Its precedence is the essence of its conclusion because it has nothing in its being other than the time of its being a particular and then non-existent for itself. Rather, the precedent in it is distinguished from the conclusion by the ruling, so it is judged to exist in the precedence and non-existence in the conclusion, and in the essence of its precedence it is the same as its conclusion because it has no existence in the second time of the time of its existence, so understand.