Pure Pleasure Products

Do you call people who lead a "pure" life enlightened or foolish?

People (monks for example) who vow to abstain from all forms of pleasure in life, are they enlightened or foolish?

Public Comments

1. I wouldn't call what monks do enlightened.
2. And how would that benefit anyone. How would not having pleasure contribute to anything good? I'd say that's pretty foolish.
3. It is foolish to think that one can possibly avoid any form of pleasure. I do not like people who call themselves "pure" because they are liars.
4. They are enlightened because they already know that there is nothing to be gained by the pleasures of the flesh and they are looking for something else
5. I don't think avoiding pleasure is enlightened at all, i think it's just the opposite. Why would anyone think it's enlightened to throw away all the good things life has to offer in order to attempt to reach some ridiculous, pointless, unattainable ideal? It doesn't even help any one so what exactly is the point? That is foolish and misguided in the extreme and exactly why i don't like religion.
6. only a fool could realise enlightenment.
7. The PROBLEM with monks, priests, nuns and and or other religious people who THINK they have chosen to be pure is that they aren't really honest about it. They 'act' in a pseudo pure way because they 'think' this is what it takes to be enlightened and it's not! You can't be pure when you are repressed! Cause and effect won't allow you to feel pure while you are repressed... The sensation of repression is all about feeling like you are being forced into actions that you have to control. If you have to force yourself to NOT think about drinking or NOT thinking about sex is not purity. It's just control and control is not enlightenment or wisdom. If you are living a 'pure' life (ie, no drinking, no sex, no debauchery ever) and it is with pride and simplicity and realistic leanings and you are actually very happy about it... then yes, you are enlightened. If it makes you able to get along with everyone and not feel a day of being judgmental or rude, then it's enlightenment. If you aren't having to think about how much you want to screw up, then you are being honest. Enlightenment is about feeling whole and without conflict.
8. I would say they have the right idea, but the wrong reason. They are actually taking the path of least resistance with that lifestyle, because secluding yourself from the world removes all of the struggles and hardships that make spiritual progression possible. People in society who strive to live a pure life would be enlightened if they did it for the right reason. It also depends on how you define pleasure. Some people get pleasure from smoking, but the enlightened person refrains because they know how addiction can halt spiritual growth. Some people define pleasure as sex so they sleep around, but the enlightened person would wait till marriage to practice the power of creating another life. But yeah, hiding in the mountains to avoid those temptations means you don't really learn anything. You can read about the benefits and pitfalls of living a pure life, but unless you experience both good/bad for yourself and then make your decision...you would find yourself on the foolish end of the spectrum.
9. Perhaps a little of both.
10. For what they believe in(religion and such), in might be pure, but toward human nature it is not. We all have a sex drive(how would we still survive?), a want for entertainment, and the want to survive, and all that entails after that. We are animals by nature, and to give up the instincts is not a natural, or pure thing to do.
11. I would not call them either enlightened nor foolish. A person living in chastity can have impure thoughts, so I do not know in how far a monk is really pure. Enlightened, how do I know if they are? Religious history shows too clearly that whichever rope you might wear, you can still go terribly wrong being far from enlightened.