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
2
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).
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
4
5
6
7
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).
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).
For example, see Qur’an, 3:180; 8:22; 24:11; 17:11. For an excellent exegesis on the Qur’an, see (Tabarsi 1350).
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).
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
9
10
11
12
13
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.
Qur’an, 2:155. Also see 67:2 and 89:16.
Qur’an, 3:26, see (Abdel Haleem 2004).
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).
Qur’an, 33:40.
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
Religions 2018, 9, 47
4 of 13
4 of 13
when afflicted with illness and adversity.13 Job’s incomparable sincerity and submission to God’s
will
in and
bothprosperity,
health andasprosperity,
as well
as during
affliction are
andthe
hardship,
are Qur’an
the reasons
the
health
well as during
affliction
and hardship,
reasons the
portrays
14
14
Qur’an
portrays
him servant.”
as “an excellent servant.”
him as “an
excellent
According
to
Muslim
exegesis,
what
distinguishes
isfact
thethat
factdespite
that despite
his enormous
According to Muslim exegesis,
what
distinguishes
Job Job
is the
his enormous
fortune,
fortune,
he
continually
attributed
the
source
of
his
blessings
to
God
and
remained
a
he continually attributed the source of his blessings to God and remained humble as ahumble
servant as
who
servant
who lacked
ownership
of his
belongings.
Similarly,
God
tested disease,
him with
serious
lacked ownership
of his
belongings.
Similarly,
when God
tested when
him with
a serious
heaexercised
disease,
he
exercised
patience
and
recognized
that
he
was
going
through
a
test—a
positive
patience and recognized that he was going through a test—a positive experience—and ascribed any
15
experience—and
any
negative feelings ascribed
of despair
to negative
Satan.15 feelings of despair to Satan.
The
The Qur’anic
Qur’anicnarrative
narrativeabout
aboutJob
Jobdemonstrates
demonstratesthat
thattrials
trialsand
andtests—whether
tests—whetherin
in prosperity
prosperity and
and
health
or
illness
and
hardship—are
part
of
the
divine
plan,
so
much
so
that
even
prophets
health or illness and hardship—are part of the divine plan, so much so that even prophets are
are not
not
exempt;
it isisthrough
throughvarious
various
experiences
in that
life man
that isman
to actualize
his potential
and
exempt; it
experiences
in life
ableisto able
actualize
his potential
and propagate
propagate
on As
thisJohn
earth.
As “the
John story
notes,of“the
story
of Job inis the
Qur’an isprimarily
understood
his missionhis
onmission
this earth.
notes,
Job in
the Qur’an
understood
as a
16
primarily
as
a
reward
narrative
with
an
emphasis
different
from
that
of
the
story
of
Job
in
the
Bible.” 16
reward narrative with an emphasis different from that of the story of Job in the Bible.”
4.
4. Concept
Conceptof
ofEvil:
Evil:Theological
Theologicaland
andPhilosophical
PhilosophicalDevelopment
Development
One
One of
of the
the 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 notion
notion 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 names
names and
and
17
17
attributes
al-ḥusnā).
The
reconciliation
of
certain
divine
attributes,
predominantly
the
aspect
attributes (asmāʾ
(asmā al-h
usnā).
The
reconciliation
of
certain
divine
attributes,
predominantly
the
aspect
of
.
of
all-powerful
God,
the idea
of human
free will—the
frame
withhuman
whichsuffering
human
anan
all-powerful
God,
withwith
the idea
of human
free will—the
broaderbroader
frame with
which
suffering
was enclosed—was
the firsttoattempt
initiate a within
theodicy
the
was enclosed—was
the first attempt
initiateto
a theodicy
thewithin
context
ofcontext
Islam. of Islam.
The
thethe
core
of the
theological
dialogue
amongst
various
groups.
The
Thediscourse
discoursepresents
presentsitself
itselfatat
core
of the
theological
dialogue
amongst
various
groups.
theologians
whowho
advocated
for for
the the
attribute
of of
omnipotence
ininitsitsabsolute
The theologians
advocated
attribute
omnipotence
absoluteand
anduncompromising
uncompromising
form
form were
were of
of the
the opinion
opinion that
that the
the only
only agent
agent in
in this
this world
world is
is God:
God: He
Hecreates
createsHis
His own
own acts
acts as
aswell
well as
as
the
of
human
beings.
the acts
acts
of all
all
human
beings. As
Asthis
thisview
viewraised
raisedserious
seriousconcerns
concernsabout
aboutthe
thecreation
creationof
of“evil”
actsby
by
Religions 2018,
9,
x FOR
PEER
REVIEW
5“evil”
of 13 acts
God,
developed
God, the
the
debate
developed further
further to
to question
question the
the validity
validity of
of human
human free
free will—the
will—the concept
concept that
that is
is
5 ofdebate
13
of instrumentality
of human
suffering
inrelates
the divine
plan.responsibility
The notion of
suffering,
which included
deeply
in
as
to
and
accountability,
as
deeply rooted
rooted
in the
the Quran
Quran
as itit
relates
to man’s
man’s
responsibility
and
accountability,
as well
well as
as divine
divine
undeserved
suffering
by
children
and animals,
continued
be discussed
by the
Muʿtazilite
of suffering,
which
included
judgment
and
and
The
dialogue
crystallized
between
judgment
and reward
and punishment.
punishment.
The
dialogueto
crystallized
between
the Muʿtazilite
Mu tazilite and
and the
the
5reward
of 13
19 The the
iscussed theologians.
by the Ashʿarite,
Muʿtazilite
two
main
schools
of
thought,
with
a
divergence
of
opinion;
both
made
a
serious
effort
Muʿtazilite’s
firm
stress
on
God’s
justice,
however,
resulted
in
the
group
dividing,
Ash arite,
schools of thought, with a divergence of opinion; both made a serious effort to
18 18
which
finally
gave
birth
to according
theaccording
Ashʾarite
school
of thought. 5 of
esulted
the
group
dividing,
eVIEW
notioninof
suffering,
which
included
to
win
the
argument
their
understanding
of
Qur’an.
win
the
argument
to to
their
understanding
thethe
Qur’an.
of 13
to be discussed
by The
the
Muʿtazilite
school
also
known
the
categorically
opposed
According
toMuʿtazilite
Ashʾarite
God’s law
justiceas
applies
only to human
beings who
have the
The
Mu
tazilite
school of
of thought,
thought,
alsoof
known
as
therationalists,
rationalists,
categorically
opposed
theidea
idea
5 of 13theologians,
been
to
act
according
to
His
laws.
Applying
the
idea
of
justice
to
God,
however,
will
put
a
ly
tosuffering
human
beings
who
have
wever,
resulted
inthat
the
group
dividing,
an
inobligated
the
divine
plan.
The
notion
of
suffering,
which
included
God
creates
human
acts
that
include
evil
and
advocated
for
human
free
will
by
emphasizing
the
that God creates human acts that include evil and advocated for human free will by emphasizing
echildren
to
God, of
however,
will
put
a included
and
animals,
continued
to be
discussed
importance
of the
divine
attribute
ofbyjustice
(ʿadl).
They
upheld
that
God,
ininaccordance
limit
on
an
all-powerful
creator;
therefore,
God
not Muʿtazilite
bound
byThey
His
own
laws.
He
is just
in whateverwith
notion
suffering,
which
the
importance
of
the
divine
attribute
ofisthe
justice
( adl).
upheld
that
God,
accordance
with His
His
20
He
does.
Applied
to
suffering,
this
then
means
that
all
harm
encountered
by
man
is
fair
as
it
has
to
be
discussed
by
the
Muʿtazilite
nxlite’s
laws.
He
is
just
in
whatever
pplies
only
to
human
beings
who
have
firm
stress
on
God’s
justice,
however,
resulted
in
the
group
dividing,
attribute
of
(ʿāadil),
cannot
create
evil
and
that
evil
is
the
direct
result
of
man’s
freedom
of
choice.
This
result
of man’s freedom of choice.
FOR PEER REVIEW attribute of ( āadil), cannot create evil and that evil is the direct
5 of
13
been
willed
by
who
is just
in all
His
creation.
Thesuch
Ashʾarite
were
in
sharp
conflict
with then,
tered
byresulted
man
is
fair
itGod
haswill
of justice
to God,
however,
put
a by
the
Ashʾarite
school
of
thought.
view
was
challenged
raising
questions
as: as:
Ifthinkers
God
does
not
create
evil,
wever,
in
theas
group
dividing,
This
view
was
challenged
by
raising
questions
such
If God
does
not
create
evil,who,
who,
then, is
is
were
sharp
conflict
responsible
for
human
suffering
caused
by
illnesses
and
disasters?
AndAnd
if God
wills
for
illnesses
and
the
Muʿtazilites
asserted
that
not
is God
subjected
toand
the
same
rules
of
justice
but
that,
inillnesses
yrs
His
own
laws.
He
islaw
justwith
whatever
eality
theologians,
God’s
ofwho
applies
only
toonly
human
beings
who have
of in
human
suffering
injustice
the
divine
plan.
The
notion
ofby
suffering,
which
included
responsible
for
human
suffering
caused
illnesses
disasters?
if God
wills
for
the
obligation
to
in
just
means
is
eternal
and
God. Itresponded
isby
worth
noting
thatillnesses
me
rules
offact,
justice
but
that,
in
m
encountered
bydisasters
man
is fair
asact
ithave
has
ding
toonly
His
laws.
Applying
the
idea
of
justice
God,
however,
will
putThe
a Muʿtazilite
in
human
life,
how
can
Hebe
bediscussed
just?
Muʿtazilites
responded
affirming
that
suffering
by
children
and
animals,
continued
to
by
the
pplies
to
human
beings
who
and
disasters
in
human
life,to
how
can
He uncompromising
beThe
just?
Mufor
tazilites
by affirming
that
It aisto
worth
noting
that
teThe
thinkers
were
in
sharp
conflict
with
and
may
appear
“evil”,
are
in
“good”
that
God
creates
and
thatand
serve
a
prominent
Muslim
Ibnlaws.
Rushd
(Averroes,
d. actuality
1198),
challenged
these
views
and
aor
ofGod.
justice
God,
however,
will
put
aHis
eator;
therefore,
God
isdisasters,
not
bound
by PEER
own
isresulted
just
in
whatever
Muʿtazilite’s
firm
stress
on
God’s
justice,
however,
in
the
group
dividing,
illnesses
and
disasters,
while
mayasHe
appear
as
“evil”,
are
in
actuality
“good”
that
Godasserted
creates
Religions
2018,
9,philosopher,
xwhile
FOR
REVIEW
5 that
of 13
that
theHe
element
of
justice
not creational
be in
employed
forisGod
and
in the
manner:
man,first
by virtue
nged
views
and
ogave
thethese
same
rules
of
justice
but
that,
in
fering,
this
then
means
that
all
harm
encountered
bycreational
man
fair
asThis
itman
has
significant
purpose
in
the
cosmic
plan.
seems
tosame
be
the
first
appearance
of the theory
birth
to
the
Ashʾarite
school
ofmay
thought.
y
His
own
laws.
isasserted
just
in
whatever
serve
a significant
purpose
the
cosmic
plan.
This
seems
to be
the
appearance
of
ofHis
being
just,
advances
to
a of
higher
level
goodness;
God,
however,
is just
due
to notion
His perfection—a
same
man,
by
virtue
mising
for
God.
Itthe
is
worth
noting
that
just
inmanner:
all
creation.
The
Ashʾarite
thinkers
were
in only
sharp
conflict
with
m
encountered
by
man
is
fair
itlaw
has
ng
to Ashʾarite
theologians,
God’s
of
justice
applies
to
human
beings
who
have
of
instrumentality
human
suffering
in
the
divine
plan.
The
notion
of
suffering,
which included
theory
ofasinstrumentality
ofof
human
suffering
in
the
divine
plan.
The
of suffering,
which
21
just
dueaccording
to
His
perfection—a
trait
that
requires
Him
towith
be the
just.
te
thinkers
were
in
sharp
conflict
),to
challenged
these
views
and
asserted
that
not
only
is
God
subjected
to
same
rules
ofand
justice
butanimals,
that,
in continued
dted
act
to
His laws.
Applying
the
idea
of children
justice
to
God,
however,
willto
putbe
a be
undeserved
suffering
by
children
animals,
continued
discussed
included
undeserved
suffering
by
and
to
discussedbybythe
the Muʿtazilite
Mu tazilite
13
The
story
of
Job
in
Judeo₋Christian
isGod’s
presented
Book
of resulted
Job and
appears
in the dividing,
form of a
19
In
the
final
analysis,
Sunnite
theologians
supported
the
Ashʾarite
school
of thought
an
inmeans
the
same
manner:
man,
by
virtue
is
eternal
and
uncompromising
for God.
It traditions
is
worth
ojust
the
same
rules
of
justice
but
that,
in
-powerful
creator;
therefore,
God
ismainstream
not
bound
by
His
own
laws.
He
isthat
just in
in the
whatever
theologians.
The
Muʿtazilite’s
firm
stress
onnoting
justice,
however,
in the
group
dialogue between Job and his friends who try to explain to him the reason for his sufferings. A comparative
wever,
is
just
due
His
perfection—a
e Ashʾarite
school
ofthis
thought
and
emphasized
that
God
creates
all acts.
Inviews
order
to
reconcile
God’s
with human
omising
for
God.
Itto
is
worth
noting
that
sopher,
Ibn
Rushd
(Averroes,
d.
1198),
challenged
these
and
pplied
to
suffering,
then
means
that
all
encountered
byasserted
man
is fair
as it omnipotence
has
which
finally
gave
birth
to harm
the
Ashʾarite
school
of
thought.
study of the story between Judeo₋Christian tradition and Islam is beyond the scope of this paper. For an
the
doctrine
of
acquisition
(kasb)
was
adopted:
God
creates
all
acts;
humans
freely
’s God
omnipotence
with
human
may
notwho
beresponsibility,
employed
for
God
and
man
in
the
same
manner:
man,
by
virtue
y
is just
inviews
all
His
creation.
The
Ashʾarite
thinkers
were
in
sharp
conflict
with
14
8),
challenged
these
and
asserted
According
to
Ashʾarite
theologians,
God’s
law
of
justice
applies
only
to
human
beings
who have
Qur’an
38:41–2
and 21:83–4.
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
M. Wheeler,
eates
all
acts;
humans
freely
aported
higher
level
of
goodness;
God,
however,
is
just
due
to
His
perfection—a
the
Ashʾarite
school
of
thought
acquire
certain
acts
and,
therefore,
are
accountable
for
the
acquisition
of
good
and
evil
acts.
an
in the
same
manner:
man,
by
virtue
es
who
asserted
that
not
only
is
God
subjected
to
the
same
rules
of
justice
but
that,
in
been
obligated
to
act
according
to
His
laws.
Applying
the
idea
of
justice
to
God,
however,
will
put a
pp. 51–82).
Prophets in
the Qur'an, an Introduction to the Qur’an and Muslim Exegesis (Wheeler 2002).
22
21
Conversely,
Muslim
thinkers
belonging
to theforShiʾite
branch
of noting
Islam—through
theHe
influence
wever,
just
due
to
His
perfection—a
of
good
and
evil
acts.
cile
God’s
omnipotence
human
eonjust.
ation
tois
act
in
just 14means
iswith
eternal
and
uncompromising
God.
isnot
worth
thatown laws.
limit
on
an
all-powerful
creator; therefore,
God It
is
bound
by His
is just inofwhatever
16
Qur’an
38:41–2
and
21:83–4.
See
(Johns
2003, pp.
50–51).
20 Applied
17
15
rational
element
in
Muʿtazilite
theology—remained
in
disagreement
with
the
Ashʿarites.
An
m—through
the
of
: God creates
allinfluence
acts;
humans
freely
mainstream
Sunnite
theologians
supported
the
Ashʾarite
school
of thought
Muslim
philosopher,
Ibn
Rushd
(Averroes,
d.
1198),
challenged
these
views
and
asserted
He
does.
to suffering,
this
then
that
harm
by
man
is fair
it has
See
Abubakr
`Tigh
Neishabur
Surabadi,
Tafsir
Surabadi,
ed.
Sa`Idi
Sirjani
(Surabadi
1381).
Also,
see as
Brannon
For
more
onthe
this
see Abdol
Rahman
Ibn
Khald
ūn, means
Muqaddimah
ofall
Ibn
Khald
ūnencountered
(Ibn
Khald
ūn 1375).
18 For a comprehensive
22God
discussion
on in
development
of
theology
inQur'an
Islam,
see
Harry
Austryn
Wolfson,
The
Philosopy
of Kalam
ment
the
An
example
of school
this
may
be
observed
the
writings
of human
anThe
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
ported
the
Ashʾarite
of by
thought
acquisition
ofAshʿarites.
good
and
evil
acts.
creates
all
acts.
In
order
to
reconcile
God’s
omnipotence
with
M.
