Lesson 2: Quiz question

Lesson 2: Quiz question

by iram - -
Number of replies: 3

Salam alaykum Shaykh,

I have few questions regarding the quiz in lesson 2 (I decided to compile them into one post otherwise there will be too much spam in people's inbox).

1. Regarding the following question 13. "The rationally necessary is that which:" where the answer is found to be "Logically must exist and logically could not not exist." is there supposed to be a single "not" at the end of the answer here? Assuming that to be the case, what is the difference between the rationally necessary and the rationally impossible?

2. Can a ruling be both morally necessary and rationally necessary? For example if one can arrive at rational ruling from reason alone and then the same ruling is given in the Qur'an is it then also morally necessary?

3. Regarding question 22. "Allah cannot be known. This means that", the answer to this questions is "We can’t understand His full reality, but we can say some things about what He is and what He isn’t." However, we are also given the option "We can only say about Allah what He has told us." Why is this option not also true? Similarly with question 23. "In Islamic theology, when we talk about Allah, we say" where the answer is "We say what is necessarily true about Allah, what would be absurd, and what is in principle possible." but why is the answer "Only what Allah say about Himself." not also correct?

Jazak Allahu Khayran

In reply to iram -

Re: Lesson 2: Quiz question

by Mawlana Irshaad Sedick -
Wa alaykum as-salam wa rahmatuLlah

1. Double “not” is correct.
2. This is possible.
3. No, Allah does not explicitly state everything about Himself that we can rationally deduce in the way rational arguments explain.

Allah knows best.
In reply to Mawlana Irshaad Sedick

Re: Lesson 2: Quiz question

by iram - -
Salam alaykum Shaykh,

Regarding the double not I am a bit confused about.

If we say that if the rational rulings can be divided into the categories:
- that which is necessary,
- that which is possible and
- that which is impossible.
I do not understand why we include the statement "logically could not not exist in the rationally necessary" in to the category of rationally necessary.

I see the statement as "could non not be" equivalent to as something which is possible i.e "could not not be" = "could be" meaning that which is rationally necessary is that which is necessary AND that which is possible which means that the original classification of rational rulings into that which is necessary, possible and impossible can be reduced to that which is necessary and impossible?

I must have misunderstood something shaykh?

JazakAllahuKhayran for your charity in giving me understanding.
In reply to iram -

Re: Lesson 2: Quiz question

by Mawlana Irshaad Sedick -
Tamam, I will look into it and ask the Course facilitator if further clarification is required, however, no one else has had this issue with the wording. Allah knows best.