Issue With The Definition

[Mobi]

Ok Robitsun,

As a confessed non alcoholic,

Really? How interesting. Any other facts about me you'd care to impart?

I've been off the booze for over 6 years now. I've posted before about my history here before. Never confessed anything about non alcoholic anything.

are you all finished?

If the pseudo-Christian evangelising and medical misinformation has stopped, then consider me well and truly stopped too.

Because you really are getting quite boorish - it's enough to drive one to drink!

I accept the style might be a little coarse but the facts remain.

You'll probably end up arguing with yourself and not even know it

Why don't you debate the questionable success rate of toads trying to jump out of my fish pond?

I couldn't do that. Don't know anything about it. You?

On the other hand, I know exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to the subject matter being discussed here.

You really are the biggest pain I've read in this forum for a long time.

Who's been pseudo-Chritian evangelising and providing medical misinformation?

You are so determined to ram your opinions and internet jammed packed crap down everyone's throat?

This is supposed to be serious forum, set up for people who have a problem with their drinking. Not some pseudo intellectual debating forum where you can score points off each other by gathering more research material than the other guy to prove that you are right and he is wrong.

GET REAL AND GET A LIFE!

I am quite sure that I am not alone in being fed up to the back teeth with what you have to say, and do not feel you are being in the slightest bit clever, even though you are probably smirking into your own saliva every time you make another smart arsed post.

Edited August 6, 2006 by Mobi D'Ark

[Neeranam]

GET REAL AND GET A LIFE!

I am quite sure that I am not alone in being fed up to the back teeth with what you have to say, and do not feel you are being in the slightest bit clever, even though you are probably smirking into your own saliva every time you make another smart arsed post.

Your not the only one - what an arrogant ###### thinking that he alone is right but everyone else is wrong.

I am not closed-minded when it comes to recovery methods and read a lot - even some of those ridiculous ones Rabitusson posted.

http://www.aca-usa.org/ this is a link that I found to be very good.

The American Council on Alcoholism, which a certain Robtisson knows better than!

Actually he is right and the American Medical Asociation and the World Health Organisation are wrong

http://www.hopenetworks.org/addiction/alcohol/Alcoholism.htm also has some good information.

Edited August 6, 2006 by Neeranam

[sabaijai]

GET REAL AND GET A LIFE!

“Those who are free of resentful thoughts surely find peace.”

— Buddha

[Mr_Know-it-All]

I have worked with sick alkies for the last 25 years

I hope that you mean worked next to, opposed to treated?

The definition that seems to fit most often is that an alcoholic is someone who can't predict the outcome of a drinking encounter, once initiated.

I used to drink daily.

Usually things went smooth.

After work, I might head to a bar for a couple drinks.

Sometimes I had a couple and went home.

Sometimes I closed the bar.

Sometimes I got picked up for DUI.

It wasn't my call.

My sister only drank about once or twice a year, on special occasions.

But, each time she drank, it was a disaster!

She would wake in a different city; she wouldn't know where her car was; she'd move all the furniture from within her house, to the lawn outside.

I really think "alcoholism" is simply a destructive manifestion of a compulsive disorder. Most alcoholics will become obsessed with something else after they kick the bottle.

AA is good for those who like "fellowship".

It's also a good place to get a negative viewpoint on drinking.

One of the problems with AA stats is the number of "members" that are sent there as terms of their probation.

Plus, in the States, many drug probabtion cases are sent there as free therapy.

Druggies and drunks are 2 different people.

Not a lot of successees in these groups.

One of the problems we have with alcohol is the industry filling people with "Get drunk and be somebody", "The night is made for Michelob", "My country, my beer" and other visions of greatness associated with drinking.

It's a part of being "adult" and belonging.

Non-drinkers are often "suspect" and make those drinking uncomfortable.

[ThaiPauly]

Ok Robitsun,

As a confessed non alcoholic,

Really? How interesting. Any other facts about me you'd care to impart?

I've been off the booze for over 6 years now. I've posted before about my history here before. Never confessed anything about non alcoholic anything.

are you all finished?

If the pseudo-Christian evangelising and medical misinformation has stopped, then consider me well and truly stopped too.

Because you really are getting quite boorish - it's enough to drive one to drink!

I accept the style might be a little coarse but the facts remain.

You'll probably end up arguing with yourself and not even know it

Why don't you debate the questionable success rate of toads trying to jump out of my fish pond?

I couldn't do that. Don't know anything about it. You?

On the other hand, I know exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to the subject matter being discussed here.

You really are the biggest pain I've read in this forum for a long time.

Who's been pseudo-Chritian evangelising and providing medical misinformation?

You are so determined to ram your opinions and internet jammed packed crap down everyone's throat?

This is supposed to be serious forum, set up for people who have a problem with their drinking. Not some pseudo intellectual debating forum where you can score points off each other by gathering more research material than the other guy to prove that you are right and he is wrong.

GET REAL AND GET A LIFE!

I am quite sure that I am not alone in being fed up to the back teeth with what you have to say, and do not feel you are being in the slightest bit clever, even though you are probably smirking into your own saliva every time you make another smart arsed post.

Well said Mobi......now perhaps he will BACK OFF , his posts are just plain BORING

[Neeranam]

“Those who are free of resentful thoughts surely find peace.”

— Buddha

Very true - strangely it was after joining AA that I learned how to practise this principle of Buddhism. The AA Big Book has so many very wise concepts. One of the senior meditation teachers at Suan Mokh, the most famous temple in Thailand for teaching the fundamentals of Buddhism and meditation, quotes from this book. There are many similarities to what the Buddha taught, along with some of the other Prophets.

[robitusson]

You really are the biggest pain I've read in this forum for a long time.

Who's been pseudo-Chritian evangelising and providing medical misinformation?

You are so determined to ram your opinions and internet jammed packed crap down everyone's throat?

This is supposed to be serious forum, set up for people who have a problem with their drinking. Not some pseudo intellectual debating forum where you can score points off each other by gathering more research material than the other guy to prove that you are right and he is wrong.

GET REAL AND GET A LIFE!

I am quite sure that I am not alone in being fed up to the back teeth with what you have to say, and do not feel you are being in the slightest bit clever, even though you are probably smirking into your own saliva every time you make another smart arsed post.

So not one refutation of the fact that addiction and alcoholism is a matter of choice and personal responsability and that AA is an evangelising movement which largely doesn't work.

I'm countering the AA "cult-lite" envangelism. You're entitled to your opinion. If you don't like what I'm saying, good for you. This is also how some people feel about pseudo-relgious organisations, spreading misinformation and ramming it downs people's throats.

Deal with the facts or if you can't, leave it to the people who can.

Edited August 7, 2006 by robitusson

[robitusson]

Your not the only one - what an arrogant ###### thinking that he alone is right but everyone else is wrong.

I am not closed-minded when it comes to recovery methods and read a lot - even some of those ridiculous ones Rabitusson posted.

http://www.aca-usa.org/ this is a link that I found to be very good.

The American Council on Alcoholism, which a certain Robtisson knows better than!

Actually he is right and the American Medical Asociation and the World Health Organisation are wrong

http://www.hopenetworks.org/addiction/alcohol/Alcoholism.htm also has some good information.

Glad to hear you've got an open mind to other possiblities other than the religious ones.

I've posted my reasons why the disease model is a myth and how the word is also used by medicine in a social sense. And yes, I know the AA crowd are wrong in this case and I'm right.

If I'm an arrogant ###### (?) that makes you an ignorant ######. Explain your point of view and address the issue. This thread is called "Issue with the definition", so deal with that.

Edited August 7, 2006 by robitusson

[ThaiPauly]

You really are the biggest pain I've read in this forum for a long time.

Who's been pseudo-Chritian evangelising and providing medical misinformation?

You are so determined to ram your opinions and internet jammed packed crap down everyone's throat?

This is supposed to be serious forum, set up for people who have a problem with their drinking. Not some pseudo intellectual debating forum where you can score points off each other by gathering more research material than the other guy to prove that you are right and he is wrong.

GET REAL AND GET A LIFE!

I am quite sure that I am not alone in being fed up to the back teeth with what you have to say, and do not feel you are being in the slightest bit clever, even though you are probably smirking into your own saliva every time you make another smart arsed post.

