C

91.      Words communicate concrete images (codified sensual perceptions) from mind to mind. The music of the voice—its tonalities and expressions—communicate feelings (non-programmable emotion) from heart to heart.

92.      We orchestrate our verbal communication with our hands, our faces, and every gesture; or by holding our fingers just so or our eyes thus. We direct a symphony of interrelationship to those around us.

93.      Each human being is a symphony played out with its overtures, its accents, and its crescendos. There is far more to be learned from the music than can be derived from the analysis of the individual words or sounds that make up what we generally believe to be communication.

94.      Thus, it is in music that we are most often caught by unexpected surges of emotion. It is the unique, though not fully explored gift of the musician to communicate a direct experience of emotion to a listener. And, indeed, the criterion for judgment of whether or not any series of noises is music, is the communication of emotion.

95.      A “song” then is the combination of elements which superimpose the emotional onto the sensually perceived. A song, therefore, engenders the emotional context in which any given “facts” (sensual perceptions) are to be understood.

96.      “Law” is weakened by a preponderance of words and a lack of music. It is no longer possible to mete out justice when the situation is stripped of its emotion or music, and judgment must be made on the basis of words alone, weighed against the unstable standard of each other.

97.      It is possible to attune oneself to the music of the universe and thereby see all things in the light, not of the responsive emotion, but of the emitted emotion. There is true communication born—when we can see and accept the emotions coloring the sensual perceptions of another without interrupting the flow of emotion generated from ourselves.

98.      This empathic response to another individual may open channels of energy between people that have been hitherto untapped. For example, the empathic response would enable total honesty. It would bear the ability to communicate across cultural and language barriers. It may even open channels of physical and most certainly psychological healing.

99.      The empathic response is latent in every human being. Some have experienced it to some degree or another. The husband who wakes up with morning sickness or labor pains during his wife’s pregnancy is one example. The mother who awakens in the middle of the night knowing beyond the shadow of a doubt that her child needs her is another. These are examples of the response that is more primeval within us than even our most elementary forms of communication.

100.  The search for meaning is endless. It turns ever in upon itself. And the further in you turn, the further out you get.

 

Editor’s Note: Verses 91-93 are often referred to as “the pencil section” of the First Hundred as Wesley abandoned his fountain pen and wrote in a soft lead pencil. Speculation suggests that he intended to come back to this section to rewrite or perhaps even erase, but this has never been confirmed.

It is widely assumed that Wesley intended to summarize his entire philosophy and understanding of life in these 100 verses. Therefore, the last ten have the feeling of a frantic scramble to cover everything a little.  It has recently been discovered, however, that Wesley was unable to stop at this First Hundred and the editor has endeavored to transcribe Wesley’s sometimes unreadable notes. The Second Hundred will follow.

XC

81.      The workings of coincidence. (74) Although we cannot control coincidence, we can become more aware of it and thus capitalize upon it. We become coincidental receivers.

82.      Consider this parable. A person is cold and, passing a coffee shop, reaches into a pocket for the necessary change for a hot cup of coffee. That person finds the pocket empty and remains cold, passing by the coffee shop. A second person, also cold, comes the same direction with the same feelings and intent. The second person is also lacking the appropriate funds. But, outside the coffee shop, the second picks up a quarter from the ground, goes in and has coffee. Coincidence? Yes. But the same coincidence was available for the first passerby who simply did not see the coin on the walk.

83.      There is a gestalt to coincidence. It multiplies itself over and over again. It would not be surprising to find that the first person above “never has anything good happen” and that the second becomes the “one millionth person through the door who wins a trip to Hawaii.”

84.      Coincidence occurs in the pattern of the existing networks of the coincidental entities. Thus the likelihood of coincidence is always 100%.

85.      Corollary to Wesley’s Theory of Relativity (17) (22): You can never go back.

86.      Much has been said concerning the possibilities and ethics of time travel. If it were possible, the ethics would resolve themselves. For example: the ethic of changing history vs. non-interference in the past. If one traveled through time into the past, it would not be possible to alter the events that led that person there/then. Whatever acts that person performed would already be historically set by the time they were enacted.

