One who, as a result of having an attachment to a chemical, a person, an emotional state, or to anything else, ends up consistently behaving or living in a manner that he or she begins to view as “destructive,” which means in a manner inconsistent with his or her ideals or goals, has been called an “addict.” Similarly, one who not only develops an attachment to a chemical, a person, an emotional state, or to anything else, but who also tends to do this on more than one occasion, or develops a pattern for doing this, has been said to have an “addictive personality.”

Eventually, once the Addict decides that his or her attachment to whatever it is has become destructive, in as much as it has caused him or her to be exposed to more than what he or she considers to be an acceptable amount of suffering, he or she may seek to reduce their overall exposure to, or amount of suffering. In such instance he or she may even attempt to completely avoid whatever it is; but naturally, for one to consistently and successfully avoid that to which he or she has become attached can be quite a challenge, which is just another way of saying that it could require the expenditure of a tremendous amount of conscious energy.

Alcohol, as an inert, powerless substance with essentially no consciousness of its own, needs nothing, seeks nothing, and is completely unable to reach out and affect the life of a human being. On the other hand, a human being, an advanced, living being with both physical needs and consciousness, is able to develop a fixation for, or an attachment to something—be it a chemical, a person, an emotional state, or anything else.

Just as absent a human being’s attachment to alcohol, alcohol is without the ability to adversely affect the life of a human being, it is only a human being’s ability to become attached to alcohol that empowers alcohol with the ability to adversely affect the life of a human being. In other words, it is only to the same degree that a human being can be disempowered that alcohol can be empowered with the ability to affect the life of a human being.

Thus, human suffering is made possible only as a result of a psychological attachment to something, regardless of what that something happens to be. So from attachment comes suffering, and from suffering can come a desire to minimize the degree to which one suffers.

What is the Conventional Disposition with Regard the Addict’s Predicament?

First, one who has yet to accept or embrace, for oneself, the idea that he or she truly has an attachment to something, or that his or her attachment is causing him or her to suffer, is beyond help. On the other hand, one who has accepted responsibility for his or her suffering is able to find help; and it is naturally for this person only that “Twelve Step Program” even exists. Now, given the situation relating to the Receptive Addict, what are his or her options?
Pursuant to, or consistent with the ideology behind the Twelve Step Program, or the current psychological model of the West, the Receptive Addict can:

1. Allow themselves full access to that to which they have become attached, be it alcohol, sex, or any other thing or state. In this instance it is not just improbable that he or she will ever completely satisfy his or her hunger for whatever it is, but that he or she will continue to compromise his or herself during the course of obtaining or pursuing whatever it is—in as much as not spending as much time with people they love, not accomplishing what it is they would like to accomplish at their job, with their health goals or ideals, or with their hobbies or interests, etcetera. In other words, with regard to this scenario, the chance of him or her living a productive and fulfilling life will remain rather bleak; OR

2. Learn to completely and successfully avoid that to which they have become attached, which means that they must learn to remain ever cognizant of, and to compensate for, the reality of their disease/sickness/attachment, in as much as learning to continually avoid ever being around certain establishments, environments, places, people, events, etc.

Is Something Missing from this Equation?

In line with the Law of Attraction and Visualization, it is impossible for one to picture the absence of something. In other words, a mother can tell her son to be careful not to wreck his bike; yet, in such instance, since it is fundamentally impossible for him to hold in his mind a picture of the absence of a bike wreck, or “not” a bike wreck, then the only thing her son will be able to picture in his mind’s eye is the actual act of wrecking his bike. This, of course, is unfortunate.

Recent scientific studies into the power of visualization revealed something statistically-significant. It was discovered, again and again, that people who visualize themselves accomplishing some act, regardless of which act it happens to be, end up actually performing the act as good as, or nearly as good as, those who actually practiced it. Thus, it is just the idea or thought of a bike wreck that can improve his odds of experiencing it, or that could create an opportunity for its ultimate experience, because whether or not the child is to picture the act of wrecking his bike, or not wrecking his bike, he would essentially be picturing the same thing.

