Hehehe.... Lama Thubten Yeshe told the story of Birwapa the great mahasidda.
He used it to demonstrate that the object of the renunciation is not the object of our attachment, but the mind of attachment we have created.
The cause for our attachment is the object or renunciation.
The object of our attachment is not, yet sometimes the focus on the object can assist in the process of getting rid of the cause.
I am attached to women, I see a woman and lust overpowers me.
What can be done? I can veil the woman so that her simple sight does not make lust arise in me, does this solve the problem? Yes it does but only partially, for it has not removed the cause of lust, it has done nothing to prepare me to react virtuously if ever I see an attractive woman that is not covered.
This is touching on Islam obviously, and many muslim scholars would agree that the veiling of the woman exposes the weakness of men and there is deeper teaching in veiling the woman than just that action.
What is to be renounced is the cause of suffering, nothing else.
What is to be renounced is anger, attachment and best of all: ignorance.
IF what was to be renounced was sex, money, food, TV, cars, parties, holidays, careers, friends, even our body, then renunciation would actually be very easy to achieve.
So easy that we could achieve it within a couple of weeks.
Then what would we have achieved? A mind that suffers from not having what it is attached to? (sounds like an existence as a preta...)
I think what must be renounced is the ignorance that makes us "like things thinking they will provide us with happiness" or "dislike things because we think they will make us un-happy".
Then we can like things wisely and dislike things wisely, free from ignorance, thus Birwapa can drink wine and teach us about renunciation, contradictory? Not at all!