University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An inquiry into the meaning of the concept of "between" in the work of Martin Buber

(USC Thesis Other)

An inquiry into the meaning of the concept of "between" in the work of Martin Buber

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content m INQUIRY INTO THE M EA N IN G OF THE CO N CEPT OF
«B E T W E E N *» IN TH E W O R E O F M ARTIN BU BER
A Theais
P resen ted to
th e F acu lty o f th e Graduate School of R elig io n
U n iv ersity o f Southern C a lifo rn ia
In P a r t ia l F u lfillm e n t
of th e Requirem ents f o r th e Degree
M aster of A rts
by
Melvin J . F rie se n
June 1950
UMI Number: EP65193
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Dissetnaîon Pubhshîng
UMI EP65193
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
This thesis, written by
...M fiL ly lii.. J * ...l ’r le £ L e iL ................................................
under the guidance of Faculty Committee,
and approved by all its members, has been
presented to and accepted by the Council on
Graduate Study and Research in partial fulfill
ment of the requirements for the degree of
M aster of A rts
Dean
Faculty Committee
Chairman
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I . INTRODUCTION 1
The Problem S ta te d 1
Problem of tr a n s la tin g 3
Danger o f p ro fe ssio n a lism in p ro je c tio n 3
I I . BUBER'S B A O E O R O U N D 4
Biography 4
B u b er's l i t e r a r y c o n trib u tio n s 4
B u b er's in flu e n c e 6
I I I . THE HASIDIM 8
D efined 8
In flu e n ce on Buber 10
Trace o f Emphasis on r e la tio n s h ip s 13
IV. G O D , M E N A N D THINGS 15
I and Thou in tro d u ced 15
Two-fold a ttitu d e o f man 16
L iving, p a st and p re se n t 18
Love 18
The realm of s p i r i t 19
Community 21
Teleology 34
The tw o -fo ld I 26
Ontology 38
CHAPTER PAGE
B i-p o la rity 35
M eeting 37
V. B E TW EEN M A N A N D M A N 44
D ialogic R e la tio n sh ip 44
R e s p o n sib ility and th e "E ingle One” in
R e la tio n to Community 51
R e la tio n sh ip in E ducation 60
P h ilo so p h ic a l Anthropology 64
In d iv id u alism and C o lle c tiv ism 67
The realm of "Between” 71
Redemption 75
The e th ic s o f th e love of God and
o n e 's neighbors 79
VI. PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATIONS 85
Two f o c i of th e Jew ish soul 86
The love o f God and the id e a o f D eity 88
Im ita tio Dei 90
What are we to do about th e 10 Commandments? 93
B ib lic a l le a d e rs h ip 93
The power o f th e S p ir it 95
N ationalism and Hebrew Humanism 97
V II. S U M M A R Y A N D CONCLUSIONS 101
Summary 101
C onclusions 107
BIBLIOGRAPHY 110
GHAPfER I
INTRODUCTION
Since M artin Buber i s l i t t l e known in America, i t is
n ecessary to give a sh o rt background of th e man and h is
work, p a r tic u la r ly because h is concepts cannot be under
stood a p a rt from h is c u ltu r a l and r e lig io u s s e ttin g . "To
u n d erstan d th e e x te n t o f B u b er's in flu e n c e and th e fo rc e of
h is d o c trin e , i t i s iB ^ o rtan t to know som ething o f h is
s p i r i t u a l backgrouzid, because h is o rig in s are a ls o th e key
to h is whole l i f e ' s w o rk ."l To an other " r e lig io n , fo r
% ib6r, i s a dialo g u e between Cod and man, o f which th e
B ib le i s a re c o rd ; and Judaism is th e Jew 's experience of
t h i s d iv in e c o n v e rsa tio n unique in th e h is to ry o f p e o p le s,"^
The problem s t a te d . I t was purposed to g iv e a s t a te
ment of th e th e o r e tic a l concepts Buber employs as found in
th e E nglish te x ts I and Thou. Between Man and Man. and
H asidism . R eference to h is book I s r a e l and th e World i s
made to show th e a p p lic a tio n of h is concepts in " l i f e
1 Paul E. P fu etze , "M artin Buber and Jew ish M ysti
cism , " R e lig io n in L ife . F a ll 1947 is s u e , p. 553.
3 Isaa c Landman, E d ito r, "M artin Buber", The
U niversal Jew ish E ncyclopedia, v o l. I I , p. 570
3
s e ttin g s ." In co n c lu sio n , i t was hoped to show th e r e l a
tio n o f B u b er's concepts to a p erso n a l contem porary a p p li
c a tio n .
To b e t t e r u n d erstan d B u b er's th o u g h t, one ch ap ter i s
to be given to "Hasidism " and i t s l i t e r a t u r e , to show what
b ea rin g t h i s had on h is ou tlo o k .
Problem o f t r a n s l a t i n g . S everal comments from
G reta H ort^ are o f v alu e in guiding th e th in k in g of th e
stu d en t o f M artin B u b er's w ritin g s . The f i r s t has to do
w ith th e problem o f tr a n s la tin g and p arap h rasin g .
I f , th e re fo re , we attem pt to t r e a t P ro fe sso r B uber's
work as being e ith e r p h ilo so p h ic a l or th e o lo g ic a l, we
im m ediately fin d o u rse lv e s confused: we cannot reduce
i t to a system , we cannot even co n v ert what he says in -
^ to o th e r term s in o rd e r to p o in t out what he 're a lly *
means or im p lie s, and th u s compare h is system w ith
o th e r p h ilo s o p h ic a l o r th e o lo g ic a l system s. Form and
m atter are in se p a ra b le in h is w o r k . 4
As to a g en eral p o in t of view , G reta H ort fu rth e r
su g g ests th a t
what P ro fe sso r Buber p rim a rily g iv es us in h is work
i s a p o in t o f view, a stan d in g ground from which we can
see and cooperate w ith t h i s trem endous u n iv e rse in
which we are p la c e d . P ro fesso r Buber i s in te r e s te d in
thought in so f a r as i t le a d s to a c tio n , and in a c tio n
in so f a r as i t le a d s to th e u n ity o f God, to th e u n ity
3 M artin Buber, Mamre. Essays in R e lig io n . Trans
la te d by G reta H ort, Melbourne and London: Melbourne
U n iv ersity P ress in A sso ciatio n w ith Oxford U n iv e rsity
P re s s , 1946, 190 pp.
4 I b i d ., p . X,
of God w ith h is w o rld -in d w ellin g g lo ry . I t i s th is
u n ity which i s h is theme, w hatever he w rite s about;
i t i s t h i s u n ity he c a re s fo r above a l l e ls e ; i t is
t h i s u n ity which he re co g n izes and d e sc rib e s in h is
works. ®
Danger of p ro fe ssio n a lism in p r o je c tio n . To c a u tio n
th e stu d e n t o f Buber from fa u lty co n clu sio n s and in te r p r e ta
tio n s in h is re ad in g and th in k in g , G re ta Hort adds a l a s t
p re c a u tio n which i s w ell used to p re fa c e th is stu d y . She
say s.
T his b rin g s me to a q u e stio n which I have asked Her
s e l f many tim es; Is i t p o s s ib le f o r Hindu, B uddhist,
C h ris tia n and Moslem re a d e rs to a p p re c ia te P ro fe sso r
B u b er's teach in g ? I f th e se re a d e rs have a sp ark o f
r e lig io n in them, th e answer is undoubtedly "y e s."
Provided th a t a re a d e r i s ig n o ran t o f theology and
ph ilo so p h y , b u t has a sense o f r e a l i t y . P ro fe sso r
B u b er's te a c h in g should not p ro v id e any s p e c ia l d i f f i
c u lty , I f , on th e o th e r hand, th e re ad er has a l i t t l e
or g re a t d ea l o f theology or p h ilo so p h y , th e danger fo r
him l i e s in th e tem p tatio n to look away from th e liv e d
l i f e in o rd er to ev a lu a te th e te a c h in g not by what i t
says o r by what I t do es, b u t by i t s im p lic a tio n s fo r
some c h e rish e d in t e l l e c t u a l co n cep tio n or fe rv e n tly
h e ld d o c trin e . One cannot re a d r e lig io n w ithout b ein g
judged by re lig io n .®
5 I b id . . p . x i - x i i ,
6 I b i d . , p. x i i i .
CHAPTER I I
M ARTIN BUBER'S B A C K G R O U N D
B iography. M artin Buber^ was born in V ienna in 1878.
He s tu d ie d in th e U n iv e rs itie s o f V ienna, L eip zig , and
B e rlin . He was an e a rly w rite r and p o l i t i c a l le a d e r in
Zionism. From 1923-1933 he occupied th e only c h a ir fo r
Jew ish philosophy o f r e lig io n and e th ic s in a German
U n iv e rsity , in F ra n k fo rt. He was e x ile d from Germany in
1933 and in 1936 became p ro fe sso r o f s o c ia l philosophy a t
th e Hebrew U n iv e rsity , Jerusalem . He advocated th e immed
i a t e c r e a tio n o f a s p e c if ic Jew ish c u ltu re and was one o f
th e f i r s t in W estern Europe to f o s te r th e p io n eer colonizar-
tio n movement in P a le s tin e . In h is y o u th , Buber le a rn e d
much from h is g ra n d fa th e r, Solomon Buber, about "Hasidism"
which only in l a t e r y e a rs became s ig n if ic a n t fo r him.
B u b er's l i t e r a r y c o n trib u tio n s . Of p a r tic u la r im
p o rtan ce in h is work i s th e r e t e l l i n g o f th e legend o f
H asidism . He f e l t i t n ecessary to ex p lo re in to the meaning
o f th e legend r a th e r th a n in i t s th e o r e tic a l l i t e r a t u r e .
1 Isaac Landman, E d ito r, "M artin B uber," The
U n iv ersal Jew ish E ncyclopedia. Vol. I I , pp. 569-570.
5
He s a id , "th e th e o r e tic a l l i t e r a t u r e i s th e g lo s s , th e
legend i s th e t e x t • ♦ .I t is obvious th a t legend i s not
c h ro n ic le ; however to him who knows how to re ad leg en d , i t
conveys more tr u th th a n th e c h ro n ic le .
Buber3 was e d ito r o f th e V ienna Welt in 1901 and
founder o f th e Ju d isc h e r V erlag . He was e d ito r o f Per Jude
from 1916-1924. In a d d itio n to th o se works l i s t e d in the
B ibliography o f t h i s p a p e r, Buber has w ritte n volum inously.4
I t was in h is study o f th e H asidic t a l e s th a t h is own
philosophy found an a lte r e d ex p ressio n . This study helped
reshape h is background o f c u ltu r a l Zionism and h is re v o lt
a g a in st th e s p i r i t o f p e rso n a l r e lig io n as sym bolised in
th e r e lig io n o f h is g ra n d fa th e r. From th i s come n o t only
h is in s ig h ts o f p e rso n a l r e la tio n s h ip s b u t a lso an o ffe rin g
2 M artin Buber, Mamre, Essays in R e lig io n . Trans
la te d by G reta H o rt, Melbourne and London: Melbourne
U n iv e rsity P ress in A sso ciatio n w ith Oxford U n iv e rsity
P re ss, 1946, p. 125.
3 Isaa c Landman, Loo, c i t .
4 Loc. P i t . In a d d itio n to th o se l i s t e d in th e
b ib lio g ra p h y , he has w ritte n : Die G eschichte des Rabbi
Nachman; Die Legends des Baalsohem; k k st a tis o h e Konfession-
en: RedeiTund &le ic h n is s e des Tschuang Tse ; D aniel ; b le '
Ju d ish e Bewegxing. Voi 1. 3; V olker. S ta a te n und Zion; Die
Rede, d ie Lehre und das Lied; E re ig n lsse und Begegnungen:
Mein W eg zum ChaBsidism us; Per H e ilig e Weg; P er Grosse
Maggid; Reden uber das Judentum; Das verborgene L io h t; Die
C hassidischen B ucher; Zweis u rache; Koinigtum Gott e s ; and
S ie Stunde und d ie E rk e n tn iss.
6
to th e w orld a w ealth o f l i t e r a t u r e h ith e rto n o t g e n e ra lly
known. This c o n trib u tio n i s th e burden o f th e main body of
t h is stu d y .
B u b er's in flu e n c e . Ronald Gregor Smith in h is tr a n s
la to r* s in tro d u c tio n ^ s t a t e s th a t th e
d ir e c t in flu e n c e of Buber on p h ilo s o p h ic a l thought
i s nowhere more c le a r ly shown th a n in th e work o f
P ro fe sso r K arl Heim. H is book, Glaube und D enken,. . ,
s h o w s ...th a t h is in v e s tig a tio n o f th e problem o f tr a n
scendence l i e s under an alm ost in c a lc u la b le o b lig a tio n
to B u b er's w o r k ...in dogm atic th e o lo g y .. .what Buber has.
done i s to s ta te in c la s s ic form th e n a tu re o f th e
claim made upon u s by th e "tra n sc e n d e n t. "
SmithG f u r th e r l i s t s as B u b er's in flu e n c e th e work
o f Dr. F rie d ric h G ogarten.
In h is loh Glaube an den d re i- e in ig e n G ott (I be
lie v e in th e Triune God) he attem p ts an in v e s tig a tio n
o f th e r e la tio n of f a i t h to h is to r y . The c o n tro llin g
a ffirm a tio n of h is t h e s i s i s th e r e a l it y of our con
scio u sn ess of o th e r s e lv e s : h is to ry fo r him i s con
s t i t u t e d where two p erso n s m e e t.. .The c o n c re te r e a l i t y ,
fo r him, as f o r Buber, is th e s itu a tio n where re sp o n sib le
perso n s confront one another in liv in g m utual r e la tio n .
The U niversal Jew ish Encyclopedia"^ su g g ests th a t out
"of tw e n tie th cen tu ry th in k e rs and w rite r s . P ro fe sso r M artin
Buber must be s in g le d out f o r having done th e most to i n t e r -
5 M artin Buber, I and Thou. Edinburgh, 38 George S t .:
T & T G lark, 1937, pp. v i i i - i x .
6 I b id . , pp. x -x i,
7 v o l. V, p. 341
7
p r ê t H asidism in th e W estern World. "
P ro fe sso r T illic h sees Buber in flu e n c in g P ro te s ta n t
ism in a th r e e - f o ld way,® and r e f e r s la rg e ly to I and Thou,
by Buber, as th e b a s is o f in flu e n c e as fo llo w s:
B u b er's e x i s t e n t i a l in te r p r e ta tio n of p ro p h e tic
r e lig io n , h is re d isc o v ery o f m ysticism as an elem ent
w ith in p ro p h e tic r e lig io n , and h is u n d erstan d in g o f
th e r e la tio n between p ro p h e tic r e lig io n and c u ltu r e ,
e s p e c ia lly in th e s o c ia l and p o l i t i c a l realm s.
8 P. T illic h , "M artin Buber and C h ris tia n Thought,"
Commentary. June 48, p. 516.
CHAPTER I I I
HASIDISM
D efined,^ H asidism i s a re lig io u s movement which
o rig in a te d in Poland in th e m iddle o f th e 18th ce n tu ry .
The term i s d eriv e d from th e Hebrew word has id (p lu ra l
h asid im ) u sed in B ib lic a l l i t e r a t u r e in the sen se o f
" k in d ly ," "b en ev o len t," and l a t e r as " s a in tly ," and
"scru p u lo u sly r e lig io u s ."
H asidism arose out o f a background o f p h y s ic a l
c a ta s tro p h e and inadequate s p i r i t u a l le a d e rs h ip . In i t s
in c e p tio n , th e re was no thought of se c ta ria n is m , nor a t-
tenrpts to tr a n s f e r w ith th e c a rd in a l d o c trin e s o f Judaism .
I t sought to r e lie v e th e gloom and im poverishm ent o f
P o lis h Jew ry. The " in s tin c tiv e " hunger f o r knowledge was
not d isco u rag ed . H asidism
ta u g h t th a t th e b u rn in g glow o f enthusiasm alone
co n tain ed the* seeds o f s a lv a tio n . I t was a g la d and
joyous f a i t h w ithout th e co rro d in g in flu e n c e s o f th e
environm ent in which i t was born th a t H asidism preach
ed in a world which fa n c ie d i t s e l f b e se t w ith a l l kinds
of g h o sts and demons. . . I t aimed not to ab ro g ate ag e-o ld
customs and t r a d i t i o n s , b u t to surround them w ith
g re a te r warmth and deeper meaning.®
1 Isaac Landman, E d ito r, U n iv ersal Jew ish Encyclo-
u e d ia . V ol. v, pp. 237-241.
2 I b id . . p. 238.
9
The founder o f th e movement was I s r a e l B aal 8hem
Toh (1700-60). From him and h is k in d ly m in istry to th e
h e a rts and p r a c tic a l l i v e s o f th e peo p le - and about him
have spun th e r e a l and legendary s t o r i e s le a d in g to th e
system o f H asidism ,
The p r in c ip le s of Hasidism in c lu d e : th e Omnipresence
o f God in a very l i t e r a l sen se; P rayer - th e medium of i n t e r
course w ith God, which must be in a c h e e rfu l, joyous, en
th u s ia s tic a ttitu d e ; and o p tim is tic a ttitu d e tow ards s in ,
in th a t God i s in e v e ry th in g and th u s good (a c tu a l or
p o te n tia l) i s in ev e ry th in g ; making s in to be " p u rifie d , "
not d e sp ise d ; S h ifl u t h . th a t s t a t e o f h u m ility which flow s
from th e r e a liz a tio n o f ones co n n ectio n w ith th e low er o r
d er o f e x is te n c e , making f o r dem ocratic conduct tow ard one
an o th er; and Zaddikism , th e d o c trin e reco g n izin g a s e le c t
group o f in d iv id u a ls who embodied th e id e a l o f e c s ta tic
p ie ty and thus were able to incluenoe not only man but th e
w ill and mood o f God a ls o .
This Jew ish m ysticism was a happy com bination o f
t h i s — and o th e r — w o rld lin e s s. The H a sid 's joyous
l i f e among th e circum stances o f e a rth was liv in g fo r
God, Since God was everyw here, in ev e ry th in g and every
human b ein g , a l l of l i f e was w orship and t h i s c o n s tit
u te d s e l f - r e a l i z a t i o n . Together w ith t h e ir le a d e r, th e
Zaddik, who was th e embodiment and example of t h i s doc
t r i n e of se rv in g th e Lord w ith g lad n ess, th e H asidic
groups developed a deep u n d ersta n d in g o f what a
genuine "Community" should b e: one in which th e D ivine
10
i s r e a liz e d in human re la tio n s h ip s .®
There was th e in e v ita b le c o n f lic t w ith Rabbinism
w ith a n a tu ra l l i t e r a r y campaign a g a in st H asidism ,
In modern l i f e Hasidism has not been able to stav e
o ff d is a s te r - which has come a t th e hands of p e tty
q u a r re ls , fam ily feuds and w orldly am bitions of th e lead
e r s , th e Zaddikim, to g e th e r w ith th e e f f e c ts of modern
ed u c atio n and g re a te r absence o f c r e d u lity in th e p o te n tia l
adm irers and fo llo w e rs o f H asidism ,
In flu e n c e on B uber. Not only d id Hasidism in flu e n c e
Buber, but i t , in in flu e n c in g Buber, caused him to a f fe c t
German and Jew ish th o u g h t.
"B uber's re d isc o v ery o f H asidism was epochal fo r
W estern Europe, Drawing h is in s p ir a tio n and informar-
tio n from m ysticism , and p a r tic u la r ly H asidism , Buber
profoundly in flu en ce d men and th o u g h t, p a r tic u la r ly in
th e r e lig io u s and s o c io lo g ic a l f ie ld s ...N o d isc u s sio n
of h is philosophy can be adequate w ithout some under
stan d in g o f th e H asidic movement and th e e f f e c t of
B u b er's in tro d u c tio n o f H asidic lo r e in to German
th o u g h t. "4
I t was found th a t from B u b er's s tu d ie s in m ysticism
and h is
"co n tact w ith a group o f young men. ..who were a t
tem pting to d isco v er th e in n er sp rin g s of th e id e a l
community in th e in d iv id u a l's f e e lin g of o rganic u n ity
3 I b id ., v o l. I I , p. 570
4 Loc. c i t .
11
w ith m ankind,. . . he came to b e lie v e th a t th e d is tin c tiv e
n o te of Jew ish c h a ra c te r - the Jew ish so u l - was to be
found n e ith e r in l e g a l i s t i c p u rita n ism nor in a s c e tic
p u r ity , but in immanent s p i r i t u a l i t y , in th e r e a liz a tio n
th a t th e s p i r i t of God i s p re se n t in a l l l i f e ; th a t
th e re fo re a l l o f l i f e is h o ly , and th a t n o th in g is a lie n
to Judaism in which th e s p i r i t of l i f e can be f o u n d . 5
I t was when he reached t h i s p o in t in h is th in k in g
th a t he r e a liz e d th a t th e p ie tis m of th e Hasidim , a g a in st
which he had re v o lte d "fo r more th an a decade o f Jew ish
a c ti v it y , ex em p lified b o th th e s a n c tif ic a tio n o f a l l l i f e
and th e essence of s p i r i t u a l community."® «The in te r e s t
in H asidism which Buber came to as th e fu sio n of h is con
cern s fo r Judaism and fo r m ysticism has become one of th e
c e n tr a l s tr a in s in h is thought and has developed in to a
p e r s is te n t phase o f h is l i t e r a r y a c tiv ity .
