Scientology Hubbard Parsons Crowley and Black Magic
PublishedNovember 30, 2010
Cal Tech on Friday put on a play about Jack Parsons, one of the founders of JPL: Jet Propultion Laboratory and gang, including Aleister Crowley and L. Ron Hubbard. They also showed the house in Pasadena where these characters met, and how, and included with real photos Jack Parson’s experiments out in the desert re Rockets. They also showed how black magic and the occult were intertwined with each. Some further reading about each here: en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org www.huffingtonpost.com (This video linked to Huffington Post, via Cal Tech site: tacit.caltech.edu Scroll to bottom left “More on Parsons Crowley and Hubbard”–Click on More 🙂 (I deleted the last video as someone said Crowley wasn’t a Satanist—but read that, and make up your own minds. Whatever he was, he was one odd guy: #666 “The Beast”) The point isn’t one thing, it’s the combo of people and the occult, plus black magic that Hubbard was influenced by. www.sweenytod.com www.gothicpress.freeserve.co.uk more view on Crowley)
25 Responses to Scientology Hubbard Parsons Crowley and Black Magic
Yes they worshipped the devil. Thier called when named is satan. So correct there. Also Parsons created solid rocket fuel. Used to go to space. Aswell he was present with Crowley for the hydrodren bomb. They tried to create the golem child during this time. Very interesting stuff to read.
You keep speaking your truth Tory! Asatru is a white supremacist pseudo-religious cult. You’ve just stumbled on another group of people who think and act even worse than $cientologists do -the Neo-pagans. They scour the internet looking for negative comments about their religion and they won’t let up until you back down and agree not to analyze their bullshit religion. Sound familiar? The problem is … they don’t know their in a cult.
You keep speaking your truth Tory! Asatru is a white supremacist pseudo-religious cult. You’ve just stumbled on another group of people who think and act even worse than $cientologists do -the Neo-pagans. They scour the internet looking for negative comments about their religion and they won’t let up until you back down and agree not to analyze their bullshit religion. Sound familiar? The problem is … they don’t know their in a cult.
… cont. The primary hallmarks that bind these larger than life personalities together are 1) the primacy of the force of will in all things, and 2) a commitment to esoteric teachings and to mystical or magical thinking and practices
This combination can be both powerful and dangerous. Crowley was focused on unrepentant hedonistic self indulgence; whereas LRH was focused on building himself up as a demigod by stealing the life force from his adherents
… Moloch 7253, I don’t believe that scientologists as a whole or individually are necessarily guilty of crimes; other than abdicating their personal moral responsibility, which I would regard as a sin rather than a crime.
There do appear to be intriguing structural linkeages, and similarities of thought and practice, between the bodies of work of Aleister Crowley, L. Ron Hubbard, Jack Parsons, and the various institutions that these individuals helped create and inform…
Muloc7253, The denotation of the word occult is a more specific than “the unknown”, it specifically points to secret or esoteric teachings, practices, or training. This denotative qualification remains intact from the 16th century to today.
The modern scientific method is a transparent process. There is nothing esoteric or secret about it. Therefore it cannot be occult. Now, alchemy is another story, but alchemy and science are not interchangeable words or practices.
In the right original contect, yes, occult merely meant ‘the unknown’ but the term has changed quite a bit over the years. You wouldn’t really say a scientist was an occultist, for instance, despite them learning about the literally unknown.
My point being – followers of Crowley (I don’t know what they’d called themselves, magickians maybe? I know they’re not satanists) aren’t responsible for such crimes as scientologists.
B.B. In no way do I disparage Crowley. I take a man at his word. I am quite liberal in this regard. Refer to Crowley’s self definition. It is stand-alone and self evident.
If you tell me that you are purple, then I believe that you believe you are purple. This does not mean I believe you are purple, or that I trust your perception on the face of it.
The terms in which an adult chooses to describe himself as an adult are revelatory of his adult self. Childhood traumas are irrelevant to the sane
Muloc7253, “occult” means secret, hidden, or esoteric, and is a very large net to cast. Any group which engages in secret rituals or practices is an occult group… One could describe Eric Cartman’s kitty tea parties as occult.
… Many, perhaps most, teachings in Buddhism are esoteric or “secret” teachings which require initiation and are never given publicly. These are not wicked IMO; but they could be readily made so by someone who was skillful enough and malicious enough. This is why lineage matters so much in Buddhism. The spiritual supermarket is not an inherently safe place. Lineage matters, as does intention. The CoS fails on both counts, IMO.