So not one refutation of the fact that addiction and alcoholism is a matter of choice and personal responsability and that AA is an evangelising movement which largely doesn't work.

I'm countering the AA "cult-lite" envangelism. You're entitled to your opinion. If you don't like what I'm saying, good for you. This is also how some people feel about pseudo-relgious organisations, spreading misinformation and ramming it downs people's throats.

Deal with the facts or if you can't, leave it to the people who can.

Have you EVER been to an AA meeting?

This nonsense about it being "cult like evangelism" is utter rubbish. I was in AA 3 years and NEVER had what you are suggesting rammed down my throat..if I had of I would not have stuck with it so long. I must have attended meetings at 100 different venues and NOTHING like you are suggesting ever happened.

There maybee members of this forum who are in need of the services that AA provide and all you are doing is putting them off...maybee even putting them off saving thier lives,

Can you deal with that?

I am imploring you.Please let it be...for everyone's sake

[mai loo khrap]

Have you EVER been to an AA meeting?

This nonsense about it being "cult like evangelism" is utter rubbish.

I've been to meetings and I know many, many members. I said "cult-lite" not cult like. You may not see it that way but there's plenty who do and evidence to support it. A lot of people don't know about this side of it. Information helps makes better choices whatever they may believe to be appropriate. Each to their own.

I was in AA 3 years and NEVER had what you are suggesting rammed down my throat..if I had of I would not have stuck with it so long.

Good for you. However it does happen.

I must have attended meetings at 100 different venues and NOTHING like you are suggesting ever happened.

There maybee members of this forum who are in need of the services that AA provide and all you are doing is putting them off...maybee even putting them off saving thier lives,

Can you deal with that?

Maybe they are. Though I seriously doubt it. AA's success rate is so low that people may actually kill themselves by attending a programme with a negligible success rate and by not exploring more well-informed and more-transparently motivated programmes so I think it helps to let the facts be known. Let the individual decide.

I am imploring you.Please let it be...for everyone's sake

I hear you. I understand what you're saying. Have a think about if promoting a programme like the 12 step ones is such a good idea yourself.

Don't worry. Most people will still choose to go to AA as the most well-known option out there. And I know people are going to sing the praises of the 12 steps despite any amount of evidence out there.

I've made my point.

Edited August 8, 2006 by mai loo khrap

[Neeranam]

QUOTE(ThaiPauly @ 2006-08-08 07:39:20) *

I was in AA 3 years and NEVER had what you are suggesting rammed down my throat..if I had of I would not have stuck with it so long.

Good for you. However it does happen.

Same for me ThaiPauly.

It does happen, I've heard in AA meetings in parts of the USA, however in these bible belts or whatever they call them they shove that religious stuff down everyones throat everywhere.

It's silly to have some resentment against AA. It's like me going to MacDonalds in those towns and refusing to go to the one in Bangkok because the waitress in America said 'praise the Lord".

There are religious nuts in AA, there are atheists, there are all sorts, but AA is developing and is nothing like it was in the 1930's, and I've been to AA meetings in different Asian countries and it is not the same as America . In Thailand, for example, the literature has been translated and the word 'God' doesn't come into it once. How then can you say that it is cult-like evangelism?

[ThaiPauly]

QUOTE(ThaiPauly @ 2006-08-08 07:39:20) *

I was in AA 3 years and NEVER had what you are suggesting rammed down my throat..if I had of I would not have stuck with it so long.

Good for you. However it does happen.

Same for me ThaiPauly.

It does happen, I've heard in AA meetings in parts of the USA, however in these bible belts or whatever they call them they shove that religious stuff down everyones throat everywhere.

It's silly to have some resentment against AA. It's like me going to MacDonalds in those towns and refusing to go to the one in Bangkok because the waitress in America said 'praise the Lord".

There are religious nuts in AA, there are atheists, there are all sorts, but AA is developing and is nothing like it was in the 1930's, and I've been to AA meetings in different Asian countries and it is not the same as America . In Thailand, for example, the literature has been translated and the word 'God' doesn't come into it once. How then can you say that it is cult-like evangelism?

Not to mention Murderers, but if these people wnat to get well, where else can they go.

One of the nicest, sweetest guys I ever met in AA was a Murderer, but he was not aware of what he had done, he did it in blackout.

Somebody explain to me how someone like this can :Re-invent themselves without AA?

I can't speak for what goes on in the USA...only in the UK, maybee they do force religion down your throat, but not in England

[sabaijai]

Here's what robitusson wrote:

I'm countering the AA "cult-lite" evangelism. [...] This is also how some people feel about pseudo-relgious organisations, spreading misinformation and ramming it downs people's throats.

It seems to me robitusson was referring to the evangelical quality of AA itself, not the pushing of religion within AA. In other words, the way some AA adherents treat AA as a sacrosanct institution that can't be critiqued or questioned, similar to way some Christian (or other religious) evangelicals consider their cause/sect/path above criticism. In the same way that evangelicals preach that you are powerless without Jesus, Mohammed, Krishna, etc, AA implies (if I understand what I've read in 'the book' correctly) that you are powerless over alcohol without AA. And where Christian evangelicals have the Bible as their ultimate written authority, AA has the Big Book.

As for the presence of religion within AA, the 12 Commandments, I mean 12 Steps, from chapter 5 in the BB do seem to support claims of strong theistic leanings:

1. We admitted we were powerless over alcohol - that our lives had become unmanageable.

2. Came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.

3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.

4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.

6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.

7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.

9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.

10. Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong, promptlym admitted it.

11. Sought though prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

I'm curious as to how numbers 6 and 7 are translated into Thai.

[Neeranam]

It seems to me robitusson was referring to the evangelical quality of AA itself, not the pushing of religion within AA. In other words, the way some AA adherents treat AA as a sacrosanct institution that can't be critiqued or questioned, similar to way some Christian (or other religious) evangelicals consider their cause/sect/path above criticism. In the same way that evangelicals preach that you are powerless without Jesus, Mohammed, Krishna, etc, AA implies (if I understand what I've read in 'the book' correctly) that you are powerless over alcohol without AA. And where Christian evangelicals have the Bible as their ultimate written authority, AA has the Big Book.

I agree, thee are some, but this is no AA itself. Many of these people stay alive, so I would question if it is actually bad or not. Most people I've met in AA, and myself, critisise a lot of things.

I'd like to know, as I've read this book, where AA say this. A common phrase I've heard is take what you want and leave the rest.

People can take any organisation and disagree, finding faults or inconsistencies. Thai Buddhism comes to mind quickly, as I know you're interested in that.

As you know, SJ, there are some that do things that seem to conradict what the Buddha taught, and what is in the literature. Now, Buddhism in Thailand does a lot of good and helps many people, just as AA is starting to do.

Now I spend a lot of time trying to help the Thai alcoholic. I want to ask Sabai Jai and Rabitusson a serious question - do you think I should stop? AA is the only way that works that I know of and there are now many Thai people stayed sober ONLY because of finding AA. I could send you there personal stories if you want. I can assure you too that there is no ramming anything down anyone's throats.

6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.

7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

I'm curious as to how numbers 6 and 7 are translated into Thai.

I don't have time to type in Thai but here's my karaoke version.

