In the Shade of the Qur'an by Sayyid Qutb

This passage relates the second episode of Joseph’s story, after he had reached Egypt where he was sold as a slave. However, the man who bought him felt that the boy was a good person. Such feelings may be sensed from a person’s looks, particularly if they are coupled with good manners. Hence the man recommends his wife to take good care of the boy. Here begins the first thread in how his dream comes true.

But another trial of a totally different type was awaiting Joseph when he reached his prime. Prior to this, he would have been given wisdom and knowledge which would help him confront the forthcoming trial, one which only those on whom God bestows His grace can stand up to and resist. It was a trial of seduction in palaces where the aristocratic environment is often characterized by loose morality. Joseph emerged unscathed from it in his moral and religious values.

The man from Egypt who bought him said to his wife: Be kind to him. He may well be of use to us, or we may adopt him as our son. Thus We established Joseph in the land, and We imparted to him some understanding of the real meaning of statements. God always prevails in whatever be His purpose; though most people may not know it.

(Verse 21)

The sūrah does not as yet reveal the identity of the person who bought him. After a long time we learn that he is a person in a very high position, perhaps Egypt’s chief minister. But for now we only know that Joseph has reached a safe place, and that his first trial is over, and that bright prospects await him.

“Be kind to him.” (Verse 21) This is how most translators of the Qur’ān render the first statement said by the man who bought Joseph. Literally the man says: “Be generous in his place of abode.” Although this is meant to be an instruction to treat him kindly, the expression signifies greater kindness to be contrasted with his stay in the well and all the fears that were associated with that experience.

But the man goes further and tells his wife of what he hopes for the boy’s future:

“He may well be of use to us, or we may adopt him as our son.” (Verse 21) Perhaps they did not have any children, as some reports suggest. Hence, the man started thinking that should the boy prove himself to be up to his master’s expectations, with regard to intelligence, character and good looks, he might adopt him as his own.

At this point in the narrative, the sūrah pauses a little to state that all this was God’s arrangement. It was through His design that Joseph was established in the land. This began with him occupying a firm position in the man’s heart and in his home. The sūrah then says that Joseph would continue along the same road, and that God would give him the faculty to interpret statements properly and accurately. It comments on the early steps in consolidating Joseph’s position by saying that God’s will shall always be done. Nothing can impede or stop it. He is in full control of everything in the universe. “Thus We established Joseph in the land, and We imparted to him some understanding of the real meaning of statements. God always prevails in whatever be His purpose.” (Verse 21)

Here we see Joseph caught between what his brothers wanted to do to him and what God wanted for him. Since God prevails in whatever His purpose may be, His will was done. Joseph’s brothers could not achieve their purpose: “God always prevails in whatever be His purpose, though most people may not know it.” (Verse 21) Most people do not know that God’s law always operates, and that His will is always done.

The sūrah goes on to state that what God willed for Joseph came to pass. This is a reference to what the sūrah stated: “We imparted to him some understanding of the real meaning of statements.” (Verse 21) Furthermore, when Joseph attained adulthood, more was given to him: “And when he attained his full manhood, We bestowed on him wisdom and knowledge. Thus do We reward those who do good.” (Verse 22) He was given a good sense to judge matters well, and also knowledge of the meaning of statements or the interpretation of dreams, or what is more general, such as knowledge of life and its different circumstances. The statement here is very general, admitting broad interpretation. That was Joseph’s reward for having done well in both belief and behaviour: “Thus do We reward those who do good.” (Verse 22)

At this point Joseph experiences the second trial in his life. It is much more severe and profound than the first one. It comes when he has been given wisdom and knowledge as a gesture of God’s grace. Hence, he faces it squarely, and he is saved from it as a reward for doing good. This trial takes the form of temptation, and the sūrah paints a very charged picture of the whole encounter, when Joseph was vulnerable to great risks.

She in whose house he was living tried to seduce him. She bolted the doors and said, ‘Come.’ He said: ‘God protect me. Goodly has my master made my stay here. Those who do wrong come to no good.’ She truly desired him, and he desired her. [He would have succumbed] had he not seen a clear sign from his Lord. Thus We averted from him evil and indecency. He was truly one of Our faithful servants. And they both rushed to the door. She tore his shirt from behind. And at the door they met her husband. She said: ‘What ought to be the punishment of someone who had evil designs on your wife other than that he should be thrown in prison or some grievous punishment.’ [Joseph] said: It was she who sought to seduce me.’ 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.’ When [her husband] saw that Joseph’s shirt was torn from behind, he said 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 23-29)

The sūrah does not mention the ages of Joseph and the woman at the time. So let us consider the matter and estimate their respective ages.

