only　accepts　in　their　separation　and　opposition。　And　if　those　who　recognise　Mysticism　as　the
  highest　truth　are　content　to　leave　it　in　its　original　utter　mystery；　their　conduct　only　proves　that　for
  them　too；　as　well　as　for　their　antagonists；　thinking　means　abstract　identification；　and　that　in　their
  opinion；　therefore　truth　can　only　be　won　by　renouncing　thought；　or　as　it　is　frequently　expressed；　by
  leading　the　reason　captive。
  But；　as　we　have　seen；　the　abstract　thinking　of　understanding　is　so　far　from　being　either　ultimate　or
  stable；　that　it　shows　a　perpetual　tendency　to　work　its　own　dissolution　and　swing　round　into　its
  opposite。　Reasonableness；　on　the　contrary；　just　consists　in　embracing　within　itself　these　opposites
  as　unsubstantial　elements。　Thus　the　reason…world　may　be　equally　styled　mystical　…　not　however
  because　thought　cannot　both　reach　and　comprehend　it；　but　merely　because　it　lies　beyond　the
  compass　of　understanding。
  Subdivision　of　Logic
  §83
  Logic　is　subdivided　into　three　parts：
  I。　The　Doctrine　of　Being。
  II。　The　Doctrine　of　Essence。
  III。　The　Doctrine　of　Notion　and　Idea。
  That　is；　the　Theory　of　Thought　in：
  I。　its　immediacy；　the　notion　implicit　and　in　germ；
  II。　its　reflection　and　mediation；　the　being…for…self　and　show　of　the　notion；
  III。　its　return　into　self；　and　its　developed　abiding　by　itself　…　the　notion　in　and　for
  itself。
  First　Subdivision　of　The　Logic；
  VII。　The　Doctrine　of　Being
  §　84
  Being　is　the　notion　implicit　only：　its　special　forms　have　the　predicate　'is'；　when
  they　are　distinguished　they　are　each　of　them　an　'other'：　and　the　shape　which
  dialectic　takes　in　them；　i。e。　their　further　specialisation；　is　at　once　a　forth…putting
  and　in　that　way　a　disengaging　of　the　notion　implicit　in　being；　and　at　the　same　time
  the　withdrawing　of　being　inwards；　its　sinking　deeper　into　itself。　Thus　the
  explication　of　the　notion　in　the　sphere　of　being　does　two　things：　it　brings　out　the
  totality　of　being；　and　it　abolishes　the　immediacy　of　being；　or　the　form　of　being　as
  such。
  §　85
  Being　itself　and　the　special　sub…categories　of　it　which　follow；　as　well　as　those　of
  logic　in　general；　may　be　looked　upon　as　definitions　of　the　Absolute；　or
  metaphysical　definitions　of　God：　at　least　the　first　and　third　categories　in　every
  triad　may　…　the　first；　where　the　thought…form　of　the　triad　is　formulated　in　its
  simplicity；　and　the　third；　being　the　return　from　differentiation　to　a　simple
  self…reference。　For　a　metaphysical　definition　of　God　is　the　expression　of　his　nature
  in　thoughts　as　such：　and　logic　embraces　all　thoughts　so　long　as　they　continue　in
  the　thought…form。　The　second　sub…category　in　each　triad；　where　the　grade　of
  thought　is　in　its　differentiation；　gives；　on　the　other　hand；　a　definition　of　the　finite。
  The　objection　to　the　form　of　definition　is　that　it　implies　a　something　in　the　mind's
  eye　on　which　these　predicates　may　fasten。　Thus　even　the　Absolute　（though　it
  purports　to　express　God　in　the　style　and　character　of　thought）　in　comparison　with
  its　predicate　（which　really　and　distinctly　expresses　in　thought　what　the　subject
  does　not）　is　as　yet　only　an　inchoate　pretended　thought　…　the　indeterminate　subject
  of　predicates　yet　to　come。　The　thought；　which　is　here　the　matter　of　sole
  importance；　is　contained　only　in　the　predicate：　and　hence　the　propositional　form；
  like　the　said　subject；　viz。；　the　Absolute；　is　a　mere　superfluity。
  Quantity；　Quality　and　Measure
  §　85n
  Each　of　the　three　spheres　of　the　logical　idea　proves　to　be　a　systematic　whole　of　thought…terms；
  and　a　phase　of　the　Absolute。　This　is　the　case　with　Being；　containing　the　three　grades　of　quality；
  quantity　and　measure。
  Quality　is；　in　the　first　place；　the　character　identical　with　being：　so　identical　that　a　thing　ceases　to　be
  what　it　is；　if　it　loses　its　quality。　Quantity；　on　the　contrary；　is　the　character　external　to　being；　and
  does　not　affect　the　being　at　all。　Thus；　e。g。　a　house　remains　what　it　is；　whether　it　be　greater　or
  smaller；　and　red　remains　red；　whether　it　be　brighter　or　darker。
  Measure；　the　third　grade　of　being；　which　is　the　unity　of　the　first　two；　is　a　qualitative　quantity。　All
  things　have　their　measure：　i。e。　the　quantitative　terms　of　their　existence；　their　being　so　or　so　great；
  does　not　matter　within　certain　limits；　but　when　these　limits　are　exceeded　by　an　additional　more　or
  less；　the　things　cease　to　be　what　they　were。　From　measure　follows　the　advance　to　the　second