Step(not commanment!) 6 - "rao prom laeo doy sin chern tee jak hai sing sak sid gamjad kwam pra terd tee seuang sia rao nee"

Step 7 - "rao on won yang on nom lae duy kwam reuseuk sam neuk kor hai sing sak sid gae kai kor bok prong kong rao"

Here is Step 3, which I thought you'd be more interested in -

ขั้นที่ ๓

“ตัดสินใจอย่างเด็ดเดี่ยวที่จะทุ่มเทความมุ่งมั่นและชีวิตจิตใจของเราให้อยู่ภายใต้การดูแลของพระเจ้าตามแบบของเรา”

การปฏิบัติตามขั้นตอนที่สามนั้น เปรียบได้กับการเปิดประตูที่ดูเหมือนยังปิดสนิทและล็อคอยู่ สิ่งที่เราต้องการก็มีเพียง กุญแจ และการที่เราตัดสินใจว่าจะเปิดมัน และมันก็มีกุญแจอยู่อย่างเดียวเท่านั้น เรียกว่า ความเต็มใจ และทันทีที่ล็อคถูกปลดออกด้วยความเต็มใจนั้น ประตูก็แทบจะเรียกได้ว่าสามารถเปิดออกมาได้เองทีเดียว และเมื่อเรามองผ่านประตูนี้เข้าไป เราก็จะพบทางเดินซึ่งข้างในมีตัวอักษรจารึกไว้ว่า “นี่คือทางไปสู่ความเชื่อที่สามารถช่วยท่านได้”

ในขั้นตอนสองขั้นแรกนั้น เราได้คุยกันถึงการประเมินสถานการณ์ที่เราเป็นอยู่ เราได้พบว่าเราเคยเป็นผู้ที่ไม่มีอำนาจใด ๆ เหนือแอลกอฮอล์เลย แต่เราก็ยังพบว่า ความศรัทธา หรือ ความเชื่อในบางสิ่งบางอย่าง แม้นจะเป็นเพียงแค่ความศรัทธาในตัว AA เองก็ตาม เป็นสิ่งที่เป็นไปได้สำหรับทุก ๆ คน และข้อสรุปที่เราได้มานี้ ไม่ได้ต้องการการลงมือกระทำใด ๆ เลย แค่เพียงต้องการการยอมรับความจริงเหล่านี้อย่างหมดหัวใจเท่านั้น

และก็เหมือนกับขั้นตอนที่เหลืออื่น ๆ ของ AA ขั้นตอนที่สามนั้นเป็นขั้นตอนที่ต้องการการลงมือกระทำ เพราะการลงมือกระทำเท่านั้นเราถึงจะสามารถตัดขาดจากความเห็นแก่ตัวบางอย่างที่คอยจะปิดกั้นการที่พระเจ้า หรือ สิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์ที่มีอำนาจเหนือกว่าเรา จะสามารถเข้ามาในชีวิตของเราได้ แน่นอนว่าความศรัทธานั้นเป็นสิ่งจำเป็น แต่ความศรัทธาอย่างเดียวนั้นทำอะไรไม่ได้ เราสามารถมีแต่ศรัทธาแต่ไม่ได้มีพระเจ้าอยู่ในชีวิตของเราได้ ดังนั้น ประเด็นของเราตอนนี้จึงอยู่ที่ เราจะทำอย่างไร และ มีกระบวนการขั้นตอนอะไรบ้าง ที่เราจะสามารถน้อมนำให้พระเจ้าเข้ามาสู่ชีวิตของเราได้ ขั้นตอนที่สามเป็นขั้นตอนแรกของเราในการพยายามที่จะทำสิ่งนี้ จะว่าไปแล้ว ประสิทธิภาพของโปรแกรมของ AA ทั้งหมด ขึ้นอยู่กับว่า เราจะสามารถปฏิบัติขั้นตอนที่สามนี้ อันได้แก่การ “ตัดสินใจอย่างเด็ดเดี่ยวที่จะทุ่มเทความมุ่งมั่นและชีวิตจิตใจของเราให้อยู่ภายใต้การดูแลของพระเจ้าตามแบบของเรา“ ได้ดีและจริงจังขนาดไหน

สำหรับผู้เริ่มต้นใหม่ ๆ ทุกคนที่ต่างก็ล้วนมีประสบการณ์ทางโลกที่โชกโชนและมองอะไรอย่างเป็นเหตุเป็นผลจับต้องได้ ขั้นตอนนี้ดูเหมือนจะยาก หรือไม่ก็ดูจะเป็นไปไม่ได้เลยด้วยซ้ำ เพราะไม่ว่าเราจะพยายามเพียงใด แต่เราจะทำ ได้อย่างไร ล่ะ ที่จะมอบความมุ่งมั่นและชีวิตจิตใจให้กับพระเจ้า ซึ่งก็ยังไม่ทราบดีเลยด้วยซ้ำว่าพระเจ้านั้นเป็นอย่างไร แต่ก็ยังนับว่าโชคดีที่พวกเราที่ได้เคยลองทำผ่านขั้นตอนนี้มาแล้ว และด้วยความลำบากใจเช่นเดียวกัน สามารถเป็นพยานได้อย่างเต็มปากเต็มคำได้ว่า ทุก ๆ คนจริงๆ ไม่ว่าจะเป็นใครก็ตาม สามารถจะเริ่มทำขั้นตอนนี้ได้

เรายังสามารถกล่าวเสริมได้อีกด้วยว่า ในตอนเริ่มแรกนี้ แม้นเพียงแต่การลงมือกระทำที่เล็กน้อยที่สุดก็เหเพียงพอแล้ว เพราะว่าเมื่อเราได้นำลูกกุญแจแห่งความเต็มใจ หรือ ความตั้งใจสอดเข้าไปในกลอนประตูที่ล็อคอยู่ และสามารถแง้มประตูเปิดออกได้เพียงเล็กน้อยเท่านั้น เราก็จะพบว่า เราจะสามารถค่อย ๆ เปิดมันออกมากขึ้นเรื่อย ๆ ได้เสมอ และถึงแม้ว่าความเห็นแก่ตัว หรือคิดถึงแต่ประโยชน์ส่วนตนเป็นหลักจะปิดประตูนั้นอีกครั้งหนึ่ง ซึ่งก็เป็นเรื่องธรรมดาที่มันจะเกิดขึ้นได้อีกบ่อย ๆ ประตูนั้นก็จะยังเปิดออกได้อีกเสมอทุกครั้งที่เราหยิบกุญแจแห่งความเต็มใจนั้นขึ้นมาเพื่อจะไขกุญแจเพื่อปลดล็อคมันใหม่อีกครั้ง

บางทีสิ่งเหล่านี้อาจฟังดูเป็นอะไรที่ลึกลับและไกลตัว ราวกับทฤษฎีสัมพันธภาพของไอน์สไตน์หรือสมมติฐานในวิชานิวเคลียร์ฟิสิกส์ แต่จริง ๆ แล้วมันไม่ได้เป็นอย่างนั้นเลย เรามาดูกันดีกว่าว่ามันเป็นเรื่องที่สามารถนำมาปฏิบัติกันได้จริง ๆ อย่างไร ทุก ๆ คนที่ได้เข้าร่วมกับ AA และตั้งใจที่จะอยู่ร่วมกับเราต่อทั้งชายและหญิงต่างก็พบว่า พวกเขาได้เริ่มต้นลงมือกระทำการเปลี่ยนแปลงตัวเองที่ขั้นตอนที่สามนี่แหละแบบไม่รู้ตัว ลองคิดดูสิว่า จริงหรือไม่ที่ทุก ๆ คนต่างก็ตัดสินใจที่จะหันทิศทางชีวิตมาสู่การดูแล และอยู่ภายใต้การแนะนำของ AA ในเรื่องทุกเรื่องที่เกี่ยวกับแอลกอฮอล์? ตรงนี้เองที่ความเต็มใจและความตั้งใจได้รับการลงมือกระทำแล้วโดยการโยนแนวคิดและการกระทำแบบเดิม ๆ ของตนทิ้งไปแล้วเลือกที่จะทำตามแนวทางของ AA แทนที่ ผู้ที่มาใหม่ทุกคนต่างก็รู้สึกมั่นอกมั่นใจว่า AA เป็นเหมือนอ่าวที่พักพิงอันสงบปลอดภัยจากคลื่นลมและพายุ สำหรับเรือลำน้อย ๆ ที่บอบบางเสี่ยงต่อการแตกสลายเป็นเสี่ยง ๆ อย่างที่พวกเขาได้กลายมาเป็นเช่นนั้นเมื่อเขาเป็นโรคพิษสุราเรื้อรัง เพราะฉะนั้น ถ้าสิ่งนี้ไม่สามารถเรียกได้ว่า เป็นการทุ่มเทความมุ่งมั่นและชีวิตจิตใจมาสู่ศรัทธาที่พบใหม่แล้วล่ะก็ เราจะเรียกมันว่าอะไรล่ะ?