87.      Seeing visions of past or future events, however, may enable one to change the “now” and thereby alter the course of history. It is only in the now that history may be changed.

88.      While life is made of paradoxes (24) it is not made of contradictions. All networks form a greater network together. Thus, to change a past history is ultimately to contradict one’s own existence.

89.      We call the arbitrary terms of measurement set against the constant motion of the cosmos (23) “time” and “space.”

90.  There is a constant pressure toward mediocrity (62).

LXXX

71.      Wesley’s Theory of Relativity (17), expanded. “Absolute” exists only in fantasy. Everything sensually perceived is “relative” to our perceptions of what is around it. Lead two people into a dimly lit room, one from the bright sunlight and one from a darkened cellar. The first will exclaim how dark it is and the second will shield his or her eyes from the light. Yet neither will be able to see.

72.      Back to if/then. Most often, we can see the possibilities within certain realms for expanded thought. In terms of the color example, if red, then not blue, yellow, green, or orange. If not red, then blue, yellow, green, or orange, ad infinitum. But truly creative thinking breaks free of even these restraints. Consider these possibilities for expanded thinking. If not red, then cool. If not red, then slow. If not red, then weightless. If not red then growing. If not red, then free. Each phrase leads the mind to a different way of considering red: hot, fast, heavy, ripe, captive. And those are only the obvious ones.

73.      The genius of the human mind is the ability to multiply sensual perceptions by associating the seemingly unrelated with each other.

74.      The Laws of Coincidence. The cosmic laws of coincidence are less real and more binding than the human laws of physics. And that is the first premise of the law of coincidence: The less real, the more binding.

75.      The second premise of the law of coincidence is that coincidence cannot be planned.

76.      Third, coincidence is everywhere, always.

77.      Fourth, coincidence cannot be created, but can always be recognized.

78.      Fifth, the more coincidental entities available, the more coincidences that are possible. While the number of possible coincidences increases, however, the probability of coincidence is unaffected by the number of coincidental entities available. The first corollary to this is that you are never alone, i.e. out of the reach of coincidence.

79.      Ultimately, coincidence always works for universal good.

80.  Consider this line of thinking (73) and the number of possibilities from the statement, “If not automobiles, then pencils.” What lines of transportation can be developed by following this linear equation.

LXX

61.      Assume a pendulum hanging still and vertical. On the left of the pendulum is light and on the right is dark. Draw the pendulum to the top of its arc on the left and let go. The initial sweep of the pendulum takes it through an arc from “A” in pure light, through the central vertical to “B,” a height of darkness. It then turns on itself and sweeps back toward the light. But it’s rise in the light is never quite as high as “A” and when it sweeps back into the dark, it will not reach the height of “B”. Still, each time it passes through the constant vertical.

62.      Historically, once a height (be it light or dark) has been passed, it can never be reached again. Neither the Glory of Greece nor the devastation of the Dark Ages shall be seen again.

63.      This central vertical, let us call it “X,” may be defined as the historical convergency.

64.      The nature of historical convergency. Two possible natures come to mind at convergence. The first is a grey, neither light nor dark area in which there is no contrast, no passion. Mediocrity, if you will. The sky and the earth being indistinguishable from each other, there is no horizon. The noble idea and the diabolic idea reach a norm which is neither noble nor diabolic. This is Hegelian synthesis. It is able to become hypothesis only because either the light or the dark would contrast with it. But ultimately, the deterioration is complete and the synthesis is the same.

65.      A is opposite B. B is opposite A. X is opposite A. A is opposite X. B is opposite X. X is opposite B. For convenience of notation let’s assume that “<->” means opposite. There are three realities, each opposites of each of the other two.

