فَلَمَّا جَهَّزَهُم بِجَهَازِهِمْ جَعَلَ ٱلسِّقَايَةَ فِى رَحْلِ أَخِيهِ ثُمَّ أَذَّنَ مُؤَذِّنٌ أَيَّتُهَا ٱلْعِيرُ إِنَّكُمْ لَسَٰرِقُونَ

“And when he provided them with their provision, he put the drinking-cup in his brother's saddlebag, and then a crier cried: O camel-riders! Lo! ye are surely thieves!” — M. M. Pickthall

Tafsirs

AI-generated
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Taberî, the accusation of 'theft' is a report coming from Allah and it is a proclaimer (münadî) who says this; this statement is not directly Yusuf's own expression. The proclaimer may have made this call either knowing only that the vessel was lost and being unaware of Yusuf's actual plan, or on Yusuf's command and knowing that they had indeed committed theft in the past, making this call with this expression. Some exegetes have said that this was an error committed by Yusuf and that Allah punished him by having the people respond to this claim.

إنما هو خبر من الله عن مؤذن أذن به، لا خبر عن يوسف وجائز أن يكون المؤذن أذن بذلك أن فقد الصواع ولا يعلم بصنيع يوسف، وجائز أن يكون كان أذن المؤذن بذلك عن أمر يوسف، واستجاز الأمر بالنداء بذلك لعلمه بهم أنهم قد كانوا سرقوا سرقة في بعض الأحوال
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Zemahşerî, the proclamation (nidâ) in the expression 'nâdâ münâd' occurred after Yusuf's brothers set out with the caravan; according to the narration, Yusuf sent them on their way, then ordered them to be brought back, and only at this stage was the proclamation made. Furthermore, he explains that the word 'îr' means beasts of burden (camel caravan), and according to some, it was originally a donkey caravan but subsequently came to be used for every caravan. The text also conveys the qira'at differences in the verse (وجعل السقاية, تفقدون, صواع/صاع/صوع and the like) and their linguistic explanations.

روي : أنهم ارتحلوا وأمهلهم يوسف حتى انطلقوا ، ثم أمر بهم فأدركوا وحبسوا ، ثم قيل لهم ذلك . والعير : الإبل التي عليها الأحمال ، لأنها تعير : أي تذهب وتجيء
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified

In this text, Râzî discusses the question of whether the 'proclamation' (calling out to the turbaned man) was made by Yusuf's command or by the officials' own assumption, and lists several possibilities to remove the appearance of false attribution to a prophet. One of these possibilities is that Yusuf's brother consented to this trick, one is that the words were spoken not in their real meaning but through insinuation (ta'rîd), one is that the proclamation was in the form of a question and does not count as a lie, and the last is that this proclamation was made by the officials based on their own opinion without Yusuf's command. Furthermore, the views of linguists regarding what kind of vessel the 'sikaya' is and the meaning of the word 'ıyr' are transmitted.

فإن قيل : هل كان ذلك النداء بأمر يوسف أو ما كان بأمره ؟ فإن كان بأمره فكيف يليق بالرسول الحق من عند الله أن يتهم أقواما وينسبهم إلى السرقة كذبا وبهتانا
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified

Kurtubî recounts in this section that Yusuf had the drinking vessel (sakiya) secretly placed in his brother Benjamin's baggage to keep him with himself, after which the proclaimer accused the caravan of theft. He lists narrations about the quality of the sakiya/siva', its material (silver or gold) and qira'at differences. He presents various answers against the appearance of Yusuf attributing theft to his brothers: that their action of stealing Yusuf from his father and throwing him into the well deserved this attribution, or that the expression is in the sense of questioning (istifhâm), or that this was a stratagem to keep Benjamin with him.

وأما نسبة يوسف السرقة إلى إخوته فالجواب : أن القوم كانوا قد سرقوه من أبيه فألقوه في الجب ثم باعوه فاستحقوا هذا الاسم بذلك الفعل فصدق إطلاق ذلك عليهم
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified

According to this exegete, the passage is a narration of an event that tells how they turned and directed themselves toward the person calling out (münadî) and answered him. The text focuses on the act of physically turning toward the direction from which the voice came and responding.

فالتفتوا إلى المنادي وقالوا
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified

Beydâvî explains in this verse that the drinking vessel (sikaya) was secretly placed in Benjamin's baggage and then a call was made to the caravan saying 'you are thieves.' Whether this call was made by Yusuf's command or for another reason is discussed, as well as whether the expression 'theft' is in its real sense or in the sense of being stolen from Yusuf's father. Furthermore, explanations are given regarding the linguistic origin of the words 'el-îr' (caravan) and 'tefkidûn' (you lost) and their different qira'ats.

أيتها العير إنكم لسارقون لعله لم يقله بأمر يوسف عليه الصلاة والسلام أو كان تعبية السقاية والنداء عليها برضا بنيامين. وقيل معناه إنكم لسارقون يوسف من أبيه أو أإنكم لسارقون

Comparison

Common ground

All exegetes agree that the cry of 'theft' in the verse is related to Yusuf having the water vessel (sikaya/sakiya) secretly placed in his brother's baggage and that this accusation appears to be a false attribution to a prophet, which is problematic; for this reason, all of them discuss the question of whether the proclamation was made by Yusuf's command or by the officials' own assumption and offer various interpretive solutions. Furthermore, the linguistic meaning of the words sikaya and ıyr/îr and qira'at differences are common subjects of investigation.

Differences

Taberî employs a narration-heavy approach, listing different interpretive possibilities (unaware proclaimer, informed proclaimer, even Yusuf's error) through transmissions. Zemahşerî and Beydâvî focus more on linguistic/rhetorical and qira'at analysis while also conveying a contextual narration. Râzî addresses the issue within a rational-logical/theological framework and lists systematic possibilities to remove the attribution of falsehood to a prophet. Kurtubî combines both narration, language, and juridical-ethical concerns; he also adds the interpretation that the brothers' past action deserved this attribution. Ibn Kesîr addresses the issue without entering into discussion, simply narrating the flow of the event, the scene of turning toward the voice and responding.

Historical context

While the early period (Taberî) shows caution with multi-voiced narration transmission, the middle period exegetes (Zemahşerî, Râzî, Kurtubî, Beydâvî) attempted to solve the issue more systematically through language, rhetoric, and theological reasoning; in narration-heavy approaches like that of Ibn Kesîr, the discussion was simplified and focused on narration. In general, the concern about not attributing falsehood to a prophet remains a consistent sensitivity across all periods.

Modern connection

This verse reminds us that wise measures taken for a purpose can sometimes be misunderstood from the outside, but the intention and outcome may be based on divine wisdom. In our time, this can be understood as a general lesson about the importance of a patient, wise, and sincere-intentioned attitude in family relations and social matters. Furthermore, the exegetes' recourse to different interpretive methods can be shown as an example of how knowledge and reasoning can play a constructive role in understanding religious texts.

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