# My suffix is the suffix of the superfix of a holy man

My prefix is not real.
My infix makes you more judicious.
My suffix is the suffix of the superfix of a holy man.
Despite these divisions, my whole is indivisible.

What am I?

Hint:

Take a more literal understanding of the word "superfix" than its traditional definition.

• Can I ask what the definition of 'superfix' is in this puzzle? As far as I can tell, it has to do with pronunciation, and not a subset of letters. Is this correct? – TwoBitOperation Feb 12 at 19:58

It's a bit rough, but here's a starting guess:

Are you Irrational?

"My prefix is not real"...

So it is imaginary: i

"My infix makes you more judicious"...

(R)ration(s): allow more judicious allocation/use of resources.

"My suffix is the suffix of the superfix of a holy man"...

Al: The final part of cardinal, as in the religious position in the Catholic church. The word is used as a title, which is not a superfix so this is a bit of a stretch.

"Despite these divisions, my whole is indivisible"...

Irrational numbers are indivisible in the sense that they cannot be expressed as a ratio of two integers.

• don't know the answer but you have awesome explained your answer :) – Ms Designer Feb 7 at 11:38
• You get an upvote for a well thought answer, but this is incorrect. – Thomas Markov Feb 7 at 16:52
• @ThomasMarkov, many of the answers in here fit pretty well to your riddle. If they are incorrect, you may provide reasons to refute them or add a clarification in the question. – Ébe Isaac Feb 14 at 15:42

My prefix is not real.

$$i$$ - an imaginary unit.

My infix makes you more judicious.

i/I - abbreviation for information or intelligence, as in IT or IQ, can help in making decisions.

My suffix is the suffix of the superfix of a holy man.

i - suffix of the titles Rabbi and Swami.

Despite these divisions, my whole is indivisible.

i/I - one in Roman numerals, can't be divided into smaller whole numbers, and is a one-letter word.

I had this silly idea, that completely depends on OP having played fast and loose with the various -fixes. Given the somewhat frivolous fixations in the title, I'm willing to give that theory a chance:

Are you, perhaps,

an int?

My prefix is not real.

the int data type can store only integers, not real numbers

My infix makes you more judicious.

The INT stat (short for intelligence) will give you better judgement in many role-playing games.

My suffix is the suffix of the superfix of a holy man.

If you superfix a holy man, you get sa'int (stress on the newly created second syllable), whose suffix is "int"

Despite these divisions, my whole is indivisible.

The whole ("int") is too short to be sensibly split into pieces, which explains the various "-fixes" actually being the whole word.

Yes, I do realise I may be wildly off the mark with all this :)

It might be

ivisible

Because

i - not real prefix
visi - Latin for to visit/go see/look at, the empiric action that makes you more judicious
ble - suffix of bible, the holy man is attached / (super)fixed to it

... and its whole is in-"divisible"

You could be

ENTWINE

My prefix is not real.

ENT - tree men from LOTR, fiction based.

My infix makes you more judicious.

WIN - a win makes one think that they can judge others because they have earned experience

My suffix is the suffix of the superfix of a holy man.

E - Jesus, the Holiest to Christians. Je being the superfix. The suffix of that being E.

Despite these divisions, my whole is indivisible.

ENTWINE - if divided, something that is entwined will be no longer.

Thoughts

WINE could maybe make someone more judgy, but then no suffix would be needed. So, WIN it is. Still feels like I'm reaching though.

My guessing it’s an

imager

My prefix is not real.

$$i$$ for imaginary number; it’s opposite to real number

My infix makes you more judicious.

age could make one more judicious

My suffix is the suffix of the superfix of a holy man.

er is the suffix of the superfix of fakeer (stressed in the second syllable)

Despite these divisions, my whole is indivisible.

An imager is something that makes or records images. It cannot do its function should it be be divided.

• doesn't your explainations leave the second letter in your word unaccounted for? – SteveV Feb 8 at 10:31
• @SteveV The OP did not state that the affixes encompass the word in its entirety. So I found my guess acceptable. – Ébe Isaac Feb 8 at 10:34

Another answer (actually the same as @Bass 's, but with different explanations):

Are you an int data type?

My prefix is not real.

The prefix is $$i$$, an imaginary unit. It is not real.

My infix makes you more judicious.

Infix is $$n$$, a common designation for sample size in statistics. Having a larger sample usually allows you to make more judicious decisions about the properties of that sample.

My suffix is the suffix of the superfix of a holy man.

Suffix is $$t$$, last letter of "Saint" (a common title of a "holy man").

Despite these divisions, my whole is indivisible.

Integers (or whole numbers) are "indivisible" in the sense that the set of integers is not closed under division operation (i.e. you cannot always divide an integer by an integer to produce another integer).

Might be:

Imperil

My prefix is not real.

Prefix is $$i$$, the imaginary number

My infix makes you more judicious.

Infix is $$mper$$, which constitutes the word $$perm$$, which curls your hair and makes you look like a judge (at least in the saxon world), thus more judicious

My suffix is the suffix of the superfix of a holy man.

Suffix is $$il$$, from the superfix (on a cross) $$nail$$ of a holy man (christ)

Despite these divisions, my whole is indivisible.

The whole is indivisible since imperil is an untangible concept.

New contributor
user65573 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.