Of i n t e r e s t in t h i s stu d y , Buber fin d s th re e fa c to rs
o f H asidic p ie ty ap p e alin g to him - " th e ir community l i f e ,
t h e i r sense o f s p i r i t u a l immanence, t h e ir freedom from
m onastic s e p a ra tio n from so ciety ."®
5 Joseph L. B lau, "M artin B ub er's R elig io u s P h ilo so
phy: A Review A r tic le ," The Review of R eliad o n . Columbia
U n iv e rsity P re ss, p. 49,
6 I b id . . p. 50.
7 Loc. c i t .
8 I b id . . p. 53.
12
Trace o f emphasis on " R e la tio n s h ip s. " As w ill be
seen in th e next c h a p te r, Buber g iv es c o n sid e ra b le p la c e
to th e emphasis of " r e la tio n s h ip s ." I t i s here purposed
to show how Buber has found th e seed of h is thought in th e
H asidic w ritin g s . (Buber s ta te s c le a r ly th a t H asid ic say
ings made o f him an Has id fo r ty y e a rs ago.)®
Speaking o f th e elem ent of legend in th e H asidic
w ritin g s , Buber su g g ests th a t th e re c o lle c tio n s handed
down in c lu d e s what they saw or thought they had seen, in
t h e i r fe rv o r. At any r a te what happened or d id not happen,
th e e la te d soul p erceiv ed i t as r e a l i t y , and " th e re fo re ,
r e la te d as s u c h .. . th e r e a l i t y of th e ex perience of fe rv e n t
s o u ls , a r e a l i t y born in a l l innocence, u nalloyed by inven
tio n and whimsy. What is re co rd ed is not an account o f
s e l f but o f what s t i r r e d them. "Something happened to
rouse th e so u l, and i t had such and such an e f f e c t, t r a d i
tio n a lso re v e a ls i t s cau se; th e c o n ta c t betw een th o se who
quicken th o se who are quickened, th e a s s o c ia tio n between
th e tw o ."11
He speaks o f th e r e la tio n s h ip o f the le a d e r ( Zaddik
9 M artin Buber, H asidism , P h il. L ib ra ry , N .Y ., p . 43.
10 ______ , T ales o f th e H asidim . Trans, by O lga Marx,
F .Y ., Schoken Books, 1947, p. 1, V ol. I .
11 Loo. o i t .
13
- rig h te o u s one) and th e le d ,
"One o f th e g re a t p rin c ip le s o f Hasidism i s th a t th e
Zaddik and th e people axe dependent on one an o th er.
Again and ag a in , t h e i r r e la tio n s h ip is compared to th a t
betw een substance and form in th e l i f e of th e in d iv id u a l
betw een body and so u l. The so u l must not b o ast th a t i t
i s more holy th an th e b o d y ...T h e body, on th e o th e r hand,
may not b ra g of su p p o rtin g th e so u l, fo r when th e soul
le a v e s , the f le s h f a l l s in to decay. Thus th e Zaddikim
need th e m u ltitu d e and th e m u ltitu d e th e Zaddikim. The
r e a l i t i e s o f H asidic te a c h in g depend on t h i s in te r
re la tio n s h ip .!®
The in te r a c tio n of le a d e r and d is c ip le , th e mutual
quickening power o f th e r e la tio n s h ip i s th e key to B uber's
a p p re c ia tio n of th e Zaddik. The Zaddik i s "the man who
le a d s th e community in God's s t e a d ,"1® b u t he i s also th e
man who has to h e lp h is Hasidim. In o rd er to do t h i s , " i t
i s n ecessary f o r him to comprehend t h e i r whole l i f e , from
the concern fo r t h e ir food to the concern f o r th e c le a n sin g
of t h e i r s o u ls . He has not to do som ething d e f in ite fo r
them; he has to do ev e ry th in g fo r them. "14 th u s becoming
th e s e rv a n ts as w ell as th e le a d e rs o f th e p eo p le, the
Zaddikim e n te r in to an o rganic co n n ectio n w ith t h e ir com
m u n itie s. The id e a l i s th a t "the le a rn e d must become aware
of t h e i r own shortcom ings and ta k e p a r t in th e l i f e of th e
13 I b id . , p. 7.
13 M artin Buber, Mamre. E ssays in R e lig io n , e t c . ,
p. 164.
14 I b id . . p . 167.
14
p eo p le, fo r only th u s can they also l i f t up th e m asses. "1®
"Here we come to th e very fo u n d a tio n o f H asidism , on
which th e l i f e between th o se who quicken, and th o se who
are quickened i s b u i l t up. The q u in tessen ce o f th i s
l i f e is th e r e la tio n s h ip between th e Zaddik and h is d is
c ip le s , which u n fo ld s the in te r a c tio n betw een th e q u ick -
ener and the quickened in com plete c l a r i t y . The te a c h e r
h elp s h is d is c ip le s fin d them selves, and in hours of
d e s o la tio n th e d is c ip le s h elp t h e i r te a c h e r fin d him self
ag ain . The te a c h e r k in d le s th e so u ls of h is d is c ip le s
and th ey surround him and l i g h t h is l i f e w ith th e flam e
he has k in d le d . The d is c ip le ask s, and by h is manner of
asking unconsciously evokes a re p ly , which h is te a c h e r 's
s p i r i t would not have produced w ithout th e stim u lu s o f
th e q u e s tio n .16
Buber fin d s th a t in tim e and w ith the in c re a s e of
th e Zaddikim and t h e ir com m unities, th e i n i t i a l fe rv o r and
u n ity beg in s to d is in te g r a te - because o f a d e p a rtu re from
th e e a rly r e la tio n s h ip s .
"Hasidism e n te rs upon i t s d e c lin e when th e Zaddikim
no lo n g e r give t h e i r H asidim in n er h elp along w ith and
through e x te rn a l h e lp . For h e re , ev e ry th in g i s based on
th e r e la tio n s h ip betw een Zaddikim and Hasidim , a liv in g
r e la tio n s h ip which is a ll- in c lu s iv e and p e n e tra te s to
th e innerm ost c o re . When th a t i s la c k in g , th en indeed,
' th e p re se n t too w ill be c o r r u p te d .'17
The next c h a p te r w ill b eg in to show th e developm ent
o f t h i s philosophy as fo rm u lated by Buber, h im se lf.
15 I b id . . p. 168.
16 M artin Buber, T ales of th e Hasidim . p . 8, Vol. I ,
17 ___________, T ales o f th e Hasidim . p. 13, Vol. I I .
CHAPTER IV
•G O D , M E N A N D THINGS
”I and Thou" in tro d u o e d . For Buber, th e re are two
w orlds. He c a lls them th e "world o f I t " and th e "world o f
Thou. " There i s a r a d ic a l d iffe re n c e between a m an's a t t i
tude to th in g s and h is a ttitu d e tow ard o th e r men. The
a ttitu d e to o th e r men i s an a ttitu d e between p e rso n s, w hile
th e a t t i tu d e to th in g s i s a co n n ectio n w ith o b je c ts . In
p e rso n a l r e la ti o n s , one su b je c t - I. - co n fro n ts an o th er sub
je c t - Thou, w hile in th e conn ectio n w ith th in g s a su b je c t
ex p erien ces and c o n sid e rs an o b je c t. The p re se n t ch a p te r i s
devoted to th e d is c u s s io n o f th i s r e la tio n s h ip as found am
p l i f i e d in B u b er's work, I and Thou.^
The t r a n s la t o r c a l l s i t a " p h ilo s o p h ic a l-re lig io u s
poem."® Because o f i t s n a tu re , much d ir e c t q u o ta tio n i s
given because o f th e inadequacy o f p a ra p h ra sin g in th i s
in s ta n c e .
That a theory of r e la tio n s h ip s i s predom inant in th e
th in k in g o f Buber in t h i s work i s evidenced in th a t he makes
1 M artin Buber, I and Thou. T rans, by R. G. Smith,
Edinburgh, 38 George S t .: T. & T. C lark , 1937.
3 I b id . , p. V i .
16
a t le a s t 23C re fe re n c e s to "R elatio n " and "R elatio n sh ip "
in th e co u rse o f 130 pages.
Twofold a ttitu d e o f man. Buber s t a r t s h is poem
w ith "To man th e w orld i s tw o fo ld , in accordance w ith h is
tw ofold a ttitu d e ," ® and s t a t e s th a t th e re are th e two p r i
mary words I-Thou and I - I t . "The prim ary word I-Thou can
only be spoken w ith th e whole b e in g . The prim ary word I - I t
can never be spoken w ith th e whole b e in g ."4 s e v e ra l tim es
Buber re p e a ts th a t "the prim ary word" can only be spoken
w ith th e whole b ein g . "Let no attem pt be made to sap th e
s tre n g th from th e meaning of th e r e la ti o n : r e la ti o n i s
m utual. There is a d iffe re n c e in an o b je c tiv e , d is
p a ssio n a te c o n s id e ra tio n of a th in g o r perso n and what can
be c o n sid ered as a s u b je c tiv e a t t itu d e w ith a response to a
th in g or p erso n as a unique t o t a l i t y . I t i s th e d iffe re n c e
between th e man who, in gazing upon a flo w e r, sees se v e ra l
le a v e s , c o lo r of th e p e ta ls , and o th e r elem ents o f a n a ly sis
f o r c l a s s i f i c a ti o n and th e l i k e , b u t c o n sid e rs i t as a
whole. He e n te rs in to i t w ith r a p tu r e . I t seems to say
som ething to him. I t s t i r s h is b ein g . I t i s not some
th in g to be p e rc e iv e d alo n e, i t becomes a th o u , to be
3 I b id . . p. 3.
4 Loc. P i t .
5 I b id . . p. 8.
17
loved and enjoyed, and, as i t were, a m angling o f h is soul
w ith th e s o u l o f th e flo w e r. I t i s n o t p o s s ib le to "ex
p e rie n c e " th e person to whom one says "th o u ." As long as
"experience" and "make use o f" are r e a lly in ten d ed in
a s s o c ia tio n w ith o th e rs or th in g s , i t i s not in th e " r e la
tio n a l" a re a . There must be resp o n se. "R elatio n is
m utual." "I do not ex p erien ce th e man to whom I say
But I tak e my sta n d in r e la ti o n to him, in th e s a n c tity of
th e prim ary word. Only when I s te p out o f i t do I exper
ience him once more. In th e a c t o f ex p erien ce Thou i s f a r
away."® In speaking th e prim ary word w ith th e whole being
"he who g iv e s h im self to i t may w ithhold n o th in g of him
s e l f , . . A l l r e a l liv in g i s m e e tin g ."7
The r e la ti o n to th e Thou is d i r e c t . No system o f
id e a s , no foreknow ledge, and no fancy in te rv e n e between
1 and Thou. The memory i t s e l f is tran sfo rm ed , as i t
plunges out o f i t s is o la tio n in to th e u n ity of th e
whole. No aim, no l u s t , and no a n tic ip a tio n in te rv e n e
between 1 and Thou. . .F or th e r e a l , though c e r ta in ly
swaying and sw inging, boundary runs n e ith e r betw een ex
p e rie n c e and n o n -ex p erien ce, nor betw een what is given
and what i s not given, nor y e t betw een th e w orld o f be
ing and th e w orld o f v a lu e ; b u t c u ttin g in d if f e r e n tly
acro ss a l l th e se p ro v in ces i t l i e s between Thou and I t ,
between th e p re se n t and th e o b j e c t . 8
6 I b id ,, p, 9,
7 I b id . . p . 10-11.
6 I b i d . , p . 13.
18
L iv in g , p a s t and p r e s e n t. True b ein g s are liv e d in
th e p re s e n t, th e l i f e o f o b je c ts is in th e p a s t.
"To be s u re , many a man who i s s a t i s f i e d w ith th e ex
p e rie n c e and use o f th e w orld o f th in g s has r a is e d over
o r about h im self a s tr u c tu r e of id e a s , in which he fin d s
refu g e and repose from th e on-come of n o th in g n ess. On
th e th re s h o ld he la y s asid e h is in a u sp ic io u s everyday
d re s s , wraps h im se lf in pure lin e n , and re g a le s h im self
w ith th e s p e c ta c le o f p rim al b ein g , or o f n ecessary be
in g ; b u t h is l i f e has no p a r t in i t . To p ro claim h is
ways may even f i l l him w ith w e ll-b e in g . But th e mankind
o f mere It. th a t i s Im agined, p o s tu la te d , and propagated
by such a man has n o th in g in common w ith a liv in g mankind
where Thou may tr u ly be spoken. The n o b le st f i c t i o n is a
f e t i s h , th e l o f t i e s t f i c t i t i o u s sentim ent i s depraved.
Ideas are no more enthroned above our heads th a n re s id e n t
in them; they wander amongst us and acco st u s . The man
who le a v e s th e prim ary word unspoken i s to be p itie d ;
b u t th e man who ad d resses in s te a d th e se id eas w ith an
a b s tra c tio n or a passw ord, as i f i t were t h e i r name, is
cont empt i b l e ,9
Love. Speaking o f lo v e , Buber su g g ests th a t i t does
n o t c lin g to th e % in such a way as to have th e Thou only fo r
i t s c o n te n t, i t s o b je c t. "F eelings a re ' e n t e r ta in e d ': love
comes to p a ss . F e e lin g s dw ell in man; but man d w ells in h is
lo v e , "10 Love i s betw een I. and Thou.
"The world o f I t i s s e t in th e c o n tex t o f space and
tim e. The w orld o f Thou i s not s e t in th e c o n te x t o f e ith e r
o f th e s e . "H a person can e n te r in to e ith e r th e I t or th e
9 I b id . . pp. 13-14.
10 Loo, o i t .
11 I b id . . p. 33
19
Thou r e la tio n w ith a l l th in g s . Even o th e r p e rso n s, w ith
whom th e u su a l and r ig h t r e la tio n is th a t o f p e rso n a l en
c o u n te r, may be reg ard ed as mere th in g s . Since men liv e in
th e w orld o f I t , they n a tu r a lly must apply t h e ir i n t e l l i
gence and t h e i r powers to th e I t- w o r ld ; but they may tr a n s
form i t through love a n d .s o c ia l im ag in atio n in to a Thou-
w orld, "The p a r tic u la r Thou, a f t e r th e r e la tio n a l event
has ru n i t s c o u rse , in bound to become an I t . . . (B ut) th e
p a r tic u la r It., by e n te rin g th e r e la ti o n a l ev en t, may become
a Thou. "I® One can le a r n to love th e w orld as Thou. In
t h i s r e la tio n we touch r e a l i t y . For r e a l liv in g i s not
liv e d in is o la tio n , nor in a union which swallows up th e
o th e r, nor in an an nexation which e x p lo its th e o th e r. Heal
liv in g is a "m eeting," which in v o lv es m utual c la im s, s a c r i
f i c e s , and r i s k s : The claim of com plete and v i t a l engage
m ent; th e s a c r if ic e o f o th e r p o s s i b i l i t i e s , sin c e th e m utual
r e la tio n re q u ire s a k in d o f e x c lu siv e n e ss; th e r i s k espec
i a l l y o f g iv in g o n e s e lf wholly in to th e keeping o f an o th er,
w ith h o ld in g n o th in g , i and Thou are th e two p o le s o f a re
l a t i o n ; love i s th e r e a l i t y o f th e r e la tio n betw een them.
The realm of th e s p i r i t . Buber su g g ests th a t th e
13 I io c .^ c it.
30
h is to ry of th e in d iv id u a l and o f th e human ra ce agree in
one r e s p e c t, th a t they in d ic a te a p ro g re ssiv e augm entation
o f th e w orld of I t . For th e s e , th e prim ary r e la ti o n o f man
to th e w orld of I t is com prised " in e x o e rie n c in g . which con
tin u a lly r e c o n s titu te s th e w orld, and u s in g , which le a d s th e
w orld to i t s m anifold aim, the s u s ta in in g , r e lie v in g , and
equipping o f human l i f e . "13 T his development along w ith th e
growing e x te n t o f th e w orld o f I t produces th e a r t of
"a c q u irin g item s o f knowledge" and th e u sin g o f th e w orld to
s p e c ia liz e d " u t i l i z a t i o n ," He c o n tin u es to s t a t e th a t
" th is is the u su a l meaning o f th e ta lk about a
p ro g re ssiv e development o f th e s p i r i t u a l l i f e . By
t h i s t a l k , g u ilt o f th e r e a l s i n o f speech a g a in st
th e s p i r i t is undoubtedly in c u rre d ; f o r th a t " s p i r it u a l
l i f e " i s fo r th e most p a r t th e o b s ta c le to a l i f e liv e d
in th e s p i r i t , and a t b e s t th e m a te ria l which, a f te r
b ein g m astered and fa sh io n e d , i s to go to make th a t l i f e . *4
Now n o tic e B u b er's f u r th e r c o n te n tio n , when he con
tin u e s :
I t is th e o b s ta c le ; fo r th e development of th e
a b i l i t y to ex p erien ce and use comes about m ostly through
th e d ecrease o f m an's power to e n te r in to r e la ti o n —th e
power in v ir tu e of which alone man can liv e th e l i f e of
th e s p i r i t . 15
Throwing more l ig h t onto th e r e l a t i o n a l e v e n t, he adds th a t
13 I b id . . p. 38
14 Loo. C i t .
15 I b id . , p. 38439.
31
^ S p irit in i t s human m a n ife sta tio n i s a response o f man to
h is Thou. Man speaks w ith many tongues, but th e s p i r i t
is one, th e response to th e Thou which appears and address
es him out of th e m ystery. Thus th e s p i r i t i s seen to
be th e re sp o n se , or to be more s p e c if ic - * S p ir it i s not in
th e 1, b u t between I and Thou. " I t i s n o t lik e th e blood
th a t c ir c u la te d in you, but li k e th e a i r in which you
b re a th e . Man liv e s in th e s p i r i t , i f he is able to respond
to h is Thou. He i s able t o , i f he e n te r s in to r e l a ti o n w ith
h is whole b ein g .
Community. Let i t be re p e a te d th a t **the development
o f th e fu n c tio n o f ex p erien cin g and u s in g comes about m ostly
through d ecrease o f m an's power to e n te r in to r e la tio n .
I n s titu tio n s are " o u ts id e ”, where a v a r ie ty of aims are pur
sued - where man works, n e g o tia te s , b e a rs in flu e n c e , under
ta k e s , o rg a n iz e s, and th e l i k e , Man li v e s h is l i f e and re
covers from i n s t itu ti o n s w ith fe e lin g s which are " w ith in .”
" I n s titu tio n s are a com plicated m ark e t-p la ce, fe e lin g s a boud
o ir r ic h in ever-changing i n t e r e s t s . "18
"But th e se p a ra te d I t o f i n s t i t u t i o n s is an anim ated
clo d w ithout so u l, and th e se p a ra te d 1 of fe e lin g s an
16 Loo, c i t .
17 I b id . , p. 43
18 Loc. c i t .
33
u n e a sily f l u t t e r i n g s o u l-b ird . l e i t h e r of them knows
man: i n s t itu t io n s know only th e specim en, f e e lin g s only
th e 'o b j e c t , ' n e ith e r knows th e p e rso n , or m utual l i f e . . .
The tru e community does not a r is e through p eo p les having
fe e lin g s f o r one another (though indeed not w ithout i t ) ,
b u t through, f i r s t , t h e ir ta k in g t h e i r stan d in liv in g
m utual r e la ti o n w ith a liv in g C en tre, and, second, th e ir
b ein g in liv in g m utual r e la tio n w ith one an o th er. The
second has i t s source in th e f i r s t , b u t is not given when
th e f i r s t alone is g iv en . L iving m utual r e la ti o n in
clu d es f e e lin g s , b u t does not o rig in a te w ith them. The
community i s b u i l t up out of liv in g m utual r e la tio n , b u t
b u ild e r i s th e liv in g e f f e c tiv e C e n tre .19
Concluding th a t th e re w ill never be new l i f e between
two people alo n e, Buber concludes,
"tru e p u b lic and tr u e p e rso n a l l i f e are two forms of
connexion. In th a t they come in to b ein g and endure,
fe e lin g s (th e changing c o n te n t) and i n s t it u t i o n s (th e
c o n sta n t form) are n ec essary ; b u t p u t to g e th e r they do
not c re a te human l i f e : t h i s is done by th e t h i r d , th e
c e n tr a l p resen ce o f th e Thou, or r a th e r , more tr u ly
s ta te d , by th e c e n tr a l Thou th a t has been re c e iv e d in
th e p r e s e n t.80
Buber r a is e s th e q u e stio n as to w hether th e communal
l i f e o f modern man w ill not th e n o f n e c e s s ity be sunk in th e
world o f It., In ste a d o f, in economics and S ta te , adding up
He and He and He to make an I t . man t r i e d to c a lc u la te th e
sum of Thou and Thou and Thou, which only adds up to a
Thou, would th e w orld f a l l in on him? "Would th a t not be
to exchange form ative m astery fo r f a s tid io u s d ila ta n t ism.
19 I b id .. pp. 44-45,
SO I b id . . p. 30.
33
and illu m in a tin g re a so n fo r cloudy f a n a tic ism? "81 The
communal l i f e o f man, says Buber, "can no more th an man
h im se lf d isp en se w ith th e world of I t . " B ut, one i s re
minded, th e lik e lih o o d o f removing from th e r e la tio n to
Thou is n a tu ra l* "There i s no e v il im pulse t i l l th e im
p u lse has been se p a ra te d from th e b ein g ; th e im pulse which
i s bound up w ith , and d efin e d by th e bein g is th e liv in g
s t u f f o f communal l i f e , th a t which is detached is i t s d is
in te g ra tio n * "88 I t i s n ecessary fo r th e S ta te to be under
th e dominance of th e s p i r i t th a t says Thou.
"Ho d istu rb a n c e on th e p e rip h e ry can serve as sub
s t i t u t e f o r th e liv in g r e la tio n w ith th e C e n tre * ,.