Wheeler,
Prophets
in and
the
Qur'an,
anthe
Introduction
to
theeminent
and
Muslim
Exegesis
(Wheeler
2002).
nt
ofwith
justice
may
not
be
employed
for
man
in
same
manner:
man,
by
virtue
been
willed
God
who
is from
just
all
His
creation.
Ashʾarite
thinkers
were
in sharp
conflict
with
(Wolfson 1976).
16
See
(Johns
2003,
pp.
50–51).
Muṭahharī
1979),
who
was
of creates
thehowever,
opinion
that
thedue
outlook,
while
aimed
ersian
philosopher,
Morteza
headvances
Islam—through
the
influence
ofGod
of acquisition
(kasb)
was
allnot
acts;
humans
toomnipotence
a higher
level
ofadopted:
goodness;
God,
isonly
just
tofreely
His
perfection—a
cile
God’s
with
human
the(d.
Muʿtazilites
who
asserted
that
isAshʾarite
God
subjected
to the
same
rulesatofvindicating
justice but that, in
17 21 For more on this see Abdol Rahman Ibn Khaldūn, Muqaddimah
Ibn Khaldūn
(Ibn
1375).
23 Khaldūn
22 anyof
k,
while
aimed
at
vindicating
isagreement
the
Ashʿarites.
An
God
from
injustice,
resulted
exonerating
human
oppressors
of
wrongdoing.
d:
God
creates
all
acts;
humans
freely
therefore,
accountable
for
the
acquisition
good
eviland
acts.
ires
Him
toare
bewith
just.
fact,
the
obligation
toinact
in justof
means
is and
eternal
uncompromising
for God.
It is worth
noting that
18
For
a
comprehensive
discussion
on
development
of
theology
in
Islam,
see
Harry
Austryn
Wolfson,
The
23
22
theShiʾite
Muslim
philosophical
perspective,
theinfluence
notionschool
ofofgood
evil is enclosed
the asserted
wrongdoing.
minent
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
ers
belonging
to
branch
ofphilosopher,
Islam—through
the
al
analysis,
mainstream
Sunnite
theologians
supported
the
Ashʾarite
of and
thought
acquisition
ofFrom
good
and
evil
acts.
athe
prominent
Muslim
Ibn Rushd
(Averroes,
d. 1198),
challenged
these within
views and
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
nd
evil
is God
enclosed
within
the
outlook,
while
aimed
atacts.
vindicating
theology—remained
in order
disagreement
with
the
Ashʿarites.
An and
wider
ontological
understanding
existence
(wujūd)
and
(ʿadam).
Briefly
put, good
heuʿtazilite
of
Islam—through
the
influence
of
zed
that
creates
all
In
to of
reconcile
God’s
omnipotence
withman
human
that
the
element
of
justice
may
not
be
employed
fornonexistence
God
in the same
manner:
man,isby virtue
23agood
defined
as
positive
entity
from
on
the
other
hand,
stems
from
disagreement
with
the
Ashʿarites.
An
ebserved
(ʿadam).
Briefly
is
any
wrongdoing.
from
the
writings
of(kasb)
an
eminent
philosopher,
,of
the
doctrine
of put,
acquisition
wasthat
adopted:
God
creates
allMorteza
acts; evil,
humans
freely
of
being
just,
advances
to Persian
abranches
higher
level
of existence;
goodness;
God,
however,
is just
due to
His perfection—a
24
22
21
nonexistence
and
asMorteza
such
is to
viewed
as aimed
a negative
entity.
An acts.
example of the ontological
the
other
hand,
stems
from
fminent
and
evil
is
enclosed
within
the
was
of the
opinion
thatthat
the
Ashʾarite
outlook,
while
atof
vindicating
Persian
philosopher,
ngood
acts
and,
therefore,
are
accountable
for
acquisition
good
and evil
trait
requires
Him
bethe
just.
23
example
of
the human
ontological
interpretation
what
constitutes
good of
andIslam—through
evil
maytheologians
be seen
the works
of two prominent
te
outlook,
while
aimed
at
vindicating
existence
(ʿadam).
Briefly
put,
good
is any branch
d
in
exonerating
oppressors
of
wrongdoing.
Muslim
thinkers
belonging
to
the
Shiʾite
the from
influence
of the Ashʾarite
Inof
the
final
analysis,
mainstream
Sunnite
supported
school of thought
23 emphasized
Muslim
who
significantly
influenced
the
shaping
of reconcile
Muslim philosophical
thought:with
Ibn human
evil,
the
other
hand,
from
he
works
of
twophilosophers
prominent
losophical
perspective,
thestems
notion
ofthat
good
and
evil
is all
enclosed
within
ent
inonthe
Muʿtazilite
theology—remained
increates
disagreement
with
thethe
Ashʿarites.
An
of any
wrongdoing.
and
God
acts.
In
order
to
God’s omnipotence
24
m
philosophical
Ibn
Anof
example
of
the
ontological
Sīnā,
as Avicenna
(d.
1037),
and
SadrBriefly
al-Din
Shirāzī,
mostly
recognized
as humans
Mullā freely
f. good
and
evilknown
isthought:
enclosed
within
anding
existence
(wujūd)
and
nonexistence
put,
good
is was
his
may
be
observed
from
the
writings
of an(ʿadam).
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
responsibility,
thethe
doctrine
ofeminent
acquisition
(kasb)
was who
adopted:
God creates
all acts;
exempt; it ispropagate
through various
experiences
in life
that
man
is patience
able
actualize
and
his mission
on this
earth.
As
John
notes,
“thetostory
Jobhis
in potential
the Qur’an
iswas
understoo
disease,
he
exercised
andofrecognized
that he
going
15
13
primarily
narrative
with
an emphasis
different
from
that
ofand
theisstory
of Job in
the
Bible.”
propagate his
missionasona reward
this earth.
Asexperience—and
John
notes,
“the
story
ofany
Jobwith
in the
Qur’an
understood
ascribed
negative
feelings
of
despair
to
Satan.
when
afflicted
illness
adversity.
Job’s
incom
16
primarily as a reward narrative with an emphasis
different
thathealth
of
the story
of Job in theas
Bible.”
The Qur’anic
narrative
about
Job demonstrates
that
trials
and tests
will from
in both
and
prosperity,
well
as during
a
14 much s
4.Religions
Concept
of
Evil:
Theological
and
Philosophical
Development
health
or
illness
and
hardship—are
part
of
the
divine
plan,
so
Qur’an
portrays
him
as
“an
excellent
servant.”
4o
5 of 2018,
13 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Religions4.
2018,
9, 47 of Evil: Theological and Philosophical
5 of that
13
Concept
Development
exempt;
it
is
through
various
experiences
in
life
man
is
able
to
According
to
Muslim
exegesis,
what
distinguishes
One of the earliest problems in Muslim theological thought (kalām) was how to reconcile th
13 Job’she
propagate
his
mission
on
this
earth.
As
John
notes,
“the
story
of
Job
fortune,
continually
attributed
the
source
of
his
ble
when
afflicted
with
illness
and
adversity.
incomparable
sincerity
and
submission
to
Go
plan. The notion of suffering,
which
included
attribute
of omnipotence
the notion
of human
departurethe
point for thi
One
of divine
the
earliest
problems
in Muslim with
theological
thought
(kalām)free
waswill.
howThe
to reconcile
primarily
as
a
reward
narrative
with
an
emphasis
different
from
that
of
servant
who
lacked
ownership
of
his
belongings.
Simil
will
in
both
health
and
prosperity,
as
well
as
during
affliction
and
hardship,
are
the
reasons
19
Religions
2018,
9,
x
FOR
PEER
REVIEW
13
ontinued to be discussed
by attribute
the
divine
of omnipotence
with
notion
of human
free
will. The
departure
point
this4 of
discourse
wasfirm
thestress
Qur’an
and
thejustice,
diverse
interpretations
of
teachings
on thefor
divine
names
ant
theologians.
The Muʿtazilite
Mu tazilite’s
onthe
God’s
however,
resulted
inits
the
group dividing,
14 he exercised patience and recognized that h
disease,
Qur’an
portrays
him
as
“an
excellent
servant.”
17
justice, however, resulted
in thegave
group
dividing,
attributes
al-ḥusnā).
The
reconciliationof
of its
certain
divineonattributes,
predominantly
was
thetoQur’an
and
theschool
diverse
teachings
the divine
names and the aspec
which discourse
finally
birth
the(asmāʾ
Ash
arite
of interpretations
thought.
13 Job’s
4. exegesis,
Concept
of
Evil:
Theological
andisPhilosophical
Development
experience—and
ascribed
any
negative
feelings
despa
According
toGod,
Muslim
what
distinguishes
Job
the
fact
thatthe
despite
hisofenormo
when(asmāʾ
afflicted
with illness
and
adversity.
incomparable
sincerity
and
submission
to which
God’s
17 The
ought.
attributes
al-ḥusnā).
reconciliation
of
certain
divine
attributes,
predominantly
aspect
of
an
all-powerful
with
the
idea
of
human
free
will—the
broader
frame
huma
According to Ash arite theologians, God’s law of justice applies only to human beings who havewith
The
Qur’anic
narrative
about
Job
demonstrates
thata
will
in
both
health
and
prosperity,
as
well
as
during
affliction
and
hardship,
are
the
reasons
the
fortune,
he
continually
attributed
the
source
of
his
blessings
to
God
and
remained
humble
f justice applies only
to obligated
human
beings
who
have
suffering
waswith
first
attempt
to
initiate
a theodicy
within
the
context
of Islam.(kalā
of an all-powerful
God,
ideaApplying
of the
human
free
broader
frame
with
which
One
of
thewill—the
earliest
problems
in Muslim
theological
thought
been
to act
according
toenclosed—was
Histhe
laws.
the
idea
of
justice
to God,
however,
will
put
ahuman
14 belongings.
health
or
illness
and
hardship—are
part
of
the
divine
p
servant
who
lacked
ownership
of
his
Similarly,
when
God
tested
him
with
a
serio
Qur’an
portrays
him
as
“an
excellent
servant.”
g the idea of justice
to God,
putdiscourse
a therefore,
The
presents
itself
the
core
the
theological
dialogue
amongst
Th
suffering
enclosed—was
the
first
attempt
to
initiate
theodicy
within
the
context
of Islam.
divine
attribute
of
omnipotence
with
theinnotion
of various
human groups.
free will.
limit
on
anhowever,
all-powerful
creator;
God
is notat
bound
byaof
His
own
laws.
He
is just
whatever
5 was
of 13will
exempt;
it
is
through
various
experiences
in
life
that
According
to
Muslim
exegesis,
what
distinguishes
Job
is
the
fact
that
despite
his
enormous
disease,
he
exercised
patience
and
recognized
that
he
was
going
through
a
test—a
posit
20 The
t bound by His own
is just
in
whatever
discourse
presents
itself
at the
core
ofthe
the
theological
dialogue
amongst
groups.
The
theologians
who
advocated
forthat
attribute
of
omnipotence
in
its
absolute
and uncompromisin
discourse
was
theencountered
Qur’an
and by
theman
diverse
interpretations
of its teachin
Helaws.
does.He
Applied
to suffering,
this
then
means
all
harm
isvarious
fair
as it
has
15
propagate
his
mission
on
this
earth.
As
John
notes,
“tha
experience—and
ascribed
any
negative
of
despair
to
Satan.
fortune,
he
attributed
the
source
offeelings
hisal-ḥusnā).
to
God
and
remained
humble
as
aattribut
17 The
all harm
by man
fair
ascontinually
it is
hasjust
eatnotion
of encountered
suffering,
included
form
were
of the
opinion
that
the
only
agent
inblessings
this
is
God:
He
creates
own
acts
as
well
theologians
who
advocated
the
of
omnipotence
inworld
its
absolute
uncompromising
attributes
(asmāʾ
reconciliation
of His
certain
divine
beenwhich
willed
byisGod
who
in for
all
His attribute
creation.
The
Ash arite
thinkers
were
inand
sharp
conflict
primarily
as
a
reward
narrative
with
an
emphasis
differen
The
Qur’anic
narrative
about
Job
demonstrates
that
trials
and
tests—whether
in
prosperity
servant
who
lacked
ownership
of
his
belongings.
Similarly,
when
God
tested
him
with
a
serious
hetoAshʾarite
thinkers
in
sharp
conflict
with
be discussed
bywere
the
Muʿtazilite
form
were
ofthe
thewho
opinion
the beings.
only
agent
inall-powerful
this
world
isGod,
God:
Hesame
creates
His
own
acts
as well
acts
of
all that
human
this
view
raised
serious
concerns
about
the
creation
ofas“evil” broad
acts ba
ofAsan
with
the rules
idea
of
human
free
will—the
with
the
Mu
tazilites
asserted
that
not only
is
God
subjected
to the
of
justice
but
health
or
illness
and hardship—are
part
of
thethe
plan,
so
much
soato
that
even
prophets
are
disease,
he
exercised
patience
and
recognized
that
hedivine
was
going
through
test—a
ubjected
to the same
ofacts
justice
that,
in
wever, resulted
inthat,
therules
group
dividing,
God,
theto
debate
developed
further
to
question
validity
of
human
free
will—the
concept
i
ofobligation
allbut
human
beings.
view
serious
concerns
about
the
creation
of
actsapositive
by
suffering
was
the
first
attempt
initiate
theodicythat
with
inthe
fact,
the
act inAs
justthis
means
israised
eternal
andenclosed—was
uncompromising
for
God.
It
is“evil”
worth
15 Theological
4.despair
Concept
of
Evil:
and
Philosophical
Devea
exempt;
it
is
through
various
experiences
in
life
that
man
is
able
to
actualize
his
potential
experience—and
ascribed
any
negative
feelings
of
to
Satan.
uncompromising for
God.
It isathe
worth
noting
that
God,
debate
developed
to question
the
validity
ofd.
human
free
that
is dialogue
The
discourse
presents
itself
at will—the
the
ofconcept
the
theological
deeply
rootedphilosopher,
infurther
the Quran
as it
relates
to man’s
responsibility
andcore
accountability,
as well
as divin
noting
that
prominent
Muslim
Ibn
Rushd
(Averroes,
1198),
challenged
these
views
The
Qur’anic
narrative
about
demonstrates
that
trials
and
tests—whether
prosperity
and
propagate
hisreward
mission
onJob
this
earth.
As
John
notes,
“the
story
of
Job
the
Qur’an
understo
es, d. 1198),
challenged
these
views
and
asserted
pplies
only to
human
who
have
judgment
and
and
punishment.
The
dialogue
crystallized
between
the
Muʿtazilite
th
deeply
rooted
in
the Quran
as
it relates
to
man’s
responsibility
and
accountability,
asin
well
asMuslim
divineistheologica
theologians
who
forearliest
the
attribute
ofin
omnipotence
inand
its ab
One
of the
problems
in
andbeings
asserted
that
the
element
of justice
may
not
be
employed
foradvocated
God
and
man
in the
same
manner:
primarily
as
a
reward
narrative
with
an
emphasis
different
from
that
of
the
story
of
Job
in
the
Bible
health
or
illness
and
hardship—are
part
of
the
divine
plan,
so
much
so
even
prophets
are
not
God
and man
theman,
sameby
manner:
man,
virtue
of justice
to in
God,
however,
will put
a by
Ashʿarite,
the
main
schools
ofwere
thought,
with
aGod,
divergence
ofthe
made
aisserious
effor
judgment
and
reward
andtwo
punishment.
The
dialogue
crystallized
between
Muʿtazilite
and
form
of the
opinion
that
the
agent
inboth
this
world
God:ofHe
cr
divine
attribute
of only
omnipotence
with
the the
notion
hum
virtue
of
being
just,
advances
to a higher
level
of goodness;
however,
isopinion;
just
due
to
His
exempt;
is main
through
various
experiences
life
that man
is
able
to view
actualize
his
potential
and about
18
however,
isperfection—a
just
due
His
perfection—a
y; God,
His own
laws. He
is just
intowhatever
Ashʿarite,
the
schools
thought,
with
divergence
of was
opinion;
both
made
athe
serious
effort
toittwo
win
the argument
according
to
their
understanding
ofAs
Qur’an.
the acts
ofainall
human
beings.
raised
serious
concerns
discourse
thethis
Qur’an
and
diverse
interpretation
trait
that
requires
Him toof
be
just.21
4.his
Concept
of on
Evil:
Theological
and Philosophical
Development
propagate
mission
this
earth.
As
John
notes,
“the
story
of
Job to
in question
the
Qur’an
understood
18
17 categorically
m encountered by manIn
istothe
fair
asthe
itanalysis,
has
The
Muʿtazilite
school
of
thought,
also
as(asmāʾ
thefurther
rationalists,
opposed
the ide
win
argument
according
to
their
understanding
ofknown
the
Qur’an.
God,
the
debate
developed
theisvalidity
ofofhuman
attributes
al-ḥusnā).
