Abstract

I investigate the mystic's claim that God, or the experience of God, is "beyond" language. Taking St John of the Cross as a primary text, I isolate the reasons that he gives for the ineffability that he claims, determine the theory or theories of language that underlie these reasons, and ask whether these are adequate reasons for ineffability. ;St John of the Cross offers various suggestions about why he should be unable to find the right words to describe his experience. I elucidate these suggestions in terms of his own tradition, and then consider them in light of other, more systematic, philosophies of language. ;On the surface, SJC's position seems incoherent, since his descriptions of mystical rapture refute what seem to be his metalinguistic views. I argue that SJC's ineffability claims are strictly speaking false. ;To say that the ineffability claims are false, however, is not to say they are without value. I argue that in context, expressions like 'It is more than I can say' actually function not as claims, but as disclaimers. These disclaimers have a characteristic rhetorical force: they serve as intensifiers, which further delineate the content of description; they have a certain imperative force; and they warn the aspiring mystic not to be turned from contemplation towards mundane values