… In Biblical terms, Satan is not evil, simply an habitual sinner. To sin is to miss the mark; or to be misguided, and thus to mislead others. To mislead others knowingly is “wicked”.
Elaboration on evil and the levels of hell came several centuries after Jesus’ death. Dante pulled this out of his own dark imagination… not the Bible.
Some esoteric teachings may be wicked. LRH demonstrated this. Intention matters.
weldmaster80, Crowley self-described himself in Biblical terms that invoke such imagery and provoke such labels. He invoked notoriety by referring to himself as “The Beast” and as “666”. The question is what he meant by doing this. Clearly he did not intend to invoke the image of a choir boy.
Charles Manson chose to invoke “666” as well. It would seem that Crowley was his inspiration in this regard. Manson was a scientologist briefly… so there is a weird lineage here.
B.B., third hand accounts are what they are, heresay. Regardless, A.C. did reference LRH in passing in his own words. A.C. described LRH in unflattering terms. I believe that A.C. had acute social and political skills; and these skills were critical in exercising the considerable influence he had in powerful circles in England and the United States.
Crowley grew up in a repressive christian household. His mother, long before Crowley ever happened upon “magick”, used to call him “The Beast” and “666”. Calling himself that was just his way of psychological therapy. It made him feel better.
If you had really read Golden Dawn, I’d doubt seriously you would have had such a disparaging view of A.C.
That’s a pretty skewered definition of sex magick.
Just google “Austin Osman Spare” if you want a clearer (pun not intended) understanding of sex magick.
Sara wasn’t Jack’s wife though. She was the younger sister of Helen, who was married for a time to Parsons. She did, however, sleep with Parsons, but turned her affection to Ron when he entered the picture.
I dont really know the guy.. however at times it seems to me everything has been called satanic by others wanting to demonise it, pot is evil, liquer is evil, if you write with your left hand your evil, interest in the ocult is evil…. it seems to me this is all subjective… I have an interest in the ocult, I CERTANLY DO NOT PROMOTE EVIL, and I wish no harm on anyone.. if anything it (as I view it) would encorage moral behavior… (rule of 3) than again I sapose there are many magik types IMHO
@Coffee1zCrack
so you think that Anton Lavey “cornered the market” on satan/satanism….lm,ao. I hope your not that naive. The devil and his angels have been around alot longer than Lavey was. Anton Lavey did not found the “church of satan” they have been around for a long time………say something!
Search Thorn & Oak
• Have your Advertisment Featured here
Contact us now <<click here>> have your advertisment featured on our site.
• Welcome to Thorn & Oak • Join the Mailing List
Keep up to date with the latest changes on this site join our mailing list sign up below.
Yes they worshipped the devil. Thier called when named is satan. So correct there. Also Parsons created solid rocket fuel. Used to go to space. Aswell he was present with Crowley for the hydrodren bomb. They tried to create the golem child during this time. Very interesting stuff to read.
@ToryMagoo44
“There are many different views on all of this…” – ToryMagoo44
Spoken like a prophet!
@Asatru19
Yep!
You keep speaking your truth Tory! Asatru is a white supremacist pseudo-religious cult. You’ve just stumbled on another group of people who think and act even worse than $cientologists do -the Neo-pagans. They scour the internet looking for negative comments about their religion and they won’t let up until you back down and agree not to analyze their bullshit religion. Sound familiar? The problem is … they don’t know their in a cult.
You keep speaking your truth Tory! Asatru is a white supremacist pseudo-religious cult. You’ve just stumbled on another group of people who think and act even worse than $cientologists do -the Neo-pagans. They scour the internet looking for negative comments about their religion and they won’t let up until you back down and agree not to analyze their bullshit religion. Sound familiar? The problem is … they don’t know their in a cult.
@AnonRanGERO1 No, you are wrong. Magick is neither black nor white. How it is used however, falls into good and evil. QED.
… cont. The primary hallmarks that bind these larger than life personalities together are 1) the primacy of the force of will in all things, and 2) a commitment to esoteric teachings and to mystical or magical thinking and practices
This combination can be both powerful and dangerous. Crowley was focused on unrepentant hedonistic self indulgence; whereas LRH was focused on building himself up as a demigod by stealing the life force from his adherents
Clearly, these inflections are distinct.
… Moloch 7253, I don’t believe that scientologists as a whole or individually are necessarily guilty of crimes; other than abdicating their personal moral responsibility, which I would regard as a sin rather than a crime.
