富足与可信度
富足与可信度
提问者：我感到困惑又好奇。
B：好吧。这是令人兴奋的状态，充满发现的状态。
提问者：是的，是关于我和我工作公司一位老板之间的特定关系情况。
B：好的。
提问者：要是你能告诉我些什么、和我分享些什么，我会非常感激。
B：嗯，你对这种情况的定义是什么呢？
提问者：嗯。情况是公司的一位老板对我反应很大。我是公司的优秀员工之一。不管我做什么，定期地——至少一周一次——他都会大发雷霆。
B：好的。
提问者：我知道在某种程度上我曾参与促成了这种情况……
B：嗯，是的。但这并不一定意味着当你和某人互动时，他们的行为就是你行为的绝对一一对应反映。这可能只是一种共同创造，让他们在这种情况中看到他们需要看到的东西。而你也能从中看到你需要看到的东西。但某些情况的出现并不一定意味着它对你们每个人的意义和程度都是一样的。明白吗？
提问者：要是你能以任何方式启发我，我真的会很感激。
B：你和那个人讨论过这件事吗？
提问者：他曾三次在全公司人面前威胁要解雇我……
B：你问过原因吗？
提问者：问过。
B：然后呢？
提问者：我没得到答案。因为事实上，没有真正的原因。
B：好的。你想继续待在那里吗？
提问者：说实话，不想。
B：那然后呢？
提问者：但我确实想在那里再待一段时间。
B：为什么？
提问者：嗯，这是我的收入来源。
B：所以呢？
提问者：而且……
B：所以呢？
提问者：我的开销相当高。
B：是什么让你觉得自己无法吸引到一个与之相当、甚至更广阔的环境呢？当你知道自己想离开时，你打算让他来承担把你推出门的责任吗？
提问者：嗯，他赶不走我；我是优秀员工之一。
B：嗯，但你正在创造一种可能引发摩擦的象征，这种摩擦会迫使你在负面情况下离开，而不是让自己从这个象征中学习，认识到你实际上更想去别的地方。这只是一个建议。你对此有什么感受？
提问者：嗯，我知道我更想去别的地方。
B：哪里呢？
提问者：我毫无头绪。
B：好的。如果你现在不在这家公司，你愿意给自己一个机会，去设想一个更广阔的你更想做的事情的版本吗？在你的想象中，你能有——或者已经有了——一幅画面，或者一个场景，描绘出你更想以更广阔的方式去做的事情吗？你能想象自己在别的地方做一些在现在这家公司做不了的事情吗？
提问者：当然可以。
B：现在，也许…… 也许你的意思是：“我不敢相信我所设想的。” 也许这才是你的意思。你觉得呢？
提问者：我是…… 我能相信，只是我不太能把握好时机。
B：哦，时机！好的。我喜欢这个技巧！运用这个叫做 “可信度阈值” 的技巧让我很兴奋——你愿意非常诚实和直接地回答吗？
提问者：愿意。
B：好的。现在：重新设想那个欣喜若狂、富足、随性、无忧无虑的艺术家的形象，那就是你。好吗？
提问者：想象好了。
B：好的。现在：你认为在你们的十年时间里，你毫无疑问、毫无问题地能成为那样的自己吗？
提问者：能。
B：好的。现在：你认为在你们的五年时间里，你毫无疑问、毫无问题地能成为那样的自己吗？
提问者：（停顿）能。
B：你为什么犹豫了？
提问者：我得认真考虑五年这个时间。我的意思是，从现在的我到五年后那样富足的状态，跨度很大。
B：好的。那么你觉得九年时间足够吗？如果十年时间足以创造那样的生活方式，九年时间够吗？
提问者：够。
B：好的，说得通。那你认为七年时间足够吗？
提问者：还是有点怀疑——有那么一点怀疑。
B：对于七年时间有怀疑吗？
提问者：是的，有疑虑。
B：好的。这种疑虑是什么样子的呢？那个小声说 “我不知道我能否在七年时间里做到” 的声音是什么呢？是什么让你认为这需要七年以上的时间呢？是什么想法冒出来了？疑虑是什么呢？
提问者：嗯……
B：好的。回到九年。回到十年。十年时间没问题。
提问者：嗯哼。
