106 Spirituality Studies 3.3 Corpus Selection and Internal Plurality of the Tradition The primary corpus consists of Sufi texts by al-Qushayrī, al-Ghazālī, Ibn ʿArabī, and Jalāl al-Dīn Rūmī. These authors are selected not because they represent a homogeneous or canonical version of Sufism, but because their works explicitly thematize: the temporality of spiritual practice, the repetitiveness of spiritual states At the same time, the study acknowledges that this corpus does not exhaust the plurality of Sufi models. Traditions emphasizing hierarchical maqām-systems, “charismatic authority” (Ar. wilāya), or eschatological culmination are not denied but bracketed for analytic reasons. The present analysis therefore does not claim to reconstruct “the” inner logic of Sufism as such, but rather a specific family of discourses within the tradition in which processuality is explicitly articulated. By making this limitation explicit, the study avoids confirmation bias and situates its claims within a clearly delimited interpretive scope. 3.4 Textual Analysis and Hermeneutic Distance Methodologically, the analysis combines close textual reading of primary sources (in critical editions and scholarly translations) with conceptual interpretation informed by contemporary philosophy of process and subjectivity. However, a strict distinction is maintained between: descriptive reconstruction of Sufi concepts within their own discursive context, and analytic interpretation that situates these concepts within a broader theoretical horizon. For example, concepts such as ṭarīqa, fanāʾ, baqāʾ, maqām, and ḥāl are first examined in terms of their internal semantic and ethical functions within Sufi literature. Only at a second stage are they interpreted through processual and metamodern categories, and even then, as heuristic translations rather than ontological equivalences. 3.5 Analytic Criteria and Their Application To avoid purely illustrative interpretation, the study employs a set of analytic criteria through which processual spirituality is identified and assessed within the texts. Two research questions guide the coding procedure: RQ1. Temporal Structure: whether spiritual transformation is conceptualized as finite or ongoing. RQ2. Repetition: the role of recurring practices (dhikr – Ar. “ethical self-discipline”) in sustaining spiritual transformation. These criteria do not function as evaluative standards but as comparative analytical tools that allow different spiritual grammars to be examined without reducing them either to subjective experience or to institutional structures. The unit of analysis is defined as a conceptual passage that explicitly describes or defines key Sufi notions such as maqām, ḥāl, fanāʾ, baqāʾ, or that refers directly to a spiritual practice (dhikr, murāqaba, muḥāsaba) in relation to transformation of the spiritual subject. To ensure transparency of interpretation, a structured coding procedure was applied. Passages were selected from the primary corpus based on the following criteria: Conceptual relevance: the passage explicitly discusses spiritual transformation, spiritual states, or practices related to the Sufi path. Terminological clarity: the passage contains one or more key terms central to Sufi spiritual anthropology (maqām, ḥāl, fanāʾ, baqāʾ, dhikr, nafs). Analytical relevance: the passage provides sufficient context to determine whether transformation is presented as linear, cyclical, recursive, or eschatological, and whether repetition functions as marginal, instrumental, or constitutive.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUwMDU5Ng==