Urfi Shirazi, a Persian poet, in one of his couplets says to his love that your beauty's limit cannot be comprehended and this statement comes from my limited comprehension.
closed as unclear what you're asking by Conifold, user19563, virmaior, Swami Vishwananda, Keelan♦ May 22 '17 at 20:50
Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
Claiming to know that something is unknowable does not seem to be a paradox straight away, but it can become a paradox if the ground for the unknowability claim is itself umknowable, by its own standard. One famous example from 20th century philosophy is the verification principle of the logical positivists. The verification principle asserted that only statements that can be empirically verified have meaning. It was soon suspected, however, that the verification principle itself cannot be empirically verified, and must be therefore meaningless, by its own standard...
No. To comprehend means to "take in the mind", so it means Urfi Sharazi knows the beauty-capacity of his mind is somewhat less than the quantity of beauty beheld. Not unlike how one knows the capacity of one's stomach is less than a full luncheon buffet table. Or how a 100G hard disk can't hold every movie ever made. It's no paradox to overfill a cup.