The question as to why there is evil or suffering in the world (why it occurs within God’s creation) is of central importance to all religions. In the case of Islam its scripture makes it clear that this life is short and that the life of the hereafter is more enduring and everlasting. For those who fail to realize this and instead cultivate or develop strong attractions exclusively for things of this world, they do nothing but set themselves up for disappointment and suffering. The puts it more dramatically by declaring that those who care for the life of this world and its bounties will be repaid in full for all that they did in this life and shall not be deprived of their just due—but their repayment in the hereafter will be nothing but torment, for everything they have done is in vain and worthless (11.15–16).
The latter verse refers to a major reason for the existence of suffering—the attachment to worldly things. This, however, does not explain why a kind, merciful God allows for all manner of suffering to exist in the first place. It fails to explain undeserved suffering, as in the case of torture, intractable diseases, natural disasters and climatic tragedies. Does God permit these instances of suffering to take place, despite being a God of love and compassion/mercy, or do they happen against his will? The latter makes no sense if God is all-powerful and in control of the universe. Which leads to: is suffering part of the purpose of God?
Types of suffering
Suffering comes in many forms:
1. suffering of those who are close to God;
2. suffering designed to spare one from more severe suffering;
3. suffering of those who stray from the straight and narrow (Islam, 1987:127–8).
The first type of suffering is meant to deepen the faith of believers by testing their patience and steadfastness in the face of life’s challenges. The makes it clear that those who are dear to God suffer severe trials as a test of their faith and as a way of sparing them from the torments of the hereafter. According to the teachings of the all the tragedy, affliction, grief, loss of wordly goods and fear that we may go through in this life are meant to test our patience in adversity (2.155; 21.35). For those who succeed in the test and continue doing good deeds in their life God promises them boundless joy, happiness and his everlasting pleasure (2.112).
The sees suffering as purposeful (as contained within God’s omnipotence); it fosters a religious disposition, forms character and helps to distinguish between the true and the false (Bowker, 1970:111). The ungrateful or thankless ones despair whenever misfortune befalls them and forget their previous good fortune, whereas the sincere ones remain steadfast irrespective of whatever life’s challenges come their way (11.9–11).
The second type of suffering seeks to jolt some people from their complacency by calling their faith into question. This could be a warning sign for them to mend their ways and thus save themselves from the more severe punishment that would otherwise await them in the next life. The test in this case is for the good of the type of believer who expects only good fortune, who doesn’t know how to handle misfortune and who seeks to blame others for it. The considers such a believer to be one whose faith wavers between belief and disbelief, especially in the event of a setback (22.11).
The example of the reverse suffered by the early Muslims at Uhud after the success at Badr serves to illustrate this point in more general terms. Some of those involved in the Uhud campaign did not realize that the setback they suffered was possibly an outcome of their own actions or their own wrong choices (4.78–79).
The question remains though as to why the defeat at Uhud resulted in even the innocent (who had not disobeyed the Prophet’s orders) suffering injury and even death. The is very clear in its response: for the innocent the Uhud episode was a trial or a test of their faith; it was not some form of punishment. As for those believers who died during this and other military campaigns, they were considered to have attained the lofty status of martyrdom, to have achieved the death of the truly virtuous (3.193).
The final type of suffering aims at dispensing justice by punishing evildoers or making an example of them as a warning to others. The pro vides many examples of the consequences of sin through the instrumentality of natural disasters (Noah, Lot, Hud, Moses). It also elaborates as a general rule that, to every community to which a prophet had been sent, its people were visited with misfortune and hardship so that they might humble themselves. Yet, if after the misfortune was lifted and prosperity followed, the wicked ones returned to their evil ways, by doing so they doomed their communities to destruction (7.94–96).
