Near-death experiences (NDEs) and out-of-body experiences (OBEs) have fascinated me for years. In the mid-2000s, I had two OBEs—one while lying in bed at night and another in the morning. These experiences, along with several lucid dreams, have given me, and many others who have had similar experiences, a keen interest in trying to understand the nature of consciousness in relation to brain death.
I have, however, never had an NDE, but I have read many accounts of people who have. One puzzling aspect of these accounts is the vast differences in how each person describes the afterlife. While some recount meeting religious figures, others describe encountering family members, glowing beings of light, or even abstract forms of love and peace. This raises the question: If the afterlife is a real place, why is it so varied and personalised?
One possible explanation is that the afterlife might not be a fixed, objective realm but rather a state of consciousness—a deeply personal, dream-like experience shaped by the individual's mind. This perspective suggests that the afterlife could be solipsistic, with each person’s experience being unique. One advantage of this view, or model, is that it might account for the diversity of NDE accounts.
In this model, the afterlife is not a static location but a continuation of consciousness in a different form. Much like a dream, the afterlife might be shaped by our thoughts, emotions and beliefs, leading to a deeply subjective experience.
Just as dreams vary markedly between individuals, the afterlife could be similarly varied. In dreams, our subconscious mind creates the reality we experience—people, places and events all arise from within us. Similarly, the afterlife could be a realm where consciousness creates or encounters a reality that reflects the individual’s inner world. This idea corresponds with the many accounts of NDEs, where people report vastly different experiences despite supposedly encountering the same "afterlife".
If the afterlife is a state of consciousness, each person would create or perceive a reality that is uniquely their own. This could explain why some people meet religious figures like Jesus or Buddha, while others encounter deceased loved ones or beings of light. The beings and environments encountered in the afterlife might not be fixed entities but rather representations or projections of the individual's mind. This would mean the afterlife is, in some sense, a solipsistic experience—each person’s afterlife is a creation of their consciousness, reflecting their beliefs.
However, this solipsistic interpretation only becomes problematic if the deceased or dreamer is aware that the afterlife is a creation of their own mind. If they remain unaware, the experience would still feel real, much like how dreams feel while we are in them. This perspective also opens up the possibility that the afterlife could be both a personal creation and an overlapping experience shared with the dreams of others, similar to intersecting convex circles. In this sense, the afterlife is not entirely solipsistic but allows for shared experiences with others, harmonising the idea of a personal afterlife with a collective, interwoven reality. Thus, the experience of the afterlife for an individual is not isolated or disconnected from others; there may be elements of shared experience, growth and connection, even if each person’s encounter is filtered through their own consciousness.
One of the major elements in this solipsistic view of the afterlife is the role of beliefs and expectations. Just as our thoughts shape our dreams, our beliefs and expectations might shape our afterlife experience. If someone believes in a heaven with pearly gates and angels, they might create that reality for themselves. Similarly, someone with a secular worldview might experience something entirely different, such as a serene landscape or a reunion with loved ones.
This also explains why NDE accounts vary across cultures and religions. Each person’s afterlife is influenced by their cultural background, religious beliefs and personal expectations. While the afterlife might be a real experience of consciousness beyond death, the way it is perceived and described is deeply personal.
This idea can also help explain paranormal phenomena like ghosts and spirits. If the afterlife is a dream-like state of consciousness, it’s possible that what we call ghosts are projections from these collective dreams onto our reality. Just as our thoughts and dreams can sometimes feel disconnected from logical reality, these projections might seem nonsensical or incoherent to those still living.
This could account for the often bizarre or trivial behavior attributed to ghosts, as well as the confusing or nonsensical messages that mediums report from spirits. These behaviors and messages may reflect the dream-like state of the deceased, which would appear as nonsense to a non-dreamer. This idea reconciles the existence of spiritual phenomena with the often puzzling nature of these encounters, suggesting that they are not literal visits from the dead but rather glimpses into the unconscious projections of deceased consciousness.
The idea that the afterlife is a solipsistic experience akin to a dream provides a way to understand the varied accounts of NDEs. If the afterlife represents a continuation of consciousness rather than a fixed, objective realm, then each person’s experience would be deeply personal and shaped by their own mind. This, to me, seems a more plausible explanation for “life after death” compared to the more commonly suggested ones.
