Yes，allthings。
Thenwecannotsupposethatthereisanythingdifferentfromtheminwhichboththeoneandtheothersmightexist？
Thereisnothing。
Thentheoneandtheothersareneverinthesame？
True。
Thentheyareseparatedfromeachother？
Yes。
Andwesurelycannotsaythatwhatistrulyonehasparts？
Impossible。
Thentheonewillnotbeintheothersasawhole，noraspart，ifitbeseparatedfromtheothers，andhasnoparts？
Impossible。
Thenthereisnowayinwhichtheotherscanpartakeoftheone，iftheydonotpartakeeitherinwholeorinpart？
Itwouldseemnot。
Thenthereisnowayinwhichtheothersareone，orhaveinthemselvesanyunity？
Thereisnot。
Noraretheothersmany;foriftheyweremany，eachpartofthemwouldbeapartofthewhole;butnowtheothers，notpartakinginanywayoftheone，areneitheronenormany，norwhole，norpart。
True。
Thentheothersneitherarenorcontaintwoorthree，ifentirelydeprivedoftheone？
True。
Thentheothersareneitherlikenorunliketheone，norislikenessandunlikenessinthem;foriftheywerelikeandunlike，orhadinthemlikenessandunlikeness，theywouldhavetwonaturesinthemoppositetooneanother。
Thatisclear。
Butforthatwhichpartakesofnothingtopartakeoftwothingswasheldbyustobeimpossible？
Impossible。
Thentheothersareneitherlikenorunlikenorboth，foriftheywerelikeorunliketheywouldpartakeofoneofthosetwonatures，whichwouldbeonething，andiftheywereboththeywouldpartakeofoppositeswhichwouldbetwothings，andthishasbeenshowntobeimpossible。
True。
Thereforetheyareneitherthesame，norother，norinmotion，noratrest，norinastateofbecoming，norofbeingdestroyed，norgreater，norless，norequal，norhavetheyexperiencedanythingelseofthesort;for，iftheyarecapableofexperiencinganysuchaffection，theywillparticipateinoneandtwoandthree，andoddandeven，andinthese，ashasbeenproved，theydonotparticipate，seeingthattheyarealtogetherandineverywaydevoidoftheone。
Verytrue。
Thereforeifoneis，theoneisallthings，andalsonothing，bothinrelationtoitselfandtootherthings。
Certainly。
Well，andoughtwenottoconsidernextwhatwillbetheconsequenceiftheoneisnot？
Yes;weought。
Whatisthemeaningofthehypothesis—Iftheoneisnot;isthereanydifferencebetweenthisandthehypothesis—Ifthenotoneisnot？
Thereisadifference，certainly。
Isthereadifferenceonly，orratherarenotthetwoexpressions—iftheoneisnot，andifthenotoneisnot，entirelyopposed？
Theyareentirelyopposed。
Andsupposeapersontosay:—Ifgreatnessisnot，ifsmallnessisnot，oranythingofthatsort，doeshenotmean，wheneverheusessuchanexpression，that\"whatisnot\"isotherthanotherthings？
Tobesure。
Andsowhenhesays\"Ifoneisnot\"heclearlymeans，thatwhat\"isnot\"isotherthanallothers;weknowwhathemeans—dowenot？
Yes，wedo。
Whenhesays\"one，\"hesayssomethingwhichisknown;andsecondlysomethingwhichisotherthanallotherthings;itmakesnodifferencewhetherhepredicateofonebeingornotbeing，forthatwhichissaid\"nottobe\"isknowntobesomethingallthesame，andisdistinguishedfromotherthings。
Certainly。
ThenIwillbeginagain，andask:Ifoneisnot，whataretheconsequences？Inthefirstplace，aswouldappear，thereisaknowledgeofit，ortheverymeaningofthewords，\"ifoneisnot，\"
wouldnotbeknown。
True。
Secondly，theothersdifferfromit，oritcouldnotbedescribedasdifferentfromtheothers？
Certainly。
Difference，then，belongstoitaswellasknowledge;forinspeakingoftheoneasdifferentfromtheothers，wedonotspeakofadifferenceintheothers，butintheone。
Clearlyso。
Moreover，theonethatisnotissomethingandpartakesofrelationto\"that，\"and\"this，\"and\"these，\"andthelike，andisanattributeof\"this\";fortheone，ortheothersthantheone，couldnothavebeenspokenof，norcouldanyattributeorrelativeoftheonethatisnothavebeenorbeenspokenof，norcouldithavebeensaidtobeanything，ifitdidnotpartakeof\"some，\"oroftheotherrelationsjustnowmentioned。