แต่สมมติว่าสัญชาติญาณยังคงเรียกร้องอยู่ ซึ่งมันก็คงจะยังเป็นอย่างนั้นอย่างแน่นอนว่า “เอาล่ะ ในเรื่องที่เกี่ยวกับแอลกอฮอล์ ฉันคิดว่าฉันคงจะต้องพึ่ง AA แต่ในเรื่องอื่น ๆ แล้ว ฉันยังจะต้องรักษาความเป็นอิสระของฉันเอาไว้เหมือนเดิม ไม่มีอะไรที่จะทำให้ฉันกลายเป็นอะไรก็ไม่รู้ที่ไม่มีตัวตนไปได้อย่างเด็ดขาด ถ้าฉันมัวแต่หันไปทุ่มเทชีวิตจิตใจและความมุ่งมั่นของฉันให้กับบางสิ่งบางอย่าง หรือใครบางคนอยู่เสมอ แล้วจะเกิดอะไรขึ้นกับตัวฉันล่ะทีนี้? ฉันก็คงเป็นเหมือนกันรูตรงกลางโดนัทนั่นเอง!” และแน่นอนที่สุด นี่ก็เป็นเพียงแค่กระบวนการที่สัญชาตญาณและความพยายามที่จะหาเหตุผลมารองรับของคนเรา กำลังทำให้เราดิ้นรนเพื่อตอกย้ำความยึดมั่นถือมั่นในตัวเองอยู่ต่อไป ซึ่งก็ยิ่งเป็นอุปสรรคขัดขวางการพัฒนาทางด้านจิตวิญญาณของเรามากขึ้นไปอีกนั่นเอง

เรื่องของเรื่องก็คือ วิธีคิดแบบนี้ไม่ได้เป็นวิธีคิดโดยยอมรับตามความเป็นจริงเลย เพราะจริง ๆ แล้วความจริงมันเป็นอย่างนี้ ยิ่งเราเต็มใจที่จะไว้วางใจและพึ่งพิง พึ่งพากับสิ่งที่มีพลังหรืออำนาจยิ่งใหญ่กว่าเราเท่าไหร่ เราเองก็จะยิ่งมีอิสรภาพมากขึ้นเท่านั้น ดังนั้น การทุ่มเทจิตใจที่จะเข้ามาพึ่งพิงอำนาจที่เหนือกว่าเราตามแบบที่ AA ทำอยู่นั้น ในความเป็นจริงแล้วจึงหมายความว่า เป็นการได้มาซึ่งอิสรภาพทางจิตวิญญาณอย่างแท้จริง

เราลองมาดูกันสักเล็กน้อยดีกว่าว่า ในชีวิตประจำวันของเรานั้น เราต้องอาศัยการพึ่งพิง หรือ พึ่งพา ต่อสิ่งต่าง ๆ มากน้อยอย่างไรบ้าง ในเรื่องนี้นั้น จะว่าไปแล้วมันน่าตระหนกใจทีเดียวเมื่อเราพบว่า จริง ๆ แล้วชีวิตเราต้องพึ่งสิ่งต่าง ๆ อยู่มากขนาดไหนโดยไม่รู้เนื้อรู้ตัวเอาเสียเลย ยกตัวอย่างง่าย ๆ ในบ้านที่เจริญแล้วทุก ๆ หลัง ก็ย่อมมีไฟฟ้าใช้กันแล้ว และเราก็มีความสุขกับการที่ได้ใช้ไฟฟ้านี้ และความหวังหลักของเราก็คือว่า เราจะมีไฟฟ้าใช้อย่างนี้ตลอดไป โดยไม่มีวันที่จะมีอะไรมาตัดกระแสไฟนี้ออกไปจากชีวิตประจำวันของเราได้

และด้วยการยอมรับว่าเราต้องพึ่งประโยชน์อันมหัศจรรย์ที่วิทยาศาสตร์สมัยใหม่ได้นำมาให้เราผ่านกระแสไฟฟ้าและเครื่องใช้ต่าง ๆ นี้ เราก็พบว่าเราสามารถใช้ชีวิตได้อย่างมีอิสระมากขึ้น ไม่ใช่แค่มีอิสระมากขึ้นอย่างเดียว แต่ยังมีความสะดวกสบายและปลอดภัยมากขึ้นอีกด้วย พลังงานไฟฟ้ามีให้เราใช้เมื่อเราต้องการ มันอยู่ตรงนั้นของมันอย่างเงียบ ๆ และถึงแม้จะมองไม่เห็นแต่ก็ไว้ใจได้ พลังงานไฟฟ้าซึ่งเป็นพลังงานที่แปลกที่คนจำนวนไม่มากนักเข้าใจการทำงานของมัน กลายมาเป็นสิ่งที่ตอบสนองความต้องการประจำวันที่ง่ายดายที่สุดในชีวิตประจำวันของเราไปเสียแล้ว รวมทั้งความต้องการที่จำเป็นอย่างยิ่งยวดของเราด้วย ลองถามผู้ป่วยที่เป็นโรคโปลิโอที่ต้องพึ่งเครื่องฟอกปอดไฟฟ้า เพื่อประคองชีวิตให้มีลมหายใจต่อไปได้ทีละเฮือกดูสิว่า เขารู้สึกอย่างไร ต่อพลังงานไฟฟ้าท่ามาช่วยต่อชีวิตของเขา

แต่ถ้าเป็นเรื่องของอิสรภาพทางใจและอารมณ์ของเราเองที่จะเข้ามาเกี่ยวข้องล่ะก็ เราจะทำตัวแตกต่างออกไปโดยสิ้นเชิงเลยใช่ไหม เรามักจะดื้อดึงดันหัวชนฝาครั้งแล้วครั้งเล่าว่า เรามีสิทธิ์ที่จะตัดสินใจด้วยตนเองว่า เรามีสิทธิ์ที่จะคิดอย่างไร และเรามีสิทธิ์ที่จะทำอย่างไร อ๋อ..และแน่นอน เราจะไตร่ตรองข้อดีและข้อเสียของปัญหาทุก ๆ ข้ออย่างดี เราจะตั้งใจฟังทุก ๆคนที่ให้คำปรึกษาเราอย่างสุภาพ แต่การตัดสินใจในทุก ๆ เรื่องจะเป็นสิทธิ์ของเราเองเท่านั้น ไม่มีใครที่จะมีสิทธิ์เข้ามายุ่งเกี่ยวกับอิสรภาพส่วนตัวของเราในเรื่องนี้ ยิ่งไปกว่านั้น เราคิดว่า ไม่มีใครหรอกที่เราสามารถจะไว้วางใจจริง ๆ ได้น่ะ เรามั่นใจว่า สติปัญญาและความสามารถ ความฉลาดเฉลียวของเรา ประกอบกับความมุ่งมั่นของเรา ย่อมจะสามารถควบคุมชีวิตด้านในของเราและเป็นหลักประกันในความสำเร็จในโลกที่เราอยู่ได้อย่างแน่นอน

ปรัชญาที่ฟังดูกล้าหาญชาญชัยมากนี้ ซึ่งในที่นี่มนุษย์แต่ละคนต่างก็ทำหน้าที่เป็นเสมือนพระเจ้าที่ควบคุมมีอำนาจเหนือชีวิตของตัวเองนั้น อาจจะฟังดูดีเวลาพูด แต่มันก็ยังต้องผ่านการทดสอบที่ขมขื่นก่อนว่า มันจะประสบผลสำเร็จได้ขนาดไหน เพียงแค่ตั้งใจมองตัวเองในกระจกดี ๆ สักครั้งเดียวก็ดูเหมือนจะเป็นคำตอบที่เพียงพอแล้วสำหรับผู้ป่วยที่เป็นโรคพิษสุราเรื้อรัง

