seiend, Seiende, Seiendes, Seienden, Seiendste, l’étant, étants, ente, entes, sendo, beings, a being

Belonging to the second group are words such as das Seiende, das Seiendste, seiender; and seiend. Whereas das Seiende appears quite frequently in the text, other variants of this word appear infrequently. An unsurpassable philosophical precision in translation—if such were ever achievable—would demand that we uniformly render das Seiende with “a being.” However, realizing that such precision is not achievable in translation, we exercised two options. For those cases where the philosophical meaning would be otherwise totally compromised, we opted for translating das Seiende with “a being.” In all other cases we translate das Seiende with “beings” in order to maintain a uniform level of readability. But the reader should bear in mind that throughout this translation “beings” is used as a word whose point of reference is “a being’s restoration in the other beginning.” which is to say that our choice of “beings” is not to be taken as a generalization of all “beings.”

When Heidegger uses das Seiendste, seiender, and seiend in Contributions, he does not assume a chain of beings and its inherent hierarchy. Although these words bring to mind the Platonic ὄντως ὄν and the Thomistic maxime ens, what is to be disclosed by them is called in the Contributions “restoration of beings.” Thus our renditions of these words with “most being” and “more being” are to be taken not in the sense of a series of superlatives but as indicating restoration of beings. (Emad & Maly, p. xxiii-xviv)

“A being” (Das Seiende): This word names not only what is actual (Wirkliche) – and this only as extant (Vorhanden) and still only as object of knowledge (Gegenstand der Erkenntnis) – names not only what is actual of whatever kind, but rather also and at the same time names the possible (Mögliche), the necessary (Notwendige), and the accidental (Zufällige) – everything that in any way whatsoever is in be-ing (Seyn), including what is not (Nichtige) and the nothing (Nichts). Whoever, thinking himself quite clever, immediately discovers here a “contradiction” (Widerspruch) – because what is not cannot “be” – he always thinks way too short with his non-contradiction as the standard for what is ownmost to beings. (GA65:§34; GA65EM:52)

VIDE: (seiend e afins->http://hyperlexikon.hyperlogos.info/modules/lexikon/search.php?option=1&term=seiend)

étant (ETEM)
being (BTJS)
ente (STMSCC)

NT: ‘seiend’. Heidegger translates Plato’s present participle ὄν by this present participle of the verb ‘sein’ (‘to be’). We accordingly translate ‘seiend’ here and in a number of later passages by the present participle ‘being’; where such a translation is inconvenient we shall resort to other constructions, usually subjoining the German word in brackets or in a footnote. The participle ‘seiend’ must be distinguished from the infinitive ‘sein’, which we shall usually translate either by the infinitive ‘to be’ or by the gerund ‘being’. It must also be distinguished from the important substantive ‘Sein’ (always capitalized), which we shall translate as ‘Being’ (capitalized), and from the equally important substantive ‘Seiendes’, which is directly derived from ‘seiend’, and which we shall usually translate as ‘entity’ or ‘entities’. (See our note i, H. 3 below.) (BTMR:1)

When Heidegger uses das Seiendste, seiender, and seiend in Contributions (GA65), He does not assume a chain of beings and its inherent hierarchy. Although these words bring to mind the Platonic ὄντως ὄv and the Thomistic maxime ens, what is to be disclosed by them is called in the Contributions “restoration of beings.” Thus our renditions of these words with “most being” and “more being” are to be taken not in the sense of a series of superlatives but as indicating restoration of beings. (GA65EM:xxiii-xxiv)