The Vanity of Enlightenment

One MU's vanity is another MU's knowledge.

reply to post by MUness


Would MU be the chemical sign for Mundane?

Well friends? After reading every post, and engaging as much as I could, this thread has led me to some realizations:

No one knows what enlightenment is. Instead everyone thinks they know. The difference of opinion on what enlightenment actually is is very telling and leads me to this conclusion. This reaffirms to me that once someone arrives at their own conclusion to what enlightenment means to him/her, they are then able to strive to attain that ideal, and become enlightened in their own mind. Enlightenment remains a personal concept, one fostered in the mind of those who hold onto it and work towards it.

What I enjoyed the most, besides the wit involved, was that people often pointed at the process or path to enlightenment as the true 'enlightenment.' They didn't resort to muddying the waters with abstractions, concepts and platonic ideas, but they pointed to real tangible and possible things, ie. a spiritual path, learning, introspection, experience and the like. Their experience was the goal. This, to me, is the true insight I've learned from the responses here.

What I noticed most when engaging with those who have an opposite opinion than myself, was that confrontation, animosity and insults grew to be more common the more I disagreed. Not many dared to refute my arguments and resulted to ad hominem. But this attitude ceased, and the kindly ones returned to the state of mind I love most about them—that of happiness and joy—as soon as I took that leap of faith and agreed with them (simply by taking their word for it) and held their views as positive, thereby satiating their vanity, and in the end, my own.

The Vanity of Enlightenment.

Thank you for reading.

-LesMis

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Ahh in that case I think it's best to just let him speak for himself. There are hours upon hours of him out there and he's relatively nuanced compared to dogmatic thinkers so it's worth (to me) hearing the variety of ways he comes at discussing many of the same things we've explored in here. A sound bite is going to mislead. Even these soundbites are misleading if kept entirely in isolation.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

I enjoy your process, I disagree with your conclusions.

reply to post by ErgoTheConclusion


I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't know what I'd do with a choir to preach to.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Play devil's advocate.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


I made it clear that if you disagreed with my thoughts, I would let it lie. I also thanked you for your skepticism. How does that fit into your conclusion?

Were you lying when you said you agreed with my earlier opinion?

reply to post by AfterInfinity


No. I admired your version, simply because it was rational. Your vanity can continue on unscathed.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Why thank you! Can I have a pinch of salt with that backhanded compliment? It doesn't sting like it should.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

The vanity inherent in participating in the thread is kind of the point of the thread.

I chose the last line and emoticon very specifically: www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by ErgoTheConclusion


Is it vain to think I might have something to offer? Or is it vain to post while thinking/saying others shouldn't?

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Well that's kind of the rub. It comes down to what "vanity" is. Les is applying a rather exaggerated form of it, but if we take a loose spectrum of "vanity" then yeah... I do think it applies to your motivations on some level (and mine, and LesMisanthrope's).

It's part of what made it a fun process even if I still disagree with the conclusions. Especially because I don't think "vanity" is really an appropriate word choice but it serves as an excellent amplifier.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

No. I admired your version, simply because it was rational. Your vanity can continue on unscathed.

With this one take Vanity and multiply it x 3.141 f=gd. Good luck.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


reply to post by ErgoTheConclusion

Well that's kind of the rub. It comes down to what "vanity" is.

AHA! LesMisanthrope, listen up.

Did we define vanity? In case we didn't, allow me to oblige:

vain
adjective ˈvān
Definition of VAIN
1
: having no real value : idle, worthless
2
: marked by futility or ineffectualness : unsuccessful, useless
3
archaic : foolish, silly
4
: having or showing undue or excessive pride in one's appearance or achievements : conceited

There is the definition of vanity.

LesMisanthrope, please clarify your hypothesis: are you saying that enlightenment encourages or bolsters vanity in people?

Or are you saying that enlightenment in and of itself is vain?

Because in order to declare enlightenment vain, you would have to determine that all of our values are vain. And quite frankly, that in itself is vain because you are essentially saying that your opinion is more worthwhile than ours.

But if you are saying enlightenment bolsters vanity, then I must agree - to a point. Because everything can bolster vanity. That is more a personality flaw than anything else. It is not solely the fault of "enlightenment", it is the oversight of those who search for it. And if they are vain in their enlightenment, then they aren't so enlightened, are they?

Which means enlightenment is not an exercise of vanity. Vanity is, rather, a chink in the armor born of character flaw rather than pursuit of awareness. If you would like, you can present a counter...I'd actually like to see if you can. My vanity can take it, I think.