ถ้าภาพสะท้อนที่เขาเห็นตัวเองในกระจกนั้นมันดูเลวร้ายเกินกว่าที่จะมานั่งพิจารณาหรือวิเคราะห์อะไรได้ (ซึ่งส่วนใหญ่แล้วมันก็มักจะเป็นเช่นนั้น) เขาก็อาจจะใช้วิธีดูไปรอบ ๆ ตัวเขาจากผลของคนรอบข้างทั่ว ๆ ไปที่ไม่ได้เป็นโรคพิษสุราเรื้อรังแต่ก็พยายามที่จะใช้ชีวิตอยู่ด้วยตัวของตัวเอง ไม่ว่าเขาจะมองไปทางไหน เขาก็จะเห็นคนที่เต็มไปด้วยความโกรธแค้นและความกลัว เขาจะเห็นสังคมที่แตกสลายออกเป็นเสี่ยง ๆ ด้วยการแบ่งพรรคแบ่งพวก โดยแต่ละฝ่ายก็จะกล่าวหาอีกฝ่ายว่า “พวกเราถูกและพวกแกผิด” ในทุก ๆ กลุ่มเหล่านั้น ถ้ามีการรวมกันมากพอแล้ว ความรู้สึกว่ากลุ่มตัวเองถูกก็จะสามารถมีอิทธิพลส่งออกไปยังคนอื่นในกลุ่มต่อไปได้ และในทุก ๆ ที่สิ่งเหล่านี้ก็เกิดขึ้นในระดับบุคคลด้วย เมื่อรวมผลของแนวคิดและการกระทำลักษณะนี้เข้าด้วยกัน มันก็ย่อมส่งผลถึงความสงบที่น้อยลง และภราดรภาพที่น้อยลงไปด้วย ในเมื่อทุกคนมัวแต่คิดว่าตัวเองถูก และคนอื่นผิด อยู่เสมอ ดังนั้น แนวคิดในเรื่อง ความสามารถที่จะใช้ชีวิตอยู่ได้ด้วยตัวของตัวเองนั้น จึงไม่ได้ให้ผลดีอะไรเลย ตรงกันข้าม กลับเป็นที่เห็นชัดได้ว่า แนวคิดแบบนี้ไม่ต่างอะไรกับเกมการต่อสู้ที่ต้องสู้กันชนิดให้กระดูกหัก พับคาเวทีกันไปข้างหนึ่ง หรือพูดง่าย ๆ ก็คือ เป็นแนวคิดที่ท้ายที่สุดแล้วนำไปสู่ความหายนะอย่างสิ้นเชิงนั่นเอง

ดังนั้น พวกเราซึ่งเป็นผู้ป่วยโรคพิษสุราเรื้อรัง สามารถเรียกตัวเองได้ว่ายังโชคดีอยู่ไม่น้อย เพราะพวกเราต่างก็เคยได้ผ่านประสบการณ์เฉียดตายกันมาแล้วทั้งนั้น และพวกเราต่างก็เคยทรมานกับมันมามากพอที่จะเต็มใจที่จะค้นหาอะไรที่มันดีกว่านี้ให้กับชีวิตของเรา เพราะฉะนั้น การที่เรามาอยู่ที่นี่ด้วยกันได้ ก็เรียกได้ว่า มาเพราะสถานการณ์พาให้เรามา มากกว่ามาเพราะคุณธรรมประจำใจ หรือมาเพราะอุดมคติใด ๆ เรามาที่นี่และเราได้ยอมรับความพ่ายแพ้ของเรา ยอมรับความสำคัญของศรัทธาขั้นพื้นฐาน และตอนนี้เราต้องการที่จะตัดสินใจที่จะทุ่มเทความมุ่งมั่นและชีวิตจิตใจของเราใ$

[sabaijai]

Good points about how any religion can be criticised. Since AA is purportedly neither a religion nor a cult, but rather a treatment programme, it should be accountable to the same kinds of criticism any treatment methodology is. Yet many AA supporters, including a couple in this forum, defend AA as if it were beyond criticism, one of the classic signs of cult-like behaviour. I will defend Thai Buddhism as a believer, but will concede that from a scientific perspective it is sorely lacking. Nor do I think it's necessarily the best religion for all seekers ... in fact far from it. I think secular humanism is the way to go, it's just not for me.

The debate in this thread stems from the fact that some AA supporters here are effectively insisting that their definition (or other AA-sanctioned definition, such as the disease model) of alcohol dependence is the only valid one. What robitusson and sabaijai have tried to point out is that there appears to be zero to nil medical evidence (as opposed to theory or opinion) to support that definition; having an organisation of health professionals or a government agency support 12-step programmes is not the same as undergoing empirical validation. Even if there was evidence supporting 12-stepping as the best approach, I don't see the harm in pointing out alternative methodologies and views, or in critiquing AA or any other methodology.

Now I spend a lot of time trying to help the Thai alcoholic. I want to ask Sabai Jai and Rabitusson a serious question - do you think I should stop? AA is the only way that works that I know of and there are now many Thai people stayed sober ONLY because of finding AA. I could send you there personal stories if you want. I can assure you too that there is no ramming anything down anyone's throats.

And there may very well be many more Thai people staying sober without AA. The sum total of your experience is anecdotal evidence; it's not scientific enough to convince me, personally speaking, that AA is the best option available for the largest cross-section of problem drinkers, Thai or otherwise. (By the way I have friends and family members who are AA members, and have attended meetings with them.)

So yes I would like to see you exploring other alternatives for helping Thai problem drinkers, such as any of the other 37 methodolgies ranked as more successful than AA according to longitudinal, cross-sectional scientific studies quotes in the Handbook of Alcoholism Treatment Approaches (3rd Edition), or any other evidence-based methodology.

I've heard that Wat Tham Krabok here in Thailand also has a very high success rate for curing alcohol and drug addictions. And of course most major hospitals in Thailand offer alcohol rehab programmes and would probably be happy to take on volunteers.

Thanks for the Thai translations. I see that the word 'God' has been replaced by 'sacred things', one submits to 'sacred things' instead of 'God'.

[robitusson]

Now I spend a lot of time trying to help the Thai alcoholic. I want to ask Sabai Jai and Rabitusson a serious question - do you think I should stop? AA is the only way that works that I know of and there are now many Thai people stayed sober ONLY because of finding AA. I could send you there personal stories if you want. I can assure you too that there is no ramming anything down anyone's throats.

My serious answer would be that by attempting to help Thai people you percieve to be alcoholics, by directing them to AA, is that this is a type of evangelism. 12th step work is evangelism and I would find doing this kind of thing in Thailand, which is not a Christian country, particularly distasteful . And that is my honest, informed opinion.

I would be interested to know, do you tell people they may be alcoholic as part of this help? And if you do, what training or education do you have helps make a diagnosis?

Should you stop trying to help people you think need it? Of course not. Do Thais need AA? Like a hole in the head.

Edited August 9, 2006 by robitusson

[Neeranam]

Evangelism is the proclaiming of the Christian Gospel or, by extension, any other form of preaching or proselytizing. It also lends its name to any one of a number of Protestant Christian sects having roots in the late 19th century American Revivalist movements.

My serious answer would be that by attempting to help Thai people you percieve to be alcoholics, by directing them to AA, is that this is a type of evangelism. 12th step work is evangelism and I would find doing this kind of thing in Thailand, which is not a Christian country, particularly distasteful . And that is my honest, informed opinion.

12th step work is not evangelism. I'm not a Christian. I never ever mention the Christian Gospel.

You seem to be confusing the early religious beliefs of the founders of AA with AA as it is today.

I would be interested to know, do you tell people they may be alcoholic as part of this help?

Never, only share my experience as an active alcoholic and how I recovered/am recovering.

If your interested, my beliefs are somewhere between Hinduism and Buddhism.

Should you stop trying to help people you think need it? Of course not. Do Thais need AA? Like a hole in the head.

Your entitled to your opinion, but many experts in the field of recovery in Thailand are over the moon with the coming of AA and say that is has already kept alcoholics, that could never stay sober for more than a few weeks at a time and doctors deemed hopeless, sober for years. I'd love to hear you tell these doctors and health professionals, and the alcoholics your 'informed' opinion.

Read the following -

Buddhism and the 12-Step Process:

An End to Suffering

By John R. Mabry, PhD

We crave: a two-word analysis of the human condition. In the United States it is a drive responsible for our criminal consumerism, for our need to "keep up with the Joneses" even if the Joneses are plummeting lemmings. We are not satisfied. Nor can we quite figure out exactly what it is we lack that produces this ache of dissatisfaction. The American way of life has degenerated into a crisis of addiction, with most of us trying to fill the void within us with whatever promises to take away the angst of existence so common to us in the West, however temporarily. We crave something beyond our experience, and the pain of that longing haunts us in every lonely moment, every empty victory, every success or acquisition which can only disappoint us when the smoke of novelty clears and we find ourselves alone again with our dissatisfaction. The great Buddhist scripture, The Dhammapada, tells us that "from craving arises sorrow and from craving arises fear."1

What can we do? It is not an easy problem to solve. When we try to numb our pain chemically, we become addicted to the chemical, which will eventually kill us. When we try to smother it in the security of others' love we smother the love of our friends. For many in our culture, the Twelve Step process has been their salvation in regard to their addictions, both physical and emotional. It liberates from slavery to chemicals and security, and mostly by means of a transformation of perception.

