Is Allah limited by the rules of logic???

[Algerian Shia]

Salam alaykum,  can Allah break the rules of impossibility and make the impossible possible??

For example: Can Allah make a round square?  Can Allah put out a fire with plants?  Can he make 2+2=5?  Can Allah put an entire universe inside an egg? 

Are these phenomens  possible by Allah or he is bound by rules of logic(created by him)?

Seriously, I'm confused...

[ShiaMan14]

35 minutes ago, Algerian Shia said:

For example: Can Allah make a round square?

 

36 minutes ago, Algerian Shia said:

Can Allah put out a fire with plants? 

fire-retardant plant species that resist ignition such as rockrose, ice plant and aloe. Select fire-resistant shrubs such as hedging roses, bush honeysuckles, currant, cotoneaster, sumac and shrub apples. Plant hardwood, maple, poplar and cherry trees that are less flammable than pine, fir and other conifers

 

38 minutes ago, Algerian Shia said:

Can he make 2+2=5?

41 minutes ago, Algerian Shia said:

Can Allah put an entire universe inside an egg?

 

Yes, a really, really, really big egg.

 

42 minutes ago, Algerian Shia said:

Are these phenomens  possible by Allah or he is bound by rules of logic(created by him)?

Seriously, I'm confused...

While I am trying to be funny, in all seriousness, the limitation is us and our minds, not Allah.

The problem is not that Allah can’t create the universe inside an egg. The problem is the lack of capability of an egg to hold the entire universe.

There are things that Allah can’t do - Allah can’t lie, Allah can’t be unjust, Allah can’t multiply...

[AkhiraisReal]

no Allah is not limited.

Allah created those rules and laws, he is the creator and he was not created. So He is not bound by anything.

 

Edited September 14, 2019 by AkhiraisReal

[Mortadakerim]

Look, 

There are thing and non-things

just because Allah can’t do these “non-things” does not mean he is limited

that is the same as asking can God stop existing and exist at the same time it is impossible which means it simply does not exist

Allah is unlimited and infinite

wasalam wa rahmat allahi

[Revert1963]

Yes I think Allah is capable of braking his own rules if he wanted to, but then again what's the point of having rules if you brake them anyway?

[Muhammed Ali]

On 9/14/2019 at 5:23 PM, AkhiraisReal said:

no Allah is not limited.

Allah created those rules and laws, he is the creator and he was not created. So He is not bound by anything.

 

On 9/14/2019 at 6:26 PM, Revert1963 said:

Yes I think Allah is capable of braking his own rules if he wanted to, but then again what's the point of having rules if you brake them anyway?

You both contradict the teachings of Ahlul Bayt. 

[eThErEaL]

On 9/14/2019 at 4:17 PM, Algerian Shia said:

Salam alaykum,  can Allah break the rules of impossibility and make the impossible possible??

Wa Alaykum Salam,

if if you had asked me this question many years ago, I would have answered by saying that God only does what is possible, not what is impossible.  Because impossibilities are in fact nothing.  

But not anymore! see below:

Quote

For example: Can Allah make a round square?  Can Allah put out a fire with plants?  Can he make 2+2=5?  Can Allah put an entire universe inside an egg? 

Such IS the case already.  In other words, God has already done so.  In your very conception of the so called “impossible things” God has made them possible.  Yes.  Welcome to paradoxes and welcome to a whole new world where the impossible is possible and the possible is impossible!  Isn’t that lovely or/and hateful!?  

Quote

Are these phenomens  possible by Allah or he is bound by rules of logic(created by him)?

He isn’t bound and yet He is bound.  

[eThErEaL]

On 9/14/2019 at 6:30 PM, Muhammed Ali said:

You both contradict the teachings of Ahlul Bayt. 

That may or may not matter if God is capable of breaking His own rules.

[AkhiraisReal]

On 9/14/2019 at 6:30 PM, Muhammed Ali said:

You both contradict the teachings of Ahlul Bayt. 

could you explain

[Ashvazdanghe]

On 9/14/2019 at 4:17 PM, Algerian Shia said:

Can Allah put an entire universe inside an egg?

Note: An atheist was convinced by Imam Sadiq ((عليه السلام)) regarding God’s existence by narrating about creation of a peacock with such beautiful fluorescent feathers. He said a peacock has not come to existence by itsef but God has created it by saying; be and it came to existence immediately as intended by God. Its egg also contains yellow and colorless liquids which is miraculously hatched a peacock.

https://www.imamreza.net/old/eng/imamreza.php?id=11488

“Abu Shakir, no one knows whether the chicken that is hatched from this egg, will be male or female. And when the chicken emerges from the egg, it has beautiful colors. (For example, consider the colorful feathers of the peacock. What power has so beautifully painted the chicken?). Is painting a chicken or a peacock less important that painting a picture? Could it be ever said that these paintings have painters but these natural colorings have arisen by themselves?

