Neither Religious, Nor Spiritual: God Without Dogma

Religion without dogmatic authority, spirituality discarded as a selfish abstraction, and a source of all creation that has no power, no plan, no desire and no will.


Think of reality as a game in which we the players (all living beings – bioverse) program the experience from the inside. That is to say, we write the rules and then live with them; or as the saying goes, we make our bed and then we lie in it. For the human sector of in-game programming, religion can be seen as the rules and limitations we have placed on ourselves and our experiences.

However it is not just the sort of religions we consider overtly, but others we do not recognize as such, which facilitate the game play. Nation state authority, culture and scientific materialism are just a few of the belief systems which act as religious strictures; and thus act as codes which program how we interact and experience ourselves, each other and the bioverse.

If human religions create the game experience, then you might think of the bioverse as the game console, the collection of the consciousness of all living beings; the basic platform from which all species and inter-species games take place.

While religion is an incredibly powerful tool for sculpting our realities, it also contains a high probability of conformity, inequality and suffering within the game. And the longer a religion lasts, and the bigger it grows, the higher the probability it will become a stranglehold that is useful only for the few.

At the same time, we need not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Religion is a useful tool, and one we cannot help but participate in, even when we do not recognize our belief system as such. Instead we should create religions that are goal orientated, and which can be converted or abandoned in lieu of their success or failure. Rather than issuing eternal religious proclamations, we should be creating Temporary Religious Injunctions. Expendable beliefs intended to achieve specific outcomes. Worldviews and ideologies constructed on planned obsolescence.

However those goals should be beneficial to all humanity and the entire bioverse, and not just the selfish success hacking we have seen spirituality morph into in our materialistic culture(s).

To escape the velocity of religious dogma in favor of intentional religious beliefs, we must also examine the question of creation and its source, since we seem to always build from those foundations. And to do so we will have to redefine God, or whatever you want to call whatever it was that started all of this.


Especially in its modern context, spirituality often appears to be an appeal to something outside of the game to help one become a better player. While it is more accepting, forgiving and personal than religion, spirituality is still predicated on the competitive notion that the goal is to win the game. The quest for self-improvement arises from the same beliefs which give rise to our materialistic and authoritarian desire for supremacy.

However, if we alter our view to see the point of the game as enjoying the play, and not just winning it, we might come to see that there is no separation between the game and our selves. To improve one is to improve the other, and a better game improves all players.

If religion has thus far been too universal and absolute, then spiritualism has been too independent and selfish. That is how it has squeezed its way into corporate culture and become a multi-million dollar industry. A commodity of promised shortcuts. Life hacks for those who are skeptical of religion, but who still look towards some higher power to program their experiences for them, whether it be Nature, The Goddess, or whatever abstraction the individual surrenders themselves to in hopes of gaining favor. Enlightenment itself is merely a highly desired status symbol.

Let us say that there is no enlightenment, nor is there transcendence. The game is not to be reviled nor escaped; it is not to be known in fullness. Once again, it is to be enjoyed, and programmed from within to optimize that outcome for the entirety of humanity and the bioverse. Existence is about beauty and creativity and love. It is its own reward. There is no need to figure it all out, nor to ascend to some abstract ‘higher level of being’. We are simply here to make the most of it, and it is a gift to be playing at all, since in all likelihood whatever started the game can only watch us play.

God Reconsidered: Simpleton Observer Underlying Reality and the Creation of Existence (SOURCE)

I want to give you an image of God that will be a potent tool for re-imagining the primal consciousness. Keep in mind that the image is only a metaphor, a way to see God in our own image without distortions of power. I intend no humor, insult nor offense; and in my mind this image is beautiful and as close to perfect as I can both conceive and relate.

A profoundly physically and mentally disabled person who is always alert and amazed to be observing everything going on around them.

I do not want to over-explain that image, even at the risk of sounding insensitive or foolish. I ask only that you hold onto it for awhile and see if it stirs up anything in you in the days, weeks,months or years after reading this article.

The most irrational and destructive concept ever attributed to the SOURCE is omnipotence. Once we disregard an all powerful being who created everything willfully for a specific purpose, the problems of religion and spirituality begin to fade away. There is no problem of evil, no hypocrisy and no authority. No expectations, rewards, nor punishments.

Instead let us consider that a powerless primal consciousness arose with the question, “What am I?” And existence is the answer to that question. Not the method of answering the question, mind you, but the answer itself. And within that mind all living beings emerge like a whirlpool in the river, or multiple personalities within that single mind. All possibilities occur through our existence and interaction. This game is an expression of that answer.

That is not to say existence is predetermined or fated. It is our activity that generates the answer. At this point it will be helpful to breakdown our tendency to look at existence in a linear fashion. Instead we can borrow from quantum physics some helpful notions.

In quantum mechanics it is considered that a particle (phenomena) is in every possible state until the act of making an observation determines an absolute state. In other words, the particle is everywhere and everything, until we take a look at it, at which point it becomes the kind of particle that our observation was designed to observe.

