“We were now at Step Three. Many of us said to our Maker, as we understood Him: “God, I offer myself to Thee—to build with me and to do with me as Thou wilt. Relieve me of the bondage of self, that I may better do Thy will. Take away my difficulties, that victory over them may bear witness to those I would help of Thy Power, Thy Love, and Thy Way of life. May I do Thy will always!’’ We thought well before taking this step making sure we were ready; that we could at last abandon ourselves utterly to Him.” (Page 63, Big Book)

The temporal scope of the Step Three decision is the rest of my life.

The substantive scope of the Step Three decision is the whole of my life.

This is a one-off decision, and I say the prayer only when I am formally (re)taking Step Three.

I used to repeat the prayer, sometimes daily, sometimes frequently, but I found that gave me the impression its effect was wearing out, that it was expiring and had to be topped up.

I remind myself of it. But I pray in the present for the present. I pray for the day about the day.

My life is taken care of.

“Before I found Al-Anon, in my confusion and despair I asked for help in this way, but the next moment I would begin to worry again about what was going to happen next. If we do finally ask for God’s help, we must do so with absolute confidence. It is fruitless to take back into our own hands the problem which our powerlessness forced us to turn over to Him.” (ODAT, 14 March)

Once I have taken Step Three and decided to trust God, if I permit fear by co-signing a fear thought, I am saying:

God does not exist OR God is not good OR God is not powerful.

One cannot rely on a resource whose existence and nature one denies.

“This day and every day, I will place myself and my life in the hands of God, secure in the knowledge that He will not fail me, if I, too, do my part.” (ODAT, 29 February)

This is the essence of Step Three:

Rather than deciding what to do, I ask God what to do and do that.

I need not worry, because God’s already solved every problem.

God will do for me what I cannot do for myself.

But God will not do for me what I can do for myself.

“3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.” (Page 59, Big Book)

“On awakening let us think about the twenty-four hours ahead. … In thinking about our day we may face indecision. We may not be able to determine which course to take. Here we ask God for inspiration, an intuitive thought or a decision.” (Page 86 Big Book)

One cannot make decisions, except to choose the decision-provider.

When I make decisions without God, I’m not making the decision at all: I’m asking the ego what to do, it tells me, and that’s the decision.

How does structural change take place in accordance with Step Eleven?

Not by making structural changes: rather, by asking God, daily, what to do today. Even changing career, moving house, getting married are not single decisions but chains of small decisions take on a specific days.

And such decisions are not made but asked for.

That means I need not lift my head above the parapet of the day: it is always sufficient to ‘keep it in the day’, and, when a decision must be made today that involves speculation about future events or circumstances, I perform such speculation only as is necessary for the purpose of today’s decision.

I then ask, and what do I get? Inspiration, an intuitive thought, a decision.

Where does wanting come in?

God’s will usually manifests as wanting. For me to be happy doing God’s will consistently, my wanting needs to be brought in line. There’s only so long one can act against one’s emotions without an incident.

So, the normal situation is for God’s will to manifest as wanting, but I cannot infer in the other direction: since the ego’s will also manifests as wanting, I cannot infer from wanting to do something that it is from God. It might equally come from the ego.

Instead, I can test against habit (what is habitually God’s will?), experience, principle, injunction, authority, knowledge, reason, reality, and other testbeds.

The thing I do not do is consult my feeling, because that is uninformative.

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

[Wikipedia] “Pascal contends that a rational person should adopt a lifestyle consistent with the existence of God and should strive to believe in God. The reasoning for this stance involves the potential outcomes: if God does not exist, the believer incurs only finite losses, potentially sacrificing certain pleasures and luxuries; if God does exist, the believer stands to gain immeasurably, as represented for example by an eternity in Heaven in Abrahamic tradition, while simultaneously avoiding boundless losses associated with an eternity in Hell.”

Presented thus, the question is one of benefits and losses to the individual, a profit-and-loss account, if you will, seen through the lens of what might today be called ‘game theory’.

The calculation, however, assumes that the individual is essential a computer programme, whose purpose is to maximum gain (the experience of pleasure; the avoidance of pain). This is remote from reality. At the bestial level, this might be valid, but human beings are more than beasts. What people appear more fervently to seek is value and meaning.

Step Three essentially offers a stick-and-twist deal: stick with what you’ve got, or twist (i.e. exchange your existing hand for a new one).

What’s the existing hand?

The existing hand is the hand of materialism. Under materialism, there is no metaphysical realm, except in the illusory imaginings of beings that have developed self-awareness; there is nothing beyond the physical; there is no absolute morality beyond the morality of what is effective, expeditious, or ‘fair’ in the marketplace of human transactions, in other words morality is a conventional system; there is no underlying, originating imperative; there is no ultimate accountability; there is no real good or bad; if one believes in such things, under the materialist viewpoint, one is actually quite wrong, because the only reality is the atoms, and the atoms are blind to  morality; any rightness, wrongness, goodness, love is merely a socially convenient construct. Materialist philosophers tell us that there is no such thing as human will; we’re subject only to physical processes; materialist doctors tell us that if we’re depressed or anxious it’s because something has gone spontaneously wrong with our bodies (specifically the brain bit), and we must alter the body to treat the mind and alter our experience. Life is simply about avoiding pain and maximising pleasure, because that’s all we’re programmed to do, and none of it has any meaning. After all, time’s arrow points in one direction; the universe is burning out, and the planet will burn out long before that, if we don’t destroy it or life on it, which we might well be capable of doing and apt to do.

If we twist, what do we get? A relationship with the Creator; access to the metaphysical realm; and a mode of living in this world that has real, ultimate value; we have a morality that derives from a transcendent and all-encompassing metaphysical realm of which this material world is simply a fleeting artefact; we have a purpose given to us by God; we have a mission; there is the possibility of meaning, value, right and wrong, love, achievement in some real sense.

Is there is a risk if we twist? Well, we might not optimally maximise pleasure and avoid pain; we might not ‘make it’ in the conventional sense of the society we happen to have been born into and programmed by; we might not have the adulation of others or—more importantly—ourselves, because we do not pass the tests of the material world. All of that would be fine as sacrifice for an infinitely higher and actually eternal purpose. But worse than that we might be wrong; there might be no metaphysical realm at all. We might be sold a bill of goods and compromise our material experience to that end.

But here’s the precise point: to ‘fail’ in the material realm is not failure, because the material realm is just atoms. The concept of success or failure is a metaphysical concept, because it requires measurement of performance against values, and there are no values in the material realm. Material ‘success’ borrows a concept from a metaphysical world whose existence it denies then bends it to material parameters. In other words, if we twist and back the God horse but are quite wrong, and all there is is the material, we are no further back than the people who have ‘made a go it’ materially, because one arrangements of atoms is not inherently more valuable than another. We have not failed, and they have not succeeded, because neither success or failure can exist in the material realm. Even if we experience more pain or less pleasure, that experience is precisely as meaningless as the more pleasurable and less painful experience of another; after all, in the materialist viewpoint, pain and pleasure are simply a function of the operations of atoms and are just as meaningless. In other words, we really lose nothing through twisting in the place of sticking.

However, if we back the material horse and are quite wrong, we have utterly failed. It is not that we have failed the examination: that can be honourable if we have sincerely tried; but we have denied the existence of the examination hall, the Examiner, and the examination. We have not even been in the running, and the whole shooting match really has been for nought. This is before one even examines the question of eternity: one’s life has been quite without value, and, in beings built for value (which we must surely be under the metaphysical viewpoint), we have actually failed in our own terms even if we have ‘succeeded’ materially. And we will learn of this in due course after death.

We are therefore left with the same result as Pascal’s wager: even if one didn’t have to take Step Three for the purpose of mere material survival, one ought to take it. It’s the only hope for valuable life.

“My Creator, I am now willing that you should have all of me, good and bad.” (Page 76, Big Book)

Now, that passage, from the Step Seven prayer, sounds a lot like Step Three.

Step Three is buying the ticket. But there’s further preparation. Steps Four to Six.

Step Seven is boarding the plane.

“We had a new Employer. Being all powerful, He provided what we needed, if we kept close to Him and performed His work well. Established on such a footing we became less and less interested in ourselves, our little plans and designs.” (Page 63, Big Book)

The world says:

- You need to take charge of your life

- You have to have dreams

- You have to have plans

- You have to fight for what you want

- You need to find out who you are

- You need to find your voice

- You need to find your tribe

- You need to have goals

- You need to know where you will be in five years’ time

- You need to get your needs met

- You need to say how you feel

- You need to set boundaries

- You are entitled to fulfilment

- You are entitled to success

- You are special

The world is wrong!

What do I need?

God.

“I can learn to avail myself of the immense, inexhaustible power of God, if I am willing to be continually conscious of God’s nearness.” (ODAT, 21 August)

How does that availing take place? Talking, thanking, listening, asking. I can and should go to God on each specific matter that arises, remind myself constantly of the presence of God, ask for the right thought or action, remind myself I am no longer running the show, recognise I have turned my life over to God so it is no longer my business or concern except in that I must dispose of my time and energies under His direction, trust that I will be shown what to do and how to behave in each situation that arises, and in general recognise myself as His creature, placed in a specific relationship with the rest of His creation.

“This Step is a challenge to each of us, personally. It suggests a decision: to Let Go and Let God take a hand in our affairs, which He can do only if we surrender our self-will and turn our lives over to His care.” (ODAT, 17 June)

Not ‘a’ hand: The Hand. Just One. The just One.

The best way to surrender self-will is to make the decision to want and will what God wants and wills.

Then the will is in alignment with God’s.

The point is not to be lacking in wanting and willing but for such to be in harmony with reality:

Both reality and Reality.

 “Let’s examine for a moment this idea of dependence at the level of everyday living. In this area it is startling to discover how dependent we really are, and how unconscious of that dependence. Every modern house has electric wiring carrying power and light to its interior. We are delighted with this dependence; our main hope is that nothing will ever cut off the supply of current. By so accepting our dependence upon this marvel of science, we find ourselves more independent personally. Not only are we more independent, we are even more comfortable and secure. Power flows just where it is needed. Silently and surely, electricity, that strange energy so few people understand, meets our simplest daily needs, and our most desperate ones, too. Ask the polio sufferer confined to an iron lung who depends with complete trust upon a motor to keep the breath of life in him.” (Twelve Steps and Twelve Decisions)

The driver of the car has to keep his eye on the road and has constant decisions. The passenger can get on with activities. The discipline of allowing God to run my life at the top level gives me far more freedom at the day-to-day level. I do not need to keep my eye on the road or make constant decisions. I can get on with the content whilst God handles the form.

When one is sick of self, one can say almost grumpily, to God:

"I'm done. Have it Your way. Have everything Your way. I'm going to resign from the debating society. I renounce all views, all 'pinions, all speculations, all assessments. Just show me what to do. Next. Next. Next. That's it."

When I'm at my most desperate, I'm at my closest to God.

“take away my difficulties” (Chapter 5, Big Book)

I do not ‘give my difficulties’ to God. He does not need them or want them.

The context of this phrase is Step Three and the programme as a whole.

The programme asks me to seek and do God’s will, in the place of seeking and doing the ego’s will.

On a compass, true north is only one of the degrees of the three hundred and sixty.

The other three hundred and fifty-nine are not true north.

Almost everything that occurs to me is not true north: it is the ego’s will.

The programme appears entirely about redirection of my will to align with God’s will not the ego’s will.

My will power then activates movement in that direction, the direction of true north, the direction of God.

When I do the right thing, the wrong action ceases to exist.

When I think the right thing, the wrong thought ceases to exist.

When I believe the right thing, the wrong belief ceases to exist.

The taking away of difficulties is really the byproduct of my concerted action along new lines.

God does not serve me: I serve God.

God does not take anything from me.

God takes me, and only me.

Anything that is not me (my troubles, my difficulties) is left behind.

