Blogging the Qur’an: Sura 12, “Joseph”
posted at 8:00 am on January 20, 2008 by Robert Spencer
Sura 12, “Joseph,” is another late Meccan sura. It was revealed, says Maududi, “when the Quraish” — the pagan Arabs of Mecca, and the tribe of which Muhammad was a member – “were considering the question of killing or exiling or imprisoning him.” It tells the story of the patriarch Joseph, again – as we saw in sura 11 with the stories of other prophets – with a clear message relating to Muhammad and his opponents.
It begins in verses 1-3 with another panegyric to the Qur’an. Ibn Kathir expresses the mainstream Islamic view when he says: “The Arabic language is the most eloquent, plain, deep and expressive of the meanings that might arise in one’s mind. Therefore, the most honorable Book, was revealed in the most honorable language, to the most honorable Prophet and Messenger, delivered by the most honorable angel, in the most honorable land on earth, and its revelation started during the most honorable month of the year, Ramadan. Therefore, the Qur’an is perfect in every respect.” This is not, of course, a perspective that tends to be welcoming of critical examination of the book – as has recently been in the news with the discovery of 450 rolls of film of ancient manuscripts of the Qur’an.
Then verses 4-101 tell the story of Joseph. According to Maududi, one of the principal purposes of this account “was to apply it to the Quraish and warn them that ultimately the conflict between them and the Holy Prophet would end in his victory over them. As they were then persecuting their brother, the Holy Prophet, in the same way the brothers of Prophet Joseph had treated him….And just as the brothers of Prophet Joseph had to humble themselves before him, so one day the Quraish shall have to beg forgiveness from their brother whom they were then trying to crush down.” He points to verse 7, “Verily in Joseph and his brethren are signs for seekers,” as referring to the Quraysh, who should heed the warning given them in this sura.
The Qur’anic tale of Joseph is an abbreviated version of the story in Genesis 37-50, with some notable differences from the Biblical account. Joseph has a dream that eleven stars and the sun and the moon prostrate themselves to him (v. 4) – that is, his parents and brothers. Dreams are to be taken seriously: according to ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas, “the dreams of Prophets are revelations from Allah.” Muhammad himself explained this as not applying just to the prophets, but as a general principle: “A good dream is from Allah, and a bad dream is from Satan. So if anyone of you sees (in a dream) something he dislikes, when he gets up he should blow thrice (on his left side) and seek refuge with Allah from its evil, for then it will not harm him.”
The brothers, jealous, want to kill him (v. 9), but finally decide to throw him down a well and tell their father, Jacob, that he is dead (vv. 15-18). In a departure from the Biblical account, Jacob doesn’t believe them (v. 18). The Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs says “he did not believe them because in another occasion they said that Joseph was killed by thieves.”
Anyway, then Joseph, sold into slavery in Egypt, is the target of an attempted seduction by the ruler’s wife (v. 30). Another detail not contained in the Biblical account is that Joseph “would have desired her,” except that Allah warded him off “from him evil and lewdness. Lo! He was of Our chosen slaves” (v. 24). The sharp dualism in Islam appears as Maududi sees a lesson in this: “Contrast the former characters [Jacob and Joseph] molded by Islam on the bedrock of the worship of Allah and accountability in the Hereafter with the latter molded by kufr [unbelief] and ‘ignorance’ on the worship of the world and disregard of Allah and the Hereafter…” She accuses him of impropriety (v. 25), but Joseph’s innocence is established when it is found that his cloak is torn in the back, not in the front – he was, in other words, fleeing from her (vv. 27-28). Her husband laments: “Lo! this is of the guile of you women. Lo! The guile of you is very great” (v. 28).
The wife then holds a banquet for the women of the city, who are so awed by Joseph’s good looks that they begin cutting their hands (v. 31). Ibn Kathir explains: “They thought highly of him and were astonished at what they saw. They started cutting their hands in amazement at his beauty, while thinking that they were cutting the citron with their knives.” The ruler’s wife felt exonerated: “When they felt the pain, they started screaming and she said to them, ‘You did all this from one look at him, so how can I be blamed?’”
