The problem of evil, as one of the most challenging issues in the philosophy of religion, has always driven scholars and thinkers to explore diverse theological and philosophical approaches across different civilizations. This article, aiming to provide a comparative analysis of how the problem of evil is addressed, examines two distinct intellectual traditions: In the first section, relying on the Avestan texts, it is explained how Zoroastrianism, by introducing the dual principle of good (Ahura Mazda/Spenta Mainyu) and evil (Angra Mainyu/Ahriman) from eternity, views the problem of evil not as a result of divine deficiency or inaction, but as a consequence of a cosmic struggle between two independent origins. This eternal duality presents evil as having an independent and real source, and while offering a clear answer to the origin of evil, it faces challenges such as undermining divine omnipotence. In the second section, the article explores the approach of Suhrawardi’s Illuminationist philosophy (Hikmat al-Ishraq). Suhrawardi, contrary to the Zoroastrian view, does not consider evil as an existing entity with an independent origin. He divides evils into two main categories: privative and relative evils, and natural and essential evils. This article attempts to answer the questions of the problem of evil by examining the general principles of the ontological system of Zoroastrianism and Suhrawardῑ’s Illuminationist philosophy, such as the non-existence (privation) of evil, possibility, deficiency, and causality as ontological sources of evil, and the necessity of temporal movement of beings in the material world from deficiency to perfection and from potentiality to actuality within the context of time as the quality of the manifestation of evils. The article ultimately concludes that both traditions strive to offer a coherent response to the problem of evil. The Avestan texts, by accepting the eternal existence of evil, bestow upon it an independent nature, whereas Illuminationist philosophy, by emphasizing the non-existence of evil and its place in the best possible system (orim) explains evil as a secondary and dependent aspect of good."