Being convinced, we were at Step Three, which is that we decided to turn our will and our life over to God as we understood Him.	-        There must be no reservation about o   Being an alcoholic and therefore not in charge of one’s life o   The necessity of having God in charge o   The adequacy and efficacy of that solution o   Taking the plunge
Just what do we mean by that, and just what do we do?	-        This is not an abstract theological question -        It must be made specific and concrete for implementation
The first requirement is that we be convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success.	-        Will: o   Outcomes o   The courses plotted to achieve those outcomes -        God’s will: o   God’s outcomes (often hidden to me) o   God’s courses (revealed through Step Eleven) -        Self = the image of me as: o   the centre of the universe o   my chief or only concern o   the lord of my manor o   the creator of me -        Life run on self-will: o   Setting egoic objectives and o   Pursuing those objectives egoically o   Pursuing good objectives egoically -        Obviously and usually egoic pursuits o   Sex o   Money o   Power o   Prestige o   Comfort o   Thrills o   Appearance -        Less obviously yet often egoic pursuits o   Health o   Security o   Ambition o   Religion o   Spirituality o   Ideology o   Politics -        Success: o   The outcome being achieved o   The outcome serving its purpose, e.g.: §  Paving the way for a further outcome §  Delivering a desired experience ·       Security ·       Calm ·       Happiness ·       Satisfaction o   The outcome persisting o   The experience persisting -        A life run on self-will fails because o   The result is costly to achieve in terms of: §  Loss of freedom §  Negative emotion (fear, frustration, boredom) §  Time, attention, effort, resources o   The result is uncertain o   The result does not deliver its promised happiness §  Either there is no happiness §  Or the happiness is short-lived §  The underlying dissatisfaction remains o   Collision (with others and internally): see below o   Self-will brings me into internal conflict §  Few people have just one plan §  Most people have multiple plans §  Multiple plans necessarily conflict
On that basis we are almost always in collision with something or somebody, even though our motives are good.	-        Other people have outcomes and courses -        Those are either: o   In pursuit of their own outcomes o   In pursuit of the common good -        Since my outcomes are not theirs, the courses will conflict -        Regarding the common good: my notion and others’ notion of the common good and the course to achieve it differ -        This also gives rise to conflict -        Beyond the individual human will, the pre-existing and infinitely large and complex world consists in a number of interlocking systems: these are powerful and conflict with my courses and outcomes -        Self-will brings me into internal conflict o   Few people have just one plan o   Most people have multiple plans o   Multiple plans necessarily conflict
Most people try to live by self-propulsion.	-        Propulsion is the generation of movement -        For propulsion, fuel is required -        This could be push-fuel (things one wants to move away from or avert) -        Or it could be pull-fuel (things one wants to move towards) -        Self-propulsion involves two types of fuel: o   Outcomes I want to achieve o   Fear of what I want not to happen -        What is the alternative? o   The push-fuel of §  Alcoholic destruction §  The misery of materialism o   The pull-fuel of §  Eternal life §  Satisfaction under God’s direction o   The direct daily download of Divine energy o   Once direction is established, ongoing onward movement is ensured by: §  Momentum §  Routine and habit §  God’s ongoing provision of energy §  Encouragement from others §  The energy of others §  The energy fed back by good results
Each person is like an actor who wants to run the whole show; is forever trying to arrange the lights, the ballet, the scenery and the rest of the players in his own way.	-        I am an actor o   That means I have my own identity o   Plus I have roles I play -        I am not the director or producer -        I only think I am -        Elements: o   Desire / ambition: to run the show o   Notions of what the show should look like o   Forever: an eternal hell of trying to change what cannot or should not be changed o   The lights: the light in which things are seen o   The ballet: the plan or design o   The scenery: the very context o   The rest of the players: others’ actions -        Whilst I am doing this, I am committing two ‘sins’ o   I am not playing the role I should be playing o   I am doing something I should not be doing o   Interference by an actor in the show is not even part of the show o   It is the disruption of the show
If his arrangements would only stay put, if only people would do as he wished, the show would be great.	-        The actor’s arrangements are extraneous to the show -        It should be up to the director and the producer to make arrangements -        His, the actor’s, arrangements, are interfered with -        They are not subject to his lasting control -        Others alter them -        And they themselves refuse to stay put -        The ego’s plan is to create a static scene in a mutable world -        The ego’s plan requires others’ cooperation -        Yet they haven’t been given the script -        They do not know what they are supposed to do -        And if they are told, they still won’t do it -        The illusion is that it is not only the actor’s life but the entire show that would be excellent, i.e. others’ lives and life itself
Everybody, including himself, would be pleased.	-        The self-server conceals his self-serving by presenting it as a part of a greater whole: his being pleased is simply a function of everyone being pleased -        The self-server knows what is right for the world, for the country, for the community, for the group, for the relationship -        Of course he would be pleased, but only because everyone would be pleased, and he is part of everyone -        Whenever I ‘know’ what is right for the world, for the country, for the community, for the group, for the relationship, I am in this self-serving delusion
Life would be wonderful.	-        An extension of the above idea: -        The illusion that the solution involves the arrangement of external circumstances as I see fit
In trying to make these arrangements our actor may sometimes be quite virtuous.	-        Virtue (a good thing) can be co-opted for a bad (getting my own way)
He may be kind, considerate, patient, generous; even modest and self-sacrificing.	-        These are examples of virtues in practice
On the other hand, he may be mean, egotistical, selfish and dishonest.	-        These are examples of vices in practice
But, as with most humans, he is more likely to have varied traits.	-        People employ a mixture of both
What usually happens? The show doesn’t come off very well.	-        Usually but not always: sometimes the show does come off (but that will not in any case deliver happiness) -        But most plans fail
He begins to think life doesn’t treat him right.	-        Rather than blaming the plan, the egotist blames life -        … as though life is a volitional being -        He construes himself as the victim -        He maintains the ideal of what is ‘right’ -        And believes that reality is out of kilter with what is ‘right’
He decides to exert himself more.	-        Rather than recognising the error, he rinses and repeats -        ‘Plan A failed; let’s try plan A!’
He becomes, on the next occasion, still more demanding or gracious, as the case may be.	-        This is simply a redoubling of the aforementioned deployment of virtues and vices
Still the play does not suit him.	-        Of course, this does not work, since the same method is being used
Admitting he may be somewhat at fault, he is sure that other people are more to blame.	-        The victimhood is being maintained -        There is a perverse form of self-victimhood: believing one’s management of one’s life is the cause of the failure -        But this is different than and a cover for admitting the real fault: -        The approach to life based on self-will
He becomes angry, indignant, self-pitying.	-        The emotional consequences of a life run on self-will
What is his basic trouble?	-        The basic trouble is the trouble underlying all other troubles
Is he not really a self-seeker even when trying to be kind?	-        The truth behind the deployment of virtues in the service of self-will is that the system remains corrupt, and the deployment of virtues does not convert a corrupt system into either a moral or a functioning system
Is he not a victim of the delusion that he can wrest satisfaction and happiness out of this world if he only manages well?	-        The error is the belief that the arrangement of external circumstances just so is the method by which happiness is achieved -        This would entail happiness being generated by an outside source -        The happiness is in a different order of reality -        Happiness is metaphysical -        Managing well produces a physical result -        This is the first reason why this fails -        Secondly, what happens downstream (in the material) will not change what happens upstream (in the metaphysical) -        This system is delusional -        But the individual is not aware, hence victim
Is it not evident to all the rest of the players that these are the things he wants?	-        This is accompanied by incredulity that others do not automatically: o   See what I want o   Approve what I want o   Act accordingly
And do not his actions make each of them wish to retaliate, snatching all they can get out of the show?	-        A review of the situation reveals that it is my actions that are harming others, not life that is harming me -        This triggers retaliation -        They are also playing the same game -        Where I wrest, they snatch -        They are operating also on the basis of the system of outside–in, i.e. arrange outside circumstances right and the internal experience will be sorted out
Is he not, even in his best moments, a producer of confusion rather than harmony?	-        Even when I do manage well, I create confusion, because my plans and designs are aligned neither with God’s nor others’ -        The only thing that could bring about harmony in the world is God’s plan -        The only thing that can bring about harmony in my life is God’s plan for me
Our actor is self-centered—ego-centric, as people like to call it nowadays.	-        I am self-centered -        The terminology for this may change from generation to generation -        This means I see myself as the centre of the universe -        And the way I conduct myself is based on this view -        And on the belief that I need to get my own way to be OK -        Also, I view things from my point of view -        That means anything close to me looks important -        And anything distant (in time or space or in terms of relationships) looks unimportant -        Yet what is unimportant to me will be important to others -        This is what gives rise to the confusion and conflict
He is like the retired businessman who lolls in the Florida sunshine in the winter complaining of the sad state of the nation; the minister who sighs over the sins of the twentieth century; politicians and reformers who are sure all would be Utopia if the rest of the world would only behave; the outlaw safe cracker who thinks society has wronged him; and the alcoholic who has lost all and is locked up.	-        Non-alcoholic examples of self-will run riot: o   The retired businessman: §  He is successful and rich §  He has what he wants §  He need not work §  He is somewhere pleasant §  Yet he is unhappy §  And the blame is firstly placed outside himself §  And secondly operates at the grand level of the ‘nation’ o   The minister / politician / reformer §  They have plans for the world §  And for everyone else §  The problem, again, lies outside §  They believe the world would be perfected would everyone only obey they §  They are tyrants §  And they are wrong o   The safecracker §  He is trying to wrest something that does not belong to him §  He is attacking and taking §  Yet he feels attacked and taken from §  What he is doing is what he thinks is done to him o   The alcoholic §  Has been trying to wrest happiness generally §  And specifically with alcohol §  But has achieved the opposite: ·       Both externally: has lost all and is locked up ·       And internally: miserable
Whatever our protestations, are not most of us concerned with ourselves, our resentments, or our self-pity?	-        Even when I appear to be concerned with outer matters … -        … I am really concerned with my own affairs o   As they play out in the world o   Or as they are reflected in the world
Selfishness—self-centeredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles.	-        Selfishness: o   Putting myself first, rather than §  Putting others first §  Putting the common good first -        Self-centeredness o   Seeing things from my point of view, rather than §  Seeing things from others’ point of view §  Seeing things from a bird’s-eye view §  Or a God’s-eye view -        Root of my troubles (= practical problems plus disturbances) -        The surface may apparently tell a different story -        But these are the real cause
Driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the toes of our fellows and they retaliate.	-        I am not in the driving seat -        Self = ego is in the driving seat -        Self-delusion o   I am the centre of the universe o   I am in charge o   I need the universe to mould around me o   I can make that happen -        Self-seeking o   The plan I concoct to bring this about -        Fear o   The innate awareness that the plan will fail -        Self-pity o   The unhappiness when the plan does fail
Sometimes they hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some time in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt.	-        The problem seems to start with others’ behaviour -        But the problem really starts with me -        I create the scenario (get the job, get into the relationship, go and live in a specific place) -        I then contribute to the situation I find myself in -        The others act in accordance with the situation -        I then suffer because of the situation I have co-authored -        But fail to recognise my part -        The decisions based on self either create or contribute to this situation -        Even in situations where I did not establish the setting or did not contribute to or elicit the event … -        … I have still made the decision that I cannot be happy unless things go my way -        So my decision is behind the trouble in any case
So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own making.	-        Basically = at source: I am the source of my own unhappiness -        This means it’s not: o   Genetics o   Intergenerational trauma o   My childhood o   My past o   Brain chemistry o   The state of the world o   Other people o   Anything else
They arise out of ourselves, and the alcoholic is an extreme example of self-will run riot, though he usually doesn’t think so.	-        Self-will is not limited to alcoholics -        But active alcoholism is an extreme example of self-will -        Alcoholics, once sober, apparently still remain extreme examples of self-will
Above everything, we alcoholics must be rid of this selfishness.	-        The number one priority is to get rid of selfishness -        Because the selfishness is the origin of the desire to drink -        And the self-will is the reason we follow through on the desire
We must, or it kills us! God makes that possible.	-        This, if not arrested, will kill us -        Because drinking, if reactivated, may never stop
And there often seems no way of entirely getting rid of self without His aid.	-        We can go some way to eliminating self on our own -        But we cannot achieve perfect elimination -        And even though God plays a part, we must play our part too
Many of us had moral and philosophical convictions galore, but we could not live up to them even though we would have liked to.	-        Morality and philosophy are necessary -        But they are not sufficient -        We lack the ability to follow through consistently
Neither could we reduce our self-centeredness much by wishing or trying on our own power.	-        Self is bigger than me -        But me joining with God is bigger than self
We had to have God’s help.	-        God’s help is necessary -        It is the only option

“Selfishness—self-centeredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles.” (Chapter 5, Big Book)

“So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own making.” (Chapter 5, ibid. )

Someone recently talked about giving their troubles to God.

Troubles presumably have an external element.

“The chances are that we have domestic troubles”, (Chapter 6, ibid. )

“If he is in a serious mood dwell on the troubles liquor has caused you”, (Chapter 7, ibid. )

“Everyone knows about the others’ alcoholic troubles.” (Chapter 9, ibid. )

These three quotations all use troubles with a partially or entirely external sense.

But is that all? Clearly there are external problems in a person’s life that are not of one’s making, whose root is not selfishness.

What must trouble be, for the first two statements above to be true?

Clearly: the disturbance at the situation, not the situation itself.

The book makes this distinction clear later on:

“Though a situation had not been entirely our fault” (Chapter 5, ibid.)

Thus, a situation has multiple factors feeding into it.

A trouble, internally, has one factor feeding into it: me, specifically my perception.

Back to ‘giving one’s troubles to God’.

What I am supposed to turn over is two things: my will and life.

This means, to take them in reverse order, I cease to be personally concerned with or invested in external facts, circumstances, situations, courses of events, or outcomes. These are in God’s hands.

