يَٰصَٰحِبَىِ ٱلسِّجْنِ أَمَّآ أَحَدُكُمَا فَيَسْقِى رَبَّهُۥ خَمْرًا وَأَمَّا ٱلْـَٔاخَرُ فَيُصْلَبُ فَتَأْكُلُ ٱلطَّيْرُ مِن رَّأْسِهِۦ قُضِىَ ٱلْأَمْرُ ٱلَّذِى فِيهِ تَسْتَفْتِيَانِ

“O my two fellow-prisoners! As for one of you, he will pour out wine for his lord to drink; and as for the other, he will be crucified so that the birds will eat from his head. Thus is the case judged concerning which ye did inquire.” — M. M. Pickthall

Tafsirs

AI-generated
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Zemahşerî, the term 'sâkî' (cup-bearer) in the dream represents a person serving drink to his master; the three vine branches symbolize three days of imprisonment followed by a return to his former position (cup-bearing), while the baskets carrying bread symbolize being taken out after three days and executed. Furthermore, the singular form of the word 'al-amr' clarifies the problem of the two prisoners asking different dreams—their common point being that they were accused regarding the king and entered prison in that one matter. According to another report, the two claimed they did not see a dream, and Yusuf informed them that the outcome would occur regardless of whether they spoke truthfully or falsely.

فإن قلت : ما استفتيا في أمر واحد ، بل في أمرين مختلفين ، فما وجه التوحيد ؟ قلت : المراد بالأمر ما اتهما به من سم الملك وما سجنا من أجله
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Râzî, Yusuf's interpretation of the dreams of the two prisoners was based not directly on revelation from Allah, but on the science of dream interpretation (the knowledge of interpreting dreams); the view transmitted from Ibn Abbas is also in this direction. Furthermore, regarding the prisoners' answer of 'we have not seen anything,' two possibilities are mentioned: first, they spoke in this manner to test Yusuf's knowledge in the science of interpretation; second, they spoke this way because they did not like the answer that would be given.

فإن قيل : هذا الجواب الذي ذكره يوسف عليه السلام ذكره بناء على الوحي من قبل الله تعالى أو بناء على علم التعبير ، والأول باطل لأن ابن عباس رضي الله تعالى عنهما نقل أنه إنما ذكره على سبيل التعبير
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified

Kurtubî relates in this section how Yusuf informed the two prisoners of his dream interpretation: to one that he would return to his former duty (cup-bearing) after three days, and to the other that he would be crucified after three days and birds would eat from his head. Then, when a person says 'By Allah, I have not seen anything,' Yusuf replies 'whether you saw or did not see (it makes no difference, the decree is the same).' In this context, he discusses the issue of whether the interpreter's interpretation binds the person who lied about what they saw in their dream, and emphasizes that this is specific to Yusuf, because he was a prophet, and the prophet's interpretation has binding force.

قال : والله ما رأيت شيئا قال : رأيت أو لم تر
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified

Ibn Kesîr notes that if a person fabricates a dream they did not actually see and gets it interpreted, that dream's interpretation will bind them. Furthermore, Yusuf, when making the interpretation for the cup-bearer that 'you will be saved,' avoided stating this clearly to the one who would be crucified and left the situation ambiguous, because the dream remains in suspense until it is interpreted, and once interpreted, it comes to pass.

وحاصله أن من تحلم بباطل وفسره فانه يلزم بتأويله والله تعالى أعلم وقد ورد في الحديث الشريف الذي رواه الإمام أحمد عن معاوية بن حيدة عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال الرؤيا على رجل طائر ما لم تعبر فإذا عبرت وقعت
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified

Beydâvî indicates that in the interpretation of dreams, the phrase 'one of you' refers to the official who serves wine, that he would return to his former duty; the other would be a baker who would be crucified and birds would eat from his head. When the two people claim they lied, Yusuf's response indicates that the decree asked about has now been finalized, meaning the judgment regarding their fate has been pronounced. Although the two people asked about two different things according to the text, in reality both of them wanted to learn about the fate that would befall them, which is why the decree was expressed as a single thing (with a singular pronoun).

فقال قضي الأمر الذي فيه تستفتيان أي قطع الأمر الذي تستفتيان فيه، وهو ما يؤول إليه أمركما ولذلك وحده، فإنهما وإن استفتيا في أمرين لكنهما أرادا استبانة عاقبة ما نزل بهما
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Taberî, after the prison companions related their dreams, when they heard the interpretation that Yusuf made, they became frightened and withdrew by saying 'we have not seen anything, we were only joking.' Yusuf then informed them that the decree regarding the matter asked of him has been finalized and that Allah's decree concerning them would inevitably come to pass. Reports are also transmitted indicating that the dreams of these two people were not real and that they lied to test Yusuf's knowledge.

ما رأينا شيئا، إنما كنا نلعب

Comparison

Common ground

All commentators unite around the same core meaning of the dream interpretation: the cup-bearer will return to his former duty after three days, and the other will be crucified and become food for birds. Moreover, all of them transmit the report that the prisoners later said 'we have not seen anything,' and Yusuf's response to this meaning 'the decree has already been finalized'; this also emphasizes a common point that whether the dream was real or not does not change the outcome.

Differences

Râzî adds an epistemological dimension by questioning whether Yusuf's interpretation derives from revelation or from the science of dream interpretation; Kurtubî addresses this from a jurisprudential perspective and emphasizes that this binding force is specific to Yusuf's prophethood. While Zemahşerî and Beydâvî resolve the singular form of 'al-amr' referring to two different dreams from a linguistic/rhetorical perspective, Taberî and Ibn Kesîr rely more on report transmission and discuss the prisoners' motivation for lying (testing Yusuf or disliking the answer). Kurtubî and Ibn Kesîr (of a later period focused on jurisprudence and report transmission) combine both the transmitted reports and practical-jurisprudential consequences such as the binding nature of the decree.

Historical context

While Taberî (early period, report-focused exegesis) addresses the matter largely through transmission-based analysis, Zemahşerî and Beydâvî (the linguistics/rhetoric school) support the same reports with linguistic refinements; Râzî (theology/philosophy-focused) adds a more analytical layer by introducing the question of the source of knowledge; Kurtubî and Ibn Kesîr (jurisprudence and report-focused later period) combine both the transmitted material and practical-jurisprudential outcomes. The fundamental meaning has remained constant while the approach has become richer and more varied.

Modern connection

These different readings remind us that the same event can be viewed from different perspectives such as knowledge, language, and transmission, and that this can create a unity rather than a conflict between science and faith. Yusuf's sharing of his knowledge even in prison with gentleness and patience can make us reflect on the value of approaching people in difficult circumstances with a constructive and service-oriented attitude in our modern times. Furthermore, the emphasis on keeping one's word and truthfulness offers a thoughtful reminder to us today about the importance of sincerity and trustworthiness in daily relationships.

AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar