The Vanity of Enlightenment

reply to post by Wang Tang


When did I say I wasnt vain?

edit: star for you in bringing it up though

One doesn't declare enlightenment. One simply is.

Originally posted by BlueMule
You can go ahead and interpret my post as ridicule if you want. Truth is, I don't look down on unenlightened people. I am grateful to them. And to you.

Of course, that doesn't mean that you aren't displaying the vanity of rationalism.

BlueMule, I see what you did there. You truly are a remarkable character. You must be the first truly Enlightened person I have ever met. I sensed the humor and sarcasm in your original post, and figured you were just some unenlightened person mocking Enlightened people. But then I realized you are actually an Enlightened person mocking Enlightened people... and through the veil of sarcastic humor you told everyone that you are an Enlightened person without seeming vain and self-absorbed. You just broke all of the rules!

There's no rules!

reply to post by BlueMule

You can go ahead and interpret my post as ridicule if you want. Truth is, I don't look down on unenlightened people. I am grateful to them. And to you.

Of course, that doesn't mean that you aren't displaying the vanity of rationalism.

Fair words. I can agree with this. Except I am able to acknowledge my own vanity, whereas some aren't.

Originally posted by Serdgiam

When did I say I wasnt vain?

Fair enough, you never said that as far as I know. I'm vain (obviously in fact I take pride in being vain), you are vain, so it looks like we've come to a vein of understanding. Does that make sense? I don't think it does. Oh well.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


If you knew anything about enlightenment you would know it and vanity are mutually exclusive, however since enlightenment is a journey not a destination, those on the path to enlightenment may suffer from some vanity.

Many equate enlightenment with inner peace, again such is incompatible with vanity.

One thing I do know, it is ego to give one's opinion about something when no one has asked (as opposed to asking implicitly by starting a thread), and all judgement is ego.

So starting a thread about the path to enlightenment being vainglorious..........my observation, not judgement is that is rooted in ego.

The key to ego is to be aware of it, don't try to fight it, that only strengthens it. Once you are aware of your ego in operation it is no longer ego, it is only an old conditioned mind pattern.

Afterall, most psychologists and psychiatrists agree that egoic thought patterns are dysfunctional, serve no purpose, and only create negativity and suffering in yourself in others................who would want to live like that? An insane person?

reply to post by 0mage


When did I say that what I learn from is my master?

Being a part of the whole, I attempt to learn from everything and everyone. It all has lessons to teach, including from myself to myself. There is no master involved, just growth.

But I would never claim to be enlightened, so theres that too.

Originally posted by Wang Tang
Fair enough, you never said that as far as I know. I'm vain (obviously in fact I take pride in being vain), you are vain, so it looks like we've come to a vein of understanding. Does that make sense? I don't think it does. Oh well.

It does, at least in the way I read it. I quite enjoyed the play on words my friend I have a thing for puns though... Some may consider it a vice in much the same way as vanity. If nothing else, some consider it to be just as annoying

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
...I am able to acknowledge my own vanity, whereas some aren't.

And now vanity in humility. Love it.

There's an element of vanity in just about anything a person does, so I'm not really sure what you're trying to say with this thread, other than insinuate that spiritual values are somehow disingenuous; that the pursuit of enlightenment is selfish and vain, and that those who seek it in a spiritual context are hypocrites.

It sounds like another line on the atheist obsession with slandering anything that even remotely resembles the spiritual. I honestly don't know how you guys go through life carrying around this ubiquitous negativity.

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

If you knew anything about enlightenment you would know it and vanity are mutually exclusive, however since enlightenment is a journey not a destination, those on the path to enlightenment may suffer from some vanity.

Many equate enlightenment with inner peace, again such is incompatible with vanity.

One thing I do know, it is ego to give one's opinion about something when no one has asked (as opposed to asking implicitly by starting a thread), and all judgement is ego.

So starting a thread about the path to enlightenment being vainglorious..........my observation, not judgement is that is rooted in ego.

The key to ego is to be aware of it, don't try to fight it, that only strengthens it. Once you are aware of your ego in operation it is no longer ego, it is only an old conditioned mind pattern.

Afterall, most psychologists and psychiatrists agree that egoic thought patterns are dysfunctional, serve no purpose, and only create negativity and suffering in yourself in others................who would want to live like that? An insane person?

Wise words. I do admit my thread is rooted in my own vanity and the assumptions about enlightenment I hold. To deny so would be folly and dishonest. But perhaps that is the difference between myself—someone who would be considered 'unenlightened' because I no longer engage in the self-proclaimed paths to enlightenment—and those that consider themselves and express themselves as enlightened. I no longer have that desire to be their ideal—someone who is enlightened—so therefore I must, by default, be unenlightened or not worthy of enlightenment.

If calling me unenlightened furthers their spirituality in some manner, or helps to justify it, then they as enlightened individuals must admit that they are doing so, but often don't, because they refuse to admit their vanity. Honesty doesn't seem to be a method in the path to enlightenment.

Originally posted by Serdgiam
reply to post by 0mage

 

When did I say that what I learn from is my master?

Being a part of the whole, I attempt to learn from everything and everyone. It all has lessons to teach, including from myself to myself. There is no master involved, just growth.

But I would never claim to be enlightened, so theres that too.

edit on 11-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)

i never said u did. i was merely supporting ur statement with a bit of addition of my own.

and no, u probably wouldnt claim to be enlightened until u attained it and realized that ppl thought it to be an unattainable myth. till u realize that the understanding that comes from it could account for an evolution of society to be more civilized and tolerant whilst still maintaining order and freedom.

that with a world population of enlightened ppl we could eradicate poverty, sickness and mourning.. but if ppl like it just how it is then who am i to judge. and really.. im not here to judge.only to see and learn. and as it turns out.. point u in the right direction if u are seeking.

reply to post by NthOther

And now vanity in humility. Love it.

There's an element of vanity in just about anything a person does, so I'm not really sure what you're trying to say with this thread, other than insinuate that spiritual values are somehow disingenuous; that the pursuit of enlightenment is selfish and vain, and that those who seek it in a spiritual context are hypocrites.

It sounds like another line on the atheist obsession with slandering anything that even remotely resembles the spiritual. I honestly don't know how you guys go through life carrying around this ubiquitous negativity.

That's not true. As I've outlined many times in this thread, the spiritual path is not in question here—in fact I endorse anything that involves contemplation and introspection. What is in question is proclaiming oneself as enlightened. I'm not producing any dogma here, only asking questions many seem to avoid. Enlightenment would involve some sort of realization or at least a contemplation of these questions.

Your assumptions, though misguided and biased, have a ring of truth, but do not pertain to anything discussed here.

Originally posted by 0mage
and no, u probably wouldnt claim to be enlightened until u attained it and realized that ppl thought it to be an unattainable myth. till u realize that the understanding that comes from it could account for an evolution of society to be more civilized and tolerant whilst still maintaining order and freedom.

that with a world population of enlightened ppl we could eradicate poverty, sickness and mourning.. but if ppl like it just how it is then who am i to judge. and really.. im not here to judge.only to see and learn. and as it turns out.. point u in the right direction if u are seeking.

So, if a society becomes completely founded on respect and tolerance without the "spiritual" experience of enlightenment.. what then?

Interestingly, to me at least, such a society would equate to a higher quality of living for everyone involved. That appeals to everything from greed to largess, and selfishness to selflessness.

How are you able to judge who is and who is not enlightened? And at what point were you given the ability and authority to make such judgments? (genuine questions)

I Am not seeking, just growing.

If a person is truly enlightened, they have no need to declare it. In fact, they would most likely reject announcing it on the basis that it would be "bragging". There a few in history who could get away scott free with proclaiming enlightenment. The Buddha, in particular, became enlightened after a long and arduous path through asceticism that ultimately led to dead end after dead end. It was only until he became enlightened that he could give his understandings into the true nature of reality. He felt not making it known would be more detrimental than making it known, otherwise his understanding of the true nature of reality would never be seen by others. It would start with him and end with him.

However, most people proclaiming enlightenment throw their "wisdom" around, and just ultimately end up sounding like they're trying too hard to appear wise or transcended.

Enlightenment is a real state, a state that many, many have become. But any real enlightenment would not be made known. A guru worth studying under is not the guru who tells you how enlightened he is, but shines with wisdom as naturally as the sun illuminates the world.

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by 1nf1del
Vanity? Where do you see vanity?

See the post above you. Ill copy and paste though, with some emphasis of my own:

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by BlueMule

 

You gotta hand it to unenlightened people. I mean, going through life under the illusion that they are what they think they are... that life is what they think it is. It's tough. It can lead to things like ulcers!

So, to all the unenlightened, I say thanks for agreeing to go through life as if the mask of your persona that you wear day-in-and-day-out is really the real you. It makes being enlightened so much more fun!

Ridiculing the 'unenlightened' seems to be the only method through which the 'enlightened' can prove they are enlightened. Of course, this only verifies that those who consider themselves enlightened feel threatened by the mere opinions of others, thus leading them to believe the image they hold of themselves are under attack. This is vanity, which only further proves my point.

Thanks for contributing.

That line wasnt directed at you, though I suppose if you assumed it was, then that would be another case of vanity present here. Some of the other lines in that post were towards you though. It really is a shame it has to be an "I win, you lose" thing. I have no doubt you could contribute greatly to this thread.

You can go to other threads I have posted in and see my statement that reads "I am not enlightened" and I've never claimed to be, but you could always go look at the man in the mirror and find out where your insecurities come from!

Well, usually I don't participate in threads like this since I am not on par with those who do. Consider me naive to the whole concept and I don't think I would ever be able to claim the title "enlightened". However, I will give my opinion on the subject regardless.

I think that someone who is enlightened would not seek to claim the title, or allow it to be imposed upon them. The reason for this being the cliche that was mentioned in the OP, that it is not really attainable. Just accepting this would make you enlightened. Although, I don't think of enlightenment as a title/label when I say that, more as an adjective, despite it being a noun in the way I used it. Meaning, nobody can acquire enlightenment, rather they are enlightened....in a relative sense. That is a big part of it too, that enlightenment is a relative term IMO.

Another large part of "enlightenment" (still falling under the guidelines mentioned above) is seeking both knowledge and wisdom, but more importantly, allowing your wisdom to shape the perception of your knowledge. I do realize that having a predisposition like that could be seen as a form of bias, but in this instance I don't classify it as such. The reason being because to truly do this, you also have to realize that wisdom is ever changing (which is wisdom in itself), thus your perception of knowlegde, whether current or yet to be acquired knowlege, is also ever changing.

See, for me to fully realize this whole thing, I also have to preform introspective, and ponder how and why I think things. I think this kind of ties into the thread made by the OP the other day entitled "How do you think?". So once again, the concept of enlightenment almost seems like a pointless one to ponder, being non-existent in label/title form, and being relative and plastic in an adjective form.

Anyways, I am no where near on the level of many others participating in this thread, and I feel my opinion should be taken lightely. Not to mention I am not in the clearest state of mind (haven't been for a couple years) due to anxiety and depression or whatever the heck is wrong with me. In any case, what was the intent of this thread OP? Was it to squash the concept as being quantifiable, or even existent? Or was it to clarify the proper form, if any, that it should be used?



ETA: I think all this talk of vanity made me think of something. I feel being vain is represented by it's other definition, if you know what I mean. Kind of funny actually.

Originally posted by 1nf1del
You can go to other threads I have posted in and see my statement that reads "I am not enlightened" and I've never claimed to be, but you could always go look at the man in the mirror and find out where your insecurities come from!

I have seen your posts from time to time. I have no issues with you.

When did I say anything about you being enlightened or not? Just like the clone statement, that seems to come completely out of left field and doesnt even seem in context of what I have written. If it were me in your shoes, I would undoubtedly be projecting. I have no doubt there is a good conversation to be had here, but I struggle to find exactly what you are responding to..

Just because I am curious, what insecurities do you see? And at what point were you given the ability and authority to make such judgments?

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by 1nf1del
You can go to other threads I have posted in and see my statement that reads "I am not enlightened" and I've never claimed to be, but you could always go look at the man in the mirror and find out where your insecurities come from!

I have seen your posts from time to time. I have no issues with you.

When did I say anything about you being enlightened or not? Just like the clone statement, that seems to come completely out of left field and doesnt even seem in context of what I have written. If it were me in your shoes, I would undoubtedly be projecting. I have no doubt there is a good conversation to be had here, but I struggle to find exactly what you are responding to..

Just because I am curious, what insecurities do you see? And at what point were you given the ability and authority to make such judgments?

edit on 11-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)

Because it wasn't an "I win, you win" thing, I was not going to argue semantics and conceded, in other words I left the argument, there is no winner so to insinuate that I claimed I won is ludicrous!

The true sage admits he knows nothing.

Actually, think its a process, not a "I've reached the goal", and the calling of all. Just like the actual processes in life, the journey is more important than winning, completion, and all that. Because its the journey were you work things out, if you're going to, and learn how to relate well to others, make the discoveries that its the man/woman in the mirror that needs some work after all, not everyone around him/her, and so its precious.