S tru c tu re s o f m an's communal l i f e draw t h e ir liv in g
q u a lity from th e ric h e s of th e power to e n te r in to
r e la tio n , which p e n e tra te s t h e i r v a rio u s p a r ts , and
o b ta in t h e i r b o d ily form from th e b in d in g up of th is
power in th e s p i r i t . "83
There are r is k s fo r him in so doing - in h is d e a lin g w ith
o th e r men.
"He does in communal l i f e p re c is e ly what i s done
in p e rso n a l l i f e by th e man who knows h im self incapable
o f r e a liz in g th e Thou in i t s p u r ity , y e t d a ily confirm s
i t s t r u t h in th e I t , in accordance w ith what i s rig h t
and f i t t i n g fo r th e day, draw ing—d is c lo s in g — th e bound
ary lin e anew each day* So, to o , only w ith s p i r i t , not
31 I b id . . p. 47,
33 I b id . . p. 48.
33 I b id . , p. 49,
24
th em selves, as s ta r tin g - p o in t, are work and p o sse ssio n
to be re le a s e d ; only from th e presen ce o f s p i r i t can
meaning and joy stream in to a l l work, awe and s a c r i f i c i a l
power in to a l l p o sse ssio n —f i l l i n g them not to th e brim
b u t s u f f ic ie n tly ; only from i t s p resen ce can ev e ry th in g
th a t is worked and p o ssessed , w hile rem aining in adherence
to th e w orld of I t . y e t be tra n s fig u re d in to what i s over
a g a in st man— in to th e re p re s e n ta tio n of th e T h o u ? 4
T eleology. Moving in to the a re a o f te le o lo g y , a
len g th y q u o ta tio n from Buber i s n ec essary .
"C au sality has an u n lim ite d re ig n in th e w orld of
I t . Every 'p h y sica l* event th a t can be p e rc e iv e d by
th e se n se s, but a lso every 'p sy c h ic al* event e x is tin g
or d isco v ered in s e lf-e x p e rie n c e i s n e c e s s a rily v a lid
as bein g caused and as cau sin g . F u rth e r, ev e n ts to
which a te le o lo g ic a l c h a ra c te r may be a ttr ib u te d are
as p a r ts of the unbroken w orld of It. not excepted from
t h i s c a u s a lity ; th e continuum to which they belong c e r
ta in ly to l e r a t e s a te le o lo g y , but only as th e re v e rs e
sid e worked in to a p a r t of c a u s a lity , and not im p airin g
i t s c o n tin u ity and com pleteness. The u n lim ite d re ig n
o f c a u s a lity in th e w orld of I t , o f fundam ental impor
tan ce fo r th e s c i e n t i f i c o rd e rin g of n a tu re , does not
weigh h e a v ily on man, who i s not lim ite d to th e world
o f I t . but can c o n tin u a lly leav e i t f o r the w orld o f
r e la tio n . Here % and Thou fre e ly co n fro n t one an o th er
in m utual e f f e c t th a t i s n e ith e r connected w ith nor
co lo u red by any c a u s a lity . Here man is assu red o f th e
freedom b o th of h is b ein g and o f Being. Only he who
knows r e la tio n and knows about th e p resence o f th e Thou
is capable o f d e c is io n . He who d ec id e s i s f r e e , fo r he
had approached th e F a c e .35
"C au sa lity does not weigh on th e man to whom freedom i s
assu re d . He knows th a t h is m ortal l i f e swings by n a tu re
between Thou and I t , and he i s aware o f th e s ig n ific a n c e o f
24 I b i d . , p p ,49-50.
35 I b id . . p . 51.
35
t h i s . "86 Every g re a t c u ltu r e , Buber c o n tin u e s, th a t has
comprehended n a tio n s r e s t s on an o r ig in a l r e la t i o n a l e v e n t,
on a response to th e Thou made a t i t s so u rce , on an a c t o f
th e b ein g made by th e s p i r i t . " I f a c u ltu re c e ases to be
c e n te re d in th e liv in g and c o n tin u a lly renewed r e la tio n a l
ev e n t, th e n i t hardens in to th e w orld o f I t . which th e
glowing deeds of s o l i ta r y s p i r i t s only spasm odically break
thro u g h . "37 n eg a tin g th e b e l i e f in f a te and th e dogma of
g rad u al p ro c e ss, Buber su g g ests th a t i t " is c o n s id e re d ," by
th a t id eo lo g y , " fo lly to imagine any freedom ; th e re is only
a ch o ice, between r e s o lu te , and h o p eless r e b e llio u s , s la v e ry ."
"And no m atter how much i s s a id , in a l l th e s e law s,
of te le o lo g ic a l developm ent and o rg an ic grow th, a t th e
b a s is o f them a l l l i e s p o sse ssio n by p ro c e ss, th a t is
by u n lim ite d c a u s a lity . The dogma o f g rad u al p ro cess
is th e a b d ic a tio n o f man b efo re th e exuberant w orld of
I t . He m isuses th e name o f d e s tin y : d e stin y i s not a
dome p re sse d ti g h tl y down on th e world o f men; no one
m eets i t b u t he who went out from freedom . But th e
dogma o f p ro cess le a v e s no room fo r freedom , none fo r
i t s most r e a l r e v e la tio n of a l l , whose calm s tre n g th
changes th e fa c e o f th e e a rth — r e v e r s a l. T his dogma
does not know th e man who through r e v e r s a l surm ounts
th e u n iv e rs a l s tru g g le , te a r s to p ie c e s th e web of
h a b itu a l i n s t in c t s , r a is e s th e c la s s ban, and s t i r s ,
re ju v e n a te s , and tran sfo rm s th e s ta b le s tr u c tu r e s of
h i s t o r y .38
That one who b e lie v e s in F ate knows n o t th e s p i r i t of
36 I b id . . p . 53.
37 I b id . . p. 54.
38 I b id . . p. 57.
86
r e a l i t y . The only th in g th a t can become f a te f o r a man i s
h is b e l i e f in f a te ; f o r t h i s su p p resses th e movement o f re
v e r s a l, says Buber,
"P re d ic tio n from o b je c tiv ity i s v a lid only f o r th e
man who does not know p re s e n tn e s s . He who is overcome
by th e w orld o f It. i s bound to s e e , in the dogma of im
m utable p ro c e ss, a t r u t h th a t c le a r s a way through th e
exuberant growth; in very t r u t h t h i s dogma en slav e s him
only th e more deeply to th e w orld o f It., But th e w orld
o f Thou i s not c lo se d . He who goes out to i t w ith con
c e n tr a te d bein g and r is e n power to e n te r in to r e la tio n
becomes aware of freedom . And to be fre e d from b e lie f
th a t th e re i s no freedom i s indeed to be f r e e . 89
The Two-fold I . "The fre e man i s he who w ills w ith
out a r b itr a r y s e l f - w i ll . He b e lie v e s in r e a l i t y , . . .he be
lie v e s in th e r e a l s o l i d a r it y o f th e r e a l tw ofold e n tity I
and Thou. "80 The fre e man not only b e lie v e s in d e s tin y , b u t
he a lso b e lie v e s i t sta n d s in need o f him. He must go out
w ith h is whole b ein g . "He must s a c r i f i c e h is puny, u n fre e
w ill, th a t i s c o n tro lle d by th in g s and i n s t i n c t s , to h is
grand w il l , which q u its d e fin e d fo r d e s tin e d b e in g ." He
does n o t in te rv e n e , b u t does not j u s t m erely l e t th in g s
happen. "He l i s te n s to what is em erging from h im se lf, to
th e course of b ein g in th e w orld" n o t to be su p p o rted by i t
b u t to b rin g i t to r e a l i t y "as i t d e s ir e s , in i t s need o f
him, to be brought—w ith human s p i r i t and deed, human l i f e
39 I b id . . p. 58.
30 I b id . . p. 59,
37
and d e a th , I s a id he b e lie v e s , b u t t h a t r e a lly means he
m eets. "81
The I o f th e I-Thou is d if f e r e n t from th e I of the
I - I t . The second makes i t s appearance as in d iv id u a lity ,
whereas th e f i r s t makes i t s appearance as p erso n . "In
d iv id u a lity makes i t s appearance by b ein g d if f e r e n tia te d
from o th e r in d iv id u a litie s . A p erso n makes h is appearance
by e n te rin g in to r e la ti o n w ith o th e r p e r s o n s ."32 There i s
r e a l i t y in th a t p ro p o rtio n which one sh a re s. "A ll r e a l it y
is an a c tiv ity in which I sh are w ithout b ein g ab le to ap
p ro p ria te fo r a ^ s e lf , "There are not two kinds of man, b u t
two p o le s of h u m an ity ,"83 «The p erso n looks on h is S e lf,
in d iv id u a lity is concerned w ith i t s M y— m y k in d , m y ra c e ,
m y r e a c tio n , ay g e n iu s ." The more a man i s m astered by
in d iv id u a lity , th e more he sin k s in to u n r e a lity . Every man
" liv e s in th e tw ofold I. But th e re are men so d e fin e d by
p erson th a t th ey may be c a lle d p e rso n s ," and o th e rs are
such th a t "they may be c a lle d in d iv id u a ls . True h is to ry
i s d ecided in th e f i e l d between th e se two p o le s ." I t i s a
m atter o f n a tu ra l detachm ent, or n a tu r a l s o lid a r ity of
connexion.
31 I b id . . pp, 59-60.
33 I b id . . p, 63.
33 I b id . . p. 65.
28
O ntology. "The aim o f r e la ti o n i s r e l a t i o n 's own
b ein g , th a t i s , c o n ta c t w ith th e T hou."84 y e t th e 1 th a t
s te p s out of th e r e la ti o n a l event in to s e p a ra tio n and con
scio u sn ess of s e p a ra tio n does not lo s e i t s r e a l i t y . The
awareness o f s o lid a r ity o f connexion and s e p a ra tio n i s th e
prov in ce of s u b je c tiv ity fo r th e X. "Genuine s u b je c tiv ity
can only be dynam ically u n d ersto o d , as th e sw inging of th e
X in i t s lo n e ly tr u t h . H ere, to o , is th e p la c e where th e
d e s ire i s formed and h eig h ten ed fo r ever h ig h e r, more un
co n d itio n e d r e la tio n , fo r the f u l l sh a rin g in b ein g . In
s u b je c tiv ity th e s p i r i t u a l su b stan ce o f th e p erso n
m atures. "86 p erso n says "I am, " w hile th e in d iv id u a l
ssy s "I am su ch -an d -su ch ." The p erso n knows h im self to
have b ein g ; th e in d iv id u a l knows th e p a r tic u la r b ein g . In
so doing, in d iv id u a lity , in d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g i t s e l f from
o th e rs , i s ren d ered rem ote from tr u e b e in g . The p erso n
d o e s n 't g iv e up th e s p e c ia l b e in g b u t does not have i t as
h is o b s e rv â tio n -p o in t. In d iv id u a lity i s is o la tio n and
absence o f s h a rin g . I t s t a r t s w ith i t s e l f . "The word X
is th e tr u e sh ib b o le th o f m ankind."86 S o crates is th e
34 I b i d . , p. 63.
35 Loo, c i t .
36 I b i d . . p. 66.
39
l iv e ly and im pressive I o f e n d le ss d ia lo g u e , "and th e a ir of
d ialo g u e is w afted around i t in a l l i t s jo u rn e y s, b e fo re th e
judges and in th e l a s t hour in p ris o n . T his I liv e d con
tin u a lly in th e r e la tio n w ith man which is bodied f o r th in
d ia lo g u e . "87 In c o n tra s t th e phenomenon o f ex p e rien cin g and
u sin g of Napoleon is su ggested as a speaking w ith o u t power
to e n te r in to r e la tio n . He spoke of X as th e "X o f a con
sumât io n . He who s tr iv e s to say i t as he s a id i t only be
tr a y s th e d e sp e ra te n e ss o f h is own s e l f - c o n t r a d ic t io n ."88
What i s t h i s s e lf- c o n tr a d ic tio n ? ,
I f a man does not re p re s e n t th e a p r i o r i o f r e la tio n
in h is liv in g w ith th e w orld, i f he does not work out
and r e a liz e th e inborn Thou on what meets i t , th e n i t
s tr ik e s inw ards. I t develops on th e u n n a tu ra l, im
p o s s ib le o b je c t of th e X; th a t i s , i t develops where
th e re i s no p la c e a t a l l f o r i t to develop. Thus con
f r o n ta tio n of what is over a g a in s t him ta k e s p la c e
w ith in h im se lf, and t h i s cannot be r e la tio n , or p re s
ence, or stream ing in te r a c tio n , but only se lf-c o n tra r-
d ic tio n . The man may seek to e x p la in i t as a r e la tio n ,
perhaps as a r e lig io u s r e la tio n , in o rd er to wrench
h im self from th e h o rro r o f th e in n er d o uble-ganger;
b u t he i s bound to d isc o v e r ag a in and ag ain th e de
c e p tio n in th e e x p la n a tio n . Here is th e verge o f
l i f e , f l i g h t of an u n f u l f i l l e d l i f e to th e s e n se le ss
semblance of f u lf illm e n t, and i t s groping in a maze
and lo s in g i t s e l f ev er more p ro fo u n d ly .89
Men have addressed t h e i r e te r n a l Thou in many ways
37 Loc. P i t .
38 I b id . , p . 69,
39 I b id . . p . 70,
30
and have expressed them selves through v ario u s channels and
modes o f speech. Many men, th e re fo re w ish to r e j e c t th e
word God as le g itim a te because i t i s so m isused. Buber
su g g ests t h a t a l l of th e co n fu sio n about God and m istaken
t a l k about h is being d o e s n 't m a tte r much in "com parison
w ith th e one tr u th th a t a l l men who have addressed God had
God H im self in m in d ." That one who speaks th e word God and
has Thou in mind, ad d resses th e tru e Thou of h is l i f e ,
"which cannot be lim ite d by an other Thou, and to which he
stan d s in a r e la tio n th a t g a th e rs up and in clu d es a l l
o t h e r s . E v e n th a t one who abhors th e name and b e lie v e s
h im se lf to be g o d le ss, b u t who "Gives h is whole b ein g to
ad d ressin g th e Thou of h is l i f e , as a Thou th a t cannot be
lim ite d by a n o th er, he ad d resses G od."
Expanding th e id e a o f Thou and th e r e la tio n o f b ein g
to i t , Buber g iv es t h i s f u r th e r word:
"The extended lin e s o f r e la tio n s meet in th e e te r n a l
Thou. Every p a r tic u la r Thou i s a glim pse through to th e
e te r n a l Thou; by means of every p a r tic u la r Thou th e p r i
mary word ad d resses th e e te r n a l Thou. Through t h i s
m ed iatio n o f th e Thou of a l l b ein g s f u lf illm e n t, and
n o n -fu lfillm e n t, of r e la tio n s comes to them: th e inborn
Thou i s r e a liz e d in each r e la ti o n and consummated in
none. I t is consummated only in th e d ir e c t r e l a t i o n
w ith th e Thou th a t by i t s n a tu re cannot become I t . ^ I
40 I b id . , pp. 75-76.
41 I b i d ., p. 75.
31
Buber i s n o t able to g ra n t th e d o c trin e s o f a b so rp tio n ,
sin c e th e elem ent o f r e la tio n i s th ereb y n egated. He con
s id e rs th e one way of lo o k in g on th e a c t o f a b so rp tio n as
im agining th a t God e n te rs th e b ein g th a t i s fre e d from I,
o r th a t t h i s being is merged in God. The o th e r way which
he su g g ests i s th a t th e b ein g ta k e s i t s stan d d ir e c tly in
i t s e l f as though i t were in th e d iv in e One. In th e f i r s t
th e re i s no tw ofold b ein g as a lso in th e second. The f i r s t
b e lie v e s in u n if ic a tio n and th e second in id e n tif ic a tio n .
"Both a s s e r t a s t a te th a t i s beyond I and Thou, th e f i r s t —
as in e c s ta s y —one th a t becomes, th e second— as in th e s e l f
o b se rv a tio n o f th e th in k in g s u b je c t— one th a t is and th a t
re v e a ls i t s e l f . "43 Both a b o lish r e la t i o n - th e one through
th e sw allow ing up of th e 1 by th e Thou and th e o th e r by th e
s e lf - r e c o g n itio n o f th e X, becoming S e lf, as th a t which
alone i s . To i l l u s t r a t e t h i s Buber r e f e r s to two sayings
o f id e n tif ic a tio n . One from th e Johanine "I and th e F ath er
are one", and th e o th e r from th e te a c h in g o f S an d ily a: "The
a ll-e m b ra c in g , t h i s i s my S e lf in m y very h e a r t. "43 The
ways th e s e sayings le a d are opposed to one an o th er. "The
f i r s t a r is e s in th e l i f e o f a p erso n o f m ythical p ro p o rtio n s
43 I b id . . p. 84.
43 Loo. P i t .
33
and advances to a d o c trin e , th e second emerges in a d o c trin e
and only th en le a d s to th e m ythical l i f e o f a p erso n . "44
With re fe re n c e to th e Johanine t r a d i t i o n , Buber p o in ts to i t
as a Gospel of p ure r e la ti o n . I t i s not a r e la t i o n o f th e 1
to th e S e lf, but r a th e r a r e la tio n between F ath er and Son,
l ik e in b ein g . He g iv es what he c a l l s a " tru e r" tr a n s la tio n
th an th e f a m ilia r m y stic a l v e rs e : "I am Thou and Thou a r t
I «,45 modern a tte m p ts to in te r p r e t t h i s p rim al r e a l i t y
of d ialo g u e as a r e la tio n o f th e i to th e S e lf , o r th e li k e —
as an event th a t i s c o n ta in e d w ith in th e s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t
i n t e r i o r l i f e of man— are f u t i l e : they ta k e t h e i r p la c e in
th e abysmal h is to ry o f d e s tru c tio n of r e a l i t y . "46 With r e
fe re n c e to th e re c o g n itio n o f th e "S e lf" o f th e o th e r view
p o in t, Buber shows th a t i t ends in a n n ih ila tio n . In so f a r
as th e d o c trin e c o n ta in s an a ffirm a tio n about tr u e being—
"however th e m atter sta n d s w ith i t s c o n te n t o f t r u t h , which
cannot be a s c e rta in e d in t h i s l i f e — i t has n o th in g in common
w ith one th in g , w ith liv e d r e a l i t y ; fo r i t is bound to reduce
t h i s too to th e w orld o f ap p e a ra n c e s.47
44 I b i d . . pp. 84-85.
45 Loc. c i t .
46 Loc. c i t .
47 I b id . , p. 88
33
The d o c trin e o f a b so rp tio n demands, and p ro m ises, refu g e
in th e One th in k in g Essence ( " th a t by which t h i s w orld
i s th o u g h t"), refu g e in pure S u b je c t. But in liv e d r e a l
ity th e re is not som ething th in k in g w ithout som ething
th o u g h t, r a th e r i s th e th in k in g no le s s dependent on th e
th in g thought th an th e l a t t e r on th e form er. A su b je c t
d ep riv ed of i t s o b je c t i s d ep riv ed of i t s r e a l i t y , 48
The outcome o f such th in k in g i s in th e a re a of "th e l o f t i
e s t peaks of th e language o f I t . The sublim e s tre n g th o f
t h e i r d is re g a rd must be re sp e c te d , and in the very glance
o f re s p e c t recognized as what i s , a t m ost, to be ex p erien ced ,
b u t not to be l i v e d . "49
A ll d o c trin e of a b so rp tio n i s based on th e c o lo s s a l
i l l u s i o n of th e human s p i r i t th a t i s bent back on i t
s e l f , th a t s p i r i t e x is ts in man. A ctually s p i r i t ex
i s t s w ith man as s ta r tin g - p o in t—between man and th a t
which i s not man. In renouncing t h i s i t s m eaning, i t s
meaning as r e la tio n , th e s p i r i t th a t is b en t back on
i t s e l f is com pelled to d ra g in to man th a t which i s not
man, i t i s com pelled to make th e w orld and God in to
fu n c tio n s o f th e so u l. This th e s p i r i t ’ s il lu s i o n
about th e s o u l . 50
"The beginning and th e e x tin c tio n of th e w orld are
not in me; but they are a lso not o u tsid e me; they cannot be
s a id to ^ a t a l l , they are a co n tin u o u s happening" which
i s connected and dependent on me and m y d e c is io n , work and
s e rv ic e . Here ag a in th e tw ofold a ttitu d e o f man comes in
48 I b id . , p . 9 0 .
49 I b id . , p . 9 0 .
50 I b id . , p . 9 3 .
34
to p la y . I t is th e to o l to be ex p erien ced , or th e w orld to
be liv e d . The f i r s t is an a lie n a te d w orld o f I t . which ex
p e rie n c e s and used . The l a t t e r i s a going o u t to meet th e
w orld and so a lso to go o u t to God.
"God com prises, b u t i s n o t, th e u n iv e rse . So, to o , God
com prises, b u t i s n o t, m yself. In view o f th e inadequacy
o f any language about th is f a c t , I can say Thou in m y
language as each man can in h i s , in view o f t h i s X and
Thou l i v e , and d ialo g u e and s p i r i t and language ( s p i r i t 's
prim al a c t) , and th e Word in e t e r n i t y . 51
Events bound up w ith one’s s e l f are not in th e a re a
o f th e X or Thou. When they are "between me and you" th e n
th a t which i s a liv e r i s e s out o f th in g s , and becomes a "be
in g in r e la ti o n to me, jo in e d to me by i t s n earn ess and i t s
s p e e c h ,.,i t i s not th e r e la ti o n th a t n e c e s s a rily grows
fe e b le , but th e a c tu a lity of i t s Im m ediacy."52 one must
d is tin g u is h between a c tu a l and p o te n tia l b ein g . "Love i t
s e l f cannot p e r s i s t in th e immediacy o f r e la tio n ; lo v e en
d u re s, but in th e in terch an g e of a c tu a l and p o te n tia l b e in g ,"
P a ra d o x ic a lly ,
"Every Thou in th e w orld is en jo in ed by i t s n a tu re
to become a th in g f o r u s, o r a t a l l events to r e - e n te r
c o n tin u a lly th e c o n d itio n of th in g s . Only in one, a l l -
em bracing r e la tio n is p o te n tia l s t i l l a c tu a l b e in g .
