rather than others among the Canaanites who were upon the creed of Ibrahim—peace be upon him—as is implied by the placement of the pronoun between the verb and its object according to some. It is stated that the advancement of the pronoun is for specification, and its repetition is for emphasis. Perhaps the negation of their belief in the Hereafter was emphasized because it was more severe than their negation of the Origin (the Beginning). Reflect on this.