There are two sorts of evil: the evil that men experience (illness, the
death of babies, etc....) and the evil that men do. G-d had to make it
possible for men to do evil, as we are here to /choose/ good. Free will
requires the possibility of not choosing good. So I assume you are only
asking the first question: Why do we experience evil.
Obviously, the two overlap, as a criminal does evil that another
experiences. However, from the perspective of the victim, we can still
validly ask: Why me? Why did G-d let the criminal succeed at all?
The words of Jeremiah offer an interesting insight.
Yotzeir or uvorei choshech -- Who formed light and created
darkness
Oseh shalom uvorei es hara -- Made peace and created evil
(In an altered form, using "hakol", everything, in place of "hara",
this text comprises the opening to the morning blessings preceding
the Shema.)
A couple of observations about this verse:
1- The opposite of evil is peace. I'm not sure what to make of it, but it
seems important.
2- Both darkness and evil are created, bara, a term meaning ex nihilo.
In Jewish thought, evil is not a thing, it's the absence of good. Just
as darkness is the absence of light.
But, to go a level deeper. R. Nachum of Gimzo, who lived through the fall
of the Second Commonwealth was wont to say "Gam zu litova" -- this too is
for the best. To the extent that his peers nicknamed him Nachum ish Gam Zu.
His famous student, R. Akiva shared R. Nachum's sentiment and taught
"All that the All-Merciful does, He does for the good." This was a
man who who was in Jerusalem when it fell, who was disowned by his
father-in-law and had to live penniless for 2 decades, who lost 24
thousand students (a catastrophe that threatened the entire chain of
Oral Law), who was imprisoned for teaching his remaining five, and was
cruelly killed. R. Akiva had plenty to ask "Why me?" about.
To this line of thinking there is no evil. This would imply that there
is no absence of good. Which reminds me of the description of Kabbalistic
idea of tzimtzum (contraction). According to the Zohar, in order for G-d
to create the universe, He had to "contract" in order to make room for it.
Of course, G-d can not contract, and it's all metaphoric and not
understandable by mere people. But since G-d is good, the parallel is
strong; evil is a contraction of good, and yet it too is not really there.
A third bit of background material to consider is the root of the two words:
Tov, good, also means to prepare. For example, in a Mishnah (included in
Shacharis services) where Abayei lists the daily tasks in the temple,
readying the lamps is called "haTAVas sh'tei neiros".
Ra, evil, on the other hand, Rabbiner SR Hirsch considers a derivative
of the root /reish-ayin-ayin/ to shatter.
The real crux of the issue, to my mind, is what we mean by evil. Something
that makes me unhappy? That would assume that my ideal is to be happy.
But happiness is /not/ our goal in this world.
Perhaps what R. Nachum ish Gamzu and R. Akiva are saying is that everything
Hashem does is to advance you toward your goal. This would bring the two
definitions of good together. Evil is then an absence -- but only of the
naive notion of good.
This notion requires faith. Without the ability to see what-could-have-been,
how we would have turned out in a different situation, we can not /prove/ that
the current set of circumstances are the ideal for nurturing our growth.
This brings me to your second question. In Jewish thought, angels lack
free will. So, there could be no rebellion against G-d. Also, such a
rebellion would only be allowed to persist if it served G-d's greater will.
(For example, people can rebel against G-d because G-d prefers people
with free will over robots.) But the whole Christian thing of a war
between G-d and the devil smacks of polytheism, it promotes the devil
to something that G-d actually has to exert effort to get rid of.
Satan means one who trips up. This too fits well with our definition of
evil: things that promote personal growth, but are conducive to unhappiness.
It is his job to produce challenges, obstacles to climb. Not in defiance
of G-d. Not even because it is in his interest for us to fail.
Briefly, this explains the dialogue in the beginning of Job. G-d and Satan
aren't, as most seem to assume, toying with Job. Satan points out that
Job had demonstrated his ability to serve G-d while things are going well.
Not getting so caught up in maintaining his fortune that he forgets his
true goal. Now, Satan suggests, it is time for Job to learn how to deal
with a new situation, adversity.
Micha Berger 201 916-0287 Help free Ron Arad, held by Syria 3626 days!
micha@aishdas.org (16-Oct-86 - 19-Sep-96)
<a href=news:alt.religion.aishdas>Orthodox Judaism: Torah, Avodah, Chessed</a>
<a href=http://aishdas.org>AishDas Society's Home Page</a>