My will, like a magnetic needle, has been pointed in the wrong direction, towards the perceptions and promptings of the ego. It needs to be reset so as to be pointed towards True North, God’s will. The content of will is not originated by me. Will is what I assent to: the content proposed by the ego or the content proposed by God. To turn my will over to God is to make a decision to seek to do God’s will not the ego’s will (= self-will) in all situations.

As a result of this, the troubles automatically drop away, firstly because I am now single-minded, and, if I do not have a notion of how things should go, there is no cause for upset. The response to everything is, “Very well; very well!” Secondly, they drop away because God’s will, pragmatically speaking, is way more effective in the world. Over any considerable period of time, life is far smoother, far more efficient and harmonious, and far more satisfactory in terms of achieving worthwhile things.

This is a far cry from ‘giving my troubles to God’, like asking a waiter to remove a toad from my plate.

God is not there to do things for me. I am there to do things for God. I am showing up for duty. I’m abandoning my mud pies and pulling people’s hair, hearing the school bell, and rushing inside to learn my Greek verbs. God does precisely nothing with my troubles, either external or internal. He plots a course of action, I follow the course of action, and the troubles cease to exist. He offers me a new attitude, and, when I adopt that attitude, I am at peace. The emotional trouble, in that moment, automatically vanishes. Nothing is done with it. The illusion is merely dispelled (the trouble being the result of a spell cast by the ego). The practical trouble, in that moment, automatically vanishes. External factors resolve either into facts I must accept or situations I must change through my practical contribution (or withdrawal).

God cannot see troubles or problems. Externally and internally, they are constructs in my mind, not God’s. And I certainly cannot give them to God in the sense of giving someone a cheesecake, which results in my having less cheesecake and God having more. God does not need troubles, mine or anyone else’s. God needs my time, attention, energy, and resources to be channelled along new lines. To God, there is only God’s will, and either I cooperate or I do not. If I do not, I will have trouble. Such trouble is not to be returned to God (as it did not originate in Him) but is to be abandoned, like the mud pie. I do not give God self. I abandon it for God.

Where the book talks about placing problems in God’s hands, that is really shorthand for asking God for God’s will in terms of precisely how I should look at the situation and what I should do. I am not relinquishing something, and God is not taking something. I am lost in a maze and God is calling out instructions for how to exit the maze: turn left, turn right, turn right, turn left. The maze is of my own creation, not God’s, and does not enter into God’s possession. But God does have a solution to the problem I created, and it is to follow His direction, however mad it may seem materially.

“This, the newcomer thinks, is just about the last straw. This is the beginning of the end. And so it is: the beginning of the end of his old life, and the beginning of his emergence into a new one.” (Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions)

Sometimes I’ve absolutely had enough. A little bit of me. But mostly of others, of the world. The spirit in which this originates might be churlish, but it can be turned to good account. What I’ve had enough is my experience of me, of others, of the world. Feeling that there is absolutely no point in going on, no point in anything, forms the perfect basis for Step Three. In fact, it is the prerequisite. I’ve been told: if you still have any investment, any potted seeds waiting to sprout, anything at all tying you to the world, ‘get done’ with that, as you had to with drinking, and then come back. Until then, have at it. The desire to completely let go of everything is an excellent one. The choice is only whether to throw everything down the drainpipe or hand it to God.

If I am done with clothing, I don’t throw it away: I give it to charity.

If I am done with my life, I don’t throw it away: I give to Charity (God, in Step Three).

Then stand back.

 ... can be found here.

See the front page for links to downloads ('TAPES') and podcasts ('PODCASTS').

“There I humbly offered myself to God, as I then understood Him, to do with me as He would. I placed myself unreservedly under His care and direction. I admitted for the first time that of myself I was nothing; that without Him I was lost.” (Chapter 1, Big Book)

• I cannot stop drinking once I start
• Sober insanity: a drink seems like a good idea
• If I am in charge I will drink based on this idea
• If I am not in charge, I will stay sober despite this idea
• If I am in charge I will not recover
• If I am not in charge I will recover
• Someone must be in charge
• That someone must be God
• “Humbly” = right-sized
• “Humbly” = recognising I am “nothing” (alone)
• That means I can achieve nothing while I am in charge
• True in relation to my drinking
• True in relation also to life
• What I achieve alone will not bring happiness
• Without him I am lost: I cannot determine the right thought or action
• With him I am found: I can be shown the right thought or action
• “As I then understood him”: the understanding need not be complete or accurate
• “To do with me as He would”: (a) I take the action He directs (b) I accept the outcome
• “Under His … direction”: (a) take the Twelve Steps (b) take direction on what actions to take all day, every day
• “Under His care”: this is the payback for being under God’s direction
• “Care” = protection against acting on the insane idea

 ... can be found here.

See the front page for links to downloads ('TAPES') and podcasts ('PODCASTS').

When a situation is troubling me, and there is nothing or little I can do about it, once I have done what little I can, the job, whenever the situation occurs to me mentally, is to conceive of God's direction and strength flowing in the direction of the situation and the people in it and to visualise those people accessing that direction and strength.

This, I've found, is the perfect solution to all negative obsession. It's temporarily replaced by positive obsession, but the positive obsession is so repetitive and boring that the mind eventually finds something else to occupy itself with, and I'm free.

 “After they have succumbed to the desire again, as so many do, and the phenomenon of craving develops, they pass through the well-known stages of a spree, emerging remorseful, with a firm resolution not to drink again.” (The Doctor’s Opinion, Big Book)

“Some will be drunk the day after making their resolutions; most of them within a few weeks.” (Chapter 3, Big Book)

“They are over-remorseful and make many resolutions, but never a decision.” (The Doctor’s Opinion, Big Book)

“3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.” (Chapter 5, Big Book)

“Let him know you are available if he wishes to make a decision and tell his story, but do not insist upon it if he prefers to consult someone else.” (Chapter 7, Big Book)

“If you have already made a decision, and an inventory of your grosser handicaps, you have made a good beginning.”

“Decision is the whole business here; a door must be shut for ever.” (G. K. Chesterton)

When I made the decision to stay sober, it had to be a decision that would prevail forever, not a temporary decision, not a provisional decision, not a hope, not an ideal, but a commitment to a course of action: that course of action was building a life around the programme and running my life in accordance with the programme.

The door must slam and lock, and the keys must be lost.

I did ‘take my will back’ for a couple of years (i.e. reversed my commitment to place AA at the centre of my life, and attended only sporadically), but I made another decision to commit to AA, and that decision has not been reversed.

Along the way I make mistakes and have certainly had excursions into self-willed behaviour, but the basic scaffolding of turning my will and life over to God has not been decommissioned or dismantled.

I don’t think it’s possible to ‘take one’s will back many times a day’ in the sense of reversing Step Three.

Either the Step has been taken or it hasn’t.

If it hasn’t, it’s possible to play-act it, as I did for a few months before I got finally sober, taking some of the actions of those who had turned their wills and lives over but without the actual decision having been made itself.

If there’s real double-mindedness, a lukewarm commitment to the programme, a constant back-and-forth, a continual to-and-fro, a dilettantish dabbling, a taking-what-I-want-and-leaving-the-rest, flurries of activities interspersed with periods of idleness and programme amnesia—where I’m living as though I really do not have a programme—the (rhetorical) question is: Did I really take Step Three in the first place?

For me, Step Three is like the decision to move to a new country.

Firstly, I must actually move there and set up home.

Secondly, there is the job of becoming a good citizen.

I might make a terrible hash of the latter, but that does not mean that the former has not taken place.

When I make a terrible hash of the latter, I’ve not reversed the decision to live there.

Contrariwise, if I have not moved there, I might eat the food of the country, listen to its radio, and learn the language, but moved I have not.

In fact, the latter person might be doing a better impression of a national of that country, but it is the former who is actually living there.

I find it useful periodically to check that my Step Three decision really is in place:

Is my life structured (albeit with flaws) around God and AA, or are the latter adjuncts to ‘my life’ (‘my life’, ‘my programme’, ‘my steps’, ‘my sponsor’, ‘my meetings’, ‘my higher power’)?

In Step Three, we are to turn over our wills and lives to God.

Turn over (per Webster's 1913):

To transfer; as, to turn over business to another hand. 

I can transfer only what is in my hand. You are not in my hand. The world is not in my hand. The past and future are not in my hand. Outcomes are not in my hand. I cannot turn these over. The delusion that they are in my hand must be smashed.

What is turned over?

My will (my determined course of action) and my life (my pursuit of that course of action) are transferred to God, and are matched by the two notions of the knowledge of God's will for me and the power to carry that out.

I do that by asking God for what to do and then by asking God for the strength to do it.

That is the entire programme. The only two ways to fail are not to do that or to do other than that.

 ... can be found here.

A downloadable version can be found, along with podcast links, by clicking TAPES and PODCASTS on the homepage.

Alcoholics Anonymous is not anonymous. It has a website called Alcoholics Anonymous. Alcoholics Anonymous is its name.

Its members are the ones who are anonymous.

There's no pointing in joining an organisation of anonymous people and then wanting to have a name.

Make your mind up.

You want a name or you want to be anonymous?

You want to be anonymous?

Fine. That means you can't have a name.

That's what anonymous means: having no name.

It's no good having a name anywhere (inside AA or outside AA) and wanting to be anonymous.

You can't have your cake and eat it.

There might be a thing walking round in the world with the old name I gave up.

Let it do its thing.

But I gave up two things already, a long time ago:

(1) My name, by joining AA.

(2) My life, by taking Step Three.

If you've still got your own name, you haven't joined AA.

If you've still got your own life, you haven't taken Step Three.

What's left if you give up your own name and your own life?

Well, if you do both, you'll find out.

I know someone that stopped going to AA. I'm not allowed to do that. I have to go to meetings, work the Twelve Steps, sponsor people, do service. Why? Because I took Step Three, and I was told that God reveals Himself through AA literature and AA members in good standing who are around longer than me and further ahead spiritually. I don't make decisions anymore. I made the last decision in my life when I took Step Three. Today, I ask for decisions, and God, the AA literature, and AA members in good standing who are around longer than me and further ahead spiritually have never even hinted that I should leave AA. So here I am!

... can be found here.

Step Three: turning my will and life over to God.

Any assessment or opinion of any situation or aspect of me or my life that does not stem from that turning over reflects a failure to turn over.

The practising of the principles starts with me, and the core of the programme is the process of turning over that starts in Step One and ends in Step Twelve.

I've gone from victimhood and thrashing around in the vale of tears, blaming others and the past, to living in a higher reality in which, whilst I remain conscious, I am untouchable by the past or the world.

Surrender to the AA programme took place in three stages. The first, in July 1993, was a surrender to what I saw as the AA way of life: meetings, sponsorship, steps, and service. This surrender was borne of a mixture of fear and common sense. I was frightened of dying of alcoholism, and common sense suggested that what works for other AA members would work for me, at the very least to keep me sober. The second surrender was the surrender to God in Step Three, which represented a switch from me using the AA suggestions as a way to manage my life more effectively to an abandonment of any notion of ‘my’ life whatsoever. It was now God’s, to do with as He pleased. The Steps are something like a rope bridge over an abyss in the fog. Only a little ahead  can one see well; further ahead, only dimly; and furthest ahead, not at all. As I took Step Seven, the later Steps hove properly into view for the first time, and I started to understand that the rest of my life would consist in serving God—and serving only God, not self—with Step Eleven as the powerhouse and Step Ten as the constant pruning, training, and repotting mechanism (to use gardening metaphors). This was the third surrender. Step Ten is a discipline that cuts away the constantly regrowing weeds of selfishness, cowardice, vanity, conceit, sensualism, materialism, and cynicism that are the enemies not only of my welfare but of the mission with which I’ve been entrusted by God as a substitute for my active alcoholism. One glimpses only faintly and fitfully God’s purpose, but I’ve learned to trust that my purpose is perfectly fulfilled by devoting each day to doing God’s will—and only God’s will.

A while ago, I told someone what I do in the programme, and they said, 'You're so lucky that your time is your own. My time is not my own. I have [X, Y, Z] responsibilities.'

Firstly, what responsibilities I have, in fact anyone has, has at some level been chosen. Almost without exception, they are not thrust upon a person. The chief exception lies in having dependents, and elderly, frail, or sick relatives are not chosen, at least at the material level. In most (but not all) cases, bearing children is chosen. Pretty much everything else is chosen, if not at the daily level, at the structural level. There is always a different way to live. The feeling of constraint typically reflects underground lines that may not be crossed, in the individual's understanding. Being unwilling to countenance a lower material standard of living in order not to have to work at a miserable but lucrative job is a good example. The unwillingness is hidden below the assumption that a higher material standard of living is necessary. This assumption literally kills people, at the end of a chain of consequences.

But more importantly, I've taken Step Three, and meant it, so my time is emphatically not my own. It is God's. I can not not do what comes down the tubes to me from God. In fact, if I were crimping my activities in behalf of God in favour of material-world projects, then construing myself as hemmed in by such projects, this really would be a demonstration of my time being my own.

5. Each Alcoholics Anonymous group ought to be a spiritual entity having but one primary purpose—that of carrying its message to the alcoholic who still suffers.

