Sainthood Among the Šāḏiliyya : The Conception of Ibn Muġayzil (fl. 895/1490)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sainthood and saints were theorised at length among Sufis, including the Šāḏiliyya. A number of studies have examined the views of individual Šāḏilī‑s, including Ibn ʿAṭāʾ Allāh, Ibn Bāḫilā, and the father and son pair, Muḥammad and ʿAlī Wafā. This article aims to build on this research by surveying the ideas of Ibn Muġayzil, a disciple of the Šāḏilī shaykh Muḥammad al‑Maġribī and author of at least two works. Focusing on four key issues in Ibn Muġayzil’s writings, I show that he drew on a rich body of Sufi literature to develop his positions, while often engaging in apologetics as he strived to defend certain notions and statements. Ibn ʿArabī, rather than al‑Tirmiḏī, is an important, albeit limited, source for Ibn Muġayzil, which reflects the Andalusian master’s eventual domination of the Sufi discourse on sainthood, including among the Šāḏilī‑s.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".