But this shows right away that the approach through elucidation of the concept is insufficient, and in truth we have already fundamentally abandoned such an elucidation without simply being able to say what has happened. And yet there is no need for another domain of inquiry. Rather, it is enough to be mindful of the word and of be-ing. And this indeed is most difficult.
[G128]
The metaphysical determination of being as beingness grasps beingness as presence and constancy. In the light of this interpretation, beings count as ἀεὶ ὄν and, applying this retrospectively to being, being itself becomes 'the most being', thereby being becomes the most constant and the most present. This is the case especially in Hegel when he 'conceives' being as the immediate and the undetermined whose "concept" is not eliminated from the absolute concept but is only sublated therein in such a way that the absolute determines itself out of, and along with, the immediate, and is at the same time purely extant and empty.
According to this metaphysical interpretation of being, it must be a violation of the conventional ways of thinking and representing when being is thought in its singularity and uniqueness. However, being in its singularity and uniqueness is not the simple opposite of the metaphysical concept of "being", which by contrast is posited through "becoming", and in terms of counter-positing belongs to the metaphysical thinking's sphere of positing.
Be-ing's singularity and uniqueness are not qualities attributed to be-ing or even subsequent determinations that could result from being's relationship to "time". Rather, be-ing itself is uniqueness, is singularity that always lets its time emerge, that is, lets its truth's 'free-play of the timespace' emerge. This uniqueness does not exclude a repetition, but the contrary.
But what is meant here is also not the "sudden" and the "moment", that is, things that still belong to the domain of metaphysical determination of being.
However, the truth of being in metaphysical interpretation refers already to something unique whose uniqueness is not touched by the duration and resiliency of metaphysical thinking. And yet speaking like this is to speak defensively.