Buddhism and the 12 Steps

[Encephalon]

I'd like to start a Buddhist 12-Step thread in here starting January 2012. Depending on how robust the turnout gets, I would imagine taking one step a month. This would allow for all participants to benefit from reading, if desired, a handful of fairly popular titles on Buddhism and recovery -

"One Breath at a Time: Buddhism and the 12 Steps" by Kevin Griffin

"The 12-Step Buddhist" by Darren Littlejohn

"Mindfulness and the 12 Steps" by Therese Jacobs-Stewart

 

As much as I would like to begin my own hybrid understanding of Taoism and the 12 Steps, I think it better to keep it focused on Buddhism for the duration of this project.

 

I've been going to 12 Step meetings on and off for about 30 years. I quit drinking in 1982 but started intermittent reefer madness when I moved to LA 10 years ago . I've been off the grass since March of 2010. I began my study of Buddhism shortly after getting off the booze and find that it is paticularly useful for penetrating the depths of human craving. I personally believe that we are all addicts, and that modern consumer culture encourages addictive behavior as an engine of economic growth. This is part of the reason why society holds addicts and alcoholics in such contempt; they make the whole system look bad.

 

My next reading assignment is "In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters with Addiction by Gabor Mate -

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9ChRBF9fpE

[manitou]

I think that's a great idea, Scott. I'd be happy to participate, since I too have walked the 12 step path for 30 years.

 

And I really don't think it matters whether it's Buddhism & the 12 steps, or Taoism and the 12 steps, or Shamanism and the 12 steps. But the 12 steps are a kick-butt template for going within, fast and dirty.

 

My recommendation on the first step would be to substitute "Life" for "Alcohol" as far as being powerless. Unless of course someone has some habit they'd like to rid themselves of in the process; overeating, booze, drugs, or co-dependent behavior with their spouse.

 

Count me in, even if it's just you and me....

[Encephalon]

I think that's a great idea, Scott. I'd be happy to participate, since I too have walked the 12 step path for 30 years.

 

And I really don't think it matters whether it's Buddhism & the 12 steps, or Taoism and the 12 steps, or Shamanism and the 12 steps. But the 12 steps are a kick-butt template for going within, fast and dirty.

 

My recommendation on the first step would be to substitute "Life" for "Alcohol" as far as being powerless. Unless of course someone has some habit they'd like to rid themselves of in the process; overeating, booze, drugs, or co-dependent behavior with their spouse.

 

Count me in, even if it's just you and me....

 

Glad to hear from you. Nice to know I can count on your support and enthusiasm.

I'd like to use the format that we've used in LA at the Buddhist 12 step groups -

 

"We admitted we were powerless over our addiction - that our lives had become unmanageable."

 

Regarding your point in your second paragraph - I understand the value of the ecumenical approach but I'd like to stick with Buddhism for the reason I mentioned - Of all the world's religions, it is Buddhism alone which trains its tools of analysis specifically on the human propensity for craving, for desire, for addiction. This gives it a certain advantage that is not immediately obvious but could actually wash out if we threw too many ingredients into the pot. This is why I posted this in the Buddhist section.

 

That being said, nothing dissolved my addictive stress, self-loathing, and stinking thinking like my Taoist Nei Kung practice, but that's another subject.

Edited November 6, 2011 by Encephalon

[C T]

Very useful thread.

 

Edited November 7, 2011 by C T

[manitou]

I agree with you, Scott re: the ecumenical approach. I think what I was trying to say is that Buddhism and 12 steps would be a wonderful apex and direction, as would Taoism and 12 steps, etc.

 

The 12 steps will take us in to ourselves. The Buddhist structure would be a nice override. I look forward to your thread! I can sure use a tune-up.

[doc benway]

I agree - great idea Scott.

I'll probably get involved as well, life permitting.

That said, anyone ever see the "Bullshit" episode on the 12 Steps by Penn and Teller?

If so, what did you think of it?

They seemed to make some valid points, although they generally do establish an agenda and then go after it one-mindedly.