There do appear to be intriguing structural linkeages, and similarities of thought and practice, between the bodies of work of Aleister Crowley, L. Ron Hubbard, Jack Parsons, and the various institutions that these individuals helped create and inform…
Muloc7253, The denotation of the word occult is a more specific than “the unknown”, it specifically points to secret or esoteric teachings, practices, or training. This denotative qualification remains intact from the 16th century to today.
The modern scientific method is a transparent process. There is nothing esoteric or secret about it. Therefore it cannot be occult. Now, alchemy is another story, but alchemy and science are not interchangeable words or practices.
In the right original contect, yes, occult merely meant ‘the unknown’ but the term has changed quite a bit over the years. You wouldn’t really say a scientist was an occultist, for instance, despite them learning about the literally unknown.
My point being – followers of Crowley (I don’t know what they’d called themselves, magickians maybe? I know they’re not satanists) aren’t responsible for such crimes as scientologists.
B.B. In no way do I disparage Crowley. I take a man at his word. I am quite liberal in this regard. Refer to Crowley’s self definition. It is stand-alone and self evident.
If you tell me that you are purple, then I believe that you believe you are purple. This does not mean I believe you are purple, or that I trust your perception on the face of it.
The terms in which an adult chooses to describe himself as an adult are revelatory of his adult self. Childhood traumas are irrelevant to the sane
Magick is specifically black magic.
True magic must be what real men practice when they are not eating quiche.
Muloc7253, “occult” means secret, hidden, or esoteric, and is a very large net to cast. Any group which engages in secret rituals or practices is an occult group… One could describe Eric Cartman’s kitty tea parties as occult.
kurtilein3, don’t forget the Manson cult. Charles Manson was a practitioner of scientology at least for a while.
… Many, perhaps most, teachings in Buddhism are esoteric or “secret” teachings which require initiation and are never given publicly. These are not wicked IMO; but they could be readily made so by someone who was skillful enough and malicious enough. This is why lineage matters so much in Buddhism. The spiritual supermarket is not an inherently safe place. Lineage matters, as does intention. The CoS fails on both counts, IMO.
… In Biblical terms, Satan is not evil, simply an habitual sinner. To sin is to miss the mark; or to be misguided, and thus to mislead others. To mislead others knowingly is “wicked”.
Elaboration on evil and the levels of hell came several centuries after Jesus’ death. Dante pulled this out of his own dark imagination… not the Bible.
Some esoteric teachings may be wicked. LRH demonstrated this. Intention matters.
weldmaster80, Crowley self-described himself in Biblical terms that invoke such imagery and provoke such labels. He invoked notoriety by referring to himself as “The Beast” and as “666”. The question is what he meant by doing this. Clearly he did not intend to invoke the image of a choir boy.
Charles Manson chose to invoke “666” as well. It would seem that Crowley was his inspiration in this regard. Manson was a scientologist briefly… so there is a weird lineage here.
B.B., third hand accounts are what they are, heresay. Regardless, A.C. did reference LRH in passing in his own words. A.C. described LRH in unflattering terms. I believe that A.C. had acute social and political skills; and these skills were critical in exercising the considerable influence he had in powerful circles in England and the United States.
Crowley grew up in a repressive christian household. His mother, long before Crowley ever happened upon “magick”, used to call him “The Beast” and “666”. Calling himself that was just his way of psychological therapy. It made him feel better.
If you had really read Golden Dawn, I’d doubt seriously you would have had such a disparaging view of A.C.
Third hands accounts are as believable as Hubbard’s wholesome reputation.
That’s a pretty skewered definition of sex magick.
Just google “Austin Osman Spare” if you want a clearer (pun not intended) understanding of sex magick.
Sara wasn’t Jack’s wife though. She was the younger sister of Helen, who was married for a time to Parsons. She did, however, sleep with Parsons, but turned her affection to Ron when he entered the picture.
Numbering things from 0 comes from the Qabalah. Same as with the Tarot, it starts at 0 because it represents the beginning of all things.
I dont really know the guy.. however at times it seems to me everything has been called satanic by others wanting to demonise it, pot is evil, liquer is evil, if you write with your left hand your evil, interest in the ocult is evil…. it seems to me this is all subjective… I have an interest in the ocult, I CERTANLY DO NOT PROMOTE EVIL, and I wish no harm on anyone.. if anything it (as I view it) would encorage moral behavior… (rule of 3) than again I sapose there are many magik types IMHO
@Coffee1zCrack
so you think that Anton Lavey “cornered the market” on satan/satanism….lm,ao. I hope your not that naive. The devil and his angels have been around alot longer than Lavey was. Anton Lavey did not found the “church of satan” they have been around for a long time………say something!