religions

Article
Evil and Human Suffering in Islamic
Thought—Towards a Mystical Theodicy
Nasrin Rouzati
Religious Studies Department, Manhattan College, Riverdale, NY 10471, USA; nasrin.rouzati@manhattan.edu

Received: 13 December 2017; Accepted: 28 January 2018; Published: 3 February 2018

Abstract: This paper sheds light on the treatment of the ‘problem of evil’ and human suffering from
an Islamic perspective. I begin by providing an overview of the term ‘evil’ in the Qur’an to highlight
its multidimensional meaning and to demonstrate the overall portrait of this notion as it is presented
in the Islamic revelation through the narrative of the prophet Job. Having established a Qur’anic
framework, I will then provide a brief historical overview of the formation of philosophical and
theological debates surrounding “good” and “bad/evil” and the origination of Muslim theodicean
thought. This will lead us to Ghazālian theodicy and the famous dictum of the “best of all possible
worlds” by one of the most influential scholars of Islamic thought, Abu H . āmid Ghazālı̄. The final
section of this paper will explore the Sufi/ mystical tradition of Islam through the teachings of one of
the most distinguished mystics of Islam, Jalāl al-Dı̄n Rūmı̄. The conclusion of the paper will attempt
to bring about a new understanding of how the so-called “problem of evil” is not presented in Islam
as a problem but rather as an instrument in the actualization of God’s plan, which is intertwined with
human experiences in this world—an experience that is necessary for man’s spiritual development.

Keywords: problem of evil; theodicy; Qur’an; Job; good; evil; al Ghazālı̄; mysticism; Islam

1. Introduction
The ‘problem of evil’ or, as it is more often referred to, the cause of human suffering is perhaps
one of the most debated questions in the history of the philosophy of religion.1 Although the issue
makes itself known to humankind in general, it gains particular attention in the context of monotheistic
religions as it brings into question the main pillar of such religions, namely, the existence of a powerful
and merciful God. In light of the enormous amount of evil in the world, especially in the case of
undeserved suffering, the challenge becomes even more acute and begs for answers. According to
Hick, pondering about the volume of afflictions and adversities that mankind is faced with, “we do
indeed have to ask ourselves whether it is possible to think of this world as the work of an omnipotent
creator who is motivated by limitless love . . . this is indeed the most serious challenge that there is to
theistic faith.”2
This paper aims to shed light on the treatment of the ‘problem of evil’ and human suffering
from an Islamic perspective. I will begin by providing an overview of the term ‘evil’ in the Qur’an to
highlight its multidimensional meaning and attempt to demonstrate the overall portrait of this notion
as it is presented in the Islamic revelation through the narrative of the prophet Job. Having established
a Qur’anic framework, I will then provide a brief historical overview of the formation of theological

1 The “Problem of Evil”, in the context of Western scholarship, is generally identified in two main categories: theoretical
and existential, and further divides the theoretical dimension into logical and evidential; the distinction between moral evil
and natural evil is also underscored. For more on this see Michael L. Peterson, The Problem of Evil, Selected Readings
(Peterson 2011), Alvin Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil (Plantinga 1974), and John Hick, Evil and the God of Love (Hick 2007).
2 See John Hick, An Interpretation of Religion (Hick 2004, p. 118).

Religions 2018, 9, 47; doi:10.3390/rel9020047 www.mdpi.com/journal/religions

Religions 2018, 9, 47 2 of 13

debates surrounding “good” and “bad/evil” and the origination of Muslim theodicean thought.
This will lead us to Ghazālian theodicy and the famous dictum of the “best of all possible worlds” by one
of the most influential scholars of Islamic thought, Abu H . āmid Ghazālı̄. The final section of this paper
will explore the Sufi/mystical tradition of Islam through the teachings of one of the most distinguished
mystics of Islam, Jalāl al-Dı̄n Rūmı̄. The conclusion of the paper will attempt to bring about a new
understanding of how the so-called “problem of evil” is not presented in Islam as a problem but rather
as an instrument in the actualization of God’s plan, which is intertwined with human experiences in
this world—an experience that is necessary for man’s spiritual development.

2. Evil and Suffering in the Qur’an: An Overview

For more than fourteen hundred years the Qur’an has served as the foundation of the religion
of Islam and continues to play a dynamic role in shaping and influencing the lives of its followers,
regardless of their diverse cultural backgrounds. The Qur’an is also considered to be the highest
source of Islamic scholarship and functions as the starting point for a major portion of scholarly works.
Therefore, to understand the treatment of evil and suffering in Muslim thought, the journey must
begin with studying the Qur’anic narratives where this concept makes itself known.
A cursory review of studies on theodicy reveals that the meaning of ‘evil’, for the most part, is
assumed and is not negotiable—personal loss, illness, violence, natural disaster, etc. Although the term
appears abundantly in both popular and scholarly works, there seems to be a conceptual ambiguity
surrounding it: What exactly is evil? Furthermore, does human understanding of evil concur with the
divine message?
A key term in Arabic that is translated as evil is ‘sharr’ and it is presented in two distinct categories
of Qur’anic narratives. The first category includes verses that fall in the semantic field of sharr and
appears amongst the moral concepts of the Qur’an. The overall notion of good (khayr) and bad/evil
(sharr) is a central theme in Qur’anic teachings and is emphasized in both Meccan and Medinan phases
of the Islamic revelation.3 Considering these narratives hermeneutically by applying an intra-textual
contextualization method, whereby the Qur’an functions as its own interpreter,4 seems to suggest
that the most prominent meaning for the term sharr in this group of narratives is the situation that
man creates for himself.5 It is clearly stated in the Qur’an that when humankind, through his own
volition, acts in certain ways and adapts to specific behaviors that are not in accordance with the
divine plan, he situates himself in a condition that is referred to as sharr by the Qur’an. Some of
the deeds that fall into this moral category include miserliness, unbelief/rejecting God, slander, and
transgression.6 The Qur’an noticeably upholds that the creation of the universe—and by extension,
humankind—is purposeful and not in vain.7 Man, therefore, must make a serious effort to live his life
according to God’s cosmic plan. By neglecting the purpose for his creation and the accountabilities
that it entails, he creates an undesirable living condition for himself, that is, sharr. The purposefulness
of man’s creation and his responsibility as it pertains to suffering will be discussed later in the article.
The second category of Qur’anic narratives is more of an interest to us as it is directly related to
human suffering and theodicy. This group of verses falls beyond the semantic field of sharr and is

3 For information on the chronology of the Qur’an, see Neal Robinson, Discovering the Qur’an: A Contemporary Approach to a
Veiled Text (Robinson 2003).
4 Intra-textual contextualization is a methodology used in understanding Qur’anic verses according to the context in which
they appear individually, as well as in relation to the overall theme of all the chapters in which they appear. For an
excellent discussion on the interpretation of the Qur’anic terms, see Toshibiko Izutsu, Ethico - Religious Concepts in the Qur’an
(Izutsu 2002).
5 For example, see Qur’an, 3:180; 8:22; 24:11; 17:11. For an excellent exegesis on the Qur’an, see (Tabarsi 1350).
6 For more information on various contexts of sharr in the Qur’an, see Tunbar Yesilhark Ozkan, A Muslim Response to Evil. Said
Nursi on Theodicy (Ozkan 2015, pp. 19–35).
7 Qur’an, 38:27
Religions 2018, 9, 47 3 of 13

revealed in various historical contexts reflected in the Qur’an.8 A careful scrutiny of these narratives
demonstrates that the so-called problem of evil—and by extension, human suffering—is not treated in
the Qur’an as a theoretical problem but rather as an instrument in the actualization of God’s purpose.
Most of these narratives illustrate that the underlying rationale for the existence of various forms of
evil and suffering is that they serve as a trial (ibtilā) and test: “We shall certainly test you with fear and
hunger, and loss of property, lives, and crops; however, [Prophet], give good news to those who are steadfast.” 9
The purpose of human suffering and its role in God’s overall cosmic plan may bring about
two corollaries. First, there is no contradiction between the divine attributes of God and the fact
that suffering exists; therefore, affirmation of the Qur’an regarding God’s omnipotence is not under
question: “Say ‘God, holder of all sovereignty, You give control to whoever You will, and remove it from whoever
You will. You elevate whoever You will and humble whoever You will. All that is good lies in Your hands: You
have power over everything.”10 Moreover, since God is undoubtedly in control of creation, suffering must
also be allowed by him for God’s plan to be fully executed. Second, if suffering is meant as a test and
is regarded as a necessary component of life, then a Muslim must view the undesirable situations
(illness, financial difficulty, loss of a loved one, etc.) as an opportunity to actualize his inner potential
and move forward in his spiritual journey, becoming who he “is” as the fruit of the creational tree.
It may also be concluded that by presenting the notion of evil and suffering as part of the human
experience and a necessary component of man’s spiritual journey, the Qur’an refrains from articulating
a systematic theodicy. Therefore, the objective is not to engage man in abstract ideas but rather to
help him realize the purpose of suffering and offer guiding principles in how to overcome various
forms of evil.11 Here it may be noted that the notion of ‘natural evil’—a distinct category under the
umbrella of the ‘problem of evil’—is not treated in the Qur’an. Although the Qur’an frequently makes
references to nature and events in the natural world that might not be desirable by mankind, these are
not referred to as ‘evil’.

3. Overcoming Evil: Prophet Job (Ayyūb)—The Exemplar

The notion of prophethood (nabuwwa) and the descriptive narratives about the lives of the
¯
prophets constitute a major portion of the Islamic scripture. While the prophets serve as the conduits
through which the divine message is communicated to addressee communities, they are portrayed
as exemplars that inspire and guide people to the straight path of monotheism. The history of
Qur’anic prophethood began with Adam, chosen to become the first prophet after the trial of eating
from the forbidden tree, and includes many of the figures mentioned in Judaeo–Christian traditions.
Although Islamic tradition speaks of 124,000 prophets in the history of mankind, the Qur’an mentions
twenty-five by name and describes their challenges as they conveyed the prophetic message to their
respected communities. Prophet Muhammad is mentioned as the final messenger and is referred to as
the “Seal of the Prophets”.12
The story of Job (Ayyūb), an eminent figure in Jewish and Christian tradition, is seen in the Qur’an
to exemplify genuine devotion to God, gratitude through fortune and health, and patience when
afflicted with illness and adversity.13 Job’s incomparable sincerity and submission to God’s will in both

8 Discussing the historical, political, and social climate of Islam’s normative period is beyond the scope of this paper; however,
it needs to be noted that a large portion of the Qur’an is directly related to the circumstances that surrounded Prophet
Muhammad and the early Muslim community.
9 Qur’an, 2:155. Also see 67:2 and 89:16.
10 Qur’an, 3:26, see (Abdel Haleem 2004).
11 For an extended discussion on the instrumentality of evil in the forms of balā see, Nasrin Rouzati, Trial and Tribulation in the
Qur’an: A Mystical Theodicy (Rouzati 2015).
12 Qur’an, 33:40.
13 The story of Job in Judeo-Christian traditions is presented in the Book of Job and appears in the form of a dialogue between
Job and his friends who try to explain to him the reason for his sufferings. A comparative study of the story between
Judeo-Christian tradition and Islam is beyond the scope of this paper. For an excellent comparative review, see A.H. Johns,
A Comparative Glance at Ayyub in the Qur’an (Johns 2008, pp. 51–82).
 Religions 2018, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13
Religions 2018, 9, 47 4 of 13

when afflicted with illness and adversity.13 Job’s incomparable sincerity and submission to God’s
will in and
health bothprosperity,
health andasprosperity,
well as duringas well as during
affliction affliction are
and hardship, andthehardship, are Qur’an
reasons the the reasons the
portrays
Qur’an portrays
him as “an him servant.”
excellent as “an excellent servant.”
14 14

According to Muslim
According to Muslim exegesis, exegesis, what
what distinguishes
distinguishes Job Job isfact
is the thethat
factdespite
that despite his enormous
his enormous fortune,
fortune,
he continually attributed the source of his blessings to God and remained humble as ahumble
he continually attributed the source of his blessings to God and remained servant as
who a
servant who lacked
lacked ownership ownership
of his belongings.of his belongings.
Similarly, when GodSimilarly,
tested when
him withGod tested disease,
a serious him with heaexercised
serious
disease, he exercised patience and recognized that he was going through
patience and recognized that he was going through a test—a positive experience—and ascribed any a test—a positive
experience—and
negative feelings ascribed
of despairanyto negative
Satan.15 feelings of despair to Satan.
15

The
The Qur’anic
Qur’anicnarrative
narrativeabout
aboutJob
Jobdemonstrates
demonstratesthat thattrials
trialsand
andtests—whether
tests—whetherin in prosperity
prosperity andand
health
health or illness and hardship—are part of the divine plan, so much so that even prophets are
or illness and hardship—are part of the divine plan, so much so that even prophets are not
not
exempt; it isisthrough
exempt; it throughvarious
various experiences
experiences in that
in life life man
that isman
ableisto able to actualize
actualize his potential
his potential and
and propagate
propagate
his missionhis onmission on As
this earth. thisJohn
earth. As “the
notes, John story
notes,of“the
Job in story of Job inis the
the Qur’an Qur’an isprimarily
understood understoodas a
primarily as a reward narrative with an emphasis different from that
reward narrative with an emphasis different from that of the story of Job in the Bible.”of the story of Job in
16 the Bible.” 16

