Spirituality Studies 105 Nina Bilokopytova 3 Methodological Framework: Metamodernity as a Reflexive Analytic Lens This study adopts a reflexive, multi-layered methodological framework aimed at analyzing Sufi spirituality as a longterm process of subject formation. Rather than proposing a new normative theory of spirituality, the article seeks to develop an analytic model capable of accounting for temporality, repetition, ethical mediation, and incompleteness as structural features of the Sufi path. 3.1 The Status of Metamodernity in This Study Metamodernity is employed here neither as a historical periodization nor as a comprehensive explanatory theory, but as a reflexive analytic lens that structures the interpretive stance of the analysis. Following Vermeulen and van den Akker (2010) and Storm (2021), metamodernity is understood as a mode of theorizing characterized by oscillation between competing epistemic orientations such as normativity and critique, transcendence and immanence, tradition and reflexivity without resolving these tensions into a synthetic unity. Methodologically, this implies that metamodernity functions as a regulative framework rather than a substantive ontology of spirituality. It does not predetermine the content of Sufi doctrines or practices, nor does it serve as a criterion of authenticity. Instead, it provides a heuristic for analyzing how Sufi texts themselves negotiate tensions between discipline and experience, effort and grace, withdrawal and ethical engagement. Importantly, the metamodern framework does not replace the internal conceptual grammar of Sufism. It operates at a secondary, meta-analytic level, structuring the interpretation of sources rather than dictating their meaning. This distinction is essential in order to avoid anachronistic projection of contemporary theoretical categories onto premodern religious texts. 3.2 Processual Spirituality as an Analytic, Not Normative, Concept The central concept of processual spirituality is introduced as an analytic category, not as a normative ideal of “authentic” spirituality. It designates a mode of spiritual life characterized by: temporal extension rather than episodic culmination, repetition rather than linear progression, ethical mediation rather than experiential intensity as the primary criterion of transformation. This model is not presented as universally valid for all forms of Sufism, nor as superior to alternative spiritual grammars (e.g., hierarchical, charismatic, or eschatological models). Rather, it is proposed as a theoretically productive abstraction that allows for the comparative analysis of diverse Sufi discourses without reducing them either to isolated mystical experiences or to purely social functions. Accordingly, the study does not seek to replace teleological models of spiritual ascent with a new, covertly normative processual teleology. Instead, it examines how certain Sufi authors conceptualize spiritual life as ongoing formation rather than as attainment of a final state. The analytic question is therefore not “which model is correct”, but what conceptual work different models perform within specific textual and ethical contexts.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUwMDU5Ng==