  subdivision　of　the　idea；　Essence。
  The　three　forms　of　being　here　mentioned；　just　because　they　are　the　first；　are　also　the　poorest；　i。e。
  the　most　abstract。　Immediate　（sensible）　consciousness；　in　so　far　as　it　simultaneously　includes　an
  intellectual　element；　is　especially　restricted　to　the　abstract　categories　of　quality　and　quantity。
  The　sensuous　consciousness　is　in　ordinary　estimation　the　most　concrete　and　thus　also　the　richest；
  but　that　is　true　only　as　regards　materials；　whereas；　in　reference　to　the　thought　it　contains；　it　is　really
  the　poorest　and　most　abstract。
  A。　QUALITY
  （a）　Being
  §　86
  Pure　Being　makes　the　beginning：　because　it　is　on　the　one　hand　pure　thought；　and
  on　the　other　immediacy　itself；　simple　and　indeterminate；　and　the　first　beginning
  cannot　be　mediated　by　anything；　or　be　further　determined。
  All　doubts　and　admonitions；　which　might　be　brought　against　beginning　the　science
  with　abstract　empty　being；　will　disappear　if　we　only　perceive　what　a　beginning
  naturally　implies。　It　is　possible　to　define　being　as　'I　=　I'；　as　'Absolute　Indifference'
  or　Identity；　and　so　on。　Where　it　is　felt　necessary　to　begin　either　with　what　is
  absolutely　certain；　i。e。　certainty　of　oneself；　or　with　a　definition　or　intuition　of　the
  absolute　truth；　these　and　other　forms　of　the　kind　may　be　looked　on　as　if　they
  must　be　the　first。　But　each　of　these　forms　contains　a　mediation；　and　hence　cannot
  be　the　real　first：　for　all　mediation　implies　advance　made　from　a　first　on　to　a
  second；　and　proceeding　from　something　different。　If　I　=　I；　or　even　the　intellectual
  intuition；　are　really　taken　to　mean　no　more　than　the　first；　they　are　in　this　mere
  immediacy　identical　with　being：　while　conversely；　pure　being；　if　abstract　no
  longer；　but　including　in　it　mediation；　is　pure　thought　or　intuition。
  If　we　enunciate　Being　as　a　predicate　of　the　Absolute；　we　get　the　first　definition　of
  the　latter。　The　Absolute　is　Being。　This　is　（in　thought）　the　absolutely　initial
  definition；　the　most　abstract　and　stinted。　It　is　the　definition　given　by　the　Eleatics；
  but　at　the　same　time　is　also　the　well…known　definition　of　God　as　the　sum　of　all
  realities。　It　means；　in　short；　that　we　are　to　set　aside　that　limitation　which　is　in
  every　reality；　so　that　God　shall　be　only　the　real　in　all　reality；　the　superlatively　real。
  Or；　if　we　reject　reality；　as　implying　a　reflection；　we　get　a　more　immediate　or
  unreflected　statement　of　the　same　thing；　when　Jacobi　says　that　the　God　of
  Spinoza　is　the　principium　of　being　in　all　existence。
  §　86n1
  When　thinking　is　to　begin；　we　have　nothing　but　thought　in　its　merest　indeterminate：　for　we　cannot
  determine　unless　there　is　both　one　and　another：　and　yet　in　the　beginning　there　is　yet　no　other。　The
  indeterminate；　as　we　have　it；　is　the　blank　we　begin　with；　not　a　featurelessness　reached　by
  abstraction；　not　the　elimination　of　all　character；　but　the　original　featurelessness　which　precedes　all
  definite　character　and　is　the　very　first　of　all。　And　this　we　call　Being。　It　is　not　to　be　felt；　or　perceived
  by　sense；　or　pictured　in　imagination：　it　is　only　and　merely　thought；　and　as　such　it　forms　the
  beginning。　Essence　also　is　indeterminate；　but　in　another　sense：　it　has　traversed　the　process　of
  mediation　and　contains　implicit　the　determination　it　has　absorbed。
  §　86n2
  In　the　history　of　philosophy　the　different　stages　of　the　logical　idea　assume　the　shape　of　successive
  systems；　each　based　on　a　particular　definition　of　the　Absolute。　As　the　logical　Idea　is　seen　to　unfold
  itself　in　a　process　from　the　abstract　to　the　concrete；　so　in　the　history　of　philosophy　the　earliest
  systems　are　the　most　abstract；　and　thus　at　the　same　time　the　poorest。　The　relation　too　of　the　earlier
  to　the　later　systems　of　philosophy　is　much　like　the　relation　of　the　corresponding　stages　of　the
  logical　Idea：　in　other　words；　the　earlier　are　preserved　in　the　later：　but　subordinated　and
  submerged。　This　is　the　true　meaning　of　a　much　misunderstood　phenomenon　in　the　history　of
  philosophy　—　the　refutation　of　one　system　by　another；　of　an　earlier　by　a　later。　Most　commonly　the
  refutation　is　taken　in　a　purely　negative　sense　to　mean　that　the　system　refuted　has　ceased　to　count
  for　anything；　has　been　set　aside　and　done　for。　Were　it　so；　the　history　of　philosophy　would　be；　of
  all　studies；　most　saddening；　displaying；　as　it　does；　the　refutation　of　every　system　which　ti