4.
4. Concept
Conceptof
ofEvil:
Evil:Theological
Theologicaland
andPhilosophical
PhilosophicalDevelopment
Development
One
One of of thethe earliest
earliest problems problems in in Muslim
Muslim theological theological thought thought (kalām) (kalām) was was how how to to reconcile
reconcile the the
divine
divine attribute attribute of of omnipotence
omnipotence with with the the notionnotion of of human
human free free will.
will. The The departure
departure point point for for this
this
discourse
discourse was was the the Qur’an
Qur’anand andthe the diverse
diverseinterpretations
interpretationsof ofits
its teachings
teachingson on the
the divine
divine namesnames and and
attributes
attributes (asmāʾ (asmā al-h al-ḥusnā).
usnā). 17
17 The
The reconciliation
reconciliation ofof certain
certain divine
divine attributes,
attributes, predominantly
predominantly thethe aspect
aspect of
.
of
anan all-powerful
all-powerful God, God, withwith the ideathe idea of human of human free will—the
free will—the broaderbroader frame with frame which withhuman
whichsuffering
human
suffering
was enclosed—was was enclosed—was the first attempt the firsttoattempt initiateto initiate a within
a theodicy theodicy thewithin
context theofcontext
Islam. of Islam.
The
Thediscourse
discoursepresents presentsitself itselfatat thethe core core of theof the theological
theological dialogue
dialogue amongstamongst various
variousgroups. The
groups.
theologians
The theologians whowho advocatedadvocated for for the the attribute
attribute of of omnipotence
omnipotence ininitsitsabsolute
absoluteand anduncompromising
uncompromising
form
form were were of of the
the opinion
opinion that that the the onlyonly agent agent in in this
this world
world is is God:
God: He Hecreates
createsHis His ownown acts
acts as aswell
well asas
Religions 2018, the
the acts acts
9, x FORof
of allall
PEER human
humanREVIEW beings.
beings. As Asthis thisview viewraised raisedserious seriousconcerns concernsabout aboutthe thecreation
creationof of“evil”
of 13 acts
5“evil” actsby by
God,
God, the 5 ofdebate
the debate
13 developed
developed further further to to question
question the the validity
validity of of human
human free free will—the
will—the conceptconcept that that is is
of instrumentality
deeply
deeply rooted rooted of human in
in thethe Quran suffering
Quran as inrelates
as itit the divine
relates to
to man’s
man’splan.responsibility
The notion of
responsibility and
andsuffering, which included
accountability,
accountability, as
as well
well as as divine
divine
of suffering, undeserved
which judgment suffering
included
judgment and
and reward by
5reward
of 13children and and animals,
and punishment.
punishment. The
The continued
dialogueto
dialogue be discussed
crystallized
crystallized between
between by the Muʿtazilite
the Muʿtazilite
Mu tazilite and and the the
iscussed theologians. by the Ashʿarite, Muʿtazilite
19 The the
Ash arite, two
Muʿtazilite’s main schools
firm stress of thought,
on God’s with
justice, a divergence
however,
schools of thought, with a divergence of opinion; both made a serious effort to of opinion;
resulted in thebothgroupmade a serious
dividing, effort
esulted
eVIEW notioninof which
the group finally
suffering, to
win win gave
dividing,
which
the the birth
included
argument
argument to according
theaccording
Ashʾarite to to school
their their of thought. 5 of
understanding
understanding of
thethe Qur’an.
Qur’an. 18 18
of 13
to be discussed According by The the
The Muʿtazilite
toMuʿtazilite
MuAshʾarite
tazilite school
school of
5 of 13theologians, of thought,
God’s law
thought, also
alsoof known
justiceas
known applies
as the
therationalists,
only to human
rationalists, categorically
beings who
categorically opposedhave the
opposed theidea
idea
lywever,
an tosuffering
human been
resulted inobligated
beings inthat
the who
thedivinegroup
God to
have act
plan. according
dividing,
creates The human notion toactsHis
of laws.
suffering,
that includeApplying which
evil
that God creates human acts that include evil and advocated for human free will by emphasizing andthe idea
included
advocated of justice
for to
human God, however,
free will bywill put
emphasizing a the
echildren
to God, of
notion however,
and
limit onanimals,
suffering, an
the will
importance put
all-powerful
which
importance a included
continued of the of to be
divine
creator;
the divine discussed
attribute
therefore,attribute ofisthe
ofbyjustice
God not Muʿtazilite
justice (ʿadl).
bound ( adl). They
byTheyHis upheld
own
upheld that
laws. that God,
He God, ininaccordance
is just in whateverwith
accordance with HisHis
pplies to
nxlite’s
laws. be firm He
discussed
He
only is
to does.
stressjust
human onin by Applied
God’s
attribute
20 the
whatever
beings who
justice,
of to
Muʿtazilite
(ʿāadil), suffering,
have
however,cannot
FOR PEER REVIEW attribute of ( āadil), cannot create evil and that evil is the direct this
resulted
create then in
evil means
the
and groupthat
that all harm
dividing,
evil is the encountered
direct result
5 of of
result
13 by man
man’s is fair
freedom as it
of
of man’s freedom of choice. has
choice. This
tered
of justice
the
wever, been
byresulted
Ashʾarite man
to God, willed
is
schoolfair
inviewtheas
however,
This by
of itGodhaswill
thought.
was
group
view who
challenged
dividing,
was put is just
a by
challenged in all His
raising
by creation.
raising questions
questionsThesuch Ashʾarite
suchas: as: Ifthinkers
God
If God were
does does in
notnot sharp
create
create conflict
evil,
evil,who,with then,
who, then, is is
yrs were
His
eality of in
own
theologians, sharp
the
laws.
human God’sconflict
Heresponsible
Muʿtazilites
sufferingislawjustwith
responsible ofwho for
whatever
injustice
thefor human
asserted applies
divine
human suffering
that
plan.only not toonly
The
suffering caused
human
notion is God
caused by
beings
ofby illnesses
subjected
who have
suffering,
illnesses andtoand
which disasters?
the same
included
disasters? AndAnd
rules if God
of justice
if Godwills
but for
wills illnesses
that, for and
inillnesses
me
m ding
suffering
pplies rules
encountered
toonly offact,
His byjustice
laws.
to the
children
human obligation
but
bydisasters
man
Applying
and that,
is fair
and
beings
disasters in
in to
the asact
human
animals,
who in in
ithave
idea has just
of
human means
justice
life,
continuedhowlife,to is
can eternal
God,
howto Hebe and
however,He uncompromising
bediscussed
can just? beThewill
just?byputThe
the Mufor
a Muʿtazilite
Muʿtazilites God. Itresponded
responded
tazilites isbyworth noting
affirming thatillnesses
that
by affirming that
aor
eator;ofGod.
teThe thinkers
justice It aisto
therefore,
Muʿtazilite’s worth
were
prominent
God, in
God noting
and sharp
however,
firm
illnesses
Religions Muslim
not that
conflict
isdisasters,
stress and
2018, will
bound on with
xwhile
9,philosopher,
putby PEER
God’s
disasters,
FOR may
aHis own
justice,
whileappear
Ibnlaws.
REVIEW mayasHe
Rushd
however, “evil”,
(Averroes,
appearisresulted
just asare
in ind. actuality
1198),
whatever
in
“evil”, the aregroupin “good”
challenged
dividing,
actuality that
these
“good” Godviews creates
that and and
Godasserted
creates thatand
serve
5 thata
of 13
nged
yogave thethese
fering,
His same
this
birth
own that
views
rules
tothen
laws. theHe
the element
and
of
means isasserted
justice
significant
Ashʾarite
serve justthatofbutjustice
all
school
in that,
purposeharm
whatever
a significant ofmay
in encountered
in
thought.not creational
the
purpose be inemployed
the bycreational
man
cosmic forisGod fair
plan. and
asThis
cosmic itman
hasseems
plan. in the tosame
This be the
seems manner:
first
to be man,first
appearance
the by virtue
of the theory
appearance of
m
ng same
mising
just inmanner:
encountered
to Ashʾaritefor
all ofHis being
God. man,
by just,
Itthe
is
creation.
ofman
theologians, by
worth advances
virtue
The
is
theory noting
fair
instrumentality Ashʾarite to a of
that
ofasinstrumentality
God’s itlawhas higher
thinkers
of justice
human level ofof
were
applies
suffering
humangoodness;
in only
sharp in to
the
suffering God,
conflict
human
divine however,
in with
beings
plan.
the is just
who
The
divine have
notion
plan. due to notion
of
The His perfection—a
suffering, which included
of suffering, which
just
te
dted),to dueaccording
thinkers
challenged
that
act to
not His
trait
were perfection—a
that
these
only in
is requires
to sharp
views
GodHis laws.
undeserved
included Him
conflict
and
subjected towith
asserted
Applying
suffering
undeserved be the
to just. same
the
by
21
suffering idea rules
children ofand
of children
by justicejustice to butanimals,
God,
animals,
and that,
however, in continued
continued willto putbe toa be
discussed
discussedbybythe the Muʿtazilite
Mu tazilite
anojust inmeans
the
-powerful the
same same is In
eternal
rules
creator;
13
the
manner:
of The
final
and
justice
therefore,
theologians. man,story
analysis,
by of
uncompromising
but God
19 that,Job
virtue
The in
in
not Judeo₋Christian
ismainstream bound
Muʿtazilite’s Sunnite
for God.
by His
firm It traditions
is theologians
own worth
stress isGod’s
onnoting
laws. presented
He just in
supported
isthat
justice, in thethe Book
whatever
however, of resulted
Ashʾarite Job andschoolappears
in the in the dividing,
of thought
group form of a
dialogue between Job and his friends who try to explain to him the reason for his sufferings. A comparative
wever,
e Ashʾarite
omising
sopher,
pplied is
Ibn
to just
forand God.due
school
Rushd
suffering, Itto
emphasizedis His
ofthis thought
worth
(Averroes,
which perfection—a
then that
noting
finally d.
means God
1198),
gave that creates
challenged
that
birth all all acts.
to harm
the these Inviews
encountered
Ashʾarite order
school and to reconcile
byasserted
of man
thought.is fair God’s
as it omnipotence
has with human
study of the story between Judeo₋Christian tradition and Islam is beyond the scope of this paper. For an
mayy
8),’s God omnipotence
notwho
challenged beresponsibility,
employed
is just
these with
inviews
14 allhuman
for the
God
His and
According
Qur’an doctrine
and
creation.
asserted
38:41–2 man
to Theofin
Ashʾarite
and 21:83–4. acquisition
the same
Ashʾarite (kasb)
manner:
thinkers
theologians, was
man,
were
God’s adopted:
by
in
law virtue
sharp
of God creates
conflict
justice applieswith all
only acts;
to humans
human freely
beings who have
excellent comparative review, see A.H. Johns, A Comparative Glance at Ayyub in the Qur'an (Johns 2008,
15 See Abubakr ‘Tigh Neishabur Surabadi, Tafsir Surabadi, ed. Sa‘Idi Sirjani (Surabadi 1381). Also, see Brannon 22
eates
aported
an
es higher
in the
who all
the acts;
level
acquire
same
asserted ofhumans
Ashʾarite goodness;
certain
manner:
that
been school
not freely
man, God,
only
obligated
pp. 51–82). of
acts thought
by and,
is however,
virtue
God
to therefore,
act subjected is
according justare
todue
tothe to
accountable
His sameHis
laws. perfection—a
rules for
Applyingof the
justice acquisition
the but
idea that,
of of
in
justice good to and
God, evil acts.
however, will put a
M. Wheeler,
Prophets in the Qur'an, an Introduction to the Qur’an and Muslim Exegesis (Wheeler 2002).
wever,
eonjust.
cile
ation of tois
God’s
21good
actConversely,
justin due
and
omnipotence to
evil
just 14means
limit
16 His Muslim
on
Qur’an perfection—a
acts.
iswith
eternal
an 22 thinkers
human
all-powerful
38:41–2 andand belonging
uncompromising to theforShiʾite
creator; therefore,
21:83–4. God.
God It branch
is isnotworth of noting
bound Islam—through
by His thatown laws. theHe influence
is just inofwhatever
See (Johns 2003, pp. 50–51).
m—through
: God creates
mainstream
Muslim rational
the
Sunnite
philosopher, element
allinfluence
acts;
He
17
15 See
For humans
theologians
Ibn
does. Rushd
more in
of onthe
20 Applied
Abubakr this Muʿtazilite
freely
supported
(Averroes,
`Tigh
see Abdol the
d.
to suffering,
Neishabur Rahmantheology—remained
Ashʾarite
1198), challenged
Ibnthis
Surabadi, Khald school
then ūn, means
Tafsir Surabadi,
Muqaddimah in
of thought
these views
thatdisagreement
ofall
ed. andharm
Sa`Idi
Ibn asserted
Khald with
ūnencountered
Sirjani
(Ibn the
(Surabadi
Khald Ashʿarites.
by man
1381).
ūn 1375). is fair
Also, An
see as it has
Brannon
18 For a comprehensive discussion on indevelopment of theology inQur'an
Islam, see Harry Austryn Wolfson, The Philosopy of Kalam
mentported ofwith
acquisition
ntcreates the
justice the
example
all ofAshʿarites.
Ashʾarite
acts.
may goodIn
not of school
been this
M.and
order
be willed An
may
employed of by
evil
to
Wheeler, be
thought
acts.
reconcile
God observed
for
Prophets22God
who God’s is from
in and
the the
omnipotence
man
just
Qur'an, in writings
anthe
all His same with
creation.
Introduction of human
manner:anThe
to theeminent
man,
Ashʾariteby Persian
and virtue
thinkers
Muslim philosopher,
were
Exegesis Morteza
in sharp
(Wheeler conflict
2002). with
(Wolfson 1976).
ersian
headvances
of acquisition
cile God’s Muṭahharī
philosopher,
Islam—through
toomnipotence
a higher 16
the(d.
(kasb) See
Morteza
thewas
level (Johns
1979),
influence
ofadopted:
with
Muʿtazilites 2003,
who
goodness;
human whopp.
was
ofGod 50–51).
of creates
God, thehowever,
asserted opinion
thatallnot that
acts;
isonly
just thedue
humans isAshʾarite
God tofreely
His outlook,
perfection—a
subjected to thewhile same aimedrulesatofvindicating
justice but that, in
17 21 For more on this see Abdol Rahman Ibn Khaldūn, Muqaddimah 22 anyof Ibn Khaldūn (Ibn
23 Khaldūn 1375).
d:k, while
isagreement
God
therefore,
ires Him aimed
God
creates
toare bewithat
from
all vindicating
the
accountable
just. fact, Ashʿarites.
injustice,
acts; humans
the resulted
for
obligation freely
the An toinact exonerating
acquisition in justof means human
good is and
eternaloppressors
eviland acts. of
uncompromising wrongdoing. for God. It is worth noting that
wrongdoing.
minent
ers
al Persian
belonging
analysis,
acquisition 23 ofFrom
to
mainstream
18
athe
good For
theShiʾite
philosopher, and
prominent a
Muslimcomprehensive
Sunnite
evil Morteza
branch philosophical
theologians
acts.
Muslim 22 discussion
ofphilosopher,
Islam—through
supported on
perspective, development
the
Ibn Rushd the theinfluence
Ashʾarite
(Averroes,of
notionschool theology
ofofgood
d. 1198),in
of and Islam,
thoughtchallengedsee Harry
evil is enclosed Austryn
these within
views and Wolfson,
the assertedThe
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
ndzed ofevil
heuʿtazilite
outlook, is God
enclosed
while
wider
Islam—through
that creates within
aimed
theology—remained
ontological
that the
all
the the
atacts.
vindicating
influence
element In in order
understanding disagreement
of of
justice to of reconcile
may with
existence
not be the
(wujūd)
God’s
employed Ashʿarites.
and
omnipotence An and
fornonexistence
God withman human(ʿadam).
in the same Briefly put, good
manner: man,isby virtue
disagreement
ebserved
,of(ʿadam).
the any defined
Briefly
wrongdoing.
from
doctrine with
of put,
the as the23agood
writings
acquisition
of being positive
Ashʿarites.
is
of(kasb)
just, an entity wasthat
An
eminent
advances abranches
to Persian
adopted: higher God from
philosopher,
level of existence;
creates acts; evil,
allMorteza
goodness; humans
God, on the
freely
however, otheris justhand,
due to stems from
His perfection—a
the
fminent
was ngood other
of the
acts and nonexistence
hand,
evil
opinion
Persian
and, is stems
enclosed
thatthat
philosopher,
therefore,trait and
from
the
are asMorteza
within
Ashʾarite
accountable
requires such the
Him is to
outlook,viewed
for bethe while
just. as aimeda negative
acquisition
21 atof entity.
vindicating
good and evil
24 An acts.example of the ontological
22

tedexample
Muslim outlook,
existence
in exonerating ofwhile
thinkers the human
interpretation
(ʿadam). ontological
aimed
Briefly
belonging Inofat what
vindicating
put,
oppressors
the to good
finalthe constitutes
is any branch
of
Shiʾite
analysis, good of
wrongdoing.
mainstream andIslam—through
evil
Sunnite
23 maytheologians
be seen the frominfluence the works
supported of two prominent
of the Ashʾarite school of thought
evil,
he
losophical
entof any inonthe
works Muslim
the of twophilosophers
other
perspective,
Muʿtazilite
wrongdoing. and hand,
prominent thestemsnotion
theology—remained
23 emphasized who from significantly
ofthatgood God and influenced
evil
increates is all
disagreement enclosed
acts. the shaping
within
with
In orderthethe of reconcile
Muslim philosophical
Ashʿarites.
to AnGod’s omnipotence thought:with Ibn human
m
f. good
anding
his 24 philosophical
mayAnof andexample
Sīnā,
be evilknown
existence
observed isthought:
of
enclosed
(wujūd)the
from
responsibility, Ibn
ontological
as Avicennawithin
and
the thethe (d.
nonexistence
writings 1037),
doctrine and
of an(ʿadam).
ofeminentSadrBriefly
acquisition al-Din
Persian Shirāzī,
put,
(kasb) was who
good
philosopher, is was
adopted: mostly
MortezaGod creates recognizedall acts; as humans
Mullā freely
 exempt; it ispropagate through various his mission experiences
on this disease, in life
earth. he As that John man
exercised notes, is patience
able“thetostory actualize
andofrecognizedJobhis in potential
the Qur’anthat he and iswas understoo going
propagate his primarily
missionasona reward this earth. narrative with
Asexperience—and
John an emphasis
notes, “the
when story
ascribed different
afflicted ofany Jobwith from
in the
negative thatQur’an
illness ofandtheisstory
feelings of Job in
understood
of despair
adversity. 13 to the
Satan.
Job’s Bible.”
incom15

