God is often described nowadays as existing beyond being, and this is fine if you wish to avoid the error of reducing him to something in creation, to an object of consciousness or, indeed, anything that can be conceptualised in any way. Ultimately God is unknowable to anything but God, and he that is the essence of being must be regarded as beyond that as it is in human terms, which is to say as it is in creation. So God can be imagined as the divine darkness that is there before the light of creation or prior to the activity involved to bring about our existence. All good apophatic stuff. However there is a drawback to this description of God in that it tends to reduce him to an abstraction and to depersonalise him. It removes him from us when really he is closer to us than our hands and feet. Indeed, being the archetypal 'I' of our 'I-ness', he is closer to us than we are to ourselves.
The Masters told me that spiritual truth is simple. They told me this when my natural human desire always to go deeper was in danger of leading me astray from a truly spiritual approach of the heart to a more intellectual one that sought to understand, and not just to understand but to capture understanding, to possess it for myself. Could it be that the desire for wisdom is sometimes rooted in the ego? Can it divert one from the true path to a head-centred approach that is all about ideas. I think this can be so. Not that wisdom isn't essential for us and a natural thing for us to want to acquire. We are created to know it. But the desire for it can be a trap that leads one away from the truth in its basic simplicity and down blind alleys into philosophical speculations which lead, if not nowhere, then certainly nowhere of a spiritually fruitful nature.
You can speculate all you like about the divine darkness of pure being but if, in so doing, you lose sight of the essential personhood of God you will remain outside spiritual truth.