Then, he said to Abu Shakir, “Don’t you agree that this egg and the chicken that is going to emerge from it with its attributes must have a thoughtful and wise Creator?”

https://www.al-Islam.org/principles-shiite-creed-ayatullah-ibrahim-amini/lesson-4-order-faculty-thought

https://www.islamquest.net/en/archive/question/en22416

https://globe.aqr.ir/portal/home/?news/33685/27076/989579/Imam-Jafar-ibn-Muhammad-al-Sadiq-...-

Atheist & the egg

Universe into an Egg? Shia Imam

[Ashvazdanghe]

[حسين]

Salam w alaykum,

Let's push the breaks and reverse a little bit.

Imagine, you are a programmer and  you code a game. Specifically a game where people can control characters and explore whatever content you provide within the game.Essentially, you are a creator, of the game, and they are your players.

What ever principles and logic you implement into the game, and whatever you want them to see and do, you program into the game. Following along still?

So whatever logic, principles and everything your players can see and do is limited to what you want them to see and do. 

Since you are the creator of the game, you are able to code whatever you want, so your character is able to do what your player base can only imagine of doing. You can do anything in the game, where as the players are limited.

Hope this helps get your answer.

[Algerian Shia]

Ok, thanks.

[Revert1963]

16 hours ago, Muhammed Ali said:

You both contradict the teachings of Ahlul Bayt. 

Astagfirullah

[AkhiraisReal]

20 hours ago, ShiaMan14 said:

 

 

on the 7th one its" -0.5 = 0.5" which is not correct. I don't understand where you got it from, I just went through it for fun sake.

Edited September 15, 2019 by AkhiraisReal

[Mzwakhe]

On 9/14/2019 at 6:30 PM, Muhammed Ali said:

You both contradict the teachings of Ahlul Bayt(عليه السلام). 

?

Do you think that the ShiaChat Shi'as are not contradicting the teachings of Ahl'ul Bayt(عليه السلام)?

[Jibrael-e-Muhammadi]

On 9/14/2019 at 4:17 PM, Algerian Shia said:

Salam alaykum,  can Allah break the rules of impossibility and make the impossible possible??

For example: Can Allah make a round square?  Can Allah put out a fire with plants?  Can he make 2+2=5?  Can Allah put an entire universe inside an egg? 

Are these phenomens  possible by Allah or he is bound by rules of logic(created by him)?

Seriously, I'm confused...

there is nothing impossible for Allah. tell me what you want to achieve by making a round to square ? 

[Jibrael-e-Muhammadi]

Allah is himself logic and logic circulate around his will what he desires will become logic.

[Muhammed Ali]

On 9/14/2019 at 10:45 PM, AkhiraisReal said:

could you explain

This text from somewhere:

Generally there are two types of impossibilities: 1, The common impossibilities. 2, Rational impossibilities.

Common impossibilities are those things which are impossible under certain conditions although the mind does not consider them to be impossible in every condition. It is possible for the mind to image their occurrence if the prevailing conditions were different. Examples of common impossibilities are: bringing the dead back to life, transforming a stick into a snake or making the force of gravity on the Moon to be stronger than that of the Earth.

All those things are generally considered impossible for humans to do, however the mind does not deem them absolutely impossible. A being with sufficient knowledge and power may be able to do those things. Perhaps in the future, with the progress of science, human beings may have the ability to do many things that are considered to be ordinarily impossible today.

It is believed that God is capable of performing all common impossibilities since God is omnipotent and omniscient. He is able to bring things into existence, manipulate the composition of the universe and is also able to manipulate the laws of physics.

Rationally impossibilities are those ‘things’ which the mind can never accept as being possible under any circumstance. Some examples: a four sided triangle, a square circle, a married bachelor, a parent that never had any children & 2 + 2 = 5.

None of the above can ever exist. The mind can never imagine a four sided triangle, and a triangle by definition, always has three sides. All of those things are absolutely impossible since they bear contradictions.

Many great philosophers and theologians throughout history have held the belief that God himself cannot do the rationally impossible. That is, God cannot do things like create four sided triangles. This is a belief that has also been taught by the official leaders of Islam:

Imam Ali [a] was asked: “Does your Lord have the power to place the Earth in an egg, without making the Earth smaller or the egg any bigger?”