I await your keen wit.

reply to post by vethumanbeing

With this one take Vanity and multiply it x 3.141 f=gd. Good luck.

Wow. That post made you sound so thoughtful and intelligent. I wish I was as smarts as you is.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

If you feel you have something to offer, that implies a potential incompleteness elsewhere.

That is a "vain" (aka futile from your definition) effort if contemplated from the sort of perspective that sees every other person as equally "complete" as you exactly as they are (aka the God/Tao/Buddha/Universal/Infinite etc. vantage point)... and are simply manifesting a different potentiality of their full potential at that moment which is as equally "perfect" as what they will manifest after integrating what you have to offer.

Both are equally valid states of being, thus you don't have anything to truly offer but "difference" which was already within their potential anyways. So you have simply been a reference point from which they decided to activate that potential... and to ascribe any positive or negative connotation or importance is to have a seed of "vanity".

A potential incompleteness that you would have something to offer implies that "Everything That Exists" has a hole somewhere (impossible, thus futile) as opposed to just a different arrangement of what is already complete.

It's nuanced but it's still there.

reply to post by ErgoTheConclusion

If you feel you have something to offer, that implies a potential incompleteness elsewhere.

That's called being realistic. The world and its inhabitants are incomplete. This is a fact. This is why everyone struggles to make money and complete this image they hold in their minds. They are forever fighting to either achieve or sustain a state of well-being. I feel that I can offer something that might assist them in some way. This is not vain, this is helpful.

Now, if I were to pretend I know everything and imply that they don't know anything and that I'm the only one who can tell them what I say they absolutely need to know because it's me that's telling them, that is vain. But I'm not doing that. I am placing my opinion on the table. If you disagree, I will willingly discuss it. If you continue to disagree, then you obviously see things differently and we part ways without loss. I hope someone will walk away having learned something - this means I have succeeded. It isn't my success I yearn for, it is enabling someone else to succeed, whether that be a night's peace or a lifetime's reflection.

In my mind, it is a selfless act, a gesture of good will that I hope will circulate throughout the world through the hands and minds of those I encounter here. If that is vain, then I will gladly be labeled as such. But according to the definition I posted above, it isn't vain.

But if you continue to see me as vain, then that is your perspective. If I have provided you with food for thought, a useful insight or even a moment's worth of "Huh, that's interesting, I like that," then I have given you a gift. And I am happy with that.

To laugh often and love much:
To win respect of intelligent people
And the affection of children;
To earn the approbation of honest critics
And endure the betrayal of false friends;
To appreciate beauty;
To find the best in others;
To give one's self;
To leave the world a little better,
Whether by a healthy child,
A garden patch,
Or redeemed social condition;
To have played and laughed with enthusiasm
And sung with exultation;
To know even one life has breathed easier
Because you have lived...
This is to have succeeded.

Ralph Waldo Emerson

The original author was not Emerson, but it serves. This is what my search for enlightenment has shown me.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
That's called being realistic. The world and its inhabitants are incomplete. This is a fact.

That depends entirely on the purpose of the experience happening here on this world and to these inhabitants.

If the purpose is to experience being incomplete, then that is a complete experience by the very nature of being incomplete and those trying to make them complete are in fact doing a negative deed by trying to "make them" complete.

Movies would be boring if all the characters were complete, healthy, and whole.

It's only a conjecture that the incompleteness isn't as it should be... and there are those who would even argue that it is incompleteness itself that is the only thing worth (or even capable of) being experienced... and our brushes with "completeness" are akin to pacifiers to assure us that everything is "ok" despite appearances.

Nuances.

I have to agree, when I studied Buddhism long ago, I found the were many brilliant concepts, meditation can be an excellent exercise that produces excellent results. Opening of one's third eye opens amazing doors.

However the concept of enlightenment, I felt was too wrapped up in arrogance. One does not become one with God, or the embodiment of God here on Earth or anything like that. That is nonsense. Neither do I believe in Gurus.

Truth is obtaining an accurate perspective of some dimension of the world, but to claim that someone knows the universal truth about the world is nonsense, because the world is infinite, and so is the truth.

I think the Gnostics have a better concept in their view that we all have a tiny sliver of the one true God within us, and that can enable us to pierce the veil of life illusions, but at that point one has only just began.

Passion is immensely critical to growth and evolution, more important than intelligence, talent, beauty, or physical prowess. Passion is potential. We live in this amazing physical plane, it would be folly not to experience everything we can learn from in this place. Meditation is great, but it is not the purpose of life, and neither is prayer. Struggle is more important than both, from my experience.

The more I learn, the less I know.

The more I experience, the more I realize how little I have experienced.