12-69 And when they went in to Joseph, he lodged his brother with himself, saying: I am thy brother, so grieve not at what they do.a
وَلَمَّا دَخَلُوا۟ عَلَىٰ يُوسُفَ ءَاوَىٰٓ إِلَيْهِ أَخَاهُ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّىٓ أَنَا۠ أَخُوكَ فَلَا تَبْتَئِسْ بِمَا كَانُوا۟ يَعْمَلُونَ (۶۹)
12-69a: Joseph gave his real brother accommodation with him and in private told him that he was his brother and asked him not to grieve at what their half-brothers had done, that is not to feel distressed at how the half-brothers had treated Joseph.
12-70 Then when he furnished them with their provision, (someone) placed the drinking-cup in his brother’s bag. Then a crier cried out: O caravan, you are surely thieves!a
فَلَمَّا جَهَّزَهُم بِجَهَازِهِمْ جَعَلَ ٱلسِّقَايَةَ فِى رَحْلِ أَخِيهِ ثُمَّ أَذَّنَ مُؤَذِّنٌ أَيَّتُهَا ٱلْعِيرُ إِنَّكُمْ لَسَـٰرِقُونَ (۷۰)
12-70a: سِّقَايَةَ – سَقیٰ and اَسۡقیٰ mean to give a drink. اسقاء is more comprehensive than سَقۡی, and means to present a drink so that the drinker may drink it as he wants. Examples are: وَسَقَىٰهُمْ رَبُّهُمْ شَرَابًۭا طَهُورًا (their Lord makes them to drink a pure drink) (76:21); وَأَسْقَيْنَـٰكُم مَّآءًۭ فُرَاتًۭا (and given you to drink of sweet water) (77:27); نُّسْقِيكُم مِّمَّا فِى بُطُونِهَا (We make you to drink of what is in their bellies) (23:21). سِّقَايَةَ is the container in which the drink is poured, that is a glass or cup from which the drink is drunk. Further in the narrative it is called صُواع and صاع is a measuring cup. The king’s cup is called صُواع because it also served as a measuring cup (R).
عِير – Is a party that is conveying a load of grain, that is the camels loaded with grains and the men accompanying them. The word however is used as well separately for the two components, the men and the loaded camels.
Joseph was not the one to place the cup in Benjamin’s sack: Who is the person indicated in the pronoun in جَعَلَ ٱلسِّقَايَةَ ((someone) placed the drinking-cup)? Most commentators think it is Joseph who placed the drinking cup in Benjamin’s sack, but the Quranic words create several difficulties for such an interpretation. How can it be befitting for a prophet to put the cup himself in the sack and then have a public announcement made أَيَّتُهَا ٱلْعِيرُ إِنَّكُمْ لَسَـٰرِقُونَ ( O caravan you are surely thieves). Even if an ordinary person was to commit such an act, he would be open to prosecution. The Quran states: وَمَن يَكْسِبْ خَطِيٓـَٔةً أَوْ إِثْمًۭا ثُمَّ يَرْمِ بِهِۦ بَرِيٓـًۭٔا فَقَدِ ٱحْتَمَلَ بُهْتَـٰنًۭا وَإِثْمًۭا مُّبِينًۭا (And whoever commits a fault or sin, then accuses of it one innocent, he indeed takes upon himself the burden of a calumny and a manifest sin) (4:112). The commentator’s response to this is that they are called thieves because they had stolen Joseph from his father. The question however is that the public announcement made before the Egyptian public is that the brothers had stolen the drinking-cup while they were not guilty of it if Joseph had put the cup in the sack. Finally, they recovered the bowl from the sack of one of them and showed them as thieves in the sight of the public. The intention of the Quran can never be that Joseph had put the cup in the sack or had ordered it to be put in the sack. Previously when Joseph wanted his brother’s money to be returned to them, Joseph had ordered his servants to do so. It is obvious that filling the sacks was not a work that Joseph was doing himself or that was performed before him. Hence if Joseph had wanted to put the cup in the sack, he would have ordered his servants to do so as he had done with the returned money. It follows that it was someone else who placed the cup in the sack. It appears from the Quran that just as Joseph’s brothers had acted wickedly towards him, they had acted wickedly against Benjamin as well. Accordingly, when Joseph finally reveals his identity to them, he says: هَلْ عَلِمْتُم مَّا فَعَلْتُم بِيُوسُفَ وَأَخِيهِ (Do you know how you treated Joseph and his brother) (12:89). It is obvious that there is no other recorded incident in which Benjamin had been treated in a similar fashion to Joseph. This is the only incident. This supposition is further corroborated by the fact that they also falsely accused Joseph of theft: إِن يَسْرِقْ فَقَدْ سَرَقَ أَخٌۭ لَّهُۥ مِن قَبْلُ ۚ (If he did steal, a brother of his did indeed steal before) (12:77). Both the accusations were of course false. Instead of providing testimony to clear the charge, they support the claim of theft by implying that both the brothers are thieves. Later when they returned and mentioned to Jacob that his son had committed theft, he blamed the incident on them by saying: بَلْ سَوَّلَتْ لَكُمْ أَنفُسُكُمْ أَمْرًۭا ۖ (Nay, your souls have contrived an affair for you) (12:83) which means clearly that this is their mischief. The real incident appears to be that someone from the brothers put the cup in Benjamin’s sack out of mischief so that he too, like Joseph, may be removed from his father’s presence. There is no doubt, however, that in the Biblical version it is Joseph who instructed his servants to put the cup in Benjamin’s sack. The Bible however is guilty of imputing the most shameful acts to prophets. For example, it has imputed adultery to Lot and that too with his own daughters, assigning partners with Allah to Aaron, idol worship to Solomon, adultery to David. The Quran has exonerated prophets from all these shameful charges and has taught the principle of the sinlessness of prophets. So, if the Bible imputes such an act to Joseph, it is one of the many corruptions of the Bible. The Quran, however, does not do this.
