I have never been anyone else, and I cannot talk on anyone else's behalf.
However, I would like to make an observation, based on what people share in
meetings. It appears to me, although I might be wrong, that not everyone (and
I'm not trying to be sarcastic on purpose) has God as the centre and main
objective of their lives. People do not talk about God all that much. Mostly,
people talk about their lives, their jobs, their relationships, their
circumstances. They talk about their feelings and their thoughts about those
feelings. Sometimes God is referenced and sometimes the programme,
spirituality, God, etc., are mentioned as tools that can be used to handle
those lives, those jobs, those relationships, those circumstances, and those
feelings. There's nothing wrong with that, and there it is.
What I can report is that I have tried to replicate that approach, and I cannot
get it to work. I cannot retain ownership of my life and see God as the service
provider enabling me to live my life. When I try and live my life (understood
in those terms: my life), God does not seem all that obliging. Sometimes
people say that God has given them options. Well, I think those ‘options’ have
always been there and are always there in terms of the array of paths that are
notionally available. The question is not one of options. I have tried to
exercise personal liberty in the selection of options. I have come horribly
unstuck doing that: the right to select options freely does not entail the
right to select the consequences. What I choose automatically produces
particular results. I cannot hijack options to orchestrate the results I
predetermine. That's not how causality works. I can do the will of my lower
self or I can do the will of my higher self. Each will have consequences
automatically entailed by what I choose. I can opt to cross the road on red,
but is that smart? There is no real liberty in crossing the road. If I want to
cross the road safely, I have to cross on green.
The only 'choice' I have today is the choice between the lower self and the
higher self. This is a choice that must be constantly made. But the choice is a
false one: it is really a sanity and reality-facing test. If I face reality and
am sane, there is only one viable option: doing what the higher self wants. If
I am not facing reality and am insane, I appear to have 'options'. Doing other
than what God wants (doing what the lower self wants) will always produce the
wrong result spiritually, however well the endeavour works out
materially.
This is not a purely academic, esoteric, or spiritual question: it is intrinsic
to the decision to recover. My experience of the choice between the former
model (I live my life and God helps me) and the latter model (I do God's will
because it is God's will) is really a decision between remaining trapped in ego
and being sprung from the trap. Ego is inextricably linked to active addiction.
The only escape from active addiction is to face reality and take the next
indicated action. When I'm sane, there is only one viable option on the table.