True。
Being，then，cannotbeascribedtotheone，sinceitisnot;buttheonethatisnotmayorrathermustparticipateinmanythings，ifitandnothingelseisnot;if，however，neithertheonenortheonethatisnotissupposednottobe，andwearespeakingofsomethingofadifferentnature，wecanpredicatenothingofit。Butsupposingthattheonethatisnotandnothingelseisnot，thenitmustparticipateinthepredicate\"that，\"andinmanyothers。
Certainly。
Anditwillhaveunlikenessinrelationtotheothers，fortheothersbeingdifferentfromtheonewillbeofadifferentkind。
Certainly。
Andarenotthingsofadifferentkindalsootherinkind？
Ofcourse。
Andarenotthingsotherinkindunlike？
Theyareunlike。
Andiftheyareunliketheone，thatwhichtheyareunlikewillclearlybeunlikethem？
Clearlyso。
Thentheonewillhaveunlikenessinrespectofwhichtheothersareunlikeit？
Thatwouldseemtobetrue。
Andifunlikenesstootherthingsisattributedtoit，itmusthavelikenesstoitself。
Howso？
Iftheonehaveunlikenesstoone，somethingelsemustbemeant;norwillthehypothesisrelatetoone;butitwillrelatetosomethingotherthanone？
Quiteso。
Butthatcannotbe。
No。
Thentheonemusthavelikenesstoitself？
Itmust。
Again，itisnotequaltotheothers;forifitwereequal，thenitwouldatoncebeandbeliketheminvirtueoftheequality;butifonehasnobeing，thenitcanneitherbenorbelike？
Itcannot。
Butsinceitisnotequaltotheothers，neithercantheothersbeequaltoit？
Certainlynot。
Andthingsthatarenotequalareunequal？
True。
Andtheyareunequaltoanunequal？
Ofcourse。
Thentheonepartakesofinequality，andinrespectofthistheothersareunequaltoit？
Verytrue。
Andinequalityimpliesgreatnessandsmallness？
Yes。
Thentheone，ifofsuchanature，hasgreatnessandsmallness？
Thatappearstobetrue。
Andgreatnessandsmallnessalwaysstandapart？
True。
Thenthereisalwayssomethingbetweenthem？
Thereis。
Andcanyouthinkofanythingelsewhichisbetweenthemotherthanequality？
No，itisequalitywhichliesbetweenthem。
Thenthatwhichhasgreatnessandsmallnessalsohasequality，whichliesbetweenthem？
Thatisclear。
Thentheone，whichisnot，partakes，aswouldappear，ofgreatnessandsmallnessandequality？
Clearly。
Further，itmustsurelyinasortpartakeofbeing？
Howso？
Itmustbeso，forifnot，thenweshouldnotspeakthetruthinsayingthattheoneisnot。Butifwespeakthetruth，clearlywemustsaywhatis。AmInotright？
Yes。
Andsinceweaffirmthatwespeaktruly，wemustalsoaffirmthatwesaywhatis？
Certainly。
Then，aswouldappear，theone，whenitisnot，is;forifitwerenottobewhenitisnot，butweretorelinquishsomethingofbeing，soastobecomenot—being，itwouldatoncebe。
Quitetrue。
Thentheonewhichisnot，ifitistomaintainitself，musthavethebeingofnot—beingasthebondofnot—being，justasbeingmusthaveasabondthenot—beingofnot—beinginordertoperfectitsownbeing;forthetruestassertionofthebeingofbeingandofthenot—beingofnotbeingiswhenbeingpartakesofthebeingofbeing，andnotofthebeingofnot—being—thatis，theperfectionofbeing;
andwhennot—beingdoesnotpartakeofthenot—beingofnot—beingbutofthebeingofnot—being—thatistheperfectionofnot—being。
Mosttrue。
Sincethenwhatispartakesofnot—being，andwhatisnotofbeing，mustnottheonealsopartakeofbeinginordernottobe？
Certainly。
Thentheone，ifitisnot，clearlyhasbeing？
Clearly。
Andhasnot—beingalso，ifitisnot？
Ofcourse。
Butcananythingwhichisinacertainstatenotbeinthatstatewithoutchanging？
Impossible。
Theneverythingwhichisandisnotinacertainstate，implieschange？
Certainly。
Andchangeismotion—wemaysaythat？
Yes，motion。