He [a] replied: “Verily, Allah, the blessed and exalted, cannot be attributed with deficit/inability. However, what you have asked is impossible.” [1]

When Imam Al-Sadiq [a] was asked a similar question and he said: “Although God’s power is infinite, nevertheless, what you are asking is a nothing.” [2]

Thus the Imams [a] state that God can do everything except that which is impossible in itself. Imam Al-Sadiq [a] points out that rational impossibilities are considered to be nothing (la shai) because they can never exist. The inability do the rationally impossible is not really an inability since the rationally impossible is not a thing. God can do everything except that which is ‘nothing’.

Some religious people falsely believe that God can do rational impossibilities; they believe that human logic should not be able determine what is impossible for God. However this argument is self-defeating because it allows for the dismissal of ‘human’ reasoning and the argument itself relies upon human reasoning.

If God were able to do the rationally impossible then it would lead to the breakdown of human reasoning. It would become acceptable to say things like: “There is a square circle in that room” and “2 + 2 = 5” since it could be argued that God willed for things to be that way. It would be acceptable to contradict the laws of thought . Humans would be allowed to make irrational arguments with the justification that God is able to do anything.

The notion that God can do the rationally impossible is something that is sometimes promoted by people whose religious beliefs entail contradictions. They desire to justify those contradictory beliefs by invoking the infinite power of God.

====================================================

Notes:

[1] Shaykh Saduq, Kitab Al-Tawhid, chapter 9 narration 9.

[2] Ayatullah Jawadi Amuli, A commentry on Theistic Arguments, pages 219-220.

[Muhammed Ali]

12 hours ago, Mzwakhe said:

?

Do you think that the ShiaChat Shi'as are not contradicting the teachings of Ahl'ul Bayt(عليه السلام)?

It is very unlikely that any us of are are not contradicting the teachings of Ahlul Bayt {s}. We are all fallible and the time between us and them is very long. Even a flawless intellect may not be able to know their true teachings fully. That is why we need to act with caution.

[Guest confused]

On 9/17/2019 at 10:40 AM, Muhammed Ali said:

This text from somewhere:

Generally there are two types of impossibilities: 1, The common impossibilities. 2, Rational impossibilities.

Common impossibilities are those things which are impossible under certain conditions although the mind does not consider them to be impossible in every condition. It is possible for the mind to image their occurrence if the prevailing conditions were different. Examples of common impossibilities are: bringing the dead back to life, transforming a stick into a snake or making the force of gravity on the Moon to be stronger than that of the Earth.

All those things are generally considered impossible for humans to do, however the mind does not deem them absolutely impossible. A being with sufficient knowledge and power may be able to do those things. Perhaps in the future, with the progress of science, human beings may have the ability to do many things that are considered to be ordinarily impossible today.

It is believed that God is capable of performing all common impossibilities since God is omnipotent and omniscient. He is able to bring things into existence, manipulate the composition of the universe and is also able to manipulate the laws of physics.

Rationally impossibilities are those ‘things’ which the mind can never accept as being possible under any circumstance. Some examples: a four sided triangle, a square circle, a married bachelor, a parent that never had any children & 2 + 2 = 5.

None of the above can ever exist. The mind can never imagine a four sided triangle, and a triangle by definition, always has three sides. All of those things are absolutely impossible since they bear contradictions.

Many great philosophers and theologians throughout history have held the belief that God himself cannot do the rationally impossible. That is, God cannot do things like create four sided triangles. This is a belief that has also been taught by the official leaders of Islam:

Imam Ali [a] was asked: “Does your Lord have the power to place the Earth in an egg, without making the Earth smaller or the egg any bigger?”

He [a] replied: “Verily, Allah, the blessed and exalted, cannot be attributed with deficit/inability. However, what you have asked is impossible.” [1]

When Imam Al-Sadiq [a] was asked a similar question and he said: “Although God’s power is infinite, nevertheless, what you are asking is a nothing.” [2]

Thus the Imams [a] state that God can do everything except that which is impossible in itself. Imam Al-Sadiq [a] points out that rational impossibilities are considered to be nothing (la shai) because they can never exist. The inability do the rationally impossible is not really an inability since the rationally impossible is not a thing. God can do everything except that which is ‘nothing’.

Some religious people falsely believe that God can do rational impossibilities; they believe that human logic should not be able determine what is impossible for God. However this argument is self-defeating because it allows for the dismissal of ‘human’ reasoning and the argument itself relies upon human reasoning.

If God were able to do the rationally impossible then it would lead to the breakdown of human reasoning. It would become acceptable to say things like: “There is a square circle in that room” and “2 + 2 = 5” since it could be argued that God willed for things to be that way. It would be acceptable to contradict the laws of thought . Humans would be allowed to make irrational arguments with the justification that God is able to do anything.

The notion that God can do the rationally impossible is something that is sometimes promoted by people whose religious beliefs entail contradictions. They desire to justify those contradictory beliefs by invoking the infinite power of God.

