Now, by looking at concrete experiences and the nature of things, and also looking at our internal and external factors of life, we see that they are not set in a manner to always coincide with our desires and wishes. The limitlessness of our desires from the one hand, and the mathematical nature of the universe on the other, is the cause of our illegitimate annoyance.
For example, we want to be absolute knowers; we want to possess absolute ownership of the world without being disturbed. We do not want to get sick. On the other hand, neither does our existential factors give value to these desires, nor do the natural elements abide to these wishes. And since our internal nature and the world itself do not permit our limitless desires, we raise our hands to the sky and say: "O God what an evil universe."
But, somebody who knows that the paraffin in his lamp is limited, will not moan after its extinction. One who knows that this lamp which he has lit is not safe from winds, will not scream when the wind blows it out. The system of the natural world is the same, and one who lives in it cannot come out of the currents of that system. So, we are obliged to accept that there is suffering. The question to ask is that, is it logical to say that these sufferings are against justice? (You should note that we are not talking about sufferings caused by humans: wars, torture, poverty......). The answer to the question is negative, since we have to understand the various meanings of justice.
There is sentimental justice, like a mother offering all her love for her child. There is legal justice. There is also moral and philosophical justice. I will try to define the last two:
Philosophical Justice: Every subject and phenomenon should travel in its appropriate line and current towards its perfection.
Moral Justice: Do not inflict any suffering on anything else.
Philosophical justice means that even if the sick screams and moans, give him the bitter medicine that he needs and do the surgery which is for his good.