B：十年做到和七年做到之间有什么区别呢？在你脑海中，这两种情况的明确区别是什么呢？你认为十年时间里你能做到的事情，是七年时间里做不到的呢？
提问者：嗯，我不太确定。是经济状况和时机的问题。
B：经济状况和时机。好的。你能说得更具体些吗？按照我的理解，你是在说你无法想象自己在七年时间里在经济上达到富足，但十年时间就足够了。你是这个意思吗？
提问者：嗯，你这么一说，我又不太确定了……
B：哦，好的。你到底是什么意思呢？在你成为那个设想形象的能力方面，七年和十年之间的区别是什么呢？你们所有人都可以把这应用到自己身上，想想什么最让你们兴奋。
提问者：很抱歉这么犹豫不决，还占用了这么多时间。
B：你说什么！抱歉？
提问者：嗯哼。
B：我让你道歉了吗？
提问者：没有。（观众中的斯特劳布瑞：“是的，你说你请她再说一遍。”）
B：谢谢！现在我们回到正轨了。看看当你重新审视时会发生什么。你开始像我一样伶牙俐齿了，我喜欢！谢谢你像萨萨尼亚人（Sassanian）那样和我说话。
B：好的！现在我不再要求你重复，你也不再道歉了——你能说清楚区别吗？是不是在你的脑海中，你设想了一种特定的结构，认为自己为了在十年时间里实现经济富足需要这样的结构，但同样的结构在七年时间里却无法实现呢？是你认为获取经济富足的方式的结构问题吗？
提问者：不是。
B：好的。除了三年的时间差，是什么让七年和十年不同呢？你们越快变得一样聪明，我就越得仔细留意，以免被一群伶牙俐齿的人包围。
提问者：你说得越多，区别就越小。
B：我说得越多，区别就越小。我把这当作是一种赞美！
提问者：当然。请这样理解。
B：不过你明白你其实只是在听自己内心的想法吗？
提问者：明白。
B：好的。现在：这不一定是一个分析的问题。但有时候你越愿意谈论它——你刚才说的是，一切变得越平等。
提问者：是的。
B：而且那些定义并非一成不变。你所使用的定义并不代表创造的基本法则。你只是在制定和创造一些定义，而这些定义仅仅是你们社会的信仰以及你所接受的信仰的结果。你不必接受这些定义。你可以接受其他的定义。抛弃那些；用这个 “钱” 去购买另一种信仰。你会为它们得到一个合理的价格。在某个地方，会有人想要你不再需要的那种信仰。
所以，就时间和空间的概念而言，你创造出的差异越小，那么在任何特定时刻，你创造自己真正想要的东西的能力就越灵活。明白吗？
提问者：明白。
B：留意你所创造的场景。你把自己看作是一个欣喜若狂、富足的创造者。那就是你。把此时此地的你和设想中的你分隔开来的，只是你认为那个你实际上在 “那里”，而不是就在 “这里”。
你所要做的就是成为那个你，表现得像那个你。去做你在想象中看到那个你正在做的事情，你就会成为那个你。而且因为你会处于那样的频率，你就会拥有那个人的生活。我保证。我保证。因为你所处的任何频率就是你所体验到的现实。不会有别的情况。
提问者：我明白。
B：好的。所以，不管需要多长时间，你也不必自责。那是你对时机的理解。无论你以何种方式去做，都没问题。所以只需认识到，你确实有能力，无论何时，去到你真正想去的地方——就在此刻！明白吗？
提问者：明白。
B：而且你所要做的就是以一种清晰的方式行动，展现出你想象中的那个自己——就在现在。清楚了吗？
提问者：清楚了。
B：这对你有帮助吗？
提问者：有帮助。我能再问你一件事吗？
B：可以。
提问者：只是我对这段关系很好奇，它引发了你和我分享的这些信息——我非常感激。但我还是……
B：那个人在发脾气。那个人曾是你的 “孩子” 之一（某种关联）。
提问者：谢谢你。
B：不客气。
提问者：非常感谢你。就这些了吗？
B：是的！
提问者：这太棒了。
B：谢谢你。
富足与可信度
原文段落：
Abundance and Believability
Q: I’m perplexed and curious.
