I don't understand this at all. Maybe I never will.

Someone doing the washing up for you doesn't mean the washing up has ended. So that doesn't stand up. It's very probable that after I die there will be dirty dishes; just because somebody else will be stuck with them doesn't mean they don't exist. As long as anyone eats off reusable utensils there will be washing up, so for all practical purposes it's infinite; there will never be a point of clean dishes for everyone, for ever. (Unless some clown invents the self-cleaning plate, but that's a paradigm shift that invalidates the analogy anyway.)

You seem to think that understanding is all there is, that when there is total understanding everything stops, and that doesn't make sense to me. After you've learned the last poem you write another one. Also, "learning" (as I used the term) and "understanding" (as you're using that one) are not congruent. I was just talking about reciting off-book.

And your last question is just a reversal of mine, and I don't see the sense in that either. An attainable goal is worth striving for, even if you can't attain it yourself. An unattainable goal is not. Which is not to say that there are not other benefits to be gained, but I think I've covered that in my reply to the_magician. The point is not that if I think the goal is unattainable I think we should stop trying for it. The point is that I think the goal is attainable, and don't understand the view that says it isn't and tries anyway.