discussing unrepressed concealment at the seminar of September 7, 1963, Zollikon:
There is a relationship to clearing which need not be "conscious" and reflected on in the Freudian sense. Being in the clearing is also a presupposition of reflection. The word "reflection" already says that the clearing is presupposed because it means the re-flected light. Concealment is not a hiding as is Freud's "repression" [Verdrängung] because hiding [as repression] is a special way and manner of being in the clearing.
That little children and old people live exclusively in the present does not mean that the two cases are the same. On the contrary, one must not cut off the ecstatic [dimension]. In contrast to the small child, the old person has having-been-ness, but it conceals itself.
In all pathological phenomena too, the three temporal ecstaces and their particular modifications must be taken into consideration.
In Freud's repression we are dealing with hiding [Verstecken] a representation [Vorstellung]. In withdrawal [Entzug] we are dealing with the phenomenon itself. The phenomenon withdraws itself from the domain of the clearing and is inaccessible--so inaccessible that this inaccessibility as such cannot be experienced anymore. What conceals itself remains what it is, otherwise I could no longer come back to it.
Clearing is never mere clearing, but always the clearing of concealment [Sich-Verbergen]. In the proper sense the clearing of concealment [Lichtung des Sich-Verbergens] means that the inaccessible shows and manifests itself as such--as the inaccessible. And again, this can mean simply inaccessible or momentarily inaccessible to me. What manifests itself as the inaccessible is the mystery [Geheimnis]. The inaccessibility is cleared [gelichtet]; I am aware of it, else I could not even ask [about it]. The totality of the modifications of presence [Anwesenheit] in itself is not something present [Anwesendes] anymore. It cannot be characterized as something present.