12-71 They said, while they turned towards them: What is it that you miss?ا
قَالُوا۟ وَأَقْبَلُوا۟ عَلَيْهِم مَّاذَا تَفْقِدُونَ (۷۱)
12-71a: أَقْبَلُوا – اِقۡبال means to turn attention to, as in فَأَقْبَلَ بَعْضُهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍۢ (Then some of them will turn to others) (37:50).
12-72 They said: We miss the king’s drinking-cup, and he who brings it shall have a camel-load, and I am responsible for it.a
قَالُوا۟ نَفْقِدُ صُوَاعَ ٱلْمَلِكِ وَلِمَن جَآءَ بِهِۦ حِمْلُ بَعِيرٍۢ وَأَنَا۠ بِهِۦ زَعِيمٌۭ (۷۲)
12-72a: زَعِيمٌۭ – See 4-60a for the meaning of زعم . The meaning of زَعَامَة is to give a verbal surety by a responsible chief, and the surety and chief are called زعیم because of a conjecture that they may not keep their word (R).
The word صُوَاعَ ٱلْمَلِكِ (the king’s drinking cup) shows that the missing thing was not Joseph’s cup but the cup of the king. This is another instance that shows that Joseph had no connection with the cup. Plausibly, the cup was made of gold, and this explains the reason for the detailed investigation.
12-73 They said: By Allah! You know for certain that we have not come to make mischief in the land, and we are not thieves.a
قَالُوا۟ تَٱللَّهِ لَقَدْ عَلِمْتُم مَّا جِئْنَا لِنُفْسِدَ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ وَمَا كُنَّا سَـٰرِقِينَ (۷۳)
12-73a: تَٱللَّه – تا before a discourse stands for an oath (R). In the opinion of most syntax experts, it is a substitute for و but it is not used with any word other than Allah (RM).
12-74 They said: But what is the penalty for this, if you are liars?
قَالُوا۟ فَمَا جَزَٰٓؤُهُۥٓ إِن كُنتُمْ كَـٰذِبِينَ (۷۴)
12-75 They said: The penalty for this — the person in whose bag it is found, he himself is the penalty for it. Thus do we punish the wrongdoers.a
قَالُوا۟ جَزَٰٓؤُهُۥ مَن وُجِدَ فِى رَحْلِهِۦ فَهُوَ جَزَٰٓؤُهُۥ ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِى ٱلظَّـٰلِمِينَ
12-75a: The pronoun (this) in جَزَٰٓؤُهُۥ (penalty for this) stands for the verb, as seen in the previous verse as well, that is the punishment for theft is فَهُوَ جَزَٰٓؤُهُۥ ۚ(He himself is the penalty for the theft). The strange thing is that the brothers first inquire what is it that they have lost and when it is confirmed that it is the cup, they then propose the punishment to be the arrest of the person from whose bag the cup is recovered because they knew that the cup is in Benjamin’s sack.
12-76 So he began with their sacks before the sack of his brother, then he brought it out from his brother’s sack. Thus did We plan for the sake of Joseph. He could not take his brother under the king’s law, unless Allah pleased. We raise in degree whom We please. And above everyone possessed of knowledge is the All-Knowing One.a
فَبَدَأَ بِأَوْعِيَتِهِمْ قَبْلَ وِعَآءِ أَخِيهِ ثُمَّ ٱسْتَخْرَجَهَا مِن وِعَآءِ أَخِيهِ ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ كِدْنَا لِيُوسُفَ ۖ مَا كَانَ لِيَأْخُذَ أَخَاهُ فِى دِينِ ٱلْمَلِكِ إِلَّآ أَن يَشَآءَ ٱللَّهُ ۚ نَرْفَعُ دَرَجَـٰتٍۢ مَّن نَّشَآءُ ۗ وَفَوْقَ كُلِّ ذِى عِلْمٍ عَلِيمٌۭ (۷۶)
12-76a: أَوْعِيَة – It is the plural of دِعَاء and the meaning of دَعۡی is to remember a thing, as in أُذُنٌۭ وَٰعِيَةٌۭ (ear might retain it) (69:12). The meaning of اِیۡعاء is to protect one’s things in a وَعَاء (receptacle). The plural is فادعیٰ (withholds) (70:18). دِعَاء is the utensil in which a thing is protected.
