Often quite difficult because in order to actually follow the middle way as the

Buddha taught it, you are to abstain from indulgence in sense pleasures. Indulgence
in sense pleasure (sex pleasure is the most common it seems) is outside the middle
way. Sex pleasure, and other pleasures of the senses, is outside the Buddha's
middle way. To indulge is sex pleasure is to go into one side of the extremes.

Many people misinterpret the non-indulgence in sense pleasure as a form of

asceticism. That is a misunderstanding of how the Buddha taught the middle way. To
abstain from indulgence from sense pleasure, is the middle way. Monks take vows of
celibacy so that this vow can help them properly follow the middle way.

The middle way is not easy to follow because it requires you to resist the
temptation to indulge in sense pleasure.

"There are these two extremes that are not to be indulged in by one who has gone
forth. Which two?

That which is devoted to sensual pleasure with reference to sensual objects: base,
vulgar, common, ignoble, unprofitable; (sex, drink, drugs, any sense pleasure)

and that which is devoted to self-affliction: painful, ignoble, unprofitable.

Avoiding both of these extremes, the middle way realized by the Tathagata —
producing vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to
self-awakening, to Unbinding. Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting the Wheel of
Dhamma in Motion

The middle way which avoids the four philosophical extremes

In discovering his own beginningless enlightenment, the buddha referred to this
path as - "the middle way". That expression denotes a view that avoids well known
errors of view - themselves referred to as "the four philosophical extremes". These
extreme views abound in many "religions of the book" and other new age
philosophies. To appreciate the middle way, one has to first understand these
philosophical extremes, which is to understand one's own patterns of seeing, and
then discover the middle way as a view that avoids all of them. The four
philosophical extremes are: monism, dualism, eternalism and nihilism.

Monism holds that "all is one", and therefore denies distinctions and differences
(dualism). The notion of a deity is inherently monist, as we are all just elements
of the one great soul. In monist thinking we are all equal, and our personalities
or egos are all problematic distortions of this great equality of every soul.
Monism then lacks the capacity for compassion because if we are all equal, then the
only explanation for abherrent behavior would be some kind of "demonic" intention,
where the term demonic can be demystified to simply mean - not part of the great
one soul, and - you guessed it - therefore an evil enemy to be humiliated or killed
(with a holy hand grenade of course). This is in contrast to where people are
recognized to have different capacities, which is fundamentally required to
experience compassion.

Dualism holds that "all is separate", and therefore denies the commonality or
dependencies of phenomena. In dualism everything is relative, and there really
can't be any absolute standards that are always and everywhere true. So if there
were a God, whatever he said - well, that's just your opinion, man. Rebels without
a cause embrace dualism to justify a life that is beyond any universal notions of
good and evil. It's your thing - do what you wanna do.

Eternalism holds the view that "everything has continuous meaning". If you are on
your way to work and it starts raining, then this means something. All sorts of
"ideas of reference" (precursors to psychosis when they get out of hand, mind you)
are just this strong belief we have that everything happens for a reason, and that
reason is taking my life into account specifically, and that reason is about me. So
eternalism denies randomness and the chaos of experience, what in buddhist circles
is sometimes called "the charnel ground". Where good people suddenly become ill and
die, and where horrible accidents can and do happen. Those truths are too
inconvenient for eternalists, and there is usually some kind of rationalization
that there is <mystically intoned> a larger reason than we can see. Or buddhism
(the part that actually stems from it's Hindu origins) has this popular notion of
karma which atrociously ascribes some kind of debt repayment to the poor victims of
chaos and randomness. They're just squaring up for what they did in another
lifetime. Not a lot of compassion in that view either.

Nihilism holds the view that "nothing lasts or has any meaning". Except black
turtlenecks, and shaving your eyebrows. But seriously, this is the least common of
the extremes, probably in no small part because nihilist tend not to breed
nihilists. They actually have the best basis for arguing the possibility of suicide
as a life strategy. Nihilism tends to pair with dualism, because nihilism
acknowledges relative subjective meanings, but then dismisses that category itself
as meaningless. This is not my beautiful house.

It should be noted that each philosophical extreme actually has some validity, and
is not absolutely false, it just isn't absolutely true. That it is an "extreme"
refers to the view being held absolutely in denial of the opposite view and the
sometimes common experiences that support the opposite view. Extremes take a facet
of reality and try to white-knuckle a consistent universal world view based on an
extreme that just doesn't always fit. Where it doesn't fit, that part of experience
is denied, and there is the rub.