primarily as a reward narrative with an emphasis different

The Qur’anic will fromnarrative
in both thathealth of
aboutthe story of Job in theas
Job demonstrates
and prosperity, Bible.”
that
well trials
16 and tests
as during a
4.Religions
Concept of Evil: Theological health and or Philosophical
illness and
Qur’an Development
hardship—are
portrays him aspart“an of the
excellent divine plan,
servant.” so
14 much s
5 of 2018,
13 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4o
Religions4. 2018,Concept
9, 47 of Evil: Theological and Philosophical exempt; it Development
is through According various toexperiences
Muslim in
exegesis, 5 of that
life 13
what man is
distinguishes able to
One of the earliest problems in Muslim theological thought (kalām) was how to reconcile th
plan. The notion of suffering, One which of divine
the when
included
earliest afflicted
attribute problems with
of omnipotenceillness propagate
in Muslim with and adversity.
theological his mission
fortune,
the notion
13 Job’she
thought on this
continually
incomparable
of human (kalām)freeearth. waswill.As John
attributed
sincerity
howThe notes,
and the
departurethe
to reconcile “the
source
submission story of
point for thi of
his
to Job
ble
Go
ontinued to be discussed Religions
19
by attribute
the 2018,will 9, xinFOR both PEER health
REVIEW and primarily
prosperity, asas a reward
servant
well as narrative
who
during lacked with
affliction an
ownership emphasis
and of
hardship, different
his belongings.
are from
the
this4 of that
reasons
13 of
Similant
theologians. divine The Muʿtazilite
discourse of omnipotence
Mu tazilite’s wasfirm thestressQur’anwith onthe and
God’s notion
thejustice,
diverse of human free
interpretations
however, resultedwill. The ofinitsthe departure
teachings
group dividing, point
on thefor divine names
justice, however, resulted in thegave group Qur’an
dividing,
attributes portrays him as “an excellent disease,
servant.” 14 he exercised patience and recognized that h
which discourse finally was birth thetoQur’an the(asmāʾAsh and al-ḥusnā).
arite theschooldiverse 17 The reconciliationof
of interpretations
thought. of its certain teachings divineonattributes, the divine predominantly
names and the aspec
when(asmāʾ afflicted According
with illness toGod, Muslim
and 4. exegesis,
adversity. Concept 13 Job’s of
what Evil: Theological
experience—and
distinguishes
incomparable andisPhilosophical
ascribed
Job
sincerity the
andany fact negative
thatthe
submission Development
feelings
despite to which hisofenormo
God’s despa
ought. attributes of an al-ḥusnā).
all-powerful 17 The reconciliation
According to Ash arite theologians, God’s law of justice applies only to human beings who havewith
with the of
idea certain
of humandivine free attributes,
will—the predominantly
broader frame aspect huma
f justice applies only to obligated
human will beingsin bothfortune,
who
suffering health
have he
waswithand prosperity,
continually as
attributed well as
the during
source Theaffliction
of Qur’anic
his and
blessings narrative
hardship,
to God about areand Job
the demonstrates
reasons
remained the
humble thata
been of an all-powerful to act according God, toenclosed—was
Histhe laws. ideaApplying of the human first
One the attempt
free
of thewill—the
idea to
earliest
of initiate
justice broader
problems
to God,a theodicy frame
in Muslim
however, within
with will the
which context
theological
put ahuman of Islam.(kalā
thought
g the idea of justice to God, Qur’an servant
portrays who
him as lacked
“an ownership
excellent servant.” of his health
14 belongings. or illness
Similarly, and hardship—are
when God tested part himof the
with divinea seriop
limit on anhowever,
suffering all-powerfulof 13will
5 was Theputdiscourse
enclosed—was
creator; a therefore, the presents
firstGod attemptitself
is notat
divine to the
boundinitiate
attribute core byaof of
His the
theodicy theological
omnipotence
own within
laws. He dialogue
the
withis justcontext amongst
theinnotion of Islam.
whatever of various
human groups. free will. Th
t bound by His own 20 The According disease, to heMuslim exercised exegesis, patience what anddistinguishes exempt;
recognized Jobit is
that is through
the
he fact
was various
that
going despite experiences
through his enormous
a in
test—a life that
posit
Helaws. does.He is just
Applied in
discourse whatever
theologians
to suffering, presents who itself
this advocated
then at the means core
discourseofthe
forthat the all theological
attribute
was
harm of
theencountered
Qur’an dialogue
omnipotence and by amongst
theman in
diverseitsisvarious
absolute
fair groups.
interpretations
as it The
and uncompromisin
has of its teachin
eatnotionall harm of encountered by man fortune, heexperience—and
ascontinually ascribed
attributed any
the negative
source propagate
offeelings
hisal-ḥusnā).
inblessings of his
despair tomission
Godto Satan.on
and this
remained
15 earth. As
humble John notes,
as aattribut“tha
suffering, beenwhich theologians
willed byisGod
included fair
form
who who it is
were hasjust
advocated of the in for opinion
all the that
His attribute the
attributes
creation. only
ofThe agent
omnipotence
(asmāʾ
Ash arite this inworld
thinkers its
17 The is
absolute
wereGod: He
inand
reconciliation sharp creates of His
uncompromising
conflict certain own acts
divine as well
hetoAshʾarite be discussed thinkers bywere the form in servant
sharp
Muʿtazilite
were ofthewho
conflict
thewho acts The
lacked
with
opinion of Qur’anic
all thatownership
human narrative
the beings.
only of his
agent about
ofAsan belongings.Job
inall-powerful
this this
view world primarily
demonstrates
Similarly,
raised isGod,God:
serious as a
that
Hesame
with reward
when trials
creates
concerns God
the rules ideanarrative
and
His tested
aboutof own the
human with
tests—whether
him
acts an
with
as well
creation
free emphasis
a in prosperity
serious
ofas“evil” broad
will—the differen
acts ba
with the Mu tazilites asserted that not only is God subjected to the of justice but
ubjected
wever, resulted to the same therules
inthat, group disease,
ofactsjustice
dividing, allbut
God, health
he exercised
that,theto or
in illness
debate and hardship—are
patience
developed and recognized
further to part
question of
that thethehedivine was
validity plan,
going of so
human much
through soato
free that
test—a
will—the even prophets
actsapositive
concept
theodicythat are i
inthe fact, the ofobligationhuman beings.
act inAs justthis means view israised
suffering
eternal serious
was concerns
andenclosed—was
uncompromising about the thefirst
for creation
attempt
God. It of is“evil” initiate
worth by with
experience—and exempt; it
ascribedis through
any various
negative experiences
feelings of 4.despair
Concept
in life to of
that
Satan.Evil:man 15 Theological
is able to and
actualize Philosophical
his potential Devea
uncompromising for noting God. God,
thatIt isatheworth debate
prominent noting
deeply that
developed
rootedphilosopher,
Muslim infurther
the Quran to question
Ibnas it The the
relates
Rushd validity
discourse
to man’s
(Averroes, ofd.
presents human
responsibility
1198), itself free at will—the
challenged the
andcore ofconcept
accountability,
these the
views that
theological is dialogue
as well as divin
es, d. 1198),
pplies only to challenged
human these views Theand Qur’anic
propagate
asserted narrative
hisrewardmission about onJob this demonstrates
earth. As Johnthat trials
notes, and
“the tests—whether
story of Job asin ofinthe prosperity
Qur’an and
divineistheologica understo
andbeings deeply
asserted who that have
rooted judgment
the in
elementthe Quran and
of justice as it relates
may and not punishment.
to man’s
theologians
be employed The
responsibility
who dialogue
foradvocated
One
God and
of the
and crystallized
accountability,
forearliest
man the
in the between
attribute
problems
same well
manner: the Muʿtazilite
asMuslim
omnipotence
in inand its ab th
God and man
of justice to in
God, theman, sameby
however, manner: health
will put man, ora byprimarily
illness
Ashʿarite, virtue andtheas
andtwo a reward
hardship—are
main narrative
schools part with
of
ofwere the
thought, an emphasis
divine with plan,aGod, different
so
divergence much from so
ofthe that of
even the story
prophets of Jobare in the
not Bible
judgment
virtue of and
being reward just, advances punishment.to a higher The
form level dialogue of the
of goodness; crystallized
divineopinion attribute that between
the
however, of only isopinion;
omnipotenceagent
justMuʿtazilite
due inboththis
with
to Hismade
andthe the
world aisserious
notion God:ofHe effor
hum cr
exempt; toittwo is mainthrough various experiences ofainall life that man is able to view actualize his potential and about
y; God,
His own however, laws. He isperfection—a
just
is justdue intowhatever
Ashʿarite, His traitperfection—a
the that win the argument
requires schools
Him toof just.21
thought,
according
be the acts with
to their divergence
understanding
human
discourse of was
beings. opinion;
ofAs thethis both
Qur’an.
Qur’an made18 raised
and athe serious
serious
diverse effort
concerns
interpretation
propagate 4.his Concept mission of on Evil: this Theological
earth. As and Philosophical
John notes, “the story Development
of Job to in question
the Qur’an
m encountered by manIn istothe
fair
win asthe
final itanalysis,
has
argument The Muʿtazilite
according
mainstream to school
Sunnitetheir of thought,
understanding
God,
theologians the also
debate ofknown
supported the
developed
attributes Qur’an.
the as(asmāʾ
thefurther
Ash 18 rationalists,
al-ḥusnā).
arite school 17 categorically
The
of thought theisvalidity
understood
reconciliation opposed ofofhumanthe ide
certain
gians
te thinkers supported were the inand Ashʾarite
sharp conflict primarily
school
The with ofas
Muʿtazilite
that a reward
thought
God school of narrative
creates ofallthought,
human with also anknown
emphasis as different
the rationalists, fromas that of
categoricallythe story of
opposed Job inthethe
ofideaBible.” 16
emphasized that God One creates the acts.acts
earliest that
deeply
problems
In order include
rooted
to inreconcile evil
Muslim in the
of and
an advocated
Quran
all-powerful
theological
God’s omnipotence for
itthought
relates
God, human to
with
(kalām)
with free
man’s thehumanwill
idea
was by
responsibility
how emphasizing
human
to reconcileandfreeacc th
w
ro to
the reconcile
same
18, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW rulesGod’s of omnipotence
justice
responsibility, that but God that, with
in
importance
creates divinehuman
human of
acts
attribute thethat
5 of 13the doctrine of acquisition (kasb) was adopted: God creates divine
of include
omnipotence attribute
evil
judgment and of
with justice
advocated
and the reward(ʿadl).
suffering
notion for and
5 ofall They
human
was
of human upheld
free
punishment.
enclosed—was will
free
13 acts; humans freely acquire that by
The
will. God,
emphasizing
the in
dialogue
The first accordance
departure the
crystallized
attempt to
point with
initiate Hi
betw
for t
4. Concept of Evil: Theological and Philosophical Development 22
smising
adopted: for God. God It creates
is worth
certain all
acts acts;
noting
importance and, humans
that of thefreely
attribute
discourse
therefore, divine of (ʿāadil),
are was attribute
accountablethecannotQur’anof for justice
Ashʿarite,
createthe evil
and (ʿadl).
the andthe
diverse
acquisition They twoof
that upheld
main
evil
The isdiscourse
interpretations
good the that
schools
and directGod,
evil of
of in teachings
thought,
result
presents
its
acts. accordance withaton
ofConversely,
man’s
itself with
afreedom
divergence
the the core His of
divine of
of choice.
the opinio
theolo
names Thia
8), e challenged
for
mentality
on the of
of suffering, acquisition
these
human which views
Muslim of
suffering good
and
attribute
included
thinkers inand
assertedof
the
One evil
view
belonging of acts.
(ʿāadil),
divine
attributes
thewas
cannot
plan.22 challenged
create
The
(asmāʾ
toearliest
the notionevil
al-ḥusnā).
Shiproblems
ite byand
branch ofraising
in that
suffering,
to
17
of win
The
Muslim questions
evil
the
Islam—through isargument
which
reconciliation
theological such
thetheologians
direct
included
the result
according
of as: who
certain
thought
influence Ifof God
man’s
to oftheirdoes
advocated
divine
(kalām) freedom
rational not
understanding
attributes,
was for
how
elementcreate
of thechoice. evil,
toattribute
predominantly ofThis
reconcile
in thewho, Qur’an.
ofthe then,
omnipo
the 18 i
asp
ean ite inbranch
eddiscussed the same
suffering ofby Islam—through
manner:
by the children
the Mu man,
view
Muʿtazilite by
and was
divine
tazilite the
virtue influence
responsible
challenged
animals, of ancontinued
attribute
theology—remained ofby for human
raising
omnipotence
all-powerful to beGod,suffering
questions
in disagreement discussed
with
withthe caused
such
The
the by
with as:
theby
Muʿtazilite
notion
idea the of illnesses
If
form
of
Ash God
Muʿtazilite
human
human school
were
arites. and
does of
freefree
Anof disasters?
thenotthought,
opinion
will.
will—the
example TheAnd
create evil,
also
that
broader
of this ifthe
known
departure God
who,
may only
frame wills
asthen,
point
be the
agent
withfor illnesses
isin
rationalists,
for this worl
this
which human c
ined
wever,
r,ns. resulted
19 inis disagreement
The just duegroup
Muʿtazilite’s
in the to Hisfirm
observed with
dividing, fromthe
perfection—a
responsible
stress
discourseAshʿarites.
the for
disasters
onwritings
God’s human
suffering
was An
theofinsuffering
justice, human
was
Qur’an
an however, caused
life,
enclosed—was
eminent and the
Persian bycan
howdiverse
resulted that illnesses
thein
GodHe the
first
philosopher, begroup
createsand
just?
interpretations the
attempt disasters?
The
human
acts
Morteza toMuʿtazilites
dividing, of ofacts
Mutall
initiate And
its that
.human a iftheodicy
teachings
ahharı̄ Godresponded
include
beings.
(d. wills
onevil
1979), As
within
thefor by
and
who illnesses
thisthe
divine affirming
advocated
view
was context
namesand
raised that
for
ofand illnesse
humanc
serious
Islam.
nallys of an
gave eminent
Religions 2018, 9, x FORof birth to Persian
the
PEER Ashʾarite
the REVIEW philosopher,
disasters attributes in
school and
humanofMorteza
disasters,
thought.
(asmāʾ life,
The how
discourse
al-ḥusnā). while
opinion that the Ash arite outlook, while aimed at vindicating God from can17 may He
presents
The be appear
just?
importance
itself
reconciliation as
The at“evil”,
Muʿtazilites
the of
of core are
the
God,
certain ofin
divine
the
the actuality
responded
divine debateattribute
theological “good” by
developed
attributes, of that
affirming
justice
dialogue
5 of injustice,
13 God
further
predominantly creates
that
(ʿadl).
amongst
resulted in to illnesses
They and
question
various
the upheld that
aspect the
groups.serve
that
validTG
e
ported
ording Ashʾarite
only totohuman the outlook,
Ashʾarite
Ashʾarite beings while
school
theologians,
exonerating and
who have aimed
of thought
disasters,
God’s
ofhuman at vindicating
an all-powerful while
significant
law
theologians
oppressors may
of justice purposeappear
ofwho
God, applies
any with as
in the “evil”,
the creational
only
advocated
wrongdoing. to
idea 23
are
human
attribute
forof thein
human actuality
cosmic
ofbeings
(ʿāadil),
attribute plan.
deeply
free who“good”
cannot This
have
ofrooted
will—the that
seems
create
omnipotence in God
the
broader toQuran
evil creates
be and
in the
itsthat
frame as and
first it
absoluteevil
with that
appearance
iswhich
relates serve
the
and todirect
man’saof result
uncompromis
human the theor
respons of m
ppressors
ofcile
stice
gated God’s
totoGod,
instrumentality act ofomnipotence
any wrongdoing.
according
however, of human will
From with
tosignificant
His put human
laws.
23aMuslim
suffering
the purpose
Applying inthe
inphilosophical
form
was the were theidea
divine
enclosed—was ofcreational
theplan. opinion thecosmic
ofperspective,
justice
The to view
notion
that
first God, plan.
the
attempt
the This
ofhowever,
was suffering,
only
notion to seems
challenged will
judgment
agent
initiate
of good which
in ato
put
this bybeand
theodicy
and the
aworld
raising
included
evil first
reward appearance
questions
isenclosed
God:
iswithin and Hepunishment.
the creates
context
within of the
such His
of
the theory
as:Islam.
If
The
own God actsdoes
dialogue as well no
cr
eundeserved
anown: notion
God
all-powerful
laws. of He
creates good isall
sufferingand acts;
creator;
just inevilhumans
by is
whatever enclosed
children
therefore, freely
God
The within
and is
discourse
the animals,
not acts the
boundof continued
presents
all byhuman His
wider ontological understanding of existence (wujūd) and nonexistence ( adam). Briefly put, good own
itselfbeings.to
at responsible
laws.be
the As discussed
He
core this is
of for
just
the
view human
inby the
whatever
Ashʿarite,
theological
raised suffering
Muʿtazilite
seriousthe two
dialogue caused
main
concerns amongst by
schools
about illnessesof
various
the and
thought,
creationgroups.disasters?
with
of The
“evil” a And
diverg
acts
d) and
acquisition nonexistence ofThe good (ʿadam).
and Briefly
evil
13
put, The
good story of justice,
isadvocated Jobencountered
in Judeo₋Christian traditions isas presented initsthe Book of and
Jobfree and appears inconcept
therespond
formtha of
ountered
20 Applied
heologians. by19toman suffering, fair
isMuʿtazilite’s
defined as
this it has
then aacts.
firm
theologians
as meansstress
22 God,
positive that
whoon the
entity all
God’s harm
debate
that developed
branches however,
for thefromdisastersby
further
attribute man
resulted
existence;in
to isquestion
ofhuman
in fair
to thewin
omnipotence
evil, life,
group it
the
the
on hashow
the can
dividing,
argument
validity
inother Heof be just?
according
absolute
hand,human stems The
to Muʿtazilites
their
will—the
uncompromising
from understanding of
13 The story of dialogue
Job in between Job and
Judeo₋Christian his friends
traditions is who try in
presented to theexplain Book toofhim Job the
and reason
appears for in histhe sufferings.
form of A comparativ
a
hxistence;
edofbyIslam—through
nkers
which were
God
finally evil,
in
who gaveon
sharp the
isnonexistence
just
birth other
the
conflict
in toall the hand,
influence
with
His creation.
Ashʾarite
form and were
asstems
ofsuch The
school
of
deeply from
the Ashʾarite
of thought.
opinion
rooted
is viewed athinkers
inthat
as the the
Quran
negative onlywere
and asagent
entity. 24
itinrelates
sharp
disasters, in
Anthis conflict
while
to world
exampleman’sThe may with
ofis appear
Muʿtazilite
God:
responsibility
the Heascreates
ontological “evil”,
school and ofare
His in actuality
thought,
interpretation own
accountability, actsalso as as “good”
known
well well as as asthat
the
div
dialogue between studyJob ofand the his story between
friends whoJudeo₋Christian
try to explain to tradition him the reason and Islam for his is sufferings.
beyond theAscope comparativeof this paper. For a
ive entity.
isagreement
azilites
same rules
who24
According An
with
ofasserted
justice
to of example
the
Ashʾaritebut
that
what Ashʿarites.
that,
not of
theinthe
only
theologians,
constitutes acts isontological
An God
of
good God’s
judgment
all subjected
human
and law
evil and of tojustice
beings.
may the
reward
beAs same
applies
seen and
this rules
significant
from only of
punishment.
view the justice
to
raised
works purpose
human but
that
The
serious
of two that,
inconcerns
beings
Goddialoguethe
prominentin creational
who
creates have
human
crystallized
aboutMuslim cosmic
the acts plan.
that
between
creation
philosophers ofThis
include the
“evil” seems
evil
Muʿtazilite
acts andtobybe the f
advoca
and
study of the story excellent between comparativeJudeo₋Christian review, see A.H.
tradition Johns,
and Islam A Comparative
is beyond the Glancescopeatof Ayyub
