Are you religious or spiritual? Take the test.

Often people say, “I’m spiritual but not religious.” Understandable. Religion, after all, has some notorious drawbacks. Intolerance, divisiveness, sanctimoniousness, irrationality—to name a few.

But what does it mean to be non-religious? I’ve just started reading Daniel Dennett’s “Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon” and came across his intriguing definition:

Tentatively, I propose to define religions as social systems whose participants avow belief in a supernatural agent or agents whose approval is to be sought.

Interesting. And persuasive to me. Not least because this definition by a professional philosopher meshes nicely with my “turn on or tune in?” distinction.

Turn-on’ers believe that through prayer, worship, penances, meditation, or other practices it’s possible to ring some sort of cosmic doorbell and grab the attention of a higher personal power. Once you get that being’s approval, you’ve got it made. Next stop, heaven! (or paradise, nirvana, etc.)

Tune-in’ers, by contrast, consider that if there is a higher power beyond the physical, it is universal, not personal. Just as you only have to tune to the right frequency to hear what’s on a radio station carried on public airwaves—no winning of approval from the broadcaster required—so is God believed to be on an open channel (the trick is to find it).

So, following Dennett, there’s a simple test for telling whether you are religious: are you seeking the approval of a supernatural agent or agents?

This could be a god who hears people’s prayers, a departed incarnation of divinity such as Jesus, a living guru with miraculous powers, an angel who watches over you, or any other godly being with whom you believe it is possible to have a personal relationship.

Now, I’m not saying that it is a mistake to be religious in this sense. There may indeed be some higher power who is aware of human petitions to him, her, or it, and who dishes out rewards (and punishments) accordingly.

However, I’m betting against this in my own philosophy of life. For since whatever created creation left us with laws of nature that operate the same everywhere for everyone, it seems that this entity is much more likely to be universal rather than personal.

So I’m much more attracted to Buddhism and Taoism, which essentially are non-religious, than to Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, which by and large are religious. Meaning, the goal of the former is union with universality, while the latter aim at a personal connection with God.

I’m not out to feel special. I used to believe that, in line with Sant Mat teachings, I was among the “marked souls” who enjoyed a unique relationship with God. It eventually dawned on me that I shared that belief with just about every other religious person on Earth.

Now I’m not religious. And I’m glad for it. I prefer the reality of being part of the human crowd to imagining that I’ve been singled out by God for special attention.

Like so many others these days, I feel that the further I flee from religion the closer I come to spirituality.

Comments

[Edward]

What if the choice isn't either tune in OR turn on? What if there's both? (I always want to be the boy at the party with the most cake!)

Your wonderful site shows me that I am not alone in feeling "in tune" with creation, fleetingly or substantially. That synchronicity, jibing, whatever you may call it, is an intended condition, ie: seekable.

This condition brings a very good feeling: invigorating; enlivening. I can't compare my insides with your outsides, so I can only report that when I feel existential approval, for the old ego, this is that feeling.

And when I need objective proof of the rightness of my cognitive powers, I am happy in my scientific conclusions as well, through this feedback.

I can't seem to get outside all creation effectively enough to judge if it is not meeting my needs, since it is the font of those needs.

But where is my social system? And what is my supernatural agent? If they are not, respectively, the scientific community and the scientific method, I am lost! I become a charlatan, a deluded "believer" in things unprovable.

But then, that would be okay, too. As Walt Whitman said, "I contain universes."

[Michelle]

Brian,

You were gracious enough to write me back when I wrote to you a few months ago. And you said perhaps people like you and I do not belong anywhere? And I have been thinking.. Perhaps that is the case. Like so many, I had through my life, since a child been 'searching'. I don't quite know when I decided that I was finally a 'spiritual' being, and not a religious one. But this works. It makes sense to me. Spiritualism is in all aspects of our lives. It is more then just God, or what ever your higher power is. It's a state of being. A mind set. A blending of the Earth, and Sky, and all things in between.

I truely do enjoy your site Brian, and thank you for being a like minded spirit. It's nice not to feel so all alone out there.

Gods Bless,

Michelle

[ben]

What I find disconcerting is how the power of thought can really mess with objective reality (whatever that is). I recently had a conversation with a person of a particular religious denomination who held such conviction about the teachings I could not see one ounce of doubt in her. For her, that is the reality of the world. I was quite moved by her conviction, and I respect it, as my resource for conviction is as empty as a car tank never filled. What struck me later was that when it comes to quality of life, whether her belief is phantom/dilusion or not, she feels safe and at peace.

And that's all through thought! So what's going on, is that cliche about "the world is what you make it" going to come back to haunt me?

[Roger]

Brian;
Your discussion and the comments that followed were pleasant to read. I'm guessing the "like-minded" group is growing.
I do hope that the "searching aspect" to Spiritually is still there. The fun for me is in the process, the investigation, the analysis, the observations, etc. This searching stuff is more fun for me when I stay neutral and open-minded. Best wishes......Oh and pray for Heidie please.....haha

[Brian]

Roger, I'd be pleased if either Heidi, Travis, or Benji wins "So You Think You Can Dance." For me, this would help prove that either there is a just god, karma rules, or American TV watchers have good taste.

I'm astounded that Danylle (or however her name is spelled) is still in the competition. Allison should be in the top four rather than her, for sure.

[Roger]

Brian, thanks for reply, I trust the gang of four (Heidi, Allison, Travis and Benji) will go on to great dancing and intertainment careers. I base this conclusion on a famous Religious and Spiritual concept know as; PURE TALENT.
Best wishes..........

[KaTanya Jones]

Would you happen to remember the cliches from 2000 to 2008
Ex. 2000 was the New Millennium
2001-
2002- threw in 2002
2003- all baout Thee (God) in 2003
2004- No more in 2004
2005- staying alive in 2005
2006- in the mix in 2006
2007- going to heaven in 2007
2008-great in 2008

[tAo]

Pearls Before Swine in 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPxpMVd0v4s

[Jayme]

Wonderful tAo. Thanks.

[tAo]

Alright Jayme...and here's a few more from my neck of the woods:

A Country Boy Can Survive
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4s0nzsU1Wg

Copperhead Road
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc86_Weoye0

Black Velvet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut09zkRoG0g