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

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.

OED: Affair: An activity performed by a person, often on a habitual basis; something to be done; a piece or item of business; an occupation, a pursuit; a task, a duty.

I don't have a life. I gave God my life. It's His, not mine.

God has given me back affairs: check out the definition of affairs above.

I don't have a home: I have habitual activities and things to be done.

I don't have a career: I have an occupation and a pursuit.

I don't have positions or roles: I have tasks and duties.

There are only things to do, and God sustains me within that and gives me all necessary resources.

Nothing can not go my way because I don't have a way.

There is nothing to fear because there is nothing to lose.

The primary purpose is to help other people stay sober, and that is achieved by practising these principles in all my affairs.

I had to cast out some old ideas.

Here are seven old ideas:

1. If I want to drink, I have to.
2. It will work for you, but it won't work for me.
3. Material success brings happiness.
4. I can read the future.
5. I know what other people are thinking.
6. I need to look after myself because God cannot.
7. There is something bad that is going to get me.

Here are the new ideas:

1. I never have to drink again if instead I take the next right action.
2. It will work for me if I take the Steps.
3. Only serving God brings happiness.
4. I cannot read the future.
5. I cannot read people's minds.
6. I cannot look after me, but God can.
7. God will help me handle any situation that arises.

'When he acquires willingness, he is the only one who can make the decision to exert himself.' (Step Three)

On the basis of these ideas, my job is to exert my will along this line to do four things:

1. Don't drink no matter what.
2. Ask God for help.
3. Take my AA actions.
4. Plod diligently and largely silently with my other affairs.

Once the world has been rejected, one cannot go back.

Dead bones cannot be brought back to life, re-fleshed, and quickened.

The only way is forward: to give one's remaining presence to God.

The life one had has already been relinquished.

What is returned is a vivid presence.

Through that vivid presence, God's Will is done.

What that Will is and how it is enacted is largely invisible.

What is visible is the array of acts that are the channel.

My job:

1. Look after the vessel that performs the acts.

2. Take care of the acts.

My 'work' is my service.

What that service consists in and why: none of my business.

The only question is: What do You want me to do today?

To go forward I have to go back to God.

"The first requirement is that we be convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success." (Page 60)

The following pages set out why: the conflict, confusion, resentment, fear, disappointment, despair, and weariness.

Let's inventory whether these symptoms are present and therefore whether we are running our lives on self-will.

Over the course of seven days, note down your experiences, as follows, covering one topic a day.

Conflict: Every time you experience conflict between you and something or someone else or within yourself, however mild or strong. For each time, write in just a few words the nature of the conflict.

Confusion: Every time you experience confusion about what is going on, what to do, or how to resolve any difficulty or doubt in your life. For each time, write in just a few words the nature of the confusion.

Resentment: Every time you are upset in any way, whatever the 'size' of the upset, whether it is mild annoyance, rage, or something in between, about the present or the past. For each time, write in just a few words the nature of the resentment.

Fear: Every time you are frightened, fretting, fearful, worried, anxious, or trepidatious, whether the feeling is fleeting or overwhelming. For each time, write in just a few words the nature of the fear.

Disappointment: Every time something or someone doesn't live up to your expectations. For each time, write in just a few words the nature of the disappointment.

Despair: Every time you wonder what it's all for or encounter a circumstance you are sure will never improve. For each time, write in just a few words the nature of the despair.

Weariness: Every time you feel low, sullen, resistant, tired, fatigued, exhausted, or otherwise lacking in resources. For each time, write in just a few words the nature of the weariness.

After one week, whatever is written down shows the extent to which I am still living life based on self-will and the results I am getting.

Surrender to God means surrender of self-will.

This means that what I want is irrelevant.

There is no 'I' to do the wanting.

It means my needs are irrelevant to me.

God satisfies them and gives me direction on what, if anything, I must do as part of His scheme.

But my needs are not my business.

I neither have boundaries nor lack boundaries.

They're not up to me.

God tells me what to do and say.

Some of those things might be construed by others as boundaries.

But I needn't concern myself with that.

My life is not remotely mine.

That's the whole point of Step Three.

It's now God's life, and I get given things to believe, think, say, and do.

I'm the blank sheet of paper on which God writes.

I cease to exist in the ordinary sense, as a drop of water in the ocean can no longer rightly be called a drop.

Step One: The building is burning.

Step Two: There is a stepladder leading out of the burning building.

Step Three: Climb down the Steps to safety.

Being all powerful, He provided what we needed, if we kept close to Him and performed His work well. (Page 63, Alcoholics Anonymous)

The first requirement is that we be convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success. On that basis we are almost always in collision with something or somebody, even though our motives are good.

Most people try to live by self-propulsion. Each person is like an actor who wants to run the whole show; is forever trying to arrange the lights, the ballet, the scenery and the rest of the players in his own way. If his arrangements would only stay put, if only people would do as he wished, the show would be great. Everybody, including himself, would be pleased. Life would be wonderful.

In trying to make these arrangements our actor may sometimes be quite virtuous. He may be kind, considerate, patient, generous; even modest and self-sacrificing. On the other hand, he may be mean, egotistical, selfish and dishonest. But, as with most humans, he is more likely to have varied traits.

He begins to think life doesn’t treat him right.

He decides to exert himself more. He becomes, on the next occasion, still more demanding or gracious, as the case may be. Still the play does not suit him.

Admitting he may be somewhat at fault, he is sure that other people are more to blame. He becomes angry, indignant, self-pitying.

What is his basic trouble? Is he not really a self-seeker even when trying to be kind?

Is he not a victim of the delusion that he can wrest satisfaction and happiness out of this world if he only manages well? Is it not evident to all the rest of the players that these are the things he wants? And do not his actions make each of them wish to retaliate, snatching all they can get out of the show? Is he not, even in his best moments, a producer of confusion rather than harmony?

Our actor is self-centered—ego-centric, as people like to call it nowadays. He is like the retired businessman who lolls in the Florida sunshine in the winter complaining of the sad state of the nation; the minister who sighs over the sins of the twentieth century; politicians and reformers who are sure all would be Utopia if the rest of the world would only behave; the outlaw safe cracker who thinks society has wronged him; and the alcoholic who has lost all and is locked up. Whatever our protestations, are not most of us concerned with ourselves, our resentments, or our self-pity?

Selfishness—self-centeredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles. Driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the toes of our fellows and they retaliate. Sometimes they hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some time in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt.

So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own making. They arise out of ourselves, and the alcoholic is an extreme example of self-will run riot, though he usually doesn’t think so. Above everything, we alcoholics must be rid of this selfishness. We must, or it kills us! God makes that possible. And there often seems no way of entirely getting rid of self without His aid. Many of us had moral and philosophical convictions galore, but we could not live up to them even though we would have liked to. Neither could we reduce our self-centeredness much by wishing or trying on our own power. We had to have God’s help.

This is the how and why of it. First of all, we had to quit playing God. It didn’t work. Next, we decided that hereafter in this drama of life, God was going to be our Director. He is the Principal; we are His agents. He is the Father, and we are His children. Most good ideas are simple, and this concept was the keystone of the new and triumphant arch through which we passed to freedom.

When we sincerely took such a position, all sorts of remarkable things followed. We had a new Employer. Being all powerful, He provided what we needed, if we kept close to Him and performed His work well. Established on such a footing we became less and less interested in ourselves, our little plans and designs. More and more we became interested in seeing what we could contribute to life. As we felt new power flow in, as we enjoyed peace of mind, as we discovered we could face life successfully, as we became conscious of His presence, we began to lose our fear of today, tomorrow or the hereafter. We were reborn.

We were now at Step Three. Many of us said to our Maker, as we understood Him: “God, I offer myself to Thee—to build with me and to do with me as Thou wilt. Relieve me of the bondage of self, that I may better do Thy will. Take away my difficulties, that victory over them may bear witness to those I would help of Thy Power, Thy Love, and Thy Way of life. May I do Thy will always!” We thought well before taking this step making sure we were ready; that we could at last abandon ourselves utterly to Him.

In my life, my troubles are of my own making. Firstly, I'm the co-author of the situation; secondly, I'm the author of my response. (Note that responsibility for the response is gradually acquired with the shift to adulthood: as a child, I could not but believe, think, and act as I was shown and had no mechanism for self-awareness and change.)

Here is a good illustration of how the turnaround takes place from victimhood to responsibility:

In a novel by Jean-Michel Guenassia, a teenage boy, maybe seventeen, is complaining that his best friend has cleared off, to another part of France, without saying anything.

He tells a much older confidant, a Russian emigré living in Paris. This is the ensuing conversation:

'It's not Nicolas's fault,' he finally replied, without looking away from his worktop, 'You're the one who is responsible.'
'How could you say something like that? I did nothing wrong!'
'You say that Nicolas has acted cruelly.''
'Yes.'
'If he had considered you to be his friend, he would not have acted like that. He was not your friend, therefore. The fault lies with you for carelessly assuming someone to be your friend. You have to know how to distinguish real friends from false ones. With friends, people often succumb to wishful thinking. You have been a little slipshod in your choice.'

Religion never did anything to me

But people did

Religion is abstract

But religious people, like people, can be jerks: the ideas can be pernicious, too, but the ideas are dead in the water without the people wielding them, so we're back to the people

For now, direct the anger away from the ideas towards the people

I'll come back to that later

Simply reject any ideas that do not help, and keep them off the blank sheet of paper we're about to use

So:

Step One says: I do not, on my own, have the power to stay away from the first drink

My experience of going to meetings told me: other people, like me, did not have that power, but they have acquired that power

Quite literally, they have a acquired greater power than what they could muster on their own, or, if you will, a power greater than themselves

Now, think of that power as a commodity, like groceries

Sure, if there are groceries, there must be a farm and a supply chain or distribution channel

But what matters is the groceries and where to buy them

The way I acquired that power myself was to surrender to a practical programme of action to change my beliefs, thinking, and behaviour

That gave me the power (and direction) to stay sober and thrive

Steps Two and Three in a nutshell:

I did not have power
Others had acquired it
When I did what they did
I got what they got: power

It did not matter what mechanism was behind this: I could figure that out over time if I cared to, or I could let it be

The point is: I did not need to figure it out before I grabbed hold of the programme

You don't need to understand aerodynamics to board a plane

You just need a ticket

And the ticket is the willingness to take action

Three more notes:

(1) Prayer and meditation

Think of prayer as accessing a part of your mind you cannot access through ordinary thought

Think of it as reaching (using words) past the rat-and-lizard brain to a higher part of you, a higher part which is connected to everyone else's higher selves and maybe to other forces in the universe

The part that enjoys music and appreciates nature and looks after kittens and wants to help people in trouble

That part

You don't have to believe in the j-man or in any traditional notions of religion to pray

Prayer is just words of appreciation, affirmation, and request

Think of meditation as a way of sinking past the crappy surface of flotsam and jetsam frantic insta-face-tik-twitter to the peaceful ocean waters below

(2) Who owns the higher power?

No one

Just because some class-A d-bags claim to speak for the higher power does not mean they do

Push past them

They do not have VIP access

You have VIP access whenever you want it

It's humility that brings VIP access to the higher power, not certainty

(3) What about the jerks?

Step Four provides a structured process for getting over the fact there were and are world-class jerks in the world

Detachment and peace are possible, in time

For now, park the jerks

They're not worth stumbling over on your way to recovery

Here are some notes I did for a talk. They can double as a rough guide to the first three Steps.

Introduction

Newcomers to the fellowship or newcomers to the programme? Sometimes people are years sober and are newcomers to the programme. The approach is largely the same with these!

Newcomers to the Steps, or newcomers to the Steps as they are set out in the Big Book? Sometimes people have great experience of some Steps, but with ideas that are fundamentally at odds with those set out in the Big Book, and likewise missing some ideas in the Big Book.

Preface / Forewords / Doctor's Opinion + up to 63: a lot of material!

If the approach is not detailed enough:

• Risk of missing important points
• Without a sufficiently deep experience, there might not be the motivation to get through the harder Steps

If the approach is too detailed:

• People lose steam and give up
• Missing the wood for the trees

Variation:

• There are different approaches for different people
• I've grown, so how I sponsor changes over time, too

This is how I sponsor presently.