B: Well, all right. Exciting states to be in, states of discovery.
Q: Yes, about a particular relationship situation with a person that is one of the owners of the company that I work for.
B: All right.
Q: I would very much appreciate anything you could tell me, share with me.
B: Well, what is your definition of the situation?
Q: Mmmm. The definition of the situation is that one of the owners of the company has a very strong reaction to me. I’m one of the top performers in the company. No matter what I do, periodically – at least once a week – he has an outrageous outburst of anger.
B: All right.
Q: Now, I know that in some way I co-created this at one point…
B: Well, yes. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that when you interact with someone, that what they do is an absolute one-to-one reflection of what you’re doing. It may simply be a co-creation to allow them to see in the situation what they need to see. And you can get out of it what you need to see. But the idea of certain situations doesn’t necessarily mean that it is relevant to each of you in the same way, or to the same degree. Understand?
Q: I would really appreciate it if you could enlighten me in any way.
B: Have you discussed this with that person?
Q: He’s threatened to fire me three times, in front of the entire company…
B: Have you asked a reason?
Q: Mmhmm.
B: And?
Q: I don’t get an answer. Because the thing is, there’s no real reason.
B: All right. Do you desire to remain there?
Q: The truth is, no.
B: Well then?
Q: But I do desire to stay there for a while.
B: Why?
Q: Well, it’s my income.
B: So?
Q: And…
B: So?
Q: I’ve got fairly high expenses.
B: What makes you think you will not be able to attract yourself into a circumstance that will be equivalent? Or even more expanded? Are you going to allow him to take the responsibility of pushing you out the door, when you know you want to walk?
Q: Well, he can’t push me out; I’m one of the top performers.
B: Well, but you are creating a symbol that could create the friction that would then force you to leave under negative circumstances, instead perhaps of allowing yourself to learn from your own symbol that you are being given an opportunity to realize that you actually prefer to be somewhere else. This is a suggestion. How does it ring within you?
Q: Well, I’d know that I would prefer to be somewhere else.
B: Where?
Q: I don’t have a clue.
B: All right. Will you give yourself the opportunity to see the more expanded version of what you would prefer to do, if you were not in the company you are in now? Can you have – or do you have in your imagination – a picture, or a play, of what you would prefer to be doing in a more expanded way? Can you see yourself doing something that you cannot do in the company you are in now – somewhere else?
Q: Absolutely.
B: Now, maybe… maybe what you mean is: “I can’t believe what I see.” Maybe that’s what you mean. How does that sound?
Q: I’m having… I can believe it; I can’t quite get the timing.
B: Oh, the timing! All right. I love this technique! This excites me a lot to use this technique – called the “threshold of believability.” Are you willing to be very honest and very direct?
Q: Yes.
B: All right. Now: recreate the image of the ecstatic, abundant, spontaneous, carefree artist that you are. All right?
Q: Got it.
B: All right. Now: do you perceive that you will be able to be that you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, no problem, in ten of your years?
Q: Yes.
B: All right. Now: do you perceive that you will be able to be that you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, no problem, in five of your years?
Q: (Pause) Yes.
B: Why did you hesitate?
Q: I had to really get five. I mean, it’s a lot of abundance for five, from what I am now.
B: All right. Do you feel, therefore, that nine years is sufficient? If ten years is sufficient to create that life style, is nine years sufficient?
Q: Sure.
B: All right, fair enough. So you believe seven years is sufficient?
Q: The shadow of the doubt is there – the shadow.
B: At seven years?
Q: Yes, the shadow.
