Is the One “Being” at all? Plotinus says that the One is “beyond being.” What is “beyond being,” someone might think, is the non-existent. Thus arises the “problem”: does the One exist? Rist’s solution is that, since being means for Plotinus finite being, Plotinus’ One is beyond finite being, is infinite being and so is not non-existent. In other words, according to Rist, when Plotinus says “being” he does not really mean being but a “kind” of being, and when he says “beyond being” he does not really mean this but rather another kind of being. Plotinus is being translated into into some other philosophic language. No explanation for this is offered, but because the existence rather than non-existence of the One is supposed to be vindicated by this procedure, it may be hazarded that the language is that of someone to whom to-exist and to-not-exist are real alternatives. “Being” for this person means to-exist as a real alternative to to-not-exist. I would suggest that (a) this is not a real alternative for Plotinus, any more than for Parmenides or for the Stranger in Plato’s Sophist and (b) it has no insurmountable metaphysical value.
“Philosophy Is The Best Commentary on a Philosopher”, by John N. Deck