§7.6πότερον δὲ ταὐτόν ἐστιν ἢ ἕτερον τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι καὶ ἕκαστον, σκεπτέον.
Whether each thing and its essence are the same or different must be investigated.
ἔστι γάρ τι πρὸ ἔργου πρὸς τὴν περὶ τῆς οὐσίας σκέψιν· ἕκαστόν τε γὰρ οὐκ ἄλλο δοκεῖ εἶναι τῆς ἑαυτοῦ οὐσίας, καὶ τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι λέγεται εἶναι ἡ ἑκάστου οὐσία.
For this is of some use for the inquiry concerning substance; for each thing is thought to be no other than its own substance, and the essence is said to be the substance of each thing.
ἐπὶ μὲν δὴ τῶν λεγομένων κατὰ συμβεβηκὸς δόξειεν ἂν ἕτερον εἶναι, οἷον λευκὸς ἄνθρωπος ἕτερον καὶ τὸ λευκῷ ἀνθρώπῳ εἶναι (εἰ γὰρ τὸ αὐτό, καὶ τὸ ἀνθρώπῳ εἶναι καὶ τὸ λευκῷ ἀνθρώπῳ τὸ αὐτό· τὸ αὐτὸ γὰρ ἄνθρωπος καὶ λευκὸς ἄνθρωπος, ὡς φασίν, ὥστε καὶ τὸ λευκῷ ἀνθρώπῳ καὶ τὸ ἀνθρώπῳ·
Now, in the case of things said accidentally, they would seem to be different, as a white man is different from being a white man (for if they are the same, being a man and being a white man are also the same; for man and white man are the same, as they say, so that being a white man and being a man would also be the same; or is it not necessary that accidental things should be the same?
ἢ οὐκ ἀνάγκη ὅσα κατὰ συμβεβηκὸς εἶναι ταὐτά, οὐ γὰρ ὡσαύτως τὰ ἄκρα γίγνεται ταὐτά· ἀλλʼ ἴσως γε ἐκεῖνο δόξειεν ἂν συμβαίνειν, τὰ ἄκρα γίγνεσθαι ταὐτὰ τὰ κατὰ συμβεβηκός, οἷον τὸ λευκῷ εἶναι καὶ τὸ μουσικῷ· δοκεῖ δὲ οὔ)·
For the extremes do not become the same in the same way; but perhaps that other consequence might seem to follow, that the accidental extremes become the same, as being white and being musical; but this is thought not to be so).
ἐπὶ δὲ τῶν καθʼ αὑτὰ λεγομένων ἆρʼ ἀνάγκη ταὐτὸ εἶναι, οἷον εἴ τινες εἰσὶν οὐσίαι ὧν ἕτεραι μὴ εἰσὶν οὐσίαι μηδὲ φύσεις ἕτεραι πρότεραι, οἵας φασὶ τὰς ἰδέας εἶναί τινες;
But in the case of things said in virtue of themselves, is it not necessary that they should be the same, as for instance if there are some substances than which there are no other substances or prior natures, such as some say the Ideas are?
εἰ γὰρ ἔσται ἕτερον αὐτὸ τὸ ἀγαθὸν καὶ τὸ ἀγαθῷ εἶναι, καὶ ζῷον καὶ τὸ ζῴῳ, καὶ τὸ ὄντι καὶ τὸ ὄν, ἔσονται ἄλλαι τε οὐσίαι καὶ φύσεις καὶ ἰδέαι παρὰ τὰς λεγομένας, καὶ πρότεραι οὐσίαι ἐκεῖναι, εἰ τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι οὐσία ἐστίν.
For if the Good itself and being good are to be different, and animal and being animal, and being and being being, there will be other substances and natures and Ideas besides those which are spoken of, and those will be prior substances, if the essence is substance.
καὶ εἰ μὲν ἀπολελυμέναι ἀλλήλων, τῶν μὲν οὐκ ἔσται ἐπιστήμη τὰ δʼ οὐκ ἔσται ὄντα (λέγω δὲ τὸ ἀπολελύσθαι εἰ μήτε τῷ ἀγαθῷ αὐτῷ ὑπάρχει τὸ εἶναι ἀγαθῷ μήτε τούτῳ τὸ εἶναι ἀγαθόν)·
And if they are disconnected from one another, there will be no knowledge of the one, and the others will not be beings (and by "being disconnected" I mean if being good does not belong to the Good itself, and being good does not belong to this [the essence]).
ἐπιστήμη τε γὰρ ἑκάστου ἔστιν ὅταν τὸ τί ἦν ἐκείνῳ εἶναι γνῶμεν, καὶ ἐπὶ ἀγαθοῦ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ὁμοίως ἔχει, ὥστε εἰ μηδὲ τὸ ἀγαθῷ εἶναι ἀγαθόν, οὐδὲ τὸ ὄντι ὂν οὐδὲ τὸ ἑνὶ ἕν·
For there is knowledge of each thing only when we know its essence, and the case is the same with the Good and other things, so that if being good is not good, neither is being being, nor being one one.
ὁμοίως δὲ πάντα ἔστιν ἢ οὐθὲν τὰ τί ἦν εἶναι, ὥστʼ εἰ μηδὲ τὸ ὄντι ὄν, οὐδὲ τῶν ἄλλων οὐδέν.
And all essences are in the same case, or none of them is; so that if being being is not being, neither is any of the others.
ἔτι ᾧ μὴ ὑπάρχει ἀγαθῷ εἶναι, οὐκ ἀγαθόν.
Further, that to which being good does not belong is not good.