B: All right. What does that shadow look like? What is the little voice that says: “I don’t know if I can do this in seven years?” What allows you to believe it would take longer than seven years? What came in? What was the doubt?
Q: Hmmm.
B: All right. Go back to nine. Go back to ten years. No problem at ten years.
Q: Mmhmm.
B: What is the difference between doing it at ten years and doing it at seven? What is the definitive difference between the two scenarios in your mind? What do you see yourself capable of doing at ten years that you don’t see yourself capable of doing at seven?
Q: Well, I’m not so sure. It’s the economics and the timing.
B: Economics and the timing. All right. Can you be more specific? You are saying to me – as I interpret what you are saying – that you cannot imagine that you will be economically abundant in seven years, but that ten years is enough. Is that what you are saying?
Q: Well, once you said it like that, I’m not quite so sure…
B: Oh, all right. What are you saying? What is the difference between seven and ten years – in your ability to be that image? All of you can be applying this to yourselves and what excites you the most.
Q: I’m sorry to be so hesitant and take so much time.
B: I beg your pardon! Sorry?
Q: Mmhmm.
B: Did I ask for an apology?
Q: No. (Strawberry, from the audience: “Yeah, you said you begged her pardon.”)
B: Thank you! Now we’re on the track. See what happens when you get born all over again. You start being as much of a smart aleck as me, and I love it! Thank you for speaking to me as a Sassanian would.
B: All right! Now that I’m no longer begging and you are no longer sorry – can you define the difference? Are you creating within your mind an assumption of a particular type of structure that you think you need in order to have the economics at ten years, that you can’t have through that same structure at seven? Is it the structure of how you think you have to get the economics?
Q: No.
B: All right. What makes seven different from ten – aside from three? The sooner you all become equal, the more I shall have to pay close attention so that I am not surrounded by smart alecks.
Q: The more you talk, the less difference there is.
B: The more I talk, the less difference there is. I’ll take that as a compliment!
Q: Absolutely. Please do.
B: Do you understand you’re only listening to yourself, however?
Q: Yes.
B: All right. Now: it isn’t necessarily a matter of analysis. But the more willing you are sometimes to talk about it – what you are saying is that the more equal everything becomes.
Q: Yes.
B: And those definitions are not chiseled in steel. You are not using definitions that represent the fundamental laws of creation. You are only making definitions and creating definitions that are simply the results of your society’s beliefs, and the beliefs that you have bought into. You don’t have to buy into them. You can buy into other ones. Sell those; use the money to buy another belief. You’ll get a fair price for them. Someone, somewhere, will want that belief, the belief you no longer need.
So the less difference you create there to be, in terms of the idea of time and space, then the more flexible you are at any given moment in your ability to create whatever you really want right now. Understand?
Q: Yes.
B: Pay attention to the scenario you have created. You have seen yourself as an ecstatic abundant creator. That is you. The only thing that separates you here, from that you there, is assuming that that you is, in fact, out there. And not right here.
All you have to do is be that you, act like that you. Do the things you see that you doing in your imagination, and you will be that you. And because you will be of that frequency, you will have the life of that person. I guarantee it. Guarantee it. Because any frequency you are is the reality you experience. It can be no other way.
Q: I understand that.
B: All right. So you also do not have to berate yourself for however long it does take. That’s your understanding of your timing. And however you do it will be just fine. So simply recognize that you do have the ability, however, to go wherever you really want to go – right now! Understand?
Q: Yes.
B: And all you have to do is act in the clear way that represents the you, you imagine yourself to be – now. Clear?
Q: Yes.
B: Does that serve you?
Q: It does. Can I ask you one more thing?
B: Yes.
Q: It’s just my curiosity about this relationship, which triggered the information and sharing you did with me – which I appreciate very much. But I still…
B: The being is throwing a tantrum. The being has been one of your children.
Q: Thank you.
B: You are welcome.
Q: Thank you very much. Is that all?
B: Yup!
Q: It’s been great.
B: Thank you.
Abundance and Believability