The Book of Wesley by Nathan Everett

The Book of Wesley

Introduction to the 1st C

When studying The Book of Wesley, it is helpful to remember that it was created before the invention of the wheel. Therefore, something had to be invented every time transportation was needed. Some of Wesley’s thoughts are necessarily the forerunners of philosophies that have evolved since. Others have merely been passed over as too preposterous for an enlightened age. Still others yet await an age of sufficient enlightenment for their future development.

It is the task of the reader to decide which are which. It is not likely that Wesley ever did.

Nathan Everett, Editor

July 31, 1981

X

The entirety of that which exists has being only because it has been remembered from the collective consciousness of humanity. As long as someone remembers something, it exists in what we call reality. It may exist in a different time frame or at a different dimension than we imagined, but it does exist.
Imagine all the things in this world that do not exist and have never been, simply because no one has remembered them. Yet.
You can positively affect your environment. It is entirely possible for you to control your body temperature, for example, so that you do not feel cold or heat in excess of what makes you comfortable. You may find yourself completely at ease lying naked in a snowdrift. If you are controlling your environment, it cannot affect you.
Paradoxically, it is quite a different thing to control other people’s perception of your environment. They are limited by their own illusions of reality. Thus, even if you are completely at ease lying naked in your snowdrift, do not be surprised if someone else perceives you as freezing to death and rushes you to a hospital. They, after all, must act according to their own perceptions.
Someone once said, “If you can dream it, you can achieve it; if you can imagine it, you can become it.”
This shows the power of the imagination. It is a cosmic law that anything you imagine in your mind and visualize until it is real to you, must come to you. It may not be what you expected when you first saw it in your mind, but its presence will strike you with the force of sudden realization. “Aha!” you will say. “I see it now!”
The laws of physics are man-made. They exist by our permission. There is another way—a mythical way—of explaining every physical phenomenon. When it is discovered, its discoverer is liberated from the law that bound him or her until then.
It is said that no two things can occupy the same space at the same time. When a person realizes that all things occupy the same space at the same time, the door to the universe is opened and black holes in space lose their terror.
Ritual is one of the foundations of humanity’s search for the infinite. Through ritual, we are released from the activities and pressures of normal life into communion with the universal consciousness of humanity.
Our greatest danger to spiritual discovery is to allow “ritual” (adj.) to become “routine” (n.).

Editor’s Note: As we’ll discover in these first twenty or thirty verses, Wesley uses a shotgun approach to toss out a variety of concepts, often paired, as a kind of starting point for later discussion. At first glance, he appears to be extremely disorganized.

XX

My most startling revelation was the gender of my soul (if I may use a vernacular and not altogether accurate term). I, a male, embrace a feminine soul. Perhaps, that is what science is alluding to when marking the male as having xy chromosomes and the female with yy. The soul may be universally feminine.
Hence, the truth of the myth of the mother goddess—less myth than self-realization at the most basic level.
The suppression of the feminine, whether in society or in oneself, can only lead to a man’s spiritual demise. The outward act has an inward consequence.
“Creation” is by definition dependent upon its “creator.” It cannot exist apart. There is nothing that the creation can draw upon for knowledge, inspiration, motivation, other than the creator.
One might say that the creation is the embodiment of the creator.
We as “Creatures” are inseparable from our creator. We are made of the same stuff.
Wesley’s Theory of Relativity: The universe, as we generally perceive it, is in constant motion. The chair on which I sit, sits on a floor that is part of the surface of a globe spinning on its axis. In addition, that globe revolves around another, spinning on its axis and revolving around its own orbital anchor. That can only mean there is never a “here,” for the “here” that I was only a moment ago is now “there.” Attached to my spinning revolving globe, I am constantly moving away.
I can only say “here” with meaning relative to other things that are moving at roughly the same speed and in the same direction I am, i.e. I am “here,” five feet from that chair “there.”
Not only are our various planets and suns and stars in motion, but the very space that surrounds us/them is also in motion.
The true secret of travel is to stay still. If one could remain “here”—even for the most instantaneous perception of time—time itself would disappear. The motion of everything else would bring all the cosmos “here” and “now.”