====================================================

Notes:

[1] Shaykh Saduq, Kitab Al-Tawhid, chapter 9 narration 9.

[2] Ayatullah Jawadi Amuli, A commentry on Theistic Arguments, pages 219-220.

I don't understand. Could you explain to me how this is not placing a limitation on God? Saying some things are impossible for Him? I heard of that egg hadith but it was different answer that basically said God CAN do things like 2+2=5. Saying if God can fit what you see in your eyes without making your eyes bigger or what you see smaller, then putting the egg in the universe is no problem. Not trying to argue with you, I'm confused and need you to elaborate a bit further. I say need because God being unable to do something makes me extremely uncomfortable. I always thought making 2+2=5 would be easy for God, because He was the one who made 2+2=4. It wouldn't be a stretch to say He could simply go back and set it so 2+2=5. Didn't God write the rules of logic itself, why can't He just rewrite them?

[Ibn Al-Ja'abi]

1 hour ago, Guest confused said:

Didn't God write the rules of logic itself, why can't He just rewrite them?

The point is that someone who argues that God cannot do what is logically impossible (or rationally impossible as the translator put it) is that they would say what is logically impossible cannot be spoken of as an actual existent even if it can be semantically put into words. I remember this example from a conversation years ago, "what is the smell of the shape of purple" (speaking here of the abstract form of purple, not the way it exists in our world). A grammatically correct sentence whose meaning is gibberish, there is no world in which a colour's "shape" has a smell. What is logically impossible is something which cannot exist since there would be a contradiction, say our square-circle. The definition of a square necessarily excludes it from being a circle and vice-versa. You cannot, therefore, in any world speak of these two qualities existing simultaneously.

There are things which God cannot do because they entail a contradiction so cannot be actually spoken of as existents. A good example, God cannot cease to exist. If a being in question could, then he is not God and we are speaking of something else since God is wajib al-wujuud and must exist. It isn't to say that God lacks potency, since we are not speaking of anything sensibly.

[Guest confused]

18 hours ago, Ibn Al-Ja'abi said:

The point is that someone who argues that God cannot do what is logically impossible (or rationally impossible as the translator put it) is that they would say what is logically impossible cannot be spoken of as an actual existent even if it can be semantically put into words. I remember this example from a conversation years ago, "what is the smell of the shape of purple" (speaking here of the abstract form of purple, not the way it exists in our world). A grammatically correct sentence whose meaning is gibberish, there is no world in which a colour's "shape" has a smell. What is logically impossible is something which cannot exist since there would be a contradiction, say our square-circle. The definition of a square necessarily excludes it from being a circle and vice-versa. You cannot, therefore, in any world speak of these two qualities existing simultaneously.

There are things which God cannot do because they entail a contradiction so cannot be actually spoken of as existents. A good example, God cannot cease to exist. If a being in question could, then he is not God and we are speaking of something else since God is wajib al-wujuud and must exist. It isn't to say that God lacks potency, since we are not speaking of anything sensibly.

Not arguing, just grappling with the idea, I need to understand it or I'll lose it.

But isn't the point that God can break the rules? I feel like if hypothetically God allowed me one wish that would be granted no mater what, and I asked for a round square, He wouldn't give me nothing. He would just make it happen. I feel like I could ask God to teach me Chinese, using only the letter "k" one time, with no tricks, or changing what that k is, or manipulating how I perceive that k. I think that no matter what absurd limitation you place, He would make it done no problem. 

Seeing things like this just makes me think God can do something like encompass infinity within one second, there's people who actually can smell colors. 

I just find it jarring to think that I can ask God to do something and He can't. I find it difficult to not see it as a limitation. I guess this is what people meant when they said "Don't touch the advanced Islamic material, it's only for experienced scholars who know their stuff. If you read it it will shake your faith". Or the hadith where the Prophet s.a was talking to Salman bin Farisi and suddenly stopped talking when some others came to them, when asked why they stopped talking the Prophet said "Honey which is beneficial to an adult is harmful to an infant".

[Quisant]

16 hours ago, Guest confused said:

I just find it jarring to think that I can ask God to do something and He can't

You are probably forgetting that:
God is Infallible: everything that happens has turned out exactly as He planned. 
God is Omniscient: he needs no prayer, because He already knows what you want. 

But if you believe that you can change God's mind, then you believe He is imperfect. 
If you believe that God can be influenced, than the God you believe is an Idol created by your mind and you are an idol-worshiper.

A Perfect Being cannot change its mind -
To change is to be subject to time, and to change implies that what comes after was better than before, which would contradict God's perfection.