Even when it seems that the wicked do prosper, and the believers do not, this is only in the short term, with the balance restored in the afterlife. As the states: There are men who say: “Our Lord: give us [the bounties] in this world”: But they will have no portion in the Hereafter’ (2.200). This makes it clear that while the wicked may seem to prosper, in the end they will be overtaken by suffering: ‘the life of this world is alluring to those who reject Faith, and they scoff at those who believe. But the righteous will be above them on the Day of Resurrection: God bestows His abundance without measure on whom He will’ (2.212).
From the point of view the fact of suffering does not negate belief in God’s mercy and omnipotence; rather, it illustrates the instrumental function of suffering.
And thus it is: if We let man taste some of Our grace, and then take it away from him—behold, he abandons all hope, forgetting all gratitude [for Our past favours]. And thus it is: if We let him taste ease and plenty after hardship has visited him, he is sure to say, ‘Gone is all evil from me!’—for, behold, he is given to vain exultation, and glories only in himself. [And thus it is with most men—] save those who are patient in adversity and do righteous deeds: it is they whom forgive ness [of sins] awaits, and a great reward. (11.9–11)
This attitude of acceptance or patient endurance of life’s trials is recommended as nothing is to be gained by despair (or, worse, giving up and committing suicide, something which is prohibited). One should place one’s trust in the overriding control and mercy of God. This can be achieved through cultivating an attitude of complete submission to God: ‘Say: truly my prayer, my sacrifice, my living, my dying belong to God, the Lord of the Universe’ (6.162).
Other types of suffering: voluntary and involuntary
Does this mean then that in the face of life’s trials one should resign oneslf to one’s misfortunes and seek no change in their situation? This can hardly be the case given that there are particular instances of suffering and injustices that can be removed. This is the whole purpose behind the call for the establishment of a just society based on righteousness. According to the the need to alleviate other people’s suffering (including that of the kin, orphans, the needy, the wayfarer, the begger, the slave, etc.) is what constitutes piety whereas, for instance, miserliness is a perversion of human nature (2.177).
Whatever injustice or evil one may see in the world, this should not lead one to think that this is an indication that God is not in control or that Satan had the upper hand in creation. The provides a mythological content to the experience of temptation symbolized by Satan’s fall (followed by respite given to him to continue to tempt and to provoke humans to evil). Yet, despite all this, God is still in control and the Satanic principle serves only a purpose or function accorded to it by God. Ultimately therefore final victory belongs to God alone, who is the supreme judge and arbiter of our affairs, as the following verse indicates: ‘Those who wish for the [things of] the Hereafter, and strive therefore with all due striving, and have Faith, they are the ones whose striving is acceptable [to Allah]. Of the bounties of thy Lord We bestow freely on all—these as well as those: the bounties of thy Lord are not closed’ (17.19–20). This is what is promised to righteous people, that is, those who do not crave the transitory things of this life (by making them the sole object of life) but who instead strive and devote their lives to attaining the more enduring things of the hereafter. In this context, we may mention that some Muslims (the mystics of Islam) have taken this striving a step further in their contemplative love of God by seeking voluntary privation. This is a form of suffering which seeks to purify the heart and empty it of all wordly concerns by distancing oneself from worldly things.
Another question of import is whether humans can atone for sins by having others suffer on their behalf. According to the no person (irrespective of how saintly or godly they may be) can bear the burdens/sins of others (53.38–40). This eliminates the need for a saviour figure (crucial to Christianity), the crucifixion or sacrifice of whom serves the purpose of atonement for the sins of humanity (as with Jesus Christ or Mithras in ancient Persia). In fact, the rejects the whole doctrine of vicarious atonement. There are a number of reasons for this: (1) humans are not born with original sin (the merciful God had forgiven Adam and Eve for their specific sin); (2) God had tested Abraham by requiring him to sacrifice his son (and having passed this test by being ready to do what God had commanded him to do Abraham was then asked to sacrifice a ram instead); and (3) the emphasizes the doctrine of personal responsibility by which each person will be judged according to what they have earned on this earth. The latter point denies the possibility of any ‘mediation’ between the sinner and God.
