user9985: This is really confusing to me. Buddha himself was an ascetic, and his teachings seem to imply that the path to nirvana is attained through renouncing one's worldly possessions. 
Isn't this in direct contradiction to the Middle Way?

user2265: What is the moderate amount of cigarettes to smoke? None.
Moderation in the pursuit of truth is a vice.
Moderation does not mean indulgence.

user8157: The 'Middle-Way' does not require giving up all worldly possessions. Instead, the Middle-Way states to not engage in sensual pleasures. 
A person can have basic worldly possessions ('requisites'), such as food, housing, clothing, medicine, etc, and still practise the Middle-Way. 
In short, practising the Middle-Way does not require being a monk or nun. 
The 'Middle-Way' was described in the 1st Sermon as the way of life that does not rely on impermanent & unsatisfying sensual pleasures for happiness nor subjects oneself to & attempts to become impervious to pain.
The Middle-Way culminates in the four blissful meditations (jhana) and ultimately Nirvana, which is permanent peace & freedom. The happiness of the Middle Way is far superior to the happiness of sensual & worldly pleasures. Therefore, there is no contradiction. 
People are attached to sensual pleasures, which generates suffering when those sensual pleasures cease &/or are lost. Sensual pleasures also create enslaving tormenting addictions. Further, sensual pleasures cannot bring true permanent happiness, which is why people get bored of sensual pleasures and continually search for & acquire new sensual pleasures. 
Therefore, from a Buddhist perspective, reliance on sensual pleasures cannot be bring lasting true permanent happiness. The scriptures state: 

The Blessed One has said that sensual pleasures are of little satisfaction, much stress, much despair & greater drawbacks. The
  Blessed One has compared sensual pleasures to a chain of bones...to a lump of flesh... a grass torch... a
  pit of glowing embers... a dream... borrowed goods... the fruits of a
  tree... a butcher's ax and chopping block... swords and spears... a
  snake's head: of much stress, much despair & greater drawbacks."
Alagaddupama Sutta

~~~

And what may be said to be subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement? Spouses & children... men & women slaves...
  goats & sheep... fowl & pigs... elephants, cattle, horses, & mares...
  gold & silver are subject to aging... illness... death...
  sorrow... defilement. Subject to aging... illness... death...
  sorrow... defilement are these acquisitions, and one who is tied to
  them, infatuated with them, who has totally fallen for them, being
  subject to birth, seeks what is likewise subject to aging...
  illness... death... sorrow... defilement
Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search


user7611: This is not true, The Buddha did not say that one only achieves nirvana (the highest happiness) after renouncing the world.
Arahantship or enlightenment is caused by the ending of mental fermentations, defilements, pains, hankers, cankers (asavas), not from merely giving up worldly possessions (this is something repeated throughout the Pali canons).
There were lots of people during The Buddha's time who gave up worldly possessions but did not achieve arahantship.
When Siddartha Gautama did severe austerities (like starving) he found that it had no benefits and just made him weak. When he started eating again after regaining his strength he found it easier to concentrate, but his enlightenment came only after the ending of mental fermentations (asavas).
The Buddha discovered the "Middle way" in between the extremes of austerities and the extremes of a worldly life.
The rules for monks are there to help one achieve arahantship in this lifetime, but arahantship won't come until the ending of mental fermentations, defilements, pains, cankers, taints, hankers (asavas).
When you go too much into the extremes of austerities it becomes difficult to end mental fermentations and when you go too much into the extremes of a worldly life it becomes difficult to end mental fermentations. So it's the "Middle way".
In the Cula-dhammasamadana Sutta (MN 45) The Buddha describes:

Practicing strict painful austerities as a practice that is "painful in the present and yields pain in the future"
Engaging in sensual pleasures as a practice that is "pleasant in the present but yields pain in the future"
Doing good deeds even when experiencing grief and misery as a practice that is "painful in the present but yields pleasure in the future"
Entering higher states (jhanas) as a practice that is "pleasant in the present and yields pleasure in the future"

So it's important to emphasize the ending of mental fermentations (asavas) above everything else as The Buddha himself said that ascetics who torment and afflict the body even while following many of the same rules that Buddhist monks follow lead a life that yields pain in the future (to lower destinations like hell).

“Master Gotama, are there any Ājīvaka ascetics who make an end of suffering when the body breaks up?” “No, Vaccha.”
