(c) The Temporal Problem of the Transcendence of the World
The understanding of a totality of relevance inherent in circumspect taking care is grounded in a previous understanding of the relations of in-order-to, what-for, for-that, and for-the-sake-of-which. We set forth the connection of these relations as significance.23 Their unity constitutes what we call world. Now the question arises of how something like world in its unity with Dasein is ontologically possible? In what way must world be, such that Dasein can exist as being-in-the-world?
Dasein exists for the sake of a potentiality-of-being of itself. Existing, it is thrown, and as thrown, it is delivered over to beings that it needs in order to be able to be as it is, namely for the sake of itself. Since Dasein exists factically, it understands itself in this connection of the for-the-sake-of-itself in each instance with an in-order-to. That within which existing Dasein understands itself is "there" together with its factical existence. The wherein of primary self-understanding has the kind of being of Dasein. Existing, Dasein is its world.
We defined the being of Dasein as care. Its ontological meaning is temporality. We showed that and how temporality constitutes the disclosedness of the there. World is also disclosed in the disclosedness [365] of the there. The unity of significance, that is, the ontological constitution of the world, must then also be grounded in temporality. The existential and temporal condition of the possibility of the world lies in the fact that temporality, as an ecstatical unity, has something like a horizon. The ecstasies are not simply raptures [Entrückungen] toward .... Rather, a "whereto" of being transported [Entrückung] belongs to each ecstasy. We call this whereto of the ecstasy the horizonal schema. The ecstatical horizon is different in each of the three ecstasies. The schema in which Dasein comes back to itself futurally, whether authentically or inauthentically, is the for-the-sake-of-itself. We call the schema in which Dasein is disclosed to itself in attunement as thrown, that in the face of which it has been thrown and that to which it has been delivered over. It characterizes the horizonal structure of the having-been. Existing for-the-sake-of-itself in being delivered over to itself as thrown, Dasein is at the same time making present as being together with. . . . The horizonal schema of the present is determined by the in-order-to.
The unity of the horizonal schemata of future, having-been, and present is grounded in the ecstatic unity of temporality. The horizon of the whole of temporality determines that upon which the being factically
23. Cf.§ 18.