Tafsir of Yusuf 12:52

The view held by more than one is that "that" is a reference to [the act of] verification, along with the entirety of the narrative that preceded it. It is, therefore, part of the speech of Joseph, peace be upon him, which he fashioned as a summary of what he had initially undertaken: to gird himself for the sake of his purity and the exoneration of his integrity. God, the Exalted, recounted what took place of this in accordance with reality, while observing the established style of the Quran regarding conciseness—such as the omission of [the phrase] "so he returned to his master and conveyed to him the words of Joseph," prompting the king to summon them and ask, "What was your situation?" and so forth. Similarly, as was said regarding "The wife of the Aziz said..." and the rest, this too is [the case here]. The meaning is: The messenger returned to him, saying, "The king has investigated the reality of the matter, and the truth of your innocence has become clear to him; it has become evident that you did not return to that slippery situation with a touch of blame." At that point, he, peace be upon him, said:

(That is so he may know) the Aziz, (that I did not betray him) regarding his honor, (in his absence), meaning: behind his back. It is also said that the pronoun in "know" refers to the King, and the pronoun in "betray" refers to the Aziz. It is also said that both refer to the King, for the treachery of his minister is a treachery against him. The preposition "bi" (in/with) either denotes accompaniment or adverbiality. According to the former, it is a state of the subject of "betray" [meaning]: I abandoned betraying him while I was absent from him; or it refers to the object [meaning]: while he was absent from me, and the two are inextricably linked. It has been permitted that it could be a state of both of them, though that is not substantial. According to the latter, it is a prepositional phrase attached to the verb [meaning]: I did not betray him in the place of absence, behind curtains and locked doors. It may also imply a state.

(And that God), meaning: and that he may know that God, the Exalted,

(does not guide the schemes of the treacherous) (52)

Meaning: He does not carry them out nor does He lead them to success; rather, He invalidates them and renders them vain. Thus, "guiding the scheme" is a metaphor for executing it. It is also permissible that the intent is: He does not guide the treacherous [person] because of their scheme; thus, the negated guidance is applied to the "scheme" while it is logically applicable to the "treacherous ones" as a metaphor for emphasis. For if He does not guide the cause, it follows a fortiori that He does not guide the one who caused it. This contains an allusion to the exoneration of the Aziz regarding her treachery against his trust, and [an allusion] to his [the Aziz's] treachery against the trust of God, the Exalted, when he aided her in imprisoning [Joseph] after they had seen the signs pointing to his, peace be upon him, innocence. It is also permissible that this constitutes, in addition to that, an affirmation of his innocence, peace be upon him, in the sense that: "If I were a traitor, God would not have guided my scheme nor led it to success." The assumption in the expression of some that affirmation and allusion cannot be combined is incorrect; the truth is that there is no impediment to that. By "his scheme," he meant his girding himself and his steadfastness; and naming that a "scheme"—assuming he were a traitor—is literal and appropriate, as is not hidden. Thus, what is found in al-Kashshaf—that he called it a scheme as a metaphor or for the sake of parallelism—is not correct.

It is also said that the pronoun in "know" and "I did not betray him" refers to God, the Exalted. That is: "That is so God may know that I did not disobey Him," meaning: "so that it may become manifest that I am not disobedient, and He may honor me for it, and it may become a cause for raising my rank; and so that it may become manifest that the scheme of the traitor does not succeed, and that the outcome belongs to the obedient, not the disobedient." This is similar to the saying of God, the Exalted: "That We might know who follows the Messenger from who turns on his heels." There are many other such instances in the Glorious Book, except that God, the Exalted, informed [us] about Himself in this [way], whereas others are not addressed in the Noble Book [in the same manner]. There is a type of implication here [in the alternative interpretation] that suggests avoiding this, which is better—especially since the situation is as has already been stated.