A Jurisprudential Examination of Rashid Rida’s Mu‘tazili View Regarding the Ambiguity of the Term “Nafs Wāḥida”

The identification of the referent of nafs wāḥida (a single soul) in the first verse of Sūrat al-Nisāʾ has long been the subject of scholarly debate among researchers and exegetes, and the findings of these discussions have been presented in various exegetical works. The results indicate that many Shia and Sunni exegetes, while acknowledging the interpretability of this term, have identified Prophet Adam as its referent. Among them, Rashid Rida, adhering to a Mu‘tazili approach, has considered the expression nafs wāḥida to be ambiguous (mujmal) and uninterpretable. He argues that there exists no explanatory evidence in the Qur’an or in prophetic traditions that can resolve this ambiguity or determine the identity of the referent. Consequently, he maintains that various segments of society are entitled to interpret this expression based on their own presuppositions, assigning different referents accordingly. This study, using descriptive and content-analytical methodology, aims to critique Rashid Rida’s viewpoint and its implications. Based on the findings of this research, not only are there explanatory indicators found in both the Qur’an and Hadith, but Rida’s position also contradicts certain well-established theological principles. Moreover, the persistent ambiguity of Qur’anic verses is incompatible with the Qur’an’s own descriptions of itself as clear, instructive, and admonitory. Furthermore, accepting Rida’s view would legitimize multiple interpretations of ambiguous terms, thereby opening the door to pluralistic readings of religion itself. This is because any theory regarding the methodology of interpreting the Qur’an and Sunnah inevitably influences the nature and interpretation of the religion. Thus, the term nafs wāḥida cannot be considered uninterpretable.