Now, depending on the philosophical or religious model one chooses to look at, attachment is broken down into two sides. Conceptually, there can be a side that is in pursuit of, or “approaching” something, and then there can also be a side that is opposed to, or in “avoidance” of something. As far as Neuro-Linguistic Programming (“NLP”) is concerned, by virtue of the fact that modern man is always focused on getting more of whatever it is that he wants, and less of whatever it is he would like to avoid, we can say that we are “for” whatever it is that we are in want of, and “against” whatever it is we would like to have less of.

Though this psychological dynamic has existed in every enlightenment tradition, and was both acknowledged and described by some of the world’s most revered avatars, its reality has yet to be acknowledged or accounted for, to any degree, by the current psychological establishment of the West, plus anything created to be in harmony with, or consistent with its principles—such as the Twelve-Step Program. Just as this dynamic is accounted for within Buddhist tradition with words such as “craving” and “dispassion,” it is also accounted for with words such as “attachment” and “aversion” within the millennia-old Hindu texts.

Use all of your power to free the senses from attachment and aversion alike, and live in the full wisdom of the Self. [Hinduism. Bhagavad Gita 2.14-15, 66-68]

This is peace, this is the excellent, namely the calm of all the impulses, the casting out of all “basis,” the extinction of craving, dispassion, stopping (neutrality), Nirvana. [Buddhism. Anguttara Nikaya v.322]

The disunited mind is far from wise; how can it meditate? How can it be at peace? When you know no peace, how can you know joy? When you let your mind follow the call of the senses, they carry away your better judgment as storms drive a boat off its charted course on the sea. Use all of your power to free the senses from attachment (FOR) and aversion (AGAINST) alike, and live in the full wisdom of the Self. [Hinduism. Bhagavad Gita 2.66-68]

The Buddha said, “Of all longings and desire, there is none stronger than sex. Sex as a desire has no equal. Rely on the Oneness. No one under heaven is able to become a follower of the Way if he accepts dualism [the attraction of opposites]. [Buddhism. Sutra of Forty-two Sections 25]

Who is least likely to be damaged by any one of the adverse effects related to the consumption of alcohol, the ‘drinking’ or ‘dry’ alcoholic, or the one who is completely indifferent to, or neutral toward alcohol? Which is the better alternative, being able to live with or without alcohol, or having to spend your life incessantly trying to either pursue or avoid certain kinds of establishments, certain kinds of people, and certain kinds of situations?

Fortunately, this is actually quite easy to answer. Take, for example, the best scenario for the ‘dry’ alcoholic, or one who has recognized and accepted their attachment to alcohol, as well as a need to completely avoid it. It is impossible for mind to successfully avoid that on which it fails to continually retain focus. In other words, if he who has an attachment to alcohol is to keep from ever meeting up with it, or from being around people or places associated with it, he must allocate just as much, if not more mental energy in its avoidance as he would if in its pursuit.

Rather than keep track of the business hours of the liquor store, or the neighborhoods that are home to the most liquor stores, or the best places to buy drinks, the Dry Alcoholic must keep track of such things as the places that do not serve alcohol, the hours kept by the local anti-alcohol groups (“AA”), or even people who, in social settings, refuse to be around other people who are consuming alcohol. Thus, in short, as far as mental energy and concentration is concerned, avoidance costs just about as much as, if more than pursuit.

Whether or not the alcoholic goes without alcohol, or the sex addict goes without sex is, at least in most cases, irrelevant, because so long as the attachment or fixation exists, so also will there exist, as a consequence of such attachment or fixation, some degree of unnecessary suffering.

Jesus Christ, one of the best psychologists the world has ever known, highlighted the fact that when one who is conflict with his or herself, as in one who has part of them wanting or pursuing something that another parts of them would like to avoid, is in a “no win” situation, and he communicate as much by saying that “a house divided against itself cannot stand.”
Whether or not it was a famous "mystic," such as Confucious, Krishna, Moses, Buddha, or Jesus, or even a more recent one, such as P.D. Ouspensky, Papaji, Osho, or Sathya Sai Baba, they all agreed on one thing. Freedom from attachment, or what has also been called either ‘cessation,’ ‘neutrality,’ or ‘stopping,’ or 'oneness,' is the most empowering position that any one human being can assume.

A "recovering alcoholic" who successfully manages to spend the balance of his life avoiding alcohol never gave up his attachment to, or fixation for it, even though he did manage to keep himself out of its way. The enlightened folks knew that this issue had more than two sides. Giving up one's mental attachment to something is superior to the successful avoidance of it.

