But in the thought experiment of forgiving a forgiving, there is something is dilemmatic and blurring. There are no ultimate good or ultimate bad sides. There is no unspeakably bad, impossible to forgive thing. There is only a god, forgiving the human souls. It is almost silly and absurd to see this action as a hurtful, disturbing and a bad thing. The god’s forgiving all human souls is really not a matter of forgiving, not at all. It is really not related to the sphere of forgiving and not forgiving, just like the occurrence of leaves of the trees falling on the soil from the trees is not something ethically bad or good. The god’s forgiving all does not belong to the dimension of forgivable-unforgivable things. But nonetheless, god’s this forgiving causes something in the heart of the human. A sense of fairness and justness is broken by this act of forgiving by god. Some souls, not all of them, now have to forgive god’s forgiving. They have to find a way to forgive something that doesn’t even belong to the realm of forgivable-unforgivable dichotomy. They have to forgive that god doesn’t hold its side of the bargain. If the other side of the bargain would not follow what is required by the agreement, then what was the point of keeping this side of the bargain, if in the end everyone would be treated the same? In the act of forgiving all, there is a violence, a violation, a trespass. This violence is two-folded. It is both about not keeping the requirements of the bargain and also about conflicting the content of it. But how can one see a forgiving (a grace, an ultimate goodness and kindness) as something within the realm of forgivable-unforgivable? The god’s forgiving is so “not-something belongs to the realm of forgiving” that it doesn’t open itself to neither forgiveness nor unforgiveness. But what about heart’s mathematics?