Seven Steps to Deep Meditation

[forestofemptiness]

This is the most Daobums things I've come across in a while: experiential, "hacking," applicable to multiple forms of meditation, seems effective. 

 

From Forrest Knutson, a kriyaban. 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2022 by forestofemptiness
sp

[Vajra Fist]

Forrest is a top guy, one of the most open and earnest teachers of kriya yoga in the west. His videos are mostly pre-initiation stuff.

 

He's latched onto HRV breathing as it tallies quite closely with what Lahari Mahasaya called the 'tranquil breath'.

 

It's actually part of a much wider and fascinating area of research. They've effectively reverse engineered the breathing patterns recorded in states of deep meditation, and promoted them as a means to induce those states.

 

 

I've dabbled a bit with HRV breathing, via an app called 'resonant breathing'.

 

It's certainly pleasant and relaxing. I'm sure it also has many health benefits - I measured blood pressure before and after and found a 10 point drop in systolic numbers. 

 

But I find it hard to truly arrive at tranquility when controlling or directing the breathing. That sort of quiescent feeling of waking up to fresh snowfall you sometimes spontaneously arrive at meditation.

 

That said, I haven't been initiated by Forrest, so I can't comment on his system of kriya. I do know a few people from several forums who have though, who speak very highly of him as a teacher, and his authenticity.

 

There's a decent interview with him here:

 

https://escaping-samsara.com/forrest-knutson-the-process-of-yogic-meditation/

 

 

Edited September 24, 2022 by Vajra Fist

[forestofemptiness]

On 9/24/2022 at 4:36 PM, Vajra Fist said:

But I find it hard to truly arrive at tranquility when controlling or directing the breathing. That sort of quiescent feeling of waking up to fresh snowfall you sometimes spontaneously arrive at meditation.

 

HRV appears to accelerate quietening my mind, not unlike being on retreat. I've been doing it for 5-10 minutes prior to my regular meditation, and so far is seems to make a substantial difference. I note that in Dr. Gevirtz's video, he says you really only need to do it 10-20 min per day to get good effects (even while, as he does, listening to podcasts! ). 

 

Forrest does introduce some reasons why he thinks the old methods may not work as well today as they did hundreds or thousands of years ago. Consider that indoor electricity is only 100-200 years old, much less more modern things such as how the internet and TV has shaped our brains. Even back then, a lot of meditation instructions begin with "go to a secluded place." 

 

Anyway, I just thought I'd put it out there in case others might want to fiddle with it also as it is more of an enhancement than a new meditation method altogether (i.e. it's not kriya). 

 

On 9/24/2022 at 4:36 PM, Vajra Fist said:

There's a decent interview with him here:

 

https://escaping-samsara.com/forrest-knutson-the-process-of-yogic-meditation/

 

 

Unfortunately, the interview doesn't seem to work. 

[Creation]

Thank you for reminding me about Knutson, I would like to check out what he's been offering in the years since I last thought of him. 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Creation

[Aeordimm]

On 9/24/2022 at 6:36 PM, Vajra Fist said:

But I find it hard to truly arrive at tranquility when controlling or directing the breathing. That sort of quiescent feeling of waking up to fresh snowfall you sometimes spontaneously arrive at meditation.

 

I get his idea to sedate the body, lower blood pressure and heart rate to settle down. But in my experience  the tranquility comes naturally anyway if you focus on the mental side of meditation. Some need 5 minutes to settle down, and some need 15, depending on your state, before entering practice.

[EFreethought]

On 9/24/2022 at 10:04 AM, forestofemptiness said:

This is the most Daobums things I've come across in a while: experiential, "hacking," applicable to multiple forms of meditation, seems effective. 

 

From Forrest Knutson, a kriyaban. 

 

 

I have looked at a few of FK's videos, and he has some interesting things to say.

 

My question is: How much of what he says applicable to someone on a more Daoist path? He talks a lot about the third eye, and Daoists seem to be against that. Daoists want to bring energy down, and focusing on the third eye brings energy up.

 

 

[forestofemptiness]

22 hours ago, EFreethought said:

My question is: How much of what he says applicable to someone on a more Daoist path? He talks a lot about the third eye, and Daoists seem to be against that. Daoists want to bring energy down, and focusing on the third eye brings energy up.

