Vat.gr.244

It is noted that the proper name is necessary ...?

It is noted, then, that the proper name is necessary, but this other type is not. And so, in this way, one may be confident. In a simple sense, it signifies existence. Whence one might say that the one is? of the necessary, the other is not. One must say this while stating this ...? except that the substance does not need to be for itself; every proper noun falls under this, not for the sake of giving the true essence itself to the sounds of names. It does not have a prior subsistence under the one that falls under it; the consequent quantity, however, does have a prior subsistence within itself.

Note: at length ...? ...?
Making a more powerful designation, the handed-down definition is not, as some say, ... things or names; it is necessary that both the horse and for many more ...? because here it does not signify the essence, but signifies the action, or the energy of those things which are universal here, whether in this or in energy, or not in rest or in ...?

It is necessary that all that is accidental, either from the past, take the ...?
because it is not a demonstration
of the accidental or
...?
...?
prior
...?
the necessary
admittedly
even in the case of colors
...?
the fire ...?
is able to ...?
...?

Regarding the intermediates, regarding light-bearing names, to proceed in a schema because it relates to few, not to all in potentiality but in things it exists as an addition, the necessary, but also every thing and primarily existent. Let it be said that the necessary is twofold, both the same and the ability to do good; the other is the doing, the bloodletting as a general example and being bled, generally, and because of this it is able to lead to it. Many are perplexed because the vein ... ? is not transferred. And then, which meaning of the "necessary" was added, so that by saying "it is necessary" one might anticipate what it is, having taken "to go" ... ? the powers that are discussed immediately regarding light, that it will be necessary ... ? regarding the accidental, the present consisting in light before all, or it holds it by itself. But if you say, how can light be ... ? and dark be ... ? if many of these ... ? are opposed in knowledge, being unable, but they are lesser. He takes up, next, by saying "it is necessary" while naming the necessary twofold ... ? signifying by misuse. But it is for all philosophy, we have added; it must be said ... ? and others have written this through misuse, in order to say that it also seems ... ? the fitting or the beneficial is necessary ... ? misuse ... ? concerning the contingent ... ? then they are credible to one another ... ? that the dialectic is useful for the sake of demonstration. Since, indeed, but ...? into the dialectic ...? differing.