Transliteration:( Wa in kaana qameesuhoo qudda min duburin fakazabat wa huwa minas saadiqeen )
of sin had not emanated from this great Prophet innocent, the baby of the afflicted woman of the Trench People of Ukhdood, the baby of the lady who would comb Hazrat Asiyah's hair, Mubarak Yamamah who testified at birth at the order of the Holy Prophetصلى الله عليه وآله وسلم the baby of the monk Juraij who testified. Thus, from this verse we learn we should take assistance from emblems and symbols to win a legal case, because here a baby testified that if Hazrat Yusuf (on whom he peace) had an evil intention then Zuleikha would not have heen running after him, nor grab him nor would the shirt be torn from behind
Â
The tafsir of Surah Yusuf verse 27 by Ibn Kathir is unavailable here.
Please refer to Surah Yusuf ayat 25 which provides the complete commentary from verse 25 through 29.
25. This is what was implied in the evidence: If Joseph’s shirt is torn from the front, it means that Joseph is the aggressor and she has struggled to defend her honor. But if the shirt is rent from the back, it is obvious that he must have been running away from her and she must have been tugging from behind. The circumstantial evidence implied another thing. As the witness invited the master’s attention to Prophet Joseph’s shirt only, it meant that there was no sign at all of violence on the garments of the woman, for had he been the aggressor, there must have been some signs of violence on her garments.
25a. A comparative study of the story as given in the Quran and in the Bible and the Talmud will be worthwhile. The Bible says: And she caught him by his garment, saying: Lie with me: and he left his garment in her hand and fled, and got himself out. And it came to pass, when she saw that he had left his garment in her hand, and was fled forth, that she called unto the men of her house, and spake unto them, saying: See, he hath brought in an Hebrew unto us to mock us; he came in unto me to lie with me, and I cried with a loud voice: And it came to pass, when he heard that I lifted up my voice and cried, that he left his garment with me, and fled, and got himself out. And she laid up his garment by her, until his lord came home…And it came to pass, when his master heard the words of his wife, which she spake unto him, saying: After this manner did thy servant to me; that his wrath was kindled. And Joseph’s master took him, and put him into the prison, a place where the king’s prisoners were bound. (Gen. 39: 12-16, 19-20).
The clumsy manner of the above version is obvious. It appears from this that Prophet Joseph’s garment was so shaped that the whole of it fell into her hands when she tugged it. Then he ran away all naked, leaving it with her, as if to supply her with a clear proof of his own guilt.
Now let us turn to the Talmud. It says: ….hearing the accusation, Potiphar commanded at once that the lad should be whipped severely. Then he carried Joseph before the judges…………They ordered that the torn garment should be brought to them and upon an examination of the same, they pronounced Joseph not guilty. (The Talmud Selections, H. Polano, pp. 81-82). Obviously this version is also faulty, for it cannot be imagined that a person of such a high rank would himself take the case to a court that his own slave had tried to assault his wife criminally. Incidentally, this Quranic version of the story is a clear proof of the fact that it has no copied stories from the Israelite traditions as the pseudo-orientalists allege, but has, on the other hand, corrected them and told the real facts to the world.
Related Ayat(Verses)/Topics