this paper. in the For Qur'an an (Johns 200
beenayfor
minent
obligation
g be God.seen
obligated
Religions toItfrom
Persian act
is worth
2018,toin the
philosopher,
just
act
who
9, x FOR works
noting
means
according
significantly of
God,
PEERexcellent totwo
Morteza
that
is eternal
REVIEW His
the prominent
and
laws. pp.uncompromising
Ashʿarite,
debate
influenced Applying the shaping
developed
the twothemain idea
further for
ofof God.
schoolsjustice
to
Muslim Itof
questionisto worth
God,
thought, the
philosophical noting
with that
however,
importance
validity will
athought:
of ofhuman
divergence putIbn
the a free
divine5of Sı̄nā, attribute
opinion;
will—the
known both of asjustice
madethat
concept a(ʿadl). is They
serious eff
comparative 51–82). review, see A.H. Johns, A Comparative Glance at Ayyub inof 13
the Qur'an (Johns 2008,
he ent shaping
eimit
outlook,
llenged Muslim
on an these of Muslim
while
philosopher,
views
all-powerful aimed and philosophical
Avicenna (d. at vindicating
asserted
Ibn
creator; Rushd
deeply
pp.1037), thought:
(Averroes,
therefore, to
rooted
51–82).andQur’an
14 winGod inIbnthe
Sadr al-Din d.
is
the 1198),
not
argument
Quran bound
38:41–2Shirāzı̄, challenged
as
and 21:83–4. by
according
it His
relates these
own toto views
laws.
their
man’s and
He is
attributeasserted
understanding just
responsibility
who was mostly recognized as Mullā Sadrā (d. 1636). in
of whatever
(ʿāadil),
of
and the cannot
Qur’an.
accountability, create
18 evil
as and
well that
as evil
divine is the d
nHetheofShirāzī,
lement any
same
does.ofof who
wrongdoing.
manner:
justice was
Applied mayman,mostly
tonot byofbe recognized
virtue
suffering, employed this as
for
then Mullā
God
means and
thethat man allin the
harm same
13 The
manner:
encountered story of
man,
by Job
man
view by in Judeo₋Christian
virtue
is
was fair as
challenged it has traditions is presented in the Book of J
instrumentality
20 23
Ibn 14 human
judgment
Sı̄nā
Qur’an formed suffering
15
38:41–2 aand The
theodicy
See and Abubakr Muʿtazilite
in21:83–4.
reward by divine
and
`Tigh school
plan.
punishment.
distinguishing
Neishabur The ofSurabadi,
thought,
notion
Thevarious
the of also
dialogue
Tafsir known
suffering,
forms crystallized
Surabadi, as
ofwhichevil
ed. the such
Sa`Idi betweenas by
rationalists,
included
Sirjani raising
thecategorically
“essential”
(Surabadi questions
Muʿtaziliteevil
1381). Also, andsuch
opposed theBranno
see as:
the If id
dialogue between Job and his friends who try to explain to him the reason f
f,ust,
been good
is just and
willeddue evil
advances
undeserved to to
by Hisisa(sharr
God enclosed
higher
perfection—a
suffering islevel
whobidh-dhāt),
15 within
just by
See of
in allthe
goodness;
children
Ashʿarite, which
Abubakr His that creation.
theisand
M.
`Tigh two
God God,
Wheeler,
non-being main however,
The
animals,
creates
Neishabur Ashʾarite
schools
or human
Prophets isof
continued
in
privation,
Surabadi, just due
thinkers
thought,
acts
the Tafsir that
Qur'an,
and to
toSurabadi,
be His
were
with
include
an perfection—a
ain
discussed
Introduction
“accidental” ed. sharp
responsible
divergence
evil and
Sa`Idi eviltobyconflict
the
Sirjani for
the with
human
Muʿtazilite
of(Surabadi
advocated
Qur'an
(sharr opinion;
bil- and suffering
forMuslim
arad ),both
. humanwhich
1381). made caused
free
Exegesis
Also, can seeawill by illnesses
serious
(Wheeler
beBrannon 2002). and
effort
emphasizing
study of the story between Judeo₋Christian tradition and Islam is beyond
he hevarious
nexistence
requiresMuʿtazilites Him
theologians. forms
(ʿadam).towho of
be evil
19Briefly
just.
The
either assertedsuchput,
Muʿtazilite’s
21
being M.toas
orgood
thatwin not
Wheeler, 16
“essential”
isfirm
the
privation. only See
importance (Johns
evil
is
stress
argument
ProphetsIn God
his inon 2003,
thesubjected
ofGod’sthe
according
analysis, pp.divine
Qur'an, 50–51).
to
justice,
Ibn anto the
their same
attribute
however,
Introduction
Sı̄nā rules
toofresulted
understanding
concluded the of justice
disasters
justice
Qur'an
that it in thein
(ʿadl).
of
is andthe but They
group
Qur’an.
Muslim that,
human in
18life, how
upheld
dividing,
Exegesis
non-essential/accidental thatcan
(Wheeler God, Heevil
2002).inbeaccordance
just? The Muʿtaz with H
excellent comparative review, see A.H. Johns, A Comparative Glance at A
devil,
he “accidental”
the
act,final on
Ashʾarite
thewhich the finally
analysis,
obligation evil
other
school (sharr
hand,
mainstream
to
gave
that of
act
is the
16
in
birth See
bil-ʿaraḍ),
stems
thought
just
leading (Johns
Sunnite
tomeans
the which
from
The
17
2003,
Ashʾarite
cause For
theologians
is can
eternal
Muʿtazilite
attribute
of more
pp.
humanbe and
school on
50–51).
ofsupported this see
uncompromising
school of thought.
(ʿāadil),
suffering Abdol
ofcannotthe
andAshʾarite
thought, Rahman
create
that forevil
also
the Ibn
school
God.
known
total andKhaldūn,
Itand
amount ofworth
is
as
that thought Muqaddimah
disasters,
the noting
ofrationalists,
evil goodis thein while of Ibn
thatuniverse
direct
the may Khaldūn
categorically
result appear
ofoutweighs(Ibn
man’s as Khaldūn
“evil”,
opposed freedom 1375).
areof
the inchoice.
idea actualit T
pp. 51–82).
For 18 Forsee awas comprehensive discussion on questions
development ofof theology in Islam, see Harry Austryn Wolfson, Th
ofmore Inon this Abdol Rahman Ibn Khaldūn, Muqaddimah Ibn Khaldūn (Ibn Khaldūn 1375).
17
y.acluded
God’s 24 An
hasized
prominent that
omnipotence
that itMuslim
example is the
God
According the non-essential/accidental
of
creates
with tothe
philosopher, ontological
human
all
Ashʾarite
amount acts.
that Ibn 25
theologians,
God
evil. order
Rushd
view
createsMullā evil
tohumanreconcile
(Averroes,
God’s challenged
Sadrā, law
actsd.
on God’s
of1198), by
justice
that
the omnipotence
challenged
include
other
14raising
applies evil
hand, onlythese
and with
to views
significant
human
advocated
extensively
Qur’an 38:41–2 and 21:83–4. human
such and as:
beings
for
developedasserted
purpose If
human God
who inthis the
does
have
free creational
will not
philosophical by create cosmic
emphasizing evil, plan.
who,
the Thisthen,se
For a comprehensive Philosopydiscussion of Kalam (Wolfson on 1976).
development of theology in Islam, see Harryput Austryn Wolfson, The
18
en
d that
bility,
hat from
creates the
the the
been total
the
all
doctrine
element amount
works
acts;
obligated ofhumansof
justice
approach of
oftoacquisition
two
actmay goodprominent
freely not
according
by in
importance
an bethe
(kasb)
interest universe
employed was
toresponsible
His ofinlaws.
theadopted:
for
combining God
for
Applying
divine God
and
human
attribute creates
man
the
theology sufferinginwith
idea
of
15 all
the
justice
See acts;
of same
caused
justice
mystical
Abubakr humans
manner:
(ʿadl).toby`Tighillnesses
God,
They
insight. freely
man,
however,
upheld
Neishabur by virtue
and
This disasters?
will
that
approach,
Surabadi, God, And
aTafsir if God
in accordance
according Surabadi, towills
ed.with for His
Sa`Idi illnesses
Sirjani (Su a
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
n of ofthe
certain
isition Muslim
being other
of
limit just,
acts good
on hand,
philosophical
advances
and,
an and extensively
therefore,
all-powerful
Rizvi, evil athought:
tototally higher
acts.are developed
creator;
attribute
22 Ibntherefore,
level
accountable
transformed of of
disasters
(ʿāadil),this
goodness;
theforinGod the
cannothuman
theory God,
isacquisition
not
create however,
of life,
bound howby
evil
existence of
and isHis
can
M.
as just
good itHe
that own
Wheeler, due
and
be laws.
evil
pertains to
is evil
just? His
toThe
the
Prophets He perfection—a
acts.
direct
IslamicisinMuʿtazilites
just
22
theresultin whatever
Qur'an, anresponded
of man’s
metaphysics. 26
freedom
Introduction by
In Mullā toof affirming
thechoice.
Qur'an This thatMuslim
and illnes
who
ely, theology
slam—through
rait was
Muslim
that
He requireswith
mostly
does. mystical
thinkers
20 therecognized
Him
Applied influence insight.
belonging
to be to as
just.of This
Mullā
to
suffering,
view 21 the
was approach,
and Shiʾite
this disasters,
then
challenged branch
means while
by of
that Islam—through
raising mayall 16
appear
harm
questions See (Johns
as
encountered the
“evil”,
such
13
2003, The
influence
are
as: pp.
by Ifinmanstory
50–51).
God of
actuality
isof Job as
fair
does in
“good”
not Judeo₋Christian
it has
create that God
evil, traditions
creates
who, and
then, is presented
that
is serv
Sadrā’s view, explained in his major work called Mafātih Al-ghayb, absolute existence is absolute good
17 For more on this dialogue
see Abdol between
Rahman JobIbn and his friends
Khaldūn, who try toofexplain
Muqaddimah Ibn Khald to
existence
eement
element Inbeen with
in as
the final it
the
willedpertains
the Muʿtazilite
Ashʿarites.
analysis,
by
andGod to
since Islamic
mainstream
who metaphysics.
theology—remained
An is just
responsible
God is the Sunnite
in allfor
significant
only His human in
theologians
26
creation.
Necessary purposedisagreement
The
suffering supported
inAshʾarite
caused
the with
creationalthe
by the
Ashʾarite
thinkers
illnesses Ashʿarites.
cosmic were school
and indisasters?
plan. An
sharp of thought
This conflict
seems And with
toif beGod the wills
firsttofor illnesses and
appearance of the theo
5 of 13Being, He is the absolute good:
study
perfection
of the story
applies
between
only
Judeo₋Christian
the
tradition and
toFor theaomnipotence
comprehensive discussion on development of that
theology in Islam, s
18
sand
nt offorms
Persian
this theof may
emphasized evil besuch
philosopher,
Muʿtazilites observed
that aswho “essential”
God Morteza
from
creates
asserted theevil
disasters writings
all
that acts.
in not
human In oforder
only an is eminent
life, God to reconcile
how canPersian
subjected He God’s be philosopher,
just? same rules
The Muʿtazilites Morteza
of withjustice humanbut that,
responded in affirming
by illnesses
Philosopy of Kalam excellent
(Wolfson comparative
1976). review, see A.H. Johns, A Compara
ntal”
look,
rī (d.evil
responsibility,
e divine while
1979),
fact, (sharr
the
plan.aimed
who bil-ʿaraḍ),
the was
obligation
The at
doctrine
notion which
vindicating
of to the actopinion
ofof andin can
acquisition
just be thatwhich
means
disasters,
suffering, the isAshʾarite
(kasb)
while eternal was
mayand
included outlook,
adopted:
appear uncompromising while
asGod “evil”, aimed
creates arefor atGod.
all
in vindicating
acts;
actualitypp.Ithumans
is worth
“good”
51–82). freely
noting
that God that creates and that serve a
m at
yimals,
andit is
injustice,
acquire athe
wrongdoing. non-essential/accidental
certain
prominent
suffering resulted
see acts
23 inand,
Muslim
(Heemskerk exonerating
therefore,
philosopher,
significant
2000). evil
human
For an
13
areextensive
Ibn The
oppressors
accountable
purpose story
Rushdin(Averroes, of
theof Job
for anyin
creational Judeo₋Christian
thewrongdoing.
d.acquisition
1198),cosmic challenged traditions
of good
plan.
23 This these is presented
andviews
seems evilto be acts.
and in
the the
asserted
22 Book
first of Job and of
appearance appears
the theory in the form o
continued 19to be
For a discussed
great discussion by the
on theMuʿtazilite
Mu tazilite’s view on pain and suffering
14
see Qur’an
(Heemskerk 38:41–2 2000). and For 21:83–4.
an extensive study
med Ghaly, Islam and Disability: Perspectives inbe dialogue
Theology between Job and his friends who try to explain to him the reason for his sufferings. A comparat
md otal
n and the
Conversely,
God’s amount
Muslim
evil
that the
justice, of
is Muslim
enclosedgood
philosophical
element
however, on inthe
within
thinkers
of the
justice
notion
resulted universe
perspective,
the
belonging
may
of in not
disability
the the
toin
group notion
the
employed
Islam, seeof
Shiʾite
dividing, forgood
Mohammed Godand
branch and ofevil
Ghaly,man is in
Islamenclosed
Islam—through the
and same 15 within
Disability: the
manner:
See theman,
influence
Abubakr
Perspectives inby
`Tigh ofvirtue
Neishabur
Theology Surabadi, Tafsir Surabadi, ed.
and Jurisprudence
(Ghaly 2010). study of the story between Judeo₋Christian tradition and Islam is beyond the scope of this paper. For
er
rational
ence
ool hand,
tologicalof(ʿadam).
of being
thought. extensively
element
understanding
Briefly
just, in the
put,
advancesdeveloped
Muʿtazilite
of
good existence
toisa higherthistheology—remained
(wujūd) level and nonexistence
of goodness; inGod,disagreement
(ʿadam).
however, Brieflyiswith
justput, the
due M. Ashʿarites.
goodto His
Wheeler, is perfection—a An in the Qur'an, an Introduction to the Qu
Prophets
20 See Wolfson, The Philosopy of
The story excellent
of Kalam
Job comparative
(Wolfson
in Judeo₋Christian 1976). review,traditions see A.H. Johns,
is presented A Comparative
in theMorteza Book Glance and appears in the form of (Johns
at Ayyub in the Qur'an 20
2003, of pp.Job a
13
on
as with athe mystical
positive
other insight.
hand,
entity 21 stems beThis
that approach,
branches
from from existence; evil, anoneminent theThe other hand, 16
stems See (Johns 50–51).
example of this may observed from Theology from
trait that requires Him to be just. 21 the writings of(Averroes), Persian philosopher,
d’s law of
s), The Philosophy and
justice applies For only
more to
on human
his philosophy, beings pp.see who
Ibn Rushd
51–82). have Philosophy and of Averroes, (Averroes 1921).
as itexample
pertains to 22 Theology
Islamic of Averroes,
metaphysics. dialogue (Averroes
between Job and 24 his friends who try to explain 17 Forto him more the onreason
this see forAbdol
his sufferings.
Rahman Ibn A comparative
Khaldūn, Muqaddi
An
ence
Muṭahharī
Applying and In as
the of
(d.thesuch
idea the
1979),
final iswho
ontological
viewed
analysis,
For morewas onof astheahowever,
mainstream
theory 26
ofnegative
opinion
acquisition,
14 that
Sunnite
Qur’an entity.
seethe Ashʾarite
theologians
Wolfson,
38:41–2 a and AnThe example
21:83–4. outlook,
supported
Philosopy of
while
of Kalam the
the ontological
aimed
Ashʾarite
(Wolfson at
1976). vindicating
school of thought
23of See justice
(Mutahhari
to God, study
1385,evil of the
pp. 50–51).
will
story put
between Judeo₋Christian tradition 18 and Islam
For a comprehensive is beyond the scope of
discussion on developmentthis paper. For anof theo
ation
modthe
God isfromofworks
and
not what
bound of
constitutes
injustice,
emphasized bytwo
24 His
prominent
resulted that
own goodGod and
in exonerating
creates
He is15 just may
all human
See acts. be In
Abubakr seen
oppressors
order from
`Tigh to the
of any
reconcile
Neishabur works of twoTafsir
wrongdoing.
God’s
Surabadi, prominent
omnipotence
23
Surabadi, with
ed. Sa`Idi human Sirjani (Surabadi 1381). Also, see Brann
hilosopy of Kalam (Wolfson more laws.
For1976). excellent
on ontological aspects in
comparative whatever
of good review, and evil, see A.H. Johns,
see Seyyed Hossein A Nasr,
Comparative
Islamic Glance
Philosophy
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976). at
from Ayyub
Its Origin in the
to the Qur'an
Present (Johns 2008,
philosophers
uslim philosophical
From the
responsibility, who
means that all harm encountered pp. Muslim significantly
thought:
the philosophical
(Nasr doctrine
2006, Ibn influenced
pp. of
65–68).
by man perspective,
acquisition
51–82). the
M. shaping
is fair as it has the
(kasb)
Wheeler, of
notion
was Muslim
Prophets of
adopted:
in good
thephilosophical
and
God
Qur'an, evil
creates
an is thought:
enclosed
Introduction all acts; Ibn
to within
thehumans
Qur'an the freely
and Muslim Exegesis (Wheeler 2002).
25 For more on Ibn Sı̄nā’s16theodicy, see Shams C. Inati, The Problem of Evil: Ibn Sina’s Theodicy (Inati 2000).
own
was
wider
ing
eyyed mostly
seeasacquire
Avicenna
ontological
(Heemskerk
Hossein recognized
certain
Nasr, (d.
2000). 1037),
understanding
IslamicactsasPhilosophy
For Mullā
and
and,
an Sadr
ofin
therefore,
extensive from
Qur’an al-Din
existence
Its See
are
Origin
38:41–2 (Johns
Shirāzī,
(wujūd)
accountable
and 2003,
andpp.
who
21:83–4. was 50–51).
mostly
nonexistence
for the acquisitionrecognized
(ʿadam). Briefly ofasgood Mullā put, and good evilisacts. 22
ation. The Ashʾarite thinkers were
14
26 See Sajjad Rizvi, ‘Mulla Sadra’, sharp conflict
Stanford
withEncyclopedia of Philosophy (Rizvi 2009).
Islam and Disability: Perspectives in Theology 17 For more on this see Abdol Rahman Ibn Khaldūn, Muqaddimah of Ibnof Khaldūn
1381).(Ibn Khaldūn 1375).
is1636).
defined God as a positive
Conversely,
subjected theentity
toMuslim same 15thatSee
thinkers
rules branches
ofbelonging
Abubakr
justice from
`Tigh
but tothat, existence;
the
Neishabur ShiʾiteSurabadi,
in evil,
branch onTafsir
ofthe other hand,
Islam—through
Surabadi, ed. Sa`Idi stems
theSirjani from
influence (Surabadi Also, see Brannon
msnonexistence
Sīnā aand as such is viewed
18 For a
astheology—remained
aProphets comprehensive
negative theentity. discussion
inanAn on
example development of thethe of theology
ontological in Islam, see Harry Austryn Wolfson,
nalof evil
formed
rationalsuch as
theodicy
element“essential” inby thedistinguishing
evil
Muʿtazilite the various in forms of evil such
disagreement as “essential” with evil Ashʿarites. An (Wheeler 2002).
he Problem of Evil: Ibn Sina's Theodicy (Inati 24
and uncompromising for God. M. is 2000).
ItWheeler,worth noting
Philosopy of
that
Kalam
Qur'an,
(Wolfson
Introduction
1976).
to the Qur'an and Muslim Exegesis
Philosophy
h-dhāt),
vil (sharr
nterpretation which
example (Rizviof of2009).
bil-ʿaraḍ),
is non-being
what which
this can
constitutes
may or 16
be be See
privation,
observed good(Johns and
and
from 2003, evil
thepp.may
“accidental” 50–51).
writings beevil of (sharr
seen anfrom bil-ʿaraḍ),
eminent the works Persianwhich can be
of philosopher,
two prominent Morteza
(Averroes, d. 1198),
osophy and Theology of Averroes, (Averroes
challenged these views and asserted
ng
theor
Muslim non-essential/accidental
privation.
philosophers In
(d.his analysis,
who 17
evilIbn For more
Sīnā on
concluded this see Abdol
that itthe Rahman
is the Ibn Khaldūn,
non-essential/accidental Muqaddimah of Ibn
evil at vindicating Khaldūn
Ibn (Ibn Khaldūn 1375).
yed for Muṭahharī
God and man 1979),
in thesignificantly
who
same wasmanner: of the influenced
man,opinion the
by virtue thatshaping of
Ashʾarite Muslim outlook, philosophicalwhile aimed thought:
he mount
Sīnā, leadingknown
God ofGod, good
cause
from in
ashowever,of the
Avicenna
injustice, human universe
(d.
resulted
18
suffering
1037), For
into a
and comprehensive
and
exoneratingSadr thatal-Din the
human discussion
total
Shirāzī, amount
oppressors on
who of development
was ofgood mostly
any in the of theology
universe
recognized
wrongdoing. 23 as Mullāsee Harry Austryn Wolfson, The
in Islam,
oodness;
alam (Wolfson 1976). is just due Philosopy
His of
perfection—a
Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
hs nd,the
Sadrā extensively
(d.amount From of
1636). developed
the evil.
Muslim 25 Mullā this Sadrā, on
philosophical the other the
perspective, hand, notion extensively
of good and developedevil is enclosed this within the
hical
mystical
sein approach
Ibn
wider insight.
Sīnā
Nasr, Islamic
e theologians by
formed
ontologicalThisan
Philosophythe
supported ainterest
approach,
theodicy
understanding in
fromAshʾarite combining
by distinguishing
of
Its Origin school of thought theology
existence the with
(wujūd) various mystical
and forms insight.
nonexistence of evil This
such
(ʿadam).approach,
as “essential”
Briefly put, evil good is
gsharr
ertains
to Rizvi, to Islamic
bidh-dhāt),
defined totallyaswhichtransformed
ametaphysics.
positive is non-being the
entity26 theory or privation,
that of existence
branches and from as itexistence;
pertains to
“accidental” evil Islamic
evil, (sharr
on the metaphysics.
bil-ʿaraḍ),
other which hand, 26 can
stems be from
Religions 2018, 9, 47 6 of 13