In light of the above, the theological debates in the period between those who emphasized the omnipotence of God and those who emphasized humankind’s free will, seem to miss the point. The issues of intercession (only hinted at in the see, for instance, 2.255, the Throne verse) and predetermination receive far more coverage (than is warranted by a careful reading of the in the prophetic traditions which (at least on the question of human responsibility) reflect the political mood of the Umayyad period. Despite attempts to reconcile God’s omnipotence with human responsibility, ultimately the problem of suffering remained more a fact of life than a matter to be settled by academic debate.
There still remains the question of undeserved suffering as in instances of torture, the mistreatment of children, miscarriages of justice, economic exploitation, intractable/congenital diseases, mass killings, death through natural disaster, plague, childbirth, drowning, as well as cruelty to animals. How should these be explained? One first has to separate suffering caused by human action (for instance, physical and mental abuse, mistreatment of children, cruelty to animals, and so on), from suffering as a consquence of ‘natural’ disaster (plague, childbirth or drowning). In the case of the former, every effort should be made to alleviate or, better, prevent such suffering. In the latter cases the hadith literature makes it clear that such people die as martyrs (Muslim, Mishkat, 18). Further, some forms of suffering, such as sickness (which calls for patience), offer a means to atone for previous sins. And some natural disasters—while they could be used as a demonstration of God’s wrath—are a consequence of the operation of natural laws.
There is one more dimension to suffering (unique to which needs to be mentioned and which focuses on the martyrdoms of al-Hasan and al-Husayn. The whole complex of ideas about the deaths of these infallible Imams brings close to Christianity in terms of their shared belief in redemptive suffering, that is, in the saving effects of martyrdom (for and crucifixion (for Christianity). Jesus for the Christians and Husayn for the emerged victorious despite suffering cruel and humiliating defeats or deaths at the hands of their enemies. The benefits of such innocent suffering created in both faiths a messianic belief in the restoration of peace, goodwill and justice which is associated with the Second Coming.
The view of suffering remains focused on the power of God and the responsibility of human beings. This means that suffering is caused by ourselves (motivated by our attraction to worldly things, power and disobedience to God). Ultimately, however, suffering is a fact of life, a reality of creation, which is of necessity situated outside God. The tells us that the present life—with all its joys and hardships (90.4)—is merely transitory and illusionary, in contrast to the next life which is blissful and everlasting. Realizing this, a discerning believer therefore seeks the good in this world and the good in the next life, which is characterized by the absence of suffering of any kind.
Further reading
Asad, M. (trans.) (1980) The Message of the Gibraltar: Dar al-andalus.
Bowker, J. (1970) Problems of Suffering in Religions of the World, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Islam, A. (1987) The Nature of Self, Suffering and Salvation, Allahabad, India: Vohra Publishers & Distributors.
Robson, J. (trans.) (1975) Mishkat al-Masabih, Kashmir Bazar, Lahore: Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, Vols I and II.
puts it more dramatically by declaring that those who care for the life of this world and its bounties will be repaid in full for all that they did in this life and shall not be deprived of their just due—but their repayment in the hereafter will be nothing but torment, for everything they have done is in vain and worthless (11.15–16).
makes it clear that those who are dear to God suffer severe trials as a test of their faith and as a way of sparing them from the torments of the hereafter. According to the teachings of the 
all the tragedy, affliction, grief, loss of wordly goods and fear that we may go through in this life are meant to test our patience in adversity (2.155; 21.35). For those who succeed in the test and continue doing good deeds in their life God promises them boundless joy, happiness and his everlasting pleasure (2.112).
sees suffering as purposeful (as contained within God’s omnipotence); it fosters a religious disposition, forms character and helps to distinguish between the true and the false (Bowker, 1970:111). The ungrateful or thankless ones despair whenever misfortune befalls them and forget their previous good fortune, whereas the sincere ones remain steadfast irrespective of whatever life’s challenges come their way (11.9–11). 
considers such a believer to be one whose faith wavers between belief and disbelief, especially in the event of a setback (22.11).