 

 

 

I think some of his general videos (like HRV) may be more generally applicable, but the more kriya or yogic centered ones may not be. 

 

I don't think Daoists are against the third eye, having a correlate in the upper dan tian. However, focusing energy higher in the body can lead to issues (the same goes with Vajrayana). 

[exorcist_1699]

This is a typical  example of  wrong way , mainly due to  not understanding well the  Taoist  "natural "  principle or Zen's no-mind . How can people  add so many deliberate stuff ( ' 造作'  )   , but still claim capable of  harmonizing  the minds and the status of the body ?

 

The principle should be to consolidate  a  no-mind at the background first ,  then if it is deep and persistent enough , it can harmonize or control all those elements  , whatever  fluctuating minds , breathing ,  heart beat ..etc  they are  at  the front stage . Just  like a well woven  spider web , although looks  invisible  , can catch all things stuck to it  even in strong wind  unaffected , not breaking apart  ;  as the Sixth Patriarch once said :  " 惠能無技倆 , 不斷百思量 "

Edited October 12, 2022 by exorcist_1699

[freeform]

It’s relaxation, not meditation.

[Master Logray]

6 hours ago, exorcist_1699 said:

This is a typical  example of  wrong way , mainly due to  not understanding well the  Taoist  "natural "  principle or Zen's no-mind . How can people  add so many deliberate stuff ( ' 造作'  )   , but still claim capable of  harmonizing  the minds and the status of the body ?

 

The principle should be to consolidate  a  no-mind at the background first ,  then if it is deep and persistent enough , it can harmonize or control all those elements  , no matter they are minds , breathing ,  heart beat ..etc  at  the front stage . Just  like a well woven  spider web , although looks  invisible  , can catch all things stuck to it  even in strong wind  unaffected ;  as the Sixth Patriarch once said :  " 惠能無技倆 , 不斷百思量 "

 

But directly go to the no-mind first is very difficult.  It is why there are so many deliberate stuff as stepping stones.

[freeform]

8 hours ago, Master Logray said:

 

But directly go to the no-mind first is very difficult.  It is why there are so many deliberate stuff as stepping stones.

That’s true.
 

Relaxation is probably the first out of hundreds of stepping stones.

 

But he still calls it meditation…

 

[Vajra Fist]

29 minutes ago, freeform said:

That’s true.
 

Relaxation is probably the first out of hundreds of stepping stones.

 

But he still calls it meditation…

 

 

I suppose its what you do with the mind. 

 

Quote

 

Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out.

 

Breathing in long, he discerns, 'I am breathing in long'; breathing out long, he discerns, 'I am breathing out long.' 

 

Or breathing in short, he discerns, 'I am breathing in short'; breathing out short, he discerns, 'I am breathing out short.'

 

 

Edited October 11, 2022 by Vajra Fist

[freeform]

9 hours ago, Vajra Fist said:

 

I suppose its what you do with the mind. 

 

 

Doing anything precludes meditation.

 

(at least in the way I understand meditation.)

 

Mindfulness is not meditation - it’s mindfulness practice… one of the other ‘stepping stones’ to actual meditation.

[Vajra Fist]

3 hours ago, freeform said:

Doing anything precludes meditation.

 

(at least in the way I understand meditation.)

 

Mindfulness is not meditation - it’s mindfulness practice… one of the other ‘stepping stones’ to actual meditation.

 

Semantics. The buddha said that insight isn't possible without mindfulness. Those who don't work to develop concentration first before practicing 'just sitting' meditation are basically just stewing in their own hindrances.

Edited October 12, 2022 by Vajra Fist

[freeform]

Yeah it’s semantics, I agree.
 

But I think semantics are important.

 

I think it’s worth understanding what is a stepping stone and what is a true result, no?

 

Incidentally, concentration is also a result that can’t happen if you’re ‘doing’ some method.

 

[forestofemptiness]

Well, if people are interested and listen to the videos, it is fairly clear that these are stepping stones. 

Saying X is not meditation and saying X is not meditation the way you understand it are two different statements. One of them is put forth as a universal and the other is a qualified statement of opinion. If one wants to have a serious exchange, one should set forth one's definition and the source from which it comes. Of course, if one just wants to argue, carry on. 

 

54 minutes ago, freeform said:

I think it’s worth understanding what is a stepping stone and what is a true result, no?