Only one Thou never ceases by i t s n a tu re to be Thou
fo r u s . He who knows God knows a lso very w ell rem ote
n ess from God, and th e anguish o f b arren n ess in th e
61 I b id . . p. 95.
52 I b id . , p. 98.
35
torm ented h e a rt; b u t he does n o t know th e absence of
God: i t i s we only who are not always t h e r e . 53
This l a s t word on th e involvem ents o f b ein g -
w hether i t i s a c tu a l o r p o te n tia l in th e r e la tio n a l ev en t.
Every r e a l r e la tio n in th e w orld i s consummated in th e
in terch a n g e of a c tu a l and p o te n tia l being; every is o la te d
Thou i s bound to e n te r th e c h r y s a lis s ta te of th e It, in
o rd er to tak e wings anew. But in pure r e la ti o n p o te n tia l
b ein g i s sim ply a c tu a l bein g as i t draws b re a th , and in
i t th e Thou rem ains p re s e n t. By i t s n a tu re th e e te r n a l
Thou i s e te r n a lly Thou; only our n a tu re compels us to
draw i t in to th e w orld and th e t a l k of I t . 54
B io o la r itv . F eelin g of dependence or o re a tu re ly
f e e lin g i s co n sid ered by some as th e r e a l elem ent in th e
r e la tio n w ith God. "F eelin g s are a mere accompaniment to
th e m etaphysical and m etapsychical f a c t of th e r e la tio n ,
which i s f u l f i l l e d not in th e so u l b u t betw een 1 and T hou,"55
U nlike r e la ti o n , f e e lin g has a p la c e in a s c a le , has a
p la c e w ith in a p o la r te n s io n where i t g e ts i t s co lo u r and
s ig n ific a n c e not only from i t s e l f b u t a lso from th e o p p o site
p o le ; "every f e e lin g is co n d itio n ed by i t s o p p o s ite ."56 % e
r e la ti o n i s an a b so lu te which com prises th e is o la te d re la ^
t iv e f e e lin g s , which are made in to r e la ti v e p sy ch o lo g ical
53 I b i d ., p. 99.
54 I b id . . p . 100.
55 I b id . , p . 81.
56 I b id . . p. 81.
36
m a tte rs. There i s th e co in cid en ce o f o p p o sitio n s o f f e e l
ing - which makes und ersto o d com plete r e la tio n only in a
b ip o la r way*
In pure r e la tio n you have f e l t y o u rs e lf to be simply
dependent, as you are able to f e e l in no o th e r r e la ti o n —
and sim ply f r e e , to o , as in no o th e r tim e o r p la c e : you
have f e l t y o u rs e lf to be b o th o re a tu re ly and c r e a tiv e .
You had th e one f e e lin g th en no lo n g e r lim ite d by th e
o th e r, but you had both o f them l i m i t l e s s ly and to g e th e r *57
One needs God more th a n ev e ry th in g ; b u t God needs th e in
d iv id u a l also* One complements th e o th e r. "What tu rg id and
presum ptuous t a l k th a t i s about th e ‘God who becomes*; b u t
we know unshakably in our h e a rts th a t th e re is a becoming
o f th e God th a t i s * "58 Buber su g g ests th a t th e re are two
se rv a n ts p acin g through th e ages - p ra y e r and s a c r if ic e .
In p ra y e r, man pours h im self out in u n re s tra in e d dependence
and y e t knows th a t in an incom prehensible way he has an
e f f e c t upon God* Through s a c r i f i c e man has also known th a t
we can and ought to give to God, "This is known by him,
to o , who o ff e r s up h is l i t t l e w ill to God and m eets Him in
th e grand w i l l , "59 p ray s "thy w ill be done", but t r u t h
adds f o r him "through me whom Thou n e e d e st" .
"What d is tin g u is h e s s a c r if ic e and p ra y er from a l l magic?
57 I b id . , p. 83.
58 Loo, c i t .
59 I b id . . p. 83.
37
n
Magic d e s ire s to o b ta in i t s e f f e c ts w ithout e n te rin g
in to r e la ti o n , and p r a c tic e s i t s t r i c k s in th e void.
But s a c r if ic e and p ra y er are s e t "before th e Face",
in th e consummation of th e holy prim ary word th a t
means m utual a c tio n : they speak th e Thou, and th en
they h e a r. To wish to u n d erstan d pure r e la ti o n as
dependence i s to w ish to empty one o f th e b e a re rs of
th e r e la tio n , and hence th e r e l a t i o n i t s e l f , of
r e a l i t y .60
M eeting. A f u r th e r word must be given on th e
m eeting"- what i t i s and where i t ta k e s p la c e . There are
some th in g s not known. The o th e r sid e o f th e m eeting is
o f g ra c e , i t comes upon one, how one does not know. The
p e rso n a l s id e o f t h i s m eeting i s a going out - i t has to do
w ith th e w ill. "The Thou c o n fro n ts me. But I s te p in to
d ir e c t r e la ti o n w ith i t . " There is choosing and being
chosen; s u ffe rin g and a c tio n in one. "Ju st as any a c tio n
o f th e whole b e in g which means th e su sp en sio n o f a l l
p a r t i a l a c tio n s , and consequently o f a l l se n sa tio n s o f
a c tio n s grounded only in t h e i r p a r tic u l a r lim ita tio n , i s
bound to resem ble s u f f e r i n g ,"61 qq i t ±s w ith t h i s d ir e c t
r e la tio n . Here i s th e a c tiv ity of a man who has become a
whole b ein g , an a c tiv ity
" th a t has been term ed doing n o th in g : n o th in g se p a ra te
or p a r t i a l s t i r s in th e man any more, th u s he makes no
60 Loc. c i t .
61 I b id . . pp. 76-77.
38
in te rv e n tio n in th e w orld; i t is th e whole man, enclosed
and a t r e s t in h is w holeness, th a t is e f f e c tiv e —he has
become an e f f e c tiv e w hole. To have won s t a b i l i t y in
t h i s s t a t e is to be ab le to go out to the supreme meet
in g . 62
There i s no need of th in k in g o f an illu s o r y w orld. There
i s only th e world which appears to us according to the two
fo ld a ttitu d e of man. There i s no need of going beyond
"sen se-ex p erien ce" fo r every ex p e rien ce, even th e most
s p i r i t u a l can only y ie ld an I t . Ideas and v a lu e s cannot
become p re se n tn e s s. "For ev e ry th in g th a t has ev er been
d ev ised and c o n triv e d in th e tim e of th e human s p i r i t as
p re c e p t, a lle g e d p re p a ra tio n , p r a c tic e , or m e d ita tio n , has
n o th in g to do w ith th e p rim a l, sim ple fa c t of th e m eeting."® 8
How t h i s does not mean th a t a l l o f t h i s of th e w orld of I t
must be d isre g a rd e d . Let i t not be fo rg o tte n th a t r e la tio n
is th e im portant th in g and th is r e la ti o n is betw een I and
Thou.
"In the r e la tio n w ith God u n c o n d itio n a l e x c lu siv e n e ss
and -unconditional in c lu s iv e n e s s are one. He who e n te rs
on th e ab so lu te r e la ti o n is concerned w ith n o th in g
is o la te d any more, n e ith e r th in g s nor b e in g s, n e ith e r
e a rth nor heaven; b u t ev e ry th in g i s g ath ered up in th e
r e la ti o n . For to s te p in to pure r e la ti o n i s not to
d is re g a rd ev e ry th in g b u t to see e v e ry th in g in th e Thou,
n o t to renounce th e w orld b u t to e s ta b lis h i t on i t s
tr u e b a s is . To look away from th e w orld, or to s ta r e
a t i t , does not h e lp a man to re ach God; but he who
62 Loc. P i t .
63 Loc. c i t .
39
se e s th e w orld in Him stan d s in His p r e s e n c e . 64
To speak o f th e w orld as one p la c e and God as in another o r
to say th a t God i s in th e w orld i s th e language o f I t .
When th e re i s no e lim in a tio n or le a v in g beh in d , to include
th e whole world in th e Thou, "to give th e w orld i t s due and
i t s t r u t h , to in clu d e n o th in g b e sid e God b u t e v e ry th in g in
Him— th is i s f u l l and com plete r e l a t i o n . G o d is th e
"wholly o th e r" ; but he i s a lso th e wholly Same and th e
wholly P re se n t. He is th e one who cannot be "expressed"
but only " a d d re sse d ."56
"Men do not fin d God i f they a ts ^ in th e w orld. They
do not fin d Him i f they leav e th e w orld. He who goes
out w ith h is whole b ein g to meet h is Thou and c a r r ie s
to i t a l l bein g th a t i s in th e w orld, fin d s Him who
cannot be sought,® ^
The w orld o f It, i s ab o lish ed in th e g re a t p riv ile g e
o f pure r e la tio n . "The w orld o f I t i s s e t in th e c o n te x t
o f space and tim e", w hile "th e w orld of Thou i s not s e t in
th e c o n te x t of e i th e r o f th e s e ," " I t s co n tex t i s in th e
C entre, where th e extended lin e s o f r e la tio n s meet— in th e
e te r n a l Thou, " There are th re e sp h eres in which th e w orld
64 I b id . . pp. 78-79.
65 Loc. c i t .
66 I b id . , p. 80
67 I b id . . p. 79.
40
o f r e l a ti o n are b u i l t - our l i f e w ith n a tu re , in which th e
r e la tio n c lin g s to the th re s h o ld o f speech; our l i f e w ith
men, in which th e r e la ti o n ta k e s on th e form o f speech; and
our l i f e w ith i n t e l l i g i b l e form s, where th e r e l a t i o n , b ein g
w ithout speech, y e t b e g e ts i t . 56 each o f th e se sp h eres
through each p ro cess o f becoming th a t i s p re s e n t, one looks
out tow ard th e "frin g e o f th e e te r n a l Thou. "
There are two k in d s o f s o litu d e - according to th a t
from which they have tu rn e d - f r e e in g o n e se lf from i n t e r
course o f ex p e rien cin g and u sin g o f th in g s , which i s good
i f done in o rd er to reach th e a c t o f r e la ti o n , b u t i f
s o litu d e means absence o f r e la tio n , "then he who has been
fo rsa k e n by the b ein g s to which he spoke th e tr u e Thou
w ill be r a is e d up by God, but n o t he who h im self fo rso o k
th e b e in g s. "59 are two o th e r kinds o f s o litu d e -
acco rd in g to th a t tow ards which they have tu rn e d , - one o f
which i s good and n ecessary even to th e man bound in r e l a
tio n i f i t i s fo r p u r if ic a tio n , b u t i t is not so i f i t i s a
s o litu d e in th e stro n g h o ld of is o la tio n ,
"where a man conducts a d ialo g u e w ith h im se lf—not in
o rd er to t e s t and m aster h im self fo r th a t which aw aits
him b u t in th e enjoyment o f th e co n firm a tio n of h is
68 I b id . . p. 101.
69 I b id . . p. 104.
41
so u l— th e n we have th e r e a l f a l l o f th e s p i r i t in to
s p i r i t u a l i t y . The man can advance to th e l a s t abyss,
where in h is s e lf - d e lu s io n he im agines he has God in
h im self and i s speaking w ith Him, But tr u ly though
God surrounds us and dw ells in u s , we never have Him
in u s . And we speak w ith Him only when speech d ie s
w ith in u s . 7G
The prim al phenomenon, term ed r e v e la tio n , i s the
"phenomenon th a t a man does not p a s s , from th e moment o f
th e supreme m eeting, th e same b ein g as he e n te re d in to i t . "
The moment i s not an ex p erien ce o f s t i r r i n g in th e re c e p tiv e
so u l and growing in to p e r fe c t b le s s e d n e s s. Something
r a th e r happens to th e man. "Man re c e iv e s , and he re c e iv e s
not a s p e c if ic ' c o n te n t’ but a P resen c e, a P resence as
p o w er."71 T his p resence and power in c lu d e th re e th in g s ,
which are u n d iv id ed , v iz . ( l ) th e whole f u lln e s s o f r e a l
m utual a c tio n , o f th e b ein g r a is e d and bound up in r e la
tio n . Man cannot give an account o f th e "how" o f t h i s .
I t does not lig h te n l i f e - i t makes i t h e a v ie r, b u t heavy
w ith m eaning. (2) There i s th e in e x p re s s ib le co n firm a tio n
o f meaning. N othing can any lo n g e r be m eaningless. (3)
This meaning is n o t th a t of "an o th er l i f e " , but th a t of
t h i s l i f e , n o t one o f "yonder l i f e " , b u t th a t of th i s w orld
and i t d e s ire s i t s c o n firm a tio n in t h i s l i f e and in r e l a
t io n w ith t h i s w o r l d . * ^ 3 n^g p r e s c r ip tio n can le a d us
70 Loc. c i t .
71 I b id . . p. 110.
73 Loo. P i t .
42
to th e m eeting, so none le a d s from i t . As only acceptance
o f th e P resence i s n ecessary f o r th e approach to th e meet
in g , so in a new sense i t i s so when we emerge from i t , "*^8
This re v e la tio n i s immediate and n o t to be m ediated to
o th e rs . One can only go and confirm i t s tr u th , "That b e fo re
which, in which, out o f which, and in to which we l i v e , even
th e m ystery, has rem ained what i t w a s .,,b u t we acq u ire no
knowledge from i t which might le s s e n or m oderate i t s
ï? y ste rio u sn e ss. "^4
This re v e la tio n is e te r n a l.
"The Word of r e v e la tio n i s I am th a t I am. That which
re v e a ls i s th a t which re v e a ls . That which i s i s , and
n o th in g more. The e te r n a l so urce of s tre n g th stream s,
th e e te r n a l c o n ta c t p e r s i s t s , th e e te r n a l v o ice sounds
f o r th , and n o th in g m o r e .75
Man d e s ir e s a c o n tin u ity in space and tim e of p o ss
e ssio n o f God. He wants more th an th e in e x p re s s ib le con
firm a tio n o f meaning. He wants t h i s co n firm a tio n s tre tc h e d
out as som ething th a t can be c o n tin u a lly taken up and
handled, "a continuum unbroken in space and tim e th a t in
su re s h is l i f e a t every p o in t and every moment. "76 The
only a u th e n tic assurance of c o n tin u ity l i e s in th e pure
73 I b i d ., p . I l l ,
74 Loc. c i t ,
75 I b id . , p. 112,
76 I b id . . p . 113.
43
r e l a t i o n which i s r a is e d to constancy in space and time by
b ein g embodied in the whole s t u f f of l i f e ,
"Thus to o , th e a u th e n tic assu ran ce o f constancy in
space c o n s is ts in th e f a c t th a t men’ s r e la tio n s w ith
t h e i r tr u e Thou, th e r a d ia l li n e s th a t proceed from
a l l th e p o in ts o f th e X to the C en tre, form a c i r c le .
I t i s n o t th e p e rip h e ry , th e community, th a t comes
f i r s t , b u t th e r a d i i , th e common q u a lity o f r e la tio n
w ith th e C en ter, T his alone g u a ra n te e s th e a u th e n tic
e x iste n c e o f th e community. Only when th e s e two a r is e —
th e b in d in g up of tim e in a r e la tio n a l l i f e of s a lv a tio n
and th e b in d in g up o f space in th e community th a t i s
made one by i t s C entre— and only so lo n g as they e x is t,
does th e re a r is e and e x is t , round about th e in v is ib le
a l t a r , a human cosmos w ith bounds and form , grasped
w ith th e s p i r i t out o f th e u n iv e rs a l s tu f f o f th e aeon,
a w orld th a t i s house and home, a d w ellin g fo r man in
th e u n iv e rs e . M eeting w ith God does not come to man
in o rd e r th a t he may concern h im se lf w ith God, but in
o rd e r th a t he may confirm th a t th e re is meaning in th e
w orld. A ll r e v e la tio n is summons and sending.
77 I b id . , p , 115
CHAPTER 7
BETW EEN M A H A N D M A H
D ialo g ic r e la tio n s h ip s . There may be communication
which is s i l e n t , Buber s u g g e sts ,^ and does n o t mean th e
" lo v e r 's te n d e r s ile n c e " nor th e "m y stical sh ared s ile n c e "
re p o rte d by some. Both o f th e se have th e e x p re ssio n o f a
g e s tu re . He r e f e r s to a " s p e ll" , a re le a s in g " in h im self
a re se rv e over which only he h im self has power. U nreserved
ly communication stream s from him, and th e s ile n c e b e a rs i t
to h is n e ig h b o r." I t i s not p o s sib le to t e l l what he has
ex p erien ced . "Ho more knowing i s needed. For where unre
serv e has ru le d , even w o rd le ssly , betw een men, th e word of
d ialo g u e has happened sa c ra m e n ta lly ."
"Human d ia lo g u e , th e re fo re although i t has i t s
d i s t in c ti v e l i f e in th e sig n , th a t i s in sound and
g e s t u r e , . , , can e x is t w ithout th e sig h , b u t ad m itted ly
not in an o b je c tiv e ly com prehensible form . On th e
o th e r hand an' elem ent o f com m unication, however inw ard,
seems to belong to i t s essen ce. But in i t s h ig h e st
moments dialogue re ach es out even beyond th e se bound
a r ie s , I t is com pleted o u tsid e c o n te n ts , even th e
most p e rso n a l, which are or can be communicated. More
over i t i s com pleted not in some "m y stical" ev e n t, b u t
in one th a t i s in th e p re c is e sense f a c tu a l, thorough
ly d o v e ta ile d in to th e common human w orld and th e con
c r e te tim e-sequenoe.2
1 M artin Buber, Between Man and Man. T ra n sla te d by
Ronald Gregor Sm ith, London: Degan P au l, 1947, p. 4.
3 Loo. P i t .
45
A problem a r is e s in d is p u ta tio n s in r e lig io n to
which Buber makes se v e ra l su g g e stio n s. Where th e re i s a
d iffe re n c e of a p o in t o f view in , fo r example, W eltan-
shauung. n e ith e r needs to give up h is p o in t of view , but
"each must expose h im se lf w holly, in a r e a l way, in h is
humanly unavoidable p a r t i a l i t y , and th ereb y ex p erien ce
h im self in a r e a l way as lim ite d by th e o th e r, so th a t th e
two s u f f e r to g e th e r th e d e s tin y of our co n d itio n e d n a tu re
and meet one another in i t , "8 They meet one an o th er when
they each so tu rn to th e o th e r t h a t , "making him p re s e n t,
he spoke r e a lly to and tow ards h im ,"4 He answers th e
problem o f th e d iffe re n c e in a co n fe ssio n o f f a i t h (to h is
own s a t is f a c ti o n and based upon h is own f a i t h , i t seems) by
su g g estin g th a t th e r e la ti o n betw een God and man has
changed. The answer to f a i t h i s not a s e t tl e d r e v e la tio n .
" I t i s th e n ig h t of an e x p e c ta tio n — not of a vague hope,
b u t of an e x p e c ta tio n . W e expect a theophany of which we
know n o th in g but th e p la c e , and th e p la c e is c a lle d com
m unity. "5 With t h i s in mind, Buber p o in ts out th a t "th e re
i s no obedience to th e coming one w ithout lo y a lty to h is
3 I b id . . p. 6,
4 Loc. c i t .
5 I b id . , p. 7.
46
c r e a t u r e ,” e v id e n tly meaning th a t th e re must be r e s p e c tfu l
in te r a c tio n w ith one an o th er sin c e a l l th e c re a tu re s are
s t i l l w a itin g fo r th e C re a to r. Then
a tim e o f genuine r e lig io u s c o n v e rsa tio n s is beginning—
not th o se s o -c a lle d b u t f i c t i t i o u s c o n v e rsa tio n s where
none reg ard ed and addressed h is p a r tn e r in r e a l i t y , b u t
genuine d ia lo g u e s, speech from c e r ta in ty to c e r ta in ty ,
b u t a lso from one o p en -h earted p erso n to an o th er open-
h e a rte d p erso n . Only th en w ill genuine common l i f e
appear, n o t th a t of an id e n tic a l co n ten t of f a i t h
which i s a lle g e d to be found in a l l r e lig io n s , b u t
th a t o f th e s itu a tio n , of anguish and o f ex p ectatio n .®
The im portant th in g to remember i s th a t th i s i s a tu rn in g ,
one to a n o th e r. I t i s n o t a t r a f f i c , t h i s d ia lo g u e , o f men
w ith one an o th er. I t is tp. one a n o th e r. I t i s not m erely
o b serv in g , not lo o k in g on, but becoming aware. H ere, r e a l
f a i t h e n te r s . I t is not d e f in i ti v e . I t can not be e x p la in
ed nor d isp la y e d . I t rem ains th e "ad d ress o f th a t moment
and cannot be is o la te d . "F a ith sta n d s in th e stream of
* happening but once* which i s spanned by know ledge." Lived
l i f e i s te s te d and f u l f i l l e d in th e stream alo n e.
"With a l l d eferen ce to th e w orld of continuum of
space and tim e I know as a liv in g tr u t h only c o n c rete
world r e a l i t y which is c o n s ta n tly , in every moment,
reached out to m e.. . in s e p a ra b le , incom parable, i r r e
d u c ib le , now, happening once o n l y , . . . 8
6 I b id . . pp. 7-8.
7 I b id . . p. 12.
8 Loo. P i t .
47
Buber su g g ests th a t th e re i s som ething between man and man
which cannot be touched b u t which n e v e rth e le s s i s th e re .
