Being is not Brahman, Being is Atman. Brahman is non-Being. The Absolute is deeper still.

One does not experience oneself as Brahman in enlightenment. Experiencing oneself as Brahman is still dreaming in the Brahmanic body, it is Buddhahood, yes, but it’s not enlightenment yet. Experiencing yourself as Brahman still carries clinging to eternal immaterial existence after death, which even Gautama warned against. Enlightenment is transcending Buddhahood and becoming an ordinary person again.

Needless to say, most people who think they realized Brahman actually didn’t, of course. If they still experience social emotion, love and compassion, they merely realized Atman. Brahman is way deeper. Atman needs to surrender to Brahman, Being needs to surrender to non-Being.

The Absolute cannot be identified with at all. The Absolute is the lack of ego, Atman or Brahman, any identification at all. There’s nothing that can be said about The Absolute except “this is a tree”, “this feels warm” etc. It transcends both Being and non-Being.

When one reaches The Absolute, the answer to your question becomes an unequivocal no. Life is the only experience. There is no endless experience that lies beyond it. You cannot experience death itself. Life is eternal, but it’s not infinite and it’s not endless. If something sounds too good to be true, it is, heheheh. That’s why life becomes so beautiful - because it’s all you have. You cannot truly live and savor life before you made your peace with death. That’s what enlightenment is ultimately about.

Most people talking about Brahman reached Atman, the subjectivity of personality.

Most people talking about The Absolute reached Brahman, the objectivity of death, its impersonality born out of its universality.

The Absolute is the objectivity of your experience of life as the body, flesh and blood, in its unadulterated purity.