Tao Te Ching vs Book of Pleasure

[rivetrenuck]

has anyone studies both these books side by side? ive read both the Tao Te Ching and Book of Pleasure at different times, but now i m reading them side by side.

it feels very explosive, maybe i m just being wierd.

this is a stupid post.

thank you

- L e x -

[Nalyd Khezr Bey]

I've not read them side by side but like you have read them both and do in fact notice the striking similarities between Spare's philosophy and that of the Tao. Of course it is no mystery that Spare was familiar with Taoism, via Crowley's translation of the Tao Te Ching. I am not sure if Spare's philosophy was influenced by or just in accord with Taoism or perhaps both at various times. I think he may have independently developed his own thing and found somewhat of a basis for it in Taoism probably around the time he was still attempting to state it. Kenneth Grant, according to what he wrote in his Zos Speaks!, states that was also the case with Hans Vaihinger's "philosophy of 'as if'". Spare had never heard of it until Grant presented Vaihinger's book to him because it also fit Spare's method and philosophy. Spare agreed and very much liked Vaihinger's book... again, according to Grant's account of it.

EDIT: Crowley's translation of the Tao Te Ching was not published at the time Spare wrote The Book of Pleasure so that was probably not the translation he read. That info slipped my mind. It's weird that just hours after I originally posted this I was turning the pages of Magick Without Tears and Crowley speaks quite extensively about his translation and the fact he couldn't seem to get it published which led me to look through various pieces by and about Spare to see where he was drawing his inspiration from. Most of the info is rather vague but there is no doubt about his familiarity with the Tao. There is a small pamphlet I can recommend which discusses some of it by Gavin W. Semple called Some perspectives towards understanding the philosophy of The Book of Pleasure by Austin Osman Spare.

[rivetrenuck]

i m not sure when Austin got wind of the Tao Te Ching, but he does acknowledge Lao Tzu in Focus of life, including other figures such as Sappho, Socrates,

my perception of these works is that Spare took the Tao Te Ching and blew it up, cuz Tao still had doctrines and still had their schools of thoughts and so forth, whereas Austin, is against everything!, against doctorines and against people who are against doctorines.

i cant believe the genius of Austin, maybe he was the son of god.

[rivetrenuck]

also do you know where i could get Gavin W. Semple's brochure on online format? or pdf or something?

[Nalyd Khezr Bey]

also do you know where i could get Gavin W. Semple's brochure on online format? or pdf or something?
No. You'll just have to seek it out.

[imagenerator]

I've never read the Book of Pleasures, and hadn't heard of it until now, so thanks for drawing my attention to it. Sounds like it might be useful to an entertainer.

[Mobius_Null]

Austin Osman Spare had too have been inspired by Lao Tzu and the Tao Te Ching in some fashion. Though the proof is scant, anyone who is versed in the Tao Te Ching and the writings of A. O. Spare can plainly see how close these two philosophies relate too each other.

[Balatro]

It's quite blatant. Spare quotes the Tao Te Ching nearly word-for-word a few times. Like in The Book of Pleasure he writes:
"The Kia which can be expressed by conceivable ideas, is not the eternal Kia"
That's directly lifted from the first verse of the Tao Te Ching. I think there are other examples like this.