Joseph was in early adolescence at the time the caravan picked him up and sold him in Egypt. He must have been around 14, or maybe less, but certainly no more than that. He was at an age when the Arabic term, ghulām, may be applied to him.

After that he would be described as a youth, then as a man. At that time, the woman was already married, and apparently neither she nor her husband had had any children. This is implied by her husband’s words, “We may adopt him as a son”. (Verse 21) The thought of adoption does not normally occur unless the one who entertains it is childless, and has practically given up hope of having a child. This means that she must have been married for quite a long time, which was sufficient for them to realize that they would not have a child. Moreover, the man who was Egypt’s chief minister must have been at least 40 years of age, and she, his wife, around 30.

Furthermore, we expect that at the time of this event, she must have been at least 40, and Joseph probably 25 or near to that. We imagine that this was her age because her behaviour during the event and subsequently shows that she was a woman of intelligence, self-possessed but bold, scheming and infatuated at the same time.

Further evidence to support this is found in the words of those women who talked about her, saying: “The Chief Minister’s wife is trying to seduce her slave lad.” (Verse 30)

Although the Arabic word, fatā, rendered here as ‘slave lad’ stresses the sense of his slavery, it would not have been said unless Joseph’s age supported it. This is more likely, weighing up all the evidence in the text.

We have discussed all this in order to arrive at the conclusion that Joseph’s trial was not merely about resisting temptation. His real trial was that he spent all his adolescent years in this palace, with this woman who was between 30 and 40 years of age, with all that goes on in palaces and in an environment which may be best described by the husband’s attitude when he saw his wife with Joseph. All that he had to say was: “Joseph, let this pass! And you, woman, ask forgiveness for your sin. You have been seriously at fault.” (Verse 29)

It is a social environment in which women speak ill of the chief minister’s wife, and her reply is to invite them to a sumptuous banquet during which she orders Joseph to walk in front of them. They, in turn, are all infatuated with him, and make their feelings public. She then admits to what she had done: “Indeed I have tried to seduce him, but he guarded his chastity. Now, however, if he does not do what I bid him, he shall certainly be thrown in prison, and shall indeed be humiliated.” (Verse 32)

A social environment which allows these attitudes is a special one. It is that of affluent aristocracy. Joseph was a slave lad who spent his adolescent years in such an environment. That is indeed the long trial which he endured. He resisted its influences, temptations, frivolity and wicked designs. His age and that of the woman under whose roof he had lived for such a long period are significant in estimating the pressure he was under, the gravity of his trial and his long resistance. As for this particular incident, it would not have been particularly difficult for Joseph to resist, had it come suddenly, without long preparation. It would have been made easier by the fact that he was the target of temptation, not the seeker. For a man may find a woman who throws herself at him not very appealing.

Let us now examine the text as it describes the situation: “She in whose house he was living tried to seduce him. She bolted the doors and said, ‘Come.’” (Verse 23) This time it was a bold attempt at seduction, with an open invitation to go the full course. The bolting of the doors only comes at the last moment. The woman was already at the point when desire is at its strongest. Hence, she calls out to him, ‘Come’. This bold, crude invitation is never the first one made by a woman. Indeed, it is of the ultimate type which may never be used unless the woman is forced to resort to it. The young man was living in her house and his growth, strength and development were all there for her to see, just as her own femininity was at its optimum. There must, therefore, have been earlier attempts at gentle persuasion before she resorted to this crude and sudden invitation.

“He said: ‘God protect me. Goodly has my master made my stay here. Those who do wrong come to no good.’“ (Verse 23) First he appeals to God to protect him against doing such a grave and sinful act: “God protect me’ (Verse 23) He then refers to God’s grace when He saved him from the well and placed him in a home where he was secure and treated kindly: “Goodly has my master made my stay here.” (Verse 23) He then expounds a clear principle: “Those who do wrong come to no good.” (Verse 23) The ‘wrong’ intended here is the one which she wants him to do, but it represents a trespass over what God has forbidden.

The sūrah makes it absolutely clear that Joseph’s reply to the open attempt at seduction was a straightforward refusal, coupled with remembrance of the grace God had bestowed on him, as well as remembrance of the limits which no one should violate. There was no initial compliance when she invited him openly after bolting the doors and speaking in crude terms of what she wanted him to do. This last point is given in the sūrah in a much milder form which hints at what actually took place. This is what we understand from the unusual Arabic expression which we have rendered here as, ‘Come’.

“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.

The husband did not take any action to separate his wife and his slave. He simply let matters go on as previously, because this is how palaces deal with such affairs.

But palaces are walls with ears, and gossip is always rife. For such scandals always provide interesting conversations: “In the city, women were saying: ‘The Chief Minister’s wife is trying to seduce her slave lad, as she is passionately in love with him. We see that she is clearly going astray.’“ (Verse 30)

This is the sort of thing women say about such matters in all jāhiliyyah societies.

