Absent any and all idea construction what remains?

[Cleric K]

Can this inquiry even be answered absent at least one idea construction—i.e. the idea of some agent that can ask/answer? Supposing some state absent even that, absent any and all idea construction, can an Origin for idea construction be found other than ever-now? If so, how so? Has it a cause? Eternal? Damn, yet another idea! SomeOne seems snookered.

Does 'idea construction' imply an idea in the intellect?

[Soul_of_Shu]

And on and on that idea can go, guaranteed to be followed by another.

Just stop. It's not so hard.

Surely y'all are impressed with my prediction skills, as sure enough another idea followed.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Can this inquiry even be answered absent at least one idea construction—i.e. the idea of some agent that can ask/answer? Supposing some state absent even that, absent any and all idea construction, can an Origin for idea construction be found other than ever-now? If so, how so? Has it a cause? Eternal? Damn, yet another idea! SomeOne seems snookered.

Does 'idea construction' imply an idea in the intellect?

Only in a very narrow sense, but more the idea that the ever-present Origin is originating idea construction, including this idea being.

[Cleric K]

Only in a very narrow sense, but more the idea that the ever-present Origin originates idea construction, including this idea being.

Maybe this helps? We simply shouldn't imagine a state of being that is lacking dimension of meaning.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Only in a very narrow sense, but more the idea that the ever-present Origin originates idea construction, including this idea being.

Maybe this helps? We simply shouldn't imagine a state of being that is lacking dimension of meaning.

Not seeing why the ever-present Origin originating idea construction would imply lack of meaning? Why would a meaningless idea construction Originate?

[Cleric K]

Not seeing why the ever-present Origin originating idea construction would imply lack of meaning? Why would a meaningless idea construction Originate?

In that case I'm not sure exactly what is the question

[Soul_of_Shu]

Not seeing why the ever-present Origin originating idea construction would imply lack of meaning? Why would a meaningless idea construction Originate?

In that case I'm not sure exactly what is the question

I guess the inquiry was too vague. Was trying to get past any duality of an Originator in some state free of idea construction that at some undetermined point suddenly started originating idea construction, which then takes on a life of its own, independent of the Origin, as in: And God said 'Let there be light'; or a more scientific take would be that it all began umpteen billion years ago. Rather, the ever-present Originating of idea constructions has never not been the case. Whatever specific origin point that can be pointed to, can only be some version of Now. As an idea being, I can find no other origin point for that being other than ever-now. Is this any less ambiguous?

[Eugene I.]

Not any idea leads to duality. There is a common misunderstanding in some nondual teachings that the state free of duality can only be a state free of ideas. Tha is simply not true.

[Cleric K]

Not seeing why the ever-present Origin originating idea construction would imply lack of meaning? Why would a meaningless idea construction Originate?

In that case I'm not sure exactly what is the question

I guess the inquiry was too vague. Was trying to get past any duality of an Originator in some state free of idea construction that at some undetermined point suddenly started originating idea construction, which then takes on a life of its own, independent of the Origin, as in: And God said 'Let there be light'; or a more scientific take would be that it all began umpteen billion years ago. Rather, the ever-present Originating of idea constructions has never not been the case. Whatever specific origin point that can be pointed to, can only be some version of Now. As an idea being, I can find no other origin point for that being other than ever-now. Is this any less ambiguous?

Yes, every state of being is a version of the Now. In certain sense it can be said that our Now is the interference of all other potential Nows. Some Nows, as ours, feel to be experienced in great differentiation. There's potential Now where all Nows nest together as if concentrically. We can call that Eternity. So we're always in an eternal Now but it is being experienced as memory integration process, gradually building up concentrically in the funnel. It's like eternity is decomposed into Nows which find themselves in different relations, just like white light is decomposed in colors. Every Now shares its center with the eternal Now which encompasses all states at once. Our Now too can be seen as the interference of all Nows but they are in different 'phase' relationships and we see them as if separated in Space and Time. Space and Time are really phase shifted wave phenomena. We need to put the Nows back together, make them concentric.

Of course, as has been spoken several times, we must be very careful when we conceive of the eternal state. If our intellect remains in the blind spot we imagine that we can be in the eternal state while the clock continues to tick.
viewtopic.php?p=10498#p10498
There's no absolute clock! Time is the experience of implosion of Nows, integrating towards eternity, which knows all Nows simultaneously.

It's not an easy topic. The only way to approach it is through (T). Once we begin to gain consciouseness of the depth rhythms within which our thinking flows, we also begin to understand the vertical nature of Time. As long as we're entrained in the sequential intellect we can't really break loose from the Newtonian clock. Recently I used the image that in Imagination we begin to Think in chords, while our intellect seems like their arpeggiations. Without living grasp of this non-linear Time (nesting of Nows), the Origin will always seem like a specific point along the absolute Newtonian time arrow. We need to curve that arrow, just like we learned to curve the flat Earth. We can speak of edge of the Earth (beginning, end) only in the flat paradigm. It becomes meaningless in curved Earth. Similarly, we seek point of beginning of Time only if we hold fast to the flat arrow. The more we rise in the depth curvature, the more we find that the beginning and the end are simultaneous and all evolutionary arcs are infinite ways of integrating the differentiated Nows into Eternity.

[Eugene I.]

The exclusion of all idea constructions (neti-neti) is only a certain phase towards realization of non-dual nature of reality including the world of forms and ideas. Rupert explains it quite well here