He c i t e s th e exp erien ce o f m eeting w ith a f rie n d when in
d e s p a ir, knowing th a t th e re i s n o th in g ta n g ib le ensuing,
y e t th e re i s som ething re c e iv e d , - " s u re ly a p resen ce by
means o f which we are to ld th a t n e v e rth e le s s th e re i s
meaning.
Buber knows th re e k in d s o f d i a l o g u e . 10 There is
genuine d ialo g u e—
"no m a tte r w hether spoken o r s i l e n t —where each o f
th e p a r tic ip a n ts r e a lly has in mind th e o th e r or o th e rs
in t h e i r p re se n t and p a r tic u l a r b ein g and tu rn s to them
w ith th e in te n tio n o f e s ta b lis h in g a liv in g m utual r e
l a t i o n betw een h im self and them.
The second i s th e te c h n ic a l d ialo g u e which i s "prompted
s o le ly by th e need of o b je c tiv e u n d e rsta n d in g ." T h e^ th ird
i s
monologue d isg u ise d as d ia lo g u e , in which two or more
men, m eeting in space, speak each w ith h im self in
s tra n g e ly to rtu o u s and c ir c u ito u s ways and y e t imagine
they have escaped th e torm ent o f b ein g thrown back on
t h e i r own re so u rc e s .
Buber i s in te r e s te d w ith th e f i r s t kind o f d ia lo g u e . He
p o in ts out th a t th e l i f e o f d ialo g u e i s not so much of
having to do w ith men as having to "do w ith th o se w ith whom
9 I b id . , p. 14.
10 I b id . , p. 30.
48
you have to d o ." The l i f e o f monologue i s liv e d by him who
i s "in cap ab le o f making r e a l in th e co n tex t of b ein g th e
community in w hich, in th e c o n tex t o f h is d e s tin y , he
m o v es . B ei n g th a t i s liv e d in d ia lo g u e , " re c e iv e s even
in extrem e d e r e lic tio n a h arsh and stre n g th e n in g sense of
r e c ip r o c ity " ; w hile b ein g liv e d in monologue i s not able to
grope beyond th e o u tlin e s o f th e s e l f . D ialo g ic is not to
be id e n tif ie d w ith lo v e , nor w ith " s o c ia l a c t i v i t y ," One
can be ev er so b u s ily absorbed in c o n ta c ts w ith fellow -m an
w ithout y e t having p e rso n a l r e la tio n from b ein g to b ein g .
D ialo g ic w ithout lo v e , on th e o th e r hand, "w ithout r e a l out
going to th e o th e r, re a c h in g to th e o th e r, and companying
w ith th e o th e r, th e lo v e rem aining w ith i t s e l f — th is i s
c a lle d L u c i f e r . T h e r e i s no need nor m ed iatio n between
con^anions in th e "com panionship o f creation"w henever th ey
come near to one an o th e r, because th ey "are bound up in
r e la ti o n to th e same c e n t r e ."13 Let i t be re p e a te d th a t th e
b a sic movement of th e l i f e o f d ialo g u e i s th e tu rn in g tow ards
th e o th e r.
Only he who h im self tu rn s to th e o th e r human b ein g and
11 Loo. P i t .
12 I b id . . p. 21.
13 Loc. c i t .
49
opens h im self to him re c e iv e s th e world in him. Only
th e b ein g whose o th e rn e s s , accep ted by m y b e in g , liv e s
and fa c e s m e in th e whole com pression of e x is te n c e ,
b rin g s th e ra d ia n c e of e te r n ity to me. Only when two
say to one an o th er w ith a l l th a t they a re , " I t i s Thou",
is th e in d w ellin g o f th e P resen t Being betw een them.
Buber su g g ests th a t th e answer i s coming back to him
th a t " in a l l t h i s th e a c tu a lity of our p re se n t l i f e , th e
co n d itio n ed n a tu re o f l i f e as a w hole, i s not ta k e n in to
a c c o u n t."13 What about th e b u sin e ss employee and h is "com
m unication w ithout re s e rv e " to h is c o lle a g u e s? Should th e
man a t th e conveyor b e lt " fe e l h im se lf add ressed in what he
ex p erien ces"? What about th e le a d e r o f a g ig a n tic te c h n ic a l
u n d ertak in g ? Can he " p ra c tic e th e r e s p o n s ib ility of d ia
logue"? A fter su g g e stin g th a t he i s not able to "demand"
d ia lo g ic , b u t th a t he sim ply re c o rd s , he re p e a ts th a t one
cannot o rd er d ia lo g u e ,
" I t is not th a t you are to answer but th a t you are
a b le . You are r e a lly a b le . The l i f e o f d ialo g u e is no
p r iv ile g e o f in t e l l e c t u a l a c tiv ity lik e d i a l e c t i c . I t
does not b eg in in th e upper s to ry o f hum anity, I t b e
g in s no h ig h e r th an where humanity b eg in s. There are
no g if te d and u n g ifte d h e re , only th o se who giv e them
se lv e s and th o se who w ithhold them selves. And he who
g iv es h im self tomorrow i s not noted to -d a y , even he
h im self does not know th a t he has i t in h im se lf, th a t
we have i t in o u rse lv e s , he w ill ju s t fin d i t , "and
fin d in g be amazed," You put b e fo re me th e man taken
14 I b id . . p. 30.
15 I b id . . p. 34.
50
up w ith duty and b u s in e s s . Yes, p re c is e ly him I mean,
him in th e fa c to ry , in th e shop, in th e o f f ic e , in th e
mine, on th e t r a c t o r , a t th e p r in tin g - p r e s s : man. I
do not seek fo r men. I do not seek men out fo r ja^self,
I accept th o se who are th e r e , I have them, I have him,
in mind, th e yoked, th e w h e e l-tre a d in g , th e c o n d itio n
ed. D ialogue i s not an a f f a i r o f s p i r i t u a l lu x u ry and
s p i r i t u a l lu x u rio u s n e ss, i t i s a m a tte r o f c re a tio n ,
of th e c r e a tu r e , and he is t h a t , th e man o f whom I
speak, he i s a c r e a tu re , t r i v i a l and irre p la c e a b le .^ ®
A tte n tio n is drawn to th e su g g estio n th a t what i s c a lle d
r e a l i t y i s m erely th e sphere o f e f f e c tiv e r e a l i t y ,
" c re a tu re ly and given to me in t r u s t and r e s p o n s ib ility .
W e do not fin d meaning ly in g in th in g s nor do we p u t i t
in to th in g s , but between us and th in g s i t can happen,
He su g g ests th a t th e re is no fa c to ry so abandoned by
c r e a tio n th a t th e re can be no c re a tiv e g lance f ly from one
working bench to an o th er, one desk to th e o th e r, - a "sober
and b ro th e rly glance which g u aran tees th e r e a l i t y o f
c r e a tio n which i s happening—quantum s a t i s . And n o th in g
i s so v a lu a b le a s e rv ic e o f d ialo g u e betw een God and man
as such an u n sen tim en tal and u n re se rv ed exchange of
g lan ces between two men in an a lie n p l a c e . 1®
This r e l a t i o n can a lso be ex p erien ced w ith th e m achine, as
i t s o p e ra to r say in g th a t i t s humming i s as "a merry and
16 I b id . . p. 35.
17 I b id . . p. 36.
18 I b id . . p. 37.
51
g r a te f u l sm ile a t me fo r h e lp in g i t to s e t asid e th e d i f f i
c u l t i e s and o b s tru c tio n s which d is tu rb e d and b ru is e d and
p ain ed i t , so th a t now i t could ru n f r e e . How can th e
le a d e r o f th e te c h n ic a l u n d erta k in g p r a c tic e th e re sp o n si
b i l i t y o f dialo g u e? Here th e re is r e a l s o c io lo g ic a l im p li
c a tio n . The le a d e r p r a c tic e s i t when
"he i s inw ardly aware, w ith a l a t e n t and d is c ip lin e d
fa n ta s y , of th e m u ltitu d e o f th o se p e rso n s, whom n a tu r
a lly he cannot s e p a ra te ly know and remember as such; so
th a t now, when one o f them fo r some reaso n o r o th e r
s te p s r e a lly as an in d iv id u a l in to th e c i r c le o f h is
v is io n and th e realm o f h is .d e c is io n , he i s aware of
him w ithout s t r a i n n o t as a number w ith a human mask
b u t as a p erso n . He p r a c tic e s i t when he comprehends
and handles th e se p erso n s as p erso n s— f o r th e g re a te s t
p a rt n e c e s s a rily i n d ir e c t ly , by means of a system of
m ediation which v a r ie s according to th e e x te n t, n atu re
and s tr u c tu r e o f th e u n d e rta k in g , b u t a lso d ir e c tly ,
in th e p a r ts which concern him by way o f o r g a n i s â t i o n . 20
R e s p o n s ib ility and th e "S ingle One" in r e la ti o n to
Community. Buber su g g ests th a t th e id e a of r e s p o n s ib ility
must be brought back from th e p ro v in ce of s p e c ia liz e d
e th ic s , "of an * ought * th a t swings f r e e in th e a i r , in to
th a t o f liv e d l i f e . Genuine r e s p o n s ib ility e x is ts only
where th e re i s r e a l r e s p o n d i n g . I t i s a responding to
19 Loc. G i t .
20 I b id . . p . 38.
31 I b id . . p . 16.
53
th e c ré a tio n as i t happens - to what i s seen, h eard and f e l t .
I t i s an e n te rin g upon th e s itu a tio n , " in to th e s itu a tio n ,
which has a t t h i s moment step p ed up to u s , whose appearance
we d id not and could not know, fo r i t s lik e has not y e t
b e e n . T h i s s itu a tio n i s never f in is h e d , but i t i s "sub
dued in to th e substan ce of liv e d l i f e . " I t is th e n th a t a
l i f e is ex p erien ced th a t i s more th a n a sum of moments.
There i s a response to th e moment.
A n ew ly -created c o n c re te r e a l i t y has been l a i d in
our arms; we answer fo r i t . A dog has looked a t you,
you answer f o r i t s g la n c e , a c h ild has clu tc h e d your
hand, you answer f o r i t s touch, a h o st o f men moves
ab out, you, you answer fo r t h e i r need.
R e s p o n s ib ility which does n o t respond to a word is
a m etaphor o f m o ra lity . F a c tu a lly , r e s p o n s ib ility only
e x is ts when th e c o u rt i s th e re to which I am re s p o n s ib le ,
and " s e lf - r e s p o n s ib ility " has r e a l i t y only when th e
" s e lf " to which I am re s p o n sib le becomes tra n s p a re n t
in to th e a b so lu te . But he who p r a c tic e s r e a l resp o n
s i b i l i t y in th e l i f e of d ialo g u e does not need to name
th e sp eak er of th e w orld to which he i s responding—he
knows him in th e w ord's su b stan ce which p re sse s on and
in , assum ing th e cadence o f an inw ardness, and s t i r s
him in h is h e a rt of h e a r ts . A man can ward o ff w ith
a l l h is s tre n g th th e b e l i e f th a t "God" i s th e r e , and
he t a s t e s him in th e s t r i c t sacram ent of d ia lo g u e .23
33 I b id . r p. 1 7 .
33 Loc. c i t .
H ote: The t r a n s l a t o r ’ s no te is e n te re d fo r o la rifio a r-
tio n , "The s ig n ific a n c e o f r e s p o n s i b il ity — i s brought out
more a c u te ly in th e German th a n in th e E n g lish . W ort. Ant-
w o rt. antw o rten . v eran tw o rten. e tc , are p a r t o f a c lo s e ly
i n t e r - r e l a t e d s itu a tio n in which speech and re sp o n se , answer
ing fo r and b ein g re s p o n sib le f o r , and so on, are more i n t i
m ately connected th a n th e E n g lish v e rsio n can hope to show.
I f the re a d e r w ill remember th a t " r e s p o n s ib ility " c a r r ie s in
i t s e l f th e ro o t sense of b ein g "answ erable", th en th e s ig n i
fic a n c e of th e "word" in a c tu a l l i f e w ill not be l o s t .
B uber’ s te a c h in g about the "word" alw ays c a r r ie s a s t r i c t
re fe re n c e to " liv e d l i f e " , and is very f a r from b e in g an
a b s tra c tio n , th e o lo g ic a l or o th e r.
53
R e s p o n s ib ility presupposes th e ad d ress o f one to
an o th er p rim a rily , " th a t i s , from a realm independent of
m y self", and to whom th e o th e r i s answ erable. The one en
t r u s t s som ething to an o th er who i s bound to tak e c a re of i t
lo y a lly . One ad d resses from h is t r u s t and th e o th e r re
sponds in h is lo y a lty o r re fu s e s to respond in d is lo y a lty .
Where no prim ary ad d ress and cla im can touch me,
f o r e v e ry th in g is p ro p e rty " , r e s p o n s ib ility has
become a phantom. At th e same tim e l i f e ’ s c h a ra c te r
of m u tu a lity i s d is s ip a te d . He who ceases to make a
response ce ases to hear th e Word, 24
Speaking o f t h i s r e s p o n s ib ility in r e l a t i o n to com
m unity, Buber c o n tin u es th a t th e " fe e lin g of community does
not re ig n where th e d e s ire d change o f i n s t it u t i o n s is w rest
ed in common, but w ithout community, from a r e s i s t i n g
w o rld ,"^3 Here i s where Buber d i f f e r s w ith K ierkegaard in
th e concept o f th e "S ingle One." K ierkegaard la y s th e emr-
p h a sis upon th e r e la tio n o f th e in d iv id u a l and h is r e la tio n
to God which i s in th e a re a of s o l i ta r i n e s s . Buber advo
c a te s th e in d iv id u a l’ s r e la tio n s h ip to God w ith in th e fram e
work of community and su g g ests th a t a p a rt from t h i s p o in t o f
re fe re n c e , th e re i s no in d iv id u a l. He r e f e r s to th e summar-
tio n o f th e "g re a t commandment" by Je su s in t h i s p erp en d icu -
34 I b id . . p. 45.
35 I b i d ., p. 31.
54
la x and h o riz o n ta l r e la tio n . He r e f e r s to them as "love
God w ith a l l your m ight" and "love your neighbour as one
lik e y o u r s e l f . T h e em phasis is not so p e rp e n d ic u la r
th a t no h o riz o n ta l s itu a tio n s are m et. W ithout th e h o ri
z o n ta l r e la ti o n which i s w ith man and man, th e perpendicu
l a r , which i s w ith God i s m eaningless. L ife i s not to be
one o f av o id in g th e o b s ta c le s and d i f f i c u l t i e s in l i f e and
th ereb y only tu rn heavenward where th e re are none to be en
co u n tered . God p la c e s th e o b s ta c le s in our p ath fo r a pur
pose, and to evade them i s to deny th e r e la ti o n w ith God.
Buber q u o tes K ierkegaard as only coming to lo v e by removing
th e o b je c t, and su g g ests th a t th a t i s wrong.
That i s sublim ely to m isunderstand God, C reatio n
i s not a h u rd le on th e ro ad to God, i t i s th e ro ad i t
s e l f . W e are c re a te d along w ith one another and d ir e c t
ed to a l i f e w ith one an o th er. C rea tu res are p laced in
my wgy so th a t I , t h e i r fe llo w -o re a tu re , by means of
them and w ith them fin d th e way to God. A God in whom
a l l l i f e i s f u l f i l l e d . A God in whom only th e p a r a lle l
lin e s o f s in g le approaches in te r s e c t i s more ak in to
th e "God o f th e p h ilo so p h e rs" th an to th e "God of
Abraham and Isaa c and Jacob". God wants us to come to
him by means o f th e R eginas (o b s ta c le s ) he has c re a te d
and not by re n u n c ia tio n o f them. I f we remove th e ob
j e c t , th e n —we have removed th e o b je c t a lto g e th e r.
W ithout an o b je c t, a r t i f i c i a l l y p roducing th e o b je c t
from th e abundance o f th e human s p i r i t and c a llin g i t
God, t h i s love has i t s b ein g in th e v o id .27
36 I b i d . , p. 51.
87 I b id . . p. 53.
55
I t is tru e th a t human re p re s e n ta tio n s o f th e r e la ti o n may
change, but the t r u t h o f the " r e la tio n is unchangeable be
cause i t stan d s in e te r n a l m u tu a lity ; i t i s not man who
d e fin e s h is approach to i t b u t th e c r e a to r who in th e un
am biguity o f man’ s c r e a tio n has i n s t i t u t e d th e a p p ro a ch , "28
For him who has e s s e n tia lly to do w ith men, i t i s necessary
e s s e n tia lly fo r him to a c t and s u ffe r in r e la ti o n to them,
God i s n o t an o b je c t b e sid e o b je c ts and hence cannot
be reached by re n u n c ia tio n of o b je c ts . God, indeed, is
not the cosmos, b u t f a r le s s i s he Being minus cosmos.
He i s n o t to be found by s u b tra c tio n and n o t to be loved
by r e d u c tio n .29
Buber i s not an advocate of o th e rw o rld lin e s s . He wants to
make th e liv e d l i f e d e f in ite ly r e la te d to t h i s w orld and
w ith i t s C entre,
As f o r K ierk eg aard , not so f o r Buber, i s "The crowd
u n tr u th ," Speaking of th e body p o l i t i c , Buber adm its th a t
th e re may be a "crowd of u n tr u th ," but th a t i s i s only a
s ta te o f a f f a i r s in th e body p o l i t i c and th e se f a ls e formar-
tio n s only d i s t o r t and cannot e lim in a te th e e te r n a l o rig in .
Every d e g e n e ra tio n in d ic a te s i t s genus, and in
such a way th a t th e d e g e n e ra tio n i s never r e la te d to
th e genus sim ply as p re se n t to p a s t, b u t as in a d is
to r te d fa c e th e d i s t o r tio n is r e la te d to th e form
p e r s is tin g b en eath i t . The body p o l i t i c , which is
38 I b id . . p. 54.
39 I b id . . p. 58.
56
sometimes a lso c a lle d th e "w orld", th a t i s , th e human
w orld, se e k s, knowingly o r unknow ingly, to r e a liz e in
i t s genuine fo rm atio n s men’ s tu rn in g to one an o th er in
the co n tex t o f c r e a t i o n ,30
There are two a t t itu d e s in which id e n ti f ic a t io n w ith
p u b lic e x iste n c e ten d s to ward o f f c o n c re tio n and d ir e c tio n
to th e a c tu a l perso n o r p erso n s. The f i r s t i s th e a c t o f
enthusiasm o f " h is to r ic h o u rs." "The crowd i s a c tu a liz e d ,
e n te rs in to th e a c tio n and is tra n s f ig u r e d in i t , and th e
p erso n , overpowered by d e lir io u s e c s ta s y , is submerged in
th e moment o f p u b lic e x is te n c e ,"31 The o th e r a tt i tu d e i s
th a t o f p u b lic o p in io n and in p u b lic "ta k in g o f a p o s itio n " .
In t h i s s itu a tio n th e crowd rem ains l a t e n t , and th e in d i
v id u a l is excused from form ing an o p in io n and a d e c is io n ,
"O therness has been v a rn ish e d o v e r." The f i r s t a t t itu d e
"sn atch es us out and away from c o n fro n ta tio n w ith th e g re a t
form o th e rn e ss in p u b lic e x is te n c e , from th e most d i f f i c u l t
o f th e in n er-w o rld ly ta s k s , and r a is e s us e n th u s ia s tic a lly
in to th e h i s t o r i c a l p a ra d is e o f c r o w d s ,"32 The second a t
t i tu d e "undermines th e ground on which c o n fro n ta tio n i s to
be c a r r ie d o u t; i t rubs out th e p a th e tic sig n s of o th ern e ss
and th e n convinces us by th e evidence of our own eyes th a t
30 I b id . . p . 60.
31 I b id . . p. 63.
32 Loc. c i t .
57
u n ifo rm ity i s th e r e a l t h i n g , "33
The man who i s liv in g w ith th e body p o l i t i c , Buber
a s s e r ts , i s not as a s tic k t i e d in a bundle which i s f l o a t
in g down th e r iv e r , abandoned to the c u rre n t. The man of
whom Buber speaks i s not "bundled, b u t bound."
He i s bound up in r e la tio n to i t , b e tro th e d to i t ,
m arried to i t , th e re fo re s u f f e r in g h is d e stin y along
w ith i t ; ra th e r sim ply s u ffe rin g i t , always w illin g
and ready to s u f f e r i t , b u t n o t abandoning h im self
b lin d ly to any o f i t s movements, r a th e r c o n fro n tin g
each movement w atc h fu lly and c a r e f u lly th a t i t does
n o t m iss t r u th and lo y a lty .
