It is in this direction that we must assess the meaning of this particular separation in the context of our task. For at bottom we are asking how it stands with Being, how and on what basis it is brought to stand in its essence, how it is understood and conceived and set up as definitive.

In the seemingly irrelevant separation between Being and thinking we have to recognize that fundamental orientation of the spirit of the West that is the real target of our attack. It can be overcome only originally, that is, in such a way that its inceptive truth is shown its own limits and thereby founded anew.

From the point at which we currently stand in the course of our questioning, we can see something further. Earlier we made it clear that the word “Being,” contrary to popular opinion, has a thoroughly limited meaning. This implies that Being itself is understood in a definite way, and as something so understood, it is open to us. But every understanding, as a basic kind of opening-up, must move in a definite line of sight. This thing, for example the clock, is closed off to us in what it is, unless we already know about something like time, reckoning with time, measuring time. Our viewpoint’s line of sight must already be laid out in advance. We call this prior line of sight “perspective.” Thus, it will become clear not only that Being is not understood in an indeterminate way, but that the determinate understanding of Being itself moves within a prior line of sight that has already been determined.

Going back and forth, slipping and sliding along this line, has become so much a part of our own flesh and blood that we neither recognize it nor even understand and pay attention to the question about it.