MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281660923 · doi:10.32739/ustad.2022.1.21

“Nefsini/Kendini Tanıyan Rabbini de Tanır” Sözünün Tasavvuf ve ʻİlmü’t- Teşrîh (Anatomi İlmi) Zâviyelerinden Şerhi

2022· article· en· W4281660923 on OpenAlexaff
Hülya Küçük

Bibliographic record

VenueÜsküdar Üniversitesi Tasavvuf Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Dergisi · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamilies in Therapy and Culture
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoulIntellectPhilosophyOrder (exchange)SentenceTheologyHuman beingSightHuman bodyAnatomyPhysicsLinguisticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The saying of “Man ʻarafa nafsah, fa-ḳad ʻarafa rabbah: He who knows himself, knows his Lord.” contains indications both to the body and the soul, since the human being’s self is formed as al-ḳālib/djism (body), and al-rūḥ (soul). This sentence is known from the ancient times in different styles. It is also referred frequently in Sufism, and even known as a Ḥadīth. This saying is important from the aspect of purification of the lower soul as well as from the aspect of the Science of Anatomy and unity of being. We can even say that in order to understand this saying, these three aspects should be considered together in a consequent form, and that is: Human being’s search for finding his Lord is bound to his practices of purification of his soul from bodily and worldly desires in a sufficient degree. When this is done, he will begin to see God even in his wordly body, since his body consists of extra-ordinary particulars, forms, organs and and their functions. After gaining this sight, he will also comprehend that his Lord is far from being known in His essence, since His essence is above all definitions and above limitations of human being’s intellect. He can only be known partly through his names and attributes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÜsküdar Üniversitesi Tasavvuf Araştırmaları Enstitüsü DergisiSame topicFamilies in Therapy and CultureFrench-language works237,207