Philosophy aside, Muslims also need to know what the Qur'anic position on the problem of evil is. Of course the Qur'anic text does not explicitly deal with philosophical questions, but it is quite easy to interpret the sacred text to support a limited role for reason. The verses which probably contain the closest parallel to our discussion are in Surah 2 (given below). They occur before the sin of Adam and the expulsion from the Garden, in the form of a dialogue between God and the angels.
And when thy Lord said to the angels,
'I am setting in the earth a viceroy.'
They said 'What, wilt Thou set therein one
who will do corruption there, and shed blood,
while We proclaim Thy praise and call Thee Holy?'
He said, 'Assuredly I know
that you know not.'
{Surah 2 (al-Baqara), verse 28}
While the above talks only of moral evil (corruption and bloodshed), the fact is that this particular verse raises the question of evil and deals with it in an exceptionally direct manner. The answer given, significantly, is not an exercise of metaphysical sophistication. It is essentially just the assertion that God's knowledge is greater than ours, with the implication that humans cannot fully understand the divine will. This practically admits to non-rationalism. And once we admit to a non-rational framework, neither moral nor natural evil remains problematic. The non-rational solution to the problem of evil is simply to assert that evil ultimately allows a greater good, and that the human tool of logical understanding cannot explain this fact of reality. It hinges upon the incapability of comprehending absolute/divine truths on the part of the non-divine, which is at the core of the Qur'anic response above.
Although rationalist Qur'anic interpreters would disagree with the above interpretation, the fact is that it is quite in keeping with other vague Qur'anic positions on metaphysical problems. The fact is that the Qur'an does not seem primarily interested in discussing philosophy, but in showing people how to live. It is only by realizing this that we can understand the core of the Qur'anic teaching. For while evil and suffering are a logical problem for believers, they present an existential difficulty which applies to non-believers as well. The problem of evil is really only the monotheist version of a basic question which people face; namely, how does one live when life contains such cruelty and unhappiness? The only means available is hoping that happiness is within reach and goodness is still possible. In the monotheist context, this hope crystallizes as faith in God, a divine-centered morality and a sense of ultimate purpose. For non-monotheists, it simply remains a more diffuse optimism. Unfortunately this basic commonality is often overlooked, in no small part due to the antagonism which is commonplace between religious and irreligious people and their beliefs. Of modern philosophers, Soren Kierkegaard was one of the few to acknowledge the religious "leap of faith" as a fundamentally existentialist phenomenon.
In the modern context, one often comes across much more extravagant claims regarding the place of logic in Islam. Muslims often like to believe that their religion is "logical" and "scientific", and that they are therefore led conclusively to Islamic faith. But this view is untenable even in classical Islamic philosophy, as even Ash'arite theology admitted to an underlying irrationality. It is in many ways a very modern view, dating from 19th and 20th century thinkers such as Jamaluddin al-Afghani who tried to "rationalize" Islam to defend it from the onslaught of post-Renaissance European anti-religious skepticism. However, monotheism is not defended by excessive rationalization; it is only made unworkable. Likewise, the claim that Islam is a "complete system of life" with its own laws, social structures, etc. derive largely from the defensive rationalizing of people like Mawlana Maududi in their attempts to protect Islamic culture from pro-European "modernizing" tendencies. But once we acknowledge that the truths of Islam are primarily existential and personal, law becomes less and less relevant. Law is by nature not an individual activity, but part of a social system. The personal equivalent of law is the individual's code of ethics, which along with belief in one God constitutes a fundamental part of Muslim faith. And like faith, ethical impulses are never based upon logic. Rather, ethics and faith are the means by which humans make livable a world which is painfully lacking in goodness. For religious purposes the deciding factor is not reason, but what helps the individual to live.
The problem of evil tells us what we cannot expect of monotheist religion; namely complete rationalism. However, over the centuries many Muslim, Jewish, Christian and even Greek philosophers have tried to prove the existence of God through rational argument. Not surprisingly, none of their arguments are really successful. However, since we have established that the function of Islamic rationalism is primarily to derive a set of personal ethics consistent with religion, it is worth looking at one of the classical arguments for the existence of God; namely, the argument from design.
The argument from design states that, when we look around us, we see a complexity and beauty in the natural world which appears to have been designed. Note the emphasized words; due to this apparent design, one may believe that it is likely that there should exist a God who designed it. The argument says that just as when we come across a watch, we assume it was produced by a watchmaker, so when we see the grace of a cat's jump or the intricate structure of a molecule, we tend to believe that these are all traces of divine design.
An interesting thing about the argument from design is that it is not based on logical reasoning. Rather it is a psychological argument, based upon our observations of how humans tend to appreciate and understand the world. We may well experience an inexplicable beauty and complexity in the world; but such perception can not provide any rational proof of God's existence (to do so conclusively, it would also have to provide an answer to the problem of evil). Rather, the argument from design is establishing a definition in religious terms of a psychologically healthy individual. Healthy individuals experience the world as beautiful in its complexity; those unable to see any beauty around them are likely to be suffering from some variety of depressive psychological illness. Likewise, psychologically healthy individuals are likely to find some purpose to their lives; these may be aesthetic, based upon experiencing the beauty and pleasures of the world oneself, or moral, based upon helping others to live better. It is through these behavioural and existential pathways that beauty is linked with religious life, not through hollow philosophical proofs of God's existence. It is likely that a person unable to find any beauty in the world surrounding them and unable to help those around them will find little comfort in logical arguments about God in any case.
With regards to modern Muslim ethics, the link between the beauty of the natural world and religion allows us to explore an avenue of ethics which is often ignored; namely, Muslim environmentalism. Muslim liberals in particular tend to be fairly Western-influenced and modern in their outlook; but the global environment is certainly the area in which the modern West has failed most miserably. In spite of the growing likelihood that the melting polar ice caps will submerge at least half of Bangladesh in the next century, industrialized nations have still done little to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Under George W. Bush, the USA has even withdrawn from even the inadequate limitations imposed by the Kyoto agreement. The world's environment is endangered today as it has never been before. In this circumstance, it is vital that Islam and other religious traditions which have spent comparatively little time worrying about the environment get involved.
The argument from design provides us with the basis of an Islamic environmentalism. For in spite of the fact that we can have no logical proof of the existence of God, we can in fact have an experiential belief in God based upon the beauty that we perceive in the natural world. If the natural world is then our main link with the divine, it becomes imperative that it be preserved. From the perspective of modern philosophy, it is perhaps not surprising that the rise of large cities housing an increasing proportion of the human race has been accompanied by the increasing prominence of atheist philosophies such as dialectical materialism. The entirely man-made environment of a city is perhaps furthest removed from any kind of natural beauty, and consequently removed from the experience of natural beauty or God. From a religious point of view, the natural beauty of the world is its strongest link with the divine and must be saved.
Check out Zeeshan Hasan's web site at LiberalIslam.net.