“But are there any Ājīvaka ascetics who go to heaven when the body breaks up?”
“Vaccha, when I recollect the past ninety-one eons, I can’t find any Ājīvaka ascetics who have gone to heaven, except one; and he taught the efficacy of deeds and action.” (MN 71)


user4888: These are common misunderstandings of the middle way. The middle way is best explained through the Buddha's life story. 
The Buddha began as a nobleman who had the money for all the indulgence in sensual pleasures which he wanted. However, indulgence in pleasure did not lead to lasting happiness. This is the first extreme. The Buddha then became an ascetic who starved himself and took part in self mortification. This was an attempt at gaining happiness through pain, or indulgence in pain. This is the second extreme and it did not lead to lasting happiness.
The middle way is neither indulgence in pleasure nor indulgence in pain. The middle way is not about moderation, it is about the attitude to indulgence. 
Taking a simple example like eating chocolate: There are extremes of never eating chocolate or eating 10 bars of chocolate each day, but eating in moderation such as 1 bar per day is not going to bring about happiness. If you eat 1 bar of chocolate and you treat it as the best thing you've ever tasted then you're already indulging in pleasure. The amount of chocolate is irrelevant. The point is to eat chocolate without doing it to seek pleasure and without doing it to seek pain.
One final common misconception which you didn't mention is "The middle way is for laypeople, monks don't follow the middle way". This misconception comes from the idea that the middle way is moderation. Although monks deny themselves things like sex or perfume this is not a type of indulgence in pain, the purpose of the rules is entirely different. The monks don't try to use perfume in moderation but as I've explained moderation is not the middle way.

9985: <p>This is really confusing to me. Buddha himself was an ascetic, and his teachings seem to imply that the path to nirvana is attained through renouncing one's worldly possessions. </p>

<p>Isn't this in direct contradiction to the Middle Way?</p>
 2265: <p>What is the moderate amount of cigarettes to smoke? None.</p>

<p><strong>Moderation in the pursuit of truth is a vice.</strong></p>

<p>Moderation does not mean indulgence.</p>
 8157: <p>The 'Middle-Way' does not require giving up all worldly possessions. Instead, the Middle-Way states to not engage in sensual pleasures. </p>

<p>A person can have basic worldly possessions ('requisites'), such as food, housing, clothing, medicine, etc, and still practise the Middle-Way. </p>

<p>In short, practising the Middle-Way does not require being a monk or nun. </p>

<p>The 'Middle-Way' was described in the <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.than.html" rel="nofollow">1st Sermon</a> as the way of life that does not rely on impermanent &amp; unsatisfying sensual pleasures for happiness nor subjects oneself to &amp; attempts to become impervious to pain.</p>

<p>The Middle-Way culminates in the four blissful meditations (jhana) and ultimately Nirvana, which is permanent peace &amp; freedom. The happiness of the Middle Way is far superior to the happiness of sensual &amp; worldly pleasures. Therefore, there is no contradiction. </p>

<p>People are attached to sensual pleasures, which generates suffering when those sensual pleasures cease &amp;/or are lost. Sensual pleasures also create enslaving tormenting addictions. Further, sensual pleasures cannot bring true permanent happiness, which is why people get bored of sensual pleasures and continually search for &amp; acquire new sensual pleasures. </p>

<p>Therefore, from a Buddhist perspective, reliance on sensual pleasures cannot be bring lasting true permanent happiness. The scriptures state: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p><em>The Blessed One has said that sensual pleasures are of little satisfaction, much stress, much despair &amp; greater drawbacks. The
  Blessed One has compared sensual pleasures to a chain of bones...to a lump of flesh... a grass torch... a
  pit of glowing embers... a dream... borrowed goods... the fruits of a
  tree... a butcher's ax and chopping block... swords and spears... a
  snake's head: of much stress, much despair &amp; greater drawbacks."</em></p>
  
  <p><a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.022.than.html" rel="nofollow"><em>Alagaddupama Sutta</em></a></p>
</blockquote>

<p>~~~</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><em>And what may be said to be subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement? Spouses &amp; children... men &amp; women slaves...
  goats &amp; sheep... fowl &amp; pigs... elephants, cattle, horses, &amp; mares...
  gold &amp; silver are subject to aging... illness... death...
