Tafsir of Yusuf 12:45

(And the one who was saved among the two) — meaning, the two companions of Yusuf (peace be upon him), specifically the cupbearer — (said, "And remembered") — pronounced with an unpointed 'dāl' according to the majority; its origin is idhtakara, where the 'tā' was changed into a 'dāl' and the 'dāl' assimilated into it. Al-Hasan read it as idh-dhakara, changing the 'tā' into a pointed 'dhāl' and assimilating the pointed 'dhāl' into it. The first reading is more eloquent. In both cases, the meaning is that he recalled what had transpired between him and Yusuf (peace be upon him) (after a period of time) — meaning a segment of time and a long duration.

Al-Ashhab al-‘Uqayli read it as immah with a kasrah on the hamzah and a shaddah on the mīm, meaning a blessing upon him after a blessing. The intent here is his deliverance from being killed and from prison, and the favor shown to him by his king. It is in this sense that the saying is used: "Behold, I do not see one who possesses a blessing (immah) who has awakened with it, but the days leave it as it is." Ibn ‘Atiyyah said: The meaning is "after a blessing" which Allah the Exalted bestowed upon Yusuf (peace be upon him), namely the nearing of his release. This interpretation is clearly far-fetched.

Ibn Abbas, Zayd ibn ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with them), and others read ummah and amaha with a fathah on the hamzah and the mīm (light/un-doubled) with a tanween on the 'hā'. This is derived from amaha-ya’muhu-amhan (meaning: he forgot). It also appears as a verbal noun (masdar), amhan, with a quiescent mīm. It has been narrated from Mujahid, ‘Ikrimah, and Shubayl ibn ‘Azrah al-Ba‘i that they read it this way. There is no merit in the view of those who rejected this reading.

This sentence is a parenthetical clause between the speech and the spoken words. It is permissible that it be a circumstantial state (hāl) of the relative pronoun (al-mawsūl) or of its pronoun in the relative clause (silah); this would require the implication of qad (for emphasis) according to the majority. It has been said that it is conjoined to "was saved," but this is not sound, as some scholars of verification have stated; for the right of every relative clause and description is that its attribution to the relative pronoun and the described object must be known to the addressee just as it is to the speaker. Hence it is said: "Descriptions before they are known are news/information, and information after it is known becomes description." You know that his remembering only became known through this sentence; therefore, there is no meaning in stringing it together with his "being saved"—which was already known—in the sequence of the relative clause.

(I will inform you of its interpretation) — meaning, I will tell you the interpretation of that matter which you find obscure, having received it from someone who possesses the knowledge of it, not from my own self. For this reason, he did not say, "I will give you a religious ruling (uftikum) on it." He followed it with: (So send me forth)

(To one who possesses the knowledge of it.) He intended by this Yusuf (peace be upon him). He did not explicitly name him, driven by his desire that he [the king] would be the one to send him. Had he mentioned him by name, they might have sent someone else.

The plural pronoun is either because he intended the king alone, but addressed him in this manner as a form of veneration, as is customary in the address of kings. This is supported by what is narrated: that when he heard the people's discussion, he knelt before the king and said, "There is a man in prison who is learned and interprets dreams; send me to him." So they sent him. The prison, according to what is narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them), was not in the king’s city. Others said it was within it. Abu Hayyan stated that people today point out the prison of Yusuf (peace be upon him) in the area of the Nile, between it and Al-Fustat, at a distance of eight miles. Allah the Exalted knows the truth of the matter.

Ibn Abi Hatim and Abu al-Shaykh reported from Al-Hasan that he used to read it as "I am coming to you" (ātikum), the imperfect tense of ata (to come). He was told, "It is actually 'I will inform you' (unabbi'ukum)." He replied, "Was he really informing them?" Ibn al-Mundhir and others reported from Ubayy that he also read it in that same manner. It is stated in Al-Bahr that this is how it appears in the Imam (referring to the Uthmanic codex) as well.