وَدَخَلَ مَعَهُ ٱلسِّجْنَ فَتَيَانِ قَالَ أَحَدُهُمَآ إِنِّىٓ أَرَىٰنِىٓ أَعْصِرُ خَمْرًا وَقَالَ ٱلْـَٔاخَرُ إِنِّىٓ أَرَىٰنِىٓ أَحْمِلُ فَوْقَ رَأْسِى خُبْزًا تَأْكُلُ ٱلطَّيْرُ مِنْهُ نَبِّئْنَا بِتَأْوِيلِهِۦٓ إِنَّا نَرَىٰكَ مِنَ ٱلْمُحْسِنِينَ
“And two young men went to prison with him. One of them said: I dreamed that I was pressing wine. The other said: I dreamed that I was carrying upon my head bread whereof the birds were eating. Announce unto us the interpretation, for we see thee of those good (at interpretation).” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Taberî, when Yûsuf entered the prison, he interpreted dreams for the other inmates, whereupon two young men who were with him in prison (one the king's servant/cook, the other his cupbearer) tested him by asking him to interpret dreams they had not seen in order to test him. The expression 'Innâ nerâke minel muhsinîn' refers to the young men's expectation that Yûsuf would show them kindness in interpreting their dreams, and it is not a description of his general habit of kindness such as visiting the sick or comforting the grieved. Taberî mentions both of these views and finds the view transmitted from Dahhâk and Katâde (that ihsân means kindness in dream interpretation) to be closest to the truth.
قيل: إن وجه ذلك أنهما قالا له: نبئنا بتأويل رؤيانا محسنا إلينا في إخبارك إيانا بذلك، كما نراك تحسن في سائر أفعالك، إنا نراك من المحسنين
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
In this text, Râzî addresses the topic of the dream and prison scene in Sûrat Yûsuf through numerous question-and-answer arrangements. He dwells on how the prison companions learned of Yûsuf's knowledge of dream interpretation, how it was understood that they were the king's servants, the linguistic explanation of the expression 'aksuru hamran' (pressing grapes/wine), and what the expression 'muhsinîn' means. The naming of grapes as 'hamr' (wine) is attributed to the Arabs' custom of naming something by the name of its final outcome, or to a usage in the language of the people of Oman.
الثاني : أن العرب تسمي الشيء باسم ما يؤل إليه إذا انكشف المعنى ولم يلتبس يقولون فلان يطبخ دبسا وهو يطبخ عصيرا . والثالث : قال أبو صالح : أهل عمان يسمون العنب بالخمر فوقعت هذه اللفظة إلى أهل مكة فنطقوا بها
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
In this section, Kurtubî transmits through narratives which of the two young men (fetâ) who entered the prison was the cook and which was the cupbearer, their names, the reasons for their imprisonment (the allegation of attempting to poison the king), and the dreams they saw (birds eating bread that he was carrying, pressing grapes). He also mentions that the word 'fetâ' is used in the sense of slave/servant and conveys different views on whether the dreams were asked about truthfully or for the purpose of testing.
وقال فتيان لأنهما كانا عبدين والعبد يسمى فتى صغيرا كان أو كبيرا ذكره الماوردي وقال القشيري : ولعل الفتى كان اسما للعبد في عرفهم ولهذا قال : تراود فتاها عن نفسه
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Ibn Kesîr, one of the two prisoners (the would-be cupbearer) saw in his dream that he planted a vine, cultivated it, pressed its grapes and presented them to the King; Yûsuf interpreted for him that he would remain imprisoned for three days and then go out and present wine to the King. Furthermore, the text conveys that the majority view is that these two truly saw dreams and sought interpretation, but in a narration from Ibn Mas'ûd, it is reported that these two falsely claimed the dream to test Yûsuf (tahalum).
وقال عكرمة قال له إني رأيت فيما يرى النائم أني غرست حبلة من عنب فنبتت فخرج فيها عناقيد فعصرتهن ثم سقيتهن الملك فقال تمكث في السجن ثلاثة أيام ثم تخرج فتسقيه خمرا
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Beydâvî, the expression 'bedâ lehüm' indicates that the idea of imprisoning him appeared even after witnesses (the testimony of the child, the tearing of his shirt from behind, the cutting of the women's hands, and Yûsuf's avoidance of them) appeared that bore witness to Yûsuf's innocence to the Aziz and his family. The reason for this is that the woman deceived her husband and had Yûsuf imprisoned for a time, either to make people suspect him of guilt or to observe the situation; for this reason Yûsuf remained imprisoned for seven years. It is also mentioned that those who entered the prison were the king's wine-pourer and baker, and that they were imprisoned on suspicion of attempted poisoning.
وذلك لأنها خدعت زوجها وحملته على سجنه زمانا حتى تبصر ما يكون منه، أو يحسب الناس أنه المجرم فلبث في السجن سبع سنين
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Zemahşerî, the preposition 'with' (maa) carries the meaning of companionship and that this companionship newly came into being; therefore, Yûsuf's entry into the prison and the two young men's entry occurred together. The two young men who entered the prison are the king's servants, the baker and the cupbearer, and they were imprisoned on the allegation that they attempted to poison the king. The expression of grapes seen in the dream is interpreted in the manner of naming grapes by what they will transform into (wine).
يدل على معنى الصحبة واستحداثها
Comparison
Common ground
All the commentators transmit that the two young men who entered the prison were the king's servants (the wine-pourer and the person responsible for bread/food), that they were imprisoned on suspicion of attempting to poison the king, and that grape/bread motifs appeared in their dreams. Furthermore, there is agreement on the point that the use of the word 'hamr' for grapes is based on a linguistic explanation (naming something by its final outcome).
Differences
Taberî limits the expression 'muhsinîn' not as a general habit of kindness but as the young men's expectation of kindness in dream interpretation, and combines textual analysis with linguistic study. Râzî and Zemahşerî approach the matter more through linguistic and rhetorical questions (prepositions, figurative language, naming conventions). Kurtubî and Ibn Kesîr are narrative-heavy and, regarding whether the dreams were true or asked to test Yûsuf, transmit different narrations (the majority view and the Ibn Mas'ûd narration) without indicating a preference between them. Beydâvî, on the other hand, broadens the context and relates the reason for Yûsuf's imprisonment to the woman's deception of her husband and public perception concerns, which is not treated to such an extent in the others.
Historical context
Early-period commentators like Taberî carefully arrange narration chains and attempt to make choices among them, while later commentators like Zemahşerî and Râzî have placed greater emphasis on linguistic and rhetorical analysis, with narrations being used more as supporting material. Kurtubî and Ibn Kesîr tend to comprehensively gather and present narrations comparatively; Beydâvî, on the other hand, shows an approach toward summary and contextual synthesis. Thus, over time the method has shown diversification from narration to linguistic analysis and contextual reading, with the basic narrative remaining fixed.