Types of Shiite jurisprudents' Reference to the Practical Sire of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and Imams (AS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on the viewpoint shared by Shiite jurisprudents, the second source of jurisprudence is ‘‘Sire’’. The Holy Prophet (PBUH) and Imams' (AS) words and deeds that are called ‘‘Sire’’ are considered as religious justification used as a reason for inferring from religious orders.In order to infer from religious orders, jurisprudents refer to the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and Imams' (AS) practical Sire which aimed at explaining an issue or removing its ambiguity as an independently supportive reason to prove their claim.The intention of investigating this subject was to gain an understanding of the Shiite jurisprudents' approach to dealing with the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and Imams' (AS) deeds as well as discovering the jurisprudents' position to their deeds, i.e. to find out if they deal with the deeds the same way as they deal with the words or not.In this study, it was tried to investigate types of Shiite jurisprudents' reference to the practical Sire of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and Imams (AS) and explain the viewpoints shared by the jurisprudents. Authentic sources of Islamic jurisprudence were benefitted from in this study.Types of jurisprudents' reference to obligation, recommendation, etc. were mentioned in this study. Also, the difference between words and deeds of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and Imams (AS) and the domain of their practical reasonability as well were discussed. Types of jurisprudents' reference to the practical Sire of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and Imams (AS) were discussed, too.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".