The A∴A∴ Classes of Publication

The A∴A∴ classes of publication identify the authority and intended use assigned to different kinds of writing in Crowley's instructional system. They distinguish received or authoritative utterance, scholarship, suggestive writing, official instructions and public expositions of the Law. They classify texts and sometimes individual passages; they do not classify the reader's grade or establish a single order in which the books must be read.

The syllabus in The Equinox I:10 (1913) explicitly defines four classes, A–D. Class E is separately attested by the printed classification of Liber II in The Equinox III:1 (1919). The familiar five-class table consequently brings together evidence from more than one publication; it should not be described as a verbatim reproduction of the 1913 definitions.¹⁾

The examples in the first four rows follow the 1913 syllabus. Their inclusion records the source's classification, rather than an assessment of their literary quality or historical reliability.²⁾

The definition of Class A treats the utterance as beyond correction even by the visible head of the organisation. Its practical editorial consequence is preservation: the text's distinctive wording should not be silently rewritten into an explanation. A translation, commentary or paraphrase can assist a reader, but needs to remain recognisable as a separate contribution.

This status is internal to the system described by the syllabus. Reporting that a work is Class A does not independently demonstrate a supernatural source, prove every historical claim associated with it, or establish the attainment of a person quoting it. Those are different questions requiring their own evidence.

The distinction is useful on a reference wiki. An article may explain Liber Cheth or Liber Ararita in contemporary prose while clearly separating that explanation from the underlying text. The encyclopedia article does not inherit the original work's Class A status merely because it discusses it.

It is tempting to summarise B as theory and D as practice, but the syllabus does not support such a rigid division. Under Class B, it describes Liber E's record-keeping, posture, breathing and concentration exercises. It also places Liber O's divine names, ritual methods and visionary exercises in Class B.

For Liber O, the syllabus gives a specific reason: its instructions are too loose to belong among Class D publications. The distinction therefore concerns the form and official standing of an instruction, not simply whether a reader is expected to do something. Class B can be practical, and Class D can contain an overview of duties rather than a complete script for a ceremony.³⁾

Liber Graduum is a good example of the latter: it summarises tasks, examinations and transitions between grades. Liber Israfel, although plainly ceremonial in form, is listed in Class B. Assigning a class solely from a modern reader's impression of the genre can therefore produce an incorrect result.

The 1913 explanation of Liber O is unusually candid:

The instructions given in this book are too loose to find place in the Class D publications.

— Aleister Crowley, A Syllabus of the Official Instructions of A∴A∴.⁴⁾

Here the distinction concerns how tightly an instruction is specified. The entry still describes practical work, including elementary Qabalah and ritual methods. Consequently, “contains exercises” cannot by itself establish Class D. A reader should retain the stated classification and examine the character of the particular instruction before replacing it with a simpler division between theory and practice.

Class C includes poetry, allegory, philosophical writing and models for reflection. The 1913 list places The Wake World, The Soldier and the Hunchback and John St. John here. These examples show that “suggestive” is a description of how material is offered, not a declaration that it is unimportant.

The syllabus calls John St. John a model for the analytical detail and fullness of a magical record. It describes The Book of Lies as addressing matters of high importance and recommends it even to beginners. A Class C work may consequently serve a serious instructional purpose without requiring every sentence to be received in the same way as a Class A text.⁵⁾

The opening definitions expressly allow publications to belong to more than one class. The subsequent entries demonstrate how carefully this needs to be applied.

The Vision and the Voice appears under “Class A–B”. The syllabus then gives Class D status to the instruction in the Eighth Aethyr and to the method of invoking Aethyrs described in the Eighteenth. A general label for the volume does not erase these distinctions within it.

Liber DCCCCLXIII is listed under Classes A and B, but the syllabus specifies that only its short note belongs to Class A. Likewise, the Class C entry for The Book of Lies expressly assigns chapters XXV, XXXVI and XLIV to Class D: these are the Star Ruby, Star Sapphire and Mass of the Phoenix.⁶⁾

The sound editorial habit is to identify the passage being discussed and the scope of the classification attached to it. Applying one label indiscriminately to a collected volume, its introduction, commentary and every embedded ritual can obscure the source's own distinctions.

The qualification is present in the initial definition of the scheme:

Some publications are composite, and pertain to more than one class.

— Aleister Crowley, A Syllabus of the Official Instructions of A∴A∴.⁷⁾

It authorises reading at more than one scale: a volume may have an overall designation while a note, vision or ritual within it has another. A catalogue can preserve both levels by recording the volume’s designation and the scope of any exception. This is especially useful when a later extract circulates on its own and no longer carries the surrounding explanation of its status.

Classification should be checked against a dated source. Liber B vel Magi illustrates why: its 1912 printing has a leaf reading Class B, while the 1913 syllabus lists it under Class A. These documents establish a difference in designation, but do not by themselves explain whether it arose through correction or deliberate reassignment.⁸⁾

The class must also be distinguished from the title and number. Liber B's letter is part of its title; Liber I is its numerical identifier. A number may encode a symbolic relationship, but is neither a publication class nor a ranking from easiest to hardest. Similarly, the paper letters A–F mentioned in Liber XIII identify grade papers that are themselves Class D; those letters are not six publication classes.

• The 1913 syllabus, The Equinox I:10, pp. 43–56: definitions, classifications, exceptions and number explanations.
• Liber II, The Equinox III:1 (1919): direct evidence for Class E.
• Liber XIII, The Equinox I:3 (1910): the separately lettered grade papers.
• Related articles: the Holy Books, the syllabus and One Star in Sight.