I think you have the intellect Surya but your extremes will trip you up I think on the spiritual path…Buddha tried all the extremes and realised the middle way was the best…when you get in a bath of water, the ideal is not too hot, not too cold, anything else forces the mind to too much activity.
Here is what Buddha did not try: He did not maintain his married and aristocratic lifestyle and do 1-2 hours of meditation in the day, while spending the rest of the day doing other things.
He left his palace and his family in search of masters. He was initiated into various practices by masters and he finally reached enlightenment 10 years later.
What I am talking about here is not an extreme. It is a choice that every soul is going to have to have make eventually when they become dispassionate about the material world. Every master has had to make this choice, including the Buddha.
The reality many of you are going to have to face is you are not living a spiritual life. You are just as ordinary as everybody else in the world. You are just as vulnerable as they are to vice. You have the same desires as them. You participate in the same world as them and contribute to the same problems of the world, just as they do.
I have the humility to accept this. I do not see the world any differently to how the average joe on the street sees it. I thus have no right to pretend I am any more holier than they are. Just because I do meditation now and again, just because I read the Vedas, does not make me spiritual.
There are genuine spiritual people in the world, and they are the ones who have renounced this world and dedicated themselves to spiritual practice. They spend hours upon hours everyday in meditation, contemplation, self-analysis. They are driven by a thrist for self-realization and everything they do moves in that direction. It is these people who truly becomes self-transformed. It is these people that really stand apart from the rest. It is these people that return to the world as masters and guide the rest.
You and I are nothing compared to these people.
Buddha left his family, secure in knowledge they would be materially cared for. Would he have done this if he’d known his wife and children would have suffered greatly? I will dare to answer for him, No.
He spent years with Masters who guided him into ways that he discovered were unnecessary.
He formed his own spiritual movement, the middle way. Buddhism… Moving away from many of the Hindu ‘ways’ and when the Hindus tried to claim him as one of theirs, it was rejected.
Out of the millions who practice ‘genuine’ spirituality, as you call it, how many of them are great?
How many of them step into the world and make a significant impact on their fellow men? Instead what really happens is they have an impact on the few, not the masses.
Only a rare few have touched the hearts of millions.
What new concepts will you bring to the world that the greats haven’t?
A tweeking of this and a tweeking of that, perhaps a new school of thought of an existing belief system that many have done with a few to follow them.
Perhaps how to combine the modern material world with spiritual enlightenment would be a new one instead of disappearing into the wilderness and coming out with old worn concepts that don’t work in this world, today.
Abandonment of the material world means what?
Begging for food off the backs of others hard labour
Growing your own food, well material people like me do a lot of that
Finding an Ashram with the New agers you reject
Setting up a tent in a remote spot hoping you wont be moved off the land
Finding a cave in the mountains…yes a possibility but you will need food
Going into the jungle hoping the snakes etc don’t get you
And illness…will you still except material medical help if you need it? Wont that be hypocrisy if you do?
Why should enlightenment not be progressive?
Buddha found fault in well set theories and practices of the time.
Our time is a highly material one and needs to be encompassed in efforts towards enlightenment not rejected, if you want to make an new impact on the world spiritually
The notion that Buddha was anti-Hindu is a highly romantic idea that is found in Buddhism in order to set themselves apart from the mainstream tradition of Hinduism. It is very similar to how the Hare Krishna insist they are not Hindu, just so that they maintain separate identity. The same with Sikhs.
Buddha was not a Buddhist. He had no idea what “Buddhism” was because only after his death was the religion of Buddhism formed. Buddha was born a Hindu, in India(present day Nepal) and he had a Hindu education. Then when he left his palace, he met Hindu masters who taught him Hindu methods. Buddha was able to achieive enlightenment using those Hindu methods. Then after he had reached enlightenment, he echoed Hindu teachings. He taught life was suffering, he taught that desire was the root cause of this suffering, and that the only way to end this suffering was to practice the 8 fold path, which was Yoga which was ancient even in his time.
Buddha did not innovate, he perpetuated an already ancient spiritual tradition which went back into unknown antiquity. There is nothing Buddha taught that cannot already be found in the Vedic literature. Ironically, even in the oldest of the Vedic literature Rig Veda, it talks about that knowledge of being ancient even then.
And therein lies the real reality of spirituality. Spirituality is not a progressive field of knowledge and nor is it limited to any locality. It is knowledge that is ageless and placeless. Spiritual people do not come to innovate, they come to perpetuate the same ageless wisdom. It can be summed up very easily
There is a transcedent and absolute reality(variously called Nirvana, Atman, Brahman, Shiva, Purusha Turiya, Absolute, god, Tao) that is the very purpose of life for all humans to realise. However, this reality is denied to us because our senses and mind distort it, enmeshing us within the duality of planes, where we wander from lifetime to lifetime, suffering endlessly. In order to return to this absolute reality we must gain control of our senses and mind and undo the distortion. This is variously known as: extinguishing all desire, stilling the mind, balancing the solar and lunar channels, self-realization, receiving the holy spirit.
