Surah Yusuf (12): Verses 37-38

Verse 37: "He said, 'No food will come to you both except that I will inform you of its interpretation before it comes to you...'"

The First Issue: Why did he deviate from answering their question?

The statement in this verse is not a direct answer to what the two men asked him (the interpretation of their dreams). Scholars have offered several explanations for this deviation:

1. To soften the blow: Since the interpretation for one of them involved execution (being crucified), which would cause intense grief and aversion to hearing further speech, Joseph (peace be upon him) prioritized establishing his credibility and knowledge first. This way, when he delivered the difficult news later, it would not be perceived as stemming from malice or enmity.
2. To assert his superior knowledge: They asked him for the science of dream interpretation, which is often based on conjecture. Joseph wanted to demonstrate that his knowledge transcended mere guesswork. He showed that he could speak about the unseen with certainty, something beyond the capacity of all creation. If he could achieve this level in interpretation, it logically followed that he excelled above everyone else in that field. Thus, the preamble served to establish his unique mastery of dream interpretation.
3. Scope of his knowledge (Al-Suddi's view): He meant that his knowledge of interpretation was not limited to dreams alone. This is why he added, "except that I will inform you of its interpretation."
4. Establishing Prophethood: Since he realized they accepted his authority and believed him, he shifted the focus to matters of religion, as correcting religious affairs takes precedence over worldly matters.
5. Saving the Condemned Man: Knowing the other man would be crucified, Joseph strove to bring him to Islam so he would not die in disbelief and incur severe punishment, fulfilling the principle: "that he who would perish might perish upon clear evidence, and he who would live might live upon clear evidence" (Al-Anfal: 42).
6. Interpretation regarding waking life: The phrase "No food will come to you both except that I will inform you of its interpretation" could refer to waking life. Meaning: "No food will be provided to you unless I tell you exactly what food it is, what color it is, what its outcome will be (whether it brings health or sickness)." Another view suggests that when the king intended to kill someone, he would prepare food for them. Joseph was saying: "No food will come to you unless I inform you whether it contains poison or not." This ultimately boils down to claiming knowledge of the unseen, similar to what Jesus (peace be upon him) said: "I will tell you what you eat and what you store in your houses" (Al Imran: 49).

Summary of reasons: The first three explanations focus on establishing his superiority in dream interpretation, while the last three focus on establishing his status as a truthful Prophet sent from God.

Addressing a potential objection:

• Objection: How can this be interpreted as claiming a miracle when he had not yet claimed prophethood?
• Response: Although not explicitly stated here, it must be assumed he had mentioned it previously. Furthermore, the phrases, "That is from what my Lord has taught me," and "And I have followed the religion of my fathers," indicate this claim.

"That is from what my Lord has taught me." This means: I am not informing you through fortune-telling or astrology; rather, I am informing you through revelation from God and knowledge granted by God's teaching.

The First Issue: The meaning of "I have left the religion of a people who do not believe in Allah."

One might assume from this phrasing that Joseph himself was previously part of that religion. The response is twofold:

1. "Leaving" (Tark) means abstaining from something; it does not require one to have previously engaged in it.
2. The sounder view is that Joseph was their slave according to their corrupt belief. Perhaps before this moment, he concealed his monotheism and faith out of fear (Taqiyya). When he revealed it now, it constituted "leaving" the religion of those disbelievers in outward appearance.

The Second Issue: The repetition of "they" in "and they, concerning the Hereafter, are disbelievers."

The repetition of the pronoun hum (they) emphasizes their exclusive disbelief. Perhaps their denial of the Resurrection was stronger than their denial of the Creator. Because they were so extreme in denying the Hereafter, the word was repeated for emphasis.

Note: His statement, "I have left the religion of a people who do not believe in Allah," points to the knowledge of the Origin (Mabda'). His statement, "and they, concerning the Hereafter, are disbelievers," points to the knowledge of the Return (Ma'ad). Whoever contemplates the Glorious Qur'an and the manner in which the Prophets called people to faith knows that the purpose of sending messengers and revealing books is to guide creation toward acknowledging the Oneness of God, the Origin, and the Return; anything beyond that is vanity.