example of the reverse suffered by the early Muslims at Uhud after the success at Badr serves to illustrate this point in more general terms. Some of those involved in the Uhud campaign did not realize that the setback they suffered was possibly an outcome of their own actions or their own wrong choices (4.78–79).
is very clear in its response: for the innocent the Uhud episode was a trial or a test of their faith; it was not some form of punishment. As for those believers who died during this and other military campaigns, they were considered to have attained the lofty status of martyrdom, to have achieved the death of the truly virtuous (3.193).
pro 
states: There are men who say: “Our Lord: give us [the bounties] in this world”: But they will have no portion in the Hereafter’ (2.200). This makes it clear that while the wicked may seem to prosper, in the end they will be overtaken by suffering: ‘the life of this world is alluring to those who reject Faith, and they scoff at those who believe. But the righteous will be above them on the Day of Resurrection: God bestows His abundance without measure on whom He will’ (2.212).
point of view the fact of suffering does not negate belief in God’s mercy and omnipotence; rather, it illustrates the instrumental function of suffering.
call for the establishment of a just society based on righteousness. According to the 
the need to alleviate other people’s suffering (including that of the kin, orphans, the needy, the wayfarer, the begger, the slave, etc.) is what constitutes piety whereas, for instance, miserliness is a perversion of human nature (2.177).
provides a mythological content to the experience of temptation symbolized by Satan’s fall (followed by respite given to him to continue to tempt and to provoke humans to evil). Yet, despite all this, God is still in control and the 
no person (irrespective of how saintly or godly they may be) can bear the burdens/sins of others (53.38–40). This eliminates the need for a saviour figure (crucial to Christianity), the crucifixion or sacrifice of whom serves the purpose of atonement for the sins of humanity (as with Jesus Christ or Mithras in ancient Persia). In fact, the 
rejects the whole doctrine of vicarious atonement. There are a number of reasons for this: (1) humans are not born with original sin (the merciful God had forgiven Adam and Eve for their specific sin); (2) God had tested Abraham by requiring him to sacrifice his son (and having passed this test by being ready to do what God had commanded him to do Abraham was then asked to sacrifice a ram instead); and (3) the 
emphasizes the doctrine of personal responsibility by which each person will be judged according to what they have earned on this earth. The latter point denies the possibility of any ‘mediation’ between the sinner and God. 
period between those who emphasized the omnipotence of God and those who emphasized humankind’s free will, seem to miss the point. The issues of intercession (only hinted at in the 
see, for instance, 2.255, the Throne verse) and predetermination receive far more coverage (than is warranted by a careful reading of the 
in the prophetic traditions which (at least on the question of human responsibility) reflect the political mood of the Umayyad period. Despite 
attempts to reconcile God’s omnipotence with human responsibility, ultimately the problem of suffering remained more a fact of life than a matter to be settled by academic debate.
which needs to be mentioned and which focuses on the martyrdoms of 
al-Hasan and al-Husayn. The whole complex of ideas about the deaths of these infallible Imams brings 
close to Christianity in terms of their shared belief in redemptive suffering, that is, in the saving effects of martyrdom (for 
and crucifixion (for Christianity). Jesus for the Christians and Husayn for the 
emerged victorious despite suffering cruel and humiliating defeats or deaths at the hands of their enemies. The benefits of such innocent suffering created in both faiths a messianic belief in the restoration of peace, goodwill and justice which is associated with the Second Coming.
view of suffering remains focused on the power of God and the responsibility of human beings. This means that suffering is caused by ourselves (motivated by our attraction to worldly things, power and disobedience to God). Ultimately, however, suffering is a fact of life, a reality of creation, which is of necessity situated outside God. The 
tells us that the present life—with all its joys and hardships (90.4)—is merely transitory and illusionary, in contrast to the next life which is blissful and everlasting. Realizing this, a discerning believer therefore seeks the good in this world and the good in the next life, which is characterized by the absence of suffering of any kind. 
Gibraltar: Dar al-andalus.