This is the ageless and placeless wisdom which is being taught on every planet in the universe. It is never going to change. Even in the next cycle of the universe this wisdom will remain the same. When I reach enlightenment, I will be teaching exactly the same wisdom. Why? Buddha answered this himself. It is sheer compassion for the suffering of others that compells you to share this wisdom with others. You have been there yourself and you know how to get people out of it.
What the worlds needs today is not just a swami. It needs a Maharishi, an avatar, a Buddha that will light the lamps of all souls living today.
Surya, I have placed your last post before the one above and mine in a new thread in the religion forum entitled ‘Should we abandon materialism and go into the wilderness’…I felt it more appropriate than under this thread…can you place the above in there xx
Now you may ask what is the difference then between an enlightened master teaching the ageless wisdom or just reading it directly from scripture. The difference is the enlightened masters speech, action and thoughts are spiritually charged. Even his/her silence transforms.
It is not what you say, it is who says it 
I have reproduced these posts in the thread you started. All discussion on this matter will continue there.
Surya, I must address some of your statements in reply to my post. I was defending the position of trying to live a spiritual life while still being worldly, because there are soe many people who want to do this. I made no boasts.
Your comment:
“In a 24 hour day if all you do is 2 hours of yoga a day, then the rest of day you spend working, socialising and entertaining yourself you will get nowhere.You will move up the spiritual ladder at a painfully slow snail peace, which will be counted in number of lifetimes.”"
And? You are still moving up! If a person is forbidden from attempting to be spiritual unless they totally renounce wordly life then many would chose worldy life and would not be moving up at all. Moving up slowly is better than standing still or going backwards in my opinion.
I do have a Guru, he has initiated me into the lofty practice of spontaneous Pranopasana, Shaktipat spontaneous Yoga Sadhana, but he also instructed me to work until I am older before renouncing the world. In the meantime he recommends practicing sadhana and cultivating detachment from worldy pleasures by giving up the things I mentioned. I do this joyfully as part of my Sadhana.
Krishna also advises that a person should work with detachment, rather than give up work but still have attachments. Real renunciation is dedicating all actions to God and giving up the fruit of all actions. In this sense it matters little if one works or not. Many people give up work but still have strong wordly attachments.
Whether we admit it or not we all have egos. I am a young man, and naturally I have egotistical desires to do good and accomplish things. If I were to renounce the world now then those lingering desires would distract me as a Sanyas. This could cause me to feel the need to preach to others, impose my opinions, seek out fame and prestige, hanker for followers and devotees, all sorts of self agrandizement to fulfil the desires for accomplishment. All of this would distract from the real purpose of renunciation, which is to pursue sadhana. My Guru and his Guru before him each spent decades in total seclusion practicing their Yoga Sadhana all day every day. Thus they needed the support of the community for their food and shelter. Most sanyasis do not follow this path, and in my opinion that is why you see so many holy men preaching different things all claiming to be right. If they all gave themselves completely to Sadhana all day every day then they would all find the same truth.
I am not at a point where I can spend all day every day in Sadhana. When I try, distractions arise, so that is why I should work. My desires for accomplishment are satisfied by doing my job, and as I face challenges at work and in Sadhana I learn to trust the Lord ever more. In this way my faith and fortitude is strengthened every day. Like I said before, this also keeps me from distractions and going off course.
In my opinion this is the benefit of pursuing spirituality while still living the worldly life. Our wordly desires can be gradually eliminated and if we let go of the desire for the fruits of our actions then our present work will not result in future bondage. Eventually we will be ready for constant sadhana and then at that point can adopt meaningful renunciation.
Back to sexuality. I am 25 years old, am healthy and fully functioning, have had much sex while in relationships before, and still attract interest from women. I have not acted on a single sexual impulse for almost 3 years now. In my opinion this would be impossible without the grace and blessings of God. I do this purefully for the pursuit of detachment and liberation and therefore I do consider this part of my Sadhana.
If one is to pursue real spirituality they should cultivate detchment from all wordly and physical bonds, including the senses and their objects. A sanyas is meant to be supported so they can pursue liberation and thereby uplift society. Should society work to support someone so they can not work but still pursue sensual pleasures?
sorry error
Back to sexuality. I am 25 years old, am healthy and fully functioning, have had much sex while in relationships before, and still attract interest from women. I have not acted on a single sexual impulse for almost 3 years now. In my opinion this would be impossible without the grace and blessings of God. I do this purefully for the pursuit of detachment and liberation and therefore I do consider this part of my Sadhana.
Good for your and that you have not deceived yourself by instead “regulating” your passions.