Step One (up to page 44)

Six points to cover:

• Physical craving: powerless after the first drink
  • How do I know I'm powerless?
  • If I keep drinking 'too much' (= giving rise to more consequences than I'm comfortable with), the only reasonable explanations are:
    • Stupidity
    • Madness
    • Powerlessness
  • If I am neither dumb nor mad yet keep drinking too much, that's powerlessness
• Entails: no such thing as a safe slip
  • I might do a terrible thing on the slip
  • I might go into a fog that never lifts
• Mental obsession: doomed to have the first drink
  • 'The recurring overpowering delusion that a drink is a good idea'
  • If I keep getting bad consequences yet keep returning to the first drink (which seems a good idea at the time), the only reasonable explanations are:
    • Stupidity
    • Madness
    • Powerlessness
  • If I am neither dumb nor mad yet keep having the first drink, that's powerlessness
• Fatal / progressive / incurable
  • If you drink way too much repeatedly, it'll likely kill you early
  • According to a German doctor I know specialising in alcoholism, you're looking at shortening your life on average by more than 20 years
  • It got worse as I got older and so will likely continue to do so
  • My response to alcohol will never fundamentally change
  • My propensity to bad decision-making will never fundamentally change

• Unmanageability

  • If I can't choose when I drink and I can't choose how much I drink when I drink, I am not in charge of the course of the day
  • I'm not in charge of the course of the day, I'm not in charge of the course of my life
  • That is unmanageability

  By going back in our own drinking histories, we could show that years before we realized it we were out of control, that our drinking even then was no mere habit, that it was indeed the beginning of a fatal progression. [After a few such experiences,] often years before the onset of extreme difficulties, [he would return to us convinced.] (Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions)

  • Unmanageability is therefore not about consequences but about being trapped in a downward spiral
  • Unmanageability is not disorder, incompetence, or neurosis: these are not singular to alcoholics nor universal amongst alcoholics
  • Being trapped in a downward spiral of alcohol is both singular to and universal amongst alcoholics
  • Powerlessness thus entails unmanageability
  • Powerlessness is the cause; unmanageability is the effect
• Necessity of the Higher Power
  • What happens after the first drink can't be fixed
  • My only hope is to stay away from the first drink
  • If I can't, necessarily something else must empower me, if I am to do this
  • I need a Higher Power to ensure my survival: and that needs to kick in today

Step Two (Chapter 4)

• I need direction and power (this is entailed by Step One)
• Establishing the existence of that power:

In the face of collapse and despair, in the face of the total failure of their human resources, they found that a new power, peace, happiness, and sense of direction flowed into them. This happened soon after they wholeheartedly met a few simple requirements. (Page 50)

• Were others powerless?
• Have others accessed power?
• There is a Power Greater Than Them!

Do I now believe, or am I even willing to believe, that there is a Power greater than myself? (Page 47)

• Either I am greater than other people's Higher Power
• Or other people's Higher Power is greater than me
• Let's test this out: can I get anyone sober?

That probably no human power could have relieved our alcoholism. (Page 60)

• Other people couldn't get me sober; I can't get other people sober
• If that Power exists, it is by definition greater not just than them but greater than me
• Relevant scope of that Power: direction and power to stay sober and thrive

God is everything or else He is nothing. God either is, or He isn’t. What was our choice to be? (Page 53)

• If power and direction are available, they're available universally, not selectively: they're available to me

What I leave out of Step Two:

• The definition of 'God'
• Theodicy ('the vindication of divine providence in view of the existence of evil')
• The how of it, other than: activating all three sides of the AA triangle is sufficient to access that Power
• Religion in general
• Anything else that gets in the way

These questions are set aside for now and can be returned to later. Generally, they resolve themselves automatically once the Steps have been completed.

Step Three

How it works

Key points to consider (from pages 58 to 60)

If you have decided you want what we have and are willing to go to any length to get it—then you are ready to take certain steps.

Some of us have tried to hold on to our old ideas and the result was nil until we let go absolutely.

Half measures availed us nothing.

Our description of the alcoholic, the chapter to the agnostic, and our personal adventures before and after make clear three pertinent ideas: (a) That we were alcoholic and could not manage our own lives. (b) That probably no human power could have relieved our alcoholism. (c) That God could and would if He were sought.

Step Three Requirement (pages 60 to 62)

We've already decided we have to have God in charge: we cannot be trusted.

Wouldn't it be easier if we turned out lives over gladly?

The point of these two pages: not only is staying sober through God being in charge necessary; it's also the only way of producing effectiveness and contentment more broadly.

We had to let go of all of our old ideas: the whole basis of life must go!

The first requirement is that we be convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success.

This means that living life believing we have to arrange circumstances to our liking fails every time.

Either we get what we want, and we're disappointed and want something else.

Or we don't (yet) get what we want and we're frightened and angry.

The whole system produces despair.

Is he not a victim of the delusion that he can wrest satisfaction and happiness out of this world if he only manages well?

I create my own unhappiness, both externally (where I play a contributory role), and internally (where my emotional response to life is 100% down to me).

So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own making.

'I' am the problem, and the 'I' has to go.

Step Three Idea

I remain in the driving seat.

But: God is the power and direction.

GPS + GAS.

I have to take action! That's down to me.

You gotta take action to activate your faith: God ain't gonna slide no hotdog under your door.

The contract:

He provided what we needed, if we kept close to Him and performed His work well.

Taking Step Three

• Am I willing to complete the process I start?
• Am I willing to do so, putting hours a day into the process until it's done?
• Am I willing to maintain the structure of Steps Ten through Twelve as I'm doing it?

If the answers to these questions are satisfactory:

• Adopt the position of God being in charge (an internal matter).
• Say the prayer (sealing the deal / signing the contract).

What next?

Establish / reaffirm the daily routine of Steps Ten through Twelve.

Start Step Four under a sponsor's guidance. 1+ hour a day on a workday. 2+ hours a day on the weekend.

So, the book Alcoholics Anonymous kinda implies that selfishness kills us addicts and alcoholics. Rude.

To take Step Three changes my relationship with my life. I'm no longer the owner but just the manager. Imagine a shop: the Owner cannot be physically present, so needs me to manage the shop for him. He gives me directions for how to manage the shop plus everything I need. Note that being given everything I need means everything I need to run the shop, not necessarily what I think I need for my own purposes. I have no needs. I'm running the shop not for me but for Him. The management of the shop is a full-time job during business hours, requiring all of my attention. This means that I must not be trying to run other businesses out of the premises. The motto is two-fold: single-mindedness and responsibility.

What matters ...
... and is my business
Don’t drink or use ...
... whatever happens
... whatever I think
... whatever I feel
Stay close to God
Stay close to others
Tell the truth promptly
First thing in the morning: plan the day ...
... covering every moment
Remain under God's protective umbrella
Neutralise any negative thinking
Permit no hostility, fretting, or contempt
And instead trust I will be guided ...
... and I will be OK
When otherwise idle, pray
Indulge no ego narratives
Instead, visualise my safety in God
Perform God's work well
Prioritise daily programme work
Plus ongoing step work
Be sober, considerate, and helpful ...
... regardless of what others say or do
Be diligent
Serve others
Do what I’m asked to do
When I’m asked to do it
As I’m asked to do it
Ask for help where necessary
Consult others where necessary

What is in God’s hands ...
... so none of my business

Spirit's purpose is what matters
Spirit's purpose is to wake up and help others to wake up

Step Three

I have an impressive capacity for gloom, censure, and dismissal. In fact I can muster these in respect of myself and my own life at the drop of a hat. It is as if the theatre is all lit up, players at the ready, just waiting for an audience. Pick a Greek play. Almost any will do. Except, of course, by Aristophanes. Far too cheerful.

Anyway. The error is forgetting I have taken Step Three. The problem with needing to take Step Three is that I have been in charge. Being a poor director, the results were poor. I was also my own audience, there to judge the show by how I felt. Feeling, of course, being the primary metric for success.

The relief provided by Step Three is this. Firstly, I never need to decide anything ever again. All I need to do is go to God and do what I think God wants me to do. Secondly, I'm not the primary consumer of 'my life'. It is not meant for me. Consequently, the worth or success of my life is not measured by how I personally feel about it.

That, incidentally, is almost entirely a function of forgiveness, amends, and service: if I feel bad, there is someone I have not forgiven, someone I owe amends to, or a shortfall in the practical devotion of my life to God. Joy is the natural condition. Ego throws a blanket over it.

Anyway, back to worth: you wouldn't judge the worth of Tolstoy's life by how he happened to have felt on a particular Tuesday or when he was thirty-six. It is the effect on those around us which is far more important than our own, personal, subjective experience of the lives given to us by God to do something important with.

I measure the effectiveness with which I have implemented Step Three in my life by looking at my actions in the Step Eleven review: am I maximising the use of the 16 waking hours every day in the service of God, with some time to take the necessary actions to keep the show on the road and to enjoy the ride, as well?

If the answer is yes, and I am indeed fitting myself to be of maximum service, then great!

If not, the problem always lies somewhere in Steps One or Two.

Step One problem: I believe I'm an alcoholic but do not need a full-blown, ongoing spiritual experience to stay sober, i.e. I can adulterate the above attitude and approach to life with admixtures of sloth and purely selfish pursuits; I believe I can have my cake and eat it; I don't believe that the only two options are a spiritual experience or a potentially unstoppable return to active addiction; I believe that half measures will available me just about enough, thank you very much.

Step Two problem: there's no point in throwing myself fully into a wide-eyed trust of God and deployment of my time in His service because it won't work: I have special problems that God cannot solve, because I'm different; God is not omnipotent; in fact, my emotional or practical difficulties stem from beliefs, thinking, and behaviour that God cannot change, because God is actually less powerful than me, maybe five foot two tall, and certainly not as smart as me. So if anyone presents me with an alternative way of believing, thinking, and behaving, which will solve my problem, I'm not going to trust them, because I'm smarter not just than them but than the aggregate of people in AA and people on a spiritual path, and indeed God: I'm not going to give up my beliefs, thinking, and behaviour, because I'm literally the smartest person I know and refuse to give any of these up because I'm right.

The answer in both cases is facing reality: go to AA long enough, and pay attention enough, and you'll soon discover that alcoholism is a patient, nasty disease, and that half measures do eventually avail nothing; go to AA long enough, and pay enough attention, and you'll soon discover that God is a patient, benevolent God, and that full measures do eventually avail everything.

Concept VI says that the chief initiative and active responsibility for world service matters lie with the General Service Board.

In life, whatever God delegates to me, acting through others, becomes my task under delegated authority. That means I must take chief initiative and active responsibility, but the outcome and the ultimate responsibility lie with God, acting through others.

That also means I need never be stressed about anything. My job is to take the initiative (considering the matter from all angles, spotting opportunities and threats, and using my intelligence proactively to determine the right action to take under God's guidance) and to take active responsibility, which means acting promptly, energetically, intelligently, diligently, carefully, and prudently. My contribution is reasoned and deliberate. The direction and strength to do this come from God.

I then deliver the work to God, who takes care of the outcome.

What do I have to do?
When?
Today.
God's will!
What's that?
Look after yourself, be useful, have some fun.
What if I don't achieve what I think God's will is?
Either it wasn't God's will, or you didn't have the power to do it.
What do I do then?
If you definitely didn't manage to do God's will, ask God for the power to do it at the next available opportunity, since the power has to come from Him.
Is that it?
Yes.
No fretting?
None at all.

If you want money, you can work for it. All you have to do is get a job, show up, do as you're told, and not make a complete fool of yourself, for instance by interfering with other people's work or arguing. Magically, at the end of the month, money shows up in your bank account.

Of course you haven't. That's the point. That's why we say we're powerless.

The only problem is failing to recognise this and trying to stay sober as someone without the grit, wit, wherewithal. We're inadequate. That's why we need God, and God fills in the gaps.

There's no point in thinking you can't go to God until you've untied the knot. God is there specifically to untie the knot. That's God's job. So embrace your inadequacy, go to God, and serve him by filling each day with a list of wholesome indicated activites, and in return find your entire life taken care of.

What keeps you sober

Turning it over to the Higher Power for me means this: when I'm emotionally detached from the problem, I can access the Universe's best wisdom to act optimally, and the optimal solution will be achieved; when I'm emotionally involved, I don't see right, and I don't act right.

Occasionally, even when I act optimally, something bad happens: then, turning it over is asking to be given a way to look at the situation, namely the right way, which brings peace and love.

There is no situation I have ever experienced where this has not worked, with enough practice and dedication.

I wouldn't bother, if I were you, with elaborate conceptions of God.

It might be helpful to stick just to this: God fills the universe and you and me, God is good, God's will is in everyone's best interests, and if you want to serve God and not self, He'll be happy to point you in the right direction and give you everything you need to be OK.

Anything more sophisticated than that, and you'll likely run into difficulties.

A lot of people tie themselves up in knots trying to come up with a conception of God they understand, discovering that it does not answer all the questions, then abandoning the effort to actually establish a relationship with God out of the cynicism that then develops.

I'm all for what a friend of mine once said: less thinking, and more believing.

It is impossible to be affected by the past. If I was hungry in 1984, I'm not currently affected by that hunger. I might be affected by current anger because of that hunger, or because of the current beliefs I have about that hunger and what it means about what the world then thought of me or what that tells me about what I am worth, but my problem is my current belief, my current thinking, or my current anger, not the past.

A good example is if I believed that something happened when it did not. The feelings are identical regardless of whether or not the event occurred. It is clear, therefore, that what affects me is not what happens to me but what I think about it. If some past events do not appear to affect me but others do, it is clearly not the past event, or even what I thought about it at the time which affects me, but what I think now.

