Yet how are we to grasp these two-holding oneself toward the binding character of things, and originary completion—in their unity? Most difficult of all, however, is that unveiledness of the being of beings which is supposed to belong together with these. Here too, we have the pieces clearly in our grasp, as it were: beings—we constantly comport ourselves toward them; being—we constantly express it. But the being of beings? The unifying connection is missing, or rather the origin of this distinction in which, in accordance with its uniqueness and originary character, the distinguishing is earlier than the two terms that are distinguished. That is, we are missing the origin that first lets these two terms spring forth.
We are now asking: What is the unitary character of the fundamental occurrence that these three moments lead us to? We can comprehend the primordial structure of the fundamental occurrence and its tripartite character as projection. We are familiar with what this designates purely from the meaning of the word in our everyday experience of being, as a projecting of measures to be taken and as planning in the sense of the anticipatory regulating of human comportment. With this in view, even my first interpretation of this phenomenon took 'projection' in this broad sense and gave this word, which is familiar in normal linguistic usage, a terminological status. At the same time, however, I was inquiring back into its intrinsic possibility in the constitution of being pertaining to Dasein itself. Thus I also called projection that which made such things possible. Strictly speaking, however, if we are clear about this, it is only the originary projection that should in general be named in this philosophical and terminological way—namely that occurrence which fundamentally makes possible all familiar projection in our everyday comportment. For only if we retain this name for what is thus unique can we remain constantly vigilant, as it were, for the uniqueness of the fact that the essence of man, the Dasein in him, is determined by this projective character. Projection as the primordial structure of this occurrence is the fundamental structure of world-formation. Accordingly, we can now say not only in a more strictly terminological way, but also with respect to a more lucid and radical problematic, that projection is world-projection. World prevails in and for a letting-prevail that has the character of projecting. With respect to our previous terminology, projection is only this originary occurrence, and no longer to be taken as our specifically factical and concrete planning, deliberation, and understanding; for this reason it is also inappropriate to speak of a derivative sense of projection.
We shall now ask more concretely to what extent projection is the primordial structure of that tripartite fundamental occurrence. By 'primordial structure' we understand that which originarily unifies those three moments in an articulated unity. 'Originary' unifying means: intrinsically forming and sustaining this articulated unity. Not only must the three moments of that fundamental occurrence appear simultaneously in projection, but in it they