This is not a new method, nor is it a new problem. In fact, it is the central issue addressed by the Buddha nearly 2,500 years ago in Northern India . He noticed that everyone who lived experienced pain. He also noted that nothing people tried removed the pain, but actually made the suffering more acute. He says, "Birth is suffering, old age is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; grief, lamentation, pain, affliction, and despair are suffering: to be united with what is unloved, to be separated from what is loved is suffering; not to obtain what is longed for is suffering."2 We can probably all attest to the truth of this, but the Buddha's great insight was to see the pain as a symptom of a greater underlying problem. The answer was not to numb the pain with chemicals or overwork, or to assuage it emotionally through others, sex, or compulsive religiosity but to reach behind the symptom to the disease itself: a misperception of one's place in the universe.

The Buddha, in his revelation of the Four Noble Truths and the subsequent Eightfold Path sheds much light upon this dilemma, even, and perhaps especially, for those of us reared in the West. And for many people in the last fifty years, the 12-step process has offered great hope, and not a little success in overcoming our compulsions and addictions, if not in eliminating our craving. That the two systems have much in common is not surprising. Both speak deeply to the heart of the human condition. Tav Sparks , in his book The Wide Open Door, states that, "the Four Truths directly relate to the Twelve Steps. Accepting the truth of suffering, and that suffering is caused by addiction, is the action of the First Step. That there is a way out falls under the domain of the Second. And the Fourth Truth, or the Eightfold Way, corresponds to the rest of the Steps and 'how recovery works'."3

Just how do these two "systems of twelve parts" relate? Sparks seems to imply that there is a direct correlation, yet I think this is perhaps expecting too much. Let us explore this relationship, and see with what fidelity each of these systems mirror the wisdom of the other.

In brief, the systems are thus:

The Four Noble Truths (4)

1. There is suffering

2. Caused by craving

3. Relief is possible

4. via 8-fold path:(6)

a. Right view

b. Right resolve

c. Right speech

d. Right conduct

e. Right livelihood

f. Right effort

g. Right awareness

h. Right meditation

The Twelve Steps (5)

1. Admitted powerlessness

2. Belief in a Higher Power

3. Turned over our will to H.P.

4. Made a fearless inventory

5. Admitted defects to another

6. Ready to have defects removed

7. Asked H.P. to remove defects

8. Listed persons harmed/amends

9. Made amends

10. Continued inventory

11. Sought closeness to H.P.

12. Carry Steps to others

We can all relate to the first of the Four Noble Truths, I am sure. It echoes the first of the twelve steps, in that both identify that there is a problem. The first step is achieved when the addict admits to him/herself that they are suffering. As with so much in life, both systems agree that the first step to solving the problem is admitting that there is a problem to begin with.

The second of the Four Noble Truths also relates to the first step. Our suffering is caused by our craving. Our craving is so great that we are powerless to free ourselves from its grip. The great revelation of the Buddhist tradition, though, is that this craving is a result of our "buying into" the illusion of consensus reality. Consensus reality tells us that we are separate creatures with no visible (and so, no actual) connection; we are millions of individual selves all looking out for #1. We are ultimately alone, and in our panic and insecurity, we clutch at what we think we need to maintain our status quo, and to improve it if we can.

The Buddha's great discovery is that consensus reality is inaccurate. He perceived that we are all a part of the great dance of the universe, all members of a great Self, and not millions of tiny, separate selves after all. It is to admit that we have been under the illusion of our isolation, when in fact we are much, much more than we thought we were. This, for the Buddhist, is the recognition that there is a Higher Power. Once this truth is fully grasped, we can move on to the third truth: suffering can cease. When we spend all our energy grasping after what we think our little self needs, we perpetuate the cycle of our suffering. But if we can understand that all we ever need is provided by the universe (since we are the universe), we have need of nothing. Lao Tzu says "when we let go of everything, we have everything we need."7 This letting go is the active decision to trust the Universe, analogous to the Third Step, that of turning our will over to our Higher Power, for our Higher Power is sufficient to supply all that we require. Jesus told us to look at the flowers of the field and the birds of the air, they are provided for.8 A closer analog to this step in Buddhism is probably the Three Refuges. "The gateway to the Buddhist path of liberation is taking refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma [teachings], and the spiritual community, known as the Sangha."9 Once we have "let go" of our ego, of our trying to make it on our own, of our dependence on consensus reality, and allow ourselves to trust--to take refuge--in our Higher Power, we experience the beginning sensations of true freedom.

The next four steps are all of a piece. The Fourth Step is the making of a "fearless moral inventory." As Tav Sparks notes, this step is primarily about "becoming aware, or conscious of the circumstances of our past...."10 This is surely Right Awareness, "mindfulness of the body, sensation, mind and mental objects,"11 Mental objects is the most relevant to us here, since it includes the "five hindrances: "lust, anger, sloth, restlessness, and doubt."12 Moral inventory, indeed. The Fifth Step, that of admitting these moral defects to our Higher Power and to another person, is another act of taking refuge, both in the Buddha and in the Sangha (or at least someone in the Sangha). Finally, we come to a place where we feel we can do without these questionable characteristics, and become ready to do without them. This is akin to Right Resolve, in which one renounces "the striving for gratification of the five senses, of the whole body or of the mind. It means the state of mind that is devoid of greed."13 Once resolved, we can ask our Higher Power to remove these defects, taking refuge, in effect, in the Buddha as we understand Him.

The next two Steps contain the listing of those whom we have harmed and the making of amends to them. This is a very difficult couple of steps, and surely requires Right Effort. Right Effort is especially appropriate here in that it involves efforts made with regard to karma. The making of amends is a way of eradicating karma, and helps to make us mindful of karma-inducing behaviors and their emotional consequences. Tav Sparks makes a very interesting point, that those involved in this kind of "deep" Step work "somehow get the feeling that they are healing not just themselves, but also an entire family or cultural pattern."14 This kind of karmic reparations go beyond this lifetime, and this "skin encapsulated ego" to heal much greater wounds. Right effort also involves "avoiding and overcoming unwholesome states of mind while developing and maintaining wholesome ones."15 This is a good example of Step Ten, where one continues their moral inventories. It is often called a "maintenance step" but this misses the importance of its potential for ever-greater awareness and resolve.

The Eleventh Step is among the most powerful and important. Bill W. said of it, "the other steps can keep us sober and somehow functioning. But Step Eleven can keep us growing, if we try hard and work at it continually."16 This step is the key to recovery, because it is in really discovering our Higher Power, and our participation in it. For when we discover the limits of our True Self, we are able to return to our "skin encapsulated ego" with compassion and much greater understanding of its fear, and its pain. But most importantly, we have glimpsed where it is we are going and who we really are. This was, in fact, the breakthrough of the Buddha beneath the Bodhi tree. He glimpsed the Universe as it really was—and himself as part of it. As Buddhist scholar Hans Schumann writes of the Mahayana view, "Liberation is...to be achieved by the removal of the ignorance and by the realization of the Absolute."17

Once I perceive that the universe is Me, I am transformed. I am no longer small, nor alone. All of Creation is a unified body which rises and falls like waves on the ocean. What I think is me is just the result of a swell on the sea that circumstance has engineered. This swell will break and rejoin the body of the water from which it has, indeed, never been separated. Whatever happens to this body is of little consequence; it is not Me. The Universe in all its myriad forms that go on forever is the Eternal life of which I am a partaker. I am connected. I am One. The Mahayana Buddhist would call the Universal Self the Cosmic Buddha, much as Christians would call it the Cosmic Christ. The "Us" that is bigger than us. The "Us" that is the real us. This revelation is the beginning of our empowerment. This is "Right Meditation," which leads to "one-pointedness of mind,"18 to the unitive vision.

The second part of the Twelfth Step, reads "we tried to practice these principles in all our affairs," and this corresponds to all of the points along the Eightfold Path as a whole, including "Right Livelihood," which we have not touched on before. But the first part of the Twelfth Step, "tried to carry this message to others," is, as Sparks points out, is a kind of Karma Yoga, since "'service,' and 'carrying the message' are part of the [Twelve Step] program."19 This is the Buddhist ideal of the Bodhisattva, who denies him or herself her ultimate liberation until all beings are liberated.

