Part 5 of: The Will to Will, as the text on Force, its essence and actuality
περὶ μὲν οὖν τοῦ πρώτως ὄντος καὶ πρὸς ὃ πᾶσαι αἱ ἄλλαι κατηγορίαι τοῦ ὄντος ἀναφέρονται εἴρηται, περὶ τῆς οὐσίας （κατὰγὰρ τὸν τῆς οὐσίας λόγον λέγεται τἆλλα  ὄντα, τό τε ποσὸν καὶ τὸ ποιὸν καὶ τἆλλα τὰ οὕτω λεγόμενα: πάντα γὰρ ἕξει τὸντῆς οὐσίας λόγον, ὥσπερ εἴπομεν ἐν τοῖς πρώτοις λόγοις (9 I, 104Sb27-32)
1.We have thus dealt with beings in the primary sense, and that means, with that to which all the other categories of beings are referred back, οὐσία. 2. The other beings are said with regard to what is said when saying οὐσία, the how much as well as the how constituted and the others that are said in this manner; for everything that is (the other categories besides οὐσία) must in and of itself have the saying of οὐσία, as stated in the previous discussion (about ousia).
The first sentence establishes that the categories, and in fact the first category, have already been dealt with in another treatise. The second sentence characterizes the manner of the relation back and forth of the other categories to the first. Three times in this sentence we find: λόγος, λέγεται, λεγόμενον. The relation back and forth of the other categories occurs as λέγειν in the λόγος.
λέγειν means "to glean" [lesen], that is, to harvest, to gather, to and add one to the other, to include and connect one with the other. Such laying together is a laying open [Dar-legen] and laying forth ( Vor- /egen] (a placing alongside and presenting) [ein Bei- und Dar-stellen}: a making something accessible in a gathered and unified way. And since such a gathering laying open and laying forth occurs above all in recounting and speaking (in trans-mitting and com-municating to others), λόγος comes to mean discourse that combines and explains. λόγος as laying open is then at the same time evidence [Be-legenj; finally it comes to mean laying something out in an interpretation [Aus-legen], έρμηνεια meaning of λόγος as relatio (unifying, gathering, coherence, rule) is therefore prior to its meaning as discourse (see below, p. 103). Asking how λόγος also came to have the meaning of "relation" is therefore backwards; the order of things is quite the reverse.
Something is placed such as to let one take up a matter. The sentence, we here learn, is not for discourse. Only later does it come into that passion, as though departing from what it is when it is more like itself.
All the rushing around, present in the Socratic/Platonic dialogues, is an error. How powerful is the Will to Will when it stands within itself, speaking? Thus the meaning of what the text Heidegger shows, that the logos speaks the human being. Or, wills it. Or, commands it?
Now we are letting the Will to Will come forward as the text, on the reading of a work of Aristotle. One is reminded, in this, of divination, of bird bones, cast in a bunch, of Hölderlin, of beauty, of fate. The Will to Will, in Jung. Of Fate, “the thrones”. Of Nietzsche the “lopsided”.