Book, Paragraph

 1   I, 2  | Parmenides says, for though the limit is indivisible, the limited
 2 III, 4  |  limitless, for that would be a limit of it. Further, as it is
 3 III, 4  |        limited always finds its limit in something, so that there
 4 III, 4  |        so that there must be no limit, if everything is always
 5 III, 5  |          but each of these is a limit.~It is plain from these
 6 III, 6  |        telos); and the end is a limit.~Hence Parmenides must be
 7 III, 7  |       that in number there is a limit in the direction of the
 8  IV, 2  |        each body, it would be a limit, so that the place would
 9  IV, 2  |        defined: for this is the limit of each body.~If, then,
10  IV, 5  |    being in a place, but as the limit is in the limited; for not
11  IV, 13 |       future time), and it is a limit of time (for it is the beginning
12  VI, 2  |        part must be finite, the limit in one direction being given.
13  VI, 3  |       it is, as we have said, a limit of both. And if it is once
14  VI, 5  |     indivisible because it is a limit. But that which has reference
15  VI, 10 |         the case may be, is the limit, e.g. being is the limit
16  VI, 10 |        limit, e.g. being is the limit of coming to be and not-being
17  VI, 10 |         be and not-being is the limit of ceasing to be: and in
18  VI, 10 |      increase and decrease: the limit of increase is to be found
19  VI, 10 |        is increasing, while the limit of decrease is the complete
20 VIII, 9 |      one point on the line be a limit rather than any other? Any
21 VIII, 10|       that exceeds any assigned limit, and in the same way by
22 VIII, 10|     falls short of any assigned limit. So we get the result that