66.      A second possible nature exists at convergence. That is that at X, instead of neither light nor dark, there is both light and dark, inseparably held together, yet each distinct and not infringing on the other. This predicates the paradox: Light and Dark proceed from the same essence of being channeled into differing networks. (58) (38) Therefore: A<->B, A<->X, and B<->X may also be written A=X, B=X, A=B. It is all one.

67.      We limit our possibilities. Our if/then formula for rational deduction may be at fault. This, only because our thought process runs in pairs. We think of light and dark as the opposite sides of the pendulum. This if/then could be expressed four ways:

a.      If light, then not dark.

b.      If dark, then not light.

c.       If not light, then dark.

d.      If not dark, then light.

We are deceived in this, yet we fight wars over it.

68.      The four formulae are based on the assumption that light and dark are opposite and that one or the other must exist while one and only one can exist.

69.      Red and green sit opposite each other on the color wheel. But consider the implication of “If not red, then green.” The inverse is not necessarily true. Depending on the subject, if not red, then any number of possibilities. If we are discussing traffic signals, if not red then either green or yellow, for example.

70.  The difference between 68 and 69 is that we have defined colors as relative and have defined light and dark as absolute.

 

Editor’s Note: Wesley wrote before the Internet and from the experience of 25 years in utter isolation. He doesn’t always have  an exact handle on the philosophies that he quotes. Thus, he identifies three terms, hypothesis, antithesis, and synthesis, and a name: Hegel. He doesn’t have access to reference material to see what Hegel actually said about them, but defines the terms to suit himself. It is surprising, however, that he comes near to the same conclusion: “Being and non-being are the same.” It should also be noted that verses 43-64 comprise what is known as “the brown section” of the First Hundred. Unaccountably, Wesley changed from black ink to brown for these verses creating many headaches as editors attempt to decipher what may have been his secret meaning.

LX

51.      True and accurate communication can exist in only two circumstances: a) The experiences and networks of the communicators are identical, or b) one or more of the communicators is able to directly impress their sensual perceptions into the mind of the other(s).

52.      Shared intimacy at this level is the greatest personal risk an individual can take.

53.      The reason we cannot reverse the effect of fire (31) and turn energy (heat and light) back into wood, is that not only would one need the same amount of energy, but the same energy.

54.      If we cannot create mass that we know (wood) from energy, what substances might be created by forcing energy into networks it was never a willing partner to? Those masses can only be more unpredictable, volatile, and dangerous than the energy created through the disruption of willing networks.

55.      Consider (34) the unpredictable and uncontrollable energy disruptions latent in the forcing of people into unwilling networks. Certainly the secret of good government would be to channel existing networks into creative good rather than to attempt the creation of new or unwilling networks to accomplish preconceived goals of power.

56.      As one studies the mythology of various cultures (36) certain similarities continually crop up. Yet, every attempt to find a common cultural or mythical root ends fruitless. So while one sees the same themes, the master thought or mother concept frequently remains obscure. This is because, as the myth travels through different networks, it adapts itself—like water to the banks of a stream—to the network through which it flows. Thus the message is limited by the method of transmission.

57.      As long as our mythology is transmitted by means of words, we limit it to the scope of that code. When we are brave enough in our intimacy to transmit the thoughts and concepts codified, we will know only the truth.

58.      In a similar paradox, we speak of soul and body or spirit and physical as if there were a rigid dichotomy between them. Yet we recognize that we are one whole being, indivisible. In reality, they are the same essence of being, channeled into differing networks. (46-48)

59.      Not being limited by space and time, one essence of being may be channeled into multiple networks and/or subnetworks.

60.  Historical Convergencies. Hegel said, Hypothesis + Antithesis = Synthesis. That synthesis becoming a new hypothesis. But . . . Imagine, if you would, a great pendulum suspended at the top of its first arc, posed for the downswing. When released, it passes through a center vertical and then rises to an opposite height, not quite so bold as its initial glory, before swooping down again toward the vertical. Is there ever really a synthesis?