قَالُوا۟ تَٱللَّهِ لَقَدْ عَلِمْتُم مَّا جِئْنَا لِنُفْسِدَ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ وَمَا كُنَّا سَٰرِقِينَ

“They said: By Allah, well ye know we came not to do evil in the land, and are no thieves.” — M. M. Pickthall

Tafsirs

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

Taberî first explains that the tâ letter in the expression 'تالله' (tallahi) is originally an oath wâw, which was transformed into tâ because Arabs frequently used it in oaths. He notes that this transformation occurred only with the name 'Allah,' and not with other names like Rahmân, Rahîm, or other things sworn by. He then reports that the brothers' statement indicates they knew 'they did not come to rebel against Allah (steal/commit corruption) in your lands,' and explains how they dared make this claim, basing it on the fact that they knew they had returned the provisions and had not wronged anyone during their journey.

وإنما جعلت تاء لكثرة ما جرى على ألسن العرب في الأيمان في قولهم «والله» ، فخصت في هذه الكلمة بأن قلبت تاء ومن قال ذلك في اسم الله، فقال: «تالله» لم يقل تالرحمن، وتالرحيم، ولا مع شيء من أسماء الله
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Zemahşerî in this text, the brothers are expressing that they have never been characterized by theft and that this crime is something contrary to and inappropriate for their condition/state. That is, theft is something that contradicts their known moral character.

وما كنا قط نوصف بالسرقة وهي منافية لحالنا
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified

Kurtubî reports the tradition that Ya'kub's children did not wrong anyone, caused no harm to anyone's crops, and bound muzzles on their camels' mouths so they would not enter and damage others' fields. He also mentions that they returned the capital/property that was with them (forgotten), and points to the conclusion that one who returns what he finds cannot be a thief.

يروى أنهم كانوا لا ينزلون على أحد ظلما ولا يرعون زرع أحد وأنهم جمعوا على أفواه إبلهم الأكمة لئلا تعيث في زروع الناس
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified

According to this exegete, it is explained that from the time the people knew these individuals, through the good conduct and behavior they witnessed from them, they definitively and firmly knew and understood that their character did not warrant this (evil) attribute.

أي لقد تحققتم وعلمتم منذ عرفتمونا لأنهم شاهدوا منهم سيرة حسنة أنا أي ليست سجايانا تقتضي هذه الصفة
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Beydâvî, in these verses it is explained that the king's officials announced that they had lost the sikka/water vessel (savâ') and promised a camel's load of reward to whoever found it, informing them that they would be guarantors of this reward to whoever brings it. Yusuf's brothers, for their part, swore by the name of Allah that they did not come to commit corruption and that they were not thieves, supporting these claims with the trustworthiness and integrity they had shown in their previous visit and in their comings and goings with the king (such as returning the price of provisions to their loads and binding the animals' mouths so they would not damage others' crops).

وفيه دليل على جواز الجعالة وضمان الجعل قبل تمام العمل. قالوا تالله قسم فيه معنى التعجب، التاء بدل من الباء مختصة باسم الله تعالى

Comparison

Common ground

All exegetes emphasize that the brothers rejected the accusation of theft and corruption by oath, and that this accusation contradicted their known honest conduct (returning provisions, not wronging anyone, preventing animals from damaging others' crops, etc.). Their trustworthy behavior in the past is presented as proof of the baselessness of the accusation.

Differences

Taberî provides a linguistic contribution by examining the transformation of the oath wâw into tâ in the expression 'tallahi' from a linguistic/rhetorical perspective; Zemahşerî and Ibn Kathîr address the matter more in a moral/character context; Kurtubî provides concrete behavioral examples based on traditions; Beydâvî evaluates the event comprehensively from linguistic, contextual, and juristic perspectives (the legal dimension of the promise of reward), offering a more comprehensive interpretation.

Historical context

While the early exegete Taberî explains the verse with a method emphasizing language and tradition, later exegetes (Zemahşerî, Kurtubî, Ibn Kathîr) foreground contextual and moral interpretation; the exegete from the latest period, Beydâvî, synthesizes previous scholarship and adds a juristic layer, enriching the interpretation. The fundamental understanding has remained constant over time; only the method and emphasis have deepened.

Modern connection

This verse reminds us that honest and trustworthy conduct shown by a person in the past can be their strongest defense in a difficult situation. Correct actions sustained with sincerity within family and society create a lasting foundation for building trust. In this context, the verse offers a patient reflection on how an individual's moral consistency is intertwined with social reputation.

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