Trust

Richard’s Selected Correspondence On Faith and Trust

[..] Trust is the ‘faith or conviction in the loyalty, strength, veracity, etc., of a person or thing; reliance on the truth of a statement etc., without examination’ … and faith is ‘belief, especially without evidence or proof’

Trust is but the antidote to doubt … without doubt, where is the need for trust? And, as doubt arises out of insecurity, then your trust is based on – and fuelled by – uncertainty and lack of confidence in your ability to discern and appraise.

Richard’s Selected Correspondence On Hope

To ‘trust’ someone – anyone at all – is to invite betrayal … to ‘trust’ someone is to impose a demand upon them that they may not be able to live up to (or want to) and I never do that. I have had no use for ‘trust’ at all: to ‘trust’ is to attract deception. Etymologically, ‘trust’ – a covenant with ‘The Truth’ – is in the same category as faith – loyalty to ‘The Truth’ – and both are aligned with belief. Belief means fervently wishing to be true. There is not much difference between ‘trust’ and faith … as a generalisation perhaps ‘trust’ is used more in spiritual circles, whereas faith is more aligned with the religious. ‘Trust’ seems to have more solid connotations than faith – to the spiritual aspirant, who scorns religion and all its trappings – yet, essentially they amount to the same. They all give rise to hope. Hope, the antidote to despair, is what most people live on. Living in hope – having faith or trusting – is a poor substitute for the living purity of the perfection of the actual. Hope sets one up for disappointment time and again … and all it is, is the antidote for despair. All trusting, believing, hoping and having faith and certitude are but the antidotes to distrust, disbelief, despair, doubt or suspicion.

Associated emotions

Links to this page
  • 🥩 Carnivore diet

    Takeaway: Doctors and nutritionists are generally not to be trusted blindly, especially when it comes to the topic of antibiotics and diet. Although harbouring no ill-will, most of them* can’t help but overweeningly** trot out what they had been taught (with bias) in medical schools … and quackery and misinformation is not very uncommon. As one HN commenter puts it:

  • macho

    The macho (or male chauvinist, or manly man) is a strutting factotum with bulging biceps, stone-dry eyes, brains that are ruled by his gonads, and an ego indoctrinated to believe that he is the lord -and master of the woman who rules him. His psyche is primed to defend his woman’s supposed honour from other men’s advances. Thoroughly conditioned to serve women, his life satisfaction comes from loyally serving his nest queen. Naturally, he is the matriarchist’s ideal man. When young, he suffers from the delusion that he is stronger, cleverer, and naturally superior to the woman who controls him. However, an older and wiser macho, if obliged to confess the truth, might say: “I am the captain of this ship, and I have the permission of my wife to say so.” But by then, it is too late for him to be anything but a habitual macho.

  • Naive Optimism

    However, once embarked upon the ‘wide and wondrous path’, you are not on your own: the perfection of the infinitude of this physical universe is with you all the way … but if you waver, you are indeed on your own. It is a matter of having the courage of your convictions and letting nothing stand in your way; determination and perseverance are the essential prerequisites to ensure success … coupled with application and diligence. Having the ‘courage of your convictions’ has nothing to do with believing, trusting, hoping or having faith that it be possible. I, for one, never believed, trusted, hoped or had faith that it was possible, for such an action of believing, trusting, hoping and having faith perpetuates the believer, the truster, the hoper and the faithful. On the contrary, I could no longer believe that it was not possible – which is a different action entirely to believing, trusting, hoping and having faith that it is possible – thus dispensing with the believer, the truster, the hoper and the faithful. Do you see this?

    RICHARD: It is very important to have confidence in your own ability to discriminate between current human knowledge and what you personally know from your own peak experiences. This will give you that optimism that is the ability to plough on regardless of whatever stands in your way until you evoke your destiny. It is not a matter of having faith or believing that it is possible; it is not a matter of trusting or hoping that it will happen to you; it is all to do with the solid knowing, born out of the peak experience, that it is here for you and anyone … if only you will act upon your knowing. This ‘action’ amounts to – at times – ‘talking yourself into it’, for the other alternative is to let doubt and disbelief and distrust and despair eat away at your resolve. Only you can manifest your own freedom.

  • Hope

    Trust gives rise to hope (antidote to despair) which sets one up for Disappointment.

  • Gullibility

    Only the gullible trust … and only a fool accepts another’s trust. – Richard

  • Belief

    RICHARD: [..] etymologically the word ‘believe’ is derived from the Old English ‘geliefa’ (belief, faith) from the West Saxon ‘geliefan’/ ‘beliefan’ (to believe, trust) from the Germanic ‘galaubjan’ (to hold dear, esteem, trust)

    Faith Required: Belief is inextricably linked with faith, trust, and hope, all of which are discarded in “actualism” in favor of confidence and certainty born of direct experience.
  • Autonomy

    I experience no fear whatsoever … which does away with the need for trust, faith, hope and belief. This is my on-going experience twenty four hours a day, year after year.