The
reconciliation
certain
final
mainstream
Sunnite
theologians
supported
the
Ash
arite
school
of thought
16
primarily
a reward
with
anknown
emphasis
different
fromas
that
of
the
story
of
Job
inthe
the
Bible.”
gians
supported
Ashʾarite
school
ofas
thought
te thinkers
were the
inand
sharp
conflict
with
The
Muʿtazilite
school
ofall
thought,
also
as
the
rationalists,
categorically
opposed
that
God
creates
human
that
include
evil
and
advocated
for
human
free
will
by
emphasizing
th
deeply
rooted
in the
Quran
itthought
relates
to
man’s
responsibility
and
of
an
all-powerful
God,
with
the
idea
ofidea
human
freeacc
w
One
of narrative
the
earliest
problems
inreconcile
Muslim
theological
(kalām)
was
how
to reconcile
emphasized
that
God
creates
acts.acts
In
order
to
God’s
omnipotence
with
human
ro
to
reconcile
God’s
omnipotence
with
human
the
same
rules
of
justice
but
that,
in
importance
of
the
divine
attribute
of
justice
(ʿadl).
They
upheld
that
God,
in
accordance
with
Hi
that
God
creates
human
acts
that
include
evil
and
advocated
for
human
free
will
by
emphasizing
the
judgment
and
reward
and
punishment.
The
dialogue
crystallized
betw
suffering
was
enclosed—was
the
first
attempt
to
initiate
divine
attribute
of
omnipotence
with
the
notion
of
human
free
will.
The
departure
point
for
t
responsibility,
18, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW
5 of 13the doctrine of acquisition (kasb) was adopted: God creates
5 ofall
13 acts; humans freely acquire
4. Concept of Evil: Theological and Philosophical Development
22
smising
adopted:
God It
creates
all
acts;
humans
for God.
is worth
noting
that
importance
of
thefreely
divine
attribute
of for
justice
(ʿadl).
They
upheld
that
God,
in teachings
accordance
with
His
Ashʿarite,
the
twoof
main
schools
of
thought,
withaton
afreedom
divergence
of
opinio
attribute
of (ʿāadil),
create
and
that
evil
isdiscourse
the
direct
result
ofConversely,
man’s
of
Thia
The
presents
itself
the
core
of choice.
the
theolo
discourse
was
thecannot
Qur’an
and
the
diverse
interpretations
of
its
the
divine
names
certain
acts
and,
therefore,
are
accountable
the evil
acquisition
good
and
evil
acts.
22 challenged
18 i
17
e challenged
for
the of
acquisition
of
good
evil
8),
these
views
and
asserted
view
was
byand
questions
such
as: who
Ifof God
does
not
create
evil,
who,
then,
attribute
of
(ʿāadil),
cannot
create
evil
that
evil
isargument
thetheologians
direct
result
man’s
freedom
of
choice.
mentality
on
of suffering,
human
which
suffering
included
inand
the
divine
plan.
The
notion
ofraising
suffering,
which
included
to
win
the
according
to
understanding
ofThis
the
Qur’an.
advocated
for
the
of
omnipo
attributes
(asmāʾ
al-ḥusnā).
The
reconciliation
of
certain
divine
attributes,
predominantly
the
asp
One
of acts.
the
in
Muslim
theological
thought
(kalām)
was
how
toattribute
reconcile
the
Muslim
thinkers
belonging
toearliest
the
Shiproblems
ite
branch
of
Islam—through
the
influence
oftheir
rational
element
in
ite
branch
ofby
Islam—through
the
influence
ofby
in
the same
manner:
man,
by
virtue
responsible
for
human
suffering
caused
by
illnesses
and
disasters?
ifthe
God
wills
for
illnesses
an
view
was
challenged
raising
questions
such
as:
If
God
does
not
create
evil,
who,
then,
isin
ean
eddiscussed
suffering
by
the
children
Muʿtazilite
and
animals,
to
be
discussed
by
the
Muʿtazilite
The
Muʿtazilite
school
of
thought,
also
known
as
the
rationalists,
c
form
were
of
the
opinion
that
only
agent
this worl
divine
attribute
omnipotence
with
notion
of
human
free
will.
TheAnd
departure
point
for
this
of ancontinued
all-powerful
God,
withthe
the
idea
of
human
free
will—the
broader
frame
with
which
hum
the
Mu
tazilite
theology—remained
in disagreement
with
the
Ash
arites.
An
example
of
this
may
be
19
ined
inis disagreement
with
the
Ashʿarites.
An
wever,
just
duegroup
to
Hisfirm
perfection—a
responsible
for
human
caused
bycan
illnesses
and
disasters?
And
God
wills
for
illnesses
and
disasters
human
life,
howdiverse
He
begroup
just?
The
responded
by
affirming
that
illnesse
r,ns.
resulted
The
Muʿtazilite’s
in the
dividing,
stress
onwritings
God’s
justice,
however,
resulted
in
the
dividing,
that
God
creates
human
acts
that
include
and
advocated
for
humanc
the
acts
of
all
beings.
As
this
view
raised
serious
suffering
was
enclosed—was
the
first
attempt
toMuʿtazilites
initiate
a iftheodicy
within
the
context
of
Islam.
discourse
was
the
Qur’an
and
the
interpretations
of
its
teachings
onevil
the
divine
names
and
observed
from
the
ofinsuffering
an
eminent
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
Mut
ahharı̄
(d.
1979),
who
was
.human
17 may
s
of
an
eminent
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
and
disasters,
while
appear
as
“evil”,
are
in
actuality
“good”
that
God
creates
and
that
serve
disasters
in
human
life,
how
can
He
be
just?
The
Muʿtazilites
responded
by
affirming
that
illnesses
nally
gave
birth
to
the
Ashʾarite
school
of
thought.
importance
of
the
divine
attribute
of
justice
(ʿadl).
They
upheld
that
God,
the
debate
developed
further
to
question
the
validTG
The
discourse
presents
itself
at
the
core
of
the
theological
dialogue
amongst
various
groups.
attributes
(asmāʾ
al-ḥusnā).
The
reconciliation
of
certain
divine
attributes,
predominantly
the
aspect
the REVIEW
opinion that the Ash arite outlook, while aimed at vindicating God from
resulted in
Religions 2018, 9, x FORof
PEER
5 of injustice,
13
23
e
Ashʾarite
outlook,
while
aimed
at
vindicating
ported
the
Ashʾarite
school
of
thought
and
disasters,
while
may
appear
as
“evil”,
are
in
actuality
“good”
that
God
creates
and
that
serve
a
significant
purpose
in the
cosmic
plan.
This
seems
toQuran
be
the
first
appearance
of result
the
theor
ording
only totohuman
Ashʾarite
beings
theologians,
who have
God’s
law
of justice
applies
only
to
human
who
have
attribute
ofbeings
(ʿāadil),
cannot
create
evil
and
evil
iswhich
the
of m
deeply
in
the
as
it
relates
todirect
man’s
respons
theologians
advocated
for
attribute
ofrooted
omnipotence
in
itsthat
absolute
and
uncompromis
ofhuman
an all-powerful
God,
with
the creational
idea
of the
human
free
will—the
broader
frame
with
human
exonerating
oppressors
ofwho
any
wrongdoing.
23
ppressors
ofomnipotence
any wrongdoing.
cile
God’s
with
human
purpose
inthe
theidea
plan.
This
seems
be
the
first
appearance
of the
theory
stice
gated
totoGod,
act
according
however,
will
tosignificant
His
put
laws.
aMuslim
Applying
ofperspective,
justice
to
God,
will
put
aworld
view
was
challenged
by
raising
questions
such
as:Islam.
If
God
no
of
instrumentality
of human
inphilosophical
the
divine
plan.
The
notion
ofhowever,
suffering,
which
included
judgment
and
reward
and
The
dialogue
cr
form
were
ofcreational
the
opinion
that
the
only
agent
in
this
isenclosed
God:
Hepunishment.
creates
His
own
actsdoes
as well
suffering
was
enclosed—was
thecosmic
first
attempt
to
initiate
ato
theodicy
the
context
of
From
the
the
notion
of
good
and
evil
iswithin
within
the
eundeserved
of He
good
and
evil
is
enclosed
within
the
: notion
God
creates
acts;
humans
freely
responsible
for
human
suffering
caused
by
illnesses
and
disasters?
And
suffering
by
children
and
animals,
continued
to
be
discussed
by
the
Muʿtazilite
an
own
all-powerful
laws.
isall
creator;
just
in
whatever
therefore,
God
is
not
bound
by
His
own
laws.
He
is
just
in
whatever
Ashʿarite,
the
two
main
schools
of
thought,
with
a
diverg
The
discourse
presents
itself
at
the
core
of
the
theological
dialogue
amongst
various
groups.
The
the
acts
of
all
human
beings.
As
this
view
raised
serious
concerns
about
the
creation
of
“evil”
acts
wider ontological understanding of existence (wujūd) and nonexistence ( adam). Briefly put, good
13
The
story
of justice,
Jobencountered
in Judeo₋Christian
traditions
isas
presented
initsthe
Book
of and
Jobfree
and
appears
inconcept
therespond
formtha
of
22 God,
20
d)
and
nonexistence
(ʿadam).
Briefly
put,
good
isadvocated
acquisition
ofThe
good
and
evil
ountered
Applied
by19
toman
suffering,
fair
as
this
it
has
then
means
that
all
harm
by
man
isquestion
fair
it
has
disasters
in
life,
how
can
He
be just?
The
Muʿtazilites
heologians.
firm
stress
on
God’s
however,
resulted
in
the
group
dividing,
to
win
the
argument
according
to
their
understanding
of
the
debate
developed
further
to
the
validity
of
human
will—the
theologians
who
for
thefrom
attribute
ofhuman
omnipotence
inother
absolute
uncompromising
isMuʿtazilite’s
defined
as
aacts.
positive
entity
that
branches
existence;
evil,
on
the
hand,
stems
from
13
dialogue
between Job and
his friends
who try in
to the
explain
toofhim
the
reason
for in
histhe
sufferings.
A comparativ
The
story
of
Job
in
Judeo₋Christian
traditions
is
presented
Book
Job
and
appears
form
of
a
24
xistence;
evil,
on
the
other
hand,
stems
from
h
the
influence
ofsuch
nkers
edofbyIslam—through
were
God
in
who
sharp
isnonexistence
just
conflict
in
with
His
creation.
The
Ashʾarite
were
sharp
conflict
with
and
disasters,
while
may
appear
“evil”,
in actuality
“good”
which
finally
gave
birth
toall
the
Ashʾarite
school
of thought.
The
Muʿtazilite
school
ofare
thought,
known
asthat
the
form
were
of
the
opinion
the
only
in
world
is
God:
Heascreates
His
own
actsalso
as as
well
as as
deeply
rooted
inthat
the
Quran
asagent
itinrelates
to
man’s
responsibility
and
accountability,
well
div
and
as
is viewed
as
athinkers
negative
entity.
Anthis
example
of
the
ontological
interpretation
studyJob
ofand
the his
story
between
and Islam
is sufferings.
beyond theAscope
of this paper. For a
dialogue between
friends
whoJudeo₋Christian
try to explain to tradition
him the reason
for his
comparative
ive
entity.
An
example
of
isagreement
with
the
Ashʿarites.
An
azilites
same
rules
who24
ofasserted
justice
but
that
that,
not
only
inthe
isontological
God
subjected
tojustice
the
same
rules
of
justice
but
that,
in
significant
purpose
inconcerns
the
creational
cosmic
plan.
seems
tobybe
the f
According
to of
Ashʾarite
theologians,
God’s
law
of
applies
only
to
human
beings
who
have
that
God
creates
human
acts
that
include
evil
and
advoca
judgment
and
reward
and
punishment.
The
dialogue
crystallized
between
the
Muʿtazilite
and
the
acts
of
all
human
beings.
this
view
raised
serious
about
the
creation
ofThis
“evil”
acts
what
constitutes
good
and
evil
may
beAs
seen
from
the
works
of
two
prominent
Muslim
philosophers
excellent
comparative
review,
see
A.H.
Johns,
A Comparative
Glance
Ayyub
in the For
Qur'an
study of the story
between
Judeo₋Christian
tradition
and Islam
is beyond the
scopeatof
this paper.
an (Johns 200
ayfor
be
seen
the
works
of
prominent
minent
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
obligation
g
God.
toItfrom
act
is worth
just
noting
means
that
is
eternal
and
for
God.
Itof
isto
worth
noting
been
obligated
toin
act
according
totwo
His
laws.
Applying
themain
idea
justice
God,
however,
will
putIbn
a free
importance
ofhuman
the
divine
attribute
of
Ashʿarite,
the shaping
two
schools
thought,
with that
athought:
divergence
opinion;
both
madethat
a(ʿadl).
serious
eff
God,
the
debate
developed
further
to
question
the
validity
of
will—the
concept
is They
who
significantly
influenced
the
ofof
Muslim
philosophical
Sı̄nā,
known
asjustice
Religions
2018,
9,
x FOR
PEERexcellent
REVIEW
5of
13
pp.uncompromising
51–82).
comparative
review,
see A.H.
Johns, A Comparative
Glance
at Ayyub
inof
the
Qur'an
(Johns
2008,
18
he
shaping
of
Muslim
philosophical
thought:
Ibn
eimit
outlook,
while
aimed
at
vindicating
ent
llenged
Muslim
these
philosopher,
views
and
asserted
Ibn
Rushd
(Averroes,
d.
1198),
challenged
these
views
and
asserted
on an
all-powerful
creator;
therefore,
God
is
not
bound
by
His
own
laws.
He
is
just
in
whatever
attribute
of
(ʿāadil),
cannot
create
evil
and
that
evil
is
the
d
14
to
win
the
argument
according
to
their
understanding
of
the
Qur’an.
deeply
rooted
in
the
Quran
as
it
relates
to
man’s
responsibility
and
accountability,
as
well
as
divine
Avicenna (d.
Sadr al-Din
who was mostly recognized as Mullā Sadrā (d. 1636).
38:41–2Shirāzı̄,
and 21:83–4.
pp.1037),
51–82).andQur’an
13
The
story
of
Job
in
Judeo₋Christian
traditions
is
presented
in
the
Book
of
J
23
20
15
nHe
Shirāzī,
who
was
mostly
recognized
as
Mullā
of
any
wrongdoing.
the
lement
same
manner:
justice
may
man,
by
virtue
employed
for
God
and
man
the
same
manner:
man,
by
virtue
does.
Applied
tonot
suffering,
this
then
means
allin
harm
encountered
by
man
is
fair
as
it
has
view
was
challenged
raising
questions
as:
The
Muʿtazilite
school
ofSurabadi,
thought,
also
known
as
the
rationalists,
opposed
the If
id
ofof
instrumentality
ofbe
human
suffering
in21:83–4.
thethat
divine
plan.
The
notion
of
suffering,
included
14
judgment
reward
and
punishment.
Thevarious
dialogue
crystallized
between
thecategorically
Muʿtazilite
andsuch
theBranno
See
Abubakr
`Tigh
Neishabur
Tafsir
Surabadi,
ed.
Sa`Idi
Sirjani
(Surabadi
1381). Also,
see
Ibn
Sı̄nā
formed
aand
theodicy
by
distinguishing
the
forms
ofwhich
evil
such
as by
“essential”
evil
Qur’an
38:41–2
and
dialogue
between
Job
and
his
friends
who
try
to
explain
to
him
the
reason
f
15
f,ust,
good
and
isa(sharr
enclosed
within
the
is
just
advances
due evil
to to
His
higher
perfection—a
of
goodness;
God,
however,
isof
just
due
to
His
perfection—a
M.
Wheeler,
Prophets
in
the
Qur'an,
an
Introduction
to
the
Qur'an
and
Exegesis
(Wheeler
2002). and
been
willed
by
God
whobidh-dhāt),
islevel
just
in
all
His
creation.
The
Ashʾarite
thinkers
were
sharp
conflict
with
responsible
for
human
suffering
caused
by illnesses
undeserved
suffering
by
children
animals,
continued
toSurabadi,
be
discussed
by
the
Muʿtazilite
Ashʿarite,
the
two
main
schools
thought,
with
ain
divergence
of(Surabadi
opinion;
made
awill
serious
effort
that
God
creates
human
acts
that
include
evil
and
advocated
forMuslim
free
emphasizing
See
Abubakr
`Tigh
Neishabur
Surabadi,
Tafsir
ed.
Sa`Idi
Sirjani
1381).
Also,
see
Brannon
which
isand
non-being
or
privation,
and
“accidental”
evil
(sharr
bilarad
),both
which
can
be
. human
study
of
the
story
between
Judeo₋Christian
tradition
and
Islam
is
beyond
16
21
19Briefly
18life, how
See
(Johns
2003,
pp.divine
50–51).
he
forms
of
evil
such
as
“essential”
evil
nexistence
(ʿadam).
put,
good
isfirm
M.
