OFF THE BEATEN TRACK
to think the τὸ χρεών, the word is the earliest name for what is thought as the ἐόν of ἐόντα; τὸ χρεών is the oldest name in which thinking brings the being of beings to language.
That which stays awhile in presence presences by surmounting reckless dis-order, the ἀδικία, which itself prevails in the while as an essential possibility. The presencing of what presences is such a surmounting. This is accomplished when the things that stay awhile allow order to belong and thereby reck, one to another. The answer to the question of to whom the order belongs has been given. It belongs to that within which presencing, and that means surmounting, presences. Order is κατὰ τὸ χρεών. At this point the essence of the χρεών begins to shine, albeit at first from a great distance. If, as the essence of presencing, τὸ χρεών is essentially related to what is present then it must be implicit in this relation that τὸ χρεών disposes order and with it reck. The χρεών disposes matters so that, within it, that which is present lets order and reck belong. The χρεών lets such disposing reach to that which is present and so grants it the manner of its arrival, the while of its staying awhile.
That which is present presences by surmounting the dis- of disorder, the ἀ of ἀδικία. This ἀπό in ἀδικία corresponds to the κατὰ of χρεών. The transitional yap in the second clause arches over from the one to the other.
So far, we have attempted to think the meaning of τὸ χρεών only via the reference of the saying's second clause back to it, without asking about the word itself. What does τὸ χρεών mean? The first word of the saying's text {GA 5: 364} we elucidate last because, according to the matter, it is the first. According to which matter? The matter of the presence of what presences. But to be the being of beingsa is the matterb of being.
The grammatical form of the enigmatically ambiguous genitive names a genesis, an originc of what is present from out of presencing. Yet, along with the essence of each of these, the essence of this origin remains hidden. Not only that, but even the relation between presence and what presences is still unthought. From earliest times it has seemed as though presence and what is present are each something for themselves. Unintentionally, presence itself became something present. Represented in terms of something present it became that which is above everything else that is present and so
a First edition, 1950. Reference to the ontological difference.
b First edition, 1950. Destiny.
c First edition, 1950. In the radiance of presencing, that which presences appears, comes forth. The radiance itself never appears!
274