Having articulated the horizonal interpretation of time, I return in this chapter to the notion of finitude, which has been presupposed through Chaps. 2 – 4 . Both the ontology of the extant and post-metaphysical differential ontology tend to understand finitude from outside it: the former with the help of the infinite intellect; the latter with the impersonal virtual. However, if we want to let the un-folding of beings present us with folds of meaning which have indeed been folded (instead of already flattened prior to un-folding), we must understand being as such (and not just the appearing of beings) as piecemeal unfolding. This was already evident in Edith Stein’s Finite and Eternal Being. To construe finitude from within it, however, a critique must be carried out of Stein’s Thomism, which presupposes the independence and priority of “essential being.” Structurally, intrinsic finitude means the realization of freedom within the receding bounds determined by impending impossibilities, as Heidegger’s “being-towards-the-end” [Sein zum Ende] discloses. Dynamically, intrinsic finitude means that the end is not just suspended on the outside but more importantly proliferated as countless minuscule deaths, which creates cracks in life so that what is new may be born. This can be read from Heidegger’s notion of “finitization” [Verendlichung], which we find in five texts he authored during 1929–30. Finally, while the clarification of intrinsic finitude assumes the viewpoint of Dasein, it can be generalized to cover beings in general. Their being consists in finite unfolding, as Heidegger exemplified with his analysis of the Greek temple in “The Origin of the Work of Art.”