If God changes from one state of mind to another, then there must be a reason. The new state must be better than the old state. But this is impossible if God is perfect: It is not possible to "improve" God.
 

16 hours ago, Guest confused said:

I find it difficult to not see it as a limitation.

You might say that God is limited.

A limitation is actually a very ambiguous word; indeed one could say that God is limited. For instance I can scratch my head while God cannot do that. 
In the broadest sense, this could be defined as a "limitation". However, these types of definitions are not relevant when it is said that God is not limited. 

What is meant by 'unlimited' is that God is unlimited in every power that He possesses.

If "God" is "the Creator", then we know that any faculty/power that exists does so because from God spring all abilities and since we are defining God to be the creator/ source of all abilities, then there cannot possibly be any limit on these abilities, because God has the power to create them.

Therefore God is unlimited, since there isn't any other power that He is dependent on; He is the source of His own abilities and by being the Creator, there isn't a limit on the amount of that ability that God possesses.

I hope that helps your confusion a little.

ws.

*

[Guest less confused]

12 hours ago, Quisant said:

You are probably forgetting that:
God is Infallible: everything that happens has turned out exactly as He planned. 
God is Omniscient: he needs no prayer, because He already knows what you want. 

But if you believe that you can change God's mind, then you believe He is imperfect. 
If you believe that God can be influenced, than the God you believe is an Idol created by your mind and you are an idol-worshiper.

A Perfect Being cannot change its mind -
To change is to be subject to time, and to change implies that what comes after was better than before, which would contradict God's perfection.

If God changes from one state of mind to another, then there must be a reason. The new state must be better than the old state. But this is impossible if God is perfect: It is not possible to "improve" God.

I completely agree, that's why I'm having trouble seeing how someone like that can't use his power to manipulate logic and make a round square. I'd thought that logic meant nothing to God, to Him it's just a little thing that he can manipulate. That's why He's not bound by matter, time, or any state, because He's above it all. And to use an analogy, I don't see God as someone who just programmed the universe. I see him as someone who wrote the program that He used, in a computer language that He made, using an operating system that He made, using a computer that he built Himself from scratch. If I think like that, what's so hard about going into the code, and just changing "value of 2 = 2" to "value of 2 = 2.5, therefore 2+2=5".

But I do accept it, just because I don't understand the logic doesn't make it false.

12 hours ago, Quisant said:

You might say that God is limited.

A limitation is actually a very ambiguous word; indeed one could say that God is limited. For instance I can scratch my head while God cannot do that. 
In the broadest sense, this could be defined as a "limitation". However, these types of definitions are not relevant when it is said that God is not limited. 

The hold-up with me is "won't" vs "can't". To go off that kind of limitation, God can't lie. Because if He did lie, that would make a flaw in Him, then by definition He wouldn't be a God. But does He have the power, the option, the choice? If He wanted to, could He lie? Could He take it a step further and change what the fundamental definition of lying is, so He can lie without it being wrong? I see that as a "won't", He won't lie. But what concerns me is the "can't". He can't, according to the Abrahamic view, make a round cube? 

Here's something I read that I found interesting. I think I'm starting to grasp it as "This question doesn't even make sense, we can't discuss it because it doesn't even mean anything". 

If God can do the logically impossible, then God could bring it about that the universe does and does not exist. But it gets stranger than this. He would also be able to bring it about that he did all these things while not existing! But how can a God who does not exist do anything?

 

Finally, if God can do the logically impossible, he can bring it about that it is logically impossible for him to do the logically impossible. This, of course, means that he both can and cannot do any and all of these things at the same time, in the same sense, in the same manner, while existing and not existing—and he can cause even that to be true and false!

https://www.randyeverist.com/2011/02/can-God-do-logically-impossible.html

[Haji 2003]

On 9/17/2019 at 4:40 PM, Muhammed Ali said:

It is believed that God is capable of performing all common impossibilities since God is omnipotent and omniscient. He is able to bring things into existence, manipulate the composition of the universe and is also able to manipulate the laws of physics.

 

Is the following relevant here? Translation of Surah al Furqan from al-Islam.org:

Quote

 

لَمۡ تَرَ إِلَىٰ رَبِّكَ كَيۡفَ مَدَّ ٱلظِّلَّ وَلَوۡ شَآءَ لَجَعَلَهُ ۥ سَاكِنً۬ا ثُمَّ جَعَلۡنَا ٱلشَّمۡسَ عَلَيۡهِ دَلِيلاً۬ (٤٥)

Hast thou not turned thy vision to thy Lord? How He doth prolong the Shadow! If He willed, He could make it stationary! Then do We make the sun its guide: (45)

 

 

Edited September 19, 2019 by Haji 2003

[Guest window]

13 hours ago, Haji 2003 said:

 

Is the following relevant here? Translation of Surah al Furqan from al-Islam.org:

 

It's times like this when you wish you were a marji3 so you can have your team of scholars get on with the research. In this thread alone we have two different narrations about people asking Imam Sadiq the universe-egg question, one saying God can, and the other saying it's impossible.