Necessary Being. Thus, the rest of creation—all contingent entities—lacks certain degrees of goodness;
that is, evil and suffering are partial and negative.27
It may be concluded that Muslim philosophers28 have mostly referred to evil as privatio boni
“privation of good,” which in turn provides a strong rationale for the doctrine of the optimum (al-as.lah.).
According to this principle, this world, regardless of the existence of evil and human suffering, has
been created in perfect fashion by its Creator who is the Perfect One. Therefore, the amount of evil and
human suffering is inconsequential in relation to the volume of good that is inherent in the makeup
of creation.

5. Evil and “The Best of All Possible Worlds”: Ghazālian Theodicy

As discussed previously, the instrumentality of human suffering—purposefulness and the greater
good that it brings—is emphasized in the Qur’an and is also at the core of the Muslim theological and
philosophical discourse. However, the practical and more tangible aspect of this theory becomes highly
observable in the teachings of one of the most influential intellectuals of Islam, namely, Abū H . āmid
al-Ghazālı̄
Religions 2018, (1058–1111).
9, x FOR PEER REVIEW Al-Ghazālı̄’s significant impact on advancing Muslim scholastic thought is
5 of 13
the reason he is often referred to as “the proof of Islam” (H . ujjat al-Islam). It is, however, his personal
of instrumentality
experience of human
with suffering and,suffering in the divine
by extension, plan. The
his powerful notion of
statement suffering,
regarding thewhich included
creation of the
undeserved
world—“there suffering
is not in by children
possibility and animals,
anything continued
more wonderful than towhat
be discussed by the abda
is” (laysa fi’l-imkān Muʿtazilite
mimmā
theologians.
kān)—that is19ofThe Muʿtazilite’s
special interest in firm
thisstress
article.on God’s justice, however, resulted in the group dividing,
whichThrough
finally gave a rigorous education in theologyofand
birth to the Ashʾarite school thought.
jurisprudence, as well as Qur’anic and hadith
According
(prophetic to Ashʾarite
traditions) studies, theologians,
al-Ghazālı̄’s God’s law of justice
extraordinary applies
abilities only to human
flourished beings young
at a relatively who haveage
been obligated
and earned him to aact according toposition
professorship His laws.atApplying
one of thethe mostideadistinguished
of justice to God, however,
academic will put
settings of hisa
limit on an all-powerful creator; therefore, God is not bound by
time, namely, Niz.āmı̄yah College in Baghdad. However, at the peak of his career, notwithstanding His own laws. He is just in whatever
He does.
great 20 Applied to suffering, this then means that all harm encountered by man is fair as it has
achievements and recognition, al-Ghazālı̄ became doubtful of the authenticity of his theoretical
been willed by God
religious knowledge and resigned who is just in from
all His hiscreation.
positionThe Ashʾarite
to pursue a morethinkers
interior were
pathinofsharp
piety.conflict with
In Bowker’s
the Muʿtazilites
view, al-Ghazālı̄ who asserted
felt that that notknowledge
his religious only is God subjected
about God and to the
the same
abilityrules of justice
to describe Him but that,
with in
such
fact, the obligation
articulacy was worthless to act inif just means
it did is eternal
not bring him and
into uncompromising
a direct experience God.It29is worth noting that
forofGod.
a prominent Muslim philosopher,
In his spiritual autobiography Ibn Rushd
al-Munqidh(Averroes,
min al-dd..1198), challenged these
alāl (Deliverance fromviewsError),and asserted
al-Ghazālı̄
that the element
describes of justice may
his intellectual and not be employed
emotional for God
challenges thatand man in the
ultimately same manner:
resulted in a major man, by virtue
event in his
of being
life. Afterjust, advances possible
examining to a higher wayslevelbyofwhich
goodness;
a deep God, however,
religious is just due
knowledge andto convention
His perfection—a
that is
trait
free that
fromrequires
doubt may Himbetoattained,
be just.21he affirmed that the mystic path of life where knowledge of God is
In the final
grounded in directanalysis, mainstream
mystical experience Sunnite
was thetheologians
way he had supported
to peruse. the Ashʾarite
However,school of thought
in preparation to
and emphasized that God creates all acts. In order to reconcile
travel on this path, he needed to disengage from all worldly attachments: the prestigious professorshipGod’s omnipotence with human
responsibility,
position, family, theanddoctrine
wealth,ofwhichacquisition (kasb)proved
in actuality was adopted:
to be much God morecreates all acts;
difficult. Thishumans freely
inner struggle
acquire
lasted more certain than actssixand,
monthstherefore,
until he arewas accountable
faced withfor the acquisition
a serious of good to
illness—inability and evil acts.
speak, eat, or22

Conversely,
drink—that Muslim caused him thinkers belonging
afflictions and much to thesuffering.
Shiʾite branch
In fact,ofit Islam—through
was through months the influence
of hardship of
rational
and sufferingelement dueintothe Muʿtazilite
unexpected theology—remained
physical and spiritual crises in disagreement
that al-Ghazālı̄ with the Ashʿarites.
transformed An
internally,
example
leaving all of of this
hismay be observed
possessions from thetowritings
and departing Damascus of anwhereeminent
he spentPersian philosopher,
two years Morteza
in contemplation
Muṭahharī
and prayer(d. 1979), who
in search was of and
of certitude the opinion
a personal that the Ashʾarite
experience of Godoutlook,
that was while
freeaimed at vindicating
from doubtfulness. 30

God from injustice,impact

The positive resulted ofinal-Ghazālı̄’s
exoneratingencounter
human oppressors of any wrongdoing.
with his severe 23
illness, which endangered his
From the Muslim philosophical perspective,
physical and mental wellness, appears in accord with the optimistic portrayalthe notion of good and evil is enclosed within and
of hardship the
wider ontological understanding of existence (wujūd) and nonexistence (ʿadam). Briefly put, good is
defined as a positive entity that branches from existence; evil, on the other hand, stems from
nonexistence
27 For an excellent and as suchonisMullā
commentary viewed
Sadrā’sas a negative
magnum opus, Asfār,entity.
24 An example of the ontological
see (Rahman 1975).
28 As mentioned previously, Ibn Rushd (Averroës, d. 1198) is considered as one of the most influential Muslim philosophers.
interpretation of what constitutes good and evil may be seen from the works of two prominent
While he was greatly influenced by Ibn Sina, he made a considerable effort to highlight Aristotle’s original roots in Islamic
Muslim philosophers who significantly influenced the shaping of Muslim philosophical thought: Ibn
philosophy, and remove the Neo-Platonism influence that had entered years later. Several centuries later, Mullā Sadrā
Sīnā,became
known known as asAvicenna (d. 1037), who
the Shiite philosopher andaddedSadra al-Din
mystical Shirāzī, who was and
layer to philosophical mostly recognized
theological as more
debates. For Mullā on
Sadrāthe development
(d. 1636). of Islamic philosophy, see (Nasr 2006).
29 See John Bowker, The Religious Imagination and the Sense of God (Bowker 1978, p. 195).
30 See IbnAbSīnā formed a theodicy by distinguishing the various forms of evil such as “essential” evil
ū H. āmid Al-Ghazālı̄, Al-Munqidh Min Al-Dalal, Deliverance from Error (Al-Ghazālı̄ 2006, pp. 52–55).
(sharr bidh-dhāt), which is non-being or privation, and “accidental” evil (sharr bil-ʿaraḍ), which can be
either being or privation. In his analysis, Ibn Sīnā concluded that it is the non-essential/accidental evil
that is the leading cause of human suffering and that the total amount of good in the universe
outweighs the amount of evil. 25 Mullā Sadrā, on the other hand, extensively developed this
philosophical approach by an interest in combining theology with mystical insight. This approach,
according to Rizvi, totally transformed the theory of existence as it pertains to Islamic metaphysics. 26
 fortune, he continually attributed the source of his blessings to God and remained humbl
Religions 2018, 9, x FORservant PEER REVIEW who lacked ownership of his belongings. Similarly, when God tested 4 of 13him with a s
disease, he exercised patience and recognized that he was going through a test—a po
when afflicted with experience—and
illness and adversity. ascribed 13 any
Job’snegative
incomparable feelingssincerity of despair and to submission
Satan.15 to God’s
Religions 2018, 9, 47
will in both health andThe Qur’anic narrative
prosperity, as well asabout during Jobaffliction
demonstrates that trials are
and hardship, andthe 7
tests—whether of
reasons 13 the in prosperit