I believe Tav Sparks' original assertion, as stated above, to be fairly accurate. The Twelve Steps indeed echo the spiritual wisdom of the ages, and, as we have seen, certainly resonate with the very foundations of the Buddha's teaching: if we can awaken to reality as it really is, (the primary goal in Buddhist practice. "Buddha" means "awakened") we learn to trust the universe, eliminating desire and with it our neurotic compulsion to satisfy our cravings which leads us to the abyss of addiction.

More articles by John R. Mabry can be found at his website: http://www.apocryphile.net/jrm/

NOTES:

1 Juan Mascaro, trans. The Dhammapada, (New York: Penguin), p.66.

2 Mv I, 6, 19 Vin I p. 10=S 56, II 5V p. 421. Quoted by Hans Wolfgang Schumann, Buddhism, an Outline of its Teachings and Schools, (Wheaton: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1973) p. 39.

3 Tav Sparks, The Wide Open Door (Center City: Hazelden, 1993), p. 200.

4 Kenneth Crim, ed. The Perennial Dictionary of World Religions (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1981), p. 264.

5 Sarpashana Sourcebook (Boulder: Vajradhatu Press, 1985), p. 134.

6 Schumann, p.67.

7 Lao Tzu, The Tao Te Ching. Chapters 7 and 22.

8 Matthew 6:25-26.

9 B. Alan Wallace Tibetan Buddhism From the Ground Up (Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1993), p. 80.

10 Sparks, p. 59.

11 Schumann, p. 72.

12 Crim, p. 236.

13 Ibid., p. 235.

14 Sparks, p. 181.

15 Crim, p. 236.

16 Sparks, p. 77.

17 Schumann, p. 39.

18 Crim, p. 236.

19 Sparks , p. 165.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The Bible

Crim, Kenneth, ed. The Perennial Dictionary of World Religions (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1981).

Lao Tzu, The Tao Te Ching.

Mascaro, Juan, trans. The Dhammapada, ( New YorK : Penguin).

Sarpashana Sourcebook (Boulder: Vajradhatu Press, 1985).

Schumann, Hans Wolfgang, Buddhism, an Outline of its Teachings and Schools, (Wheaton: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1973).

Sparks, Tav, The Wide Open Door (Center City: Hazelden, 1993).

Wallace, B. Alan Tibetan Buddhism From the Ground Up (Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1993).

[robitusson]

Interesting attempts to point out commonalities between the 12 steps and the Noble 8 Fold Path and 4 Noble Truths. Thre are some plausible attempts to draw parallels in the details but it's in the fundamentals where the two are completely disimilar.

The crux of following the 8 Fold Path is based upon taking personal responsibility and the idea that only the individual can bring him or herself to Transcendence. On the other hand the concept of powerlessness, which is the whole basis of the steps, is what the (supposed) alcoholic must admit to, that he is not responsible for his actions and that it is the diabolical work of a 'disease' which coincidentally mirrors the Christian concept of sin. He is then told that a Higher Power of the individuals choosing, but not himself, can control the disease and he must hand over his power to this imagined Being.

These would seem to me to be two completely opposing ideas. One of personal active responsiblity and spiritual progress based on experiental results, the other of personal powerlessness over an abstract 'disease' that an invented Outside Force can alleviate, with any failue being accounted for as the lacking of the 'diseased' working the programme sufficiently.

The Dhammapada, tells us that "from craving arises sorrow and from craving arises fear." It also explains how the causes of craving and desire are deep seated anger and ignorances which are the result of our own actions (karmas).

With regard to the evangelism, at AA meetings I attended, I met members who also would have sworn blind, when they were 'informing' potential new members about the steps, that they were not evangelising and would never force anything on anybody. All the while they would tell the potential members (Lost Souls), people they've only just met, that they were 'alcoholics' (Sinners). Then they'd tell them, with no expert or educated justification, that they were abnormal and different from everybody physically, mentally and spiritually and how they needed a Higher Power (God) to alleviate their 'disease' (Sin) and how if they did not follow them (The Group) and the programme (The Scripture of The Group), they would die miserably or suffer horribly (Hel_l).

Lots of members who did this regularly would say how much they hated organised religion but they loved AA, and the steps and the programme, never realising the irony of what they were doing. It's evangelism and most 12 steppers don't even know they're doing it.

Edited August 9, 2006 by robitusson

[Neeranam]

Are you reading anything of what I write? Have you even considered that you might be wrong?

[robitusson]

I thought I just replied to your post. Wrong about what?

That an imaginary spiritual Being can relieve people of a supposed medical disease?

That loads has been developed in the field of addiction and alcoholism worth noting in the last 65 years since the Big Book first appeared and that AA is completely closed to any of this new information?

That the statistically proven 5% success rate is wildy inaccurate somehow?

That AA is not first and foremost a religious group that actively seeks new members?

That there are plenty of more successful and more transparent alternative programmes out there but that do not evangelicallly seek new members?

Edited August 9, 2006 by robitusson

[kayo]

Who´s Worse:

The Evangelical Preacher

or the

Preacher against Evangelism????

Song Saitang.

[Neeranam]

Who´s Worse:

The Evangelical Preacher

or the

Preacher against Evangelism????

coffee1.gif

Song Saitang.

whistling.gif

lol

Don't you have to be Christian to be an Evangeist?

[kayo]

nah, you can be an evangelical muslim.

Only we call them Extremists or terrorists.

[Neeranam]

I'm curious as to how numbers 6 and 7 are translated into Thai.

Here's a bit extra.

6. เราพร้อมแล้วโดยสิ้นเชิง ที่จะให้สิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์กำจัดความประพฤติที่เสื่อมเสียเหล่านี้

คนที่ทำขั้นตอนทั้ง 5 อย่างจริงจังจะเห็นว่าความอยากที่จะดื่มเหล้าได้ลดน้อยลง เราขอให้สิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์เอาความอยากดื่มเหล้าออกไปจากเราได้สำเร็จ เราก็เห็นว่าการที่จะขอให้สิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์เอาความประพฤติที่เสื่อมเสียและนิสัยที่ไม่ดีของเราออกไปด้วยนั้นสำคัญ นิสัยที่ไม่ดีของเรามักนำเราไปสู่ความไม่สบายใจ และความไม่สบายใจมักพาเราไปดื่มเหล้า เพราะฉะนั้นเราจึงจำเป็นต้องให้สิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์ขจัดนิสัยที่ไม่ดี

เหตุผลที่ทำให้เราไม่ยอมปล่อยนิสัยที่ไม่ดีของเราไปคือ เราเคยชินกับความเจ็บปวด เรารู้วิธีจัดการกับมัน เราไม่ รู้ว่าถ้าไม่มีมันแล้วจะเป็นอย่างไร บางนิสัยก็สนุก ป่วนคนอื่นทำให้คนเจ็บ ทำให้เรารู้สึกสูงส่งกว่าคนอื่น ทับถมคนอื่น และบางทีเราก็ชอบกับความป่วนเองบ้าง เราบางทีก็สนุกกับมันบ้าง

บางคนกลัวว่าถ้าสิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์เอานิสัยต่าง ๆ ไปแล้วเราจะไม่เหลืออะไร จะไม่เป็นตัวของตัวเอง

เราสามารถให้สิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์ขจัดนิสัยไม่ดีเหล่านี้และแทนที่ว่างนั้น โดยความรัก ความเอาใจใส่ ความสงบสุข และความปรารถนาของเขา

เราดูขั้นตอนที่ 4 ของเราแล้วดูว่านิสัยไหนที่มีมากที่สุด เราทำบ่อยที่สุด แล้วมันทำให้เราเจ็บปวดมากแค่ไหน เรารู้ว่าขืนเราพยายามรั้ง เก็บมันไว้มันจะพาเรากลับไปดื่มเหล้าแล้วชีวิตของเราจะเน่าอย่างที่เคยเป็น

เราสามารถให้เวลากับตัวเราจนกว่าเราจะพร้อม พร้อมจริงๆ ที่จะให้สิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์กำจัดความประพฤติที่เสื่อมเสียเหล่านี้

7. เราอ้อนวอนอย่างอ่อนน้อมและด้วยความรู้สึกสำนึก ขอให้สิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์แก้ไขข้อบกพร่องของเรา