Joseph is ultimately imprisoned (v. 35). When two fellow prisoners ask him to interpret their dreams (v. 36), he first tells them that he is a good Muslim: he has “abandoned the ways of a people that believe not in Allah” (v. 37). He follows the religion of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and “never could we attribute any partners whatever to Allah” (v. 38). He languishes in prison for awhile longer, but ultimately gets a chance to interpret the king’s dream (vv. 46-49). The ruler’s wife confesses her wrongdoing (v. 51) and so Joseph is freed and rewarded (vv. 54-56). Joseph’s brothers come to him for help during the famine, not recognizing him (v. 58); Joseph demands that they bring their youngest brother (v. 60). Muhammad Asad explains how the story then unfolds: “Joseph had wanted to keep Benjamin with himself, but under the law of Egypt he could not do this without the consent of his half-brothers.” But when the goblet is discovered in his brother’s bag, “Benjamin appeared to be guilty of theft, and under the law of the land Joseph was entitled to claim him as his slave, and thus to keep him in his house.” The point of the Qur’anic story is that Allah orders all events, and none can thwart his will: “Thus did We contrive for Joseph. He could not have taken his brother according to the king’s law unless Allah willed” (v. 76). Joseph reveals his identity to his brothers (v. 90), who beg Allah’s forgiveness (v. 91) and receive it (v. 92, 98). Jacob and his brothers go live with Joseph in Egypt (vv. 99-100).
Verses 102-111 emphasize that all this is a warning. Allah tells Muhammad that he revealed the story of Joseph to him “by inspiration,” for Muhammad was not present when Joseph’s brothers plotted against him, so how could he know how it happened unless he is a true prophet (v. 102)? Still, most will not believe (vv. 103, 105, 106), although this is not an invented tale, but a confirmation of existing Scripture (v. 111) – which Scriptures, of course, to Muhammad’s great vexation, did not actually confirm his message.
Next week: Sura 13, “The Thunder”: “If there were a Qur’an with which mountains were moved, or the earth were cloven asunder, or the dead were made to speak, this would be the one!”
(Here you can find links to all the earlier “Blogging the Qur’an” segments. Here is a good Arabic/English Qur’an, here are two popular Muslim translations, those of Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, along with a third by M. H. Shakir. Here is another popular translation, that of Muhammad Asad. And here is an omnibus of ten Qur’an translations.)










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
So just say they’re wrong. Not only wrong, but knowingly wrong.
Everybody else is lying about it, you see.
Jaynie59 on January 20, 2008 at 8:17 AM
This is an example of the strong thread of supremicism that I (as a casual observer, I’m no scholar) keep seeing in Islam. As I understand it, (please correct me if I’m wrong) even the oft heard “Allahu Akbar” doesn’t mean “God is great”, it means “Allah (specifically the God of Islam) is greatest”. It’s akin (to me at least) to hearing someone shout “white power”. I’m sure it gets thrown around colloquially, just as people often say “thank God” or “God bless you” after a sneeze, with no real thought of a supreme being, but it bugs me nonetheless.
trubble on January 20, 2008 at 8:36 AM
There are several places, like this one, where the Quran takes on bits of Jewish Medrashic and Talmudic interpretations.
I haven’t commented on this on previous BTQ threads but here’s verse 11 from Genesis chapter 29, with RASHI’s commentary, taken from Talmudic Tractate Sotah:
Copyright 0, G-d, All Rights Reserved.
Shy Guy on January 20, 2008 at 9:58 AM
I spend a lot of time reading Muslim forums like Ummah.com to gain insight into how Muslims think. The co-existence of ignorance and arrogance is pervasive. They are simultaneously slaves to the Islamic collective and masters over the kuffar. The collective nature of the ummah is most evident in their attitudes toward apostasy. Even those who do not support the death penalty regard apostates with contempt. It seems that members of the collective are not permitted the sin of independent thought. Resistance is futile.
RedWinged Blackbird on January 20, 2008 at 10:04 AM
FYI, from the Jewish Encyclopedia:
Shy Guy on January 20, 2008 at 10:17 AM
Thanks for the info. I never knew the exact origin.
trubble on January 20, 2008 at 10:23 AM
Considering that the individual making this statement, if he is a typical Arab, knows exactly zero languages aside from Arabic, how did he arrive at this conclusion? I’m sure that at it’s best Arabic is better than, say, Ebonics, but that doesn’t mean much when you’ve got other languages out there, including French and English, with much more words (one would assume that words correspond to “meanings that arise in one’s mind”) in which case, more words equals more meanings, more meanings means more subtlety of meaning, means more eloquence, etc. This is probably the (non-terrorism related) Muslim habit that irrites me the most: their constant assertion of things they cannot possibly prove or that are easily disprovable with readily available information. Someone said, “arrogance and ignorance”. Exactly.