Wheeler,
Prophets
inon
the
Qur'an,
an
Introduction
toofresulted
the
Qur'an
and
Muslim
Exegesis
(Wheeler
2002).
requires
Him
towho
be
just.
hevarious
Muʿtazilites
asserted
that
not
only
is
God
subjected
to
the
same
rules
of justice
but
that,
in
disasters
human
Heevil
just? The Muʿtaz
importance
of
the
attribute
justice
(ʿadl).
They
upheld
thatcan
God,
inbeaccordance
with H
theologians.
The
Muʿtazilite’s
stress
God’s
justice,
however,
thein
group
dividing,
to
win
the
argument
according
to
their
understanding
of
Qur’an.
either
being
or
privation.
In
his
analysis,
Ibn
Sı̄nā
concluded
that
it in
is
the
non-essential/accidental
excellent comparative
review,
see A.H. Johns, A Comparative
Glance at A
17
16
For
more
on
this
see
Abdol
Rahman
Ibn
Khaldūn,
Muqaddimah
of
Ibn
Khaldūn
(Ibn
Khaldūn
1375).
See
(Johns
2003,
pp.
50–51).
“accidental”
evil
(sharr
bil-ʿaraḍ),
which
can
be
on
the finally
other
hand,
stems
from
he
devil,
the
final
Ashʾarite
analysis,
school
mainstream
of
thought
Sunnite
theologians
the
school
ofworth
thought
act,
the
obligation
to
act
in
just
is
eternal
and
uncompromising
forevil
God.
Itand
is
noting
thatuniverse
disasters,
while
may
appear
as
“evil”,
areof
inchoice.
actualit
which
gave
birth
tomeans
the
Ashʾarite
school
of thought.
The
Muʿtazilite
school
ofcannot
thought,
also
known
as
the
categorically
opposed
the
idea
attribute
ofsupported
(ʿāadil),
create
and
that
evil
is
thein
direct
result
ofoutweighs
man’s
freedom
T
that
is the
leading
cause
of
human
suffering
andAshʾarite
that
the
total
amount
ofrationalists,
good
the
pp.
51–82).
18
17
Forsee
awas
comprehensive
discussion
on questions
development
theology
in
Islam,
see
Harry
Austryn
Wolfson,
Th
24 An
For
this
Abdol
Rahman
Ibn
Khaldūn,
Muqaddimah
ofof
Ibn
Khaldūn
(Ibn
Khaldūn
1375).
25
that
itMuslim
is the
non-essential/accidental
evil
y.
example
of
the
ontological
God’s
hasized
omnipotence
that
God
creates
with
human
all
acts.
Inon
order
tohuman
reconcile
God’s
omnipotence
with
human
acluded
prominent
philosopher,
Ibn
Rushd
(Averroes,
d.
challenged
these
views
and
asserted
significant
purpose
in
the
creational
cosmic
plan.
This
se
view
challenged
by
raising
such
as:
If
God
does
not
create
evil,
who,
then,
According
to
Ashʾarite
theologians,
God’s
law
of1198),
justice
applies
only
to
human
beings
who
have
that
God
creates
acts
that
include
evil
and
advocated
for
human
free
will
by
emphasizing
the
14
the
amount
ofmore
evil.
Mullā
Sadrā,
on
the
other
hand,
extensively
developed
this
philosophical
Qur’an 38:41–2 and 21:83–4.
18
Philosopydiscussion
of Kalam (Wolfson
1976).
For
a comprehensive
on
development
of
theology
in
Islam,
see
Harry
Wolfson,
The
15
that
the
total
amount
of
good
in
the
universe
en
from
the
works
oftoacquisition
two
prominent
d
bility,
creates
the
all
doctrine
acts;
of
freely
(kasb)
was
adopted:
God
creates
all
acts;
humans
freely
hat
the
element
ofhumans
justice
not
be
employed
for
God
and
man
inwith
the
manner:
man,
by virtue
for
human
suffering
caused
by`Tigh
illnesses
and
disasters?
And
if God
for His
illnesses
a
been
obligated
actmay
according
toresponsible
His
Applying
the
idea
of same
justice
to
God,
however,
will
put Austryn
aTafsir
importance
ofinlaws.
the
divine
attribute
of
justice
(ʿadl).
They
upheld
that
God,
in accordance
See
Abubakr
Neishabur
Surabadi,
Surabadi,
ed.with
Sa`Idi
Sirjani (Su
approach
by
an
interest
combining
theology
mystical
insight.
This
approach,
according
towills
Philosopy
of
Kalam
(Wolfson
1976).
22
22
26
n
other
hand,
extensively
developed
this
ofthe
Muslim
philosophical
Ibntherefore,
of
being
just,
advances
tototally
athought:
higher
level
of
goodness;
God,
however,
isHis
just
due
to
His
perfection—a
certain
isition
of
acts
good
and,
therefore,
evil
acts.
are
accountable
forin
the
acquisition
of
good
and
evil
acts.
M.
Wheeler,
Prophets
inMuʿtazilites
the
Qur'an,
anresponded
Introduction
toof
thechoice.
Qur'an This
and
disasters
human
howby
can
be laws.
just?
by
affirming
thatMuslim
illnes
limit
on
an and
all-powerful
creator;
God
is
not
bound
own
He
is
just
in whatever
attribute
of
(ʿāadil),
cannot
create
evil
and
that
evil
is
the
direct
result
of man’s
freedom
Rizvi,
transformed
the
theory
of life,
existence
as
itHe
pertains
toThe
Islamic
metaphysics.
In Mullā
13
16
The
story
of
Job as
in
Judeo₋Christian
traditions
is presented
21
20
See
(Johns
2003,
pp.
50–51).
theology
with
mystical
insight.
This
approach,
who
was
mostly
recognized
as
Mullā
ely,
slam—through
Muslim
thinkers
the
influence
belonging
of
to
the
Shiʾite
branch
of
Islam—through
the
influence
of
rait
that
Him
to
be
just.
and
disasters,
while
may
appear
as
“evil”,
are
in
actuality
“good”
that
God
creates
and
that
serv
He requires
does.
Applied
to
suffering,
this
then
means
that
all
harm
encountered
by
man
is
fair
it
has
view
was
challenged
by
raising
questions
such
as:
If
God
does
not
create
evil,
who,
then,
is
Sadrā’s view, explained in his major work called Mafātih Al-ghayb, absolute existence is absolute good
dialogue
between
JobIbn
and
his friends
who try toofexplain
to
17
26
For
more
on
this
see
Abdol
Rahman
Khaldūn,
Muqaddimah
Ibn
Khald
existence
as
it
pertains
to
Islamic
metaphysics.
eement
element
with
in
the
the
Muʿtazilite
Ashʿarites.
theology—remained
An
in
disagreement
with
the
Ashʿarites.
An
Inbeen
the final
analysis,
mainstream
Sunnite
theologians
supported
the
Ashʾarite
school
of thought
willed
by
who
is just
in
allfor
His
creation.
The
thinkers
were
indisasters?
sharp
conflict
with
responsible
human
suffering
caused
by
illnesses
and
And
God
wills
illnesses and
significant
purpose
inAshʾarite
the
creational
cosmic
plan.
This
seems
toif
be
the
firsttofor
appearance
of the theo
andGod
since
God
is the
only
Necessary
is the
absolute
good:
perfection
applies
only
the
5 of 13Being, He
study
of
the
story
between
Judeo₋Christian
tradition
and
18
comprehensive
discussion
on development
of that
theology
in Islam, s
sand
forms
evil
aswho
“essential”
nt
of
Persian
this
may
philosopher,
besuch
observed
Morteza
from
theevil
writings
oforder
an
philosopher,
Morteza
emphasized
that
God
creates
all
acts.
In
to reconcile
human
theof
Muʿtazilites
asserted
that
not
only
is eminent
God
subjected
toFor
theaomnipotence
same
rules
of with
justice
but that,
in affirming
disasters
in
human
life,
how
canPersian
He God’s
be
just?
The Muʿtazilites
responded
by
illnesses
excellent
comparative
review, see A.H. Johns, A Compara
Philosopy of Kalam
(Wolfson
1976).
ntal”
(sharr
bil-ʿaraḍ),
which
can
be
look,
rī
(d.evil
while
1979),
aimed
who
was
at
vindicating
of to
the
opinion
thatwhich
the
outlook,
while
aimed
atGod.
vindicating
responsibility,
the
doctrine
acquisition
(kasb)
was
adopted:
creates
all
acts;
freely
fact,
the
obligation
act
in
just
means
isAshʾarite
eternal
uncompromising
Ithumans
is
worth
noting
that creates and that serve a
and
disasters,
while
mayand
appear
asGod
“evil”,
arefor
in
actuality
“good”
that God
e divine
plan.
The
notion
ofof
suffering,
included
pp.
51–82).
13
The
story
of
Job
in
Judeo₋Christian
traditions
is
presented
in
the
Book
of Job and of
appears
in the form o
23
23
22
at
it is
non-essential/accidental
evil
m
yimals,
injustice,
wrongdoing.
resulted
inand,
exonerating
human
oppressors
any
acquire
certain
therefore,
areextensive
accountable
for
thewrongdoing.
of good
andviews
evil
acts.
athe
prominent
Muslim
philosopher,
Ibn
Rushdin(Averroes,
d.acquisition
1198),
challenged
these
and
asserted
and
suffering
see acts
(Heemskerk
2000).
For
an
significant
purpose
theof
creational
cosmic
plan.
This
seems
to be
the
first
appearance
the theory
14
19
Qur’an
38:41–2
and
21:83–4.
continued
to
be
by
the
For
a discussed
great discussion
on
theMuʿtazilite
Mu tazilite’s
view
on
pain
and
suffering
see
(Heemskerk
2000).
For
an
extensive
study
dialogue
between
Job
and
his
friends
who
try
to
explain
to
him
the
reason
for
his
sufferings.
A comparat
med
Ghaly,
Islam
and
Disability:
Perspectives
inbe
Theology
15 within
otal
amount
of
good
inthe
the
universe
m
d
the
Muslim
evil
is Muslim
enclosed
philosophical
within
perspective,
the
the
notion
good
is
enclosed
theman,
Conversely,
thinkers
belonging
toin
the
Shiʾite
branch
ofevil
Islam—through
the
influence
ofvirtue
that
the
element
of
justice
may
not
employed
for
Godand
and
man
in
the
manner:
on
notion
of in
disability
Islam,
seeof
Mohammed
Ghaly,
Islam
and same
Disability:
Perspectives
inby
Theology
and Jurisprudence
See
Abubakr
`Tigh
Neishabur
Surabadi, Tafsir Surabadi, ed.
n and
God’s
justice,
however,
resulted
the
group
dividing,
study
of
the
story
between
Judeo₋Christian
tradition
and
Islam
is
beyond
the
scope
of
this
paper. For
(Ghaly
2010).
er
hand,
extensively
developed
this
rational
element
in
the
Muʿtazilite
theology—remained
inGod,
disagreement
the
Ashʿarites.
An in the Qur'an, an Introduction to the Qu
ence
tological
understanding
Briefly
put,
of
good
existence
(wujūd)
nonexistence
(ʿadam).
Briefly
good
is perfection—a
of
being
just,
advances
toisa higher
level and
of goodness;
however,
iswith
justput,
due
to
His
M.
Wheeler,
Prophets
ool
of(ʿadam).
thought.
20 See Wolfson, The Philosopy of
excellent
comparative
review,
see
A.H.
Johns,
A
Comparative
Glance
at
Ayyub
in
the
Qur'an
20
Kalam
(Wolfson
1976).
13
16
The
story
of
Job
in Judeo₋Christian
traditions
is presented
in theMorteza
Book
and appears in the form of (Johns
a
21 the
See (Johns
2003, of
pp.Job
50–51).
with
mystical
insight.
approach,
on
as
athe
positive
other
hand,
entity
that
branches
from
from
existence;
evil,
theThe
other
hand,
stems
example
of
this
may
beThis
observed
from
writings
of(Averroes),
anoneminent
Persian
philosopher,
trait
that
requires
Him
to
be
just.
21 stems
For
more
on
his
philosophy,
see
Ibn Rushd
Philosophy
and
Theology from
of Averroes, (Averroes 1921).
d’s
law
of
justice
applies
only
to
human
beings
who
have
pp.
51–82).
s), The Philosophy and
of Averroes,
(Averroes
dialogue
between Job and
friends who try to explain
to him
the
forAbdol
his sufferings.
A comparative
17
22 Theology
26
24 his
For
more
onreason
this
see
Rahman Ibn
Khaldūn, Muqaddi
as
itexample
pertains
to
Islamic
metaphysics.
For
more
onof
theory
of
acquisition,
see
Wolfson,
The
Philosopy
of Kalam
(Wolfson
1976).
An
ence
and In
as
of
such
the
iswho
ontological
viewed
astheahowever,
negative
entity.
An
example
of
the
ontological
Muṭahharī
(d.the
1979),
was
opinion
that
the
Ashʾarite
outlook,
while
aimed
at
vindicating
final
analysis,
mainstream
Sunnite
theologians
supported
the
Ashʾarite
school
of thought
14
Qur’an
38:41–2
21:83–4.
Applying
the
idea
justice
to
God,
will
put
a and
23of See
study
of
the
story
between
Judeo₋Christian
tradition
and
Islam
is
beyond
the
scope
of
this
paper.
For anof theo
18
For a comprehensive
discussion on development
(Mutahhari
1385,evil
pp. 50–51).
23
ation
m
ofworks
what
of
constitutes
two
prominent
good
and
may
be In
seen
from
the
works
of twoTafsir
prominent
God
injustice,
resulted
in exonerating
human
oppressors
of any
wrongdoing.
and
emphasized
that
God
creates
all
acts.
order
to
reconcile
God’s
omnipotence
with
human
See
Abubakr
`Tigh
Neishabur
Surabadi,
Surabadi,
ed.
Sa`Idi
Sirjani
(Surabadi
1381).
Also,
see Brann
24 His
odthe
isfrom
not
bound
by
own
He is15 just
in
whatever
hilosopy
of Kalam
(Wolfson
excellent
comparative
A.H. Johns,
A Nasr,
Comparative
Glance
at
Ayyub
in
the
Qur'an
(Johns
2008,
For1976).
more laws.
on ontological
aspects
of good review,
and evil, see
see Seyyed
Hossein
Islamic
Philosophy
from
Its
Origin
to
the
Present
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
philosophers
uslim
philosophical
who
significantly
thought:
Ibn
influenced
the
shaping
of
Muslim
philosophical
thought:
Ibn
From
the
Muslim
philosophical
perspective,
the
notion
of
good
and
evil
is
enclosed
within
the
responsibility,
the
doctrine
of
acquisition
(kasb)
was
adopted:
God
creates
all
acts;
humans
freely
M.
Wheeler,
Prophets
in
the
Qur'an,
an
Introduction
to
the
Qur'an
and
Muslim
Exegesis
(Wheeler
2002).
(Nasr
2006,
pp.
65–68).
means that all harm encountered pp.
by man
is fair as it has
51–82).
25 For more on Ibn Sı̄nā’s16theodicy, see Shams C. Inati, The Problem of Evil: Ibn Sina’s Theodicy (Inati 2000).
See
(Johns
2003,
50–51).
own
was
mostly
asacquire
Avicenna
recognized
(d.
1037),
asPhilosophy
Mullā
and
Sadr
al-Din
Shirāzī,
who
was
mostly
recognized
Mullā
wider
ontological
understanding
ofin
existence
(wujūd)
andpp.
nonexistence
(ʿadam). Briefly
put,
good
certain
acts
and,
therefore,
are
accountable
for
the acquisition
ofasgood
and
evilisacts. 22
ing
see
(Heemskerk
2000).
For
an
extensive
14
eyyed
Hossein
Nasr,
Islamic
from
Its
Origin
Qur’an
38:41–2
and
21:83–4.
ation.
The
Ashʾarite
thinkers
were
sharp
conflict
with
26 See Sajjad Rizvi, ‘Mulla Sadra’,
Stanford
Encyclopedia
of Philosophy
(Rizvi
2009).
17
For
more
on
this
see
Abdol
Rahman
Ibn
Khaldūn,
Muqaddimah
of Ibnof
Khaldūn
Khaldūn
1375).
Islam
and
Disability:
Perspectives
in
Theology
15
defined
as a positive
thatSee
branches
from
existence;
evil,
onTafsir
other hand,
stems
from
Conversely,
thinkers
tothat,
the
ShiʾiteSurabadi,
branch
ofthe
Islam—through
theSirjani
influence
Abubakr
`Tigh
Neishabur
Surabadi,
ed. Sa`Idi
(Surabadi
1381).(Ibn
Also,
see Brannon
is1636).