  sorrow... defilement. Subject to aging... illness... death...
  sorrow... defilement are these acquisitions, and one who is tied to
  them, infatuated with them, who has totally fallen for them, being
  subject to birth, seeks what is likewise subject to aging...
  illness... death... sorrow... defilement</em></p>
  
  <p><a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.026.than.html" rel="nofollow"><em>Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search</em></a></p>
</blockquote>
 7611: <p>This is not true, The Buddha did not say that one only achieves nirvana (the highest happiness) after renouncing the world.</p>
<p>Arahantship or enlightenment is caused by the ending of mental fermentations, defilements, pains, hankers, cankers (asavas), not from merely giving up worldly possessions (this is something repeated throughout the Pali canons).</p>
<p>There were lots of people during The Buddha's time who gave up worldly possessions but did not achieve arahantship.</p>
<p>When Siddartha Gautama did severe austerities (like starving) he found that it had no benefits and just made him weak. When he started eating again after regaining his strength he found it easier to concentrate, but his enlightenment came only after the ending of mental fermentations (asavas).</p>
<p>The Buddha discovered the &quot;Middle way&quot; in between the extremes of austerities and the extremes of a worldly life.</p>
<p>The rules for monks are there to help one achieve arahantship in this lifetime, but arahantship won't come until the ending of mental fermentations, defilements, pains, cankers, taints, hankers (asavas).</p>
<p>When you go too much into the extremes of austerities it becomes difficult to end mental fermentations and when you go too much into the extremes of a worldly life it becomes difficult to end mental fermentations. So it's the &quot;Middle way&quot;.</p>
<p>In the Cula-dhammasamadana Sutta (MN 45) The Buddha describes:</p>
<ul>
<li>Practicing strict painful austerities as a practice that is &quot;painful in the present and yields pain in the future&quot;</li>
<li>Engaging in sensual pleasures as a practice that is &quot;pleasant in the present but yields pain in the future&quot;</li>
<li>Doing good deeds even when experiencing grief and misery as a practice that is &quot;painful in the present but yields pleasure in the future&quot;</li>
<li>Entering higher states (jhanas) as a practice that is &quot;pleasant in the present and yields pleasure in the future&quot;</li>
</ul>
<p>So it's important to emphasize the ending of mental fermentations (asavas) above everything else as The Buddha himself said that ascetics who torment and afflict the body even while following many of the same rules that Buddhist monks follow lead a life that yields pain in the future (to lower destinations like hell).</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Master Gotama, are there any Ājīvaka ascetics who make an end of suffering when the body breaks up?” “No, Vaccha.”</p>
<p>“But are there any Ājīvaka ascetics who go to heaven when the body breaks up?”</p>
<p>“Vaccha, when I recollect the past ninety-one eons, I can’t find any Ājīvaka ascetics who have gone to heaven, except one; and he taught the efficacy of deeds and action.” (MN 71)</p>
</blockquote>
 4888: <p>These are common misunderstandings of the middle way. The middle way is best explained through the Buddha's life story. </p>

<p>The Buddha began as a nobleman who had the money for all the indulgence in sensual pleasures which he wanted. However, indulgence in pleasure did not lead to lasting happiness. This is the first extreme. The Buddha then became an ascetic who starved himself and took part in self mortification. This was an attempt at gaining happiness through pain, or indulgence in pain. This is the second extreme and it did not lead to lasting happiness.</p>

<p>The middle way is neither indulgence in pleasure nor indulgence in pain. The middle way is not about moderation, it is about the attitude to indulgence. </p>

<p>Taking a simple example like eating chocolate: There are extremes of never eating chocolate or eating 10 bars of chocolate each day, but eating in moderation such as 1 bar per day is not going to bring about happiness. If you eat 1 bar of chocolate and you treat it as the best thing you've ever tasted then you're already indulging in pleasure. The amount of chocolate is irrelevant. The point is to eat chocolate without doing it to seek pleasure and without doing it to seek pain.</p>

<p>One final common misconception which you didn't mention is "The middle way is for laypeople, monks don't follow the middle way". This misconception comes from the idea that the middle way is moderation. Although monks deny themselves things like sex or perfume this is not a type of indulgence in pain, the purpose of the rules is entirely different. The monks don't try to use perfume in moderation but as I've explained moderation is not the middle way.</p>
