Tuesday, March 22, 2016

A Duck, or Too Good To Be True?

(or, "Too Good To Be True, Two")

If something seems too good to be true, it usually is.

Right - but not because the situation isn't good or can't be good, but because you don't trust it to be good.

How many times have you heard yourself say that you don't trust something?

Do you realize what you are doing? When you say that you don't trust, you are showing total trust - just in something else; usually, the opposite of the situation as it appears and in its possibilities. It's not that you are not trusting the situation or circumstance; you are trusting your disbelief in it.

Determining that something is too good to be true is giving prior judgment to a situation as negative, despite its positive appearance. Why? If it looks like a duck and acts like a duck, isn't it a duck? Why is it only a duck sometimes, when other times it can look like a duck and act like a duck, and instead of being a duck it's too good to be true?

Why can't we believe all the time that something is exactly what it appears to be? People use the phrase "Seeing is Believing" all the time, yet will not always believe what they see. What makes them so selective?


When did everybody become afraid of a duck?

Will believing in something we can see make us vulnerable to it? How? We see many things every time we open our eyes, and we aren't afraid of them.  Just certain things?

If you feel you are vulnerable to something, recognize that there is a special power in being vulnerable, because vulnerability is really an openness to possibility. It puts you in a position of gaining something that you would never attain by "playing it safe".  There are no possibilities without giving something a shot.

Vulnerability is trust. Trust is belief. Belief is always positive. If the thought of vulnerability causes fear, there is a predetermined judgment of the situation as being negative, even if all indications of it point otherwise.

So, it looks good (looks like a duck), feels good (acts like a duck), but you don't believe it's good (it's a duck), and because of that you won't let it be good (a duck)?

That poor duck.

Once you've labeled something as too good to be true, you have already condemned it to being so. The statement itself is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

When you trust in something, all of your actions around it are positive and integrative; when you don't trust in it, your actions are negative and segregative. Basically, even if you have made the decision to go along with something, any distrust you have will cause you to withhold yourself from honest immersion in it. You can't give anything your all if your all isn't present, and the situation is doomed before it starts.

(But you already knew that, didn't you?)

Believing in something can never be destructive because it will not interfere with the situation or circumstance and will allow it to flow. Attempting to act on something you don't truly believe in will cause you to react to your mistrust, instead of allowing what you "hope" will happen.

Remember, the opposite of hope is despair. You don't want to hope, you want to know. Believing and trusting is knowing.

If it looks like a duck and acts like a duck, it's a duck. If it looks good and feels good, it is good.

(And it's true.)

Let the duck be a duck.

Believe in the duck.

Allow it to be a duck.

It will be a duck.