God
subjected
toMuslim
theentity
same
rules
ofbelonging
justice
but
in
18
For
a
comprehensive
discussion
on
development
of
theology
in
Islam,
see
Harry
Austryn
Wolfson,
24
nonexistence
as such
is
viewed
astheology—remained
aProphets
negative
example
of
thethe
ontological
ms
Sīnā
evil
formed
such
aand
as
theodicy
“essential”
distinguishing
evil
the
various
of evil
such
as “essential”
evil
rational
element
inby
the
Muʿtazilite
inanAn
disagreement
with
Ashʿarites.
An (Wheeler 2002).
he
Problem
of Evil:
Ibn
Sina's
Theodicy
(Inati
M.
in forms
theentity.
Qur'an,
Introduction
to the
Qur'an
and
Muslim Exegesis
nalof
and
uncompromising
for
God.
ItWheeler,
is 2000).
worth
noting
that
Philosopy
of
Kalam
(Wolfson
1976).
16
Philosophy
(Rizviof
See
(Johns
2003,
pp.may
50–51).
h-dhāt),
vil
(sharr
which
bil-ʿaraḍ),
is
non-being
which
can
or
privation,
and
“accidental”
bil-ʿaraḍ),
which
can be
nterpretation
what
constitutes
good
and
evil
beevil
seen
the works
of philosopher,
two
prominent
example
of2009).
this
may
be be
observed
from
the
writings
of (sharr
anfrom
eminent
Persian
Morteza
(Averroes,
d. 1198),
challenged
these
views
and
asserted
osophy and Theology of Averroes, (Averroes
17
For
more
on
this
see
Abdol
Rahman
Ibn
Khaldūn,
Muqaddimah
of
Ibn
Khaldūn
ng
theor
non-essential/accidental
privation.
In
analysis,
evilIbn
Sīnā
concluded
that
itthe
is the
non-essential/accidental
evil at vindicating
Muslim
philosophers
who
influenced
the
of
Muslim
philosophical
thought:
Ibn (Ibn Khaldūn 1375).
Muṭahharī
(d.his
1979),
who
was
of the
opinion
thatshaping
Ashʾarite
outlook,
while aimed
yed
for
God
and man
in
thesignificantly
same
manner:
man,
by virtue
18
For
a
comprehensive
discussion
on
development
of
theology
in
Islam,
23 as Mullāsee Harry Austryn Wolfson, The
he
mount
leading
ofGod,
good
cause
in
of the
human
universe
suffering
and
thatal-Din
the
total
amount
in the
universe
Sīnā,
known
ashowever,
Avicenna
(d.
1037),
and
Sadr
Shirāzī,
who of
was
mostly
recognized
God
from
injustice,
resulted
into
exonerating
human
oppressors
ofgood
any
wrongdoing.
oodness;
is
just
due
His
perfection—a
alam (Wolfson
1976).
Philosopy
of
Kalam
(Wolfson
1976).
25 Mullā
hs
nd,the
extensively
amount
developed
evil.
this Sadrā, on
the other the
hand,
extensively
developed
this
Sadrā
(d.
1636).
From of
the
Muslim
philosophical
perspective,
notion
of good and
evil is enclosed
within the
hical
mystical
approach
insight.
by
This
an
interest
approach,
in
combining
theology
with
mystical
insight.
This
approach,
Ibn
Sīnā
formed
a
theodicy
by
distinguishing
the
various
forms
of
evil
such
as
“essential”
evil
wider
ontological
understanding
of
existence
(wujūd)
and
nonexistence
(ʿadam).
Briefly
put,
good is
sein
Nasr, Islamic
Philosophythe
fromAshʾarite
Its Origin school of thought
e theologians
supported
26 theory
26
gsharr
ertains
to Rizvi,
to Islamic
totally
transformed
the
of existence
as
itexistence;
pertains to
Islamic
metaphysics.
bidh-dhāt),
is non-being
or privation,
and
“accidental”
evil
(sharr
bil-ʿaraḍ),
can
be from
defined
aswhich
ametaphysics.
positive
entity
that
branches
from
evil,
on the
other which
hand,
stems
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
Al-Ghazālı̄’s significant impact on advancing Muslim scholastic thought
is
Religions
2018, (1058–1111).
9, x FOR PEER REVIEW
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
of human
suffering
in the divine
plan. The
notion of
suffering,
included
experience
with suffering
and,
by extension,
his powerful
statement
regarding
thewhich
creation
of the
undeserved
suffering
children
and animals,
continued
towhat
be discussed
by the abda
Muʿtazilite
world—“there
is not in by
possibility
anything
more wonderful
than
is” (laysa fi’l-imkān
mimmā
theologians.
Muʿtazilite’s
firm
on God’s justice, however, resulted in the group dividing,
kān)—that is19ofThe
special
interest in
thisstress
article.
whichThrough
finally gave
birth
to
the
Ashʾarite
school
thought.
a rigorous education in theologyofand
jurisprudence, as well as Qur’anic and hadith
According
to Ashʾarite
theologians,
God’s
law of justice
applies
only to human
beings young
who have
(prophetic
traditions)
studies,
al-Ghazālı̄’s
extraordinary
abilities
flourished
at a relatively
age
been
obligated
to aact
according toposition
His laws.atApplying
ideadistinguished
of justice to God,
however,
will put
a
and earned
him
professorship
one of thethe
most
academic
settings
of his
limit
on
an
all-powerful
creator;
therefore,
God
is
not
bound
by
His
own
laws.
He
is
just
in
whatever
time, namely, Niz.āmı̄yah College in Baghdad. However, at the peak of his career, notwithstanding
20 Applied to suffering, this then means that all harm encountered by man is fair as it has
He
does.
great
achievements
and recognition, al-Ghazālı̄ became doubtful of the authenticity of his theoretical
been
willed
by
God
who
is just in from
all His
Ashʾarite
thinkers
were
inofsharp
with
religious knowledge and resigned
hiscreation.
positionThe
to pursue
a more
interior
path
piety.conflict
In Bowker’s
the
Muʿtazilites
asserted
that notknowledge
only is God
subjected
to the
of justice
but
that,
in
view,
al-Ghazālı̄ who
felt that
his religious
about
God and
the same
abilityrules
to describe
Him
with
such
fact,
the obligation
to act inif just
means
is eternal
forofGod.
articulacy
was worthless
it did
not bring
him and
into uncompromising
a direct experience
God.It29is worth noting that
a prominent
Muslim philosopher,
Ibn Rushd
(Averroes,
d..1198),
challenged these
and
asserted
In his spiritual
autobiography
al-Munqidh
min al-d
alāl (Deliverance
fromviews
Error),
al-Ghazālı̄
that
the element
of justice may
be employed
for God
man in the
same manner:
man,
by virtue
describes
his intellectual
and not
emotional
challenges
thatand
ultimately
resulted
in a major
event
in his
of
being
just,
advances possible
to a higher
level
goodness;
God,
however,
is just due
to convention
His perfection—a
life.
After
examining
ways
byofwhich
a deep
religious
knowledge
and
that is
trait
Himbetoattained,
be just.21he affirmed that the mystic path of life where knowledge of God is
free that
fromrequires
doubt may
In the final
analysis,
mainstream
Sunnite
theologians
supported
the Ashʾarite
of thought
grounded
in direct
mystical
experience
was the
way he had
to peruse.
However,school
in preparation
to
and
emphasized
that
God
creates
all
acts.
In
order
to
reconcile
God’s
omnipotence
with
human
travel on this path, he needed to disengage from all worldly attachments: the prestigious professorship
responsibility,
the
doctrine
acquisition
(kasb)proved
was adopted:
God
creates
all acts;
freely
position, family,
and
wealth,ofwhich
in actuality
to be much
more
difficult.
Thishumans
inner struggle
22
acquire
certain
acts
therefore,
arewas
accountable
the acquisition
of good to
and
evil acts.
lasted more
than
sixand,
months
until he
faced withfor
a serious
illness—inability
speak,
eat, or
Conversely,
thinkers
belonging
to thesuffering.
Shiʾite branch
the influence
of
drink—that Muslim
caused him
afflictions
and much
In fact,ofit Islam—through
was through months
of hardship
rational
element
Muʿtazilite
theology—remained
in disagreement
with
the Ashʿarites.
An
and suffering
dueintothe
unexpected
physical
and spiritual crises
that al-Ghazālı̄
transformed
internally,
example
of of
this
be observed
from thetowritings
of an
eminent
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
leaving all
hismay
possessions
and departing
Damascus
where
he spent
two years
in contemplation
30
Muṭahharī
1979), who
was of and
the opinion
that
the Ashʾarite
outlook,
while
at vindicating
and prayer(d.
in search
of certitude
a personal
experience
of God
that was
freeaimed
from doubtfulness.
23
God from
injustice,impact
resulted
exoneratingencounter
human oppressors
of any wrongdoing.
The positive
ofinal-Ghazālı̄’s
with his severe
illness, which endangered his
From
the
Muslim
philosophical
perspective,
the
notion
of
good
and
evil is enclosed
within and
the
physical and mental wellness, appears in accord with the optimistic portrayal
of hardship
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
24 An example of the ontological
nonexistence
and
as suchonisMullā
viewed
a negative
27 For an excellent
commentary
Sadrā’sas
magnum
opus, Asfār,entity.
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
as as
Avicenna
(d. 1037), who
andadded
Sadra al-Din
who was and
mostly
recognized
as more
Mullā
known
the Shiite philosopher
mystical Shirāzī,
layer to philosophical
theological
debates. For
on
the
development
of
Islamic
philosophy,
see
(Nasr
2006).
Sadrā
(d.
1636).
29 See John Bowker, The Religious Imagination and the Sense of God (Bowker 1978, p. 195).
Ibn
formed a theodicy by distinguishing the various forms of evil such as “essential” evil
30 See
AbSīnā
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
who lacked ownership of his belongings. Similarly, when God tested
him with a s
Religions 2018, 9, x FORservant
PEER REVIEW
4 of 13
disease, he exercised patience and recognized that he was going through a test—a po
13 any
experience—and
ascribed
feelingssincerity
of despair
to submission
Satan.15
when afflicted with
illness and adversity.
Job’snegative
incomparable
and
to God’s
Religions
2018,
9,
47
7
of
13 the in prosperit
Qur’anic narrative
Jobaffliction
demonstrates
that trials are
andthe
tests—whether
will in both health andThe
prosperity,
as well asabout
during
and hardship,
reasons
14
health
or illness
and
hardship—are
part of the divine plan, so much so that even prophets a
Qur’an portrays him
as “an
excellent
servant.”
is through
various
experiences
in the
lifefact
thatthat
mandespite
is ablehis
to enormous
actualize his potentia
According toexempt;
Muslim itexegesis,
what
distinguishes
Job is
suffering presented in the Qur’an.31 For al-Ghazālı̄, this apparent negative experience proved, in
propagate
his mission
on this
As Johntonotes,
of Job
in the as
Qur’an
is under
fortune, he continually
attributed
the source
of earth.
his blessings
God “the
and story
remained
humble
a
fact, to be positive and instrumental in the actualization of his intellectual and spiritual potentialities.
primarily
as a reward
narrative with
an emphasis
fromhim
thatwith
of thea story
of Job in the Bi
servant who lacked
ownership
of his belongings.
Similarly,
whendifferent
God tested
serious
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
4. Concept
Evil: Theological
Philosophical
experience—and ascribed
anyofnegative
feelings of and
despair
to Satan.15 Development
the relationship between theological and mystical discourses, are clearly articulated in his writings
The Qur’anic narrative
about
Job
demonstrates
thatMuslim
trials and
tests—whether
in(kalām)
prosperity
One
of
the
earliest
theological
thought
wasand
how to reconc
following his departure and the
years
he spent
seclusion. in
As Zarrinkūb
pointed out,
the authenticity
5 ofin
13problems
health or illness and
hardship—are
of the divine
so
much
that even
prophets
are not
divine
attributepursued
ofpart
omnipotence
withplan,
thedeductions
notion
ofso
human
will.
of religious knowledge that
al-Ghazālı̄
through rational
for
muchfree
of his
lifeThe
boredeparture point fo
exempt;
it is of
through
various
life
that
man interpretations
is able to actualize
potential
anddivine name
33the
ering in the divinefruit
plan.
Thehis
notion
suffering,
included
discourse
wasexperiences
the
Qur’an in
and
diverse
of its his
teachings
on the
after
illness
and
major which
mystical
experience.
The
reflections
of al-Ghazālı̄’s
renewal
are
propagate his
mission
on this
earth.
As John
notes,
“the story of Job
in the
Qur’an
is understood
17 The
n and animals, continued
discussed
the
attributes
(asmāʾ
reconciliation
certain
divine
attributes,
predominantly the
presented intohisbemagnum
opus by
called
Ih.Muʿtazilite
yā al-ḥusnā).
ulūm al-din
(“The
Revival of the of
Religious
Sciences”),
composed
16
primarily
as
a
reward
narrative
with
an
emphasis
different
from
that
of
the
story
of
Job
in
the frame
Bible.”with
m stress on God’sduring
justice,the
however,
resulted
in
group
of his
anthe
all-powerful
God,work,
with
the 2018,
idea9,of
human
will—the
broader
which h
Religions
xillustrated
FOR
PEER free
REVIEW
next decade
of
life.
In thisdividing,
major
al-Ghazālı̄
through
a highly
detailed
hʾarite school of thought.
suffering
was
enclosed—was
the
first
attempt
to
initiate
a
theodicy
within
the
context
of Islam
elucidation of personal religious experiences ways by which a profound inner life may be integrated
4. Concept of Evil: Theological
and Philosophical
Development
13 Job’s incomparable sin
34
when
afflicted
with
illness
and
adversity.
gians,
law of
justice
applies
only todoctrines.
human
whopresents
have
Thebeings
discourse
itself at the
with
sound
theological
OR
PEERGod’s
REVIEW
5 ofcore
13 of the theological dialogue amongst various group
will
in
both
health
and
prosperity,
astheodicy
well
as during
an
His laws. Applying theThe
ideareflection
of justice
toearliest
God,
however,
will
put
a
theologians
who
advocated
for
the
attribute
omnipotence
in
its
uncomprom
One
of theof
problems
in
Muslim
theological
thought
(kalām)
was how
to absolute
reconcile
theaffliction
this
worldview
and
much
of
what
may
be of
called
Ghazālian
is and
5 of 13
14
Qur’an
portrays
him
as
“an
excellent
servant.”
erefore,
God is
notencapsulated
bound
by His
laws.
Hedictum
is just
whatever
ty
of human
suffering
in
the
divine
The
notion
of
suffering,
which
were
ofin
the
opinion
that
only
agent
in this
world
isnot
God:
Hepoint
creates
divine
attribute
ofform
omnipotence
with
the notion
ofincluded
human
free
will.
Theisdeparture
forHis
thisown acts as w
inown
hisplan.
famous
the
best
of
allthe
possible
worlds:
“There
in possibility
According
to
Muslim
exegesis,
what
distinguishes
Job“evil”
is thea
his
then
that
all
harm
encountered
by
man
isalldiscussed
fair
as
it has
bymeans
children
animals,
continued
towhat
be
byinterpretations
theAsabda
Muʿtazilite
efering
plan.
The
notion
ofand
suffering,
which
included
the
acts
of
human
beings.
thisReligions
viewofraised
concerns
about
the creation
discourse
was
the
Qur’an
and
the
diverse
its
teachings
on REVIEW
thepresents
divine
names
and of
2018,
9,serious
x FOR
PEER
anything
more
wonderful
than
is”
(laysa
fi’l-imkān
mimmā
kān).
The
statement
itself
17 debate
he
continually
attributed
ofwill—the
his blessings
to G
all Muʿtazilite’s
His creation.
The
Ashʾarite
thinkers
inal-din:
sharp
conflict
with
continued
to befirm
discussed
the
Muʿtazilite
he
stress
onby
God’s
however,
resulted
in the fortune,
group
dividing,
God,
the
developed
further
to question
the
validity
ofthe
human
free
concept
attributes
(asmāʾ
al-ḥusnā).
The
reconciliation
ofl-tawakkul,
certain
divine
attributes,
predominantly
the
aspect
in Book
35
of
the
Ih.justice,
yā were
ul
ūm
Kitāb
al-tawhı̄d
wa’
Divine
Unity
and
Trust
insource
God:
13
servant
who
lacked
ownership
of
his
belongings.
Similarly,
when
when
afflicted
with
illness
and
adversity.
Job’s
incompa
not
only
God
subjected
tothe
the
same
rules
of justice
but
that,Quran
ve
birth
toisthe
Ashʾarite
ofgroup
thought.
justice,
however,
resulted
in
dividing,
deeply
rooted
inidea
the
as it free
relates
to man’s
responsibility
and which
accountability,
ofschool
an
all-powerful
God,
with
the
ofinhuman
will—the
broader
frame with
human as well as
Everything
that
God
distributes
among
men
such
aswho
sustenance,
life-span
‘ajal’,
happiness
will
inThe
both
health
and
prosperity,
as well
during
disease,
hehave
patience
recognized
thatas
he
was affl
go
ans
is eternal
and uncompromising
forjustice
God.
