To a certain extent the existence, or possible existence, of the supreme being can be compared to the existence of a number. The concept of a number does always exist, certainly when speaking about it --even tho some may call it "the incomplete referent of a predicate"-- but whether there 'really' is something that corresponds to such a number, depends on what sets there 'really' are in the universe (so that the question whether there exists a set with exactly that number of elements can be answered). Likewise, the concept of the supreme being cannot be rejected in a coherent normative system, but it is another matter altogether whether there really is an entity that can be individuated and identified, and that is (so far as possible) neutrally catenal in all respects in which it is catenal. Thus there may be a tri-neutral point and an object which occupies it; and yet such does not mean that this object could not be unneutrally catenal in respect of one or more nonspatial catenas.

The question which precedes that of the truth of the supreme being's existence is whether its existence or nonexistence is relevant. The answer is, as we have seen in the division on the antithesis between normism and theocentrism in the Book of Fundamentals (F.6.4), that the true existence of the supreme being is not relevant from a fundamentalistic, normistic perspective. But also from the symbolistic point of view, it is only important to recognize the significance of the supreme being or its image as a symbol which has the same supreme value as ananicity and which is its supreme representation in the world of primary things.

On the absolute definition of supreme being we have employed, the supreme being indicates, by the place it is to occupy, the direction of all normative striving, of all attempts to improve the world. (The difference between the absolute and the relative definitions has been explained in I.6.2.4.) The question whether there is (already) an object at a certain point in a certain space of a certain number of dimensions does not affect the direction of the path we go, or have to go, in any way. On a relative definition of supreme being the supreme is a thing which did, does or will come closer to all-neutrality than any other thing which did, does or will exist. The supreme being is then the existent with the highest normative value whether this value is 1 or smaller than 1. (If there are two or more things which are equally superior, then the set of those things may be conceived of as 'the supreme being' altho such a set itself does, strictly speaking, not exist.)

Those who opt for the relative definition of supreme being can be sure that the supreme being truly exists, but --as demonstrated already in the Book of Instruments-- the price of this truth is irrelevance. The 'empirical' knowledge that there is a particular existent which comes closest to the ideal of a doctrine does not add anything to one's normative insight, for this insight itself is a prerequisite to determining which existent deserves to be called "supreme".

Tho it may not exist, the all-ananic represents normative superiority in every field. In contrast with this, a relatively defined 'supreme existent' could still be normatively inferior in any field, the sole requirement being that it has the highest actual value on the whole. (Note that for divine prophets the absolute and the relative definitions are often conveniently mixed up. On a relative definition such a prophet is an existent, that is, a historical figure; but this may mean that 'e has one or more inferior, perhaps extremely inferior, attributes. On an absolute definition such a prophet would solely have superior attributes, but then no-one may actually ever have lived up to this ideal.)

The adherent of the Ananorm need not believe in or deny the true existence of the all-ananic supreme being. Whether or not it exists, the all-ananic represents perfective values like neutral well-being, nondiscrimination, interpersonal equality and the absence of all suffering. Recognizing this representation may make it easier or more meaningful for the individual adherent to conform to the dharma of neutrality and inclusivity. And this is what counts towards the realization of supremeness both in oneself and in others.