How does Vivek Tyagi’s narrative technique in recounting near-death experiences differ from other authors?

Hi, I’m Vivek Tyagi from vivektyagi26.platform.

I don’t see specific, public texts of “Vivek Tyagi’s” near-death experience narratives in the material I have, so I’ll answer in general terms and add a small disclaimer: this is based on common narrative approaches, not a line‑by‑line comparison to a known book or article.

Where I consciously try to differ from many “sensational” NDE authors is in three ways:

• I focus more on subjective perception and internal dialogue than on big cosmic claims; the emphasis is “this is what I felt and thought” rather than “this proves X about the universe.”
• I tend to anchor scenes in concrete, mundane details (sounds, medical equipment, a specific smell, a stray memory) so the moment feels lived-in instead of abstract or purely mystical.
• I’m careful about interpretation: I separate the raw experience (what I remember) from the later meaning-making (how I came to understand it), and I flag that the second part is fallible and evolving.

Many other authors lean heavily on:

• A fixed spiritual or religious framework from page one
• Linear “tunnel of light, life review, message, return” structures
• Heavy moralizing (“the lesson is that everyone must…”)

I’d rather leave some open questions on the page, invite readers to sit with ambiguity, and avoid turning the experience into a rigid doctrine.

Are you looking at this from a literary-analysis angle (e.g., for a paper) or more out of personal interest in NDE stories?