Beyond the ideation of a beyond

[Sandeep-Kuber Technologies]

Before the mind--I am.

I am....... is not a thought in the mind.

The mind happens to I AM .

 I AM does not happen to the mind.

And since time and space are in the mind, I AM is beyond time and space.

And as much beyond any conceptions that is created by the mind, including ideations of eternal, omnipresence, omniscience.

As well as the ideation of I AM.

Or the ideation of a beyond.

[Ram]

Before the mind--I am.

- Before I Am, I am a i am not. Maharshi called it "I - I", Maharaj
called it "Self without self." Like them, I also say, "Even these
words do not express it."

I am....... is not a thought in the mind.

- It is a thought in the mind. Where is "I am" if there is no thought?
Only the non-conceptual "I-ness" or "Am-ness" without any thought of I-
ness or Am-ness is not a thought in the mind. The moment the
inspiration arises to express or conceive of it, it is a thought, even
though there is no distinction between the essence and substance of
the thought and seer of the thought. Without such distinction, only
singular homogeneity. Even in the distinction appears in thought, it
is still only Oneness. Oneness with the label of thought or mind, or
Oneness without the label of thought or mind, both only Oneness that
cannot even be called both or Oneness.

The mind happens to I AM .

- Mind is I AM. No mind, no I AM to be found. No I AM, no mind to be
found. No finder to find the un-found.

I AM does not happen to the mind.

- I AM is mind happening. No mind, no I AM, no happening. This is the
most basic and subtle concept. Where can anyone say that "happening"
or "mind" can be found without "I Am"? Or where can "I AM" be found,
indicated, or stated without mind? Non-conceptual homegeneity need not
make any such assertions. Even when it appears to, 'nothing' is
"happening" be it "mind" or "I AM."

And since time and space are in the mind, I AM is beyond time and
space.

- Mind being "I AM," time and space are the substance of "I Am" and
"mind." Mind is the container of time and space, which is the
substance of "I Am." No one can speak of time, space, or mind, without
the first inspiration or acknowledgement of "I Am." If "I AM Not" who
is there to speak of time or space or mind?

And as much beyond any conceptions that is created by the mind,
including ideations of eternal, omnipresence, omniscience.

- A challenge. There is a finer level of discrimination or viveka that
is not merely of the mind or created by the mind. Granted, it starts
as a mental cognitive process, but at a point of minute subtlety, mind
and any thoughts of eternal, omnipresence, omniscience, observer,
witness, are recognized as the moving from the unmoving. The still
unmoving changlessness sees the motion, and that it is not unmoving,
while also being not-two. The Changeless is not moving and is not a
mere concept of eternal, omnipresent, or omniscient. All these
concepts are moving. When even these concepts are seen to be that non-
moving Oneness, no words or notions of moving and unmoving are there
to express that singularity. Rare and few are those who take up this
challenge of taking up the most subtle of investigation, of
discrimination that allow the mind and "I AM" to be seen as nothing
without the concept of nothing.

As well as the ideation of I AM.
Or the ideation of a beyond.

- Yes, meaningless ideations that have both meaning and no meaning,
depending upon context and perspective.

For everything that can be said in the dream, the opposite can also be
said. Two sides of a non-existent coin which appears to be what a coin
of duality would look like, if said coin were to actually exist.