Then when I say that the beginning is the question, “What am I?” – I do not mean that event lies at the front of a timeline. It exists eternally, everywhere, and comes into focus only when observed. In fact, everything that is and ever was or will be, exists in an indeterminate state. Phenomena only occur when observed. The order which we have thus far observed them gives us a sense of linearity. We are strongly imbued with an intuition of front to back beginnings and endings. Yet this is primarily because this is how we have designed our observations, and not any inherent truth in the phenomena observed.

In this sense, you can look at life as a period of mutual observations between observers. Death is not the end of observation, just shared observation. Even though we do not know what happens to other observers when we can no longer observe them due to ‘death’, although I do have a pretty strong suspicion, there is no reason too believe they discontinue existence or observation altogether. Like particles, they slip back into infinite possibilities. From our perspective, infinite possibilities looks like nothingness. Yet there may be an experience of infinite possibility itself, which can only occur after the period of mutual observations. Death then may be the ultimate act of liberation, in which the limitations of our methods of observation no longer bind us to narrow, singular possibilities co-created by other observers.

Now, it must be asked, is my description here objectively true? Most definitely not. I am not trying to figure out the game so I can beat it. I am writing a new program that I hope leads to new experiences. The value of my description is not in its truth, but in its ability to change our experiences for the better.

It is entirely possible, yet also entirely unknowable, that existence operates from fixed principles. Yet since we cannot know that, it is perhaps better to start from the assumption that anything is possible. To even begin to make that assumption we must undermine our own certainties and absolutes. We must strike the roots, and get to the foundational beliefs that cause us to believe in limitations, and reimagine them in ways that do not suggest any limitations. This is to be done, not because we know it is right, but because if we do not explore the possibilities, we cannot know that the limitations we experience arise from anything but ourselves. If the goal is to make the game more harmonious and enjoyable, we would be fools not to explore our potential power in shaping it.

I have shared with you a lot of very far out ideas, ideas that will seem to negate everything you believe is true. However I do not intend to speak truth, but to help you create your own intuitive sense of reality independent of the dogmas of the current game situation. Ultimately I realize that this is a hard sell, and I am unlikely to outright convince anyone with my ideas. You must choose to try to see things completely differently, and perhaps this will help you to make that choice or give you a starting point for your own unique vision.

I am trying to destroy dogmas, not create one. If you believe that our existence can be improved upon, the first step in doing so is to cease believing what most everyone else believes. To do so involves sacrificing your own certainty and authority, and can be a very difficult and disrupting process. It will almost certainly cause your friends and family to consider you a bit cuckoo, and will thus affect your status in the social order. If you just want to skate through life with as little disruption as possible, this quest is not for you. Yet if your goal is transform the game and make it more fun to play, only completely letting go will do. If the team who programmed The Legend of Zelda believed that game represented the only way a game could be programmed, they would never be able to program a different game. Only faith in your own imagination and creative powers can free you from experiencing existence in the default settings provided by humanity and the bioverse.

Reimagine everything. Create and disseminate your own Temporary Religious Injunctions, avoid abstractions like spirituality, and recreate God and the Universe to fit your own agenda. All you have to gain is everything possible.


3 thoughts on “Neither Religious, Nor Spiritual: God Without Dogma

  1. Interesting ideas. Not right or wrong, but I find them a bit lacking. Lacking in imagination. Don’t get me wrong. I think you have a great imagination, but for some reason you seem to restrict yourself to “certain” absolutes which to me lack imagination. For instance: your absolute insistence on denying anything “spiritual.” I don’t believe it is necessary to put religious overtones on “spirit.” I find spirit to be very real and also to be the most imaginative and expansive idea of what ultimate reality is. As in “the spirit of the game.” The game being the “game of life.” Spirit is what plays, as well as creates the game. I do not view spirit as having a “goal” to win the game. Not at all. It is in the “spirit” of fun that the game….all games are created. A spirited game is a lively game! Death is just an arbitrary time constraint, because a game that goes on forever would be boring. Ultimately there is no goal or even point to the game. It is all play…. a cosmic play.


    1. I think you have perverted the definition of spiritualism into something not at all representative of what people using that label actually believe and do. They believe in higher selves and chakras and a bunch of abstractions which they believe represent something external to them, which can be used or appealed to for personal advantage. And even your wishy washy definition is pure abstraction. I am a point of observation. Spirit implies something historically tied to suggestion I am a product of a divine plan. You cannot just erase the history of the word, nor whitewash centuries of the things it was used to imply. This is a case of you remaining willfully attached to other peoples narratives, and being afraid to let go. Try to let go. Don’t convince yourself you are right until you have at least made a genuine effort to purge the thing and seek new clarity without it.


    2. Furthermore, you did not even address any of my actual criticisms. You just went all in for preserving the spirituality concept. That is a clue to your attachment, or as you chide others, your confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s