If that is “mainstream” (and I’m sure it is), the average Muslim has an absurdly inflated view of his culture’s importance in the grand sweep of history.
venividivici on January 20, 2008 at 1:16 PM
I only wish more people could read just one of these explorations into the difference between the telling of old testament histories by the Bible and by the islamic holy books. I think it would straighten out the misconceptions about the two faiths that have been carefully cultivated
The differences in facts, and viewpoint are huge. When Westerners hear that we share the same books with islam they do not understand that islam has its own version of the Bible that not only reads different, but forces a totally different view of the world, and man’s place in the world. The moral tale of Joseph becomes a different morality.
There is a ton of plain old superstition in islam. Beware the dog with a black spot, what to do if you have a bad dream. Sadly, there is also a philosophy that honors deception and a dual system of justice.
Who would know this if they rely on politically correct information sources?
This article alone would bend a lot of minds. We need to be clear headed if we are to understand the problems that come from using one language that means different things to different speakers.
The semantics of our dialogue with this culture is broken. We need to clear it up fast or we can walk into a problem a lot bigger than 911
You are doing a great service here. I hope it becomes a book that gets read by many
entagor on January 20, 2008 at 1:21 PM
From the WSJ article linked above,
If he’s right, there are a lot of pissed off Islamic martyrs in the after life right now.
In all seriousness, the article, “The Lost Archive” is facinating. It’s remarkable that the Qur’an has avoided any serious historical analysis.
TheBigOldDog on January 20, 2008 at 1:39 PM
“NOT THE BLACK SPOT! A-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h ! ! !”
Shy Guy on January 20, 2008 at 1:43 PM
Replace “Muslim” with “Christian” and maybe you can begin to understand. Your lament is similar to that of many atheists (which shouldn’t come as surprising considering you don’t believe in the Muslim God and neither do they). If they (the Muslims) answered “it’s faith” what would you say then? In religion there is always this “constant assertion of things” people “cannot possibly prove,” Islam is no different than the others.
Nonfactor on January 20, 2008 at 2:04 PM
Come on, you must have heard the old joke that “Christians will condemn you to Hell, Muslims will try to send you there”.
I allocate my anti-religion activities in direct proportion to the amount of real-life annoyance a given religion causes ME. Therefore, I allocate about 99.9% of my available anti-religious feelings toward Islam and the remainder spread among whatever religion’s got an annoying figure in the news that day, like when Pat Robertson said 9/11 was divine punishment. Happy now?
venividivici on January 20, 2008 at 2:14 PM
Just a touch of background on Ms. Neuwirth, in passing words:
From Jihad Watch’s Hugh Fitzgerald, Islam, scholarship, and appropriation, January 17, 2006.
Shy Guy on January 20, 2008 at 2:17 PM
1 year to go till bush is gone happy aniversary.
daileyck1 on January 20, 2008 at 2:37 PM
A very interesting read here: The Syro-Aramaic Reading Of The Koran including a picture of “5th Century Christian mural representing the white grapes symbolism”
pedestrian on January 20, 2008 at 2:38 PM
I’m not a frequent visitor to this blog for several reasons but when we look at stories written about the same person but one was written millinea before the other. The one written last is most likely written to meet an agenda.
As far as things being written and not being able to prove them, look at the book, “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” for proof of the truthfulness of the Bible. That should stir it a bit.
rightwingpastor on January 20, 2008 at 2:39 PM
daileyck1 @ 2:37 PM
?????????
Wrong thread perhaps?
;-)
Pachyderm on January 20, 2008 at 2:53 PM
rightwingpast @ 2:39PM
Excellent book!
;-)
Pachyderm on January 20, 2008 at 2:55 PM
This happens a lot in the Qur’an. Borrowings from Judaism, Christianity, and even Zoroastrianism that are only half understood, then mangled and thrown together in a mish-mash to serve Muhammad’s needs. I think it’s ibn Warraq in Why I am not a Muslim who ventures that Muhammad really wanted to be accepted by the Jews of Mecca as a Jewish prophet. When they rejected him, he created his own religion in an “I’ll show you” moment.
Great series, Robert. I’m looking forward to future installments.
–Anthony (Los Angeles)
irishspy on January 20, 2008 at 3:41 PM
The Syriac textual analysis method may not affect the extremist element, but it may serve as part of a broader strategy to moderate and mobilize peaceful and/or intellectual Muslims to work against violence perpetrated in the name of their faith. Unfortunately, it’s not likely to be successful if it is instigated by kuffar.
