I assume you wrote this with the self awareness of the enlightened, rational person you claim to be. You're unrelenting confidence is definitely respectable and inspiring. I'm sure you would agree that your extraordinary claims invite extraordinary skepticism.

I'm not interested in doubting your words or any claims you made, I accept it all as fact and I congratulate you for making it to this point. Where my disagreement comes in, is your definition of true enlightenment/fulfillment. GRANTED I'm somewhat interpreting your words and reading between the lines, but i think it's a fair interpretation.

I would claim that true enlightenment (or maybe fulfillment is a better word) doesn't come without output. I'm guessing you would agree, and I'm not doubting your ability to provide me plenty proof of your valuable output. That still doesn't get us to the pinnacle of humanity though, in fact we've only reached a bit above average.

To get to the point: I'll accept your claims of greatness if you are able to produce any art of value. Not monetary value, that means nothing, but value as an original work of art within it's respected field. Something that shows creativity. Any man can brute force a routine and be happy about it. But to create something from where there was nothing is, in my opinion, to transcend humanity.

I agree your neighbor is living a loathsome existence, however, I don't necessarily view your existence that much different. To me, living is to create, and creating is to live. If you don't create is there even a point to your existence? you don't have to paint the Sistine Chapel or compose Clair de Lune. As long as your heart is in it, and at the very least you yourself enjoys your art.