The crowd i s around him, b u t he does not put up w ith i t
where i t i s in o p p o s itio n to th e s e rv ic e of d e c is io n fo r
h im se lf. He does what he can w ith th e powers he p o sse sse s
to make th e crowd no lo n g e r a crowd. "O therness enshrouds
him, th e o th e rn e ss to which he i s b e tro th e d . But he ta k e s
i t up in to h is l i f e only in the form of th e o th e r, tim e and
ag ain th e o th e r, th e o th e r who m eets him, who i s sought,
l i f t e d out of th e crowd, th e ’companion’ ". Even when work
ing w ith th e crowd, h e.sp e ak s to the p erso n , th e p ersons
making up th e crowd. I t cannot be th e one who i s re se rv e d ,
not th e one who ta k e s . I t is th e one "who is g iv en ; g iv en ,
not g iv en o v e r." T his is th e p a ra d o x ic a l work to which he
33 Loc. c i t .
34 I b id . . p. 64.
58
i s g iv en - to make th e crowd no lo n g e r the crowd. "That i s
th e S in g le One who 'changes th e crowd in to S in g le Ones' —
how could i t he one who rem ains f a r from th e crow d? "35
The S in g le One i s th e man fo r whom th e r e a l i t y o f
r e la ti o n w ith God as an e x c lu siv e r e la ti o n in c lu d e s and
encompasses th e p o s s i b ili ty o f r e l a ti o n w ith a l l o th e r
n e ss, and f o r whom th e whole body p o l i t i c , th e re s e r v o ir
o f o th e rn e s s , o f f e r s ju g t enough o th e rn e ss f o r him to
p ass h is l i f e w ith it.®®
The r e la ti o n o f th e human p erso n to God cannot be
e s t ^ l i s h e d by the s u b tra c tio n o f th e w orld. The S in g le One
must ta k e th e w orld w ithout any re d u c tio n in to h is l i f e ’ s
d ev o tio n . He does not fin d God’ s hand when he reach es away
beyond c r e a tio n , but r a th e r when he p la c e s h is arms around
th e "v ex atio u s w orld, " "He must fa c e th e hour which ap
proaches him, th e b io g ra p h ic a l and h i s t o r i c a l hour, j u s t as
i t i s , in i t s whole w orld c o n te n t and a p p a re n tly se n se le ss
c o n tra d ic tio n , w ithout weakening th e im pact of o th e rn e ss in
i t , "37 Whether he wants to acknowledge i t o r n o t, the
human p erso n belongs to th e community in which he was born.
He must r e a liz e what d e s tin y means, in b ein g p lace d th e re ,
even though i t seems m isplaced, He n o te s th a t tr u e member
sh ip in a community in c lu d e s th e e x p e rie n c e , which cannot
35 I b id . . p. 65.
36 Loc. c i t .
37 Loc. c i t .
59
be d e f in ite ly fo rm u lated , of th e "boundary of t h i s member
sh ip . " He ex p erien ces th e boundary when he g ra sp s th e
s itu a tio n of h is people and h is own in th e h is to r ic o - b io -
g ra p h ic a l hour and does not sp are h im se lf and h is community
b e fo re God.
He alone is tru e to th e one P re se n t Being who knows
he i s bound to h is p la c e — and j u s t th e re f r e e fo r h is
p ro p er r e s p o n s ib ility . Only th o se who are bound and
fre e in t h i s way can s t i l l produce what can tr u ly be
c a lle d com munity.38
C ontinuing h is em phasis f o r th e need fo r th e in
d iv id u a l to be a s s o c ia te d w ith th e group, Buber a s s e r ts
th a t th e groups o f today cannot ex p erien ce what i s r ig h t
except through men who w ill belong to them, " sta k in g t h e i r
own so u ls to exp erien ce i t and th en re v e a lin g i t , however
b i t t e r i t may b e, to t h e i r companions— c h a rita b ly i f i t
may b e, c ru e lly i f i t must b e . "39
I t i s not p o s s ib le to comprehend man from th e stan d
p o in t of b io lo g y alo n e, Man has e n te re d fundam entally upon
what "would be bound to appear to th e b e a st o f prey as
s e n se le ss and g ro te sq u e — namely, on r e s p o n s ib ility , and
th u s on becoming a perso n w ith a r e la ti o n to th e t r u t h . "40
38 I b id . . p. 70.
39 Loo. P i t .
40 I b id . , p. 73.
60
■History i s not th e sequence of power and a c tio n s of power
in conquest. I t i s r a th e r th e "co n tex t of th e re s p o n s ib il
i t i e s o f power in ti m e ."41
That man may not be lo s t th e r e i s need o f th e p e r
so n ’ s r e s p o n s ib ility to tr u th in h is h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a
t io n . There i s need o f th e S in g le One who stan d s over
a g a in s t a l l b ein g which is p re se n t to him— and thus
a lso over a g a in st th e body p o l i t i c — and g u a ra n te e s a l l
b ein g which i s p re se n t to him— and th u s a ls o th e body
p o l i t i c .
True community and tru e commonwealth w ill be r e a l
iz e d only to th e e x te n t to which th e S in g le Ones be
come r e a l out o f whose re sp o n s ib le l i f e th e body
p o l i t i c is renew ed,43
R e la tio n s h ip in E d u catio n . For th e b u ild in g o f tr u e
human l i f e , th e re are two forms needed - "to which th e o r i
g in a tiv e i n s t i n c t , l e f t to i t s e l f , does not le a d and cannot
le a d : to sh a rin g in an u n d erta k in g and to e n te rin g in to
m u tu a lity . "43 i t is n ecessary f o r man to e n te r in to under
ta k in g s where he w ill d isc o v e r and p r a c tic e a community of
work w ith o th e r men. E ducation based only on th e in s tin c t
o f o rig in a tio n p re p a re s fo r human s o l i t a r i n e s s . There i s
th e need o f the i n s t in c t f o r communion which te a c h e s th e
say in g o f Thou. Buber su g g ests th a t th e re i s a tendency to
m isunderstand th e freedom c u rre n t in p re se n t day e d u c a tio n a l
41 Loc. c i t .
43 I b id . . p, 83.
43 I b id . , p. 87.
61
c i r c le s . At th e o p p o site end o f com pulsion th e re does not
l i e freedom , b u t r a th e r communion. "Compulsion i s a nega
tiv e r e a l i t y ; communion i s th e p o s itiv e r e a l i t y ; freedom
i s a p o s s i b i l i t y , p o s s i b i li t y r e g a i n e d . "44 I t i s not a
q u e s tio n o f d e stin y tow ards com pulsion or a d e s tin y in
freedom , b u t r a th e r a d e s tin y to commune and to covenant
w ith o th e rs , "Compulsion in ed u c atio n means d isu n io n , i t
means h u m ilia tio n and re b e llio u s n e s s . Communion in educa
tio n i s j u s t communion, i t means b e in g opened up and drawn
i n . "^5
I t i s easy to u n d ersta n d th a t in a tim e when th e
d e te r io r a tio n o f a l l t r a d i t i o n a l bonds has made t h e i r
le g itim a c y q u e s tio n a b le , th e tendency to freedom is
e x a lte d , th e sp rin g b o ard is tr e a te d as th e go al and
a fu n c tio n a l good as s u b s ta n tia l good. M oreover, i t
i s id le s e n tim e n ta lity to lam ent a t g re a t le n g th th a t
freedom is made th e s u b je c t o f ex perim ents. Perhaps
i t i s f i t t i n g fo r t h i s tim e which has no compass th a t
people should throw out t h e i r liv e s lik e a plummet to
d isc o v e r our b e a rin g s and th e co u rse we should s e t.
But tr u ly t h e i r liv e s ! Such an experim ent, when i t
i s c a r r ie d o u t, i s a n eck -b reak in g v en tu re which can
n o t be d isp u te d . But when i t is ta lk e d about and
ta lk e d around, in i n t e l l e c t u a l d is c u ss io n s and con
fe s s io n s and in the m utual pro s and cons o f t h e i r
l i f e ’ s "problem s", i t i s an abom ination of d i s i n t e
g ra tio n . Those who sta k e th em selv es, as in d iv id u a ls
or as a community, may le a p and c ra s h out in to th e
swaying void where sen ses and sense f a i l , o r through
i t and beyond in to some k in d o f e x is te n c e . But they
44 I b id . . p. 91.
45 Loc. c i t .
63
must not make freedom in to a theorem or programme. To
become f r e e of a bond is d e s tin y ; one c a r r ie s th a t lik e
a c ro s s , not lik e a cockade. Let us r e a liz e th e tru e
meaning of bein g f r e e o f a bond: i t means th a t a q u ite
p e rso n a l r e s p o n s ib ility ta k e s th e p la c e o f one shared
w ith many g e n e ra tio n s . L ife liv e d in freedom is p er
so n al r e s p o n s ib ility o r i t i s a p a th e tic f a r c e . 46
L ife can be a f u lf illm e n t— i f i t i s a d ia lo g u e . The
tro u b le i s th a t th e re i s g e n e ra lly l i t t l e l i s te n i n g to th e
"ad d ress" and, r a th e r , "b reak in g in w ith id le c h a t t e r ."
There must be th e p r a c tic e of r e s p o n s ib ility in th a t realm
o f l i f e a l l o t te d to th e in d iv id u a l and e n tr u s te d to him fo r
which he i s able to resp o n d , " th a t i s , f o r which we have a
r e la tio n o f deeds which may count— in a l l our inadequacy—
as a p ro p er re s p o n s e ."47
That r e la tio n betw een perso n s which i s c h a ra c te riz e d
by th e elem ent o f in c lu s io n may be term ed a d ia lo g ic a l relar-
tio n and w ill a lso show i t s e l f in genuine c o n v e rsa tio n ,
though i t is not composed o f t h i s .
"The r e la tio n in ed u c atio n is one o f pure d ia lo g u e ."48
There must be a r e a l fa c in g of the c h ild , a g a th e rin g of th e
c h ild ’ s p resence in to " h is own s to re as one o f th e b e a re rs
o f h is communion w ith th e w orld, one o f th e fo c u se s of h is
46 I b i d . . p. 91-93.
47 Loc. c i t .
48 I b id . . p. 98.
63
r e s p o n s i b i l i ti e s fo r th e w o r l d ,"49 th e re has been th e
g a th e rin g o f the c h ild in to th e l i f e , " th a t stead y p o ten
t i a l p resen ce of th e one to th e o th e r i s e s ta b lis h e d and
endures* Then th e re i s r e a l i t y betw een them, th e re i s
m u tu a lity , "50
Buber d is tin g u is h e d th re e c h ie f forms of th e d i a
lo g ic a l r e la ti o n in t h i s c o n te x t.51 The f i r s t i s th a t o f
an " a b s tra c t b u t m utual ex p erien ce of in c lu s io n ," This i s
th a t experience where one becomes aware th a t " i t i s w ith
th e o th e r as w ith o u rs e lv e s , and th a t what r u le s over us
b o th i s not a t r u t h o f re c o g n itio n but th e t r u t h - o f - e x i s t -
ence and th e e x is te n c e - o f - tr u th of th e P resen t B eing. In
t h i s way we have become able to acknowledge. " The second
form of r e la tio n i s th a t where th e ed u cato r p u ts h im self in
th e p la c e of th e o th e r and sees how t h i s o th e r human b ein g
i s a ffe c te d . The t h i r d k in d i s what he c a l l s " frie n d s h ip " .
" I t i s based on a c o n c re te and m utual ex p erien ce o f in c lu
sio n . I t i s th e tru e in c lu s io n o f one an o th er by human
s o u l s ."
There is no t r u t h in th e autonomy o f e d u c a tio n in
49 Loo. P i t .
5 0 Loc. c i t .
51 I b id ., p . 1 0 1 .
64
a formed age, but ra th e r in th a t age which is lo s in g form .
Only in i t , in th e d is in te g r a tio n of t r a d i t i o n a l
bonds, in th e sp in n in g w h irl o f freedom , does p e rso n a l
r e s p o n s ib ility a r is e which in th e end can no lo n g er
le a n w ith i t s burden o f d e c is io n on any church o r
s o c ie ty o r c u ltu r e , b u t i s lo n e ly in face o f P resen t
B e in g .,.T h e ones who count are th o se perso n s who----
though they may be o f l i t t l e renown— respond to and
are re sp o n s ib le fo r th e c o n tin u a tio n of th e liv in g
s p i r i t , each in th e a c tiv e s t i l l n e s s of h is sphere o f
w ork.53
P h ilo so p h ic a l A nthropology. Buber d ev o tes c o n sid e r
able space to a d is c u s s io n o f th e q u e stio n "What i s man"53
and th e c o n trib u tio n v a rio u s p h ilo so p h e rs may or may not
have made to th e q u e stio n s ta te d . The answer to t h i s
q u e s tio n l i e s in th e a re a o f what Buber c a lls "P h ilo so p h ic a l
an th ro p o lo g y " . I t does not s u f f ic e to study s e p a ra te e le
ments in th e make-up o f man, i t i s n ecessary to study him
in h is "w holeness".
A le g itim a te p h ilo s o p h ic a l anthropology must know
th a t th e r e is not m erely a human sp e c ie s b u t a lso
p e o p le s, not m erely a human so u l but a lso ty p e s and
C h a ra c te rs, not m erely a human l i f e b u t a ls o sta g e s
in l i f e ; only from th e sy ste m a tic com prehension of
th e se and o f a l l o th e r d if f e r e n c e s , from th e recog
n itio n o f th e dynamic th a t e x e rts power w ith in every
p a r ti c u la r r e a l i t y and between them, and from th e
c o n s ta n tly new p ro o f of th e one in th e many, can i t
come to see th e w holeness o f m an .54
53 I b id . . p. 103.
53 I b id . . pp. 118-156.
54 I b id . , p. 133.
65
I t is n ecessary fo r th e p h ilo s o p h ic a l a n th ro p o lo g is t to
"stak e n o th in g le s s th a n h is r e a l w holeness, h is co n c rete
s e l f , "^5 only must he give h im se lf as an obi eo t of
knowledge, b u t he must a lso give h is s u b j e c t i v i ty . He can
no t rem ain an untouched o b serv e r. I t is only th e n th a t he
can know th e w holeness o f th e person and through i t th e
w holeness o f man. The a n th ro p o lo g ist must d ea l w ith the
unbroken w holeness o f e v e n ts, " e s p e c ia lly w ith th e unbroken
n a tu r a l connexion betw een fe e lin g s and a c tio n s ; and th i s
connexion is most pow erfu lly in flu e n c e d in self-o b serv ac
tio n .
The s t r i c t a n th ro p o lo g ic a l q u e stio n becomes an in
s i s t e n t problem in tim es "when as i t were th e o r ig in a l con
t r a c t betw een th e u n iv e rs e and man i s d is so lv e d and man
fin d s h im se lf a s tra n g e r and s o li ta r y in th e w orld. "5? The
q u e stio n i s r a is e d as to th e s p e c ia l "human hom elessness and
s o litu d e ," The d i f f i c u l t y o f th e im p ressio n o f f i n i t e or
i n f i n i t e space and tim e was re so lv e d f o r Buber when he r e a l
ized th a t space and tim e a re only "th e form s in which m y
human view o f what i s , n e c e s s a rily works i t s e l f o u t; th a t
55 I b i d . . p. 124.
56 I b id . . p . 125.
57 I b id . . p. 132,
6 6
i s , they were not a tta c h e d to th e in n e r n a tu re o f th e w orld,
b u t to th e n a tu re of m y s e n s e s . "58 ig j u s t as im possible
to a l l one’ s concepts to say th a t th e w orld i s i n f i n i t e in
space and tim e as i t i s to say th a t i t s i f i n i t e . N eith er
are in h e re n t in e x p e rie n c e . I t i s only th e appearance which
ta k e s p la c e in e x p e rie n c e . There must be a sh arp d is tin c tio n
between what Buber c a l l s cosm ological tim e and a n th ro p o lo g i
c a l tim e. He d i f f e r e n t i a t e s betw een th e two in th a t cosmo
lo g ic a l tim e i s to be comprehended "as i f a l l tim e were p re
sen t in a r e la tiv e way, even though th e fu tu re i s not g iv en
to us a t a l l , " and a n th ro p o lo g ic a l tim e i s "tim e in re s p e c t
o f a c tu a l, co n scio u sly w illin g man," and "cannot be com
prehended, because th e fu tu re cannot be p re s e n t, sin ce i t
depends to a c e r ta in e x te n t, in m y co n scio u sn ess and w ill,
on m y d e c is io n ."59 T his d i s t in c ti o n i s th a t o f r e g u la rity
in th e u n iv e rse and th e i r r e g u la r , u n p re d ic ta b le w ill o f man
in th e f u tu r e . The ex c e p tio n to t h i s i s "an image of th e
u n iv e rse which i s grounded on f a i t h : th e power o f f a i t h alone
can ex p erien ce p e r f e c tio n as som ething a ssu re d , because i t i s
som ething g u aran teed to us by someone we t r u s t — whom we t r u s t
58 I b id . . p. 136.
59 I b id . . pp. 140-141.
67
as th e g u aran to r a lso f o r what has not y e t come to he in
our w o r ld . "50 Man i s more th an a s p e c ie s , he i s a c a te
gory, To answer th e a n th ro p o lo g ic a l q u e s tio n , one must
"invoke not m erely th e s p i r i t h u t a lso n a tu re to t e l l us
what i t has to t e l l ; h u t we know th a t we have a lso to ap
proach an o th er power fo r in fo rm a tio n , namely, community. "51
W ithout th e power o f community th e re i s only fragm entary
knowledge which is a lso in adequate in i t s e l f .
In d iv id u a lism and C o lle c tiv is m . Buher does not con
s id e r th e in d iv id u a l to he e ith e r th e s t a r t i n g p o in t o f th e
w orld o r i t s g o a l. He does c o n sid e r th e in d iv id u a l to be
"the irrem ovable c e n tr a l p la c e o f the s tru g g le betw een the
w orld ’s movement away from God and i t s movement tow ards
G od."53 This s tru g g le ta k e s p la c e to a la rg e e x te n t in
p u b lic l i f e , not betw een groups b u t w ith in th e gro u p . "Yet
th e d e c is iv e b a t t l e s o f t h i s realm as w ell are fought in
th e d ep th , in th e ground, or th e g ro u n d le ssn e ss, o f th e
p e r s o n ,"53
The man who liv e s oozmnunity fin d s th e ground o f p e r-
50 Loc. c i t .
61 I b i d ., p, 156
68 I b id . . p. 70.
S3 Loo, c i t .
68
so n al and e s s e n tia l d e c is io n c o n tin u a lly th re a te n e d by so -
c a lle d c o lle c tiv e d e c is io n s . T his does not remove any fra g
ment o f r e s p o n s ib ility fo r th e man. The community to which
a man belongs does not ex p ress in a u n ifie d and unambiguous
way what i s co n sid ered r ig h t and wrong in given s itu a tio n s .
This group cannot r e lie v e th e in d iv id u a l of r e s p o n s ib ility .
There must be a p e rso n a l answ ering w ith d e c is io n and a c tio n .
I f th e in d iv id u a l is re lie v e d of r e s p o n s ib ility , he i s p e r
v e r tin g h is r e la tio n of f a i t h and c u ts out God’ s realm o f
power in th e sphere of h is group. Program and r e s o lu tio n
may be serv ed or c o n tra riw is e . The r e s p o n s ib ility i f to ,
in p e rso n a l d e c is io n , do j u s t ic e to th e group b e fo re th e
Face of G o d . 54
C o lle c tiv ity is based on an o rg an ized atrophy of
p e rso n a l e x is te n c e , community on i t s in c re a se and con
firm a tio n in l i f e liv e d tow ards one o th e r. The modern
z e a l f o r c o l le c t iv i ty i s a f l i g h t from community’ s
t e s t in g and c o n s e c ra tio n o f th e p erso n , a f l i g h t from
th e v i t a l d ia lo g ic .55
With th e rem oval o f r e s p o n s ib ility through c o ll e c t
i v i ty , th e person becomes q u e s tio n a b le .
. . . c o l l e c t i v i t y re c e iv e s th e r ig h t to hold th e person
who is bound to i t , bound in such a way th a t he ceases
to have com plete r e s p o n s ib ility . The c o l l e c t i v i t y be
comes what r e a lly e x is ts , th e p erso n becomes d e riv a to ry .
In every realm which jo in s him to th e whole he is to be
64 I b id . . pp. 66-68.
65 I b id . . pp. 31-33.
69
excused a p e rso n a l r e s p o n s e ,, .Human p e rc e p tio n c e a se s,
th e human response is dumb, i f th e person is no lo n g er
th e re to hear and to speak.®5
There is th e need o f perso n s who a re not c o lle c tiv iz e d , not
" re p re s e n ta tiv e s " who are chosen in some to ex o n erate
th e re p re se n te d of r e s p o n s ib ility , but a lso "re p re se n te d "
who w ill not l e t them selves be re p re s e n te d w ith re g a rd to
r e s p o n s i b il i ty ,5?
Buber makes an im portant comment on th e m o tiv a tio n
o f a s e c tio n of th e young in h is s e c tio n on "The ed u c atio n
o f C h a ra c te r."58 In b e in g absorbed in to th e c o lle c tiv e ,
som ething "im portant and ir re p la c e a b le i s lo s t to them—
p e rso n a l r e s p o n s ib ility fo r l i f e and th e w orld. " They do
n ot as y e t r e a liz e th a t t h e i r b lin d d ev o tio n to a c o lle c tiv e ,
f o r exam ple, a p a r ty , was not a genuine a c t of p e rso n a l l i f e ;
b u t r a th e r o f fe a r o f b ein g l e f t to r e ly on th em selv es, on
a s e l f which no lo n g er re c e iv e s d ir e c tio n from e te r n a l
v a lu e s . They do not r e a liz e th a t t h i s d ev o tio n was an es
cape, an unconscious d e s ir e to have r e s p o n s ib ility removed
by an a u th o rity in which they b e lie v e or in which they want
to b e lie v e . They are b eg in n in g to r e a liz e th a t he who does
not d ecid e w ith h is whole b ein g what he d e c id e s, and assumes
66 I b id . . pp. 80-81.
67 I b id . . p. 82.
68 I b id . , p. 115,
70
r e s p o n s ib ility fo r i t , "becomes a s t e r i l e so u l. And a
s t e r i l e so u l soon c e ases to be a s o u l."