ConstantSorrow on January 20, 2008 at 4:30 PM
More of the hoodoo at work: all them ancient dooods had to be muslims. The perverters came later to obfuscate & deceive. The deniers of today are simply infidels – ’cause it’s all about the mohammed!
Question for you, Robert Spencer: Sura 12:25-28 shows Joseph innocent this fleshly desire, and the woman obviously guilty for the sin, so does the koran ever state why Joseph was imprisoned, and by whom?
locomotivebreath1901 on January 20, 2008 at 6:24 PM
If it turned out that even a small part of the Qur’an could be shown to be pre-Arabic, that would have a major impact on how Islam was perceived outside the Arab world and would greatly reduce how authoritative it would seem to potential recruits. That would make life a whole lot better for people in border regions such as Thailand and Indonesia.
pedestrian on January 20, 2008 at 6:58 PM
It debatable whether there is a difference between the “Muslim God” and the “Christian God”. Many Christians believe that Muslims do not worship the same God as they do. Some claim that “Allah” is actually the “Moon God”. That’s why many Christians go out of their way to use the term “Allah” instead of “God” whenever they discuss Islam and Muslims. The dumb Christians tell people they don’t think Muslims worship the same god. The smart ones don’t go any further than using the term “Allah”. Whenever you see a Christian use the term “Allah” you can bet they don’t for a second believe that Muslims and Christians are talking about the same being.
As to your point and your last sentence? There is no comparison between Christians and Muslims. They are not at all the same.
A Christian will answer with “it’s faith” and is driven by a desire to save you. He has your best interests at heart and wants to spread his love of Jesus Christ to all who will listen because he wants to make things better, he doesn’t want you to burn in Hell. He wants to save you by opening your heart and mind to the greatest love and eternal life through Jesus Christ. He means well.
A Muslim will answer with “it’s faith” and is driven by rules and laws that are beyond his own thinking. He can’t save you. If Allah wills it, you are already doomed and there is nothing that can save you. A Muslims only desire, from his duty as a Muslim, is to stop you from contaminating the world with your presence. You are an insult to Islam by your mere disbelief in it.
Jaynie59 on January 20, 2008 at 8:02 PM
Christians, Muslims, and Jews all agree there is only one God. So none of them can really think that they can be worshipping different gods, because that would require there to exist more than one god to be worshipped. The only meaningful question is which form of worship is the appropriate form. Christians and Jews believe that God is rational and unchanging, and wants the Jews and all people to be saved. Muslims believe God’s inerrant revealed word can be revised at a later date, and wants Jews and other infidels to be killed. If you think those are two descriptions of a single God, ok, but most people conclude that at least one of them is completely wrong.
pedestrian on January 20, 2008 at 8:33 PM
Mohammad’s former grade school teacher, Mrs. Abu Babu came up to him in a crowded mosque, in Medina, grabbed him by the ear, and yanked him to the front of the gathering. As she smacked him on the bottom with a thorny stick, she scolded the “prophet” thusly:
“You get an F for plagiarizing this material, you bold, brazen article! An F! Stealing another person’s work is against the rules, Mohammad! Or are you Mr. Special, who can pilfer another author’s writing, and get away with it, scot free! Well, not in my classroom, you don’t!”
Smack!
(She was assassinated that very night by one of the Messenger’s loyal henchmen.)
profitsbeard on January 20, 2008 at 8:39 PM
Wrong. Speaking for myself and the Christians with whom I’ve come into contact, we believe we are worshiping the one and only God of the Old and New Testaments, God of Jacob, etc. We also believe that Muslims believe in a higher power, but this “Allah” fellow doesn’t exist.
emailnuevo on January 20, 2008 at 8:49 PM
Amend: I remember a lesson from a Muslim scholar who emphasized the parallels between Satan and Allah, so that idea’s floating around too. But it’s unfair (and inaccurate) to say that just because a religion is monotheistic, it believes or must believe it shares God with all monotheistic religions. Quite the opposite, actually.
emailnuevo on January 20, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Sorry, I’ve read your post three times now and if you had a point, you seemed to have lost it before you finished writing it.
You also don’t seem to know what Christians, Jews, or Muslims believe.
Next time you’re bored try Google.
