If God is unable to prevent evil, then he is not all-powerful.
If God is not willing to prevent evil, then he is not all-good.
If God is both willing and able to prevent evil, then why does evil exist?
And there you have it, one of the drivers for the notion of a "disinterested" God.
Postulating a separate entity who is the overlord of evil, only enhances the above paradox.
The way of SD, on the other hand, is a neat reconciliation - again owing to the "disinterested" nature of God.
I postulate that SD goes with the second choice, but in a much fuller way - "If God is not willing to prevent evil, then he is not all-good." The statement is still problematic, as it exists. It still cannot work away from the notion that "evil" is something undesirable, inferior, sinister, plain "evil," and that "good" is the desirable state. It still elevates the trivial notion of "good vs evil" as some kind of fundamental conflict.
No such thing in SD. "Good" and "evil" are just two of the possibilities, out of the endless, infinite potential that is God. Not some kind of driving force behind the universe.
But are we comfortable with all the implications? Think about it. The postulate is that all evil is also God - murder and arson, sexual assault and pedophilia, every depraved and abhorrent act - all of that is also God. Poison and disease, madness and delusion and paranoia, MSM lies and deception and betrayal of the nation - all of that is also God. Still good with those implications?
Absolutely! Because of the notion of "disinterest."
A "good" person is not incapable of evil. This person is still capable of picking up a knife and sticking it into somebody's back, just for the heck of it. If the person is incapable of evil, then there is no merit in being good.
The postulate is - that karmic consequences apply to those of your possibilities and potential, which you actually materialize in your quest for your desires (again - you can materialize these possibilities on behalf of a higher principle, and then the karmic consequences will not apply to you - this is the "nishkama karma" of the Bhagavad Gita).
So since God is disinterested in materializing Her potential for material pleasure, God is not bound by the law of karma. The capability for infinite evil is not materialized in pursuit of pleasure.
So - no need for a separate overlord of evil. The all-powerful God encompasses all those possibilities as well. With the notion of "disinterest" preventing any willful materialization of those capabilities.
In SD, evildoers actually attain moksha a lot faster than the good and righteous! Whether it is Hiranyakashipu or Kamsa, Raktabija, Shumba or Nishumba. Go back to the short story with Ankit and Divya. If the girl finally loses patience with Ankit's endless pursuit of that 7th dimension - and especially, if she is the owner of the arcade (all-powerful) and starts receiving complaints from the other players about Ankit's "adharmic" pursuit of his goal - she will show up in the game, crash his ship, neutralize his accumulated credits, dish out general death and destruction and thus end the game for him. Then tell him - get back home now, idiot, we have an all-night date, remember? No more fleeting pleasures for you, endless bliss instead!
Yadha yadha hi dharmasya, rather than being a statement of preference (or "interest" if you will) in good over evil, is a reassurance to us, that our pursuit of desire will be honored and indulged by God, even in the event of karmic logjams, and that God will manifest to re-enable our quest (for most of us). But in the process, some of us will get whacked on the butt and yanked out summarily from the material plane - "get back here with me, we have a date, enough of this material pursuit for you!"
That is the true driver for this notion of "disinterested God."