[Aaron]

I don't think Bill W. would approve. AA has no affiliation with any group or denomination and the twelve steps aren't meant to be confined to any one religious group or ideology. I understand your desire to keep it Buddhist, but in doing so you may be depriving someone who desires to drink the genuine chance to receive recovery, simply because you've said, "this is a Buddhist group". Perhaps you could start this in the general discussion section and just explain how you practice the steps as a Buddhist?

 

I'm not knocking your intention, in fact a year ago I had the same "great" idea, but what I came to understand from my experiences on the Tao Bums forum and other forums, is that there are a lot of people who need help with alcohol from many different paths, and the best path to teach them, is not the Buddhist path, or Taoist path, but rather that they can choose their own path and find recovery within that path, that it isn't who or what you decide is your higher power that is important, but rather working the steps and practicing the principles.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Aaron

[manitou]

I don't think Bill W. would approve. AA has no affiliation with any group or denomination and the twelve steps aren't meant to be confined to any one religious group or ideology. I understand your desire to keep it Buddhist, but in doing so you may be depriving someone who desires to drink the genuine chance to receive recovery, simply because you've said, "this is a Buddhist group". Perhaps you could start this in the general discussion section and just explain how you practice the steps as a Buddhist?

 

 

 

Did you know that Bill W. was an open-minded gent who dropped acid after about 25 years of sobriety to aid in his inner quest? Googling it will find it.

 

I would look forward to a 12 step line that helped us go inwards, right brain understanding instead of left brained intellectualism. I don't think the intent is to really 'get us off substances' as Bill W. would have been concerned about. I think what Encephalon's trying to do is merge a couple of paths inward to unleash our right brain capability; once the right brain has been tapped into that is when true understanding begins.

 

But, if somebody is going to use the thread to actually get off substance, then I see exactly what you're saying, Aaron. It must be done straight. To merge it with the other distraction would leave too many loopholes through which the substance abuser would be able to slip.

 

Or not. Maybe the Buddhists in L.A. have found a perfect way to merge the 12 steps with the eightfold path to do the inner work. This I would be real interested in participating in, albeit a bit strange for my 30 sober years through the original 12 steps. But I do think openmindedness is a good thing; and what's the harm in trying to merge the two, even for an experiment?

 

If somebody actually uses this thread to get sober and is unable to stay sober because it's not exactly the 12 steps, where's the harm? All things are as they should be; it is not their time to get sober. I hope you participate, Twinner, because your right brain and left brain seem pretty well merged from my point of view. Your intellectual self is nicely merged with your understanding of self. You would have so much to add.

[Encephalon]

I agree - great idea Scott.

I'll probably get involved as well, life permitting.

That said, anyone ever see the "Bullshit" episode on the 12 Steps by Penn and Teller?

If so, what did you think of it?

They seemed to make some valid points, although they generally do establish an agenda and then go after it one-mindedly.

 

I just watched it on youtube, thanks to you. I think they make excellent points, not the least of which is the recovery rate of people in 12-Step groups, which hovers around 5%.

Penn & Teller are atheists, and while my spirit is oriented more to skepticism and critical thinking, atheism still presumes information that is not available to us. I prefer the scientist Timothy Ferris' idea that agnosticism is the most cognitively hygienic philosophical stance we can take, because it presumes nothing, which is why I fall into the camp of agnostic Buddhism as described by Stephen Batchelor.

 

As I understand it from the readings I posted in the beginning, Buddhism is a powerful psychological tool for understanding our craving instinct, and for some people, it offers a way out of addiction that works better than the 12 steps. What the 12-Step community has that Buddhism in America doesn't have is a critical component of the recovery process, that being a sense of community and group participation. Evaluating the 12 step process through the lens of Buddhism becomes an important means for Buddhist-minded individuals to benefit from the comraderie of 12 step meetings.

 

PS - To anyone who has reservations about my premises for starting this thread, I respectfully ask that you do not participate. I would refer you instead to the dozens of authors listed on Amazon who write on this subject.

Edited November 12, 2011 by Encephalon

[Seth Ananda]

 

As I understand it from the readings I posted in the beginning, Buddhism is a powerful psychological tool for understanding our craving instinct, and for some people, it offers a way out of addiction that works better than the 12 steps. What the 12-Step community has that Buddhism in America doesn't have is a critical component of the recovery process, that being a sense of community and group participation. Evaluating the 12 step process through the lens of Buddhism becomes an important means for Buddhist-minded individuals to benefit from the comraderie of 12 step meetings.

