Differentiation

From my own humble observation of people's actions and behaviour, in addition to their claims and sayings; I have found many, if not most, to be lost. Not lost in the sense that I would love to see many, and this time not most, on the path of redemption. Rather, lost in the sense that they seem to lack the ability of correctly identifying that which they want to discuss.

We, the population of the Gulf, would like to believe that we are people of tradition. We, again, like to believe that this tradition is derived, if not directly connected, to our religious beliefs. Since we enjoy believing in certain things so much, we therefore have come up with the concept of Il 3aadat Wil Taghaleed.

This, in my humble opinion, is something we should be proud of. However, this is where it can prove to be a little bit too tricky for some. You see, I believe that there is a misconception of "Il 3adaat Wil Taghaleed". I believe that, unfortunately, this phrase has grown for some to become a synonym of "the right thing".

The problem in this case is not in that these certain people (x) regard it as "the right thing", quite ironically in this case, it is that some others (z) would actually believe it is "the right thing". Hence, (z) projects the misbelief of (x) to be true. When, ofcourse, it isn't.

As a result, we have individuals who would challenge the 3adaat Wil Taghaleed, under the false belief that these traditions are the ultimate truth. In other words, they are wasting their times.

Take anything from these traditions, and say you do not agree with. Nobody will give a fuck. The catch being, unless this tradition is directly linked to religion. For instance, and this is coming from my limited understanding, the tradition of asking for the hand of a young lady is to let the mothers do the talking first. This never hurt anybody, and it never will. However, from religion, what I seem to understand is that the man would speak directly to the young lady's father (or waly ilamr). Since there is nothing wrong with the tradition, espicially when it is known that after the women talk, both men would meet.
The point is, traditions are just the way things work in a given society. This happens to be an example which does not affect religion, so no worries there.

Moving on to my main point, consider drinking alcohol. Here, what I am trying to say becomes clear. Drinking alcohol is not "wrong" because traditionally it is forbidden. Sure, it may be forbidden in a given soceity. But that does not mean that that is the reason why it is "wrong".
If that were the case, then when someone is outside the geographical parameters of that society, that certain aspect loses its value.

To show what I mean by a tradition losing its value if outside the geographical parameter, here is an example. In Kuwait (presumably the Gulf), upon a man meeting another man, if the physical distance between them is not that great, a shake of the hands is due. Not shaking hands, would send the implication that there seems to be lack of respect for whatever reason. This falls when you are someplace like the UK. The none-shaking-hands does not mean lack of respect. Rather, the refusal to shake a hand which has already been extended is.

Projecting this back to drinking alcohol, it would still be "wrong" for you to drink even if you were in the UK. And ofcourse, any other similar example you can come up with.

In addition, you can apply this also to the parameters of time.

Here, we reach the introduction of religion, the actual fixed "right thing".