FINK: In Fr. 10, a relatedness is articulated between πάντα, in the sense of many in entirety, and the one, and a relatedness of the one to the many in entirety. Here, the one does not mean a part.
HEIDEGGER: Our German word Eins [one] is fatal for the Greek ἕν. To what extent?
FINK: In the relatedness of ἕν and πάντα, it is not only a matter of a counterreference, but also of a unification.
PARTICIPANT: I would like to understand ἕν as something complex in opposition to a numerical conception. The tension between ἕν and πάντα has the character of a complex.
FINK: ἕν is lightning and fire. If one wishes to speak here of a complex, one can do so only if one understands by it an encompassing unity that the many in entirety gather in themselves.
HEIDEGGER: We must think ἕν, the one [das Eine], as the unifying. To be sure, the one can have the meaning of the one and only, but here it has the character of unifying. If one translates the passage in question from Fr. 10, "out of everything, one; and out of one, everything," this is a thoughtless translation. ἕν is not by itself a one that would have nothing to do with πάντα; rather, it is unifying.
FINK: In order to make clear the unifying unity of ἕν, one can take as a comparison the unity of an element. However, this is not enough; rather, the unifying unity must be thought back to the one of lightning, which, in its gleam, gathers and unifies the many in entirety in their distinctness.
HEIDEGGER: ἕν runs throughout all philosophy till Kant's Transcendental Apperception. You said just now that one had to consider ἕν in its relatedness to πάντα, and πάντα in its relatedness to ἕν in Fr. 10, together with λόγος and strife in its reference to πάντα in Frs. 1 and 80. However, that is only possible when we understand λόγος as gathering and ἔρις [strife] as dismantling. Fr. 10 begins with the word συνάψιες [contact]. How should we translate this?
PARTICIPANT: I would propose: joining-together [Zusammenfügen].
HEIDEGGER: In this, we would be concerned with the word "together." Accordingly, ἕν is that which unifies.
FINK: Fr. 29 seems at first not to belong in the series of fragments in which πάντα are mentioned: αἱρεῦνται γὰρ ἓν ἀντὶ ἁπάντων οἱ ἄριστοι, κλέος ἀέναον θνητῶν.7 For here πάντα are not mentioned directly in a specific respect; rather, a human phenomenon is mentioned, specifically, that the noble minded prefer one thing rather than all else, namely everlasting glory rather than transient things. The comportment of the noble minded is opposed to that of the πολλοί, the many, who lie there like well-fed cattle. And here, nevertheless, the reference in question of ἕν and πάντα is also to be seen. According to the prima facie meaning, ἕν Is here the everlasting glory that occupies a special place vis-a-vis all else.