It is worth
noting
that
ought.
o Ashʾarite
theologians,
God’s law
of
applies
only
to human
beings
judgment
and
reward
and
punishment.
dialogue
crystallized
between
the
Muʿtazilite
an
suffering
was
enclosed—was
the
first
attempt
to initiate
aexercised
theodicy
within
theand
context
of Islam.
and
sadness,
weakness
and
power,
faith
and
unbelief,
obedience
anda apostasy—all
of
it isgroups.
14 to Satan.
experience—and
ascribed
any
negative
feelings
of despair
Qur’an
him
as
“anvarious
servant.”
Rushd
(Averroes,
d.
1198),
challenged
these
views
and
oIbn
according
to
Histo
laws.
Applying
the
idea
of
justice
to
God,
however,
will
put a portrays
f act
justice
applies
only
human
beings
who
have
Ashʿarite,
the
two
main
schools
of
thought,
with
divergence
ofexcellent
opinion;
both
made
a serious
The
discourse
presents
itself
atasserted
the
core
of
the theological
dialogue
amongst
The
unqualifiedly
just
with
injustice
it,
true
with
no
wrong
infecting
Indeed,
all
this
18
The
Qur’anic
narrative
about
Jobexegesis,
demonstrates
that trials and Jt
According
toit.Muslim
what distinguishes
bethe
employed
fortherefore,
Godtoand
man
in
thewho
same
manner:
man,
byin
virtue
ng
idea
of justice
God,
however,
willadvocated
put
owerful
creator;
God
is not
bound
byano
His
own
laws.
He
is just
to
win
the
argument
according
towhatever
their
understanding
of
theand
Qur’an.
theologians
for the
attribute
of in
omnipotence
in
its absolute
uncompromising
happens
according
to
a
necessary
and
true
order,
according
to
what
is
appropriate
as
it
or
illness
and
hardship—are
part of
the
muc
he continually
attributed
source
of
hissobless
goodness;
God,
however,
isin
just
due
to
His
perfection—a
lied
toofsuffering,
this
then
means
that
all
harm
encountered
manhealth
isthis
fair
asfortune,
it has
tlevel
bound
by
His own
laws.
He
is just
whatever
The
Muʿtazilite
school
of
thought,
also
known
the rationalists,
categorically
opposed
th
form
were
of
the
opinion
that
the onlyby
agent
in
world
is God:
He as
creates
His
own
acts
asdivine
well asplan,
is
appropriate
and
in
the
measure
that
is
proper
to
it;
nor
is
anything
more
fitting,
more
exempt;
it
is
through
various
experiences
in
life
that
man
is
abl
servant
who
lacked
ownership
of
his
belongings.
Similar
God
who
is
just
in
all
His
creation.
The
Ashʾarite
thinkers
were
in
sharp
conflict
with
at all harm encounteredthe
byacts
man
asthat
it has
God creates
acts that
include
evil and
advocated
for human
freeacts
willby
by emphasizi
ofisallfair
human
beings.
As thishuman
view raised
serious
concerns
about
the creation
of “evil”
perfect,
and
more
attractive
within
the
realm
of the
possibility.
For
if something
was to
exist
propagate
mission
onThey
this will—the
earth.
Asthat
John
notes,
“the
disease,
exercised
patience
and
recognized
that of
he J
am
Sunnite
theologians
supported
the
Ashʾarite
school
thought
he
Ashʾarite
thinkers
inisthe
sharp
conflict
with
who
asserted
that notwere
only
God
subjected
to the
same
rules
of justice
butvalidity
that,
in
importance
ofofthe
attribute
ofhis
justice
(ʿadl).
upheld
God,
in accordance
wit
God,
debate
developed
further
todivine
question
of he
human
free
concept
that
is story
and
remind
one
of
the
sheer
omnipotence
of
God
and
not
of
the
good
things
accomplished
primarily
as
a reward
narrative
withany
anas
emphasis
different
that
experience—and
ascribed
negative
offrom
despair
subjected
all
order
torules
God’s
with
human
on
to acts.
act intoIn
just
means
isreconcile
eternal
and
uncompromising
for
God.
Itto
is man’s
worth
noting
that
the
same
of justice
but
that,
in ofas(ʿāadil),
attribute
cannot
create
evil
and
that and
evil
is the
direct
result
of
man’s
freedom
of
choice
deeply
rooted
inomnipotence
the
Quran
it relates
responsibility
accountability,
well
asfeelings
divine
by
His
action,
it
would
be
miserliness
that
utterly
contradicts
God’s
generosity
and
injustice
The
Qur’anic
narrative
about
Job
demonstrates
that
quisition
(kasb) was
God
creates
all
acts;
humans
freely
uncompromising
for
God.
It is
worth
noting
that
slim
philosopher,
Ibnadopted:
Rushd
(Averroes,
d. view
1198),
challenged
these
views
and asserted
was
challenged
by
raising
questions
suchbetween
as: If God
does not create
evil, who, tr
th
judgment
and
reward
and
punishment.
The
dialogue
crystallized
the Muʿtazilite
and the
contrary
to
divine
justice.
And
if
God
were
not
omnipotent,
He
would
be
impotent,
thereby
4.
Concept
of
Evil:
Theological
and
Philosophical
Development
22
illness
hardship—are
part
ofwills
the divine
plan
re,
are
accountable
the acquisition
of
good
evil
acts.
of justice
may
not be for
employed
forthe
God
and
man
inand
thefor
same
manner:
man,
byhealth
virtue
oes,
d. 1198),
challenged
these
views
and
asserted
responsible
suffering
byor
illnesses
andboth
disasters?
if
God
for illnesse
Ashʿarite,
two
main
schools
ofhuman
thought,
with
a caused
divergence
of
opinion;
made And
a serious
effort
35
contradicting
the
ofthe
divinity.
18
itThe
is through
various
experiences
in life
that
onging
to
branch
of
influence
ofhow
vances
athe
higher
of
goodness;
God,
however,
justtheir
due
to
His perfection—a
God
andto
man
inShiʾite
thelevel
same
manner:
man,
bynature
virtue
disasters
inishuman
life,
can
Heexempt;
bethe
just?
Muʿtazilites
by affirming
that ma
ill(
to
win
theIslam—through
argument
according
to
understanding
of
the
Qur’an.
One
of
earliest
problems
inresponded
Muslim
theological
thought
21
propagate
his
mission
on
this
earth.
As
John
notes,
“the
te
theology—remained
in disagreement
with
the of
Ashʿarites.
Anstatement
however,
due
to
His
s; God,
Him
to
be just. is justAlthough
disasters,
while may
appear
“evil”,
are
inscope
actuality
“good”
that
God
andfree
thatws
The
Muʿtazilite
school
of
thought,
also
known
rationalists,
categorically
opposed
thecreates
divine as
attribute
of
omnipotence
with
the
ofidea
human
a perfection—a
critical and
analysis
al-Ghazālı̄’s
is the
beyond
the
of this
paper,
it notion
should
primarily
as
a
reward
narrative
with
an
emphasis
different
from the
writings
of
an
eminent
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
analysis,
mainstream
Sunnite
theologians
supported
the
Ashʾarite
school
of
thought
significant
purpose
in
the
creational
cosmic
plan.
This
seems
to
be
the
first
appearance
of
that
God
creates
human
acts
that
include
evil
and
advocated
for
human
free
will
by
emphasizing
the
was the
Qur’an
diverse interpretations
of itsthe
teat
be mentioned that he received much criticism fromdiscourse
his opponents
since
takingand
thisthe
position—it
is not
hethat
opinion
that the
Ashʾarite
outlook,
while
aimed
at
vindicating
supported
the
Ashʾarite
school
of
thought
dgians
God creates
all
acts.
In
order
to
reconcile
God’s
omnipotence
with
human
importance
the divine
ofinjustice
(ʿadl).
upheld
that
God,
accordance
with
His divine attr
17 Thein
attributes
al-ḥusnā).
reconciliation
of certain
possible
for God toofcreate
a betterattribute
world—is
conflict
withThey
the(asmāʾ
Ash
arite
theological
teachings
relating
4.freely
Concept
of Evil:
Theological
and
Philosophical
Develo
23create
onerating
human
oppressors
of
any
wrongdoing.
he
of God’s
acquisition
(kasb)
was
adopted:
God
creates
all
acts;
humans
r todoctrine
reconcile
omnipotence
with
human
attribute
of
(ʿāadil),
cannot
evil
and
that
evil
is
the
direct
result
of
man’s
freedom
of
choice.
This
36
of anout
all-powerful
God, with
the idea ofwithin
humana free will—the bro
to God’s omnipotence. 13 However, it must be pointed
that the statement
is embedded
The
story
of
Job
in
Judeo₋Christian
traditions
is
presented
in
the
Book
of
Job
and
appears
in
the for
22
cal
perspective,
notion
ofacts;
good
and
evilfreely
is“trust
enclosed
within
the issuffering
s18,adopted:
Godthe
creates
all
acts
and, therefore,
areview
accountable
for
the
acquisition
ofwhich
good
and
evil
acts.
washumans
by
raising
questions
such
as:inwas
If
God
does
not
create
evil,
who,
then,
istheological
enclosed—was
the first
attempt
initiate
a theodicyt
One
the
earliest
problems
in to
Muslim
broader
context
ofchallenged
tawakkul,
in between
God,”
treated
the
Qur’an
extensively.
In
fact,
Al-Wakı̄l,
9, x FOR PEER REVIEW
5of
ofexplain
13
dialogue
Job
and
his
friends
who
try
to
to
him
the
reason
for
his
sufferings.
A
comp
22of Islam—through
of
existence
(wujūd)
nonexistence
(ʿadam).
Briefly
put,
good
isQur’an
slim
belonging
to
the
Shiʾite
branch
the influence
ofwhen
le
forthinkers
the acquisition
of
good
and
evil
acts. suffering
responsible
for
human
caused
by
illnesses
and
disasters?
ifitself
Godat
wills
for
illnesses
and
The
discourse
presents
core
ofthe
the
theological
dialog
divine
attribute
of
omnipotence
with
the
notion
of paper.
huma
theand
trustee,
is one
of
the
divine
attributes
that
the
references
itAnd
characterizes
believers,
study
of the story
between
Judeo₋Christian
tradition
and
Islam the
istrue
beyond
scope
of this
branches
existence;
evil,
on
the
other
stems
from
in branch
the Muʿtazilite
theology—remained
inlife,
disagreement
with
the
Ashʿarites.
An
ʾite
ofhuman
Islam—through
influence
ofhand,
in
how
can
He
be
just?
The
Muʿtazilites
responded
by affirming
that
mentality
offrom
suffering
inthe
thehuman
divine
plan.
The
notion
of
suffering,
included
theologians
who
advocated
for
the
attribute
ofillnesses
omnipotence
its
discourse
was
the Qur’an
and
the
diverse
that
is,disasters
those
who
hold
full
trust
in
God.
This
concept
is also
discussed
by
al-Ghazālı̄
inGlance
his
book
called
excellent
comparative
review,
seewhich
A.H.
Johns,
A Comparative
at Ayyub
in interpretations
the Qur'an in
(John
24 An
ewed
as
a
negative
entity.
example
of
the
ontological
ained
in
disagreement
with
the
Ashʿarites.
An
may
be
observed
from
the
writings
of
an
eminent
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
and
disasters,
while
may
appear
as
“evil”,
are
in
actuality
“good”
that
God
creates
and
that
serve
a of is
17
ved suffering by The
children
and animals,
continued
to‘al-Mags
be discussed
by
the
Muʿtazilite
form
were
of
the
opinion
that
the
only
agent
in
this
world
God:
H
attributes
(asmāʾ
al-ḥusnā).
The
reconciliation
certain
di
Ninety-Nine
Beautiful Names
of God,
ad
al-asnā
fı̄
sharh
ma
ānı̄
asmā
Allāh
al-h
usnā’,
where
he
pp. 51–82).
.
.
.
good
and
evil
be
seen
from
the
works
of
two
prominent
979),
was
of may
the
opinion
that
the
Ashʾarite
outlook,
while
aimed
at
vindicating
gs
of19 who
an
eminent
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
significant
purpose
the
creational
cosmic
plan.
This
seems
to
be
the
first
appearance
of
the
theory
14 in
ns.
The
Muʿtazilite’s
firm
stress
on
God’s
justice,
however,
resulted
in
the
group
dividing,
the
acts
of
all
human
beings.
As
this
view
raised
serious
concerns
ab
Qur’an
38:41–2
and
21:83–4.
of
an
all-powerful
God,
with
the
idea
of
human
free
will
provides a comprehensive discussion of the divine attribute of Al-Wakı̄l, and describes to his audience
15
antly
influenced
ofHis
Muslim
thought:
Ibn 23 God,
ece,Ashʾarite
outlook,
while
aimed
atessence,
vindicating
resulted
in exonerating
oppressors
of Abubakr
anyto
wrongdoing.
37
See
`Tigh
Neishabur
Surabadi,
Tafsir
Surabadi,
ed.
Sa`Idito
Sirjani
(Surabadi
nally
gave
birth
tothe
theshaping
Ashʾarite
school
ofphilosophical
thought.
the suffering
debate
developed
further
question
the 1381).
validity
of see
hum
was
enclosed—was
the
first
attempt
to Also,
initiate
aBrt
how
God,human
in
deserves
have
matters
entrusted
to Him.
23 was
7),
and
Sadr
al-Din
Shirāzī,
who
mostly
recognized
as
Mullā
Muslim
philosophical
perspective,
the
notion
of
good
and
evil
is
enclosed
within
the
ppressors
of
any
wrongdoing.
M.elements
Wheeler,
Prophets
in human
the
Qur'an,
anare
Introduction
to the
anditself
Muslim
Exegesis
(Wheeler
2002).
ording to Ashʾarite theologians,
God’s
of justice
applies
to
beings
who
have
The
discourse
presents
at
the
core
of the theologi
deeply
rooted
in the
Quran
as it relates
to
man’s
responsibility
and
Therefore,
whilelaw
certain
of
aonly
classical
theodicy
articulated
in Qur'an
al-Ghazālı̄’s
maxim
of
13
The
story ofwithin
Job16in
Judeo₋Christian
traditions
is presented
inisthe Book of Job and appears in the form of a
See
(Johns
2003,
pp.
50–51).
egated
notion
of
good
and
evil
is
enclosed
the
al
understanding
of
existence
(wujūd)
and
nonexistence
(ʿadam).
Briefly
put,
good
to act according
to His
laws.
Applying
the idea
of justice
to
God,
however,
will
put
aandadvocated
judgment
and
reward
punishment.
dialogue
crystallized
theologians
who
for The
the attribute
of
omnipote
“the best
of
all
possible
worlds,”
one
infer
that
objective
was
to
provide
guidelines
to
dialogue
between
and
his may
friends
who
try his
toRahman
explain
to
him
the
reason
forpractical
his sufferings.
A comparative
17 Job
For
more
on
this
see
Abdol
Ibn
Khaldūn,
Muqaddimah
of Ibn Khaldūn
(Ibn Khaldūn 1375).
y distinguishing
the
various
forms
of
evil
such
“essential”
evil
ositive
entity that
branches
from
existence;
evil,
on
the
other
hand,
stems
from
d)
and
nonexistence
(ʿadam).
Briefly
put,
good
isas
an
all-powerful
creator;
therefore,
God
is
not
bound
by
His
own
laws.
He
is
just
in
whatever
Ashʿarite,
the
two
main
schools
of
thought,
with
a
divergence
of opi
form
were
of
the
opinion
that
the
only
agent
in
this
world
reach
a high
level
of
trust
in
God
despite
the
apparent
imperfections
of
the
world.
Furthermore,
prior
study of the story
Judeo₋Christian
tradition on
anddevelopment
Islam is beyond
the scope
this paper.
For an
18 between
For24 a An
comprehensive
discussion
of theology
in of
Islam,
see Harry
Austryn Wolfso
ng
and
“accidental”
evil
(sharr
bil-ʿaraḍ),
which
can be
nd
asprivation,
such
viewed
as
athen
negative
entity.
example
of
the
ontological
xistence;
evil,
on
the
other
hand,
stems
from
20 or
Applied
tois suffering,
this
means
that
all
harm
encountered
by
man
is
fair
as
it
has
to
win
the
argument
according
to
their
understanding
of
the
Qur’an
the
acts
of
all
human
beings.
As
this
view
raised
serious
co
excellent comparative
review,ofsee
A.H.(Wolfson
Johns, A1976).
Comparative Glance at Ayyub in the Qur'an (Johns 2008,
Philosopy
Kalam
24 An
alysis,
Ibn
Sīnā
concluded
that
it
is
the
non-essential/accidental
evil
entity.
example
of
the
ontological
five
what
constitutes
good
and
evil
may
be
seen
from
the
works
of
two
prominent
ed by God who is just in allpp.
