Tafsir Zone - Surah 12: Yusuf (Joseph)

Tafsir Zone

Surah Yusuf 12:24
 

Overview (Verses 24 - 29)

False Accusation and Irrefutable Testimony

“She truly desired him, and he desired her. [He would have succumbed] had he not seen a clear sign from his Lord.” (Verse 24) All commentators on the Qur’ān, past and present alike, have focused their attention on this last incident. Those who have taken their information from Jewish sources mention numerous legendary reports describing Joseph as one driven by insatiable desire, and God unable to restrain him despite all His evidence. He is said to have seen his father’s image on the ceiling, biting his finger. Another such report suggests that he saw several plates of calligraphy, with verses of the Qur’ān, [Yes, the Qur’ān!] denouncing such action, but he continues as though he saw nothing. Then God sent the angel Gabriel, telling him to save Joseph. The angel hit him in the chest. There are many such reports, but they are all clearly groundless and manifestly fabricated.

Most commentators on the Qur’ān say that her desire was physical, whilst his was mental. Then he saw the evidence from his Lord, and he was able to resist temptation.

The late scholar, Rashīd Riđā’, rejects this view altogether. He says that she desired to hit him because of his dignified resistance when she was the mistress to be obeyed. On the other hand, he desired to repel her, but he preferred to try to escape. However, she caught up with him and tore his shirt from behind. To interpret the verse as her desire to hit him and his desire to repel the aggression however is merely an attempt to draw Joseph away from responding to temptation at that particular moment. This is an arbitrary interpretation which lacks proper support.

Looking at the text here, and reviewing Joseph’s situation, given that he had lived for quite some time in the palace, I feel that the Qur’ānic statement, “She truly desired him, and he desired her. [He would have succumbed] had he not seen a clear sign from his Lord,” represents the culmination of a long line of temptation on the one hand, and initial resistance on the other. This is a true description of a goodly human soul, resisting temptation, then weakening a little, then turning to God for support and escaping unscathed. The sūrah does not dwell for long on these conflicting emotions, because the Qur’ān does not aim to paint that moment into a panoramic scene that is far larger than what is appropriate to the story, or to human life in general. Hence, the sūrah mentions Joseph’s resistance at the outset and at the end, with a moment of weakness in between. This then gives us a credible and practical picture.

This interpretation of the text is closer to human nature and to the protection God grants prophets. Joseph was only a human being. It is true that he was chosen by God. That is indeed the reason why his weakness was limited to feelings only, and lasted just for a brief moment. When he saw a sign from his Lord shining in his heart and conscience, he resumed his resistance to all temptation.

“Thus We averted from him evil and indecency. He was truly one of Our faithful servants.” (Verse 24) When he came to himself, he wanted to rush away while she went after him, excited, out of control: “And they both rushed to the door.” (Verse 25) As she tried to pull him away from the door, “she tore his shirt from behind.” (Verse 25) At this moment, a totally unexpected surprise awaited them: “And at the door they met her husband.” (Verse 25) The mature woman who is in control of the situation emerges here. An answer to the question raised by the husband to the very suspicious scene is readily given. An unhesitating accusation of Joseph being the offender is immediately stated. However, she still loves him and does not want him to collect a very severe punishment, so she suggests a safe one:: “She said: ‘What ought to be the punishment of someone who has evil designs on your wife other than that he should be thrown in prison or some grievous punishment?’” (Verse 25) But Joseph would not accept this false accusation, so he speaks out in reply: “It was she who sought to seduce me.” (Verse 26)

The sūrah states here that someone from her household came forward as a witness to put an end to the dispute. “One of her own household testified: If his shirt has been torn from the front, then she is speaking the truth and he is lying. But if it has been torn from behind, then she is lying, and he is speaking the truth.’“ (Verses 26-27) Where and when did this witness give his testimony? Did he arrive with the husband and witness the event? Or was he called in by her husband for consultation as people sometimes call in a respectable person of the wife’s family? This may fit well with the practices of the aristocracy which is often devoid of moral values.

Both alternatives are possible. Neither affects the outcome. His view is described as a testimony because it provides a way for establishing the truth, considering that the woman’s word is set against Joseph’s. Joseph’s shirt was to be examined: if it was torn from the front, then she must have torn it as she ‘tried to repel his assault’. On the other hand, if his shirt was torn from behind, then he was trying to move away from her as she chased him towards the door. In this case, she would be the one who was lying while he stated the truth. The first possibility is stated first because it would mean that she was right. After all, she was the mistress and he was the slave. It was only proper that this possibility be given prominence.

“When [her husband] saw that Joseph’s shirt was torn from behind,” he realized, both logically and practically, that it was the woman who tried to seduce the man, and then made her accusations against him. Here we see a picture of the high class in ignorant, or jāhiliyyah society. Although this picture was drawn several thousand years ago, it is still applicable today. There is clear complacency when faced with sex scandals, followed by attempts to suppress them. Such suppression is the overriding concern. Hence, the woman’s husband merely says to her: “This is indeed [an instance] of the guile of you, women. Your guile is awesome indeed!’ ‘Joseph, let this pass! And you, woman, ask forgiveness for your sin. You have been seriously at fault.’” (Verses 28-29)

That is all he said: it is a matter of awesome feminine guile. It is an altogether too diplomatic approach to something that would make one’s blood boil. The aristocratic lady is addressed in a very gentle way, with the question of seduction attributed to the female sex in general, with an overtone even of approval. No woman is offended when she is told, in comment on her action, that women’s guile is awesome! Instead, she takes this as recognition of her full female status, able to match others with her guile.

As for Joseph, whose innocence is thus established, he is told to let the matter drop. He should not give it too much attention, and should not talk about it to others. This is the main point, so that appearances are maintained.

On the other hand, the woman who tried to seduce her slave and whose guilt is established through his torn shirt receives some admonition: “Seek forgiveness for your sin. You have been seriously at fault.” (Verse 29)

The same sort of low morality is found in aristocratic classes and those close to government in all jāhiliyyah societies, with little difference in substance.

Thus the curtains are drawn and the whole incident is brought to a close. All this without using the sort of language usually associated with pornographic descriptions.