First Question: What is the benefit of mentioning this?

Answer: Since he claimed prophethood and challenged them with a miracle (knowledge of the unseen), he linked this claim to his noble lineage. If a person claims a craft practiced by his father or grandfather, it is not usually doubted. Furthermore, the high status of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was famous. By showing he was their descendant, they would hold him in greater esteem, and their submission to him and the impact of his words on their hearts would be more complete.

Second Question: Since he was a Prophet, why did he say, "I followed the religion of my fathers," when a Prophet must adhere to his own specific law (Shari'ah)?

Answer: Perhaps he meant the fundamental principle of Monotheism (Tawhid), which never changed. Alternatively, he might have been a messenger from God but was following the Law of Abraham (peace be upon him).

Third Question: Why did he say, "It was not for us to associate anything with Allah," when this is required of all accountable beings?

Answer: The phrase "It was not for us" does not mean it was forbidden for them. Rather, it means that God purified his fathers from disbelief. This is analogous to His saying: "It is not befitting for Allah to take a son" (Maryam: 35).

*Fourth Question: What is the benefit of saying, "of anything" (min shay')?*

Answer: The types of polytheism are numerous: some worship idols, some worship fire, some worship stars, and some worship intellect, the soul, or nature. The phrase, "It was not for us to associate anything with Allah," is a refutation of all these sects and groups, guiding them to the true religion: that there is no originator except Allah, no creator except Allah, and no provider except Allah.

The Issue: He said, "It was not for us to associate anything with Allah," and then said, "That is from the bounty of Allah."

The word "That" (dhalika) refers to the preceding statement: the abandonment of polytheism. This indicates that refraining from polytheism and attaining faith is from the bounty of God. He then clarified that this is true for himself and for all people. Finally, he stated that most people are not grateful.

This must mean they are not grateful to God for the blessing of faith.

Anecdote: It is narrated that a Sunni scholar visited Bishr al-Mu'tazili and asked him: "Do you thank Allah for faith or not?" If he said no, he contradicted consensus. If he said yes, the scholar asked: "How can you thank Him for something that is not your action?" Bishr replied: "We thank Him because He gave us the ability, the intellect, and the means. We must thank Him for granting the ability and means, but thanking Him for faith, when faith is not our action, is invalid." This stumped Bishr. Then Thumama ibn Al-Ashras entered and said: "We do not thank Allah for faith; rather, Allah thanks us for it, as He says: 'Those—their efforts will be thanked' (Al-Isra: 19)." Bishr then said: "When the argument became difficult, it became easy [for me to concede]."

Scholarly Note: What Thumama attributed to the verse is false. Allah clearly stated that refraining from polytheism is a bounty of Allah, and then stated that most people do not thank for this bounty, mentioning it as a cause for blame. This proves that every believer must thank Allah for the blessing of faith, strengthening the argument.

Al-Qadi's View: If we take "That" (dhalika) as referring to adhering to monotheism, it is from Allah's bounty because it was achieved through His subtle guidance and facilitation. He also suggested it could refer to Prophethood.

Response: "That" must refer to the immediately preceding statement, which is the abandonment of polytheism. Therefore, abandoning polytheism must be from the bounty of Allah. Al-Qadi's interpretation, referring it to subtle guidance and facilitation, is a departure from the literal meaning. Referring it to Prophethood is distant, as the demonstrative pronoun should refer to the closest mentioned antecedent, which here is the abandonment of polytheism.

Verse 41: "O my two companions in prison, 'Are separate lords better, or Allah, the One, the Supreme Conqueror?'"

Verse 42: "'You worship nothing besides Him except names you have named—you and your fathers—for which Allah has sent down no authority. Judgment belongs only to Allah. He has commanded that you worship none except Him; that is the correct religion, but most of the people do not know.'"