Qur’an portrays him health as “an or illness

excellent and hardship—are
servant.” 14 part of the divine plan, so much so that even prophets a
According toexempt; Muslim itexegesis, is through what various
distinguishesexperiences Job is in the lifefact thatthat mandespite is ablehis to enormous
actualize his potentia
suffering presented in the Qur’an.31 For al-Ghazālı̄, this apparent negative experience proved, in
fortune, he continually propagate attributedhis mission the source on this of earth.
his blessings As Johntonotes, God “the and story remained of Job in the as
humble Qur’an
a is under
fact, to be positive and instrumental in the actualization of his intellectual and spiritual potentialities.
servant who lacked primarily
ownership as a reward narrative with
of his belongings. an emphasis
Similarly, whendifferentGod tested fromhim thatwith of thea story serious of Job in the Bi
As already mentioned, during his professorship in Baghdad, al-Ghazālı̄ contributed greatly to shaping
disease, he exercised patience and recognized that he was going through a test—a positive
a variety of Muslim thoughts.32 Still, the practical implications of much of his teachings, particularly
experience—and ascribed 4. Concept anyofnegativeEvil: Theologicalfeelings of and despair Philosophical
to Satan.15 Development
the relationship between theological and mystical discourses, are clearly articulated in his writings
The Qur’anic narrative One about
of the Job
earliestdemonstrates thatMuslim
trials and tests—whether in(kalām)
prosperity wasand
following his departure and the years he spent 5 ofin 13problems
seclusion. in As Zarrinkūb theological
pointed out, thought the authenticity how to reconc
health or illness and divine hardship—are
attributepursued ofpart of the divine
omnipotence withplan, so
thedeductions
notionmuch ofso that even
human prophets are not
of religious knowledge that al-Ghazālı̄ through rational for muchfree of his will. lifeThe boredeparture point fo
ering in the divinefruit plan. exempt;
Thehis notionit is of through
suffering, various wasexperiences Qur’an in life
33the that man interpretations
is able to actualize of its his potential anddivine name
after illness and major which
discourse mystical included
the experience. and The diverse
reflections of al-Ghazālı̄’s teachings
renewal are on the
n and animals, continued propagate his mission on this earth. As John notes, “the story of Job in the Qur’an is understood
presented intohisbemagnum discussed opus by
attributes called the Ih.Muʿtazilite
(asmāʾ yā al-ḥusnā).
ulūm al-din 17 The
(“The reconciliation
Revival of the of certain
Religious divine
Sciences”), attributes,
composed predominantly the
m stress on God’sduring primarily
justice,the however, as a reward
resulted innarrative
anthe group with an emphasis different from that of the story of Job in the frameBible.”with 16
next decade of his
of life. In thisdividing,
all-powerful major God,work, with the 2018,
al-Ghazālı̄
Religions idea9,of human
xillustrated
FOR PEER free through
REVIEW will—the a highly broader detailed which h
hʾarite school of thought. suffering was enclosed—was
elucidation of personal religious experiences ways by which a profound inner life may be integrated the first attempt to initiate a theodicy within the context of Islam
4. Concept of Evil: Theological 34 and Philosophical when Development
afflicted with illness and adversity. 13 Job’s incomparable sin
OR gians,PEERGod’s REVIEW law of justice
with sound applies only todoctrines.
theological human Thebeingsdiscourse whopresentshave itself at the 5 ofcore13 of the theological dialogue amongst various group
His laws. Applying theThe ideareflection
of justice
One of theof toearliest
God,
theologians
this5 of 13 however,
problems
worldview who will in
and put
advocated
Muslim
mucha will for in
theological
of whatthe both may health
attribute
thought be of and prosperity,
omnipotence
(kalām)
called was how
Ghazālian astheodicy
in well
its
to absolute as during
reconcile is and theaffliction
uncomprom an
ty erefore,
of human God is notencapsulated
suffering bound in
divineby His
the inown
divine hisplan.
attribute laws.
ofform
famous The Hedictum
is just
notion
were
omnipotence ofin of
thewhatever
suffering,
withopinion
the the notion
best Qur’an
which
that
of allthe portrays
ofincluded
only
possible human agent him
free
worlds: as
in this
will.“an
“Thereworld excellentisnot
Theisdeparture God: servant.”
Hepoint
in possibility creates 14
forHis thisown acts as w
his
efering plan. then bymeans
The children
notion that all
ofand
anything harm
animals,
suffering,
discourse
more encountered
which continued
was
wonderful included
the the by
Qur’an man
towhat
acts
than be
of isalldiscussed
and fair
human
the
is” as it has
diverse
(laysa byinterpretations
beings.
fi’l-imkāntheAsabdaAccording
Muʿtazilite
thisReligions
viewofraised
mimmā to
its Muslim
kān).
2018, 9,serious
teachings
The
x FOR exegesis,
concerns
on REVIEW
statement
PEER what
thepresents about
divine distinguishes
the creation
names
itself and of Job“evil”
is thea
all Muʿtazilite’s
continued
he His creation. to befirm The Ashʾarite
discussed
stress
in Book onby
attributes
35 of thinkers
God’s the
the (asmāʾ yā were
Muʿtazilite
Ih.justice, God, inal-din:
al-ḥusnā).
ul ūm sharp
however,
the conflict
resulted
17 debate
TheKitāb in the fortune,
with
developed
reconciliation
al-tawhı̄d group
wa’further
ofl-tawakkul,
certain he
dividing, continually
to question
divineDivine the
attributes,
Unity attributed
validity
and ofthe
predominantly
Trust insource
human God: freetheofwill—the
his blessings
aspect concept to G
ve not only
birth
justice, toisthe
however,God subjected
Ashʾarite
resulted ofschool
in
antothe the same
ofgroup
thought.
all-powerful rules
dividing,
deeply
God, of justice
rooted
with but
the inideathat,Quran
the ofinhuman servant
as it free who
relateswhen lacked
afflicted
to man’s
will—the ownership
with
responsibility
broader illnessof
frame with hisand belongings.
and which adversity.
accountability, Similarly,
13 Job’s
human as well as when
incompa
ans
ought. is eternal
o Ashʾarite and uncompromising
theologians, Everything
God’s law
suffering was that
forjustice
of God
God.
enclosed—was distributes
It is worth
applies
judgment only
and
the among
noting
to human
reward
first men
that
attemptand such
disease,
beings aswho
punishment.
to initiate sustenance,
will
hehave inThe
aexercisedboth
theodicy life-span
health
dialogue patience
within ‘ajal’,
and
theand
crystallized happiness
prosperity,
context recognized
between
of Islam. as well thatas
the during
he was affl
Muʿtazilite goan
oIbn f act Rushd
justice according (Averroes,
applies toonlyHistod. and
1198),
laws.
human sadness,
challenged
Applying
The beings
discourseweakness
the
who these
idea
have
Ashʿarite,
presents and
views
of power,
justice
theand
itself to
two faith
atasserted
God,
main
the and
however,
core unbelief,
experience—and
schools
of will
of
the theological obedience
Qur’an
put a portrays
thought, with anda apostasy—all
ascribed
dialogue any
him
divergence
amongst negative
as “anvarious of
ofexcellent it isgroups.
feelings
opinion; of despair
servant.”
both made
The 14 to Satan.
a serious
ng bethe
owerful employed
idea fortherefore,
of justice
creator; Godtoand unqualifiedly
God, man
God in
however,
theologians thewho
is not just
same with
willadvocated
bound to put byano
manner:
win Histhe injustice
man,
own
argument
for the byin
laws. it,
virtue
He true
is just
according
attribute with
of in The no
towhatever
their
omnipotence wrong
Qur’anic infecting
According
understandingnarrative
in toit.Muslim
its absolute ofIndeed,
abouttheand Qur’an. all
Jobexegesis, this
demonstrates
uncompromising
18 that trials and Jt
what distinguishes
tlevel
lied bound toofsuffering,
goodness;
by His own thisGod, happens
then
laws. however,
form means
He is just
were according
isin
that
of just
the all due to
harm
whatever
opinion a
to necessary
His
encountered
The that perfection—a
the onlyby
Muʿtazilite and true
school
agent order,
manhealth isthis
of
in fair according
thought,or
world illness
asfortune,
it has
also to
and
is God:knownwhat
he continually
He as is
hardship—are appropriate
the rationalists,
creates His part of
attributed
own as it
acts the asdivine
categoricallywell asplan,
source of hissobless
opposed mucth
God who is just
at all harm encounteredthe in all His is appropriate
creation.
byactsman The
ofisallfair and
Ashʾarite
human in
asthat
it has the measure
thinkers
God creates
beings. that
were
As thishuman is
in
view raisedproper
sharp exempt;
acts that to
conflict
serious it; it
include noris
servant
with is
concerns anything
throughwho
evil and about more
various
lacked
advocated fitting,
experiences
ownership
the creation for human more of
of “evil” in
his life
freeacts that
belongings.
willby man
by emphasizi is abl
Similar
am
he who Sunnite
Ashʾarite
asserted theologians
thinkers
that notwere perfect,
supported
only
God, inisthe
sharp
Godand more
the
conflict
subjected
debate attractive
Ashʾarite withto the
importance
developed school within
same ofofthe
further the
thought
rules realm
todivineof justice
question of the
attributepossibility.
propagate butvalidity ofhis
disease,
that, in
justice For
mission
of he if something
(ʿadl).
human onThey
exercised this will—the
free was to
earth.
patience
upheld exist
Asthat John
and
concept God, notes,
recognized “the
is story
in accordance
that that of he J
wit
subjected
on allto acts.
act intoIn just
theorder
means
same torulesand
isreconcile
eternal
deeply remind God’s
and
of justice
rooted one of
uncompromising
but the
inomnipotence
that,
attribute
the sheer omnipotence
in ofas(ʿāadil),
Quran with
for God.
it relateshuman Itto
cannot of God
is man’sprimarily
worth
create and
noting
evil notas
responsibilityand of
that the
a reward
experience—and
that andgood
evil things
narrative
is theascribed accomplished
withany
direct
accountability, anas
result emphasis
negative
of
well man’s different
asfeelingsfreedom
divine offrom
despair
of that
choice
quisition
uncompromising
slim (kasb) was
philosopher, God. by
Ibnadopted:
for Rushd His
It is
judgment action,
God
worth
(Averroes, and it
creates would
notingd. view
reward allthat
1198), be
acts;
and miserliness
humans
challenged
was challenged
punishment. that
freely
these utterly
views
by
The contradicts
and asserted
raising
dialogue questions The God’s
crystallized generosity
Qur’anic
suchbetween narrative
as: If God and injustice
about
does not create
the Muʿtazilite Job demonstrates
and the evil, who, tr
that th
re,
oes,of justiceare
d. 1198),accountable
may not be for
challenged contrary
employedthe acquisition
these
Ashʿarite, views to
forthedivine
God
and two andjustice.
of
asserted
main good
man
responsible And
inand
schools theforif God
evil
same
ofhuman were
acts.
manner:
thought, not 4.
suffering
22 with omnipotent,
Concept
man, byhealth
a caused of
virtue
divergence He
Evil:
byor would
Theological
illness
illnesses
of opinion;be impotent,
andboth and
hardship—are
disasters? thereby
Philosophical
made And a serious part
if God Development
ofwills
effortthe divine plan
for illnesse
contradicting the 35
onging
vances
God andto to athe
man inShiʾite
higher thelevel
same branch
of
to manner:
win oftheIslam—through
goodness; man, God,
argument bynaturehowever,
virtue
disasters ofthe
according divinity.
influence
inishumanjusttheir
to due life, ofhow
to His perfection—a
understanding can One Heexempt;
bethe
of
of just?
the itThe
Qur’an.
earliestis through
Muʿtazilites
18
problems variousinresponded
Muslim experiences by affirming
theological in life that
that ma
thought ill(
tes; God,theology—remained
however,
be just. is justAlthough in disagreement
due to His with the of Ashʿarites. Anstatement propagate his mission on this earth. As John notes, “the
Him to The a perfection—a
critical and
Muʿtazilite disasters,
school of while may
thought, also appear
known
divine as “evil”,
is the are
rationalists, inscope
actuality
categorically “good” that
opposed God thecreates
ofidea andfreethatws
21
analysis al-Ghazālı̄’s attribute
beyond ofthe omnipotence of this with
paper, the it notion
should human
from the
analysis, writings
mainstream of an
Sunnite
that eminent
God theologians Persian
creates human philosopher,
supported
significant acts the
purpose
that Morteza
Ashʾarite
include in the
evilschool
creational
and of
advocated primarily
thought
cosmic for as
plan. a
human reward
This seems
free narrative
will to by be with
the
emphasizing an
first emphasis
appearance
the different
of itsthe
of teat
be mentioned that he received much criticism fromdiscourse his opponents was the since Qur’an
takingand thisthe diverse interpretations
position—it is not
hethat
dgians opinion
supported
God createsthat the the Ashʾarite
Ashʾarite
all
possible acts.
importanceIn outlook,
school
order
for God toofcreate of
to while
thought
reconcile
the divine aimed
a betterattribute at
God’s
world—is vindicating
omnipotence
ofinjustice
conflict with
(ʿadl).
withThey
attributes human
the(asmāʾ
Ash upheld al-ḥusnā).
arite that God,
17 Thein
theological accordance
reconciliation
teachings relating with
of certain His divine attr
onerating
her todoctrine reconcile human
of God’s oppressors
acquisition omnipotence
attribute of
(kasb) anywas
of wrongdoing.
with adopted:
(ʿāadil), human
36 cannot God
23create createsevil all
and acts;
that humans
evil is the 4.freely
Concept
direct resultof Evil:
of Theological
man’s freedom and
of Philosophical
choice. This Develo
to God’s omnipotence. 13 However, it must be pointed of anout all-powerful
that the statement God, with the idea ofwithin
is embedded humana free will—the bro
cal perspective,
s18,adopted:
acts Godthe
and, therefore, notion
creates areviewall ofacts;
good
washumans
accountable and forevilfreely
the The
is“trust story
enclosed
acquisition of Job
within in
ofwhich Judeo₋Christian
the issuffering
good and evil traditions
acts. is presented in the Book of Job and appears in the for
ofchallenged by raising questions such as:inwas If God does not create evil, who, then, istheological
22
9, x FOR PEER REVIEW broader context tawakkul, in between
God,” treated the enclosed—was
OneQur’an 5of the earliest
extensively.
ofexplain
13 the firstproblems
In attempt
fact, in to
Al-Wakı̄l, Musliminitiate a theodicyt
dialogue Job and his friends who try to to him the reason for his sufferings. A comp
ofslim
le existence
forthinkers (wujūd)
the acquisition theand
belonging of nonexistence
to
good the
responsible Shiʾite
and for (ʿadam).
evil branch
human Briefly
acts. suffering put,
22of Islam—through causedgood byisQur’an
the influence
illnesses The and ofwhen
disasters?
discourse itAnd
presents ifitself
Godat wills for illnesses and
trustee, is one of the divine attributes
study of the story that the
between references
Judeo₋Christian divine attribute
tradition of
characterizes
and Islam the
omnipotence istrue core
beyond withofthe
believers, thethe theological
scopenotionof this dialog
of paper.
huma
ʾite branches
in branch
mentality offrom
the Muʿtaziliteofhuman existence;
is,disasters
suffering evil,
theology—remained
Islam—through inthe on
in the
influence
thehuman divine other
inlife, ofhand,
disagreement
plan. how The canstems He
notion withfrom
be of the
just? Ashʿarites.
The
suffering, Muʿtazilites An responded by affirming that ofillnesses
that those who hold full trust
excellentin God. This
comparative concept theologians
review, seewhich
is also who
discourse
discussed
A.H. included
Johns, advocated
was
by the Qur’an
al-Ghazālı̄
A Comparative for the and
inGlance
his attribute
the
book diverse
at Ayyubcalled omnipotence
the Qur'an in
in interpretations (Johnits
ewed
ained may
ved suffering by Theas
in
be a negative
disagreement
observed from
childrenentity.
with
andthe
Ninety-Nine
24 An
the
writings
disasters,
and animals, example
Ashʿarites. of
while
Beautiful Names an An
continued of
eminent
may the
appear
of God,
pp. 51–82). ontological
Persianas
to‘al-Mags philosopher,
“evil”,
be discussed ad areform
al-asnāin by were
fı̄ Morteza
actuality
the of “good”
Muʿtazilite
attributes
sharh the
ma opinion
ānı̄ (asmāʾ
asmāthat God
that the
al-ḥusnā).
Allāh creates
al-h only17
usnā’,The and
agent that
in
reconciliation
where serve
this
he worlda of is God:
certain H
di
. . .
979),
gs good
ns. of19 who
an
The and was evil
eminent of may
Muʿtazilite’s the
Persianbe
opinion
firm seen stressfrom
that
philosopher,
significant the
on the
purpose
God’s works
Ashʾarite
Morteza
14 in the
justice, of
Qur’an two
outlook,
creational
however,
38:41–2 prominent
while cosmic aimed
resulted
and 21:83–4.
provides a comprehensive discussion of the divine attribute of Al-Wakı̄l, and describes to his audience plan.
the at
in vindicating
theThis
acts group
ofofseems
allan to
dividing,
human be
all-powerful the
beings. first As
God,appearance
this with view the of
raised
idea the theory
serious
of human concerns
free ab
will
antly
nally influenced
ece,Ashʾarite
resulted
gave outlook,
birth tothetheshaping
in exonerating
how while
God,human
Ashʾarite ofHis
aimed
in Muslim
atessence,
school ofphilosophical
vindicating
oppressors 15
thought. of Abubakr
See
deserves anyto thought:
wrongdoing.
have `Tigh Ibn 23 God,
Neishabur
matters entrustedSurabadi,
the suffering
debate Tafsir
to Him. Surabadi,
37
developed
was ed. Sa`Idito
further
enclosed—was Sirjani
question
the (Surabadi
first the 1381).
attempt to Also,
validity of see
initiate humaBrt
7),
Muslim and
ppressors Sadr of al-Din
philosophical
any
ording to Ashʾarite theologians, Shirāzī,
perspective,
wrongdoing.
Therefore, who 23 wasthe
God’s
whilelaw mostly
notion ofrecognized
of justice
certain good
M.elements
Wheeler, and
applies of as
evil Mullā
Prophets
aonly is enclosed
classicalin human
to the Qur'an,
deeply
theodicy within
beings anare
rooted the
Introduction
who
Thein the have
discourse
articulated to the
Quran in Qur'an
presents
as it relates
al-Ghazālı̄’s anditselfMuslim
to
maximat
man’s Exegesis
the core
of (Wheeler 2002).
of the theologi
responsibility and
alegatednotion
understanding of good and
of evil
13
existence is The story ofwithin
enclosed
(wujūd) andJob16in Judeo₋Christian
See
the
nonexistence (Johns 2003,
(ʿadam).traditions
pp. 50–51).
Briefly is presented
put, good inisthe Book of Job and appears in the form of a
to act according “the best to His of laws.
all Applying
possible worlds,” the idea one of justice to God,judgmenthowever, and will
theologians rewardput aandadvocated
who punishment. for The dialogue
the attribute crystallized
of omnipote
dialogue between 17 Job Forand more his mayfriends
on this
inferwho
see
that
try his
Abdol
objective
toRahman
explain to
Ibn
was
him to
the
Khaldūn,
provide
reason forpractical
Muqaddimah his sufferings. guidelines
of Ibn Khaldūn A comparative to
(Ibn Khaldūn 1375).
d)
an y distinguishing
ositive and entity that
nonexistence
all-powerful the
creator;
reachvarious
branches
(ʿadam).
therefore,
a high forms
from
Briefly
level Godof
ofput, evil
existence;
is
trustgood
notsuch
in isas
evil,
bound
God “essential”
on
by
despite the
His other
own
the evil hand,
laws.
apparent He stems
Ashʿarite, is just
imperfectionsformfrom
in
the whatever
two
were ofmain
ofthe the schools
opinion
world. of thought,
that
Furthermore, the with
only prior a
agent divergence
in this of opi
world
study of the story 18 between
For24 a An Judeo₋Christian
comprehensive tradition on
discussion anddevelopment
Islam is beyond the scope
of theology in of this paper.
Islam, see Harry For an Austryn Wolfso
ng
nd 20 or
xistence;asprivation,
Applied such evil, and
tois suffering,
viewed
on “accidental”
the as
other
this athen evil
negative
hand, (sharr
stems
means thatbil-ʿaraḍ),
entity.
from all harm which
example can be
encountered of the
by
to man
win ontological
the is
the fair
argument
acts as ofit has
allaccording
human to
beings. their As understanding
this view raised of the Qur’an
serious co
excellent comparative review,ofsee
Philosopy Kalam A.H.(Wolfson
Johns, A1976). Comparative Glance at Ayyub in the Qur'an (Johns 2008,
alysis,
five what Ibn
entity. Sīnā
24 An
constitutes
ed by God who is just in allpp.concluded
example
good that
and of it
evil is
the
His51–82). the
may non-essential/accidental
ontological
be seen from
creation. The Ashʾarite thinkers were in sharp the works evil of two prominent
The God, conflict
Muʿtazilite with
the debate school of thought,
developed also known
further to question as thethe rationalist
validity
mayan suffering
phers
azilites bewho seen
who and 31that
significantly
from
asserted thethat the
works
14 not total
influenced of
Qur’anonly amount
two the
is
38:41–2 shaping
prominent
God of good
subjected
and 21:83–4. in to
of Muslim the the universe
philosophical
same rules that ofthought:
justice
God deeply Ibn that,
but
creates human
rooted in inactsthe that
Quran include as it evil
relates and to advocated
man’s for hum
responsib
For example, Quran, 2:216, “ . . . you may dislike something although it is good for you, or like something although it is bad
he
obligationMullā
Avicennashaping Sadrā,
ofact
(d.
to Muslim
1037),onjust
in the
and
for 15other
philosophical
meansSadr
you: See
God hand,
isal-Din
Abubakr
eternal
knows extensively
thought:
Shirāzī,
and `Tigh
and you Ibnwho developed
Neishabur
uncompromising
don’t.” wasSurabadi,
mostly forthis
recognized
Tafsir
God. Surabadi,
It is worth
importance asjudgment
Mullā
ed. Sa`Idi
noting
of the Sirjani
that
divine
and reward (Surabadi
attribute and 1381). Also, see
ofpunishment.
justice Brannon
(ʿadl). The They upheldcrys
dialogue th
32 For a comprehensive study on al-Ghazālı̄’s thoughts, see Frank Griffel, Al-Ghazālı̄’s Philosophical Theology (Griffel 2009).
nent rest in
Shirāzī, combining
who
Muslim philosopher, was theology
mostly with
recognized
M. Wheeler,mystical
Ibn RushdE.(Averroes, as insight.
Mullā
Prophets in the This
Qur'an, approach,
d. 1198), challenged these an Introduction attribute to
viewsthe Qur'an
ofand
Ashʿarite,
(ʿāadil), and
asserted Muslim
the twocreate
cannot Exegesis
main evil (Wheeler
schools and of that 2002).
thought,
evil is the with a diverge
direct result
Also 16 see Michael Marmura, ‘Al-Ghazālı̄’, in Peter Adamson and Richard Taylor (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Arabic
medmed the oftheory
justiceof
a theodicy by not beSee
existence
distinguishing as (Johns
it the2003,
pertains forto
variouspp. 50–51).
Islamicforms metaphysics.
of evil such 26as “essential” evil
lement may Philosophy employed
(Marmura 2005). God and man in the same manner:
view was man, winbythe
to challenged virtue
argumentby raising according questions to their such as: If God does
understanding of th
he whichvarious is non-being
forms 33 See17Abdolhusin
of or
evil such Foras
privation, more and on“accidental”
“essential”
Zarrinkub, this see evil
Farar Abdol
Az evilRahman
Madrasah (sharr - Ibn
Life andKhaldūn,
bil-ʿaraḍ),
Teachings whichMuqaddimah
of can
Al-Ghazali be of Ibn Khaldūn
(Zarrinkub 1387, (Ibn
p. 124).Khaldūn 1375).
ust, advances to a34higher level of goodness; God, however, is just due to His perfection—a
responsible for The human
Muʿtazilite suffering school caused by illnesses
of thought, alsoand known disasters?
as the rA
rivation.
d “accidental” In histo analysis,
evil For18Ibn
(sharr more Foron a
Sīnā
21bil-ʿaraḍ),
comprehensive
this, see (Wattcan
concluded
which 2007).
that bediscussion on development of theology
it is the non-essential/accidental evil in Islam, see Harry Austryn Wolfson, The
requires Him be35 just.
See (Al-Ghazālı̄ 2001, pp. 45–46). disasters in
that human
God life,
creates howhuman can He
acts be
that just?include The Muʿtazilites
evil and respo
advocate
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
he ng cluded
azilite’s cause
final that
view ofon
analysis,ithuman
ispain
the non-essential/accidental
36andsuffering
mainstream
For suffering
a detailed and
see
Sunnite that
(Heemskerk
discussion the
theologians evil
total
2000).
on al-Ghazālı̄’s amount
Forstatement,
supported ofthe
an extensive good
see in the
Ashʾarite
and
(Ormsby universe
school
disasters,
1984). ofwhile
importance
It should thought may
of the
be noted appear
that divine
several asattribute
“evil”, later
centuries are
of in actuality
justice
this (ʿadl). “good”
They u t
namount
thatIslam, the see ofMohammed
total evil. 25 Mullā
amount Ghaly,
statement
of goodIslam
Sadrā,
wasin and
on
raised
the
hasized that God37creates all acts. In order to reconcile God’s omnipotenceDisability:
the other
byuniverse
Leibnitz Perspectives
inhand,
the context in Theology
extensively
of a consistent developed
theodicy. Also
significant withthis
purpose
attribute see (Kermani 2011, p. 58).
human
ofin the creational
(ʿāadil), cannot create cosmic evil plan.
andThis that evilseems to be
is the dirt
See (Al-Ghazālı̄ 1992, pp. 375–76).
n the the
pproach
bility, other anhand,
bydoctrine interest extensively
of in combining
acquisition developed
(kasb)theology wasthis with mystical
adopted: God creates insight.all This acts; approach,
humans
view was freelychallenged by raising questions such as: If G
mvi, (Wolfson
totally 1976).mystical
transformed the theory of existence as
theology with insight. This approach, foritthe pertains to Islamic metaphysics. 26
certain acts and, therefore, are accountable acquisition of good and evil acts.for
responsible 22 human suffering caused by illnesses and di
Ibn Rushd (Averroes), The Philosophy and Theology of Averroes, (Averroes 13 The story of Job in Judeo₋Christian traditions is presented in the Book
existence as it pertains to Islamic
ely, Muslim thinkers belonging to the Shiʾite branch of Islam—through themetaphysics. 26
influence
disasters of
in human life, how can He be just? The Muʿtazil
dialogue between Job and his friends who try to explain to him the reas
element in the
see Wolfson, TheMuʿtazilite theology—remained
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976). in disagreement with study the Ashʿarites. Anwhile may appear as “evil”, are in actuality
and disasters,
cussion on the Muʿtazilite’s view on pain and suffering see (Heemskerk 2000). For an of the story between Judeo₋Christian tradition and Islam is bey
extensive
of this may be observed from the writings of an eminent Persian philosopher, Morteza
significant purpose in the creational cosmic plan. This seem
otion of disability inwas
Islam, see 2000).
Mohammed Ghaly, Islam andfrom
Disability: excellent
Perspectives comparative review, see A.H. Johns, A Comparative Glance
in Theology
nrī
and
(d.suffering
good 1979),
and see
who
evil, see(Heemskerk
of Hossein
Seyyed the For that
opinion
Nasr, an extensive
thePhilosophy
Islamic Ashʾarite outlook, while aimed
Its Origin at vindicating
Religions 2018, 9, 47 8 of 13

to making the aforementioned statement about the perfectness of the world, al-Ghazālı̄ engages in
an in-depth discussion on the divine attributes of “wisdom” and “will” to highlight their connection,
as well as the importance of viewing the world as the most excellent work of the Creator. From the
Ghazālian perspective, the signs of God’s will and wisdom are plentifully evident throughout His
creation. Consequently, in order to fully trust in God that this world—including all of its seeming
deficiencies—is the best of all possible worlds, one must be able to genuinely believe that the creation
of the universe is planned and premeditated according to God’s will and wisdom. It should also be
mentioned that this level of trust, tawakkul, is one of the highest stations in the mystic path and plays a
significant role in man’s spiritual development.
As it may be inferred from the above discussion, al-Ghazālı̄’s theodicy is established on a strong
relationship between man and God and the need to reach an elevated level of trust in God in the face
of the world’s imperfections, adversities, and suffering. Nevertheless, it is in the teachings of Jalāl
al-Dı̄n Rūmı̄, one of the most prominent thinkers of Islam as well as a mystic and Sufi poet, where the
comprehensive elucidations of the constructive aspects of hardship and suffering in man’s spiritual
development come to light.38

