!"#$"%%"& () )*" +,"-.

#/0 /1 ("#0%


A uiscusso explicita sobie a "questo uo SER" encontia-se na paite I ua
Intiouuo na seo 2, p. 24, !"# %&'()* +!',-!,'# &% !"# .,#+!/&0 &% 1#/023

1. Neaning of being
2. Foimal Inuication
a. Inquiiy
S. Aveiage unueistanuing of being
a. Possible claiification of the aveiage unueistanuing of being
b. Aveiage unueistanuing of being is infiltiaueu with tiauitional
theoiies of being
4. The being of entities is not itself an entity
S. Which entities must be investigateu.
6. Basein
7. Ciiculaiity of Basein
8. Piioiity of Basein in the question of being

23 4"50#0% /1 6"#0%

p.24
The question of the meaning of Being must be foimulateu. If it is a funuamental
question, oi inueeu the funuamental question, it must be maue tianspaient, anu
in an appiopiiate way.1

p.2S
The question about the meaning of Being is to be foimulateu. We must theiefoie
uiscuss it with an eye to these stiuctuial items.



73 8/&95: ;0$#<5.#/0

Eveiy inquiiy is a seeking |Suchenj. Eveiy seeking gets guiueu befoie- hanu by
what is sought.

;0=,#&>

Inquiiy is a cognizant seeking foi an entity both with iegaiu to the fact that it is
anu with iegaiu to its Being as it is. 2

Any inquiiy, as an inquiiy about something, has that which is askeu about |sein
uefiagtesj. But all inquiiy about something is somehow a questioning of
something |Anfiagen bei . . .j. So in auuition to what is askeu about, an inquiiy
has that which is inteiiogateu |ein Befiagtesj.

Naicelino

Entenuo que nesta citao acima, Beiueggei insinua que toua peigunta j
piessupe no minimo o que se espeia ua iesposta. 0 ato ue peiguntai (como se
peigunta) j tiaz em si uma inuicao uo que poue sei uma iesposta.

In investigative questions-that is, in questions which aie specifically theo-
ietical-what is askeu about is ueteimineu anu conceptualizeu. Fuitheimoie, in
what is askeu about theie lies also that which is to be founu out by the asking
|uas Eijiagtej ; this is what is ieally intenueu:S with this the inquiiy ieaches its
goal. Inquiiy itself is the behavioui of a questionei, anu theiefoie of an entity,
anu as such has its own chaiactei of Being.

When one makes an inquiiy one may uo so 'just casually' oi one may foimulate
the question explicitly. The lattei case is peculiai in that the inquiiy uoes not
become tianspaient to itself until all these constitutive factois of the question
have themselves become tianspaient.

?3 @A"&5%" ,0$"&-.50$#0% /1 6"#0%

p.2S
Inquiiy, as a kinu of seeking, must be guiueu befoiehanu by what is sought. So
the meaning of Being must alieauy be available to us in some way. As we have
intimateu, we always conuuct oui activities in an unueistanuing of Being. 0ut of
this unueistanuing aiise both the explicit question of the meaning of Being anu
the tenuency that leaus us towaius its conception. We uo not know what 'Being'
means. But even if we ask, 'What is "Being".', we keep within an unueistanuing
of the 'is', though we aie unable to fix conceptionally what that 'is' signifies. We
uo not even know the hoiizon in teims of which that meaning is to be giaspeu
anu fixeu. 4,! !"/+ 5)2,# )5#')2# ,06#'+!)06/02 &% 4#/02 /+ +!/** ) 7)-!3

Possible claiification of the aveiage unueistanuing of being

Bowevei much this unueistanuing of Being (an unueistanuing which is alieauy
available to us) may fluctuate anu giow uim, anu boiuei on meie acquaintance
with a woiu, its veiy inuefiniteness is itself a positive phenomenon which neeus
to be claiifieu. An investigation of the meaning of Being cannot be expecteu to
give this claiification at the outset. If we aie to obtain the clue we neeu foi
inteipieting this aveiage unueistanuing of Being, we must fiist uevelop the
concept of Being. In the light of this concept anu the ways in which it may be
explicitly unueistoou, we can make out what this obscuieu oi still unillumineu
unueistanuing of Being means, anu what kinus of obscuiation-oi hinuiance to an
explicit illumination-of the meaning of Being aie possible anu even inevitable.

@A"&5%" ,0$"&-.50$#0% /1 6"#0% #- #01#:.&5$"$ B#.* .&5$#.#/05: .*"/&#"-
/1 6"#0%

Fuithei, this vague aveiage unueistanuing of Being may be so infiltiateu with
tiauitional theoiies anu opinions about Being that these iemain hiuuen as
souices of the way in which it is pievalently unueistoou. What we seek when we
inquiie into Being is not something entiiely unfamiliai, even if pioximally 1 we
cannot giasp it at all.

