Because that's what follows from your ostensibly truthful reply to my question (the limitations of which reply express what we call understanding).Because THE TRUTH is inconceivable and non-conceptual. It's more related to intuition.
How do you know that's the truth?
Can you explain how a strawberry tastes ?
Can you explain what an orgasm feels like ?
Will it do justice ?
All you suggest with that reply to the question here is that since truth is not only an ineffable experience but, in contradistinction to undesirable and/or painful experience, a pleasurable one, speaking of it is not only impossible but completely inadequate. Of course, I did have to assume that for you eating a strawberry is a desirable passive pleasure. You do enjoy strawberries, right?
When we combine the above with your earlier assertion (below), then we arrive at the above conclusion.
Of course, you haven't for a moment stopped conceptualising either in this discussion about truth or in your experiences of orgasms and eating strawberries. Moreover, it's an explicit statement that neither has anything to do with reasoning (thinking). Thus it is that it comprises your claim to the truth of enlightenment itself as a self-satisfying experience of personal bliss.The purpose of Enlightenment is to realize THE TRUTH .
In order to realize THE TRUTH , you need to stop conceptual thinking.