Inscribing the Eternal into the Everyday: Voice in Bedil’s Ruqaʿāt
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Can we read ʿAbd al-Qādir Bedil’s (1644–1720) oeuvre in ways that socialize it against his own pervasive Sufi posture of ascetic distance from everyday social exchanges? What kind of selfhood comes into view if we do so? Of all the genres Bedil wrote in, his correspondence best allows us such a socialization. This essay explores Bedil’s epistolary voice in terms of a tension between the trans-mundane ghazal metaphors he uses in his letters and the mundane specificities of each epistolary situation. It puts this voice into relation with prior models of Persian epistolography (inshā), with Arabic-Persian literary theories of wonder in Bedil’s milieu and with models of Sufi wit, reflecting on what his appropriations of these genres allowed him in each case. It concludes by reflecting on how Bedil’s voice might be understood in the wider contexts of non-European practices of civility and the order of mimesis it assumes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".