 

 

[freeform]

4 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

Saying X is not meditation and saying X is not meditation the way you understand it are two different statements. One of them is put forth as a universal and the other is a qualified statement of opinion. If one wants to have a serious exchange, one should set forth one's definition

 

Quote

Doing anything precludes meditation.

 

(at least in the way I understand meditation.)

I’m pretty sure I already qualified it as my opinion.

 

And the same quote pretty much explains the key difference in definition.

 

I did watch a few of his videos. 
 

I don’t have issues with HRV training for it’s intended purpose.

 

I like his presentation actually. I suspect it’s a very good resource for people with a lot of stress.

It’s just not meditation.
 

Following his method will not result in samadhi or any of the various jhannic states. 
 

And if that is your aim - then following his method past a certain point will actually stop you being able to achieve it at all.

 

[searcher7977]

 

27 minutes ago, freeform said:

 

I’m pretty sure I already qualified it as my opinion.

 

And the same quote pretty much explains the key difference in definition.

 

I did watch a few of his videos. 
 

I don’t have issues with HRV training for it’s intended purpose.

 

I like his presentation actually. I suspect it’s a very good resource for people with a lot of stress.

It’s just not meditation.
 

Following his method will not result in samadhi or any of the various jhannic states. 
 

And if that is your aim - then following his method past a certain point will actually stop you being able to achieve it at all.

 

 

I agree with you, mostly, lol. I also do not think simple HRV training can lead to samadhi. In my experience, Kriyabans (and indian yogi's in general) tend to use the word "meditation" very loosely.

 

However, if his videos and methods include more than HRV training, which it looks like they do since he has one on pratyahara, japa, and stillness, then it possibly could lead to samadhi. The kriya yogi's of his lineage seem to always like involving science as much as they could, specifically to appeal to westerners.

 

Incidentally, when I attended Sadhguru's 3-day Inner Engineering Kriya Course, the last technique they taught us for a couple hours, after 20+hrs of practice, lectures, etc., was a special type of meditation they called "fun meditation." It consisted of going outside and playing frisbee and volleyball XD

Edited October 12, 2022 by searcher7977

[forestofemptiness]

This is the universal statement:

 

On 10/11/2022 at 2:10 AM, freeform said:

It’s relaxation, not meditation.

 

This statement: 

 

2 hours ago, freeform said:

Incidentally, concentration is also a result that can’t happen if you’re ‘doing’ some method.

 

is not always true. For example, applied thought and sustained thought are typically used for not only access concentration, but the first jhana as well as they are listed as jhanic factors for both Sutta jhana and Visudhamagga jhana. 

 

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html

 

In some traditions, it may be true, although it is more typical for a method to be learned before it is dropped in my experience. 

[freeform]

3 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

This is the universal statement:

 

On 11/10/2022 at 9:10 AM, freeform said:

It’s relaxation, not meditation.

 

I then qualified that I’m talking about meditation ‘as I understand it’ 

 

I’ve written a lot about what I consider meditation to be… as well as jhanna. 
 

My view is certainly not shared by the vast majority of meditators.
 

Thats because it’s way beyond what they think is possible.
 

For example, I’ve been taught (and shown) that attainment of each jhannic absorption, when fully realised, invariably comes with certain siddhi. Just like learning to draw invariably comes with the ability to generate a likeness of any object on paper.
 

For my teachers, it’s very simple - if you haven’t achieved xxxx siddhi - then you haven’t achieved xxxx stage of jhanna. These siddhi are things like bilocation, changing one physical substance into another, generating visible light phenomena etc.

 

It might sound elitist or materialistic to some but it’s just like if you can’t generate a likeness of an object on paper, then you can’t say that you’ve attained the ability to draw. You need to prove your ability to graduate from art school.
 

These results are used as tests or assessments of one’s practice, because inner experience is generally not trusted in traditional schools.

 

Most meditators think that these things (despite being written about over and over) are myths and allegorical legends.
 

I believe they’ve become myths and legends because as a culture we tend to move the goal posts from something exceptionally difficult to something we can achieve with relative ease. It’s like we feel entitled to decide our own level of attainment…
 

So generating a bright, visible light as a sign of attaining certain meditative absorption… over a few generations of lazy practitioners - turns to being able to feel tingles on your lips as a sign of meditation… or worse still - being able to imagine a bright light.

 

I think that’s a shame.