Jaynie59 on January 20, 2008 at 9:04 PM
I wasn’t talking about radical Muslims and what their goals are, I was talking about the logic associated in believing in something when people ‘constantly assert things they cannot prove or be disproved’ and how Islam and Christianity are similar in this regard. It just strikes me as funny that a Christian (assumingly) would make the same complaints against Islam that atheists make against Islam and Christianity (and every other religion)
Nonfactor on January 21, 2008 at 12:54 AM
locomotive breath:
The text seems to be suggesting that the ruler’s wife exonerated herself by showing the other women how handsome and hence irresistible Joseph was. They’re all apparently going to seduce him now, so that he prays to go to prison (v. 33) and the men, presumably their husbands, seeing all this, decide to imprison him (v. 35). Then later the ruler’s wife admits she was trying to seduce him (v. 51) and he is released (v. 54).
Robert Spencer on January 21, 2008 at 2:23 AM
Someone’s up burning the midnight oil reading the Quran. :)
Shy Guy on January 21, 2008 at 3:48 AM
Thank you Mr. Spencer keep the truth coming and it will bury the falsehoods of the fundamentalists.
MSGTAS on January 21, 2008 at 8:54 AM
The seductive wife wasn’t “honor killed” in today’s passage. Why not? and is the practice supported elsewhere in the koran?
jdpaz on January 21, 2008 at 11:57 AM
jdpaz,
No, she wasn’t, and no, it isn’t.
Robert Spencer on January 21, 2008 at 1:51 PM
Jews, Christians and Muslims are all monothestic. It is the nature of the god they worship that is different. In both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament God’s love and His desire to engage in relationship with mankind are constant theme. For a few (of many!) examples from the Hebrew (Old Testament) Bible and the New Testament look at Deuteronomy 7:9, “Know therefore that the LORD your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commands.” and, my favorite, 1 John 4:16b, “God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him.”. This invitation from God to have a personal relationship with Him honors His gift of free will to us and is at the core of Judaism and Christianity.
I detect no such themes in the Koran. Just the Allah-is-and-you-better-believe-that-but-even-if-you-don’t-Allah-has-already-predestined-everything-about-you theme. Love and free will are not on Allah’s resume.
All three are monotheistic; the similarities end there.
Bubba Redneck on January 21, 2008 at 3:49 PM
Profitsbeard, THAT is funny!!!!!!! The mental image of this has made my day!
Bubba Redneck on January 21, 2008 at 3:54 PM
Mr. S, where does it come from? Short version, just point me in the right direction and I can look it up.
Thanks.
dentalque on January 21, 2008 at 4:07 PM
dentalque,
As far as I know it is pagan, pre-Islamic. I’ve seen Islamic apologists attribute it to pagan, Hindu, AND Judeo-Christian influences. But its exact origins I do not know.
It is widely accepted in some areas of the Muslim world today because all too often it is justified on Islamic grounds, despite its lack of attestation in the Qur’an and Sunnah. In 2003, the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. In a sadly typical consequence of this early last year, a Jordanian man who murdered his sister because he thought she had a lover was given a three-month sentence, which was suspended for time served, allowing him to walk free. The Yemen Times just a few weeks ago published an article insisting that violence against women is necessary for the stability of the family and the society, and invoking Islam to support this view.
Robert Spencer on January 21, 2008 at 4:40 PM
Thanks.
Once again I believe I am only scratching the surface. Someone could write a PhD thesis on that!
Or to put it another way, Islam dives downn a very deep rabbit hole, Alice.
dentalque on January 21, 2008 at 6:51 PM
Explain the Trinity, will ya?
Never mind. I’ve been trying to get someone to explain it since I was 14 and nobody has managed to do it yet.
All Gods are imaginary. Arguing that believing in only One True God is somehow more logical and correct than believing in multiple Gods is moronic. But it is one of the basic arguments of Islam against all unbelievers. God has no partners, no matter what all the other religions may call them.
Don’t ever tell a Muslim they “worship” Muhammed. They get very pissed off. Even though the very definition of being a Muslim is the belief that there is only one God and Muhammed was his Messenger (PBUH), they will never admit that Muhammed was anything more that God’s last Prophet.
But make sure you don’t dis him because they’ll kill you.
Jaynie59 on January 22, 2008 at 6:17 AM
*sigh* pitty I’m coming along so late…ah well, here’s a great site, totally on topic and a nice easy read too. It does a much better job of explaining the Trinity than many Christians have done when discussing the concept with me!
The Doctrine of the Trinity From Answering Islam
I especially liked this ending portion of the article…
emphasis mine
Auralae on April 14, 2008 at 11:52 PM