Through the abandonment of desire the Deathless is realized. [Buddhism. Samyutta Nikaya x1vii37]
Beauty arises from the fusion of extremes into a harmonious oneness. [Unification Church. Sun Myung Moon, 9-11-79]
More than being just an issue of winning a two-sided battle, or conflict, within which one side favors something that another side feels threatened by, it is more about leaving the two-sided (dualistic) battle, leaving both ‘for’ and ‘against,’ and removing oneself from not only it, but the consequences (suffering) that have always been, and will remain inextricably related to its enslavement.

The Twelve-Step Program completely overlooks the existence or reality of the most empowering position a human being can assume, which is that of neutrality, nothing but another name for the end of attachment, or craving, or desire. One who is attached to a certain chemical or emotional state can, through employment of certain introspective techniques that affect changes at both the conscious and unconscious levels, become just as objective and indifferent to something as one who had never realized, or been adversely affected by an attachment to that same thing. It is that easy... and I have yet to say anything that has not already been said.

Regardless of what it is that one is attached to, that to which he or she is attached ceases to be a 'focal point,' or a frequent occupier of mind, or a necessary component of his or her lifestyle, the moment he or she addresses the needs of, and removes from themselves the unconscious part of them that benefited from either having or not having 'it' around. This is not only possible; this is the best alternative for anyone. Psychologically speaking, this is the most empowering position anyone can assume.

Discarding or neutralizing unconscious attachment is even superior to total, and even successful abstinence, in which case he or she will still need to spend the balance of his or her life both consciously and unconsciously avoiding whatever 'it' is, or associating with certain people who are constantly around, or who consume or use 'it,' or constantly making sure he or she never ends up in a "high risk" environment or establishment in which 'it' is most prevalent.

The Smoker, during the course of neutralizing his or her attachment to cigarettes, will be simultaneously empowering his or herself as he or she takes power away from cigarettes. The Alcoholic, during the course of neutralizing his or her attachment to alcohol, will be simultaneously empowering his or herself as he or she takes power away from alcohol, that which never really had any power in the first place.

No attachment, no suffering. No suffering, no need to minimize the amount of suffering. Having Heaven not only covers the entirety of this phenomenon, and in great detail, it also explains how it is that one single, illusive principle lies at the root of all sickness and disease; and it is this one single, illusive principle that was spoken of by the greatest teachers of all time.

Author's Bio: 

In 1995, Kevin Manderscheid was sent to federal prison as a first-time, non-violent drug offender. Because the chemical evidence the federal government held him accountable for had been prematurely destroyed prior to him even being able to examine it, or to have it tested by a third party, he began his prison sentence with the hope of eventually winning an appeal, the reality of which would relieve him of the duty of having to serve almost ten years of his life in prison as a first-time drug offender.

In 1997, after having filed numerous appeals, he exhausted the appeals process, thus extinguishing any hope or possibility of receiving any form of remedy for the damage sustained as a result of the evidence in his case being prematurely destroyed. On embracing the reality of having to serve the full length of the original sentence, and the reality of having to serve time for an amount of chemical evidence that, to him, clearly exceeded that which had actually been present within the “conspiracy,” he felt a sense of injustice such that he had never known. Such sense of injustice, combined with loss of hope, in as much as ever being able to receive remedy for what had happened, sent him into a psychological tailspin.

Soon thereafter he was diagnosed and treated for “Bipolar Disorder” and depression. Then, while taking medication commensurate with Bipolar Disorder, he faced yet another challenge. As if coming to terms with the fact that he would spend almost a decade in prison weren’t enough, he was then blamed for destroying the property of a government employee. Not unlike the courtroom situation in which he had once found himself, the disciplinary hearing held in light of the charges against him also made a mockery out of both itself, and any reasonable sense of justice.

Increasingly burdened and overwhelmed with the idea of being punished beyond that which would have been appropriate, giving the circumstances, then for a second time, something happened to him. While in a cell by himself one night, in solitary confinement, the instance of which would have been appropriate in the event that he had actually been responsible for the charge for which he was receiving punishment, an invisible, loving presence visited him. And it was at that moment that the overall course of his life changed forever.