Both views o f l i f e — modern in d iv id u a lism and modern
c o lle c tiv is m —however d if f e r e n t t h e i r causes may be,
are e s s e n tia lly th e co n c lu sio n or e x p re ssio n o f th e
same human c o n d itio n , only a t d if f e r e n t s ta g e s . This
c o n d itio n is c h a ra c te riz e d by th e union o f cosmic and
s o c ia l hom elessness, dread o f th e u n iv e rse and dread
o f l i f e , r e s u ltin g in an e x i s t e n t i a l c o n s titu tio n of
s o litu d e such as has probably never e x is te d b e fo re to
th e same e x te n t. The human p erso n f e e ls h im se lf to be
a man exposed by n a tu re — as an unwanted c h ild i s ex
posed— and a t th e same tim e a p erso n is o la te d in th e
m idst o f th e tum ultuous w orld. The f i r s t re a c tio n o f
the s p i r i t to th e aw areness of t h i s new and uncanny
p o s itio n i s modern in d iv id u a lism , th e second i s modern
c o lle c tiv is m .69
In in d iv id u a lism th e human b e in g a c cep ts h is i s o l a
tio n as a p erso n and g l o r i f i e s h im self as an in d iv id u a l to
th e u tm o st. To save h im se lf from th e d e s p a ir of th e th r e a t
ening o f th e s o lita r y s t a t e , he g l o r i f i e s i t , "Modern in
d iv id u a lism has e s s e n tia lly an im aginary b a s i s . "70 c o l
le c tiv is m th e in d iv id u a l throw s h im se lf com pletely in to th e
fo rm atio n s of some m assive modern group. Here he is saved
from th e hom elessness in th e s o c ia l and cosmic a re a s . There
i s no dread of l i f e because o f th e a b so rp tio n in to c o lle c t
ive r e s p o n s ib ility . Man’ s is o la tio n is not overcome, but
ra th e r overpowered and numbed.
69 I b id . . P. 200.
70 Loc. c i t .
71
#hen im aginings and illn s io n s axe o v er, th e p o s s ib le
and in e v ita b le m eeting of man w ith h im self i s ab le to
tak e p la c e only as th e m eeting o f th e in d iv id u a l w ith
h is fellow -m an— and t h i s is how i t must tak e p la c e .
Only when th e in d iv id u a l knows th e o th e r in a l l h is
o th e rn e ss as h im s e lf, as man, and from th e re b reak s
through to th e o th e r , has he broken through h is s o l i
tu d e in a s t r i c t and tra n sfo rm in g m eeting.
I t i s obvious th a t such an event can only tak e
p la c e i f the p erso n i s s t i r r e d up as a p erso n . In
in d iv id u a lism th e p erso n , in consequence o f h is mere
ly im aginary m astery o f h is b a sic s itu a tio n , i s a t
tack e d by th e rav ag es o f th e f i c t i t i o u s , however much
he th in k s , o r s t r i v e s to th in k , th a t he i s a s s e r tin g
h im self as a p erso n in b ein g . In c o lle c tiv is m th e
p erso n su rre n d e rs h im se lf when he renounces th e
d ire c tn e s s o f p e rso n a l d e c is io n and r e s p o n s ib ility .
In b o th o ases the p e rso n is in cap a b le o f b re a k in g
through to th e o th e r: th e re is genuine r e la ti o n only
betw een genuine p e r s o n s ,71
The realm o f "betw een^. The fundam ental f a c t of
human e x iste n c e i s not th e e x iste n c e of th e in d iv id u a l nor
th e ag g reg ate as such. C onsidered alo n e, each i s a ^mighty
a b s tr a c tio n , ” The in d iv id u a l is a f a c t only when he ste p s
in to a liv in g r e la tio n w ith o th e r in d iv id u a ls . The aggre
g ate i s a f a c t only as i t is b u i l t up of liv in g u n its of
r e la tio n , ®The fundam ental f a c t o f human e x is te n c e is man
w ith man. ”73 a tu rn in g of one b ein g to an o th er in
o rd e r to communicate in a sphere which i s common to b o th
b u t which reach es out beyond th e common sphere o f each.
71 I b id . . pp, 301-303,
72 I b i d ,, p. 303.
73
This sp h e re , Buber c a l l s , though ^co n cep tu ally s t i l l un
comprehended, th e sp h ere o f * betw een*.
The view which e s ta b lis h e s th e concept o f "between**
i s to be acq u ired by no lo n g e r lo c a liz in g th e r e la ti o n
betw een human b e in g s, as i s custom ary, e ith e r w ith in
in d iv id u a l so u ls or in a g e n e ra l world which embraces
and d eterm ines them, but in a c tu a l f a c t betw een them.
"Between" i s not an a u x ilia ry c o n s tru c tio n , but
th e r e a l p lace and b e a re r o f what happens betw een men;
i t has re c e iv e d no s p e c if ic a tte n tio n b ecau se, in d is
t i n c t i o n from th e in d iv id u a l so u l and i t s c o n te x t, i t
does not e x h ib it a smooth c o n tin u ity , b u t i s ev er and
again r e c o n s titu te d in accordance w ith men’ s m eetings
w ith one an o th er; hence what i s ex p erien ce has been
annexed n a tu r a lly to th e continuous elem en ts, th e so u l
and i t s w orld.
In a r e a l c o n v e rsa tio n ( th a t i s , not one whose in
d iv id u a l p a r ts have been p re c o n c e rte d , b u t one which
i s com pletely spontaneous, in which each speaks d i r e c t
ly to h is p a rtn e r and c a l l s f o r th h is u n p re d ic ta b le
re p ly ) , a r e a l le s s o n ( th a t i s , n e ith e r a ro u tin e r e
p e t i t i o n nor a le s s o n whose fin d in g s th e te a c h e r knows
b e fo re he s t a r t s , b u t one which develops in m utual s u r
p r i s e s ) , a r e a l embrace and not one of mere h a b it, a
r e a l d u el and not a mere game— in a l l th e se what is
e s s e n tia l does not ta k e p la c e in each of th e p a r t i c i
p a n ts o r in a n e u tr a l w orld which in clu d es th e two
and a l l o th e r th in g s ; b u t i t ta k e s p lace betw een them
in th e most p re c is e se n se , as i t were in a dim ension
which i s a c c e s s ib le only to them b o th .
There i s a d iffe re n c e o f having som ething happen to th e in
d iv id u a l and two people coming up a g a in st one a n o th er,
"happen** to one a n o th er. The sum of t h i s cannot be e x a c tly
d iv id e d , th e re is a rem ainder, a p lu s . This i s found in
e v en ts o f la rg e or sm all im port. I t is th a t " a s to n is h in g
73 Loo, c i t .
74 I b i d , , pp. 303-304.
73
and u n re la te d m u tu a lity " which comes from th e g lan ce of
s tra n g e rs caught in id e n tic a l c irc u m sta n c e s. T his cannot
be u n d ersto o d by in tro d u c in g m otives o f f e e lin g , "What
happens h ere cannot be reach ed by p sy c h o lo g ic a l co n c e p ts,
i t i s som ething o n t i c , The e n ta n g lin g o f two men in th e
same liv in g s itu a tio n , re v e a lin g "to one an o th er in mute
c l a r i t y an ir r e c o n c ila b le o p p o sitio n o f b ein g , th e d ia lo g i-
c a l s i tu a tio n can be ad eq u ately g rasped only in an onto
lo g ic a l way. But i t i s not to be grasped in th e o n tic
o f p e rso n a l e x is te n c e , or o f two p e rso n a l e x is te n c e s , but
ra th e r in th a t b ein g betw een them , and tra n sc e n d s b o th .
In th e most pow erful moments o f d ia lo g ic , where
in t r u t h "deep c a l l s unto d eep ", i t becomes unmis
ta k a b ly c le a r th a t i t i s n o t th e wand of th e in d iv id
u a l or o f th e s o c ia l , b u t o f a t h i r d which draws th e
c i r c le round th e happening. On th e f a r s id e o f th e
s u b je c tiv e , on t h i s sid e o f th e o b je c tiv e , on th e
narrow rid g e , where I and Thou m eet, th e re i s th e
realm o f "betw een". 7T
Thus, going beyond in d iv id u a lism and c o lle c tiv is m ,
man i s d ire c te d in becoming a "genuine person ag a in and to
e s ta b lis h genuine community."78 The essence o f man which
i s s p e c ia l to him can only be known in a liv in g r e la ti o n .
75 Loc. P i t .
76 Loc. P i t .
77 Loo. P i t .
78 I b id . . p, 305.
74
In a study o f man, th e s t a r t i n g p o in t must be a co n sid e r
a tio n o f "man w ith man".
I f you c o n sid e r th e in d iv id u a l by h im se lf, th en
you see of man j u s t as much as you see o f th e moon;
only man w ith man p ro v id es a f u l l image. I f you
c o n sid e r th e aggregate by i t s e l f , th e n you see o f
man j u s t as much as we see of th e Milky Way; only
man which is a com pletely o u tlin e d form . C onsider
man w ith man, and you see human l i f e , dynam ic, two
f o ld , th e g iv e r and th e r e c e iv e r , he who does and
he who en d u res, th e a tta c k in g fo rc e and th e defend
in g fo rc e , th e n a tu re which in v e s tig a te s and th e
n a tu re which s u p p lie s in fo rm a tio n , th e re q u e st begged
and g ra n te d — and always b o th to g e th e r, com pleting one
an o th er in m utual c o n trib u tio n , to g e th e r showing
f o r th man.7^
W ow one can tu rn to th e in d iv id u a l and reco g n ize man ac
co rd in g to th e p o s s i b i li t y o f r e l a t i o n which he shows.
One can lo o k a t th e ag g reg ate and see man according to
th e f u lln e s s of r e l a t i o n which he shows, "W e may come
n e a re r th e answer to th e q u e s tio n what man i s when we
come to see him as the e te rn a l m eeting of th e One w ith
th e O th e r,
Buber fin d s much em phasis on t h i s r e la ti o n betw een
in d iv id u a ls in th e h is to r y o f th e H asidic movement.
H asidism re co g n izes th e d is a s te r in th e r e la tio n s h ip be
tween Cod and man. This in ju ry done to r e la tio n s h ip con-
79 Loc. c i t .
80 Loc. c i t .
81 M artin Buber, H asidism . P h il. L ib ra ry , H.Y.
75
tin u e s to in c re a s e . T his e v il must be checked b e fo re i t
becomes in v in c ib le , "The q u e stio n i s no lo n g er th a t o f th e
h e a lin g of th e p eo p le, b u t a q u e stio n o f h e a lin g th e broken
r e la tio n s h ip betw een heaven and e a rth . T his can be done,
Buber c o n tin u es only through "new m ed iatio n and new guid
ance,"® ^ As was seen e a r l i e r , 84 H asidism th e Zaddik be
comes th e man who le a d s th e community in God* s s te a d , and
who m ediates between God and th e community. "These men
m ediated betw een God and man, but a t th e same tim e they in
s i s t e d on th e im portance of th e immediate r e la tio n s h ip to
God, which cannot be re p la c e d by any m ediation."® ®
Bedem otion. Buber p o in ts o u t th a t i t was Spinoza
who " d e c isiv e ly a c c e le ra te d th e tendency of th e w estern
mind to liv e a l i f e o f s o lilo q u y — and w ith th a t he p re
c i p i ta te d th e whole s p i r i t u a l c r is e s ; fo r th e s p i r i t
w ith e rs g lo rio u s ly in th e a i r of th e m onologue."8®
83 I b id . . p. 13.
83 Loc. c i t .
84 Loc. c i t .
85 I b id . , p , 30
86 I b id . . p. 98.
76
Spinoza undertook to d e p riv e God o f b ein g open to human ad
d re s s . Buber su g g ests th a t th e fundam ental m istake Spinoza
made was t h a t he thought I s r a e l ta u g h t God is a p erso n .
However,
The r e a l communion o f man w ith God has n o t only
i t s p la c e in th e w orld, b u t a lso i t s o b je c t. God
speaks to man in th e th in g s and b ein g s which he sends
him in l i f e . Man answers th ro u g h h is d e a lin g s w ith
th e se th in g s and beings.® ?
The h a s id ic w orld i s one ready to uphold "a r e a l a c t of
red em p tio n ," I t is g iv en , imposed and o ffe re d u s . " I t is
th e medium in which God speaks to me and in which He w ills
to re c e iv e h is answer from me,"®®
What about th e w o rld ’ s need f o r redem ption? What
i s c a lle d e v il is not only in man b u t a ls o in th e w orld,
Buber states® ® th a t as man can choose God, so he can a lso
r e je c t God, "That man may f a l l im p lie s th a t he may r i s e ;
th a t man has power to le a d th e w orld to p e r d itio n im p lies
th a t he has power to le a d th e w orld to re d em p tio n ." God
w ills th a t man should choose Him and not f a l l away from
Him. I t must be added th a t God w ills th a t His c r e a tio n
s h a ll not be an end in i t s e l f , b u t a way. He w ants them
to go in th e way in t h e i r own p e r s o n a l it ie s , in t h e i r own
87 I b id . . p. 99,
88 I b id . . p. 103.
89 I b i d . . p. 108.
77
p erso n . I f th e f a l l i s real, th en th e redem ption must be
r e a l and th e man who has th e power to f a l l has th e power to
a c t on th e work of redem ption from out o f h is own s e l f .
Does th a t mean th a t God cannot redeem th e w orld
w ithout man’s h elp ? I t means th a t God w ills not t h a t
he could do th a t. Has God need of man fo r h is work?
He w ills to have need o f man.
God w ills to use man f o r th e com pletion o f His
work o f c r e a t i o n .. .But as i t is God’ s w ill so to use
man, t h i s means th a t th e use o f man f o r t h i s work be
comes an e f f e c tiv e r e a l i t y . In h is to ry as i t a c tu a lly
u n fo ld s i t s e l f b e fo re our eyes we see th a t God w a its
f o r m a n .G O
That th e A ll-m ighty and A ll-know ing God, C reato r and Re
deemer i s a m ystery, not known by man and only b elo n g in g to
H im self, i s agreed by Buber; b u t, he adds, th a t m ystery is
no g r e a te r th an th a t He i s ; and t h i s i s a le s s e r m ystery
th a n th a t h e, Buber (and o th e rs ) i s , " I t would be sen se
l e s s to tr y to measure how g re a t i s man* s p a r t in th e r e
dem ption o f th e w orld. There i s not any p a r t th a t belongs
to man, o r any p a r t th a t belo n g s to God. * * ® 1 I t i s not
p o s s ib le to determ ine how f a r man’s a c tio n reach es and
where God’ s grace b e g in s.
Each moment o f man i s s e t betw een c r e a tio n and r e
dem ption, As c r e a tio n d id not ta k e p la c e once f o r a l l in
th e b eg in n in g , but c o n tin u es throughout tim e, so a ls o r e -
90 I b id . . p . 109.
91 I b id . . p. 110.
78
dem ption does not j u s t ta k e p la c e in th e end of tim e b u t
throughout th e whole of tim e.
As in th e sphere o f c r e a tio n in which God alone
a c ts th e moment does not j u s t come from somewhere,
b u t ta k e s p la c e in i t s own r ig h t and- in i t s e l f , so
i t i s a lso in th e sphere o f redem ption, where God
p e rm its, y ea demands, th a t work o f man s h a ll be en
clo sed in His work, however incom prehensible th e
mode of t h i s e n c lo sin g may be to u s. And so th e
moment o f redem ption is r e a l not only w ith re s p e c t
to p e r fe c t redem ption, b u t a lso in i t s e l f ; th e m om
e n ts of redem ption cannot be added u p ;...e a c h o f them
ta k e s i t s p la c e in th e tim e -s e rie s on th e moving can
vas of th e w o rld ’s h is to r y , and th e re counts in i t s
p la c e , but each o f them a lso b e a rs i t s own testim o n y ,
se a le d up w ith in i t , and d i s t i n c t from th a t o f a l l
th e o th e rs .
The H asidic message of redem ption ro se a g a in st th e
m essianic s e l f - d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n betw een one man and o th e r
men, one a c t and o th e r a c ts , one age and o th er ages. To
a l l of mankind i s given th e power to c o -o p e ra te , sta n d in g
im m ediately fa ce to fa ce w ith redem ption.
But only u nprem editated a c tio n can be a c tio n fo r
God’ s sak e. The s e l f - d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , th e r e f le c tio n
of man on a m essianic p r iv ile g e b elo n g in g to t h i s or
th a t p erso n , to t h i s or th a t h o u r, to th i s or th a t
a c tio n , d e stro y s th e u n p rem ed itated q u a lity of th e
a c t. To tu rn one’ s whole w o r ld - lif e tow ards God and
th en to l e t i t expand in a l l i t s moments even t i l l th e
l a s t , th a t i s man’ s work tow ards redem ption.
W e liv e in an unredeemed w orld. But from every
l i f e o f man th a t has a s s o c ia te d i t s e l f to th e w orld
w ithout a r b itr a r in e s s a seed o f redem ption f a l l s in
i t . And th e h a rv e st i s God’ s.®®
93 I b id . . p. 111.
93 I b id . . p. 116.
79
The e th ic s o f love o f God and lo v e o f one’ s n eig h b o r.
E th ic s wants to know w hether one i s to do good because i t
is o rd ain ed by th e gods, or because i t i s sim ply good to do
so. For e th ic s , th e problem is reduced to one o f heteronosy
o r autonomy. R e lig io n asks w hether one should do good or
whether on e’s concern should be to c a rry out th e command or
o rd e r of God. E th ic s d is tin g u is h e d betw een two m otives fo r
th e same a c t, whereas r e lig io n seeks to d is tin g u is h which of
two a c ts , "fo r th e sake of God", i s th e su p e rio r one. "Man
e ith e r b e lie v e s in a commanding and p o s tu la tin g God, or does
not b e lie v e in such a G od.. , For th e p erso n who does not
b e lie v e , " e th ic s is obviously u n eq u iv o cally r i g h t ; he can
and has to do good j u s t because i t i s good. "® ® E th ic s must
be c r e d ite d in re s p e c t o f th e p o s tu la te o f autonomy.
The problem o f autonomy and heteronom y does not ex
i s t fo r th e man who b e lie v e s in a commanding and p o s tu la tin g
God. But th e re i s th e problem o f knowing th e re v e la tio n
which i s coming to him. Even co n scien ce i s not always an
a ssu rin g agency. "He must seek h e lp : from th e t r a d i ti o n a l
’word of God’ as i t d is c lo s e s i t s e l f to him, in o rd er th a t
th e d iv in e elem ent th e r e in may s t r i k e him in th e soul."®®
94 i b i d .'f p. 160.
95 Loc. P i t .
96 I b id . . p. 163,
80
Buber r e f e r s to a r e lig io u s community to f u r th e r am
p lif y th e r e la t i o n betw een th e e th ic a l and r e lig io u s . Al
though t h i s community i s r e lig io u s ly determ ined as a whole,
th e re i s a d iv id in g lin e between th e r e lig io u s sp h e re , c u lt
and r i t u a l , and th e e th ic a l sp h ere. What b o th o f th e se
have in common i s th a t t h e i r law s and re g u la tio n s are de
r iv e d from d iv in e a u th o rity and are s u b je c t to d iv in e
s a n c tio n . There i s a d e s ir e to fo llo w th e commands of God
as found in th e forms o f s e rv ic e and e x p re ssio n o f r e l i
gious c o n v ic tio n . The people give them selves over to ex
p re s s io n and s a t is f a c ti o n o f t h e i r own r e lig io u s d e s ir e ,
"th e d e s ire fo r p ro x im ity to God and p rep ared n ess f o r Him.
The e th ic a l domain evidences an o th er tendency in a
co rresp o n d in g way. There i s th e command to honour p a re n ts ,
b u t t h i s i s th e very b a s is of l i f e m an ifested . One should
n ot b e a r f a ls e w itn e ss, "but f o r th e h o n est men t r u t h is
n ot m e r e ly ...th e S eal of God,— i t i s th e tr e a s u r e o f h is
own s o u l. "®8 Love to th e neighbor i s commanded, b u t how
can th e re be love which does not s p rin g from th e h e a rt?
Here are evidences o f th e "d iv in e f i r e , r a d ia tin g in in
f i n i t e rem oteness and m ajesty over man."®® Here th e
97 I b i d ., p . 163.
98 Loc. c i t .
99 I b id . . p. 164.
81
r e lig io u s p r in c ip le has embodied th e e t h ic a l w ith o u t en
cro ach in g upon i t s power. T his embodiment o f th e two i s
n o t th e h ig h e s t le v e l. Whereas they both have a common
r e la ti o n to God’ s command, they axe s t i l l s e p a ra te d from
one an o th er in th e r e lig io u s community.
But th e d i s t in c ti o n betw een th e e th ic a l and th e
r e lig io u s elem ents does not hold a f t e r an in n e r c r i s i s
has been underm ining th e fo u n d a tio n s— th e very c e r t i
tude th a t i t i s th e W ill o f God th a t men l i v e th u s and
not d if f e r e n t l y — and a f te r a movement has been promoted .
in th e community w ith th e o b je c t o f overcoming th i s
c r i s i s and of r e - e s ta b lis h in g a c le a r and d i s t i n c t form
o f l i f e " in th e p resen ce o f God." For th e purpose of
t h i s movement, th e e th ic a l p r a c tic e s m ust, by v ir tu e
o f t h e i r essence and e f f e c t , become r e lig io u s p r a c tic e s ,
conseq u en tly n o t j u s t a p p e rta in in g to r e lig io n as hav
in g been commanded by God, b u t an in s e p a ra b le in g re d ie n t
o f i t s germ inal su b stan ce as such, an in g re d ie n t not
le s s im portant th a n th e rest.l® ®
The e th ic a l elem ent th en i s no lo n g e r betw een men b u t i t i s
a m a tte r betw een man and God as i s th e r e lig io u s elem en t.