Katie P once said, 'You want to talk about feelings? Your feelings come from a delusional mindset. Let's talk about delusion!'

When I'm resentful, or upset, or frightened, I am literally delusional: I think that I can be harmed or have been harmed, or will be harmed. I cannot. I am spirit. There is nothing wrong, there never has been, and there never will be, because I am not my body, my material circumstances, my external life, or anything that happens around me. WAKEY WAKEY! God is here, God is now, and all is well.

God provides what I need if I stay close to Him and perform His work well. That is what I need to keep my mind on: not delusions about the past, present, or future.

The AA pledge (above) suggests that AA should never say 'no' to a reasonable, relevant request. At the individual level, this looks like it means we say 'yes' to all AA requests. It does not. It means we're responsible for making sure AA says 'yes' to all AA requests, provided that they are reasonable and relevant. We're not, for instance, responsible when someone asks for money or lodging. With the reasonable, relevant requests, almost all of the time, I discharge the duty myself. Occasionally the duty is best served by being discharged by someone else, in which case I pass the job on to them. This is not because I don't want to do it but because, for instance, I have a sponsee who is fairly new and is desperate to find someone to work with, and has several hours a day free to give to that person, whereas I might be able to offer a couple of hours a week. I do this also so that I am free to handle requests that come in that I am specially positioned to meet. The trade-off is not between self and God but between intensive work and extensive work, the former being what God is commissioning me to do. But I temper this with the offer for the person to continue calling me. If God has placed someone in my life, there is a reason, and I never shut the door on anyone or say I won't talk to them. Phone calls are available to anyone, provided I can be useful, and missed phone calls get returned within 24 hours.

It is possible to swing so far the other way, i.e. making sure that every request is met but not, ourselves, pulling our weight. That's a very obvious way of not doing God's will, as we're simply leaving it to others and then acting only as the final safety net or fuse in the fuse box. This is less dangerous, as it's hard to conceal to ourselves for long that we're not stepping up to the plate.

The most insidious form of self-reliance is to do a lot of service or sponsorship but to set boundaries on the basis that we won't be able to cope with more. There is no trust that God will help us find a way. This means that we do not reach our potential, as it is only when the pressure is applied that we're forced to grow to a new level where our intensive (not extensive) work with other alcoholics (page 89 of the book Alcoholics Anonymous) forces us to work smarter and quicker, as we grow in understanding and effectiveness (page 84).

This is partial surrender, compliance in the place of surrender, following God's will provided it's not hard or inconvenient, provided there are no sacrifices. This is not following God's will. This is getting by on just enough, with our own ideas of what we think is enough. It blocks God from truly working through us, as it leaves Him with one hand tied behind His back. It also means that there are going to be other false Gods, other false idols, other false north stars guiding us, grabbing our attention, and zapping our energy.

What is the result? Service becomes tiring because we're doing it on our strength not God's; life becomes tiring because the ego's demands are never satisfied and the ego takes more than it yields. What happens next? We pull back further, we pull up the drawbridge earlier, and we retreat even further into self-reliance.

When I have fallen into this trap, I have believed I can get by with only partial relief of selfishness. I want to abandon the bits of self that get in my way, and get just enough benefits of the programme that I have some relief from running on self in other areas of my life. But it stops short of full abandonment:


(Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, Step 6)

There are several passages in the Big Book that suggest complete abandonment of self:




(Alcoholics Anonymous, page 14 et seq.)

Note that this is not just serving when it suits us: 'self-sacrifice' is a grand term, and denotes less martyrdom and more the abandonment of selfish desires.


(Alcoholics Anonymous, page 15)

Self-abandonment, again, is a strong term.

Exactly how 'abandoned' do we need to be?

Step Six is about the abandonment of limited objectives:


(Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, Step 6)

The limited objectives are where we take on just enough service to satisfy ourselves we are doing enough: but if the requests are still coming through, God's calling us. This is where we need to step out of our comfort zone into the danger of performing God's will when we are frightened it will be too much. We must never forget that it is God who provides the strength and direction. We are responsible not for the work but for entrusting the work to God to be performed through us. Then we're free, and the burden is light or non-existent. It becomes a joy; it is like flying.


(Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, Step 7)

What we're interested in is the 'true purpose' of our lives: not our purpose but God's purpose. In Step Three, it asks us to turn our lives, not part of our lives, over to God. God does not care one jot for our personal ambitions. He wants to use us. This is wild, dangerous self-abandonment. But don't forget: what we get out of this is a working faith, a faith that actually gives us access to strength and intelligence beyond our own.


(Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, Step 7)

This final passage from the Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions summarises the content of the previous passage: we do not get to live our own lives, we get to live the lives that God wants us to live, which may be radically different from what we have in mind.

Let's look at what this looks like practically:

Sometimes some thought is required. My job requires quite a lot of thinking, but it is technical thinking. I have to consider the meaning of words, sentences, and whole texts, and then process them. This sort of thinking is fine. A lot of thought that goes on in my mind is not, however, necessary. I know, for example, how I am going to vote in an upcoming event, but my mind has a habit of re-considering my arguments and quarreling with people on the opposing side. It worries about politics in other countries. It berates me for what I haven't done well enough or at all over the last 24 hours. It frets about the future and extrapolates today's failure into perpetuity. As someone once said, my head would kill me if it didn't need me for transportation; in truth, it could kill me even though it needs me for transportation.

Don't get me wrong, my mind is a hell of a lot more functional than it was 23 years ago, when I got sober, I believe wrong thinking far less often, and I'm largely at peace and content. There is a residual background noise at times, though, and also an awareness of the 'scripts' that are not even running but could run: I know the plotlines so well I do not even have to watch the movie to know what happens.

What do you do about this? Well, as Ed says, if you have a problem, pick a number between one and twelve. I pick three:

To turn my will and life over to God means that I need to ask God what to do. At the start of the day, I plan as far as I need to but no more (cf. Tradition Nine) and bring into my consciousness an awareness of all that needs to be done today. I schedule only what must be scheduled; the rest I trust God will fit into my schedule as I go. I complete each task, one by one, and ask God, 'what next?'

Once a day I run through the possible duties and tasks of the week; once a week I run through the possible duties and tasks of the month; once a month I run through the possible duties and tasks of the year; once a year I run through the possible duties and tasks of the rest of my life. Turning one's life over to God means considering timeframes outside the moment is carried out only as often as strictly necessary and no more. I need to cast my mind forward in an ad hoc fashion on occasion, but generally there is no need to be outside the moment, outside the technical task at hand. For more on different types of thinking: technical and other, see Joko Beck, who is brilliant on this.

Most people believe what they think. I have learned the opposite approach is more useful. I start with this: everything I think is a fiction to be disregarded as pointless and often painful, unless the thought clearly comes from God and is useful or otherwise loving (the latter category includes all forms of appreciation and positive imagination). I do not need to consider any particular negative thought to work out whether it is valid or invalid, whether the judgements and perceptions are right and wrong, whether to take heed of it or disregard it. I may quietly set it aside as I would an unpleasant dystopian novel and come back to reality: at almost all moments, the universe is entirely benign, and when horrid things happen God will give me the strength and poise to deal with them as they arise.

What about stress? Most people live in a prison of obligations stacking up around them in all directions forever. That sort of attitude has to go.

A more truthful and productive one is this: you do not need to be good; you do not need to be well; you do not need to be productive; you do not need to be talented; you do not need to be maximising your potential; you are enough as you are, in the same way that dogs and elephants and forests and rivers are enough as they are. They do not need to have anything added to them to be perfect. Thus are you, too.

Conceive of life like this: you are under no laws but God's: you are permanently free of the thousands of little rules you have been living by. Now, you are given time to play with. What are you going to do with it? What are you going to do next? Every action and decision has consequences. These are the laws of God. But these are the only laws. Ask God, what action shall I take next? Since God is good, the answer will be the right one.

Does this not leave room for rationalisation, sloth, and neglect of obligations? In principle yes, but in practice no: we are under no laws but God's but we are under those laws. If we trust God and listen carefully, we will, by the very nature of the exercise, be acting in our own best interests and in the best interests of all. Were we to make the wrong decisions, we would soon encounter negative consequences, and we would realise that the decisions were coming not from God but from some other source. This process takes practice, self-honesty, the application of principle, and time to come to fruition, but it works.

Take life largely one task at a time, and treat each task as a task carried out for the love of God and the love of the world. That is the entire formula.

Taking Step Three is like dropping your cards, face up, on the table for all to see, and, although still present at the game, playing the role of servant to the House.

Taking your will back, as people put it, is starting once more to lift cards and conceal them from others ... and the House.

There is nothing to play for. The House always wins.

Pick your side.

In the third column of the resentment inventory, we discover that we are unhappy because various people and circumstances are affecting the seven areas of self. Many people stop there.

• This is not (necessarily) the God of one's childhood or religion.
• The premise of this is that God is caring ('over to the care of God').
• This means that God has our best interests at heart.

• We disregard self-will.
• We relinquish the desire to direct the course of our (and others') lives.
• Instead we ask God what attitudes to adopt, what to think, and what to do and follow through with constructive action.
• We trust that our experience will be improved as a result and that our lives will take care of themselves.

• Following self-will and attempting to direct the course of our (and others') lives has produced terrible results; that is why we are in Al-Anon.
• Following the programme might produce better results ('satisfying' and 'serene' [PTR {Paths to Recovery} 28]), so it is worth trying.

• Remember God's permanent presence.
• Pray (set or ad lib) prayers or just talk to God and listen.
• Meditate (in whatever fashion suits you).
• Ask for God's direction.
• Ask for strength to follow God's direction.
• Do not ask for specific results (this is playing God).
• Situation by situation:
• Adopt this position: self-will must be disregarded, because it does not bring good results.
• Ask: God, what attitude should do I adopt? What should I think and do?
• Take the required action and let go of (= stop thinking about) the results.
• Trust: my experience will be improved as a result.
• This is calling 'letting go and letting God'.
• Watch for 'taking your will back' (= thinking about selfish ends, planning and plotting, and thinking about results).
• When this is spotted, immediately turn the situation over again, e.g. by saying to God, 'Over to you. I'm not going to think about this or interfere unless I am so instructed by you.'

• Stop obsessing about problems.
• Stop obsessing about other people's actions, thoughts, feelings, and internal lives.
• Stop obsessing about the past and the future.
• Instead: think about God and His will for you, and come back to the moment and your own constructive contribution.
• Seek validation from God, not from others, about yourself and your attitudes, thinking, and behaviour.
• Write troublesome situations on slips of paper and 'post' them into a God box; then refuse to think about them.
• Recall personal powerlessness to solve your own problems without God's help, or to solve others' problems at all.
• When others make decisions you do not like: leave them to the consequences of their own actions.
• Recognise that all our paths are different and we do not know what is right for others.

• Relief from a sense of responsibility for our (and others') lives.
• More reliable guidance and therefore better results in our lives.
• Independence from the opinions, needs, and demands of others (PTR 29).

• Do I have a concept of a Higher Power?
• Is it a helpful concept?
• If not: do I even need a concept?
• Do I have any reservations about making this decision?
• What will happen if I do not make this decision?

"We asked ourselves why we had [these fears]. Wasn't it because self-reliance failed us? Self-reliance was good as far as it went, but it didn't go far enough. Some of us once had great self-confidence, but it didn't fully solve the fear problem, or any other. When it made us cocky, it was worse." (p. 68)

"Is he not a victim of the delusion that he can wrest satisfaction and happiness out of this world if he only manages well?" (p. 61)

Before we can turn our lives over to God, we need to be convinced that the alternative, which is running our own lives, is a poor alternative.

To achieve this, here is a useful exercise:

Why can I not be trusted with my own life? What results have I been getting from running my own life?

Step One
What negative thinking and behaviour am I stuck in? (Powerlessness)
What are the negative consequences for me and others? (Unmanageability)

Step Two
Have I seen others restored to sanity in this area?
Have I been restored to sanity in other areas?
Is there any reason why the remaining Steps will not restore me to sanity in this area?

Step Three
What will happen if I do not turn my will and life over completely?
What might happen if I do?
Am I willing to question every belief and attitude that lie at the root of my defective thinking and behaviour?
Am I willing to take Steps Four through Twelve in this area?

Question: but surely it is normal to have ambition?

Aspiration is fine, as long as it is focused on the contribution we will attempt to make, not on the outcome.

As soon as the outcome is the focus, we're set up for unhappiness. If we want to be happy, we have to be indifferent to outcome.

There is also the problem of apparently noble aspirations (e.g. career success) concealing egoic desires.

Have a long-term plan. Great!
Break it down into individual actions. Great!

But then "be" in the actions.

Whenever our minds are other than here, except for necessary and fruitful planning, we have to ask "why?" The chances are, we're then in an egoic fantasy.

The Step Three requirement is that we be convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success. Step Four elaborates upon this.