6. Evil from the Muslim Mystical Perspective: Jalāl al-Dı̄n Rūmı̄

The mystical dimension of Islam, similar to other forms of religious mysticism discussed in
Perennial Philosophy,39 deals with the esoteric teachings of Islam and is traditionally represented by
Sufism. Although the development of Sufism may be traced back to a century after the death of prophet
Muhammad, the roots of its teachings go back to the Qur’an and the Sunna (normative behavior) of the
prophet where contemplating on the spiritual realities of the universe is highly encouraged. That the
external (z.āhir) practices of Islam should guide to insight and inner realities (bāt.in) may be understood
from the Qur’an where God is presented as both the Outward (al-z.āhir) and the Inward (al-bāt.in).40
Although the focus of Sufism is on the esoteric path (tarı̄qah) in order to reach a state of union with
God, the doctrines and practices of the Sufi path are, nevertheless, founded on the exoteric framework
specified in Islamic law (sharı̄’ah).41
One of the most influential Sufis of Islam is Jalāl al-Dı̄n Rūmı̄ (1207–1273) who is known in the
West for his mystical poetry. Rūmı̄ was born in Balkh, the Persian province of Khorāsān, and received
a high level of education under his father who was a distinguished jurisprudent and Sufi, as well
as a formal trainee to the mastery level in Sufism from one of the most well-known Sufi masters of
the time, Burhān al-Din Tirmidhı̄. Being educated in the traditional religious sciences in addition
to Sufism gained him widespread recognition as a religious scholar and influential teacher in both
exoteric and esoteric teachings of Islam. In Shafiei Kadkani’s opinion, Rūmı̄ is considered as one of
the greatest intellectuals of the world mainly because of his extraordinary ability to engage with the
mystical interpretation of some of the most difficult theological concepts, as well as their exposition in
a poetic and inspirational language.42 Although Rūmı̄’s mystical elucidations are presented in much
of his work, it is, however, his magnum opus, the Mathnawı̄ that illuminates the mystical elements of the
Qur’anic teachings, and is regarded as an esoteric commentary of the Qur’an.43 In what follows, I will

38 It is important to note that al-Ghazālı̄’s mystical teachings have greatly influenced Rūmı̄’s worldview. However, while the
former emphasized more on God’s majesty, the latter established his teachings more on the notion of God’s love. For more
on the mystical views of al-Ghazālı̄ and Rūmı̄, see (Soroush 1379, pp. 33–37).
39 Perennial Philosophy takes a universal approach in explaining the teachings of world religions, and brings to light a shared
mystical vision among them. Viewed from this perspective, world religions and spiritual traditions, despite their cultural
and historical differences, promote a deep understanding of the transcendent element, the Reality, which exists in the
universe. For more on this, see (Huxley 2009, p. vii).
40 Qur’an: 57:3, “He is the First and the Last; the Outer and the Inner: He has the knowledge of all things.”
41 For a comprehensive discussion about Islamic mysticism, see (Schimmel 1975). Also, see (Nasr 1987).
42 See (Shafiei Kadkani 1388, p. 2).
43 For more on the influence of the Qur’an in shaping Rumi’s worldview, see (Zarrinkub 1388, p. 342).
 health or illness and hardship—are part of the divine The Qur’anic
plan, so much narrative
so thatabout evenJob demonstrates
prophets are not that trials a
exempt; it is through various experiences in life health thatormanillnessis able to actualize hispart
and hardship—are potential and plan, so
of the divine
propagate his mission on this earth. As John notes, exempt; “theit story
is through
of Job various
in the Qur’an experiences in life that man is
is understood
primarily as a reward narrative with an emphasispropagate different from that of the
his mission on story of Job As
this earth. in theJohn Bible.”
notes, 16 “the story

Religions 2018, 9, 47 primarily as a reward narrative with an emphasis different from 9 of 13

4. Concept of Evil: Theological and Philosophical Development
4. Concept of Evil: Theological and Philosophical Developme
One of the R
attempt to summarize earliest problems inonMuslim
ūmı̄’s expositions the notiontheological
of evil and thought
human (kalām)
sufferingwas as how to reconcile
presented in the
divine attribute of omnipotence with the notion of One
the Mathnawı̄. human freeearliest
of the will. The departure
problems point for
in Muslim this
theological thoug
discourse was the Qur’an and the diverse divine
interpretations attribute
of its of omnipotence
teachings
In Rūmı̄’s worldview, the multiplicity that exists in this world is the effect of the manifestation on the with
divine the notion
names and of human fre
of God’s attributes
names (asmāʾ
(asmā )al-ḥusnā). 17
and attributes The (sifāt)
reconciliation
that aimofdiscourse
tocertain
revealdivine
His attributes,
wascreative
the Qur’anpower. predominantly
andInthe diverse
other words,the aspect
interpretations of its
while theof anformall-powerful
(s.ūrat) of theGod, withentities
created the idea of human
is varied, attributes
their free (asmāʾ
will—the
meaning al-ḥusnā).
broader
(ma nā), 17 The with
frame
nevertheless, reconciliation
which human
is indicative of certain divine
Reality.44was
of Onesuffering enclosed—was
Rūmı̄ further expands the first
the attempt
distinction toof initiate a theodicy
form andwithin
an all-powerful
between God,
meaning the context
with ideaofofIslam.
thedemonstrate
to human free will—th
that while man The discourse
appears topresents
be a being itself at the other
among core ofbeings
the theological
suffering
in thewas dialogue theamongst
enclosed—was
universe, universe thevarious
first groups.
is, inattempt
fact, in toThe initiate a theod
theologians who advocated for the attribute of The
omnipotence discourse
man: “ . . . in form thou art the microcosm, in reality thou art the macrocosm.” He also identifies in itspresents
absolute45 itself
and at the core
uncompromising of the theological d
man asform were ofofthe
the “fruit” opinionand
creation thatuses
the the
onlyanalogy
agent inofthis world
theologians
a tree is who
God: advocated
to describe He
thiscreates
highlyfor His ownattribute
the
elevated acts as well
status: as
of omnipotence i
“The onlythe acts
reasonof all
thathuman beings. As
the gardener this view
plants is forform
a treeraised serious were
the sake of the
concerns
of the fruit.
opinion
aboutMan thethat isthetheonly
creation agent
of thein
of “evil”
goal this
acts byworld is Go
creation;God, the debate
therefore, he isdeveloped furtherthat
the last creature to question
comes into theexistence;
validity
acts ofhuman
of allyet, human freehe
beings.
in reality, will—the
As thisfirst.”
is the view 46raised
concept that is
serious concern
deeply
The rooted
creation of in the Quran
Adam, as the as exemplar
it relates to ofman’s God,
humankind theindebate
responsibility developed
and
his ultimate furtherto
accountability,
closeness to God,
as question
well the validity of
asisdivine
judgment
postulated at the and
centerreward and teachings
of Rūmı̄’s punishment. as it The dialogue
relates deeply crystallized
rooted in
to the positive thebetween
impact Quran
of trials the
as it Muʿtazilite
and relates to man’s
tribulations and the responsibility
in man’s Ashʿarite,
spiritualthe two main schools
development. of thought,
According withthe
to Rūmı̄, a divergence
judgment
Qur’anic and of opinion;
reward
notion andboth
of the made a serious
punishment.
“knowledge ofThe effort crystalli
thedialogue
names,” to47win the argument
taught to Adam upon according to their reveals
his creation, understandingAshʿarite,
that theQur’an.
of the
humankind two
hasmain 18
the schools to
capacity of become
thought,the with a divergence o
perfect mirror Thewhere
Muʿtazilite
God’sschool
namesofand thought, also may
attributes known to as
bewin the
therationalists,
manifested.argument categorically
according
The knowledge opposed
tooftheir the idea of the Qu
understanding
the names,
that Godus,
Rūmı̄ informs creates
is nothuman acts that
the external include
names evilcreated
of the and advocatedThe Muʿtazilite
beings; for human
rather, itschool
is free of
will thought,
the mysteries alsothe
by emphasizing
and known theas the ration
importance
inner meanings of of
thethe divineelements
various attributewithin
of justice (ʿadl).
that They
the creation God upheld
creates
of the cosmos. that
human God,
Man’s in accordance
actsresponsibility
that include evil iswith
toandHis advocated for
attribute of (ʿāadil), cannot create evil and that evilimportance
is the direct of the
result
live in accordance with his inner nature (fitra) and recognize that actualization of his potential is doable divine
of man’s attribute
freedom of justice
of choice. (ʿadl).
This They uphe
by his view was challenged
own volition, as well as by the raising
ability toquestions
differentiatesuch as: If of
attribute
between God does
(ʿāadil),
“form” and not
cannot create
create evil,
“meaning”: evil who,
and
to search that then,
for evil is isthe direct re
responsible
the truth behind the veils.for human suffering caused by illnesses
view andwasdisasters?
challenged And if
by God
raising wills for illnesses
questions suchand as: If God
disasters
From the Rin human
ūmı̄an life, how can
perspective, the He mostbeimportant
just? The responsible
Muʿtazilites
phase in man’s forresponded
human suffering
spiritual bydevelopmentcausedthat
affirming by is illnesses
illnessesand disaste
to
and disasters,
get to know one’s self, while may appear(ma’rifat
self-knowledge as “evil”, are indisasters
al-nafs), actuality
and in“good”
ultimatelyhuman to that
life,God
recognizehowcreates
can
that He heand that
beenserve
be just?
has a
The Muʿtazilites r
significant purpose in the creational cosmic plan. and This disasters,
seems to
separated from his original Source (as.l). By employing the analogy of a “reed,” Rūmı̄ explicates thatwhile
be themayfirst appear
appearance as “evil”,
of are
the in
theory actuality “goo
this separation is the primary cause for humankind’s unhappiness significant purpose in the
in this life. 48 Man
creational
tends cosmic
to forget plan. This seems to
his divine origin and occupies himself with the worldly attainments; therefore, in order to awaken
13 The story of Job in Judeo₋Christian traditions is presented in the Book of Job and appears in the form of a
him from the state of negligence, he will be faced with adversities and sufferings. In other words,
dialogue between Job and his friends who try to explain13 Thetostory
him the
of Jobreason for his sufferings.
in Judeo₋Christian A comparative
traditions is presented in the B
trials and tribulations are necessary as they assist man in self-purification (tazkiyat al-nafs), freeing him
study of the story between Judeo₋Christian traditiondialogue and Islam is beyond the scope
between Job and his friends whoof this paper.
try toFor an to him the
explain
from material attachments
excellent comparativeandreview,
the inclinations of his
see A.H. Johns, ego. Rūmı̄ expounds
A Comparative Glance at upon in
Ayyub prophet
the Qur'anJoseph’s
(Johns 2008,
study of the story between Judeo₋Christian tradition and Islam i
experiencepp. to describe
51–82). the constructiveness of trials; Joseph’s enslavement,
excellent comparative as difficult
review,as seeit A.H.
was,Johns,
freed A Comparative Gla
him from slavery to other creatures so that he could become God’s slave alone. 49 Furthermore, in
14 Qur’an 38:41–2 and 21:83–4. pp. 51–82).
Rūmı̄’s15scheme, when a`Tigh
See Abubakr person is facedSurabadi,
Neishabur with a negative balā,Qur’an
Tafsir Surabadi,
14 for
ed.example,
Sa`Idi
38:41–2 a serious
Sirjani
and (Surabadi
21:83–4.illness,
1381).his attitude
Also, see Brannon
and response M. Wheeler,
towardsProphets in the Qur'an,
his condition are ofanprimary
Introduction15to the
SeeQur'an
importance. The
Abubakr andperson
Muslim
`Tigh Exegesisgoal
whose
Neishabur (Wheeler
in life2002).
Surabadi, is toSurabadi, ed. Sa`Idi S
Tafsir
satisfy the See (Johns 2003, pp. animal
50–51). self will complain and bring
16
inclinations of his M. Wheeler, Prophets
to question theinjustice
the Qur'an,
of God. an Introduction
On the to the Qur'an and
17 For more on this see Abdol Rahman Ibn Khaldūn, 16 Muqaddimah
See (Johns of Ibn
2003, Khaldūn
pp. (Ibn
50–51).
other hand, a person whose goal is to purify the self (nafs), to go up the spiritual ladder, will find a Khaldūn 1375).
18 For a comprehensive discussion on development 17 of theology in 50 Islam,
seesee Harry Austryn Ibn Wolfson,
Khaldūn, The
deeper meaning in learning the lessons hidden within this For more on
experience. this Abdol Rahman Muqaddimah of I
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976). 18 For a comprehensive discussion on development of theology in
As it was alluded to previously, from the Qur’anic perspective, man’s entire life on earth, in “good”
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
(khayr) and “bad” (sharr), is viewed as a trial and a test; the purpose is to grant him the opportunity to
flourish his inner potential by exercising freedom of choice (ı˛khtiār) and to strive to find ways to return
to his source. As Rūmı̄ explains, mankind has the tendency to forget God in two situations: when he is
granted wealth and during good health.

44 See (Rumi 1926, VI:3172, 83).

45 Ibid., IV:521.
46 Ibid., III:1128–29.
47 Qur’an: 2:30–37.
48 See (Rumi 1926, I:1–2; 3; and 11).
49 See (Renard 1994).
50 See (Rumi 1926, III:682–68). For more on this, see (Zamani 1384).
Religions 2018, 9, 47 10 of 13

Between God and His servant are just two veils and all other veils manifest out of these:
they are health and wealth. The man who is well in body says, ‘Where is God? I do not
know and I do not see.’ As soon as pain afflicts him he begins to say, ‘O God! O God!’,
communing and conversing with God. So you see that health was his veil and God was
hidden under that pain. As much as man has wealth and resources, he procures the means
to gratify his desires and is preoccupied during the night and day with that. The moment
indigence appears, his ego is weakened and he goes round about God.51

Rūmı̄ further invites his reader to ponder about times of afflictions when his prayer in ending
the suffering appears not to have been granted by God, and to recognize and appreciate that this is
more beneficial for him: the longer the duration of the hardship, the longer he remains in this state
of immanence to God.52 Also, as Chittick observes, in Rūmı̄’s view, “if a person tries to flee from
suffering through various stratagems, he is, in fact, fleeing God. The only way to flee from suffering is
to seek refuge from one’s own ego with God.”53 Moreover, another positive impact of adversity and
sorrow is that it transforms and purifies human character.

When someone beats a rug with a stick, he is not beating the rug; his aim is to get rid of
the dust.
Your inward is full of dust from the veil of I-ness and that dust will not leave all at once.54

Finally, before closing the discussion on Rūmı̄’s teachings, it should be pointed out that in his
elucidations on the fruitfulness of hardships in man’s life, Rūmı̄ also provides practical guidelines that
can be put to practice when one is faced with adversities. In an effort to benefit from spiritual growth,
as well as overcome suffering without going into despair, Rūmı̄ explicates two critical aspects of being
a Muslim, namely, the Qur’anic virtues of patience (s.abr) and trust in God (tawakkul). As trusting God
is at the core of al-Ghazālı̄’s teachings and has already been discussed in conjunction with the “best of
all possible world” statement, we will now turn to a brief discussion on the concept of patience from
the Rūmı̄an perspective.
In his explications of man’s condition on this earth, Rūmı̄ frequently sheds light on the virtue of
patience. Nevertheless, it is in the parable of the “chickpea,” one of the most well-known stories of the
Mathnawı̄, where the importance of patience in the face of suffering fully comes to light. The story is
about a fictional dialogue between a housewife and a chickpea that is being cooked as part of a meal.
Similar to man at the time of his encounter with affliction, the chickpea complains to the housewife
for cooking it in boiling water and it tries to escape by constantly jumping out of the pot. Finally, on
realizing that it is not able to relieve itself from its misery, it desperately pleads with the housewife to
take it out of the boiling water. The housewife then comes into a conversation to console the chickpea
and help it learn that patiently enduring suffering is needed for its growth.