Editor’s Note: I thought for a while Wesley was contradicting himself when he said that all things occupy the same space at the same time (8) and then launched into this “Theory of Relativity.” Then he gets back to all things being “here and now.” Wesley had a unique way of embracing contradictions and not even acknowledging they existed.

XXX

To equate this: The Devine Constant or “Here” equals the combined mass of the cosmos times its universal motion. H: Here; T: This; M: Motion. H=TM.
I suspect there is no greater motion than the universal motion of the cosmos. Why? It would not be possible to achieve greater motion than the cosmos because you would “arrive” before you got there. You would arrive at a time/place that did not yet exist. By so doing, you would contradict your own existence.
This, then, implies that the universal motion of the cosmos is a constant by which all else can be measured. The terms of measurement are arbitrarily set.
All life is made of paradoxes. One of the most significant is that while every person is responsible for his or her life, few if any are to blame for it. Thus, we may take charge and affect our own environments, but cannot refuse succor to those who for one reason or another do not.
Responsibility may be accepted, but it may not be imputed. It is, then, a position of power and authority.
Guilt is imputed. It is passive. It is a position of weakness.
One is seldom guilty of that for which he or she is responsible.
Innocence is not an antonym to guilt, but rather a synonym for ignorance. Consider the “fall” of Adam. (Adam is non-gendered. “Male and Female created He them and He called their name Adam.”) Adam was promised and received the knowledge of good and evil. In that knowledge Adam lost innocence/ignorance.
Adam was never guilty, for how can guilt be imputed against one who does not know good from evil?
The important thing to remember about the “physical” world as we know it is that it is anything but physical. All the cosmos in its final analysis is a network of relationships—not between things, but among realities.

Editor’s Note: Understanding his namesake, John Wesley, Wesley Allen’s apparent confusion about what is Biblical and what is spiritual and what is just hogwash seems less contradictive and more a record of his expanding universe. John Wesley was the founder of Methodism back in the 1700s. J. Wesley Allen was named in honor of the religious leader by zealous parents.

XL

The creation of energy out of mass—i.e. burning wood for heat and light—is essentially the breaking apart of networks. Since disruption is the primary factor, it becomes virtually impossible to take the appropriate quantities of heat and light and mold them back into wood, or to re-establish the network.
The more basic the network that is disrupted, the greater and less controllable the energy that erupts from it. Thus, severing the branch from the tree creates one type of energy (motion). Disrupting the basic structure of the branch itself creates a less controllable energy called fire. Disrupting the elemental network of the fire (the hydrogen, oxygen, sulfur, carbon) can only create an even greater explosion of uncontrollable energy.
There must be some way of expanding the network, tapping its energy, without disrupting the network itself.
Networks also exist among the separate realities of people.
The significance of the “Christ event” (death and resurrection) is not in its uniqueness, but rather in its commonality to the human experience. The deepest mythology is marked by the continued struggle of light and dark forces.
While the sum and substance of humanity’s dream has always been to dwell in the light, all good gifts that are given to humanity (in mythology) are brought forth from the forces of darkness (or stolen from them). Christ, the leader of the force of light in Christian mythology, brings forth his gift from the deepest oblivion of hell.
If there were no such thing as darkness, the light could not shine. It would be dull, lacking contrast.
Embrace the dark and the light without losing either, and you will be at one and at peace.
It was once believed that for every individual there was one other, and only one, that would perfectly complement and fulfill him or her. Much sadness worked within those who did not or could not find their special ones. Far more likely, however, is the idea that for every individual there is a group of people that will complement and fulfill him/her in a variety of unique ways.
This knowledge exemplifies loss of innocence in yet another way.

Editor’s Note: Wesley has a habit of backtracking. In the coming sections, we’ll see him revisit the light and dark issue and attempt to explain them mathematically. It should be noted that everything Wesley learned about math and physics, he learned from music. Therefore, his math sometimes looks a little strange.

L

Editor’s Note: In reading this, it is helpful to note that The Book of Wesley was conceived, if not set to paper, during a time when Wesley was separated not only from one he considered his soulmate, but also from the rest of living beings. He sat alone, creating an entire world out of the thoughts in his mind and then watched as his mind was unable to hold that world together and it disintegrated around him. It is no wonder that he was constantly looking for the “Why” in attempting to explain the “What.”