[Haji 2003]

6 hours ago, Guest window said:

It's times like this when you wish you were a marji3 so you can have your team of scholars get on with the research. In this thread alone we have two different narrations about people asking Imam Sadiq the universe-egg question, one saying God can, and the other saying it's impossible.

Actually I realise now that what I posted is not really relevant. My post deals with the laws of physics etc. whereas the thread is about the laws of logic and while I know not a lot about either, I would surmise they are quite different things.

[Ibn Al-Ja'abi]

On 9/18/2019 at 12:24 AM, Guest confused said:

But isn't the point that God can break the rules?

Miracles aren't what is logically impossible. They are what is logically possible but not naturally occurring. For example, for a virgin to become pregnant since the act of sex which takes away virginity is the vehicle for the child to be created, but the child might be created within the mother's womb. While the category virgin isn't applied to pregnant women pregnant through natural means, it here works since what would be needed for the category of virgin to be nullified didn't happen. As opposed to a married bachelor since those two categories don't exist at the same time. Similarly splitting the sea, raising the dead, healing the blind and the leaper aren't logical impossibilities, they aren't normally naturally observed (at least in the manner that the Qur'an and Bible refer to them happening). What we're talking about are logical impossibilities, my point is that they are not something we could have God get to happen since they aren't things that happen. They are mumtani' al-wujuud. We can't speak of them logically, there is neither a mental existence or external existence for them unlike contingent things which exist or don't exist. These are things which cannot exist by their definition.

On 9/18/2019 at 12:24 AM, Guest confused said:

Seeing things like this just makes me think God can do something like encompass infinity within one second, there's people who actually can smell colors. 

This video misses the point of the example sentence. The point is that colour is perceived by site, not smell, and it lacks a shape of its own. Not that there are people whose senses don't work properly and perceive a smell along with a site, a problem with the way the brain processes the colour since there are no cells in your nose to smell colour. It isn't the same thing. The point of this was to show that you had a semantically/grammatically correct sentence which isn't sensible and is effectively gibberish. Similarly asking for impossibilities isn't to speak sensibly since we are not speaking of things which can ever be, let alone actually are.

On 9/18/2019 at 12:24 AM, Guest confused said:

I feel like if hypothetically God allowed me one wish that would be granted no mater what, and I asked for a round square, He wouldn't give me nothing. He would just make it happen.

If I ask God not to exist, I have effectively said something which isn't sensible and something that cannot happen. If God is a necessary existent then it is impossible for him not to be, if it is impossible for him to not be, then he must always exist. God must, therefore, always exist. It is impossible for him not to, even if I ask him in such a scenario as you presented. Similarly the definition of a square necessary excludes a circle and vice-versa. If God gives the questioner anything it might be a good lesson in logic, I know I could use one.

On 9/18/2019 at 7:33 AM, Guest less confused said:

and just changing "value of 2 = 2" to "value of 2 = 2.5, therefore 2+2=5".

The issue is that two and five aren't arbitrary words lacking any grounded meaning, the value of 2.5 is not two and cannot be two since we are referring to. We might change what the word two stands for, but the actual form two necessarily isn't everything that isn't two.

On 9/18/2019 at 12:24 AM, Guest confused said:

I find it difficult to not see it as a limitation. I guess this is what people meant when they said "Don't touch the advanced Islamic material, it's only for experienced scholars who know their stuff. If you read it it will shake your faith".

Thankfully they don't say that, especially since mantiq is a course taught in the introductory level of the hawza and because the books you would use to study it are all online with duruus accompanying them.

Edited September 20, 2019 by Ibn Al-Ja'abi

[Guest less confused]

I think I'm starting to get it now, it would be like asking God for my 18th arm back. He'd give me nothing because I've never had an 18th arm, the question is impossible. Or it would be like me staying silent for 10 seconds, then saying "I want that which I asked for using speech in the last 10 seconds". He'd give me nothing, but not because of inability, only because the question is invalid. Then the confusion comes from mistaking logical impossibilities as a common impossibility or vice versa. How exactly God can manipulate physics and logic, I could never know.

[Guest another question]

Sorry to dig this thread up again, but what about God Himself? Isn't He the definition of a logical impossibility? He exists without existing, He thinks without using using a mind (He doesn't even need to think), He doesn't have a beginning or an end. That sounds like the the ultimate logical impossibility. Imagine if I asked for a red apple that isn't red or an apple. That would be placed in the "round square" list of impossible questions. But here is a God who has no beginning or end; who doesn't exist, yet is not nothing, and somehow is more real than any of us. And I think someone brought up one example of a L.I (logical impossibility), saying you can't have a parent without children. But then I think about Mary s.a, who was a virgin parent. 