 

That’s why when I see a relaxation hack being taught as meditation, I like to point out that there’s a lot more to this stuff. Relaxation is great - but don’t settle for relaxation if genuine cultivation is your calling in life  

 

Meditation is a doorway to the very building blocks of reality… when they say that physical reality is fundamentally consciousness at its root - this is not metaphor or allegory… they have a good reason to believe this. Each level of meditative absorption pierces a deeper layer of consciousness and accesses a deeper layer of what we consider our reality.
 

It’s not just about developing a calm mind and a harmonious nervous system (great as these goals are, of course).

 

I’m not here to convince anyone of anything. I get that this is a radical thing to say in this day and age. I get that it’s unbelievable. But there are people here who benefit from hearing about how deep this stuff goes and then making up their own mind about it.

 

There are people with great talent and drive that feel an inner pull to cultivation - but then they look at the sorry state of the spiritual world and go into finance or law or music - endeavours that are more challenging and interesting, that require rigour, dedication and excellence. 

 

There’s more to this stuff than what can be seen on the surface! It goes deeper than any other human endeavour.
 

I think it’s worth putting that out there and letting talented, ambitious people get curious and discover for themselves if that’s what they want.

The people that do well with cultivation are excited by the challenge - not overwhelmed by it.

Edited October 12, 2022 by freeform

[freeform]

3 hours ago, searcher7977 said:

The kriya yogi's of his lineage seem to always like involving science as much as they could, specifically to appeal to westerners.

This suggests to me that they’ve lost some key aspects of the art generations ago - and are resorting to science-like factors to fill the missing pieces.

 

Uncorrupted traditions are just as rigorous as the scientific method - and don’t require the mental models and methodologies from outside of their own tradition.

 

This doesn’t mean that dogmatic traditionalism is the answer though. That can corrupt an art just as much…

[Vajra Fist]

2 hours ago, freeform said:

These results are used as tests or assessments of one’s practice, because inner experience is generally not trusted in traditional schools.

 

Most meditators think that these things (despite being written about over and over) are myths and allegorical legends.

 

I've heard about siddhi discussed quite openly in schools where the so-called hard jhana is strongly emphasised, for instance the Pa Auk lineage in Burma.

 

But even within Pa Auk tradition I've never heard that siddhi was used as an indicator of one's quality of practice. Personally, that would give rise to all sorts of attachments in me.

 

Edited October 12, 2022 by Vajra Fist

[freeform]

41 minutes ago, Vajra Fist said:

I've heard about siddhi discussed quite openly in schools where the so-called hard jhanna is strongly emphasised, for instance the Pa Auk lineage in Burma.

 

Yup there are some genuine practitioners coming from Pa Auk Sayadaw’s line.

 

Quote

But I've never heard that siddhi was used as an indicator of one's quality of practice.

Buddhism is not my main path - however I’ve seen this being the case in both an esoteric Burmese Buddhist tradition that I’m part of as well as a Chan tradition I’m familiar with.

 

This stuff isn’t shared with the general population of a monastery - but only in small, specialised groups where meditative practice is the focus.
 

As weird as it may seem, the majority of monks have little interest in cultivation. It’s more of a lifestyle thing for most.

 

In Daoist alchemical traditions siddhi obviously play an important role on the path.

 

Quote

Doesn't that give rise to all sorts of attachments?

Generally those that get to the stage where these things are relevant have gotten past attachments … or they wouldn’t have been able to get there.
 

Though they can still get corrupted after attainment… usually happens if they leave their teacher prematurely.

 

There are traditions that specifically seek powers and siddhi directly… They don’t lead to spiritual cultivation and in fact create further karmic weight that keeps them trapped.

The siddhi in these traditions tend to be a little different in quality to the ones that arise as a byproduct of spiritual cultivation.

 

I steer well clear of these!

[Shadow_self]

On 11/10/2022 at 9:10 AM, freeform said:

It’s relaxation, not meditation.

100% agree...Nice little thing to do for a while if you are feeling stressed...I did it for a little bit...its a good way to consciously root out/identify bad patterns in your breathing...but those things will drop away naturally as well with the right seated practice imo

 

 

16 hours ago, freeform said:

Doing anything precludes meditation.

 

(at least in the way I understand meditation.)

 

Mindfulness is not meditation - it’s mindfulness practice… one of the other ‘stepping stones’ to actual meditation.

