In recent decades, design research has emerged as an independent field concerned with understanding the nature and processes of design; however, its primary focus has largely remained on architecture, urban design, and industrial design, while domains such as carpet studies- particularly Iranian rural carpets -have received limited systematic theoretical attention. Problem statement: The central problem addressed in this study is the lack of a coherent theoretical framework capable of explaining how the design process in rural carpets takes shape, given that this process typically unfolds without formally trained designers and instead develops within a context of tradition, lived experience, and tacit knowledge, and is rarely documented in written form. Accordingly, this study asks: How does the design process in Iranian rural carpets emerge and evolve, and to what extent can it be interpreted through existing design theories, particularly Christopher Alexander’s theory of “Pattern Language”? Research objective: The aim of this research is to identify, reconstruct, and explain this process by drawing on key concepts from Alexander’s framework, including the “quality without a name,” the “timeless way,” patterns and pattern language, and the continuity of tradition. This study adopts a qualitative, descriptive–analytical approach. Data were collected through a review of theoretical literature and the visual analysis of selected Sultanabad carpets as case studies. Due to the inaccessibility of weavers, visual documents were used as empirical evidence to reconstruct the design process. The analysis is based on an interpretive–comparative reading of the samples, focusing on recurring motifs, compositional structures, and variations in repetition, as well as the hierarchical relationships between elements. Morphological analysis is also employed to examine how patterns are organized and transformed within the carpets. The findings indicate that the design process in rural carpets unfolds through a series of interrelated stages in which patterns are not predefined but gradually emerge through interaction between tradition, collective memory, environmental context, and the weaver’s embodied practice. This process is characterized by a form of structured flexibility, where repetition coexists with variation and so-called “imperfections” contribute to the vitality of the work. The organization of motifs and repeating units (vagireh) can be interpreted as a hierarchical system analogous to language, in which meaning arises through relationships rather than isolated elements. Ultimately, design in Iranian rural carpets can be understood as a context-dependent, gradual, dynamic, and partly unconscious process governed by the internal logic of tradition rather than formal planning. This process reflects a form of “living order” consistent with Alexander’s theory and can be articulated as a pattern-based generative system in which cultural continuity and individual creativity are intertwined. Furthermore, the study contributes to expanding the scope of design research by positioning vernacular artistic practices as legitimate sites of theoretical inquiry, challenging dominant design paradigms that privilege formalized and professionalized processes. It also suggests that rural carpet design embodies an alternative epistemology of making, where knowledge is transmitted through practice, adaptation, and collective memory rather than explicit instruction. By bridging design theory and carpet studies, this research opens new pathways for interdisciplinary dialogue and provides a foundation for future studies on other forms of traditional and craft-based design systems.