Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the Umayyad and Abbasid reigns the mystics tried their best to propagate the teachings of Islam by keeping a distance from the power corridors. They resolved to perform the duty of preaching Islam in a solid and practical way by remaining aloof from the tyrannous governmental powers. Different convoys of the mystics reached every nook and corner of the world in different ages, and with their sincere and compromising policy impressed the veracity of Islam upon the minds of the astray people. And in this way, by enlightening them with the light of Islam, made them a strong link of a wide circle in which the standard of respect and regard is not caste, colour or racial superiority but character and piety. This is the basis of old monastic system. The monastery of Sayed Ali bin Usman Hujveri alias Data Ganj Bakhsh (died 665AH) is considered to be the oldest in the subcontinent (established 431AH). The light of Islam spread in the mountains and valleys of Central Asia through the untiring efforts of the ancient revered saints. The monasteries of the saints acted as the centers of knowledge and enlightenment for many centuries. The fame of the cities like Khiva, Samarkand, Bukhara and Neyshabur spread far and wide. The old monastic system contributed to the propagation of Islam and it created many Orders (Silasil) the fundamental objective of which was to make the following of the teachings of Islam obligatory. Though these orders have differences over the spiritual paths (suluks) they adopt, the root of all the Orders is to ‘enjoin good and forbid evil’. The origin and evolution of these Orders in the subcontinent started in the 13th century. Their number increased rapidly in the beginning, but most of them underwent extinction for different reasons except the four ones. The reason of survival of the Four Orders is the common features of several of their principles.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.957 | 0.973 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".