Yes 100%

 

 

12 hours ago, Vajra Fist said:

 

Semantics. The buddha said that insight isn't possible without mindfulness. Those who don't work to develop concentration first before practicing 'just sitting' meditation are basically just stewing in their own hindrances.

But concentration isnt a practice so much as a substance, in my experience

 

11 hours ago, freeform said:

Yeah it’s semantics, I agree.
 

But I think semantics are important.

 

I think it’s worth understanding what is a stepping stone and what is a true result, no?

 

Incidentally, concentration is also a result that can’t happen if you’re ‘doing’ some method.

 

Anecdotal, but I have felt that the difference is that when you get into a deep state of concentration and substance starts to build...then you aren't actually doing the method so much anymore, because, at least in my experience, once you "enter" that gateway, you'd get absorbed into it. One you are in, then it becomes a matter of not being pulled out as opposed to "improving concentration"

 

All opinion of course

 

9 hours ago, freeform said:

I’m pretty sure I already qualified it as my opinion.

 

And the same quote pretty much explains the key difference in definition.

 

I did watch a few of his videos. 
 

I don’t have issues with HRV training for it’s intended purpose.

 

I like his presentation actually. I suspect it’s a very good resource for people with a lot of stress.

It’s just not meditation.
 

Following his method will not result in samadhi or any of the various jhannic states. 
 

And if that is your aim - then following his method past a certain point will actually stop you being able to achieve it at all.

 

I also got this vibe....a lot of intent behind it

 

 

8 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

This is the universal statement:

 

 

This statement: 

 

 

is not always true. For example, applied thought and sustained thought are typically used for not only access concentration, but the first jhana as well as they are listed as jhanic factors for both Sutta jhana and Visudhamagga jhana. 

 

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html

 

In some traditions, it may be true, although it is more typical for a method to be learned before it is dropped in my experience. 

I agree with @freeform on this....from several teachers, I have been told there is only 1 jhana definition that is real...and the results are pretty life altering...anything else is just moving the goalposts to create "participation" trophies

 

That sounds awful I know...but hey, dont shoot the messenger

 

5 hours ago, freeform said:

I then qualified that I’m talking about meditation ‘as I understand it’ 

 

I’ve written a lot about what I consider meditation to be… as well as jhanna. 
 

My view is certainly not shared by the vast majority of meditators.
 

Thats because it’s way beyond what they think is possible.
 

For example, I’ve been taught (and shown) that attainment of each jhannic absorption, when fully realised, invariably comes with certain siddhi. Just like learning to draw invariably comes with the ability to generate a likeness of any object on paper.
 

For my teachers, it’s very simple - if you haven’t achieved xxxx siddhi - then you haven’t achieved xxxx stage of jhanna. These siddhi are things like bilocation, changing one physical substance into another, generating visible light phenomena etc.

 

It might sound elitist or materialistic to some but it’s just like if you can’t generate a likeness of an object on paper, then you can’t say that you’ve attained the ability to draw. You need to prove your ability to graduate from art school.
 

These results are used as tests or assessments of one’s practice, because inner experience is generally not trusted in traditional schools.

 

Most meditators think that these things (despite being written about over and over) are myths and allegorical legends.
 

I believe they’ve become myths and legends because as a culture we tend to move the goal posts from something exceptionally difficult to something we can achieve with relative ease. It’s like we feel entitled to decide our own level of attainment…
 

So generating a bright, visible light as a sign of attaining certain meditative absorption… over a few generations of lazy practitioners - turns to being able to feel tingles on your lips as a sign of meditation… or worse still - being able to imagine a bright light.

 

I think that’s a shame.

 

That’s why when I see a relaxation hack being taught as meditation, I like to point out that there’s a lot more to this stuff. Relaxation is great - but don’t settle for relaxation if genuine cultivation is your calling in life  

 

Meditation is a doorway to the very building blocks of reality… when they say that physical reality is fundamentally consciousness at its root - this is not metaphor or allegory… they have a good reason to believe this. Each level of meditative absorption pierces a deeper layer of consciousness and accesses a deeper layer of what we consider our reality.
 

It’s not just about developing a calm mind and a harmonious nervous system (great as these goals are, of course).