It gives worked examples of what happens when you go through life with self-centred wishes and ambitions and plans and designs and demands.

The question is: are you happy?

If not, question every belief you hold and be willing to let go of any life-long conception (page 42).

The merits of any particular idea in isolation are irrelevant. It is its role in a structure, a way of living, that makes you inevitably unhappy that must be examined to form the basis of whether the idea be accepted or rejected.

The alternative?

Ask God only for direction. Be pleased at whatever the task appointed is. Chop wood. Carry water. Cook the dinner. Clean your ears. Run a corporation. Win a prize. Make the bed. All the same. All for God. Not for you.

Anything I do for me turns sour. Anything I do for others comes with a price tag. Anything I do for God is endlessly fulfilling.
The holy instant in which everyday tasks transcend their apparent insignificance is eternally available.

But only once the grip of the ego has been released. How? We see through it. That is all.

From Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions:

"As to our grandiose behavior, we insisted that we had been possessed of nothing but a high and legitimate ambition to win the battle of life.
...
We have seen that we were prodded by unreasonable fears or anxieties into making a life business of winning fame, money, and what we thought was leadership. So false pride became the reverse side of that ruinous coin marked "Fear." We simply had to be number one people to cover up our deep-lying inferiorities. In fitful successes we boasted of greater feats to be done; in defeat we were bitter. If we didn't have much of any worldly success we became depressed and cowed. Then people said we were of the "inferior" type. But now we see ourselves as chips off the same old block. At heart we had all been abnormally fearful. It mattered little whether we had sat on the shore of life drinking ourselves into forgetfulness or had plunged in recklessly and willfully beyond our depth and ability. The result was the same—all of us had nearly perished in a sea of alcohol.
But today, in well-matured A.A.'s, these distorted drives have been restored to something like their true purpose and direction. We no longer strive to dominate or rule those about us in order to gain self-importance. We no longer seek fame and honor in order to be praised. When by devoted service to family, friends, business, or community we attract widespread affection and are sometimes singled out for posts of greater responsibility and trust, we try to be humbly grateful and exert ourselves the more in a spirit of love and service. True leadership, we find, depends upon able example and not upon vain displays of power or glory.
Still more wonderful is the feeling that we do not have to be specially distinguished among our fellows in order to be useful and profoundly happy. Not many of us can be leaders of prominence, nor do we wish to be. Service, gladly rendered, obligations squarely met, troubles well accepted or solved with God's help, the knowledge that at home or in the world outside we are partners in a common effort, the well-understood fact that in God's sight all human beings are important, the proof that love freely given surely brings a full return, the certainty that we are no longer isolated and alone in self-constructed prisons, the surety that we need no longer be square pegs in round holes but can fit and belong in God's scheme of things—these are the permanent and legitimate satisfactions of right living for which no amount of pomp and circumstance, no heap of material possessions, could possibly be substitutes. True ambition is not what we thought it was. True ambition is the deep desire to live usefully and walk humbly under the grace of God."

The Step Three idea appears to me to be this. God is the Director and, in fact, fulfils all of the roles other than actor, which is my role. Motto: "He has no hands but yours."

My role is vital: I cannot play anyone else's ... I can play only mine, and no one can play mine for me.

I am no longer in charge of the overall plan (director) or detailed execution (producer). I am no longer in charge of other people's moves (choreographer and stage manager). I am not there to prompt anyone if they forget their lines. I am no longer in charge of writing the script. I ASK the Director for my lines, instead. I am not the audience, either, nor the critic, nor the theatre-owner worried about the overall profit or loss the play is making.

My role is to remain in communication with the Director. The Director's voice is quiet, however, so I need to be quiet, too. Worldly clamours need to be silenced or at least hushed.

Worldly clamours consist in resentment (disturbance at the way I think things are or have been), fear (disturbance at the way I think things will be), or shame/guilt (disturbance at what I think I have been or done).

The next six Steps are needed, promptly and in their entirety, to silence these worldly clamours. Steps Ten and Eleven are needed to stop the clamours returning and to prepare me for the work of the actor, which is Step Twelve.

My job, therefore, is to stay close to God as my source of direction and power and to perform His work well, which means fulfilling Tradition Five (spending much of my free time engaged in Twelfth Step work) and applying the Steps to be of service in all areas of my life.

The promise on page 63 is that I get given all the resources from God as a loving parent provided that I fulfil these conditions.

My other "job" as one of God's kids is to love, learn, grow, and play.

And, as a kid of God, I do not need to be worried about the seven areas of self. These are now God's business, not mine:

(1) Pride (what I think you think about me)

(2) Self-esteem (what I think of myself)

(3) Personal relations (the script I give you)

(4) Sex relations (the script I give you inside the sexual arena—a subset of 'personal relations')

(5) Ambitions (what I want in order to be happy and satisfied (p. 61:1))

(6) Security (what I need to be OK)

(7) Pocketbooks (money and what it means to me).

To adopt the role of actor to God's Director, therefore, I need to take the remaining Steps promptly.

I do not need to work out how to get God in my life. All I need to do is to make the decision that that is what I want and take the remainder of the Steps.

I think carefully before this decision, because a Step Three will tend to set in motion a process in which that which is hidden within me starts to surface, and I need to make sure I am processing what is arising as it arises.

Step Three without a follow-through will give me awareness but no power. That is hell.

When I'm ready, I adopt the position described above then say the page 63 prayer to seal the deal. Then, immediately, I start writing the list of names for the Step Four resentment inventory.

Step One suggests I admit powerlessness and unmanageability. These apply not just to what happens when I have a drink and to whether or not I can stay away from a drink when left to my own devices. These apply also to an inability to manage my life under any circumstances.

"The first requirement is that we be convinced that AA run on self-will can hardly be a success. On that basis we are almost always in collision with something or somebody, even though our motives—saving the lives of suffering alcoholics—are good. Most people try to carry the AA message by self-propulsion. Each Twelfth-Stepper is like a humble servant who tries to run the whole of the Fellowship; is forever trying to arrange the meeting, group business, the service structure, and the lives of his sponsees in his own way. If only his arrangements would stay put, if only people would work the Steps as he wished, if only people would follow the Big Book not the 'Twelve and Twelve', if only people would carry the message, not the mess, if only people would ditch the therapy-speak, if only people would stop talking about other addictions, AA would be great. Everybody, including himself, would be happy, joyous, and free. AA would be wonderful. In trying to make these arrangements our humble servant may sometimes be quite virtuous. He may be kind, considerate, patient, generous; even modest and self-sacrificing. On the other hand, he may be mean, egotistical, selfish, and dishonest. But as with most humans, he is likely to have varied traits.

What usually happens? The show doesn't come off very well—his sponsees become disaffected, he gets a reputation in local AA meetings for being a fascist, and local AA is polarised into two self-righteous camps, each convinced the other is wrong. He begins to think AA doesn't treat him right. He decides to exert himself more. He becomes, on the next occasion, still more demanding or gracious, as the case may be. Still AA does not suit him. Admitting he may be somewhat at fault, he is sure that other people are more to blame. He becomes angry, indignant, self-pitying. What is his basic trouble? Is he not really a self-seeker even when trying to be kind? Is he not a victim of the delusion that he can wrest satisfaction and happiness out of AA if he only manages well? Is it not evident to all the rest of the alcoholics that these are the things he wants? And do not his actions make each of them wish to retaliate, snatching all they can get out of AA? Is he not, even in his best moments, a producer of confusion rather than harmony?

Our humble servant is self-centred—egocentric, as people like to call it nowadays. He is like the retired Twelfth-Stepper who lolls in the Sunshine of the Spirit complaining of the sad state of the Fellowship; the bleeding deacon who sighs over the sins of 'Middle of the Road AA'; politicians and reformers who are sure AA would be Utopia if everyone else would only behave; the deposed group chairman who thinks the group has wronged him; and the Twelfth-Stepper who has lost all credibility and is locked up in the prison of his own judgements. Whatever our protestations, are not most of us concerned with ourselves, our resentments, or our self-pity?

. . . So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own making.

. . . We had to quit playing God. It didn't work."

"Is he not a victim of the delusion that he can wrest satisfaction and happiness out of this world if he only manages well?" (61:1, 'Alcoholics Anonymous')

"I was soon to be catapulted into what I like to call the fourth dimension of existence. I was to know happiness, peace, and usefulness, in a way of life that is incredibly more wonderful as time passes." (8:2)

"Quite as important was the discovery that spiritual principles would solve all my problems. I have since been brought into a way of living infinitely more satisfying and, I hope, more useful than the life I lived before. My old manner of life was by no means a bad one, but I would not exchange its best moments for the worst I have now. I would not go back to it even if I could." (42:3)

"Follow the dictates of a Higher Power and you will presently live in a new and wonderful world, no matter what your present circumstances." (100:1)

"You, as well as your husband, ought to think of what you can put into life instead of what you can take out. Inevitably your lives will be fuller for doing so. You will lose the old life to find one much better." (120:0)

I've heard it said, 'God's grace lasts as long as ignorance. As soon as truth starts showing up, you're going to need to peddle hard.'

I know what is meant by this: when I was new to AA, staying sober, for a while, was entirely automatic. I was safe and protected, and enjoying the Step Ten promises without having taken any of the Steps. As time passed, I realised I needed to do the work of the Steps merely to remain sober, let alone live a life I wanted to live.

The danger with this interpretation, however, is false inference that, just because you cannot see God's grace, it is no longer available.

When the cloud of ignorance dissipates and the truth of how I have been living starts to show up, it is not God who has moved, but my consciousness which has shifted. The clouds of ignorance move from covering my thoughts and behaviour to blocking my sight of God.

God's grace, I have to believe, is totally available to everyone at all times.

But it is up to me to make sure that I take the effort necessary to remove what blocks me from accessing that grace.

Ironically, I do not have the strength, myself, to remove those blocks and need to invoke the power from which I am detached by dint of those blocks . . . to remove those blocks.

It's a terrible vicious circle.

The leap of faith required is that of making the effort to approach God by performing the preliminary work for the actual removal of the blocks (Steps Four through Nine), and, mysteriously, the power becomes available. But it is not mine to wield, it is mine to be the channel for.

The faith to take action which is patently insufficient to achieve what needs to be achieved, by treating what is obviously not enough as entirely enough.

And then I realise the power was there all along. My separation from God was only ever an optical illusion.

What I sometimes notice is that (a) my behaviour is upsetting other people or running up against brick walls or (b) my mind is racing with Little Plans and Ideas—obsession about how I am going to solve a situation.

I used to say that I had 'taken my will back'.

If my will had been truly aligned with God's, totally, perfectly, permanently, I would be in light. God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all. No one in light can even perceive or understand darkness. To be in light is to be innocent. I can be aware that another person perceives himself to be in darkness and remember the fact of my own exile from the Kingdom, but I cannot enter into that darkness for I know it exists only in that person's perception. I cannot re-enter dreams—I can barely remember their occurrence, let alone content. In brief: when there is light, I cannot choose to enter darkness or error—I cannot enter what does not exist.

The principle is the same as with drinking. I could never choose to drink (for that would be insane) so I am not choosing to stay sober. It is the only option. There is only one pass through the mountains. (Conversely, when I was drinking, I could not choose not to drink, so I was not choosing to keep drinking. It was the only option. There was only one pass through the mountains). No one chooses to relapse. If you are a real alcoholic, the only reason to drink is an insanity of which you may be only dimly aware.

When there is a fire, horses must be tied up to stop them running into burning barns.

Does the horse run into the barn as a rational choice?

Can I 'take my will back' the way I would, say, take a nap, take a walk, or take a bath?

The mechanism is this:

I get presented with a difficult situation that requires a response of some kind. I do not, instinctively, know what to do. I could go to God, sure, I could relax, not struggle, take it easy, ask God for inspiration, an intuitive thought, or a decision (86:3, 'Alcoholics Anonymous'). But in a corner of my mind, I believe this enemy is too great, this peril too powerful, this problem too complex. I am frightened.

And I do what horses do: I run into the burning barn, I grab the problem and hold it tight in my mind, hugging it close to myself the way a bear hugs its enemy to crush it to death. Soon, I'm engaged in mindless (but ostensibly rational) action, convinced I'm in 'control' of the situation and managing perfectly well. Then the enemy starts climbing over the battlements, and I realise I'm besieged on all sides and hours from utter defeat.

The problem does not start with 'taking my will back'. The problem starts with an underlying belief in the non-totality of God, in the limitation of God, in the non-omnipotence, the non-omniscience, the non-omnipresence of God in every situation.

It is only when, as my life expands like the ever-expanding universe, I am faced with a novel or great difficulty that challenges my conception of God that I become scared, and fear 'sets in motion trains of circumstances which [bring] us misfortune we [felt] we [do not] deserve' (67:3).

The truth is, the old idea—the particular limitation to my conception of God—was always there, the whole time. It is never new. It can only ever be uncovered, having been previously hidden. My ever-expanding conception of God is only ever in a particular phase of its development—this conception may, today, have expanded sufficiently to match the situation I am placed in. When, tomorrow, this conception proves inadequate, I have not 'relapsed' or backslid or taken my will back: my growing conception has, instead, failed to keep pace with my ever-growing life.

