Life through Death in Rumi’s Story of the Boatman and the Grammarian: A Thematic and Symbolic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following study examines the story/parable of the Grammarian and the Boatman within the Mathnavī of Rumi. We have striven to provide an account of the allegorical aspect of the story and the messages that Rumi attempted to convey. We demonstrated that the primary objective of the story is to signify the Sufi concept of maḥv (self-effacement/annihilation) and prioritize it in the life of the Sufi disciple. We examined and analyzed how the theme of maḥv is presented through an earthly experience, and explored the symbols Rumi, and the Sufis for that matter, utilized in conveying their teachings. We have also drawn parallels with Qur’anic verses, prophetic teachings, and the teachings of earlier Sufi masters. The Sufi epistemological approach, the experiential knowledge, has been the primary examination of our research, and we drew attention to how the Sufi masters imparted knowledge to their audience. Other poetic formulations of Rumi in various parts of Mathnavī have been enlisted to elucidate the author’s mindset on the theory of knowledge. Similar attestations of other Sufi mystics have also been utilized in this survey and the mutual objectives of other Sufis have been analyzed. We have striven to maintain an analytical approach and provided an expository formulation of the Sufis on the nature of epistemology.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".