Heidegger draws attention in his 'Moira' essay to the goddess Ἀλήθεια in Parmenides' poem which he, Heidegger, interprets as the hitherto unthought openness of disclosure that bears the presencing of presents and their "taking-in" by "thinking". Ἀλήθεια as the unfolding of the folded-in, i.e. implicit, twofold of presence and presents, is said by Heidegger to "grant ... all presencing the light in which presents can appear". This "light", however, is then immediately associated with the "clearing of presencing", even to the extent of hazarding formulations such as "Licht der Lichtung" (light of the clearing) and "sich lichtendes Scheinen" (self-clearing shining), suggesting that the clearing were simply shining and light-filled. This ambiguity is resolved only much later, in 1969, when Heidegger says clearly that, "Light, namely, can fall into the clearing, into its openness, and in it allow brightness to play with darkness". This implies that the clearing as ecstatic time-space is the clearing for both light and dark, disclosure and concealment. Concealment, however, must be understood in two different senses.

The first sense concerns the self-concealment of the clearing of presencing-and-absencing itself in granting the presencing of presents, which is an historical event (Ereignis) of self-concealment in favour of the presents that present themselves in the temporal clearing. Heidegger interprets the goddess, Moira (one's portion in life, lot, fate, destiny; Liddell/Scott), who appears in Frag. VIII at line 37, as the dispensing, sending event of enpropriation (Ereignis) that enpropriates to each other human being and the play of presencing and absencing. Moira is the event of enpropriation that "bound" (ἐπέδησεν; Frag. VIII 37) minding and presencing into their simple self-sameness. Due to the self-concealment of the temporal clearing of presencing in favour of its presents, it is overlooked — or rather, taken for granted — and left unthought throughout the two-and-a-half millennia history of Western metaphysics. Instead, time itself is thought as a linear sequence of 'nows' that are ('exist'), without the (circularly temporal) meaning of being itself ever being clarified.

The second sense of concealment, however, concerns the play of disclosure and concealment of presents themselves within the granted clearing, which, according to the above new interpretation of Frag. III, is three-dimensional time-space and mind in their sameness. Presents (beings) can present themselves clearly in the mind's light, or can remain hidden to the mind, or they can present themselves only distortedly and obscurely in an ambiguity of light and shade. This play of disclosing and hiding of presents is overlaid and thus crossed with the play of presencing and twofold temporal absencing of beings in a matrix of various combinations so that, for instance, the arriving of that which is still absent in the future may be seen by mind clearly or only obscurely. With its absolute will to foresee and control all change, modern science is hell-bent on fore-seeing the future as clearly, unambiguously and predictively as possible through its calculative theoretical models for fore-seeing. Similarly, what has been and is thus absent in this specific temporal mode, can be retrieved to presence by the mind's calling to presence — without, however, overcoming its absence, but attaining only a presence as an absent — either clearly or only faintly; or it can remain in the complete darkness of oblivion, so to speak, out of mind. The mind can also be mindful that it has forgotten something that remains in concealment, or it can be totally oblivious even to its own forgetting, in which case, what has been forgotten is doubly concealed to the point of oblivion.

¶ 5:02 AM