Also, you will find very few of the teachings offered by Maharaj in his earlier talks and far more of the message that he offered in his ultimate talks. Why? During his last years, he said of I AM THAT: "That book and whatever was expounded at that time was only relevant for that period. I am speaking differently today." His final understanding, which was completely different from what he offered early on, is the basis of pointers here.
In Reality, there is no "co-existence"; there is only One ... only the "not two." It would be like asking, "How can the two parts "I AM THAT; I AM" co-exist?" If Fully Realized, it is understood that "I AM THAT; I AM" does not refer to "two" and does not refer to "some thing" existing in the relative realm post-Realization and co-existing with "THAT."
Nor does the summative statement of Advaita suggest that, post-Realization, the Am-ness is to be denied and one is to strut about as if she / he is "all that" or "all THAT." The latter are the types who were tossed from the loft.
Here the pointer is that Reality is overlaid upon the relative, that abidance happens as the original nature, and that the relative unfolds in a totally nisarga fashion.
At the level of the ultimate understanding, there is no identification with either the Am-ness or with THAT. [Most trapped in their ego-states reject that notion, identified as they are with THAT or Brahman or God or some Supreme or Superlative or Infinite Self. They are fixated in what Maharaj called kindergarten level spirituality. Many trapped in ego-states will hate that pointer and will hate "the one" they think is making the point. So it is. As one person said to another recently, "Just because you disagree with a fact does not mean it is not so."]
In the final understanding, there is no identification at all. Most of Maharaj's earliest pointers on the subject of identification, including fifty times in I AM THAT, dissuaded seekers from assuming (false) self -identification, but he did say even on one early occasion, "I am free from all description and identification."
A question similar to the one being addressed here was raised by a visitor to the loft:
Questioner: "If I am eliminated, what will remain?"
Maharaj: "Nothing will remain, all will remain. Being - Awareness - Love will shine in full splendour. Liberation is never of the person, it is always from the person."
Thus, post-Realization, everything (including Being and Awareness and Real Love) will remain, even as nothing will remain; thus, Real Love is knowing You are "everything" / "everyone" while Wisdom is knowing that "you" and "You" are nothing.
Even from the platform of nothingness, of identity-less-ness, Real Love Is. In fact, Real Love can only be understood during the manifestation and the nothingness can only be understood during the manifestation. Because Real Love Is, and
a. because what it is rooted in is the "not two," and
b. because that means there is no subject-object element involved with Real Love at all, then
c. it should be clear that the awareness of "nothingness" and "no subject-object love" and Real Love can all manifest at the same time as components of the understood but unstatable Truth.
Then, as a result of that understanding, all will merely happen spontaneously for the remainder of the manifestation. So what happens in terms of even Real Love if the understanding is: "I am neither object nor subject"?
Again, Maharaj taught: "Love says: 'I am everything'. Wisdom says: 'I am nothing'. Between the two my life flows."
The Reality of no identification ("I am nothing") becomes a lubricant which allows abidance to happen for the remainder of the manifestation in a smooth and easy and unforced manner when Reality is overlaid on the relative and which allows the "flow of life" to happen effortlessly. That is the way it can be when it is understood that "everything" and "nothing" are advaita - that is, "not two."
Please enter the silence of contemplation.