His51–82).
creation. The Ashʾarite thinkers were in sharp
conflict
with
The God,
Muʿtazilite
school
of thought,
also known
as thethe
rationalist
the debate
developed
further
to question
validity
an suffering
and 31that
the
total
amount
of
good
in to
the
universe
phers
significantly
influenced
the
shaping
of Muslim
philosophical
thought:
Ibn that,
may
bewho
seen
from
thethat
works
of
two
prominent
14 not
azilites
who
asserted
only
is
God
subjected
the
same
rules
of
justice
but
in
that
God
creates
human
acts
that
include
evil
and
advocated
for hum
deeply
rooted
in
the
Quran
as
it
relates
to
man’s
responsib
Qur’an
38:41–2
and
21:83–4.
For example, Quran, 2:216, “ . . . you may dislike something although it is good for you, or like something although it is bad
15
Mullā
Sadrā,
onjust
the
other
hand,
extensively
this
he
shaping
ofact
Muslim
philosophical
thought:
Ibn
Avicenna
(d.
1037),
and
Sadr
Shirāzī,
who developed
wasSurabadi,
mostly
recognized
asjudgment
Mullā
for
you:
God
knows
and
you
don’t.”
See
Abubakr
`Tigh
Neishabur
Tafsir
Surabadi,
ed.
Sa`Idi
(Surabadi
1381).
Also, see
Brannon
obligation
to
in
means
isal-Din
eternal
and
uncompromising
for
God.
It is worth
noting
that
importance
of
the Sirjani
divine
attribute
ofpunishment.
justice
(ʿadl).
They
upheldcrys
th
and reward
and
The
dialogue
32 For a comprehensive study on al-Ghazālı̄’s thoughts, see Frank Griffel, Al-Ghazālı̄’s Philosophical Theology (Griffel 2009).
rest
in
combining
theology
with
mystical
insight.
This
approach,
nent
Shirāzī,
who
was
mostly
recognized
as
Mullā
M.
Wheeler,
Prophets
in
the
Qur'an,
an
Introduction
to
the
Qur'an
and
Muslim
Exegesis
(Wheeler
2002).
Muslim philosopher,
Ibn RushdE.(Averroes,
d. 1198), challenged these
views
asserted
Ashʿarite,
the twocreate
main evil
schools
thought,
with
a diverge
attribute
ofand
(ʿāadil),
cannot
and of
that
evil is the
direct
result
Also
Marmura, ‘Al-Ghazālı̄’, in Peter Adamson
and Richard Taylor (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Arabic
16 see Michael
26as “essential” evil
(Johns
pp.
50–51).
med
existence
as
it
pertains
Islamic
metaphysics.
med the
a theodicy
by
distinguishing
the2003,
various
forms
of evil
such
lement
oftheory
justiceof
may
not beSee
employed
forto
God
and man
in the
same
manner:
man,
virtue
view
was
by raising
questions
such
as: If God does
to challenged
winbythe
argument
according
to their
understanding
of th
Philosophy
(Marmura
2005).
33 See17Abdolhusin
Foras
more
on“accidental”
this see
Abdol
Rahman
Ibn
Khaldūn,
Muqaddimah
of Ibn Khaldūn
(Ibn
Khaldūn 1375).
Zarrinkub,
Farar
Az
Madrasah
Life
and
Teachings
of
Al-Ghazali
(Zarrinkub
1387,
p.
124).
which
is
non-being
or
privation,
and
evil
(sharr
bil-ʿaraḍ),
which
can
be
he
various
forms
of
evil
such
“essential”
evil
ust, advances to a34higher
level of goodness; God, however, is just due
to His perfection—a
responsible
for
human
suffering
caused
by illnesses
disasters?
The
Muʿtazilite
school
of thought,
alsoand
known
as the rA
For18Ibn
more
on a
this,
see (Wattcan
2007).
For
comprehensive
on development of theology
in Islam, see Harry Austryn Wolfson, The
rivation.
In
histo
analysis,
Sīnā
concluded
that
it is the non-essential/accidental
evil
d
“accidental”
evil
(sharr
which
bediscussion
21bil-ʿaraḍ),
requires
Him
be
disasters
in
human
life,
how
can
He
be
just?
The
Muʿtazilites
respo
that
God
creates
human
acts
that
include
evil
and
advocate
35 just.
See (Al-Ghazālı̄
2001,
pp. 45–46).
Philosopy
of Kalam
(Wolfson 1976).
36and
cluded
that
ithuman
ispain
the
non-essential/accidental
evil
ng
cause
ofon
suffering
and
that
the
total
amount
ofthe
good
in the
universe
azilite’s
view
suffering
see
(Heemskerk
2000).
Forstatement,
an extensive
For
a detailed
discussion
on al-Ghazālı̄’s
see
(Ormsby
1984).
It should
be noted
that
several
centuries
this
he
final
analysis,
mainstream
Sunnite
theologians
supported
Ashʾarite
school
ofwhile
thought
and
disasters,
may
appear
asattribute
“evil”, later
are
actuality
“good”
t
importance
of the
divine
of in
justice
(ʿadl).
They u
25 Mullā
statement
wasin
raised
byuniverse
Leibnitz
inhand,
the context
of a consistent
theodicy. Also
see (Kermani 2011, p. 58).
namount
Islam,
see
Mohammed
Ghaly,
Islam
and
Disability:
Perspectives
in
Theology
of
evil.
Sadrā,
on
the
other
extensively
developed
this
that
the
total
amount
of
good
the
hasized that God37creates all acts. In order to reconcile God’s omnipotence
with
human
significant
purpose
the creational
cosmic
plan.
seems
to be
attribute
ofin
(ʿāadil),
cannot create
evil
andThis
that evil
is the
dirt
See (Al-Ghazālı̄ 1992, pp. 375–76).
n the the
other
extensively
developed
pproach
bydoctrine
anhand,
interest
in combining
theology
with mystical
insight.all
This
approach,
bility,
of
acquisition
(kasb)
wasthis
adopted:
God creates
acts;
humans
freely
view was
challenged by raising questions such as: If G
m
(Wolfson
1976).mystical
26
vi,
totally
transformed
the
theory
of existence
as
pertains
to Islamic
metaphysics.
theology
with
insight.
This
approach,
22 human suffering caused by illnesses and di
certain
acts
and, therefore,
are accountable
foritthe
acquisition
of good
and
evil acts.for
responsible
Ibn Rushd (Averroes), The Philosophy and Theology of
Averroes, (Averroes 13 The story of Job in Judeo₋Christian traditions is presented in the Book
26
existence
as
it
pertains
to
Islamic
metaphysics.
ely, Muslim thinkers belonging to the Shiʾite branch of Islam—through the
influence
of
disasters
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
theology—remained
the Ashʿarites.
Anwhile may appear as “evil”, are in actuality
and disasters,
see Wolfson,
TheMuʿtazilite
Philosopy of Kalam
(Wolfson 1976). in disagreement with study
of the story between Judeo₋Christian tradition and Islam is bey
cussion
on
the
Muʿtazilite’s
view
on
pain
and
suffering
see
(Heemskerk
2000).
For
an
extensive
of this may be observed from the writings of an eminent Persian philosopher,
Morteza
significant
purpose in the creational cosmic plan. This seem
excellent
comparative review, see A.H. Johns, A Comparative Glance
otion
of
disability
inwas
Islam,
see 2000).
Mohammed
Ghaly,
Islam andfrom
Disability:
Perspectives
in Theology
nrī
and
see
For that
an
extensive
(d.suffering
1979),
who
of Hossein
the
opinion
thePhilosophy
Ashʾarite
outlook,
while aimed
at vindicating
good
and
evil,
see(Heemskerk
Seyyed
Nasr,
Islamic
Its Origin
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
39
40
41
42
43
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).
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).
Qur’an: 57:3, “He is the First and the Last; the Outer and the Inner: He has the knowledge of all things.”
For a comprehensive discussion about Islamic mysticism, see (Schimmel 1975). Also, see (Nasr 1987).
See (Shafiei Kadkani 1388, p. 2).
For more on the influence of the Qur’an in shaping Rumi’s worldview, see (Zarrinkub 1388, p. 342).
The
Qur’anic
narrative
demonstrates
health or illness and hardship—are part of the divine
plan,
so much
so thatabout
evenJob
prophets
are not that trials a
exempt; it is through various experiences in life
thatorman
is able
to actualize hispart
potential
and plan, so
health
illness
and hardship—are
of the divine
exempt;
is through
experiences
in life that man is
propagate his mission on this earth. As John notes,
“theit story
of Job various
in the Qur’an
is understood
16 “the story
primarily as a reward narrative with an emphasispropagate
different from
that of the
of Job As
in the
Bible.”
his mission
on story
this earth.
John
notes,
Religions 2018, 9, 47
9
of
13
primarily as a reward narrative with an emphasis different from
4. Concept of Evil: Theological and Philosophical Development
4. Concept of Evil: Theological and Philosophical Developme
One of the R
earliest
problems inonMuslim
theological
thought
(kalām)
was as
how
to reconcile
attempt to summarize
ūmı̄’s expositions
the notion
of evil and
human
suffering
presented
in the
divine attribute of omnipotence with the notion of One
human
freeearliest
will. The
departure
point for
this
of the
problems
in Muslim
theological
thoug
the Mathnawı̄.
divine
attribute
of
omnipotence
with
the
notion
of
human
fre
discourse
was
the
Qur’an
and
the
diverse
interpretations
of
its
teachings
on
the
divine
names
and
In Rūmı̄’s worldview, the multiplicity that exists in this world is the effect of the manifestation
17
attributes
The (sifāt)
reconciliation
attributes,
predominantly
the
aspect
wascreative
the
Qur’an
andInthe
diverse
interpretations
of its
of God’s
names (asmāʾ
(asmā )al-ḥusnā).
and attributes
that aimofdiscourse
tocertain
revealdivine
His
power.
other
words,
17 The with
attributes
(asmāʾ
al-ḥusnā).
reconciliation
of certain divine
of an
all-powerful
God,
withentities
the idea
of human
free
will—the
broader
frame
which human
while the
form
(s.ūrat) of the
created
is varied,
their
meaning
(ma nā),
nevertheless,
is indicative
enclosed—was
the first
toof
initiate
a theodicy
the context
an all-powerful
God,
with
thedemonstrate
ideaofofIslam.
human free will—th
of Onesuffering
Reality.44was
Rūmı̄
further expands
the attempt
distinction
between
form andwithin
meaning
to
The discourse
itself
at the other
core ofbeings
the
theological
dialogue
groups.
suffering
enclosed—was
thevarious
first
initiate a theod
that while man
appears topresents
be a being
among
in thewas
universe,
theamongst
universe
is, inattempt
fact,
in toThe
45
The
discourse
presents
itself
at
the
core
of
the
theological d
theologians
who
advocated
for
the
attribute
of
omnipotence
in
its
absolute
and
uncompromising
man: “ . . . in form thou art the microcosm, in reality thou art the macrocosm.” He also identifies
were ofofthe
opinionand
thatuses
the the
onlyanalogy
agent inofthis
world
is who
God: advocated
He
His
ownattribute
acts
as well
as
theologians
the
of omnipotence
i
man asform
the “fruit”
creation
a tree
to describe
thiscreates
highlyfor
elevated
status:
were
of the
the fruit.
opinion
that
agent
this
the acts
of all
human
beings. As
this view
serious
concerns
aboutMan
the
creation
of “evil”
acts
byworld is Go
“The only
reason
that
the gardener
plants
a treeraised
is forform
the sake
of
isthe
theonly
goal
of thein
46raised
God,
the debate
furtherthat
to question
theexistence;
validity
ofhuman
human
freehe
will—the
concept
that
is
acts
of allyet,
beings.
As
thisfirst.”
view
serious
concern
creation;
therefore,
he isdeveloped
the last creature
comes into
in reality,
is the
God,
theindebate
developed
furtherto
to God,
question
the validity of
deeply
rooted
the Quran
as exemplar
it relates to
responsibility
and
accountability,
as
well
asisdivine
The
creation
of in
Adam,
as the
ofman’s
humankind
his ultimate
closeness
judgment
reward
and teachings
punishment.
dialogue
crystallized
the
and the
deeply
rooted in
thebetween
Quran
as
it Muʿtazilite
relates
to man’s
responsibility
postulated
at the and
center
of Rūmı̄’s
as it The
relates
to the positive
impact
of trials
and
tribulations
Ashʿarite,
two main schools
of thought,
withthe
a divergence
of
opinion;
made a serious
effort crystalli
judgment
and
reward
andboth
punishment.
in man’s
spiritualthe
development.
According
to Rūmı̄,
Qur’anic
notion
of the
“knowledge
ofThe
thedialogue
18
Ashʿarite,
theQur’an.
two
schools to
of become
thought,the
with a divergence o
to47win
the argument
according
to their reveals
understanding
of the
names,”
taught
to Adam upon
his creation,
that
humankind
hasmain
the
capacity
Thewhere
Muʿtazilite
thought,
also may
known
as
the
categorically
opposed
the idea of the Qu
to
therationalists,
argument
according
tooftheir
understanding
perfect mirror
God’sschool
namesofand
attributes
bewin
manifested.
The knowledge
the names,
The Muʿtazilite
of
thought,
alsothe
known
that Godus,
creates
acts that
include
evilcreated
and advocated
for human
will
by emphasizing
theas the ration
Rūmı̄ informs
is nothuman
the external
names
of the
beings;
rather,
itschool
is free
the mysteries
and
importance
divineelements
attributewithin
of justice
(ʿadl).
upheld
that
God,
in
accordance
that They
God
creates
human
actsresponsibility
that
include evil
advocated for
inner meanings
of of
thethe
various
the creation
of the
cosmos.
Man’s
iswith
toandHis
importance
of
the
divine
attribute
of
justice
(ʿadl).
They uphe
attribute
of
(ʿāadil),
cannot
create
evil
and
that
evil
is
the
direct
result
of
man’s
freedom
of
choice.
This
live in accordance with his inner nature (fitra) and recognize that actualization of his potential is doable
was challenged
such
as: If of
God
does
not
create
who,
then,
isthe direct re
attribute
(ʿāadil),
cannot
create evil,
evil
and
that
evil is
by his view
own volition,
as well as by
the raising
ability toquestions
differentiate
between
“form”
and
“meaning”:
to search
for
responsible
for
human
suffering
caused
by
illnesses
and
disasters?
And
if
God
wills
for
illnesses
and
view
was
challenged
by
raising
questions
such
as: If God
the truth behind the veils.
responsible
forresponded
human
suffering
causedthat
by
disasters
human
life, how can
beimportant
just? The
Muʿtazilites
bydevelopment
affirming
illnessesand disaste
From
the Rin
ūmı̄an
perspective,
the He
most
phase in man’s
spiritual
is illnesses
to
and disasters,
while
may appear(ma’rifat
as “evil”,
are indisasters
actuality
that
a
in“good”
human
life,God
howcreates
can
be just?
The Muʿtazilites
r
get to know
one’s self,
self-knowledge
al-nafs),
and
ultimately
to that
recognize
that He
heand
has
beenserve
and
disasters,
while
may
appear
as
“evil”,
are
in
actuality
“goo
significant
purpose
in
the
creational
cosmic
plan.
This
seems
to
be
the
first
appearance
of
the
theory
separated from his original Source (as.l). By employing the analogy of a “reed,” Rūmı̄ explicates that
48 Man
significant purpose
in the
creational
plan. This seems to
this separation is the primary cause for humankind’s unhappiness
in this life.
tends cosmic
to forget
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,
13
dialogue between Job and his friends who try to explain
him the
reason
for his sufferings.
A comparative
Thetostory
of Job
in Judeo₋Christian
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
of
this
paper.
an to him the
between Job and his friends who
try toFor
explain
from material
attachments
andreview,
the inclinations
of his
ego. Rūmı̄ expounds
upon in
prophet
Joseph’s
excellent
comparative
see A.H. Johns,
A Comparative
Glance
at
Ayyub
the
Qur'an
(Johns
2008,
study of the story between Judeo₋Christian tradition and Islam i
experiencepp.
to describe
enslavement,
as difficult
was,Johns,
freed A Comparative Gla
51–82). the constructiveness of trials; Joseph’s
excellent
comparative
review,as
seeit A.H.
49 Furthermore, in
14
him from
slavery
to
other
creatures
so
that
he
could
become
God’s
slave
alone.
Qur’an 38:41–2 and 21:83–4.
pp. 51–82).
14
See Abubakr
Neishabur
Tafsir Surabadi,
ed.example,
Sa`Idi
Sirjani
(Surabadi
1381).his
Also,
see Brannon
Rūmı̄’s15scheme,
when a`Tigh
person
is facedSurabadi,
with a negative
balā,Qur’an
for
a serious
illness,
attitude
38:41–2
and
21:83–4.
