Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quran is a mystery, the mystery of all mysteries, mystery wrapped in more mystery, mystery pervaded by mystery.It should demote its status as a holy book to become understandable for human beings.Quran is a blessing for everyone, source of all knowledge, fountain of all heavenly knowledge and truth, guidance to the righteous path, and the purifier of the soul.This source of heavenly knowledge, which is fay beyond the mundane existence, has demoted its status to words and signs, which are below the state of closeness to God, to become understandable.The manifestation of this book in words is a sign of God's beneficence toward the human beings.Quran has come down to the human beings, i.e. this dark and prison-like world, wrapped in words and signs.A mystical interpretation of Quran involves a figurative language.Mysticism is the language of tropes and signs.In other words, the mystical interpretation of Quran means understanding the truth of Quran, i.e. the true meaning rather than words and signs.One should consider the figurative and metaphoric language of Quran in understanding its truth.This study has tried to discuss the mystical interpretation of Quran in relation to other forms of interpretation, e.g.thematic, philosophical, historical, and literary.It can be claimed that the most significant form of interpretation is the mystical.In this way, Quran becomes the fountain of knowledge for the seekers of truth and a guidance from the wandering on earth to the salvation in heaven.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.996 | 0.983 |
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; both teacher heads 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".