ἀνάγκη ἄρα ἓν εἶναι τὸ ἀγαθὸν καὶ ἀγαθῷ εἶναι καὶ καλὸν καὶ καλῷ εἶναι, καὶ ὅσα μὴ κατʼ ἄλλο λέγεται, ἀλλὰ καθʼ αὑτὰ καὶ πρῶτα·
Therefore, the Good and being good must be one, and the Beautiful and being beautiful, and all things that are said not in virtue of another but in virtue of themselves and primarily.
καὶ γὰρ τοῦτο ἱκανὸν ἂν ὑπάρχῃ, κἂν μὴ ᾖ εἴδη, μᾶλλον δʼ ἴσως κἂν ᾖ εἴδη (ἅμα δὲ δῆλον καὶ ὅτι εἴπερ εἰσὶν αἱ ἰδέαι οἵας τινές φασιν, οὐκ ἔσται τὸ ὑποκείμενον οὐσία· ταύτας γὰρ οὐσίας μὲν ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι, μὴ καθʼ ὑποκειμένου δέ· ἔσονται γὰρ κατὰ μέθεξιν). —ἔκ τε δὴ τούτων τῶν λόγων ἓν καὶ ταὐτὸ οὐ κατὰ συμβεβηκὸς αὐτὸ ἕκαστον καὶ τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι, καὶ ὅτι γε τὸ ἐπίστασθαι ἕκαστον τοῦτό ἐστι, τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι ἐπίστασθαι, ὥστε καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἔκθεσιν ἀνάγκη ἕν τι εἶναι ἄμφω (τὸ δὲ κατὰ συμβεβηκὸς λεγόμενον, οἷον τὸ μουσικὸν ἢ λευκόν, διὰ τὸ διττὸν σημαίνειν οὐκ ἀληθὲς εἰπεῖν ὡς ταὐτὸ τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι καὶ αὐτό· καὶ γὰρ ᾧ συμβέβηκε λευκὸν καὶ τὸ συμβεβηκός, ὥστʼ ἔστι μὲν ὡς ταὐτόν, ἔστι δὲ ὡς οὐ ταὐτὸ τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι καὶ αὐτό· τῷ μὲν γὰρ ἀνθρώπῳ καὶ τῷ λευκῷ ἀνθρώπῳ οὐ ταὐτό, τῷ πάθει δὲ ταὐτό). ἄτοπον δʼ ἂν φανείη κἂν εἴ τις ἑκάστῳ ὄνομα θεῖτο τῶν τί ἦν εἶναι· ἔσται γὰρ καὶ παρʼ ἐκεῖνο ἄλλο, οἷον τῷ τί ἦν εἶναι ἵππῳ τί ἦν εἶναι ἕτερον.
For this is sufficient if it belongs, even if there are no Forms, and perhaps even more so if there are Forms. (And at the same time it is clear that if the Ideas are such as some say they are, the substrate will not be substance; for these must be substances, but not predicated of a substrate; otherwise they would exist by participation.)—From these arguments, then, each thing itself and its essence are one and the same, and not accidentally, and also because to know each thing is to know its essence, so that even by exposition they must be some one thing. (But as for what is said accidentally, such as the musical or the white, because of its double meaning it is not true to say that the essence and the thing itself are the same; for that to which white belongs is white, and so is the accident, so that in one way the essence and the thing itself are the same, and in another way they are not; for they are not the same for man and white man, but they are the same for the affection.) It would also seem absurd if one were to give a name to each of the essences; for there will be another besides that one, as to the essence of horse there will be a different essence.
καίτοι τί κωλύει καὶ νῦν εἶναι ἔνια εὐθὺς τί ἦν εἶναι, εἴπερ οὐσία τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι;
And yet what prevents some things from being directly essences even now, since essence is substance?
ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐ μόνον ἕν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ λόγος ὁ αὐτὸς αὐτῶν, ὡς δῆλον καὶ ἐκ τῶν εἰρημένων· οὐ γὰρ κατὰ συμβεβηκὸς ἓν τὸ ἑνὶ εἶναι καὶ ἕν.
Indeed, they are not only one, but their formula is also the same, as is clear also from what has been said; for being one and one are not one accidentally.
ἔτι εἰ ἄλλο ἔσται, εἰς ἄπειρον εἶσιν· τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἔσται τί ἦν εἶναι τοῦ ἑνὸς τὸ δὲ τὸ ἕν, ὥστε καὶ ἐπʼ ἐκείνων ὁ αὐτὸς ἔσται λόγος.
Further, if they are different, the process will go on to infinity; for the one will be the essence of one, and the other will be the one itself, so that for those also the same argument will apply.
ὅτι μὲν οὖν ἐπὶ τῶν πρώτων καὶ καθʼ αὑτὰ λεγομένων τὸ ἑκάστῳ εἶναι καὶ ἕκαστον τὸ αὐτὸ καὶ ἕν ἐστι, δῆλον·
That, then, in the case of primary things and those said in virtue of themselves, each thing and its being are the same and one, is clear.
οἱ δὲ σοφιστικοὶ ἔλεγχοι πρὸς τὴν θέσιν ταύτην φανερὸν ὅτι τῇ αὐτῇ λύονται λύσει καὶ εἰ ταὐτὸ Σωκράτης καὶ Σωκράτει εἶναι· οὐδὲν γὰρ διαφέρει οὔτε ἐξ ὧν ἐρωτήσειεν ἄν τις οὔτε ἐξ ὧν λύων ἐπιτύχοι.
And it is obvious that the sophistical refutations against this thesis are solved by the same solution as the question whether Socrates and being Socrates are the same; for it makes no difference either from what one would ask or from what one would succeed in solving.
πῶς μὲν οὖν τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι ταὐτὸν καὶ πῶς οὐ ταὐτὸν ἑκάστῳ, εἴρηται.
How, then, the essence is the same as each thing and how it is not, has been said.