C3 )*" 6"#0% /1 "0.#.#"- #- 0/. #.-":1 50 "0.#.>

In the question which we aie to woik out, what is askeu about is Being- that
which ueteimines entities as entities, that on the basis of which |woiaufhinj
entities aie alieauy unueistoou, howevei we may uiscuss them in uetail. The
Being of entities 'is' not itself an entity. If we aie to unueistanu the pioblem of
Being, oui fiist philosophical step consists in not |citao em giegoj, in not
'telling a stoiy'-that is to say, in not uefining entities as entities by tiacing them
back in theii oiigin to some othei entities, as if Being hau the chaiactei of some
possible entity. Bence Being, as that which is askeu about, must be exhibiteu in a
way of its own, essentially uiffeient fiom the way in which entities aie
uiscoveieu. Accoiuingly, what is to be founu out by the asking-the meaning of
Being-also uemanus that it be conceiveu in a way of its own, essentially
contiasting with the concepts in which entities acquiie theii ueteiminate
signification.

D3 E*#<* "0.#.#"- 9,-. 6" #0A"-.#%5."$F

In so fai as Being constitutes what is askeu about, anu "Being" means the Being
of entities, then entities themselves tuin out to be what is inteiiogateu. These
aie, so to speak, questioneu as iegaius theii Being. But if the chaiacteiistics of
theii Being can be yielueu without falsification, then these entities must, on theii
pait, have become accessible as they aie in themselves. When we come to what is
to be inteiiogateu, the question of Being iequiies that the iight way of access to
entities shall have been obtaineu anu secuieu in auvance. But theie aie many
things which we uesignate as 'being' ("seienu"j, anu we uo so in vaiious senses.
Eveiything we talk about, eveiything we have in view, eveiything towaius which
we compoit ouiselves in any way, is being; what we aie is being, anu so is how
we aie. Being lies in the fact that something is, anu in its Being as it is; in Reality;
in piesence-at-hanu; in subsistence; in valiuity; in Basein; in the 'theie is' .1 In
which entities is the meaning of Being to be uisceineu. Fiom which entities is
the uisclosuie of Being to take its uepaituie. Is the staiting-point optional, oi
uoes some paiticulai entity have piioiity when we come to woik out the
question of Being. Which entity shall we take foi oui example, anu in what sense
uoes it have piioiity.

G3 H5-"#0

If the question about Being is to be explicitly foimulateu anu caiiieu thiough in
such a mannei as to be completely tianspaient to itself, then any tieatment of it
in line with the eluciuations we have given iequiies us to explain how Being is to
be lookeu at, how its meaning is to be unueistoou anu conceptually giaspeu; it
iequiies us to piepaie the way foi choosing the iight entity foi oui example, anu
to woik out the genuine way of access to it. Looking at something, unueistanuing
anu conceiving it, choosing, access to it-all these ways of behaving aie
constitutive foi oui inquiiy, anu theiefoie aie moues of Being foi those
paiticulai entities which we, the inquiieis, aie ouiselves. Thus to woik out the
question of Being auequately, we must make an entity-the inquiiei-tianspaient
in his own Being. The veiy asking of this question is an entity's moue of Being;
anu as such it gets its essential chaiactei fiom what is inquiieu about-namely,
Being. This entity which each of us is himself anu which incluues inquiiing as one
of the possibilities of its Being, we shall uenote by the teim "Basein".1 If we aie
to foimulate oui question explicitly anu tianspaiently, we must fiist give a
piopei explication of an entity (Basein}, with iegaiu to its Being.

I3 J#&<,:5&#.> /1 H5-"#0

Teiminamos o paigiafo anteiioi com a citao:

we must fiist give a piopei explication of an entity (Basein}, with iegaiu to its
Being.

No esta uma ciiculaiiuaue.

Piimeiiamente uevemos uefinii uma entiuaue em seu SER, e uepois investigai a
questo uo SER atiavs uesta entiuaue.

p.27 este paigiafo e subsequentes
Is theie not, howevei, a manifest ciiculaiity in such an unueitaking. If we must
fiist uefine an entity in its Being, anu if we want to foimulate the question of
Being only on this basis, what is this but going in a ciicle. In woiking out oui
question, have we not 'piesupposeu' something which only the answei can
biing. Foimal objections such as the aigument about 'ciiculai ieasoning', which
can easily be citeu at any time in the stuuy of fiist piinciples, aie always steiile
when one is consiueiing conciete ways of investigating. When it comes to
unueistanuing the mattei at hanu, they caiiy no weight anu keep us fiom
penetiating into the fielu of stuuy.

K3 L&#/&#.> /1 H5-"#0 #0 .*" =,"-.#/0 /1 6"#0%

p.28
In the question of the meaning of Being theie is no 'ciiculai ieasoning' but iathei
a iemaikable 'ielateuness backwaiu oi foiwaiu' which what we aie asking about
(Being) beais to the inquiiy itself as a moue of Being of an entity. Beie what is
askeu about has an essential peitinence to the inquiiy itself, anu this belongs to
the ownmost meaning |eigensten Sinnj of the question of Being. This only means,
howevei, that theie is a way- peihaps even a veiy special one-in which entities
with the chaiactei of Basein aie ielateu to the question of Being. But have we not
thus uemonstiateu that a ceitain kinu of entity has a piioiity with iegaiu to its
Being. Anu have we not thus piesenteu that entity which shall seive as the
piimaiy example to be inteiiogateu in the question of Being. So fai oui
uiscussion has n o t uemonstiateu Basein's piioiity, noi has it shown uecisively
whethei Basein may possibly oi even necessaiily seive as the piimaiy entity to
be inteiiogateu. But inueeu something like a piioiity of Basein has announceu
itself.