The previous attempts, in Being and Time and the ensuing writings, to implement this essence of truth (in opposition to correctness in representing and asserting) as the ground of Da-sein itself had to remain insufficient. For they were always carried out as a rejection and so always took their orientation from that which they rejected. Thus they made it impossible to know the essence of truth in a radical way, i.e., from the ground (and the essence itself essentially occurs as that ground). For such knowledge to succeed, saying of the essence of beyng must no longer be withheld due to the mistaken opinion that, despite insight into the necessity of a projection which leaps ahead, ultimately there still could be built a way to the truth of beyng that would proceed step by step from the earlier views. The attempt to build such a way must always fail.
As strong as may be the new danger that the event will immediately become a mere name and a pliant concept from which almost anything might be "deduced," we must nevertheless speak of it, though not in a detached way within a "speculative" discussion. Instead, we must speak of the event in a meditation compelled throughout by the plight of the abandonment by being.
The clearing of concealment does not mean the sublation [Aufhebung] of the concealed, i.e., its liberation and transformation into unconcealment. It instead means precisely the grounding of the abyssal ground for the concealment (the hesitant withholding).
In my previous attempts at projecting this essence of truth, the endeavor to be understood was always primarily directed at an elucidation of the modes of clearing, the variations of concealment, and their essential interconnections (d., e.g., the lecture on truth, 1930).
With regard to determinations such as "Da-sein is simultaneously in the truth and in the untruth," they were at once taken in terms of morals and worldviews, and what is decisive in this philosophical meditation, namely, the essential occurrence of the "simultaneously" as the basic essence of truth, was not grasped, nor was untruth grasped originarily in the sense of concealment (rather than some sort of falsehood).
What does it mean to "stand" in the clearing of concealment and to withstand it? The basic disposition of restraint. The extraordinarily historical non-repeatability of this steadfastness, that here first, and here alone, a decision is made about "what is true." Which sort of constancy is