Vanity Under the Sun

There is a saying that the vanity of human life is best expressed by the lack of profit to eternally enjoy, all of it from our labor under the sun. The idea is that human hands are worked to the bone for profit, of some kind, yet nothing is kept beyond death. In many cases, an entire life is spent acquiring something materialistic. Some people believe this pursuit to be an absolute necessity to reap profit, some believe reincarnation to be the manner of profit and each life time to be a pursuit to an even greater goal, and some simply don't know what to think. I fall into the category of people who see death as the end to this life, but not the end of life (I don't believe in reincarnation into a new life in this world). There is one other view that is not commonly expressed that deserves more attention than the views of what is after death, because it defines the value of things while we're still alive, persuaded to believe we can reap our rewards. This view relates to the temporal understanding of birth to death; it isn't based on gender, nationality, culture, or creed. The view relates to the mannerisms of any individual and it influences any and all pursuits. From here an individual can determine the nature of sincerity as well as the long-term importance of their actions and/or goals.
I am speaking of the Vanity Under the Sun.

I am a strong believer in the nature of living life for the better of the human race, be it that you start with your family or with the community. I am not an aspiring guru of some Spiritual philosophy and I am not aiming to be a priest of some religious sect. I am just pointing out something obvious that shouldn't be reserved for philosophy. It is a way of life, it is a determining factor that explains the point of life, and there is no substitute for this unless there is an open objection to any kind of absolute. That is because the vanity found in life is not because life is vain, it is because people live vainly. They can only see the forest and not the trees; shortsighted and selfish is only the tip of the iceberg and it is by no means the only manner of delineation between good character and evil.

What is vanity?
Out of all the ways to use the word, it isn't always a bad thing, but in this case I am using the meaning of futility and worthlessness. I am going so far as to point out the highest degree of depravity that an individual can experience. It is in the order of a Rich man in a Mercedes pulling up to a homeless man, giving them seventeen cents and telling that homeless man that is all they have to give, hoping to get a response of thanks for their charitable deed. Now doesn't that sound depraved of any humility or genuine compassion?
Take a closer look though and you may be surprised of what the possibilities are, that tell you otherwise.
The vanity is not in the thankfulness of the homeless man, or the act of giving from the rich man.
The vanity could be said to be in the hope of the rich man not being perceived as a liar, a hypocrite, and a haughty accessory in the eyes of the homeless man; or even worse, not being those things in the eyes of whatever higher authority that rich man may perceive as the judge of his supposed righteousness.
We can say that the vanity is that the rich man was being arrogant. Yet we could assert he really was broke at the time and wanted to give instead of make excuses. How far can we go if we can even say that none of it matters because that rich man is the head of a charity organization and happens to work at the local homeless shelter on the weekends so his act was to establish rapport. Do you see it yet?
The vanity isn't in the story itself, it's in us as we listen to the story. 
Isn't it fun that the vanity of understanding the meaning of the story yields an understanding of the vanity of our assumptions? That's to say the realization came even after I explained..

The reason why I use a rich man and a homeless man to make a point is because people are often sucked into the belief of contrast. This is not unreasonable since it is through contrast that we learn important things that lend a hand to the process of maturity.
The strongest contrast in all societies that have ever existed is that riches determine success in life. More or less, it is the material wealth we acquire in our life time that establishes our ability to get what we want and most people sum their existence by what they want. Be it Love from a Spouse, kids, a house, a car, a good paying job or one that is simply enjoyable, or it be social acceptance, and maybe even some stroke of genius that changes lives.
Regardless of what can be acquired in this life, there seems to be a worthlessness to it all in the end if the sum of life was only the temporary happiness brought by the triumph of goals. I make this statement knowing that many people will disagree and that is ok.

What is humankind that it would be so arrogant to put the value of life in the accomplishments brought on by hands working for the benefit of the self? Isn't the sustenance of life just a necessity, not the point of it's existence?
Is the blood, sweat, and tears of humanity just the sum of the struggle for success or is it the painful realization that something isn't right about this existence that life's purpose is to fight against depravity in every moment?
It might seem odd for some people to hear that the true triumph of life is in death because none of the vanity matters any more. Perhaps that's why most people call death the eternal rest. From what I recall, no amount of work is worth it's weight in gold unless the people who worked can rest and behold the glorious fruits of their labor (that is to insinuate they can partake in it, much like working to grow food is for a very reasonable cause).

It is by this reasoning that humankind has tried to answer the question of purpose since the beginning of our race. We have tried to answer the question through the pursuit of the divine, sophistication of our knowledge, and relating to each other. It would seem that all three aspects are noble causes in the face of our existence, even more so in the absence of death. Though I seem to be suggesting that death is a trump to the nobility of those three things, I am saying that it makes the implications of our method of pursuit all the more profound.
After all.. The poor look to the rich with contempt and envy, the rich look down on the poor with insecurity and rejection yet the two groups usually don't know how similar they are in mentality let alone capacity.

So what would it mean if we lived life over the Sun?

The metaphor is reflective of the duality of the human nature.
Humans were never meant to lead a life of self-fulfillment. No human has jumped the gap of ignorance by seeking a satisfying life and no culture has impacted the world without doing something for the good of mankind, be it a negative pursuit of propaganda or a sincerely positive pursuit of well-being.
The fact of the matter is that humankind has advanced due to the desire to make things better for the whole, utilizing every bit of what is endowed with to get somewhere. The crux is that the pursuit of well-being goes against the instincts of the physical body, it is the main reason why Humans have a duality to their nature that can't be escaped.
The naturalists who pervert knowledge to support their godless existence are the greatest example I can ever provide. They believe in moral goodness without a foundation, subjective perception rules more than general absolutes. The base of reasoning is the self because it is through their personal representation (or expression) of experiences instead of transcending reasoning. Let's be clear that there is a difference between an evolutionist and a naturalist, just as much as there is a difference between a deists and the religious.
I am not arguing the character of the supernatural or trying to disenfranchise anyone who has a particular belief in something, because that is just a matter of semantics in this case. What should be known is that true naturalists can't and wont jump into the exploration of the duality of human existence without contradicting their world view, something that doesn't need modern science to explain a lick of.. Philosophers and Spiritualists have been diving into this facet of academia for thousands of years and they have come to some very interesting conclusions that science can't refute.

If all the great prophets of antiquity and all the great philosophers of the modern times are saying the same thing about the point of life.. At what point does an individual question the words of the wise as being more than personal interpretations? Even the greatest minds of natural science have given credit to the absolutely profound nature of energy, time, space, and consciousness. How many metaphors do you need of one idea just to believe the speaker has an understanding of a situation? I certainly hope there isn't a requirement of professional expertise or some sense of accreditation by a 'trusted' source just to hear truth when it is presented.

If the homeless man who received the seventeen cents from the rich man in a Mercedes can say thank you and smile, believing in his heart that the point of life comes down to being thankful for the little bit and keeping hope alive that there is some good in people regardless of their circumstances... Isn't that a revelation to the point of life?
I won't explain what that point is. Sometimes you have to read between the lines to get the message.