I cannot 'jump' intentionally away from God. All I can ever do is slip from God's grace—I cannot choose to slip, whether into alcohol or into other error.

In another book, a man—an actual man, not the son of God—walks on water. It is only when he fears that he 'slips' and falls into the waves. And the only reason to fear is misperception of God, the subscription to the belief that God is anything less than everything. Anything less, and, for practical purposes, right here, right now, He may as well be nothing. That is why any sitting on the fence is described in the Big Book as 'soft and mushy' (53:1). God is either everything or nothing, at any point in time and space (53:2).

The danger is trying to solve the problem at the wrong level. Self-will—in behaviour of thought—is not the source of the problem but a domino much further down the line. The problem is only ever the failure to recognise the total love and power of God and the presence of God at the centre of every situation.

Fear is an early-warning system that I am entering a Godless land—a place in my life where I am refusing to take God or have never been so I do not know whether God will follow. Sometimes, I am sure God will not follow only because I have never taken Him there before. So I saddle up and arm myself using my self-reliance toolkit: I need to look after myself (because who else will do that for me?), so I need to monitor myself and my needs and wants and demands, constantly (self-centredness, self-obsession). I need to make sure I get everything I need (because who else will do that for me?), so selfishness (putting me above you) and self-seeking (making shopping lists of how the world should view me, treat me, and shower me with goodies) are now in my left and right hands. And the whole sorry business begins again . . . Cue pages 60–62 (self-will run riot), 52 (bedevilments), 73 (double life), and 152–153 (whistling in the dark).
So I stop. And ask God to come with me. If He will not, and I still feel the cold wind blowing, I might need to examine why I am entering the lands I am entering. Perhaps I am wanted elsewhere. As though I had taken the left at the fork and God had taken the right, and I hear Him shouting back at me "Not that way, this way, dummy!" I have to listen carefully at junctions—if I get too far past the fork, I will not be able to see Him and think myself abandoned.

As soon as fear enters the scene, I need to pay attention: the hazard lies not outside me but inside me—the real danger is my ability to desert God when He's calling me to His side, to His work, to His banquet, to His Kingdom.

"We were having trouble with personal relationships, we couldn't control our emotional natures, we were a prey to misery and depression, we couldn't make a living, we had a feeling of uselessness, we were full of fear, we were unhappy, we couldn't seem to be of real help to other people—was not a basic solution of these bedevilments more important than whether we should see newsreels of lunar flight?" (52:2, 'Alcoholics Anonymous')

A SPOT-CHECK DIAGNOSTIC TOOL—THE BEDEVILMENTS

• Are you experiencing lack, limitation, emptiness, or strife in your personal relationships?

• Do emotions lead you to make (or not make) decisions, take (or not take) actions, or say (or not say) things that you then regret?

• Do you suffer from misery, depression, unhappiness, or low self-worth?

• Are you able to be of real help to other people?

• Do you suffer from fear, anxiety, misgivings, or perfectionism (a sign of fear)? Do you try to discern the future? Do you spend much time pre-playing future scenarios?

If you're suffering in any of these areas, there is probably self-will in operation.

"The first requirement is that we be convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success. On that basis we are almost always in collision with something or somebody, even though our motives are good. Most people try to live by self-propulsion. Each person is like an actor who tried to run the whole show; is forever trying to arrange the lights, the ballet, the scenery, and the rest of the players in his own way. If his arrangements would only stay put, if only people would do as he wished, the show would be great. Everybody, including himself, would be pleased. Life would be wonderful. In trying to make these arrangements our actor may sometimes be quite virtuous. He may be kind, considerate, patient, generous; even modest and self-sacrificing. On the other hand, he may be mean, egotistical, selfish, and dishonest. But as with most humans, he is likely to have varied traits.

What usually happens? The show doesn't come off very well. He begins to think life doesn't treat him right. He decides to exert himself more. He becomes, on the next occasion, still more demanding or gracious, as the case may be. Still the play does not suit him. Admitting he may be somewhat at fault, he is sure that other people are more to blame. He becomes angry, indignant, self-pitying. What is his basic trouble? Is he not really a self seeker even when trying to be kind? Is he not a victim of the delusion that he can wrest satisfaction and happiness out of this world if he only manages well? Is it not evident to all the rest of the players that these are the things he wants? And do not his actions make each of them wish to retaliate, snatching all they can get out of the show? Is he not, even in his best moments, a producer of confusion rather than harmony?

Our actor is self-centered—egocentric, as people like to call it nowadays. He is like the retired business man who lolls in the Florida sunshine in the winter complaining of the sad state of the nation; the minister who sighs over the sins of the twentieth century; politicians and reformers who are sure all would be Utopia if the rest of the world would only behave; the outlaw safe cracker who thinks society has wronged him; and the alcoholic who has lost all and is locked up. Whatever our protestations, are not most of us concerned with ourselves, our resentments, or our self-pity?

Selfishness—self-centeredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles. Driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the toes of our fellows and they retaliate. Sometimes they hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some time in the past we have made decisions based on self which has placed us in a position to be hurt." (60:8–62:2)

Self-will can be defined as what I want for myself. This manifests in seven ways (cf. p. 64–65):

(1) Pride (what I think you think about me)

(2) Self-esteem (what I think of myself)

(3) Personal relations (the script I give you)

(4) Sex relations (the script I give you inside the sexual arena—a subset of 'personal relations')

(5) Ambitions (what I want in order to be happy and satisfied (p. 61:1))

(6) Security (what I need to be OK)

(7) Pocketbooks (money and what it means to me).

Thus self-will provides me with DIRECTION. Self-propulsion is where I am using these seven areas of self to provide me with motivation, therefore POWER. This takes the place of seeking DIRECTION and POWER from God.

Before I can turn to God for DIRECTION and POWER, I need be convinced that living life with self-will and self-propulsion as DIRECTION and POWER can hardly be a success.

The aim of this inventory is to convince me of this at gut level.

THE SELF AS THE SOURCE OF DIRECTION AND POWER

• Do I make demands in the seven areas of self (= self-seeking)?

• Is this what propels me through my day, through my life (= self-propulsion)?

• Am I driven by fear?

• Self-pity?

THE DELUDED IDEALIST

• Am I a victim of the DELUSION that I can wrest satisfaction and happiness from this world if only I manage (myself, others, and circumstances) well?

• Do I believe that, if only my arrangements would stay put, the show would be great?

• Do I believe that, if only people would do as I wished, THEY would be pleased, too?

• Do I believe that the world would be Utopia if only the rest of the world would behave, like the politician or reformer?

• Can other people not see that all I want is the best?

THE ACTOR PLAYING OTHER ROLES

• Actors act.

• Do I play the director, the producer, the playwright, the choreographer, the prompt, the critic, or the audience in my life?

• Do I use egotism, selfishness, dishonesty, or demands to get my own way?

• Do I use kindness, consideration, patience, generosity, modesty, self-sacrifice, or graciousness to get my own way?

• Am I like the outlaw safe-cracker—trying to get something for nothing?

• Do I respond to failure simply by exerting myself more?

THE PRODUCER OF CONFUSION

• Does this cause internal collision (conflicting demands within myself)?

• Does this cause collision with people, institutions, or principles?

• Do I step on the toes of others?

• When others retaliate, can I see that my selfish decisions prompted the reaction?

• Do I produce confusion or harmony?

THE BLAME-THROWER

• Do I blame the world around me for my troubles?

• Do I complain about the sad state of the world like the business man?

• Do I sigh over the sins of the world like the minister?

THE SELF-OBSESSED, SELF-PITYING ALCOHOLIC

• Does the play suit me?

• Do I believe that society has wronged me?

• Do people hurt me, SEEMINGLY without provocation?

• Am I angry, indignant, and self-pitying?

• Do I believe that life does not treat me right?

• Am I concerned mostly with myself, my resentments, and my self-pity?

• Have I lost all?

• Am I locked up—either literally, or inside myself?

"Selfishness—self-centeredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles. . .

So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own making. They arise out of ourselves, and the alcoholic is an extreme example of self-will run riot, though he usually doesn't think so. Above everything, we alcoholics must be rid of this selfishness. We must, or it will kill us! God makes that possible. And there often seems no way of entirely getting rid of self without His aid. Many of us had moral and philosophical convictions galore, but we could not live up to them even though we would have liked to. Neither could we reduce our self-centeredness much by wishing or trying on our own power. We had to have God's help." (62:1–2)

WRAP-UP QUESTIONS

• Can I see that my troubles are of my own making?

• Can I see I must be rid of selfishness or I will drink and die?

• Can I see that moral and philosophical convictions are insufficient for me to rid myself of selfishness?

• Am I unable to get rid of my own selfishness on my own power—by wishing or trying?

• Can I see God making this possible in others?

• Must I have God's help?

WHAT NEXT?

If the answer to these six questions is 'yes', follow the instructions from 62:3 ("This is the how . . .") to (83:3 ". . . this phase of our development").

This process will fulfil the following promises, which are the reversal of the bedevilments described above.

"We are going to know a new freedom and a new happiness. We will not regret the past nor wish to shut the door on it. We will comprehend the word serenity and we will know peace. No matter how far down the scale we have gone, we will see how our experience can benefit others. That feeling of uselessness and self-pity will disappear. We will lose interest in selfish things and gain interest in our fellows. Self-seeking will slip away. Our whole attitude and outlook upon life will change. Fear of people and of economic insecurity will leave us. We will intuitively know how to handle situations which used to baffle us. We will suddenly realize that God is doing for us what we could not do for ourselves."

Step One

Does my experience abundantly confirm that, whenever I take any alcohol whatever into my system, something happens both in the bodily and mental sense, which makes it virtually impossible for me to stop? (22:4)

Do I have any lurking notion that someday I will be immune to alcohol? (33:1)

Do I believe I am unable, at certain times, to bring into my consciousness with sufficient force the memory of the suffering and humiliation of even a week or a month ago, let alone the suffering and humiliation of whenever my last drink was? Do I believe I am without defence against the first drink? (24:2)

Do I believe such a defence must come from a Higher Power? (43:3)

Identification of current problems

Is living unsatisfactory? (51:0) → 'Lack'

Am I making heavy going of life? (51:0) → 'Limitation'

Am I baffled by the seeming futility of existence? (51:0) → 'Emptiness'

Have I almost always been in collision with something or somebody? (60:8) → 'Strife'

Am I having trouble with personal relationships? Is my emotional nature controlling me? Am I a prey to misery and depression? Am I having troubling making a living? Am I existing rather than living? Do I have a feeling of uselessness? Am I full of fear? Am I unhappy? Do I seem unable to be of real help to other people? (52:2)

This represents current unmanageability.

Step Two

Can a mere code of morals or a better philosophy of life solve these problems? When I wish to be moral or philosophically comforted, and will these things will all my might, do I find that the needed power is not there? Are my human resources, as marshalled by the will, insufficient—have they failed utterly? (44:4)

This represents current powerlessness.

Do I believe that lack of power is my dilemma—that I need to find a power by which I could live? Is it obvious that this Power must be greater than me? (45:1)

Do I now believe, or am I even willing to believe, that there is a Power greater than myself, who can lead me beyond where I am now to a resolution of these problems? (47:2)

Have I been keeping God out of the above areas of current unmanageability and powerlessness due to lack of faith?

This represents current agnosticism.

Either God is everything or else He is nothing. God either is, or He isn't. What is our choice? (53:2)

Step Three

Am I convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success? (60:8)

Taking the areas of current powerlessness, unmanageability, and agnosticism:

Am I trying to fulfil any role other than actor/child, with God as the Director/Father? (62:3)

Am I playing the director—in charge of the overall plan?

Am I playing the producer—in charge of the detail?

Am I playing the playwright—in charge of everyone's scripts, including my own?

Am I playing the choreographer—in charge of everyone's moves, including my own?

Am I playing the prompt—in charge of reminding other people of their lines?

Am I playing the critic—in charge of judging and rating?

Am I playing the audience—standing back and shirking my assigned role?

These are areas of current self-will run riot.

Am I willing to quit playing God because it does not work? (62:3)

Proceed from 62:3 ("Next, we decided ...") to 103:3 ("... We have to!"), following the clear-cut directions (29:1).

(1) When I drink, I can't stop. Powerless. Ain't managing my life.

(2) Left to my own devices, I drink even when I don't want to. Powerless. Ain't managing my life.

(3) Alcohol gave me a sham knock-off of God's grace. Unless I connect with God, I'll drink, because the Promised Land will always call to me in the desert.

(4) Separated from God, I start trying to rearrange the world around me to suit me. Cue collision. Cue failure. Cue resentment. Cue fear. Cue bedevilments. Help!

(5) Enter alcohol, stage left. BOOM.

Cheap grace, or real grace. Your choice.