 

 

This is a great Idea and a Dharma service as well!

 

There are already many other denomination focused 12 step programs out there for the theistically minded, and that can make Buddhists uncomfortable. I had never even heard of a Buddhist 12 step program... I will follow keenly...

[Harmonious Emptiness]

My presumtion as to why there's no Buddhist 12 steps yet is that the AA thing apparently started with a psychologist's (maybe Jung, not sure) finding that people gave up addictions most reliably when they had a spiritual awakening. I'm guessing this is why some enthogens have shown great effectiveness treating various addictions.

 

Some might say "well, Buddhism doensn't believe in God so it won't work like the other faith based steps" but I think the key is just to have a newly spiritual outlook on one's life that makes them drop the substance crutch and be happy(er) without it.

 

just my 2 cents

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

This will be a thread I would participate in...but why limit ourselves to the 12-Step model? Why not 'Buddhism and Addiction"? I have a problem with a lot of the 12 Step material.

[Aaron]

My presumtion as to why there's no Buddhist 12 steps yet is that the AA thing apparently started with a psychologist's (maybe Jung, not sure) finding that people gave up addictions most reliably when they had a spiritual awakening. I'm guessing this is why some enthogens have shown great effectiveness treating various addictions.

 

Some might say "well, Buddhism doensn't believe in God so it won't work like the other faith based steps" but I think the key is just to have a newly spiritual outlook on one's life that makes them drop the substance crutch and be happy(er) without it.

 

just my 2 cents

 

One of the founders of AA actually contacted Jung regarding the Twelve Step program he had envisioned and Jung responded with the following letter...

 

Dear Mr. W.

 

Your letter has been very welcome indeed.

 

I had no news from Rowland H. anymore and often wondered what has been his fate. Our conversation which he has adequately reported to you had an aspect of which he did not know. The reason that I could not tell him everything was that those days I had to be exceedingly careful of what I said. I had found out that I was misunderstood in every possible way. Thus I was very careful when I talked to Rowland H. But what I really thought about was the result of many experiences with men of his kind.

 

His craving for alcohol was the equivalent, on a low level, of the spiritual thirst of our being for wholeness, expressed in medieval language: the union with God.*

 

How could one formulate such an insight in a language that is not misunderstood in our days?

 

The only right and legitimate way to such an experience is that it happens to you in reality and it can only happen to you when you walk on a path which leads you to higher understanding. You might be led to that goal by an act of grace or through a personal and honest contact with friends, or through a higher education of the mind beyond the confines of mere rationalism. I see from your letter that Rowland H. has chosen the second way, which was, under the circumstances, obviously the best one.

 

I am strongly convinced that the evil principle prevailing in this world leads the unrecognized spiritual need into perdition, if it is not counteracted either by real religious insight or by the protective wall of human community. An ordinary man, not protected by an action from above and isolated in society, cannot resist the power of evil, which is called very aptly the Devil. But the use of such words arouses so many mistakes that one can only keep aloof from them as much as possible.

 

These are the reasons why I could not give a full and sufficient explanation to Rowland H., but I am risking it with you because I conclude from your very decent and honest letter that you have acquired a point of view above the misleading platitudes one usually hears about alcoholism.

 

You see, "alcohol" in Latin is "spiritus" and you use the same word for the highest religious experience as well as for the most depraving poison. The helpful formula therefore is: spiritus contra spiritum.

 

Thanking you again for your kind letter

 

I remain

 

Yours sincerely

 

C. G. Jung*

 

"As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God." (Psalms 42:1)

 

 

 

Anyways, the program may have a very small percent of success, but in reality almost every method of recovery has the same rate of success, so if you want to recover, you don't need to join AA or practice the twelve steps to do it, with the advancements of psychology there are many other methods equally successful, but where AA and the twelve steps differ from those other methods is that if one is fearless and thorough what they can attain is an understanding of themselves and the nature of their addiction, and in understanding this also come to a knowledge that there is a power greater than themselves that can remove this addiction. This power is not necessarily God, in fact it is immensely personal for each person and where I go to meetings it's considered rude to ask what someone else considers to be their higher power.