The linking of souls is different than the traditions of coupling either as two individuals or a group. Soul-mating is a deliberate act, much like lovemaking, but the bond is at a level of intimacy seldom, if ever, achieved on a physical plateau.
Nor is soul-mating restrained by physical limitations. It knows no bounds of time or place. In fact, it is a rare and exquisite experience to share a close time-space with one’s soul mate.
The more knowledge that is gained—usually through the shared experience of others—the more difficult it is to live according to traditions originating in the innocence of a time past. In the new, urban society, for example, it becomes nearly impossible to have two people who can fulfill each other completely. Each tends to expand in different directions and at different speeds. Thus, satellite relationships become more prevalent in the more urban environment.
Refusing to accept the knowledge received leads to a distortion of the tradition—not a return to innocence. We call this warping the innocence. In the present case, it leads to a possessionist posture. One’s claim on another person becomes a property right, reducing the other’s perceived humanity or self-worth.
Accepting the knowledge and its implications grants freedom and individuality to each of the partners. But it does not mean that one would not occasionally yearn for that lost age of innocence, just as we, millennia separate from it, still yearn for paradise.
The Transient Conscious. Another paradox is that the Conscious, while separate from the physical, is inseparable from it. One cannot exist without the other. Yet, the Conscious is not limited by the physical. The physical is the chosen expression of the Conscious.
It is therefore possible that a single physical entity might be the joint expression of more than one Conscious. Perhaps revealed in the psychological expression of schizophrenia.
It is equally possible—the Conscious not being bound by physical limitations of time and space—for a single Conscious to express itself in more than one physical. Hence, the phenomenon of a person being able to see glimpses of past and even future lifetimes. And, it could certainly not be considered beyond the realm of possibility to live simultaneous lifetimes. Thus, a derivative of our earlier recitation of physical law (8): It is possible to be in two places at the same time.
Language is an encumbrance to communication. Perhaps one should say not language, but words. The mind does not think in separate words, but, like our earlier networks, in relationships of connections or, figuratively speaking, in pictures. Since we have only one method of input for our thought patterns—sensual perception—our words are defined only by our experience.
Our words communicate with another person only when our experience base is the same or quite similar.

Editor’s Note: The concept of simultaneous lifetimes (48) finally made it into one of Devon Layne’s novels in 2017 when he published Yelloweye: an Erotic Paranormal Romance Western Adventure.

LX

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).
Shared intimacy at this level is the greatest personal risk an individual can take.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
Not being limited by space and time, one essence of being may be channeled into multiple networks and/or subnetworks.
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?

LXX

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.
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.
This central vertical, let us call it “X,” may be defined as the historical convergency.
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.
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.
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.
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:
1. If light, then not dark.
2. If dark, then not light.
3. If not light, then dark.
4. If not dark, then light.
We are deceived in this, yet we fight wars over it.
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.
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.
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 twenty 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.

LXXX

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.
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.
The genius of the human mind is the ability to multiply sensual perceptions by associating the seemingly unrelated with each other.
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.
The second premise of the law of coincidence is that coincidence cannot be planned.
Third, coincidence is everywhere, always.
Fourth, coincidence cannot be created, but can always be recognized.
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.
Ultimately, coincidence always works for universal good.
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.

XC

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.
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.
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.”
Coincidence occurs in the pattern of the existing networks of the coincidental entities. Thus, the likelihood of coincidence is always 100%.
Corollary to Wesley’s Theory of Relativity (17) (22): You can never go back.
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.
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.
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.
We call the arbitrary terms of measurement set against the constant motion of the cosmos (23) “time” and “space.”
There is a constant pressure toward mediocrity (62).

Editor’s Note: It took thirty years before the concept of time travel ethics and the inability to change history (86) finally made it into one of Devon Layne’s novels—2017’s Redtail: an Erotic Paranormal Romance Western Adventure

C

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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
“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.
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.
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.
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.
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.

❮ Cover Second C ❯

Donate!

Comments

Please feel free to send comments to the author at nathan@nathaneverett.com.