For the first time we learn who the woman is, and we learn that the man who bought Joseph was Egypt’s Chief Minister. This is announced as the scandal becomes public, with her position graphically described: “The Chief Minister’s wife is trying to seduce her slave lad, as she is passionately in love with him.” (Verse 30) Hers is a consuming love that takes complete hold. Hence the comment: “We see that she is clearly going astray.” (Verse 30) She is supposed to be the role model as she is married to a leading personality in government. Yet she is infatuated with the young man her husband had bought. Or perhaps they were merely commenting on the fact that she had become the centre of a scandal. It is not the offence itself that is reproachable, but of being found out doing it. If it remains concealed, no blame is attached.

Again we see something that happens only amongst the higher classes. We are shown a scene of that bold woman’s further engineering: “When she heard of their malicious talk, she sent for them, and prepared for them a sumptuous repast, and handed each one of them a knife and said (to Joseph]: ‘Come out and present yourself to them.’ When they saw him, they were amazed at him, and they cut their hands, exclaiming: ‘God preserve us! This is no mortal man! This is none other than a noble angel.’ Said she: ‘This is he on whose account you have been blaming me! Indeed I have tried to seduce him, but he guarded his chastity. Now, however, if he does not do what I bid him, he shall certainly be thrown in prison, and shall indeed be humiliated.’ (Verses 31-32)

She arranged for a banquet in her own palace, which suggests that the women so invited also belonged to the same milieu. It is women in such a class that are invited to a palace banquet. They are the ones who love such gentle appearances. It seems that as they ate, they reclined on cushions and couches, as was the custom in eastern countries. Hence, she prepared this repast, and gave a knife to each one of her guests.

This also suggests that material civilization had attained a high standard in Egypt at the time. Luxurious life was at a high standard. The use of knives with a meal several thousand years ago is indicative of the level of luxury that obtained. But as they were engaged with cutting meat or peeling fruit, the hostess surprised her guests with Joseph’s appearance. She instructed him to: “Come out and present yourself to them.” (Verse 31) So what was their reaction? “When they saw him, they were amazed at him.” They were taken by surprise. “They cut their hands.” (Verse 31) In their surprise, they cut their hands. They uttered a word that is normally used to express amazement at God’s wonderful creation. “God preserve us! This is no mortal man! This is none other than a noble angel.” (Verse 31) These words also indicate that there were traces of the divine faith, based on God’s oneness, in their community.

At this point she felt that she had scored her point and gained a victory over the women of her class. They could not stop their surprised admiration of Joseph.

Victorious as she felt, she saw no need for modesty in front of these other women.

Indeed she could boast that he was under her command. If he resisted her at one point, he could not do so forever. Hence, her statement: “This is he on whose account you have been blaming me.” (Verse 32) You can see how handsome and manly he is, so much so that you cannot help admiring him: “Indeed I have tried to seduce him, but he guarded his chastity.” (Verse 32)

She goes on to press the point that she was his mistress and that he would have to do as he was told. In that society, a woman in her position could afford to be boastful and arrogant. She could declare publicly in front of other women the sexual urge she felt: “Now, however, if he does not do what I bid him, he shall certainly be thrown in prison, and shall indeed be humiliated.” (Verse 32)

What a mixture of temptation, persistence and threat. And this is coupled with a new phase of temptation hidden under a mask of warning.

What could Joseph do when he heard this said openly in a social gathering of women who were undoubtedly revealing their beauty and expressing their admiration of him. What was his attitude on hearing his mistress openly declare her intention to carry on attempting to seduce him? He simply turns to his Lord with this appeal: “My Lord, I would sooner be put in prison than comply with what they are inviting me to do.” (Verse 33)

We note here that Joseph did not say, ‘what she is inviting me to do’. They were all part of the seduction attempt, either by word, look or movement. He felt that the only way for him to evade their tricks was to appeal to his Lord. That would be the only way he would not yield to their temptation. Hence, he declares: “Unless You turn away their guile from me, I may yield to them and lapse into folly.” (Verse 33) This is a declaration by one who knows his own human weakness. He prays for more of God’s care and protection, because that is the best way to resist all temptation.

“His Lord answered his prayer and warded off their guile from him. It is He alone who hears all and knows all.” (Verse 34) This might have taken the form of making them despair of him ever yielding to their approaches and persuasion, or might have been in the shape of stronger resistance to their temptation.

“It is He alone who hears all and knows all.” (Verse 33) He hears their scheming, and Joseph’s prayers. He knows the intention behind the scheming and the purpose of the prayer.

Thus Joseph was able to stand firm through this second trial. He had to rely on God’s grace and good care to do so, and through this managed to avoid falling into sin. With this, the second episode in Joseph’s story is over.