Rogers ( wrote:
>Thanks, Ted.

>I'm still not sure why you would discriminate between a cog and a "reality
>change" but nevertheless, this gem was appreciated.

>My feeling (again) is that "support" is one of those perfect words that
>comes closest (so far) to represent an "isness" that we have skirted and/or
>picked at with "contribute to" and "help."

     Adore has it as CO-OPERATE.

>Well, I can see it has a positive side, and I can see it represents an
>isness, but I can see how it would (and did) become troublesome.

     Support is part of native state as Source supports us all.

     All aberration is *ENFORCED* basic truth, so once support becomes
enforced through duty, obligation, agreements etc, then it can become

     In particular, study "One for all, and all for one", you will
see the dissonance to the all for one part.

     Should the group sacrifice itself for the sake of one?

     When people join together for support they at first swear 'all
for one', but pretty soon they resent the one that would need 'all for
one', and they prefer the *GROUP* to survive above the survival of
anyone individual.  They hope themselves not to be sacrificed for the
*INDIVIDUAL* in this way.  Ultimately though the cat comes around and
sits in their lap and they are sacrificed for the *GROUP* in this way.

     Support becomes a one for all period, and the group becomes a
black hole sucking in individuals never to return.