Franklin Merrell-Wolff begins a twelve-part series on the subject of his philosophy. He examines various motivations for formulating a philosophy and expresses his desire to formulate a statement that is meaningful not only to himself but available to others who might find it valuable. He explores the epistemological and psychological criticisms, along with the contributions of modern Western mathematical thought, that have shaped the substance and method of his philosophical formulation. He also discusses the importance of the meeting of East and West and outlines efforts by both Western and Eastern thinkers to establish a cross-understanding. He then produces a brief review of what is implied in the historic development of Western philosophic thought from Thales’ challenging the myth and tradition of his culture through Kant’s reconciliation of the rationalistic and empiric schools of philosophy to his own formulation of Introceptualism.

Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues this series by returning to the subject of the early Greeks and to certain consequences of the Kantian contribution. He credits the pre-Socratics with having formulated the problems known as the “One and the Many” and the “Permanent and the Impermanent.” He goes on to consider the contributions of Pythagoras that are of perennial importance; namely, the mathematical principle of proof and the discovery of the irrationals. Wolff proceeds to outline Kant’s transcendental aesthetic and the categories of the understanding, to review the importance of non-Euclidean geometry upon the thinking of Einstein, and to point out that pure thought is valid for experience because our thought and experience are predetermined by our forms of cognition. He then raises the question as to the universal validity of the Kantian forms and suggests that this critique may provide a new interpretation of evolution and of the nature of universal illusionism.

Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues this series by returning to the image of a cognizing entity within a shell or capsule that encloses his consciousness and predetermines his experience and thought. In this illustration, metaphysical knowledge would be possible by the fabrication of a door so that the cognizing entity could penetrate into the zone beyond the capsule, unconditioned by the forms of perceptual consciousness and the categories of the understanding. Such a door would correspond to a third function of cognition—that which Wolff calls “introception.” Wolff continues this discourse on 14 February 1972 by addressing a question concerning the meaning of the conception of “Universal Consciousness” brought up in the recording titled “On Space,” part 2 recorded on 8 November 1971. He begins by offering an analysis of Northrop’s thesis presented in The Meeting of East and West that, in general, Eastern man is oriented to what he has called the “aesthetic continuum,” while Western man is oriented to the “theoretic continuum.” Wolff then proceeds by discussing Northrop’s conceptions of the “determinate aesthetic continuum” and the “indeterminate aesthetic continuum,” and suggests that the indeterminate aesthetic continuum might be what is meant by “Universal Consciousness.” He does, however, maintain that the essence of his own yogic contribution to finding a Western Way lies in the possibility of realizing what he describes as the “indeterminate theoretic continuum” analogous to Northrop’s conception of the indeterminate aesthetic continuum, and he considers Western culture’s orientation to mathematics to be the primary component in this yoga. He goes on to elaborate on the three approaches to resolving the wrongness in the world represented by Buddha, Shankara, and Christ. He suggests that the Buddha’s psychological emphasis upon suffering is more concerned with the aesthetic component while Shankara’s concern with ignorance is more related to the theoretic component. He concludes by presenting the Christian formulation of the problem of wrongness in the world as due to the action of a perverse will and suggests that the student should choose a path most suited to his personal psychology.

Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues this series by stating that his reason for basing his philosophic statement upon a third form of cognition, which he calls “introception,” is that the epistemological basis of his series of five Realizations cannot be established upon the functions of sense perception and conceptual cognition alone. He proceeds to go through the process of self-analysis consistent with the philosophy of Shankara that led to his first realization that “I am Atman,” and makes a distinction between the meaning of ‘convincement’ and ‘conviction’. He goes on to cite Aurobindo’s statement that Realizations are valid within the zone they cover and that correction to an earlier conviction can only be achieved by reference to a subsequent more comprehensive Realization. He then elaborates upon Aurobindo’s distinction between mental realizations and transcendental realizations. Wolff continues his description of the series of realizations by relating the significance of Maharishee’s thought that led to his second mental realization, “I am Nirvana.” He presents a mathematical analogy to demonstrate how it is possible to identify a microcosmic subject to consciousness with a macrocosmic state of consciousness. He concludes by referring to the mathematics of the infinite as a logical paradigm to resolve the paradox that the seeker cannot “attain” Nirvana, but rather, must become conscious of an eternal fact.

Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues this series by reviewing the material presented in part 4 and proceeding to a consideration of the third of his five realizations; namely, “substantiality is inversely proportional to ponderability.” He formulates this realization in mathematical terms as PS = 1, which is the equation of an equilateral hyperbola. He goes on to describe the generation of the mandala suggested by the mathematical treatment of this realization and considers the significance of the mandala as viewed by Dr. Carl G. Jung and in terms of the religious symbolism of the Great Pyramid of Giza. He points out that while the circle symbolizes an orientation of consciousness toward a center, the hyperbola represents an orientation of consciousness toward space, which he regards as foreshadowing a shift from the Vedantic notion of the Self as the ultimate Realization to the Buddhistic notion of Anatma and Nastikata. He elaborates upon the evolution of our conception of number and suggests that the square circumscribing the circle represents an evolution in our conceptuality that has reached the point where it can now comprehend the meaning of the circle. Wolff concludes this discourse on his third mental realization by providing a brief review of the trigonometric function associated with the circle known as the sine curve and contrasts the endless periodicity implied by the sine curve with the orientation to infinity represented by the hyperbola.

Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues this series by suggesting that the union of the East and West is best considered as the union of that which is most ancient and original from the cultures oriented to the aesthetic component with that which is latest to develop in the cultures oriented to the theoretic component. He proceeds to a consideration of the fourth of his series of five realizations. He begins by making a distinction between a systematic method for the awakening of transcendental Consciousness and the spontaneous awakening as the result of thought oriented in a transcendental direction. He acknowledges that although he experimented with certain tantric techniques, he nonetheless attained no positive results from them. He does, however, state that he gave substantial attention to Theosophical literature, which helped to produce a favorable condition with respect to the awakening process. He comments upon his coming into contact with one whom he recognized as a Sage by whom he was brought into a deeper valuation of Sri Shankaracharya. Wolff states that he sympathizes completely with Shankara’s method of self-analysis and that insofar as method is concerned in his own case, the heart of it lay in self-analysis and philosophic thought. He then raises the question as to whether or not his Kantian understanding of Shankara’s thought as presented by Paul Deussen is the same as what Shankara himself meant. He concludes by commenting upon his experience of sleepiness and his experience of working underground earlier in the year prior to his fourth Realization. (This audio recording appears to be incomplete.)

Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues this series by asserting that Realization, for the one who has it, is an authoritative third source of knowledge and that this knowledge forms the epistemic basis of his philosophic formulation. He maintains that Realizations, in the zones that they cover, do not invalidate scientific research in any field, but that they may delimit the value attaching to the conclusions drawn from such scientific research. He acknowledges that there are students of mystical states of consciousness who have granted their factuality but have denied their validity as a source of knowledge; however, based on his own imperiences, Wolff insists upon their cognitive value. He then offers a description of his imperience of the fourth Realization and the consequences that are precipitated into the relative consciousness from this transcendental state of Consciousness.

Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues this series by elaborating upon the fourth of the five realizations that form the epistemic basis of this philosophy. He reiterates that the one essential principle of conscious method in his seeking a Realization was the use of self-analysis for the identification of that which “I” really am. He goes on to describe our relative consciousness as having a vector flow outwardly toward apparent objects, and he affirms that the Self can be realized by reversing that vector flow so that it turns toward its Source without projecting an object in consciousness, no matter how subtle. He then raises the question of a possible locked-in state of trance that he avoided by maintaining a relative state of consciousness on the sidelines that witnessed and recorded the imperiences of the “escalator self.” Wolff proceeds with an extended study of the state and of certain processes characteristic of the fourth Realization. He discusses the inner delight, the nature of the subjective consciousness, and the question of the aesthetic versus theoretic continuum; he also emphasizes the importance of the Kwan-Yin vow, reports the action of a “levitational” force, and comments on the value of the “butterfly valve.”

Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues this series by reviewing the evolution of Buddhist thought as presented in the work entitled Buddhist Logic by Stcherbatsky. He addresses the question of what is essential to a point of view or attitude that may be classified as “Buddhistic,” noting that some radical differences are tolerated. Wolff continues his exposition of Buddhist Logic by reading a section from the text in the chapter titled “Ultimate Reality.” He compares the radical sensationalism of the Buddhist orientation presented here to the Western schools of Empiricism and Pragmatism, and examines the use of language in terms of logical universals versus pointers to a reality beyond the conceptual order. He discusses the possibility of isolating the point-instant of sensation and elaborates upon a parallel conception to this aesthetic orientation found in the theoretic orientation to differential calculus. He concludes by insisting that whereas raw sensation may be the ultimate reality for those oriented to the aesthetic component, self-consistency is the ultimate for those oriented to the theoretic component; moreover, he notes that the theoretic commands power over the aesthetic component, and therefore is at least as real as the purely sensational.

Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues this series by reviewing his critique of Buddhist Logic presented in the preceding audio recording. He stresses the point that in his own Realizations the answers to the theoretical questions of meaning and significance rate higher than the enjoyment of supreme delight associated with the aesthetic component. He suggests that both the aesthetic component and the theoretic component are derived from a third form of cognition that he calls “introception.” Wolff then addresses the problem of the relationship between sensuous perception and conceptual cognition. He discusses an objection to the parthenogenetic birth of conceptions from perceptions and offers the conception of a catalytic agent to explain how an effect may appear to be dissimilar to its cause. Next he introduces the notion of “intelligible intuition” presented in the text as a means to effect the crossing from pure sensuous perception to conceptual cognition. He considers this intelligible intuition to be a third form of cognition that that has the same meaning as the term ‘Realization’, and suggests that we use the term ‘introception’ rather than ‘intelligible intuition’ and ‘imperience’ rather than ‘experience’ to distinguish this third form of cognition from both sense perception and conceptual cognition. Wolff discusses the manner in which these forms of cognition are interrelated, and suggests that these relations reveal that a return to Root Consciousness may be attained by more than one route. He considers a return through the theoretic component as the crown of Buddhahood and an acceptance of the adventure of thought to be a higher possibility than returning from the perceptual domain. He then suggests that a distinction between the aesthetic and theoretic components may be made by contrasting the East’s metaphysical orientation to reality with the West’s epistemological orientation to truth. He concludes by questioning whether the dictum that “all is subject to eternal change” also applies to that dictum itself, so that it too would be subject to decay and change.

Franklin Merrell-Wolff continues this series by proceeding with his critique of the philosophic position presented in the Buddhist Logic by Stcherbatsky. He points out that this position stands in the strongest possible contrast to his own philosophy and raises a question concerning the minimum requirement necessary for a philosophic statement to be regarded as “Buddhist.” He goes on to discuss the doctrines of karma, reincarnation, and anatman. Wolff affirms that it is fundamental in his philosophy that the subject to consciousness transcends the object of consciousness, but notes that it too vanishes from the scene with the ultimate dissolution of the object; otherwise, however, it is recognized as more persistent than the object. He then returns to his elucidation of his fourth and fifth Realizations. He comments on the “butterfly valve,” on the experience of “psycho-physical heat,” and on the experience of “induction,” suggesting that they produce effects that may be experienced, and thus provide strong evidence of the actuality of Realization. He concludes by delineating the features of his fifth Realization, such as the power, delight, and satisfaction that culminated in what he calls the state of “High Indifference,” the recognition of the equipollency of Nirvana and Sangsara, and the acceptance of doctrine of anatman.

Franklin Merrell-Wolff concludes this series by offering an interlude concerning the conditions that are favorable for this type of composition. He describes this type of production as a joint effort between the intellectual mind and an inciting charge from a different level that activates the resources of the intellectual mind to produce material that is not in its organization and development governed by intellectual thinking alone. He concludes by reading and commenting upon a few aphorisms that resulted from his fifth Realization, which he notes are examples of this type of production.