Doctrine of imamate in Twelver Shi'ism : traditional, theological, philosophical and mystical perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The doctrine of imamate---that is, the rule of a particular individual over the community---is a central and pivotal concept in Islam generally, and in Shi`ism specifically. Scholars who have studied this concept have tended to emphasize one aspect of the doctrine of imamate to the exclusion of all others. At one end of the spectrum, scholars ascribe to the imamate a strictly esoteric dimension, and at the other end, they view it primarily as a political institution. Dr. Mohammad Amir-Moezzi is a proponent of the former, while the late Ayatullah Khumayni is a proponent of the latter. Both polarized views prevent us from appreciating the coherence and integrity of the Shi`ite tradition and the richness of the doctrine of imamate, whose central and primary function is to provide guidance such that humanity can attain success and prosperity in this life, and salvation in the afterlife. The diverse approaches adopted in the study of this doctrine---from the perspectives of the Qur'an and ḥadith, theology, philosophy and mysticism---along with the linkages and commonalities established between them on the basis of the revelatory sources, are indicative of the foundational role played by this doctrine in the development of these various disciplines. It has informed all aspects of the Shi`ite religious sciences and world view. This is best reflected in the works of Maytham al-Baḥrani (d. 699/1299), who is perhaps the first Imamite scholar to embrace these traditionally mutually exclusive approaches in his treatment of the doctrine of imamate, and who is the subject of study of the last chapter of this thesis.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.053 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".