§121 [237-238]

left over and thus are still allowed and retained as the residue of an absconding of the gods.

The most genuine and broadest leap is the one of thinking-not as though the essence of beyng could be determined on the basis of thinking (assertion) but because here, in know/edge of the event, the fissure of being is penetrated the furthest and the possibilities of sheltering the truth in beings can be gauged most extensively.

Thinking, as inceptual, grounds the time-space in its structure of transporting and captivating and penetrates the fissure of beyng in the uniqueness, freedom, contingency, necessity, possibility, and actuality of the essential occurrence of beyng.

The grounding of the time-space does not project an empty table of categories; instead, as inceptual, thinking is intrinsically historical, i.e., determined by the plight of the lack of a sense of plight. Such thinking reaches ahead into the necessities connected to the essential shelterings of truth and of the guiding knowledge of it.

If it does break out, the plight of the lack of a sense of plight will strike up against the remaining absent of both the advent and the absconding of the gods. This remaining absent is all the more uncanny the longer churches and forms of divine service survive (and seem permanent) and yet are unable to ground an original truth.

The leap is a knowing one into the momentariness of the site of the intrusion; it is that first move which leaps into the sheltering of the appropriation in an indicative word (cf. the essential occurrence of beyng).

121. Beyng and beings

Place on one pan of a scale all things and objectively present beings, plus the machinations in which they are congealed and entrenched, and place on the other pan the projection of beyng, plus the weight of the thrownness of the projection. In what direction will the pointer of the scale lean? Toward the side of things objectively present in order to allow the impotency of the projection to spring up into ineffectualness.

Yet who is weighing with this scale? What is objectively present? What rages in machinations? All these issues never reach the truth of beyng; they clothe themselves instead in the mere appearance of a ground and of indispensability in that they withdraw from truth and want to disavow their primary moment, objective presence, as a nullity.

Who ordered this scale of the kind used in the market place and demands that everything be weighed on it alone?

Contributions to Philosophy (of the Event) (GA 65) by Martin Heidegger