[Botak]

On 9/20/2019 at 10:57 AM, Guest less confused said:

I think I'm starting to get it now, it would be like asking God for my 18th arm back.

Finally! Something that kinda ease my mind on this topic

[Botak]

On 9/20/2019 at 7:16 AM, Ibn Al-Ja'abi said:

On 9/18/2019 at 11:24 AM, Guest confused said:

I find it difficult to not see it as a limitation. I guess this is what people meant when they said "Don't touch the advanced Islamic material, it's only for experienced scholars who know their stuff. If you read it it will shake your faith".

Thankfully they don't say that, especially since mantiq is a course taught in the introductory level of the hawza and because the books you would use to study it are all online with duruus accompanying them.

Where can I kearn these mantiq and duruus? Is there like an online course? Are they paid or free?

[mahmood8726]

On 9/14/2019 at 5:17 PM, Algerian Shia said:

Salam alaykum,  can Allah break the rules of impossibility and make the impossible possible??

For example: Can Allah make a round square?  Can Allah put out a fire with plants?  Can he make 2+2=5?  Can Allah put an entire universe inside an egg? 

Are these phenomens  possible by Allah or he is bound by rules of logic(created by him)?

Seriously, I'm confused...

2+2=5 is the equivalent of saying "kjhebdnhdhebksifhb2nsjydh"

Made no sense? That's because it's nonsense and means nothing. Saying 2+2=5 is nonsense, it's an absurdity, if you accept absurdity nothing will make sense and you'll be called schizophrenic. 

I don't think these are rules, this is just logic, ie Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is not the creation, if Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) becomes the creation, then he is not Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), because Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is the creator. Can't be both at the same time, the creation has its own distinct definition and the creator has his own distinc definition.

Edited November 10 by mahmood8726

[Guest Random Nigerian]

On 9/14/2019 at 3:17 PM, Algerian Shia said:

Salam alaykum,  can Allah break the rules of impossibility and make the impossible possible??

For example: Can Allah make a round square?  Can Allah put out a fire with plants?  Can he make 2+2=5?  Can Allah put an entire universe inside an egg? 

Are these phenomens  possible by Allah or he is bound by rules of logic(created by him)?

Seriously, I'm confused...

This is a really old post but I was intrigued by it so I will try my best.

For the first one, language is not reality and language is only a reflection of reality; there is no obligation for reality to adhere to the constraints (or, in this case, the unnecessary liberties) of language. That you can utter the phrase "round square" does not mean that such a thing is even possible (after all, someone like me can imagine Allah not existing and yet you would probably consider that odd) and only speaks to the fact that the human imagination generates from its own experiences new experiences that, by virtue of being played with in the mind, are not restrained by the physical laws of nature (though they may replicate those laws by virtue of being generated from real experience).

The second is not impossible. A coconut is a fruit of a plant and is therefore a plant. Crack the coconut and pour the water over the fire.

The third is also contradictory because Mathematics is an abstraction, or rather, an abstract way to describe real patterns that are observed in the universe by pulling them out of those things that exhibit said patterns and then describing the patterns by themselves. For instance, whole number addition and subtraction describes any scenario with an infinite number of items and one compartment in which any arbitrary number of those items can be placed. So if you have a bin and an infinite number of balls, then x + y is just "if the bin has x balls, and you add y balls, how many balls does the bin have." Subtraction involves removing balls, but obviously if you have 10 balls in the bin and you attempt to remove 15, then this no longer makes sense. So negative numbers do not describe this system well (but negative numbers work nicely to describe directional distance, for instance). Math, like language, is not reality, but unlike language it just describes discovered patterns in reality. Here, 2+2 = 5 makes no sense because in this pattern, the definition of two necessarily implies that 2+2 = 4.

The fourth doesn't make any sense because you are thinking of an egg as some abstract thing floating in nothingness, but the universe has to exist first before eggs exist; eggs come from the universe. You're just using an incorrect definition of "universe" here.

The source of your confusion is thinking of logic as being restrictions and not descriptions. Logic describes the universe around us, they are not invisible chains that stop human beings from doing what they would otherwise be able to do. We figure out the elementary rules of logic by practical observation of the universe around us and are strengthened in our convictions by their adherence to those same rules. Using those rules, we flourish more rules using the same process. This is the scientific method and you and I use it at least a little bit in our daily activities. Obviously my perspective is characterized by the fact that I don't believe in god, and if you do then your problem is a bit earlier than this - faith is by definition at least partially counter to logic (not in an offensive and the racist sense that repugnant Islamophobes in my area of the world mean when they say it but that it rejects this previous process that I described when it comes to matters of the divine), so if you believe in Allah without sufficient experience of Allah then you have already denied this process of the acquisition of logic. So why are you trying to rescue it again? Me personally I think your mission was over before it began, so you can either give up on thinking about "rules of logic" or you can abandon faith.

