ABSTRACT Name: Adlina Salsabila Munawwaroh NIM : 422021283011 This research examines various specific emphases on the perspective of Angelika Neuwirth and explores important aspects of the interpretation of the meaning of "Aḥad" in the Qur’ān. The study comprehensively investigates how Orientalists understand the word "Aḥad" when they read the Qur’ān and how this impacts the understanding of "Aḥad" within the Islamic community. The aim of this research is to gain insight into the rhetorical interpretation approach that Angelika Neuwirth employs in her understanding of the Qur’ān, particularly in regard to how she views the Divine aspects of the Qur’ān's epistemology. Additionally, this research investigates how classical and contemporary interpreters have interpreted the Qur’ān as part of their understanding of God's creation. This research employs a qualitative method with a descriptive analysis approach, encompassing an analysis of Angelika Neuwirth's works as well as the examination of Qur'anic readings by various individuals and communities. Through this method, our aim is to gain an in-depth understanding of how Angelika Neuwirth's interpretation of the term "Aḥad" in the Qur'an influences its context, history, and rhetoric. The researcher then conducts a comprehensive examination. The research findings indicate that Angelika Neuwirth's interpretation of the term "Aḥad" refers to the idea put forth by linguists that ungrammaticality signifies a discomfort within a textual moment that symbiotically alludes to the Jewish Creed, which provides a key for its decoding. This aspect is part of the Qur’ān's negotiation strategy that attempts to adopt the Jewish Creed. However, different principles are employed. "Lam yalid wa-lam yūlad," states Verse 3. This interpretation contradicts the Nicene belief. It rejects the clear assertion regarding Jesus as the "begotten, not made" and "gennethena, or poiethenta," which are also firmly rejected. This negative theology is encapsulated in Verse 4, " Wa-lam yakun lahu kufuwan Aḥadun," meaning "and there is nothing comparable to Him." Besides reversing the Nicene formula concerning these verses, this statement also overturns the Nicene formulation of Christ's existence as one substance with God, "homoousios to patri," therefore, these verses oppose the significant declarations contained within the Nicene Creed. The author also critiques Angelika Neuwirth's interpretation for overly applying sociolinguistic and historical approaches. The author argues that Neuwirth only understands the word "Aḥad" as a numeral or nominal term, whereas its meaning provides evidence of God's Oneness. Furthermore, the spiritual aspects within the text could be overlooked by Neuwirth's approach, which prioritizes grammatical analysis. This focus on ungrammaticality as a cause of discomfort does not reflect the complex meanings of the Qur’ānic verses. Additionally, it fails to consider the historical and theological context, particularly regarding the Nicene Creed, which must be noted, as it can lead to misunderstandings among Muslims regarding the Oneness of God. Moreover, the method is inconsistent and inappropriate for interpreting the Qur’ān. Angelika Neuwirth's interpretations raise questions about the legitimacy of interpretations within Islamic society, while differing views on Orientalism add complexity to the interpretation of the Qur’ān concerning the meaning of "Aḥad." The recommendations emphasize the importance of broadening perspectives on Qur’ānic interpretation and its impact on the Muslim community, as well as the need for further research to reduce misunderstandings regarding the Transcendence of God's Oneness based on religious beliefs. Keywords: Al-Qur’ān, Angelika Neuwirth, Interpretation, Rhetoric, Aḥad