قَالَ لَا يَأْتِيكُمَا طَعَامٌ تُرْزَقَانِهِۦٓ إِلَّا نَبَّأْتُكُمَا بِتَأْوِيلِهِۦ قَبْلَ أَن يَأْتِيَكُمَا ذَٰلِكُمَا مِمَّا عَلَّمَنِى رَبِّىٓ إِنِّى تَرَكْتُ مِلَّةَ قَوْمٍ لَّا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِٱللَّهِ · وَٱتَّبَعْتُ مِلَّةَ ءَابَآءِىٓ إِبْرَٰهِيمَ وَإِسْحَٰقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ
"He said: 'Before any food comes to you as your provision, I shall tell you the interpretation of it. This is of what my Lord has taught me. I have left the religion of a people who do not believe in God and who deny the hereafter; I have followed the religion of my fathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It is not for us to associate anything with God. This is of God's bounty upon us and upon mankind; but most people are not thankful.'"
And this is one of the most remarkable points of word order in the sūra; it deserves treatment in detail.
The question has been asked (36) and the answer will come in verse 41. The four verses in between (37-40) are not an interpretation of dreams — they are an exposition of divine oneness.
| Verse | Content |
|---|---|
| 36 | The question — two dreams, nabbiʾnā bi-taʾwīlih |
| 37 | The source of the capacity — mimmā ʿallamanī rabbī; and the declaration of his own position |
| 38 | Belonging — the religion of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; mā kāna lanā an nushrika |
| 39 | The question — a-arbābun mutafarriqūna khayrun am… |
| 40 | The proof — mā taʿbudūna min dūnihi illā asmāʾan |
| 41 | The answer — the interpretation of the dreams |
I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the order of the verses. Three separate things are done, and their order is meaningful:
One — the source of the capacity is stated first. Dhālikumā mimmā ʿallamanī rabbī. That is, those who ask are invited to attach the knowledge of what is to come not to a person but to the source that taught that person. Before the interpretation is given, where the interpretation comes from is stated.
Two — the position is declared at the moment interest arises. The two young men had said "we see that you are one of those who do good". That interest, before it is answered at all, is turned into a declaration of belonging.
Three — the call is made before any debt arises. This is the finest point, and its ground is the first clause of verse 37: the interpretation has not yet been given. That is, the hearers are under no obligation. Had the order been reversed — first the interpretation, then the call — acceptance of the call could have become entangled with a debt of gratitude.
I give this as my own reading; the verse does not build this ground explicitly, but the order of the verses lends itself to it.
And the measure of the assurance given is worth recording: the promise is not "I shall interpret" — it is "I shall interpret before your food comes". That is, a commitment as to time is given.
The lexicographers record that this sentence is understood in two ways: (1) the interpretation of the dreams, (2) telling in advance what the coming food will be. The second reading rests on the prominence of the word ṭaʿām in the sentence. I transmit the disagreement; I do not impose a preference.
The lexicographers dwell on the concrete sense of the root: malla — to cook a thing by burying it in hot ashes; another sense of malla is to dictate (akin to imlāʾ). From this comes milla: the road followed, the order kept to — especially in the sense of the way a community holds to.
The lexicographers record the difference between milla and dīn thus: dīn is ascribed to a person (dīnī), whereas milla is ascribed to a prophet or to a community (millatu Ibrāhīm). The Qurʾān preserves this distinction.
And two verbs must be recorded: taraktu (I left) and ittabaʿtu (I followed). That is, the declaration consists of two steps: to go out from one road and to enter another. And that is the order too: first the leaving, then the following.
The pattern must be recorded: mā kāna lanā an… — in Arabic "it is not for us", that is, it conveys impossibility and unfittingness. Not a simple negation (lā nushriku).
And the plural is worth noting: lanā — "for us". That is, the speaker speaks not in his own name but in the name of a line that takes in the three names he has mentioned.