Near Death Experiences 3:Language and the Impossibility of Describing the Eternal

A striking feature of Near-Death Experiences (NDEs) is the recurring claim that they are “beyond words.” Many who undergo NDEs struggle to articulate what they have seen, felt, or understood, often resorting to paradoxes: It was more real than reality. I experienced everything at once, but it wasn’t time as we know it. The light wasn’t light, but it was all things. These expressions reveal an essential truth—language, which is bound to distinctions and finite reference points, is fundamentally inadequate when attempting to describe the appearing of the eternal.

The Limits of Language in Capturing Truth and Infinity

Language functions by dividing and categorizing, distinguishing one thing from another, establishing relationships between concepts. It operates within the structure of human cognition, which is conditioned by spatial and temporal reference points. When someone describes an event, they do so within a framework of before and after, here and there, self and other. Yet, those who experience NDEs frequently report encountering something that does not conform to these distinctions.

If NDEs provide a glimpse of what is eternally true, then it follows that language, which is shaped by finitude, cannot fully express them. This is why many accounts are filled with approximations: the “light” is not a light, the “being” is not a being, the “presence” is not a presence in any ordinary sense. The words point toward something but never fully capture it.

The Necessity—and Limitation—of Metaphor

To bridge this gap, NDE accounts rely on metaphor. They speak of tunnels, doorways, and radiant landscapes. They describe encounters with “beings of light” or feeling “immersed in unconditional love.” These images, drawn from human experience, serve as signposts for what cannot be directly expressed.

Yet metaphor is always approximate. A tunnel suggests movement, but is there truly movement in what is eternal? A light suggests something visible, but what is seen in these experiences is often described as beyond seeing. A presence suggests proximity, but how can one speak of nearness when there is no distance to cross? Each metaphor, while evocative, imposes a structure that can obscure as much as it reveals.

This is why NDE reports, when taken literally, lead to contradictions. Some describe an “entrance” into another realm, while others insist they were always there but had simply forgotten. Some speak of communication without words, while others claim to have been “told” great truths. These inconsistencies do not indicate falsehood but rather the impossibility of expressing the eternal within the limits of human speech.

The Paradox of Language and Truth

Yet, this very failure of language paradoxically affirms the necessity of truth. If those who undergo NDEs uniformly struggle to articulate what they experienced, if they all reach the limits of expression and resort to negation—It was not this, but something more—then they are, in a way, pointing toward the same reality. The inadequacy of speech does not mean the experience was incoherent; rather, it reveals that what was encountered exceeds the structures within which we attempt to frame it.

This is not a limitation exclusive to NDEs. Mystical traditions across cultures have long recognized the same principle. The Tao Te Ching opens with the statement: The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao. Christian apophatic theology insists that God is best understood by what cannot be said about Him. The same necessity applies here—if NDEs are glimpses of what is eternally true, then they must, by necessity, transcend what can be spoken.

Conclusion

Near-Death Experiences do not merely suggest something ineffable; they demonstrate, through their very description, the impossibility of reducing truth to words. The paradoxical language of NDE accounts—full of negations, approximations, and contradictions—confirms rather than undermines their significance. Their essence is not found in the images used to describe them but in the necessity of what they reveal: that Being, as eternal, is beyond the distinctions and limitations imposed by human speech.