 

Yes there are a large number of theistic and even atheistic groups that use the twelve steps to recover with equal success, because essentially, even the atheist is understanding a unifying principle that is necessary for recovery, that there is something in the universe greater than himself. Once one understands that they have a problem, that they alone cannot be rid of this problem, that this problem require something more to do it, and they can figure out what that "more" is, then they are set on the path of recovery using this twelve step model.

 

So, it is entirely possible and practical that one can use Buddhism as a basis for recovery, in fact Buddhism is very similar to Christianity and other religions in regards to the moral compass that one is loosely directed to follow within the program. I doubt any Buddhist would look at the twelve steps and find it to contradict the actual teaching of Buddha in any way, unless they seriously needed to nitpick.

 

Where most people have issue is that the founders of AA used the word God in the twelve steps and referred to the higher power as God. This rubs some people the wrong way, especially atheists, because they seem to be unable to accept that the concept of God is a very personal one, and that despite what everyone thinks, we all have our Gods, even if that notion of God is atheism itself or detachment. God, as I've come to understand it, is simply what we believe to be the underlying nature of the Universe. So God can be the notion of Good, the collective unconscious, or God, and when one sees mention of this, and rather than hold onto unaddressed bitterness regarding the notion of God, but rather views it with an open mind, one can easily follow the twelve steps regardless of their religious or spiritual persuasion or lack there of.

 

I've seen the twelve steps turn bitter angry abusive men into content happy loving men. Essentially you get out of it, what you put into it. I also think it's wise to tailor it to your own individual needs. So there is nothing wrong with changing the wording in the twelve steps around, so long as the original intent is still there. I think the danger comes from changing the steps in order to avoid some of the steps that are difficult to work through, such as the forth and fifth. When I see these steps watered down or removed from a program, I start to wonder how effective the path can be, or if one is able to fully benefit from the spiritual path that the twelve steps leads one on.

 

Anyways, I didn't originally intend to write all of this, but I started thinking about it after I answered your original question and thought I might add it.

 

I wish the Buddhist Twelve Step thread good luck. Perhaps if there is a great show of interest we could start a generic thread about the twelve steps in order to examine the process without having to confine ourselves to one religious or philosophical ideology.

 

Aaron

Edited November 14, 2011 by Twinner

[Encephalon]

Lots of points to respond to!

 

There Is a small but robust Buddhist 12-step community in America today. Some of the groups follow the example and format created by Kevin Griffin ("One Breath at a Time: Buddhism and the 12 Steps") and the Buddhist Recovery Network. Some are modeled on Darren Littlejohn's work. Some are modeled on the work Noah Levine, author of "Dharma Punx."

 

The point I want to emphasize is that many people in recovery who resonate with

Buddhism live in places where the Buddhist 12-Step vibe hasn't caught on. What AA offers is the critical component missing from American Buddhism; the "sangha" if you will, the social connection and group participation in relative proximity to Anywhere, USA. I would like to be able to investigate the affinities between the Dharma and the 12 Steps so that those on the Buddhist path of recovery can feel comfortable within AA orthodoxy. I still find it challenging at times to perform the inner translations myself, but that is a reflection of the depths of the Dharma and the Steps I have yet to fathom.

 

My assumptions from the get-go are -

 

The American Buddhist 12-step community is likely a much different community than the self-identified Buddhists of TaoBums. I don't believe the TTB Buddhists speak with a monolithic voice, but I often find them referenced in a general, and often perjorative, fashion. As far as I can tell, Buddhist psychology in the service of the Buddhist recovery movement is mostly limited to the 4 Noble Truths, the 8-Fold Path, the Three Poisons, and the 5 Precepts. This is purely secular; no metaphysics, no suspensions of reason. Beyond that is your own private path.

 

I am choosing Buddhism because it is part of my practice and for reasons I stated in my opening post; because Buddhism is trained on the human impulse for craving, desire, addiction, lust, etc., and that to open it up to an ecumenical investigation would dissolve the unique contribution Buddhism makes to the recovery movement.

 

I am only too happy to see a more ecumenical interpretation of the 12 Steps at some point in the future, though.

edit - removed article from Dr. Weil

Edited November 15, 2011 by Encephalon