หัวใจของขั้นตอนนี้คือ ความอ่อนน้อมถ่อมตน

ความอ่อนน้อมถ่อมตนไม่ได้มาง่าย ๆ สำหรับเรา แต่ละคนก็มีวิธีดึงความอ่อนน้อมถ่อมตนของตัวเองออกมา บางทีความเจ็บปวดก็เป็นวิธีหนึ่งที่ทำให้เรามีความอ่อนน้อมถ่อมตน

เมื่อเรารู้ตัวว่าเราสู้กับนิสัยที่ไม่ดีไม่ได้ ก็เป็นการเริ่มต้นในการมีความอ่อนน้อมถ่อมตน และเราก็รู้ว่าเราไม่สามารถกำจัดหรือแก้ไขมันเองได้ เพราะเราเป็นเพียงมนุษย์คนหนึ่งท่ามกลางมนุษย์ทั้งโลก นี่ก็เป็นการอ่อนน้อมถ่อมตนอีกอย่าง และนี่เป็นเพียงตัวอย่างเท่านั้น ยังมีอีกหลายวิธี แล้วแต่ละสถานการณ์ต่างๆ ด้วย

เมื่อเรามองนิสัยที่ไม่น่าพึงประสงค์ของเราในขั้นตอนที่ 6 แล้วเราก็พร้อมให้สิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์ขจัดและแก้ไขมัน เราก็ขอสิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์ให้ขจัดนิสัยที่ไม่ดีของเราในขั้นตอนที่ 7 โดยการภาวนา พูดกับสิ่งศักดิ์สิทธิ์ของเรา

[sbk]

I thought I just replied to your post. Wrong about what?

That an imaginary spiritual Being can relieve people of a supposed medical disease?

That loads has been developed in the field of addiction and alcoholism worth noting in the last 65 years since the Big Book first appeared and that AA is completely closed to any of this new information?

That the statistically proven 5% success rate is wildy inaccurate somehow?

That AA is not first and foremost a religious group that actively seeks new members?

That there are plenty of more successful and more transparent alternative programmes out there but that do not evangelicallly seek new members?

You are getting very tiresome with this crusade. Please stop. I have asked you before and you continue to ignore my requests. STOP hijacking threads with your crusade.

Back to the topic at hand please. What is an alcoholic? What constitues alcoholism?

[robitusson]

You are getting very tiresome with this crusade. Please stop. I have asked you before and you continue to ignore my requests. STOP hijacking threads with your crusade.

Back to the topic at hand please. What is an alcoholic? What constitues alcoholism?

Having an informed opinion = hijacking. Replying to other posters = hijacking. Grow up.

[sbk]

You are getting very tiresome with this crusade. Please stop. I have asked you before and you continue to ignore my requests. STOP hijacking threads with your crusade.

Back to the topic at hand please. What is an alcoholic? What constitues alcoholism?

Having an informed opinion = hijacking. Replying to other posters = hijacking. Grow up.

Your insistent need to promote your point of view regardless of the topic is hijacking. Yes, you are responding to others posts but lets face reality here, you have done it before, endlessly. You will do it again. You reiterate the same issues over and over again and frankly, people are tired of it. You have made your point. Over and over and over and over. And over. Enough

[Upekkha]

I have been an interested bystander on this thread – indeed in this “drinking forum” - since it first started a few weeks ago.

It is interesting to observe how the debate has developed, and to see the frustrations and anger expressed by various participants as the days and weeks have progressed.

May I summarise the situation as I see it?

• The forum was started by some people who had a problem with alcohol and wished to have a ‘special’ place to discuss and seek help and advice with their problem.

• A number of topics were opened, and one of the early ones was a debate started on the definition of alcoholism.

• At the same time another thread was started, namely: “Drinkers diary vs. AA”.

• About half way through the Drinkers thread a certain Mr R appeared, and immediately informed all and sundry that alcoholism was not a disease, and that the AA - with it’s evangelical approach – was not the wonderful cure that many believed it to be, and in fact only had a 5 % success rate. He produced a veritable wealth of references from all manner of learned establishments to back up his extremely forthright statements..

• A certain Mr S seemed also very keen to support Mr R in his desire to ‘rubbish’ the AA.

• A number of confessed alcoholics – for whom this forum was presumably intended – became quite irritated with the esoteric debate on the “definition’ thread, and also with the zeal in which Mr R and his cohorts were ‘ripping’ into the AA.

• Mr R acknowledged as much on the Drinkers diary forum and agreed to continue the debate ‘elsewhere’ So he renewed his lengthy posts in the definition thread, often making two lengthy posts in a row, without any rebuttals or discussions in between. The alcoholics were getting angrier, and some implored him to stop, but he seemed to become ever more confrontational – with yet more quotes from learned journals to back up his point of view. He also continued to enjoy the support of Mr. S.

• Today, a certain Mr. Sbk asked him to stop. Mr. R still was reluctant to accede, so he was asked again, more forcefully. We will await further events with interest.

In conclusion, it does indeed appear to be the case that a forum set up to help alcoholics has been hi-jacked by a person or persons who seem determined to restate their case against the AA ad infinitum, even though they were heard loud and clear the first time round, and even though they are obviously causing considerable distress to their fellow members. I am not too sure what their motives really are, or what they hope to achieve by this.

[Mr_Know-it-All]

Many AA chapters will have different meetings: open and closed.

Open meetings are for those who might just want to check it out, want to accompany a friend, or are sent as terms of their probation.

These often give the appearance of a tent church, with lots of the "I was screwed up; now I'm wonderful; you, too, can be like me."

Then there are the closed sessions.

These are more for people actually wanting to participate in the program.

There is typically a lot less " baring witness" and a lot more discussion.

The reason for the closure is to cut back on the debate like the one developed here.

If you don't "buy it", you will simply be told to move on.

Whether one believes in the AA solution, or not, the purpose is to help.

If nothing else, it's an environment free from pro-alcohol hype, a place for a differing opinion on the subject, maybe a little "de-programming".

[robitusson]

I have been an interested bystander on this thread – indeed in this “drinking forum” - since it first started a few weeks ago.

It is interesting to observe how the debate has developed, and to see the frustrations and anger expressed by various participants as the days and weeks have progressed.

May I summarise the situation as I see it?

• The forum was started by some people who had a problem with alcohol and wished to have a ‘special’ place to discuss and seek help and advice with their problem.

• A number of topics were opened, and one of the early ones was a debate started on the definition of alcoholism.

• At the same time another thread was started, namely: “Drinkers diary vs. AA”.

• About half way through the Drinkers thread a certain Mr R appeared, and immediately informed all and sundry that alcoholism was not a disease, and that the AA - with it’s evangelical approach – was not the wonderful cure that many believed it to be, and in fact only had a 5 % success rate. He produced a veritable wealth of references from all manner of learned establishments to back up his extremely forthright statements..

• A certain Mr S seemed also very keen to support Mr R in his desire to ‘rubbish’ the AA.

• A number of confessed alcoholics – for whom this forum was presumably intended – became quite irritated with the esoteric debate on the “definition’ thread, and also with the zeal in which Mr R and his cohorts were ‘ripping’ into the AA.

• Mr R acknowledged as much on the Drinkers diary forum and agreed to continue the debate ‘elsewhere’ So he renewed his lengthy posts in the definition thread, often making two lengthy posts in a row, without any rebuttals or discussions in between. The alcoholics were getting angrier, and some implored him to stop, but he seemed to become ever more confrontational – with yet more quotes from learned journals to back up his point of view. He also continued to enjoy the support of Mr. S.

• Today, a certain Mr. Sbk asked him to stop. Mr. R still was reluctant to accede, so he was asked again, more forcefully. We will await further events with interest.

In conclusion, it does indeed appear to be the case that a forum set up to help alcoholics has been hi-jacked by a person or persons who seem determined to restate their case against the AA ad infinitum, even though they were heard loud and clear the first time round, and even though they are obviously causing considerable distress to their fellow members. I am not too sure what their motives really are, or what they hope to achieve by this.

Sorry, about the facts. I'll try to stick to hearsay and superstition from now on. That'll be a lot more helpful for problem-drinkers.

I've described my own experience with alcohol so there's no "alcohloics vs. non-alcoholics" going on here.