This paper addresses an increasingly contested topic in the contemporary Western vipassanā meditation movement: The dissemination of Buddhist frameworks like the “stages of insight,” the “ñāṇas” first seen in the 5th century Visudhimagga text, within cultures of mindfulness. The principal question is two-fold: 1) Would sharing such Buddhist frameworks protect potential Western meditators from possible (and underreported) harms of intensive practice? And 2) Does in-depth knowledge of such Buddhist frameworks help, hinder, or otherwise affect perceived progress for experienced meditators? While a growing body of literature has begun reifying the harms mentioned in the first question, the second question has gone unanswered academically despite being answered anecdotally within spiritual communities. Having struggled immensely myself to reconcile conceptual Buddhist knowledge with my own meditation practice, I hypothesize that knowledge of ñāṇas hinders meditative progress, and conduct in-depth, semi-structured interviews of experienced meditators to test this hypothesis. Through this interview-based field work, I construct an intersubjective account of the relationship between cerebral knowledge about meditation – a practice of non-cerebral engagement with one’s direct experience of reality – and meditation itself. Through the research interviews, the hypothesis that conceptualization of the meditative path through ñāṇas hinders vipassanā practice is confirmed, although benefits of meditative frameworks like the “stages of insight” also emerge. A number of themes related to the limitations of concepts emerge as well, fashioning contemporary American insight meditation into a lens through which I deconstruct the general truth of conceptualization philosophically. Pragmatically for meditators, on the other hand, I propose a new map of the meditative path that retains the relevant accuracy of the “stages of insight,” yet lets go of the conceptual trappings they present to Western practitioners.