At the time of being boiled, the chickpea comes up continually to the top of the pot and
raises a hundred cries,
Saying, ‘Why are you setting the fire on me? Since you bought me, how are you turning
me upside down?’
The housewife goes on hitting it with the ladle. ‘No!’ says she: ‘boil nicely and don’t jump
away from the one who makes the fire.’
I do not boil you because you are hateful to me; nay, ‘tis that you may get taste; this
affliction of yours is not on account of you being despised.’
Continue, O chickpea, to boil in tribulation, that neither existence nor self may remain

51 See (Rumi 2004, p. 240).

52 See (Rumi 1926, VI:4222–26).
53 See (Chittick 1983, p. 238).
54 See (Rumi 1379).
 Religions 2018, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW

when afflicted with illness and adversity.13 Job’s incomparable sincerity and submission to
will in both health and prosperity, as well as during affliction and hardship, are the reason
Religions 2018, 9, 47 Qur’an portrays him as “an excellent servant.”14 11 of 13
According to Muslim exegesis, what distinguishes Job is the fact that despite his enor
fortune, he continually attributed the source of his blessings to God and remained humble
to thee. servant who lacked ownership of his belongings. Similarly, when God tested him with a se
The chickpea said,disease,
‘since it he
is so, O lady, I patience
exercised will gladly boil:recognized
and give me helpthatin he
verity!
was going through a test—a po
In this boiling thou art, as it were, my
experience—and architect:
ascribed smite mefeelings
any negative with theofskimming-spoon,
despair to Satan.15for
thou smites very delightfully.’ 55
The Qur’anic narrative about Job demonstrates that trials and tests—whether in prosperit
health or illness and hardship—are part of the divine plan, so much so that even prophets a
Recapitulating Rūmı̄’s thought as presented in the final verse of the chickpea story, when man
exempt; it is through various experiences in life that man is able to actualize his potentia
journeys in the mystic path and is able to attain the state of inner contentment (rizā) during times of
propagate his mission on this earth. As John notes, “the story of Job in the Qur’an is under
suffering, he has truly submitted to the will of God—has become a Muslim. Consequently, in patiently
primarily as a reward narrative with an emphasis different from that of the story of Job in the Bib
enduring suffering, as well as trusting in God and the overall goodness of His creation, man will be
able to overcome the anguish and move up the spiritual ladder to reach nearness with God. It should
4. Concept of Evil: Theological and Philosophical Development
also be mentioned that in Rūmı̄’s mystical path, love of God plays a significant role in the process of
man’s spiritual growth. As man One of the earliest
is reminded ofproblems
his separation in Muslimfrom his theological
Source (as thought
. l), the love (kalām) of the was how to reconci
Beloved is the means bydivine which he attribute
will be of ableomnipotence
to endure the withmost the notiontimes,
difficult of humanknowing freethat will. The departure point fo
through
God’s love he has the potential discoursetowas reach thetheQur’an
elevatedandstatethe diverse
of rizā—whatinterpretations
the Qur’an of its teachings
refers to as the on the divine name
attributes
(‘nafs mut (asmāʾ al-ḥusnā). The
17 reconciliation of certain 56
divine attributes, predominantly the a
highest state of tranquility . ma inna’)—where man is pleased with his Lord.
of an all-powerful God, with the idea of human free will—the broader frame with which h
7. Conclusions suffering was enclosed—was the first attempt to initiate a theodicy Religions within
2018, 9, xthe FORcontext
PEER REVIEW
of Islam
The notion of evil and human The discourse
sufferingpresents itself at the
is not portrayed in thecore of therevelation
Islamic theological asdialogue
a “problem” amongstto various group
theologians who advocated for the attribute of omnipotence when in afflicted
its absolute with
andillness and ad
uncomprom
be resolved but rather as part of the human experience. Therefore, since the Qur’an does not engage its
will in both health and prosperit
readers in abstract ideasform were of thediscussions
and theological opinion thatabout the only
evil,agent in this world
the formulation of aisclassical
God: Hetheodicy creates His own acts as w
thetheacts of all human Qur’an portrays him as “an excelle
is not presented. Most of Qur’anic versesbeings. As thisand
on adversity view raised serious
suffering suggestconcerns
that human about the creation
beings, of “evil” a
God, the debate developed further to question the validity of According
human free to Muslim
will—the exeges
concept t
including prophets, will be tested by difficult times. The ontological nature of evil is referred to as
deeply rootedbyinMuslimthe Quran as it relateswhile to man’s responsibility fortune, he continually
and accountability, attributed
as well as d
nonexistence and privation of good philosophers, the theologians attribute evil to
judgment and reward and punishment. The dialogue servantbetween
crystallized who lacked the ownership an
Muʿtazilite of
man’s conduct. The Muslim mystical literature as presented in the teachings of Rūmı̄ demonstrates
disease, he exercised patience a
that trials in adversitiesAshʿarite,
are necessary the two main schools
to remove man from of thought,
the state with a divergence
of negligence in order of opinion;
for himboth to made a serious
realize his divine sourceto andwin to the argument
choose according
to set forth to their journey.
on a spiritual understanding of theexperience—and
In this mystic Qur’an. 18
path, exercising
ascribed any neg
The Muʿtazilite The Qur’anic narrative about
patience, trusting God, as well as loving God, school of thought,
are essential also known
in assisting man reach as thetherationalists,
state of tranquility. categorically opposed th
that God creates human acts that include evil and advocated health
for human or illness
free and
will hardship—ar
by emphasizin
Along the path, man, as the fruit of the creation, will be able to actualize the potentialities of his inner
importance exempt; thatit God, is through various wit exp
nature and purify his soul to becomeofa the divine
perfect attribute
mirror of justice God’s
in manifesting (ʿadl). names
They upheld
and attributes. in accordance
propagate
attribute of (ʿāadil), cannot create evil and that evil is the direct result of man’s freedom of choice his mission on this ear
Conflicts of Interest: The authorsview was declare no conflictby
challenged of interest.
raising questions such as: If God primarily
does not as acreate
rewardevil,narrative
who, wi th
responsible for human suffering caused by illnesses and disasters? And if God wills for illnesse
References 4. Concept of Evil: Theological an
disasters in human life, how can He be just? The Muʿtazilites responded by affirming that illn
Religions 2018,Ibn
Averroes, 9, xRushd.
FOR PEER and Thedisasters,
REVIEW
1921. Philosophywhile may appear
and Theology as “evil”,
of Averroes. are inby
Translated actuality
Mohammad “good” One
Jamil that God
5ofof
Rehman. 13 creates
the earliest and that s
problems
Lexington: ForgottenBooks. significant purpose in the creational cosmic plan. This seems to
divine be the first
attribute appearance
of of
omnipotence the tw
ofAbdel
instrumentality of human suffering in the divine plan. The notion
Haleem, Muhammad A. S. 2004. The Qur’an, English Translation. New York: Oxford University of suffering, which
discourse included
Press, was US. the Qur’an and the
undeserved
Al-Ghazālı̄, Absuffering
ū H
. āmid.by children
1992. The and
Ninety-Nine animals,
Beautiful continued
Names of to
God, be discussed
al-Mags . ad al-Asnābyfı̄ the
Sharh . Muʿtazilite
attributes
Ma (asmāʾ
ānı̄ asmā al-ḥusnā).17 The re
theologians.
13 The story of Job in Judeo₋Christian traditions
19 The Muʿtazilite’s firm stress on God’s justice, however, resulted in the group is presented in the Book all-powerfulappears
of an dividing, of Job and in thethe
God, with for
Allāh al-H
. usnā. Translated by David B. Burrell. Cambridge: The Islamic Text Society.
dialogue between Job and his friends who try to explain to him the reason for his sufferings. A compa
which finallyAb
Al-Ghazālı̄, gave
ū H birth to
. āmid. theKitāb
2001. Ashʾarite school
al-Tawhı̄d of thought.Faith in Divine Unity & Trust insuffering
wa’ l-Tawakkul, Divine Providence.was enclosed—was the f
study of the story between Judeo₋Christian tradition and Islam is beyond the scope of this paper.
According
Translatedto byAshʾarite theologians,
David Burrell. Louisville: God’s
Fons law of justice applies only to human beings The
Vitae. whodiscourse
have presents itself a
excellent comparative review, see A.H. Johns, A Comparative Glance at Ayyub in the Qur'an (John
Al-Ghazālı̄,
been obligated Abto
ū H
act
. āmid. 2006.
according Al-Munqidh
to His laws. min al-Dalal,
Applying Deliverance
the idea of from Error.
justice to Translated
God, however, by R. J.
will
theologians Mccarthy.
put a
who advocated for th
pp. 51–82).
Louisville: Fons Vitae.
limit on an all-powerful creator; 14 Qur’antherefore,
38:41–2 God is not bound by His own laws. He is just
and 21:83–4. form in were
whatever of the opinion that the o
HeBowker,
does. John. 1978. The
20 Applied to Religious
15 SeeImagination
suffering, this then
Abubakr and
`Tigh the
means Sense
thatofall
Neishabur God.
harm Oxford:
Surabadi, Oxford
encountered
Tafsir University
Surabadi, byed.man
Sa`Idi Press.
is fair
the actsasof
Sirjani itall
has
(Surabadihuman beings.
1381). Also, Assee th
Br
Chittick,
been willedWilliam
by God 1983.isThe
C. who justM.Sufi
in Path
all
Wheeler,HisofProphets
Love: The
creation. Spiritual
in The
the Teachings
Ashʾarite
Qur'an, of Rumi.
thinkers
an Introduction to Albany:
were the in sharp
Qur'an State
God,
and University
conflict
the debate
Muslim with of developed
Exegesis furthe
(Wheeler 2002).
New York Press.
the Muʿtazilites who asserted 16 See
that(Johns
not 2003,
only pp. 50–51).
is God subjected to the same rules of justice deeply but rooted
that, inin the Quran as it re
Ghaly, Mohammed. 2010. Islam
17 and Disability:
fact, the obligation to act in just means is eternal Abdol
For more on thisPerspectives
see in Theology
Rahman
and uncompromising and
Ibn Jurisprudence.
Khaldūn,
for God. ItLondon:
Muqaddimah
is worth Routledge.
of Ibn
judgment Khaldūn
noting that
and (Ibn Khaldūn
reward and1375).
punish
Griffel, Frank. 2009. Al-Ghazālı̄’s
18 ForPhilosophical
a Theology.
comprehensive New
discussion
a prominent Muslim philosopher, Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 1198), challenged these viewsYork: on Oxford University
development of Press.
theology in Islam,
and asserted see Harry Austryn Wolfso
Ashʿarite, the two main schools of
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
that the element of justice may not be employed for God and man in the same manner:to man,winby the virtue
argument according to
of being just, advances to a higher level of goodness; God, however, is just due to His perfection—a The Muʿtazilite school of thou
55 See (Rumi 1926, III:4160–64; 78; 97–98).
trait that requires Him to be just. 21
56 For more on the notion of love in Rumi’s mysticism, see (Zarrinkub 1388). Also, see (Schimmel 1993).
that God creates human acts that i
In the final analysis, mainstream Sunnite theologians supported the Ashʾarite school of thought
importance of the divine attribute
and emphasized that God creates all acts. In order to reconcile God’s omnipotence with human
attribute of (ʿāadil), cannot create e
responsibility, the doctrine of acquisition (kasb) was adopted: God creates all acts; view humans wasfreely challenged by raising
acquire certain acts and, therefore, are accountable for the acquisition of good and evil acts.
responsible for
22 human suffering ca

Conversely, Muslim thinkers belonging to the Shiʾite branch of Islam—through the influence
disasters of
in human life, how can H
rational element in the Muʿtazilite theology—remained in disagreement with the and Ashʿarites.
disasters, Anwhile may appear a
EW 5 of 13
Religions 2018, 9, 47 12 of 13

n suffering in the divine plan. The notion of suffering, which included

hildren and animals, continued
Heemskerk, to beT.discussed
Margaretha 2000. Suffering by inthe
TheMuʿtazilite
Mu tazilite Theology: ‘Abd al-Jabbar’s Teachings on Pain and Divine
e’s firm stress on God’sJustice.
justice, however,
London: Brill.resulted in the group dividing,
he Ashʾarite schoolHick,
of thought.
John. 2004. An Interpretation of Religion. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
heologians, God’sHick,
law of justice
John. 2007.applies
Evil andonly
the Godto human beings
of Love. New who
York: have Macmillan.
Palgrave
Huxley, Aldous.
ng to His laws. Applying the idea2009. The Perennial
of justice to God, Philosophy.
however, NewwillYork:
put HarperCollins.
a
tor; therefore, GodIbnis Khald ūn, Abdol
not bound by HisRahman.
own laws. Muqaddimah
1375. He is just inofwhatever
Ibn Khaldūn. Translated by Mohammad P. Ghonabadi. 2 vols.
ring, this then means thatTehran: Sherkat
all harm Elmi Farhangi.
encountered by man is fair as it has
Inati,The
ust in all His creation. Shams The Problem
C. 2000.thinkers
Ashʾarite wereof Evil: Ibn Sina’s
in sharp Theodicy.
conflict withAlbany: State University of New York Press.
d that not only is God subjected to the same rules of justice but that,Qur’an.
Izutsu, Toshibiko. 2002. Ethico—Religious Concepts in the in Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Johns, Anthony H. 2003. ‘Job’. In Encyclopedia
ust means is eternal and uncompromising for God. It is worth noting that of the Qur’an. Edited by Jane Dammen McAuliffe. 3 vols. Washington:
Brill, pp. 50–51.
pher, Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 1198), challenged these views and asserted
Johns, A. H. 2008. ‘A Comparative Glance at Ayyub in the Qur’an’. In Deconstructing Theodicy. Edited by
ay not be employed for God and man in the same manner: man, by virtue
David Burrell. Michigan: Brazos Press, Baker Publishing.
higher level of goodness; God, however, is just due to His perfection—a
Kermani, Navid. 2011. The Terror of God (Original Work in German). Translated by Wieland Hoban. Cambridge:
just.21
Polity Press.
instream Sunnite theologians supported the Ashʾarite school of thought
Mutahhari, Morteza. 1385. ‘Adl-e elahi. Tehran: Sadra.
creates all acts. In order to reconcile God’s omnipotence with human
Marmura, Michael E. 2005. ‘Al-Ghazālı̄’. In The Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy. Edited by Peter Adamson
of acquisition (kasb) was adopted: God creates all acts; humans freely
and Richard Taylor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
herefore, are accountable
Nasr, Seyyed for the acquisition
Hossein. of good
2006. Islamic and evil
Philosophy fromacts. 22
Its Origin to the Present. Albany: State University of
rs belonging to the Shiʾite New Yorkbranch of Islam—through the influence of
Press.
ʿtazilite theology—remained
Seyyed Hossein in Nasr,
disagreement withSpirituality—Foundations.
ed. 1987. Islamic the Ashʿarites. An 2 vols; World Spirituality, 1.; New York: Crossroad.
erved from the writings of an eminent Persian philosopher,
Ormsby, Eric L. 1984. Theodicy in Islamic Thought: Dispute Morteza over Al-Ghazali’s “Best of All Possible Worlds”. Princeton:
as of the opinion that the Ashʾarite outlook,
Princeton University Press. while aimed at vindicating
in exonerating humanOzkan, oppressors of any 2015.
Tunbar Yesilhark. wrongdoing.
A Muslim23Response to Evil. Said Nursi on Theodicy. London: Ashgate.
sophical perspective, the notion
Peterson, Michael ofL.good
2011.and evil is enclosed
The Problem within
of Evil, Selected the Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.
Readings.
ding of existence Plantinga,
(wujūd) and nonexistence
Alvin. (ʿadam).and
1974. God, Freedom, Briefly put, good is
Evil. Cambridge: WM. B. Berdmans.
y that branches from Rahman,existence; evil, The
Fazlur. 1975. on Philosophy
the otherof hand, stemsAlbany:
Mulla Sadra. from State University of NY Press.
is viewed as a Renard,
negativeJohn. entity.
1994.24 An example
All the of the Rumi
King’s Falcons, ontological
on Prophets and Revelation. Albany: State University of
New York Press.
titutes good and evil may be seen from the works of two prominent
Rizvi,the
gnificantly influenced Sajjad. 2009.of
shaping ‘Mulla
MuslimSadra’, Stanford Encyclopedia
philosophical thought: Ibn of Philosophy. Available online: http://plato.stanford.
. 1037), and Sadr al-Din edu/entries/mulla-sadra/
Shirāzī, who was mostly (accessed on 13 January
recognized as Mullā 2013).
Robinson, Neal. 2003. Discovering the Qur’an: A Contemporary Approach to a Veiled Text. Washington: Georgetown
dicy by distinguishing University
the various Press.
forms of evil such as “essential” evil
n-being or privation, and “accidental” Trial
Rouzati, Nasrin. 2015. evil and Tribulation
(sharr in the
bil-ʿaraḍ), Qur’an:
which canAbe
Mystical Theodicy. Berlin, Germany: Gerlach.
Rumi, Jalal al-Din. 1379. Diwan Shams Tabrizi. Tehran: Peyman.
his analysis, Ibn Sīnā concluded that it is the non-essential/accidental evil
Rumi, Jalal al-Din. 1926. The Mathnawi of Jalaluddin Rumi. Translated by Reynold A. Nicholson. Cambridge:
human suffering and that the total amount of good in the universe
E.J.W. Gibb Memorial.
evil. 25 Mullā Sadrā, on the other hand, extensively developed this
Rumi, Jalal al-Din. 2004. Fihi ma fihi (Discourses of Rumi). Translated by Arthur John Arberry. London and
n interest in combining theology with mystical insight. This approach,
New York: Routledge.
ansformed the theory of existence as it pertains to Islamic metaphysics. 26
Schimmel, Annemarie. 1975. Mystical Dimentions of Islam. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.
Schimmel, Annemarie. 1993. The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalalodin Rumi. Albany: State University of
New York Press.
e Muʿtazilite’s view on pain and suffering
Shafiei Kadkani, see (Heemskerk
Muhammad 2000).
Reza. 1388. For an extensive
Mowlana Rumi’s Ghazaliat Shams Tabrizi. Tehran: Sokhan.
bility in Islam, see Mohammed
Surabadi, Abubakr ‘tigh Neishabur. 1381. TafsirinSurabadi.
Ghaly, Islam and Disability: Perspectives Theology Edited by Sa‘idi Sirjani. 3 vols; Tehran: Farhamg
10).
Nashr-Nu.
of Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
Soroush, Abdolkarim. 1379. Ghomar-E ‘Asheghaneh: Rumi and Shams. Tehran: Serat.
y, see Ibn Rushd (Averroes), The Philosophy and Theology of Averroes, (Averroes
Tabarsi, Abu ‘Ali al-Fadl ibn al-Hassan. 1350. Majma’ al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an. Translated by Ahmad Beheshti.
Tehran: Farahani.
isition, see Wolfson, The Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
–51). Watt, W. Mongomery. 2007. The Faith and Practice of al-Ghazali. Oxford: Oneworld.
Wheeler, Brannon
pects of good and evil, see Seyyed HosseinM.Nasr, Prophets
2002.Islamic in the
Philosophy Qur’an,
from An Introduction to the Qur’an and Muslim Exegesis.
Its Origin
. 65–68). New York: Continuum.
Wolfson,
dicy, see Shams C. Inati, The Harry
ProblemAustryn. 1976.
of Evil: Ibn TheTheodicy
Sina's Philosopy(Inati
of Kalam.
2000).Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
ra', Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Rizvi 2009).
Religions 2018, 9, 47 13 of 13

Zamani, Karim. 1384. Minagar-E Eshgh: A Thematical Commentary of the Mathnawi Ma‘nawi. Tehran: Nashr-e Nay.
Zarrinkub, Abd al-Husayn. 1388. Sirr Nay: A Critical Analysis and Commentary of Masnavi. Tehran: Ettellat.
Zarrinkub, Abdolhusin. 1387. Farar az Madrasah—Life and Teachings of al-Ghazali. Tehran: Amir Kabir.

© 2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).