 

I’m not here to convince anyone of anything. I get that this is a radical thing to say in this day and age. I get that it’s unbelievable. But there are people here who benefit from hearing about how deep this stuff goes and then making up their own mind about it.

 

There are people with great talent and drive that feel an inner pull to cultivation - but then they look at the sorry state of the spiritual world and go into finance or law or music - endeavours that are more challenging and interesting, that require rigour, dedication and excellence. 

 

There’s more to this stuff than what can be seen on the surface! It goes deeper than any other human endeavour.
 

I think it’s worth putting that out there and letting talented, ambitious people get curious and discover for themselves if that’s what they want.

The people that do well with cultivation are excited by the challenge - not overwhelmed by it.

One of those siddhi you mentioned, both of my teachers mentioned it...You mentioned one of them in an earlier post about it being known as the strike of Ling. Swathes of people saw it on the first teacher...several others attest to it on the second one. Including non students with no investment in said individual

4 hours ago, freeform said:

This suggests to me that they’ve lost some key aspects of the art generations ago - and are resorting to science-like factors to fill the missing pieces.

 

Uncorrupted traditions are just as rigorous as the scientific method - and don’t require the mental models and methodologies from outside of their own tradition.

 

This doesn’t mean that dogmatic traditionalism is the answer though. That can corrupt an art just as much…

In fact, I would go so far as to say they are even stricter than any scientific approach...

 

In the Buddhist practices i was shown..it was sit and do a, b, c until something happens...I wont tell you what. document your experiences..we can discuss them...when the "thing happens" you'll know, then we'll go further. No questions about what will happen. Questions afterwards only

 

That was it...cause, effect, and clearing up of misunderstandings along the way....there was no room for deviation whatsoever...and if deviation begins...it is quickly corrected

 

 

3 hours ago, Vajra Fist said:

 

I've heard about siddhi discussed quite openly in schools where the so-called hard jhana is strongly emphasised, for instance the Pa Auk lineage in Burma.

 

But even within Pa Auk tradition I've never heard that siddhi was used as an indicator of one's quality of practice. Personally, that would give rise to all sorts of attachments in me.

 

It is used, its just not spoken about....The Pau Auk tradition have some esoteric stuff going on that isnt so public...They explicitly teach certain practices for siddhi to arise to certain folk...it is nearly insisted upon. But the siddhi that they teach are not saught for power...it is for the ability to discern between the layers of reality, and in even narrower cases, how it can be manipulated

 

PS.I need to shut up now because Im saying too much  

 

2 hours ago, freeform said:

Yup there are some genuine practitioners coming from Pa Auk Sayadaw’s line.

 

Buddhism is not my main path - however I’ve seen this being the case in both an esoteric Burmese Buddhist tradition that I’m part of as well as a Chan tradition I’m familiar with.

 

This stuff isn’t shared with the general population of a monastery - but only in small, specialised groups where meditative practice is the focus.
 

As weird as it may seem, the majority of monks have little interest in cultivation. It’s more of a lifestyle thing for most.

 

In Daoist alchemical traditions siddhi obviously play an important role on the path.

 

Generally those that get to the stage where these things are relevant have gotten past attachments … or they wouldn’t have been able to get there.
 

Though they can still get corrupted after attainment… usually happens if they leave their teacher prematurely.

 

There are traditions that specifically seek powers and siddhi directly… They don’t lead to spiritual cultivation and in fact create further karmic weight that keeps them trapped.

The siddhi in these traditions tend to be a little different in quality to the ones that arise as a byproduct of spiritual cultivation.

 

I steer well clear of these!

Indeed there are...interesting approach they have

 

I picked up a text on the Weizza lines recently..made me want to go traverse Myanmar

 

There was actually clips from a ceremony shown recently on YouTube...Tattoos during the full moon and pulling out the machete to check out if the ritual was successful...scary stuff

[Creation]

12 hours ago, freeform said:

Yeah it’s semantics, I agree.
 

But I think semantics are important.

 

I think it’s worth understanding what is a stepping stone and what is a true result, no?

To be fair, what Knutson is sharing on YouTube is like his personal path notes of what he's found helpful, including all the stuff relating it to science. The actual methods of his lineage are not shared outside of one on one instruction with an authorized teacher. And his lineage does have a word for the state that eventually arises: samadhi. If he wants to call the training you do prior to samadhi "meditation", I really don't see the problem with that.