That’s my thinking too. Flow feels more like a result. Effort and mindfulness being what gets you there.
Though, I must concede that I hesitate to say that “Samādhi” = “Flow.” The concept of “Flow” might be broader than “Samādhi” - covering, as it does, many mundane (though pleasurable!) states of consciousness. Certain Pāli-thumping theologians will scoff at deigning “Flow” (or any Western concept!) “equivalent” to something as exalted (read: exotic) as “samādhi” … so I have to be careful what I commit to in public! I hope you understand
[PS: For an example of what I mean, just look at all the flak (a hundred replies and counting) Bhante Sujato is getting for translating nibbāna at all! ]
I do understand Bhante. My reason for pressing you is because I always try to understand any modern teaching given with respect to my very flawed understanding of the EBTs. This approach usually helps my understanding of the EBTs to grow a little.
I thought all samadhi was mundane Bhante? Is that not correct? Is there samadhi that is supramundane? Jhanas are mundane states right?
But effort and mindfulness can also be understood as ‘results’ themselves and samadhi is also a process (“what gets you there”) - in a dependant origination (“with the arising of this …”) sort of way. What do you think?
Ah sorry, I was being sloppy with my terms. I meant mundane in the coloquial sense (as in “not jhana”) not in the Buddhist Doctrinal™ sense (“not leading to enlightenment”). At the risk of embarrassing myself further, I will put on my doctrine hat and say:
The N8P has a mundane and a supramundane version. So, yes, there is a supramundane jhana (i.e. that leads to extinguishing). That is, after all, the whole point of the N8P, right?
Sure. Like all your other questions, this is technically correct, though I fail to see any practical point here other than you getting the chance to show off your ability to “well, actually” the monk. Of course it’s also a process. Everything is a process.
I suggest that instead of comparing teachings to your limited understanding of the EBTs, that you instead compare them with your own experience. As Ajahn Brahm says, don’t spend your whole time in the restaurant comparing menus: eat the food!
Sorry it came across like that Bhante. I just wanted to clear up my confusion at what you had written.
I do that as well Bhante. But for me, talking to bhikkhus about their teachings and how they compare to the suttas is the menu stage. Sorry for pressing you.
Please remember that despite the more relaxed nature of the Watercooler, intended for lighthearted EBT/Buddhism related topics, it is still not an appropriate place for personal practice discussion. Those conversations can be carried out through PM.
Sorry if my reply gave the impression I was steering things personal. That was not my intent. I was taking offense at feeling pressured: pressure that has now been apologized for and forgiven! May the light-hearted discussion now resume! Sorry about that everyone!
Flow in the Kanehman sense provides a natural and contemporary engagement with the EBT concept of samadhi/immersion in that the identity is greatly diminished, as are greed and aversion. Dukkha impedes flow.
Interestingly, if we follow this engagement of understanding further, we rapidly realize that flow taken alone is merely a stick attempting to stand up by itself. Flow alone totters and falls over. This is why the pursuit of flow alone is a dead end. Flow falls over and collapses. Always.
In the EBTs, we see that the Noble Eightfold Path is a subset of the three practices of immersion, ethics and wisdom. “The three practice categories are not included in the noble eightfold path. Rather, the noble eightfold path is included in the three practice categories. –MN44
From this we understand that in relying on flow alone (used here a crude synonym for immersion), we will have neglected ethics and wisdom. These other two legs of the tripod are required for a stable foundation. We simply cannot build our lives on flow alone. That would be unethical and foolish.
Yet we can simply start with the understanding of flow as a proxy for samadhi and explore that further in the EBTs, deepening our study. In doing so, we start understanding why flow encompases both right and wrong immersion. And that leads to further study and practice: “Unification of the mind is immersion.
The four kinds of mindfulness meditation are the foundations of immersion.
The four right efforts are the prerequisites for immersion.
The cultivation, development, and making much of these very same things is the development of immersion.” --MN44
Pursued by fear and dread, we seek refuge.
To enter the stream, one must see the flow…
Now that I’ve cooled down a bit, I wanted to take the time today to more formally (and publicly) apologize for my touchiness yesterday.
To be absolutely clear: I don’t think you did anything wrong @stu If your honest questions triggered some defensiveness in me, that problem is squarely mine. It was inappropriate for me to project my insecurity onto you and I apologise for the resulting harsh speech.
Thank you for this simile Karl! I think I see now what @stu meant by:
I think I hyperbolized a bit too far when I claimed that samādhi can become completely stable. It is indeed still a process: subject to arising and ceasing. Even an arahant has to sleep!
So I feel I should amend my previous post to make the more limited claim that samādhi / flow can become something unreliant on perfect external conditions. To get to extinguishing (the truly unconditional mind), one must ride that samādhi to insight: “Right Knowledge”
So, if I may suggest one slight change to your simile, @karl_lew, perhaps it’s better called a tricycle than a tripod!
I hope you understand
and say:
May the light-hearted discussion now resume! Sorry about that everyone!
=> 
=> 
