The Asymmetry of Grace and Merit

Rabia's revolutionary insight was that love (especially divine love) cannot be earned or merited. This directly challenges how favoritism justifies itself. We tell ourselves: 'I favor those who've earned it, who try harder, who share my values.' This language of merit disguises the arbitrary nature of favoritism. Someone born into poverty didn't 'deserve' their circumstance; someone with a disability isn't 'less worthy' of attention. Rabia's insistence on grace—that love flows to the undeserving and the deserving alike—dismantles this justification. Her practice involved deliberately extending care to those society deemed undeserving: the poor, the enslaved, the morally compromised. She saw in them the same radical dignity she saw everywhere. The cost of the merit framework is moral calculus that hardens the heart. We unconsciously sort people into deserving and undeserving, worthy and unworthy of our favor. This creates a world where vulnerable people are expected to prove themselves before receiving basic kindness. By embracing asymmetrical grace—giving without scorecard—we align with Rabia's vision of a community where belonging precedes performance, and love flows without prerequisite.