15to the
M. Wheeler,
in the Qur'an,
Introduction
andperson
Muslim
Exegesisgoal
(Wheeler
SeeQur'an
Abubakr
`Tigh
Neishabur
Surabadi,
Tafsir
and response
towardsProphets
his condition
are ofanprimary
importance.
The
whose
in life2002).
is toSurabadi, ed. Sa`Idi S
16
(Johns 2003,
pp. animal
50–51). self will complain and bring
M. Wheeler,
Prophets
the Qur'an,
an Introduction
to the Qur'an and
satisfy the See
inclinations
of his
to question
theinjustice
of God.
On the
17
16 Muqaddimah
For
more
on
this
see
Abdol
Rahman
Ibn
Khaldūn,
of
Ibn
Khaldūn
(Ibn
Khaldūn
1375).
See
(Johns
2003,
pp.
50–51).
other hand, a person whose goal is to purify the self (nafs), to go up the spiritual ladder, will find a
18
17 of theology
For a comprehensive discussion on development
in 50
Islam,
Harry
Austryn
more on
this
seesee
Abdol
Rahman
Ibn Wolfson,
Khaldūn, The
Muqaddimah of I
deeper meaning in learning the lessons hidden within this For
experience.
18
Philosopy of Kalam (Wolfson 1976).
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
45
46
47
48
49
50
See (Rumi 1926, VI:3172, 83).
Ibid., IV:521.
Ibid., III:1128–29.
Qur’an: 2:30–37.
See (Rumi 1926, I:1–2; 3; and 11).
See (Renard 1994).
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
52
53
54
See (Rumi 2004, p. 240).
See (Rumi 1926, VI:4222–26).
See (Chittick 1983, p. 238).
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
Qur’an portrays him as “an excellent servant.”14
Religions 2018, 9, 47
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
will gladly
boil:recognized
give me help
verity!
exercised
and
thatin he
was going through a test—a po
In this boiling thou
art, as it were, my
architect:
smite mefeelings
with theofskimming-spoon,
experience—and
ascribed
any negative
despair to Satan.15for
55
thou smites very delightfully.’
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
One of
the earliest
in Muslim
theological
thought
(kalām)
was how to reconci
man’s spiritual growth. As man
is reminded
ofproblems
his separation
from his
Source (as
of the
. l), the love
attribute
omnipotence
with
the
notiontimes,
of human
freethat
will.
The departure point fo
Beloved is the means bydivine
which he
will be of
able
to endure the
most
difficult
knowing
through
discoursetowas
thethe
Qur’an
andstate
the diverse
interpretations
of its
teachings
on the divine name
God’s love he has the potential
reach
elevated
of rizā—what
the Qur’an
refers
to as the
17
56
attributes
(asmāʾ
al-ḥusnā). The
reconciliation
of certain
divine attributes, predominantly the a
highest state of tranquility
(‘nafs mut
man
is pleased with
his Lord.
. ma inna’)—where
of an all-powerful God, with the idea of human free will—the broader frame with which h
7. Conclusions
Religions within
2018, 9, xthe
FORcontext
PEER REVIEW
suffering was enclosed—was the first attempt to initiate a theodicy
of Islam
The discourse
itself at the
core
of therevelation
theological
amongst
various group
The notion of evil and human
sufferingpresents
is not portrayed
in the
Islamic
asdialogue
a “problem”
to
when
afflicted
with
illness
and ad
theologians
who
advocated
for
the
attribute
of
omnipotence
in
its
absolute
and
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
were of thediscussions
opinion thatabout
the only
in this world
God: Hetheodicy
creates His own acts as w
readers in abstract ideasform
and theological
evil,agent
the formulation
of aisclassical
Qur’an
portrays
him as “an
excelle
thethe
acts
of all human
As thisand
view
raised serious
about
the creation
of “evil”
a
is not presented. Most of
Qur’anic
versesbeings.
on adversity
suffering
suggestconcerns
that human
beings,
According
to
Muslim
exeges
God,
the
debate
developed
further
to
question
the
validity
of
human
free
will—the
concept
t
including prophets, will be tested by difficult times. The ontological nature of evil is referred to as
fortune,
he
continually
attributed
deeply
rootedbyinMuslim
the Quran
as it relateswhile
to man’s
responsibility
and accountability,
as well as d
nonexistence and privation
of good
philosophers,
the theologians
attribute
evil to
servantbetween
who lacked
ownership an
of
judgment
and
reward
and
punishment.
The
dialogue
crystallized
the
Muʿtazilite
man’s conduct. The Muslim mystical literature as presented in the teachings of Rūmı̄ demonstrates
disease,
he
exercised
patience
a
the two
main schools
of thought,
a divergence
of opinion;
that trials in adversitiesAshʿarite,
are necessary
to remove
man from
the state with
of negligence
in order
for himboth
to made a serious
ascribed any neg
18
win
argument
according
to their journey.
understanding
of theexperience—and
Qur’an.
realize his divine sourceto
and
to the
choose
to set forth
on a spiritual
In this mystic
path, exercising
The
Qur’anic
narrative
about
The
Muʿtazilite
of thought,
also known
as the
categorically
opposed
th
patience, trusting God, as well
as loving
God, school
are essential
in assisting
man reach
therationalists,
state of tranquility.
health
or
illness
and
hardship—ar
that
God
creates
human
acts
that
include
evil
and
advocated
for
human
free
will
by
emphasizin
Along the path, man, as the fruit of the creation, will be able to actualize the potentialities of his inner
exempt;
is through
various wit
exp
importance
divine
attribute
of justice God’s
(ʿadl). names
They upheld
thatit God,
in accordance
nature and purify his soul
to becomeofa the
perfect
mirror
in manifesting
and attributes.
propagate
his
mission
on
this
ear
attribute of (ʿāadil), cannot create evil and that evil is the direct result of man’s freedom of choice
primarily
as acreate
rewardevil,
narrative
Conflicts of Interest: The authors
declare
no conflictby
of interest.
view was
challenged
raising questions such as: If God
does not
who, wi
th
responsible for human suffering caused by illnesses and disasters? And if God wills for illnesse
4. Concept of Evil: Theological an
References
disasters in human life, how can He be just? The Muʿtazilites responded by affirming that illn
and
may appear
as “evil”,
are inby
actuality
“good”
that
God
that s
One
the
earliest and
problems
Religions
2018,Ibn
9, xRushd.
FOR PEER
REVIEW
5ofof
13 creates
Averroes,
1921.
Thedisasters,
Philosophywhile
and Theology
of Averroes.
Translated
Mohammad
Jamil
Rehman.
significant
purpose
in
the
creational
cosmic
plan.
This
seems
to
be
the
first
appearance
of
the tw
divine
attribute
of
omnipotence
Lexington: ForgottenBooks.
ofAbdel
instrumentality
of
human
suffering
in
the
divine
plan.
The
notion
of
suffering,
which
included
discourse
was
the Qur’an and the
Haleem, Muhammad A. S. 2004. The Qur’an, English Translation. New York: Oxford University
Press,
US.
undeserved
suffering
by
children
and
animals,
continued
to
be
discussed
by
the
Muʿtazilite
attributes
(asmāʾ
al-ḥusnā).17 The re
Al-Ghazālı̄, Ab
ū H
āmid.
1992.
The
Ninety-Nine
Beautiful
Names
of
God,
al-Mags
ad
al-Asnā
fı̄
Sharh
Ma
ānı̄
asmā
.
.
.
13
The
story
of
Job
in
Judeo₋Christian
traditions
is
presented
in
the
Book
of
Job
and
in thethe
for
19 The Muʿtazilite’s firm stress on God’s justice, however, resulted in the group
theologians.
of an dividing,
all-powerfulappears
God, with
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
gave
birth to
theKitāb
Ashʾarite
school
of thought.Faith in Divine Unity & Trust insuffering
was enclosed—was the f
Al-Ghazālı̄,
ū H
2001.
al-Tawhı̄d
wa’ l-Tawakkul,
Divine Providence.
. āmid.
study of the story between Judeo₋Christian tradition and Islam is beyond the scope of this paper.
Translatedto
byAshʾarite
David Burrell.
Louisville:
Fons law
Vitae.
According
theologians,
God’s
of justice applies only to human beings The
whodiscourse
have
presents itself a
excellent comparative review, see A.H. Johns, A Comparative Glance at Ayyub in the Qur'an (John
Al-Ghazālı̄,
Abto
ū H
āmid.
2006.
Al-Munqidh
min
al-Dalal,
Deliverance
from
Error.
Translated
by
R.
J.
Mccarthy.
been
obligated
act
according
to
His
laws.
Applying
the
idea
of
justice
to
God,
however,
will
put
a
theologians
who
advocated
for th
.
pp. 51–82).
Louisville:
Fons
Vitae.
14
limit on an all-powerful creator;
therefore,
is not bound by His own laws. He is just
in were
whatever
form
of the opinion that the o
Qur’an
38:41–2 God
and 21:83–4.
20 Applied
Bowker,
1978. The
and
the
Sense
God.
Oxford:
Oxford
University
Press.
15
He
does. John.
to Religious
suffering,
this then
means
thatofall
harm
encountered
byed.
man
is fair
itall
has
the
actsasof
human
beings.
SeeImagination
Abubakr
`Tigh
Neishabur
Surabadi,
Tafsir
Surabadi,
Sa`Idi
Sirjani
(Surabadi
1381).
Also, As
see th
Br
Chittick,
William
C. who
1983.isThe
Path
ofProphets
Love: The
Spiritual
Teachings
of Rumi.
State
University
of developed
M.Sufi
Wheeler,
in The
the
Qur'an,
an Introduction
to Albany:
the in
Qur'an
and
Muslim
Exegesis
(Wheeler 2002).
been
willed
by God
just
in
all
His
creation.
Ashʾarite
thinkers
were
sharp
conflict
with
God,
the debate
furthe
16
New York Press.
See
(Johns
50–51).
the Muʿtazilites
who asserted
that
not 2003,
only pp.
is God
subjected to the same rules of justice
but rooted
that, inin the Quran as it re
deeply
17
Ghaly,
Mohammed.
2010.
Islam
and
Disability:
Perspectives
in
Theology
and
Jurisprudence.
Routledge.
For
more
on
this
see
Rahman
Ibn
Khaldūn,
Muqaddimah
of Ibn
Khaldūn
(Ibn
Khaldūn
fact, the obligation to act in just means is eternal Abdol
and uncompromising
for God.
ItLondon:
is worth
noting
that
judgment
and
reward
and1375).
punish
18
Griffel,
Frank.
2009.
Al-Ghazālı̄’s
Philosophical
Theology.
New
York:
Oxford
University
Press.
For
a
comprehensive
discussion
on
development
of
theology
in
Islam,
see
Harry
Austryn
Wolfso
a prominent Muslim philosopher, Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 1198), challenged these views
and asserted
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,
virtue
winby
the
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).
21
trait
that requires Him to be just.
that God creates human acts that i
56 For more on the notion of love in Rumi’s mysticism, see (Zarrinkub 1388). Also, see (Schimmel 1993).
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
22 human suffering ca
acquire certain acts and, therefore, are accountable for the acquisition of good and
evil acts.
responsible
for
Conversely, Muslim thinkers belonging to the Shiʾite branch of Islam—through the
influence
of
disasters
in human
life, how can H
rational element in the Muʿtazilite theology—remained in disagreement with the and
Ashʿarites.
Anwhile may appear a
disasters,
EW
Religions 2018, 9, 47
5 of 13
12 of 13
n suffering in the divine plan. The notion of suffering, which included
hildren and animals,
continued
to beT.discussed
by inthe
Heemskerk,
Margaretha
2000. Suffering
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.
John.
2007.applies
Evil andonly
the God
of Love. New
York:
Palgrave
heologians, God’sHick,
law of
justice
to human
beings
who
have Macmillan.
Huxley, Aldous.
The Perennial
Philosophy.
New
ng to His laws. Applying
the idea2009.
of justice
to God,
however,
willYork:
put HarperCollins.
a
ūn, Abdol
Rahman.
1375. He
Muqaddimah
Ibn Khaldūn. Translated by Mohammad P. Ghonabadi. 2 vols.
tor; therefore, GodIbn
is Khald
not bound
by His
own laws.
is just inofwhatever
Tehran:
Sherkat
Elmi Farhangi.
ring, this then means that
all harm
encountered
by man is fair as it has
Inati,The
Shams
C. 2000.thinkers
The Problem
of Evil:
Ibn Sina’s
Theodicy.
ust in all His creation.
Ashʾarite
were
in sharp
conflict
withAlbany: State University of New York Press.
Izutsu,
Toshibiko.
2002.
Ethico—Religious
Concepts
in
the
Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
d that not only is God subjected to the same rules of justice but that,Qur’an.
in
Johns,
Anthony
H.
2003.
‘Job’.
In
Encyclopedia
of
the
Qur’an.
Edited
by Jane Dammen McAuliffe. 3 vols. Washington:
ust means is eternal and uncompromising for God. It is worth noting that
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.
22
herefore, are accountable
for the
acquisition
of good
and evil
acts.
Nasr, Seyyed
Hossein.
2006. Islamic
Philosophy
from
Its Origin to the Present. Albany: State University of
rs belonging to the Shiʾite
branch
of Islam—through the influence of
New York
Press.
ʿtazilite theology—remained
in Nasr,
disagreement
withSpirituality—Foundations.
the Ashʿarites. An 2 vols; World Spirituality, 1.; New York: Crossroad.
Seyyed Hossein
ed. 1987. Islamic
erved from the writings
of
an
eminent
Persian
philosopher,
Morteza
Ormsby, Eric L. 1984. Theodicy in Islamic Thought: Dispute
over Al-Ghazali’s “Best of All Possible Worlds”. Princeton:
as of the opinion that the
Ashʾarite
outlook,
while
aimed
at
vindicating
Princeton University Press.
in exonerating human
oppressors
of any 2015.
wrongdoing.
Ozkan,
Tunbar Yesilhark.
A Muslim23Response to Evil. Said Nursi on Theodicy. London: Ashgate.
sophical perspective,
the notion
ofL.good
evil is enclosed
within
the Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.
Peterson,
Michael
2011.and
The Problem
of Evil, Selected
Readings.
ding of existence Plantinga,
(wujūd) and
nonexistence
(ʿadam).and
Briefly
put, good is
Alvin.
1974. God, Freedom,
Evil. Cambridge:
WM. B. Berdmans.
Rahman,
Fazlur. 1975.
Mulla Sadra.
y that branches from
existence;
evil, The
on Philosophy
the otherof hand,
stemsAlbany:
from State University of NY Press.
24 An
1994.
All the
King’s Falcons,
on Prophets and Revelation. Albany: State University of
is viewed as a Renard,
negativeJohn.
entity.
example
of the Rumi
ontological
New
York
Press.
titutes good and evil may be seen from the works of two prominent
Rizvi,the
Sajjad.
2009.of
‘Mulla
Sadra’,
Stanford Encyclopedia
of Philosophy. Available online: http://plato.stanford.
gnificantly influenced
shaping
Muslim
philosophical
thought: Ibn
edu/entries/mulla-sadra/
(accessed
on 13 January
2013).
. 1037), and Sadr al-Din
Shirāzī, who was mostly
recognized
as Mullā
Robinson, Neal. 2003. Discovering the Qur’an: A Contemporary Approach to a Veiled Text. Washington: Georgetown
Press.
dicy by distinguishing University
the various
forms of evil such as “essential” evil
Rouzati,
Nasrin.
2015.
Tribulation
in the
Qur’an:
Mystical Theodicy. Berlin, Germany: Gerlach.
n-being or privation, and “accidental” Trial
evil and
(sharr
bil-ʿaraḍ),
which
canAbe
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
see (Heemskerk
2000).
For an extensive
Shafiei Kadkani,
Muhammad
Reza. 1388.
Mowlana
Rumi’s Ghazaliat Shams Tabrizi. Tehran: Sokhan.
bility in Islam, see Mohammed
Ghaly,
Islam
and
Disability:
Perspectives
Theology Edited by Sa‘idi Sirjani. 3 vols; Tehran: Farhamg
Surabadi, Abubakr ‘tigh Neishabur. 1381. TafsirinSurabadi.
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).
Watt,
W. Mongomery. 2007. The Faith and Practice of al-Ghazali. Oxford: Oneworld.
–51).
Wheeler,
Brannon
M.Nasr,
2002.Islamic
Prophets
in the
Qur’an,
An Introduction to the Qur’an and Muslim Exegesis.
pects of good and evil, see Seyyed
Hossein
Philosophy
from
Its Origin
New
York:
Continuum.
. 65–68).
Wolfson,
1976.
TheTheodicy
Philosopy(Inati
of Kalam.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
dicy, see Shams C. Inati,
The Harry
ProblemAustryn.
of Evil: Ibn
Sina's
2000).
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/).