The middle way doesn't deny any experience. If you taste all the experiences of a
lifetime, from the great oceanic feeling of being in your mothers womb (monism) to
the day you lose the love of your life (dualism), to the day that some tiny
coincidence of butterfly proportions completely changes your life (eternalism), to
the moments when chaos rains down on you in your finest hours (nihilism), then you
can't harden your view into one of these extremes. You have to let each one arise,
dwell and cease, as they will do - again, and again, and again. There has to be a
seat you can take in the middle of this four ring circus of life, and simply be
awed, terrified, attracted and disgusted by it all, without rejecting part of it.
Without drawing a curtain in that circus tent over the part you just can't bear to
look at and acknowledge.

And that is a crude fingerpainting of the middle way that avoids the four
philosophical extremes. There's not so much that can be said about the middle way.
It's more the practice of realizing in your life when the patterns of each of the
philosophical extremes are trying to harden up and solidify your world view, like
when you are falling in love, or when someone just died. That's when you need to
find a middle way. And no, the middle way is not numbness. Not at all. It's all of
the feelings of falling in love or someone dying, without the conviction that - I'm
going to live for ever (because she loves me) or life isn't worth living (because
he's gone forever). It just is - as it is.

Kera mu Rwanda bararirimbaga ngo uwanga fondateri ntakatubemo bashaka kuvuga Kinani
wari warashinze muvoma, nyuma utarumvikanaga n'imiyoborere ya Kinani yaje kwitwa
inyangarwanda, ndibukako inkotanyi zigeze kujya zitwa inyangabirama, abanzi
b'amahoro, imburagasani n'ibindi. Amateka ahora yisubiramo uko ibihe bihora
bisimburana iteka ryose.
A must buy if you grew up with Tintin comics , I never thought I'll one day relive
my favourite adventures playing Tintin himself in modern 3d graphics, solving
clever puzzles, some cool action sequences just like the books or playing an
adorable stealthy Snowy/Milou, if you're a real fan this game needs no introduction
it's pure joy though I hope it launches a video game franchise I am so content the
incredible things technology has given us.

Ive been retaining for more that 5 years, and tried every method existent, Karezza,
Neo, and Brahmacharya ( Chastity in word, thought and deed). Ive experimented a lot
with all of them, and i can tell you (in my experience) without a shadow of a
doubt, that total mental and physical celibacy is the most powerful technique to
enhance your mind, creativity, phisical, and spiritual energy, but its also the
hardest one by far (at least at the beggining).

I tried Karezza for almost a year with a GF, and it only made me extremely
hypersexual, extremely anxious, with a dificulty to focus, and the morning after,
when i went to pee, my insides (i believe it was the prostate) hurt like i had a
burning needle piercing through me. Not enjoyable at all. But that is my
experience, and nothing more than that. Maybe i was doing it wrong, but i practiced
for a year and it didnt enhance my life in any other way than having fun and
connecting with my girl.

Experiment and do what is best for you my friend, i can only share my experience.
And in my experience, Brahmacharya is the most powerful lifestyle in existence.
Extreme focus, physical strengh, spiritual stoicism, extremely high moral
standards, increased capacity for creativity and mental work, insane self
confidence, bravery and poise.

Karezza or NEO or trantric sex, it just seems to me like the easy way out, to try
to convince yourself that you can have the best of both worlds. I dont think you
can, at least in my case, i cant. Its very fun and beautiful to share that level of
intimacy with a lovely girl, and i think everyone should experience (Unless you are
a lifelong monk, for whom i have nothing but the deepest respect) but in my mind,
this practices are a mere justification to continue to enjoy lustful thoughts and
actions under the veil of spirituality. This activities will cause imprints in your
mind, its been a year since i broke off that relationship and become an absolute
celibate, and i still dream vividly of the countless hours i spent having sex with
this girl, the urge for reproduction is the strongest urge, and your mind and
subconcious will try to drive you to fullfil it, and will try to drive your mind to
rationalize its lustful impulses, giving it a spiritual spin.

In the end, you can only follow your intuition and draw your own conclusions based
on your personal experiences. Ive read all the famous tantric books, and tried to
practice their techniques, and to me, what they offer is so far below what
Brahmacharya offers, that i hope and pray to have the commitment and level of
discipline necesary to live the rest of my life celibate in word, thought and deed,
and focus my energy in my artistic passions, my spiritual development, and my
physical strengh and well being.

But dont accept any knowledge dogmatically, dont bow down to any guru or author,
try to experiment to find out the best path for you. There is no absolute truth or
recipe for a blissful life. Or maybe if there is, you may not be ready yet to
endure its hardships, and you may live struggling with cognitive dissonance. You
have to find that out for yourself.