كِدْنَا – For کاد in the sense of اراد see 2:71a. The meaning here is plan.
دین – For the meaning of دین in shariah see 1:3a. Here دین is used in the sense of law. According to Qatadah the meaning is command and decree.
Benjamin stays behind with Joseph: The events narrated do not show that all this is taking place in the presence of Joseph. Apparently, the person who has come to investigate is doing this of his own accord. Leaving the search of Benjamin’s sack for the last, if deliberate, is perhaps because Joseph had particularly honored him. Allah states that it was His will that Joseph’s brother should stay back with Joseph. The use of the word كِدْنَا in the sense of اردنا also manifests this, and the statement a bit later in the verse إِلَّآ أَن يَشَآءَ ٱللَّهُ (unless Allah pleased) shows this happened under Allah’s pleasure and will. If كِدْنَا is taken in the sense of a plan, then Allah says that this is His plan for the sake of Joseph and not that this is Joseph’s plan. In this case there is an indication in the use of the word كِدْنَا that the plan of the half-brothers to prevent the return of Benjamin to Jacob is diverted by Allah in favor of Joseph so that the two real brothers could be together. Joseph could not have kept his brother back without revealing his identity and he did not want to reveal this reality. So, Allah created the conditions as a result of which Benjamin stayed back with Joseph. Although this happened without the knowledge of Joseph but God Who had more knowledge than Joseph did this for him. If Joseph had done this himself then it would not have been an occasion that would befit the statement نَرْفَعُ دَرَجَـٰتٍۢ مَّن نَّشَآءُ (We raise in degrees whom We please) because then it would at best be a cunning trick and not an occasion for نَرْفَعُ دَرَجَـٰتٍۢ مَّن نَّشَآءُ that is of raising by degrees. However, for the conditions to develop organically to the point where Joseph could keep his brother is a testimonial to Joseph having been raised to a high degree where Allah is taking care of his affairs. Thus, when one gives himself to Allah, then Allah creates the conditions to benefit the person.
Accepting the laws of a king of different faith: It can also be derived from this verse that when a person is living under the rule of a king of a different faith, the law of that king must be followed. Joseph was under a king who was not of his faith but nevertheless he followed his laws. This small incident provides the foundation for a grand principle.
12-77 They said: If he steal, a brother of his did indeed steal before. But Joseph kept it secret in his soul, and disclosed it not to them. He said: You are in an evil condition, and Allah knows best what you state.a
قَالُوٓا۟ إِن يَسْرِقْ فَقَدْ سَرَقَ أَخٌۭ لَّهُۥ مِن قَبْلُ ۚ فَأَسَرَّهَا يُوسُفُ فِى نَفْسِهِۦ وَلَمْ يُبْدِهَا لَهُمْ ۚ قَالَ أَنتُمْ شَرٌّۭ مَّكَانًۭا ۖ وَٱللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا تَصِفُونَ (۷۷)
12-77a: Some commentators have tried to justify the accusation of theft levied against Joseph either by distorting some statements in the Bible or by putting forward their own made-up stories. However, the brothers levying the accusation of stealing are a group who had no compunction in taking the life of an innocent person and then lying about it to their father, Jacob. So, it is not far-fetched if they have again resorted to a lie. The matter is quite clear. The half-brothers first separate themselves from the affair of theft and then to prove the accusation of theft on Joseph’s brother, they provide the supporting testimony that his brother Joseph is also a thief. Their objective in doing this is to remove Benjamin from the eyes of Jacob, as they had done previously with Joseph. So, their contention is that they, the half-brothers, are a pious band but Joseph and his brother are thieves. What is it that Joseph keeps secret in his soul? Joseph did not want to reveal his identity; otherwise in response to this accusation, his reply would have been: you accuse me falsely to my face.
12-78 They said: O chief, he has a father, a very old man, so take one of us in his place. Surely we see thee to be of the doers of good.
قَالُوا۟ يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلْعَزِيزُ إِنَّ لَهُۥٓ أَبًۭا شَيْخًۭا كَبِيرًۭا فَخُذْ أَحَدَنَا مَكَانَهُۥٓ ۖ إِنَّا نَرَىٰكَ مِنَ ٱلْمُحْسِنِينَ (۷۸)
12-79 He said: Allah forbid that we should seize other than him with whom we found our property, for then surely we should be unjust!a
قَالَ مَعَاذَ ٱللَّهِ أَن نَّأْخُذَ إِلَّا مَن وَجَدْنَا مَتَـٰعَنَا عِندَهُۥٓ إِنَّآ إِذًۭا لَّظَـٰلِمُونَ (۷۹)
12-79a: There were some among the half-brothers who were good hearted. It is one of them who had said on the earlier occasion: لَا تَقْتُلُوا۟ يُوسُفَ (Do not slay Joseph). Even this time, one of them suggests to Joseph that one of them should be imprisoned in place of Benjamin but Joseph rejects the proposal.