On 9/19/2019 at 6:16 PM, Ibn Al-Ja'abi said:

Miracles aren't what is logically impossible. They are what is logically possible but not naturally occurring. For example, for a virgin to become pregnant since the act of sex which takes away virginity is the vehicle for the child to be created, but the child might be created within the mother's womb. While the category virgin isn't applied to pregnant women pregnant through natural means, it here works since what would be needed for the category of virgin to be nullified didn't happen. As opposed to a married bachelor since those two categories don't exist at the same time. Similarly splitting the sea, raising the dead, healing the blind and the leaper aren't logical impossibilities, they aren't normally naturally observed (at least in the manner that the Qur'an and Bible refer to them happening). What we're talking about are logical impossibilities, my point is that they are not something we could have God get to happen since they aren't things that happen. They are mumtani' al-wujuud. We can't speak of them logically, there is neither a mental existence or external existence for them unlike contingent things which exist or don't exist. These are things which cannot exist by their definition.

This is a decent attempt at salvaging the concept of logic but it fails since the author has simply trapped themselves in the quagmire of linguistics and are ducking from creating a coherent definition of impossibility through confusing events with the linguistic categories that describe them. Again, language is not reality and reality does not have to adhere to the liberties of language. That the category of virgin does not explicitly require that the woman be impregnated by a man is a result of the structure of the language of the speaker and of the level of comprehension of reality that the person saying the word has at a given time. To say being a pregnant virgin is impossible is to say that, in reality, the two events described by "X is a virgin" and "X is pregnant" cannot happen at the same time because of the multiple logical implications expressed by said sentence at a given point in time, and the implications gotten from those implications, and so on. In the modern day we know that a female human being's egg cannot be fertilized except by insemination by a sperm cell, and that human sperm dies when exposed to air in mere minutes and only survives hours in a closed container except with modern techniques. Technically in the modern day a woman can become pregnant without a man but in the ancient days this was an "impossibility" since modern tools were inaccessible and such a thing would therefore imply that the inseminating sperm cell was both alive and dead at the same time, which is a more familiar logical contradiction. Doesn't this imply that this was mumtani' al-wujuud? The commenter commented this 5 years ago or more so they will probably not respond. Anyway, because ancient peoples did not know this and instead only knew that women seemed only to get pregnant when inseminated directly by a man, their definition of virginhood necessarily entailed direct insemination by a man, but this definition of virgin in modernity is no longer so clear cut because our understanding of reality has sped past our language and cultural practices. If you want to salvage the word then you can either double-down on the direct insemination aspect which would make pregnant virgins possible, or you would double-down on the insemination aspect, which would imply that Maryam was not a virgin at the conception of 3isa since in this definition artificial insemination is still insemination. Regardless of what you choose, even attempting the exercise implies adjusting the definition of a word to meet some social function and at that point you're no longer even talking about virgins anymore.

2 hours ago, mahmood8726 said:

2+2=5 is the equivalent of saying "kjhebdnhdhebksifhb2nsjydh"

Made no sense? That's because it's nonsense and means nothing. Saying 2+2=5 is nonsense, it's an absurdity, if you accept absurdity nothing will make sense and you'll be called schizophrenic. 

I don't think these are rules, this is just logic, ie Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is not the creation, if Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) becomes the creation, then he is not Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), because Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is the creator. Can't be both at the same time, the creation has its own distinct definition and the creator has his own distinc definition.

This one is not an answer and is just restating the question. The question poster already knows that those statements are nonsense and absurd (that's why they are asking in the first place), but they have acknowledged that it is by the logical process that we have come to know those things to be absurd (or they would not care). We are all aware of what logic is here, but the problem is that they presumably heard someone describe logic as constraints instead of descriptions and now confused since they rightfully assume that Allah is free of all constraints. If you think of logic as a definition of the universe as we understand it, then the concept of being "limited" by its "rules" becomes incoherent and if Allah can be logically proven to exist then Allah either proves or disproves our current logic since Allah is now part of the description of reality and everything other observation we make must bend to accommodate him (or, he must bend to accommodate them). The whole reason why this problem exists is that people do not want to subject Allah to logical inquiry and therefore must presume him to be above the process somehow, and thus reality is treated as a "constraint" which all but Allah are held back by.