The is o la te d r e lig io u s elem ent and th e is o la te d e th ic a l
elem ents have dw indled away. "You cannot tr u ly lo v e God i f
you do n o t lo v e your fe llo w man, and you cannot lo v e your
fe llo w man i f you do not lo v e God. "101 To have e s s e n tia l
in te rc o u rs e w ith God only i s im p o ssib le. This can only come
when th e re i s a lso e s s e n tia l in te rc o u rs e w ith men.
An immediate r e l a t i o n to God which does n o t embody
100 Loo, c i t .
101 I b id . , p. 165.
82
an immediate r e l a ti o n to th e w orld ie s e lf- d e c e p tio n
i f not d ec ep tio n ; i f you tu rn away from th e w orld in
o rd er to tu rn to God, th e n you are not c o n c e n tra tin g
on th e r e a l i t y o f God b u t m erely on your own id e a o f
Him. The re lig io u s elem ent in is o la tio n is not r e a lly
th e r e lig io u s elem en t.10®
To m a in ta in an em otional r e la tio n s h ip w ith God w ith o u t p e r
c e iv in g th e liv in g w orld around him and re c o g n iz in g th e l i f e
in i t , i s to rob th e w orld o f th a t which belongs to i t and
which is in i t . "W hatever i s is o la te d is c o n fu sin g . Whole
ness alone i s r e li a b le and le a d s man to s a l v a t i o n ."103
A Zaddik once ex p lain ed to h is p u p i l :
"In th e P rayer Book i t i s s a id , b e fo re you say
your p ra y e rs , you have to r e c i t e th e v e r s e : ’Love thy
neighbour as y o u r s e l f .* The r e a l love o f God should
b e g in w ith th e love of men. And i f someone should
t e l l you th a t he has lo v e o f God b u t has no lo v e o f
men, th e n know th a t he i s ly in g . "104
Love fo r God comes by way o f e x p e rie n c in g love f o r men,
though lo v e fo r men i s p e rfe c te d th ro u g h love f o r God. Re
fe re n c e i s made^^® to th e s c r ip tu r e where love to God i s
commanded and a lso to th e so jo u rn e r because he i s a lso
loved by God. "For each of th e two k in d s o f lo v e , in i t s
s t a t e o f t r u t h , re q u ire s th e o th e r f o r th e sake o f i t s
w holeness and s tim u la te s th e o t h e r ."106
103 Ib id . . o . 167.
103 I b i d .. p. 168,
104 Loc. c i t .
105 I b i d . . D. 105.
106 Loc. c i t .
83
The h ig h -s tru n g p o s tu la te o f id e n t if ic a ti o n i s en
t i r e l y re c o n c ila b le , in H asidism , w ith th e in s ig h t in
to th e s p e c ia l c h a ra c te r o f th e r e la t i o n o f every man
to h im s e lf, but even th e p ro b le m a tic s p e c u lia r to t h i s
r e la tio n s h ip i s c le a r ly re c o g n iz e d . I t is ju s t o u t of
t h i s p ro b lem atics th a t new a s p e c ts o f th e commandment
of lo v e are g a in e d . 107
Buber th e n c i t e s two say in g s where one i s commanded to lo v e
o n e’ s neighbour as one’ s s e l f . A fter you r e c a ll your many
shortcom ings and th e f a c t th a t you are s t i l l love y o u rs e lf ,
th en even so must you lo v e your neighbour in s p ite o f a l l
h is shortcom ings. But what about th e man who does n o t even
lo v e h im self? He has to p r a c tic e rep en tan ce u n t i l he can
b e a r th e s ig h t o f h im self ag a in . So must he a lso do w ith
th e neig h b o u rs.
Thus i t i s seen th a t such a lo v e - f a c to r w ill b eg in
to p e n e trâ te from th e r e la tio n s h ip betw een man and man to
th e r e la tio n s h ip w ith th e community. Whatever i s accom plish
ed in th e in d iv id u a l w ill be accom plished in th e coherence
o f th e Whole.
Buber le a rn s from H asid ic l i t e r a t u r e th e p r a c tic e o f
"lo v in g m ore". This is ex e m p lified by th e f a th e r who was
o rd ered to lo v e h is son, who had f a l l e n among th e d is b e lie v
e r s , more th a n he had h ith e r to . Out o f t h i s s u rp lu s o f lo v e
came th e in flu e n c e which brought th e young man back to th e
community. "The f e e lin g o f b ein g cramped in th e human
107 I b id . . p . 1 7 4 .
84
w orld i s d e riv e d from inadeq u ate lo v e . "108
Everyone has p e c u li a r i t i e s or p a r t i c l e s which d i f
f e r e n t ia t e from one an o th e r. There are th in g s which are
f o r th e in d iv id u a l to do and n o t someone e ls e . Each must
liv e h is own l i f e in r e la ti o n to th e n e x t. Thus "th e man
who w ishes to tre a d in th e p ath o f God must n o t tu rn relar-
ti v e d iffe re n c e s in to a b so lu te o n e s."109
What we must beware of i s t h i s p e r s is te n t d isc rim
in a tio n betw een o u rse lv e s and our neighbour, th e con
c e it o f d is c rim in a tio n , th e d e c e p tio n o f d isc rim in a
tio n — in d eed , t h i s e n ti r e triu m p h al w orld of i llu s io n ,
based upon a s e l f - s a t is f y i n g d is c rim in a tio n . N othing
d is tu rb s th e u n ity of God’ s work, th e f o r e ta s te o f
E te rn ity , as much as t h i s o v erb earin g d is c rim in a tio n
betw een m yself and my neighbour, as i f indeed I ex
c e lle d in one way o r an o th er above somebody e ls e .H O
Thus i t i s seen ag ain th a t Buber s tr e s s e s th e r e la ti o n be
tween man and man as th e im portant f a c to r in d eterm ining
what man i s .
108 I b id . . p. 177.
109 I b id . , p. 179.
110 I b id . . pp. 181-183.
CHAPTER T I
PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATIONS
I t i s purposed to give s p e c if ic in s ta n c e s of
m a te ria l or happenings w ith in th e framework of Judaism as
i l l u s t r a t i v e o f B uber’ s concept o f "between" in t h i s chap
t e r . The bulk o f th e re fe re n c e s axe tak en from h is work
I s r a e l and th e Wprld^ o f which he s t a t e s in th e preface®
" is a d is c u s s io n o f th e encounter betw een th e h is to r ic
s p i r i t of I s r a e l and a w orld which re g a rd s i t as fo re ig n ,
incom prehensible, or i r r e l e v a n t . " Dogma rem ains o f second
ary im portance in Judaism . I t a r is e s only where "detach
ment i s th e p re v a ilin g a ttitu d e to th e c o n c re te . For
Judaism a p l u r a l i t y o f p r in c ip le s cannot a r is e , Buber
a s s e r ts , because " I s r a e l ’s ex p erien ce of the Thou in th e
d ir e c t r e la tio n s h ip , th e p u rely s ig n u la r ex p e rien ce, i s so
overwhelm ingly s tr o n g ."4 Buber f e e ls th a t th e "conception
and ex p erien ce o f th e d ia lo g io a l s itu a tio n " i s n o t co n fin ed
to Judaism , b u t he is c e r ta in th a t "no o th e r community o f
1 M artin Buber, I s r a e l and th e W orld. E ssays in a
tim e o f C r is is , New York: Shocken Books, 1948,
3 I b id . . p . 6.
3 I b id . , p. 14.
4 I b id . . pp. 14-15.
8 6
human b ein g s has e n te re d w ith such s tre n g th and fe rv o r in to
t h i s ex p erien ce as have th e Jews,"®
The two fo c i o f th e Jew ish s o u l. Buber se e s th e
so u l of Judaism tu rn in g e l l i p t i c a lly around two c e n te rs .
The one is th e ex p erien ce th a t "God i s w holly r a is e d above
m an,. . . and y e t th a t he i s p re se n t in an im mediate r e la tio n
sh ip w ith th e se human b ein g s who are a b s o lu te ly incommen
su ra b le w ith him, and th a t he fa c e s them. To know both
o f th e se th in g s so t h a t th ey are in se p a ra b le " c o n s titu te s
th e liv in g core o f every b e lie v in g Jew ish so u l. For him
i t i s th e knowing o f "God in Heaven" and man "on e a rth " ;
"God in th e p e r fe c tio n and in c o m p re h e n sib ility o f h is b ein g ,
and man in th e abysmal c o n tra d ic tio n of t h i s s tra n g e e x is t
ence from b i r t h to d e a th — and betw een b o th , immediacy !
Although God f o r him is incom prehensible, he can be known
through th e bond of r e la tio n s h ip , "In t h i s d ialo g u e God
speaks to every man th rough th e l i f e which he g iv e s him
ag ain and ag ain . T h erefo re man can only answer God w ith
5 I b id . . p . 16.
6 I b id . . p. 30.
7 Loc. c i t .
8 I b i d . . p. 31.
87
th e whole o f lif e ." ® Every a re a o f l i f e must be hallow ed
and g iv en over to God. There must be a s a c r a liz a tio n o f
th e n a tu r a l l i f e and a sa o ra m e n ta liz a tio n of th e com pletely
su rre n d e re d l i f e .
"The second focus o f th e Jew ish so u l i s th e b a s ic
co n scio u sn ess th a t God’s redeem ing power i s at work every
where and a t a l l tim e s, b u t th a t a s t a te of redem ption ex
i s t s nowhere and n ev er. "10 There i s an aw areness and ex
p e rie n c in g o f th e w orld’ s la c k o f redem ption. And y e t he
knows th a t "th e re can be no e te r n ity in which e v e ry th in g
w ill not be accepted in to God’s atonem ent, when God has
drawn tim e back in to e te r n it y . " H
The d iffe re n c e betw een th e a p o c a ly p tis ts who wished
to p re d ic t u n a lte ra b le ev en ts in th e fu tu re and th e p ro p h ets
o f I s r a e l i s m entioned. U nlike th e u n a lte ra b le ev en ts o f
p re d ic tio n , the p ro p h e ts o f I s r a e l "prophecy ’f o r th e sake
o f th o se who tu rn . ’ " They do n o t warn a g a in st th a t which
w ill happen in any c a se , b u t they warn about th a t which
w ill happen to th o se c a lle d upon to tu r n and don’t . "Those
who tu r n c o -o p e ra te in th e redem ption of th e w orld. "1®
9 I b id . . p. 33.
10 I b i d ., p. 34.
11 I b id . . p. 35.
13 I b id . . p. 37,
88
Again i t i s re p e a te d -
"Does th a t mean th a t God cannot redeem h is w orld
w ithout th e h elp of h is c re a tu re s ? I t means th a t God
does n o t w ill to he ab le to do i t . Has God need o f
man f o r h is work? He w ills to have need of man. "1®
a p le a f o r th e r e lig io u s re s p e c t fo r th e tru e
f a i t h of one a n o th er, which is th e r e a l r e la tio n s h ip in
which b o th s ta n d to th e t r u t h , Buber su g g ests th a t when b o th
O h ria tia n and Jew "care more fo r God h im se lf th an f o r our
images o f God, we are u n ite d in th e f e e lin g th a t our
F a th e r’ s house is d if f e r e n tly c o n s tru c te d than our human
models ta k e i t to be. "14
The Love o f God and th e Id e a o f D e ity . Buber in tr o
duces th e pages here w ith th e s c r ib b lin g o f P ascal when
under th e heading F ire he w rote "God of Abraham, God of
Is a a c , God o f Jacob—n ot o f th e p h ilo so p h e rs and s c h o la rs . "1®
I t was b ec au se, f o r P a s c a l, "th e e n tir e r e lig io n o f th e Jews
n A
c o n s is te d only o f th e lo v e o f God", th a t t h i s o u tlo o k could
no t be in tro d u ced in to a system o f th o u g h t. I t is not
p o s s ib le to lo v e m erely id e a s .
13 Loc. c i t .
14 I b id . , p. 40.
15 I b id . , p. 57.
16 Loo. P i t .
89
Only i f and because I love t h i s o r th a t s p e c if ic
man can I e le v a te m y r e la ti o n to th e s o c ia l id e a o f
man in to th a t em otional r e la tio n s h ip in v o lv in g m y
whole b e in g which I am e n t i t l e d to c a l l by th e name
o f lo v e .17
Speaking o f th e paradox th a t man must lo v e , Buber
c a ll s a tte n tio n to th e B ible and draws a tte n tio n to th e
f a c t t h a t:
The B ible does not d ir e c tly e n jo in th e love o f
man, b u t by u sin g th e d a tiv e p u ts i t r a th e r in th e
form o f an a c t o f love (Lev. 1 9 :1 8 , 34). I must act
lo v in g ly tow ard m y r e a , m y "companion" (u s u a lly tr a n s
la te d "my neighbor"T 7~ that i s , tow ard every man w ith
whom I d e a l in th e co u rse o f m y l i f e , in c lu d in g th e
g e r , th e " s tra n g e r" o r " so jo u rn e r" ; I must bestow the
fa v o rs of love on him, I must t r e a t him w ith lo v e as
one who i s " lik e u n to me." (I must love "to him"; a
c o n s tru c tio n only found in th e se two v e rse s in th e
B ib le .) I must lo v e him n a tu r a lly , not m erely w ith
s u p e r f ic ia l g e s tu re s but w ith an e s s e n tia l r e la tio n
sh ip . I t l i e s w ith in m y power to w ill i t , and so I
can accep t th e commandment. I t i s n o t m y w ill which
g iv e s me th e em otion of lo v e tow ard m y "neighbor"—
i t i s m y b eh av io r which aro u ses lo v e w ith in me.^®
The Jew ish id e a o f God can only be ach iev ed by p lu n g in g
in to th e p h rase by which God id e n ti f i e d h im self to Moses,
which Buber re n d e rs "I s h a ll be t h e r e , "1® f o r th e u su a l
re n d e rin g "I am th a t I am." What i s im portant h ere i s th e
exact e x p re ssio n o f th e p e rso n a l "e x iste n c e " of God, not
I f I b id . . p. 61.
18 I b id . , p . 60,
19 I b id . . p. 64.
90
h is d e t r a c t "b ein g ". Here th e re i s a m a n ife s ta tio n , not
an a b s tr a c tio n .
Im ita tio D ei. The C h ris tia n i s ex h o rted to im ita te
God and he does t h i s by fo llo w in g C h ris t. He does not
im ita te God d i r e c tl y ; he im ita te s a l i f e - h i s t o r y , The
q u e stio n i s ra is e d as to how f a r such an im ita tio n of a
human l i f e can be s a id to be an im ita tio n o f God. The
church answers t h is w ith th e dogma o f th e In c a rn a tio n .
Thus, th e im ita tio n i s made e a s ie r by in term ed iary lin k s .
T his i s n o t enough fo r th e Jew. "W e need only tr a n s f e r
o u rse lv e s frommsdiacy to immediacy, from th e im ita tio n of
Je su s to h is im ita tio n o f our F a th e r, and we are stan d in g
on Jew ish soil."® ®
Here i s th e real^ paradox of Judaism - th e im ita tio n
of God, n o t a m ediator in human form. "How should man be
ab le to im ita te God, th e in v is ib le , in co m p reh en sib le, un
form ed, not-to-be-form ed?"® ^ This cannot s p rin g from memory
or im ag in atio n . The answer is given in th e Jew ish te a c h in g
th a t th e in d iv id u a l is d e s tin e d to be li k e Him, Buber c a ll s
a tte n tio n to th e c r e a tiv e statem en t where God s a id , "Let
20 I b id . , p. 71.
21 Loo, c i t .
91
u s make man In our own im age, a f t e r our lik e n e s s ." N otice
th e om ission in th e act of c r e a tio n when i t is s a id th a t
"God c re a te d man in His own image" and makes no m ention o f
th e " lik e n e s s " . This i s ex p la in e d as "the image" bein g th e
hand o f God; "the lik e n e s s " l i e s in th e hand o f man. "The
’lik en ess* is th e p ro c ess o f becoming l i k e . «8® What does
t h i s p ro c e ss e n ta il? I t i s to cleav e to h is ways, to walk
in h is ways. These in clu d e H is a t t r i b u t e s such as b ein g
"m e rc ifu l, g ra c io u s, lo n g -s u ffe rin g , abundant in lo v in g
k in d n ess and f a it h f u l l n e s s .
But where are th e re v e a le d ways of God’s working
re v ealed ?
J u s t a t th e b eg in n in g o f th e wandering through
th e d e s e r t; j u s t a t th e h e ig h t o f Jo b ’s t r i a l ; ju s t
in th e m idst of th e t e r r o r o f th e o th e r, th e inoomr-
p re h e n s ib le , u n u n d erstan d ab le works; ju s t from out
o f th e s e c r e t, God does n o t show mercy and grace
alone to u s; i t i s t e r r i b l e when h is hand f a l l s on
u s , and what th en happens to us does n o t somehow
fin d a p la c e b e sid e mercy and g ra c e , i t does not
belong to th e same c a te g o ry as th e s e ; th e u ltim a te
does not belong here to th e a t t r i b u t e of rig h te o u s
n ess— i t i s beyond a l l a t t r i b u t e s . I t is indeed
th e s e c r e t, and i t i s not f o r us to en q u ire in to
i t . But ju s t in t h i s q u a lity o f God’ s is h is
"handiwork" m an ifested to u s . Only when th e s e c r e t
no lo n g e r stan d s over our t e n t , b u t b reaks i t , do
we le a r n to know God’ s in te rc o u rs e w ith u s. And we
le a r n to im ita te God.®4
33 I b id . . p. 73.
33 I b id . . pp. 75-76.
34 I b id . . pp. 76-77.
93
What are we to do about th e te n commandments?
R eplying to a c ir c u la r q u e stio n on what to do w ith th e te n
commandments, Buher s t a te s th a t the h i s t o r i c a l and p re se n t
s ta tu s of th e D ecalogue, in h is o p in io n , d e riv e s from a
tw ofold f a c t .
1) The Ten Commandments are n o t p a r t o f an im
p e rso n a l codex governing an a s s o c ia tio n o f men. They
were u tte r e d by an % and addressed to a Thou. They
b eg in w ith th e 1 and every one o f them ad d resses th e
Thou in p erso n . An 1 "commands" and a Thou — every
Thou who h ea rs t h i s Thou— " is commanded."
3) In the d ecalogue, th e word o f Him who is s u e s
commands i s equipped w ith no e x e c u tiv e power e f f e c tiv e
on th e p lan e o f p re d ic ta b le c a u s a lity . The word does
not en fo rce i t s own h e a r in g ,,,® 5
He who had s u f f ic ie n t power to c r e a te th e heavens and th e
e a rth has renounced h is power s u f f i c ie n tl y to allow fo r p e r
sonal d e c is io n re g a rd in g th e D ecalogue. He does not fo rc e
a keeping o f i t nor does he s tr ik e dead th o se who break i t .
Human s o c ie ty as a liv in g community has always had an in te r
e s t in keeping th e Ten Commandments. I t i s u n d erstan d ab le
th a t i t has not d e s ire d to depend upon th e in d iv id u a l’ is in
c lin a tio n to h e a r o r not to h ear and obey th e se p ro h ib itio n s .
Thus s o c ie ty has moved th e s e elem ents from th e realm o f
" re lig io n " to th a t o f "m o ra ls." The commandments have been
p laced in th e a re a o f " z m sts." But th e v a s t m achinery o f
25 I b i d . . p . 8 5 .
93
s o c ie ty has n o th in g to do w ith th e s i t u a t io n which p re v a ils
betw een th e a ll-p o w e rfu l Speaker and him who i s spoken to ,
and i t has n o th in g to do w ith th e d a rin g c a ta s tr o p h ic ,
redeem ing s i tu a t io n o f f a i t h . But i f so c ie ty were to
have th e te m e rity to p re te n d th a t i t s v o ic e le s s m orals
and i t s fa c e le s s law a re r e a l ly th e Word— ad apted to
th e tim es and e x tr ic a te d from th e husk o f s u p e r s titio n s
and outmoded id e a s— some th in g would ta k e p la c e which
has not y e t happened in th e h is to ry o f mankind. And
then i t would, p erh ap s, be too l a t e fo r s o c ie ty to
d isc o v e r th a t th e re i s One who r e j e c t s j a i l e r s and
hangmen as e x e c u to rs o f h is will,®®
What should be done w ith th e te n commandments is to le a d
up to them - not to th e s c r o l l or th e sto n e t a b l e t s , but to
th e Spoken Word. This i s an a tt i tu d e o f t r u s t and f a i t h ,
a r e la tio n s h ip to God.
B ib lic a l L ea d ersh ip . For Buber, th e B ib le does not
concern i t s e l f p rim a rily w ith c h a ra c te rs o r in d iv id u a ls . I t
does n o t concern i t s e l f w ith the d iffe re n c e betw een p erso n s.
I t i s in te r e s te d in p erso n s in s itu a tio n s and th e d iffe re n c e s
o f th e se s itu a tio n s in which th e ap p o in ted p erso n stan d s h is
t e s t o r f a i l s .
Buber c i te s le a d e rs o f o r ig in a tio n r a th e r th an le a d e rs
o f su c c e ssio n , by th a t he means th o se who are b eg in n ers in
s itu a tio n s - as Moses, r a th e r th a n Jo sh u a. I t is "a g a in st
n a tu re " th a t th e se le a d e rs work, and they are in one way o r
26 I b id . . p. 88.
94
an o th er m ostly th e weak and th e humble. "The B ib le knows
n o th in g o f t h i s i n t r i n s i c v alu e o f s u c c e s s .. .when i t an
nounces a s u c c e ssfu l deed, i t i s duty bound to announce in
com plete d e t a i l th e f a il u r e involved in th e success."® ? I t
i s f o r th e le a d e r to f i g h t , not to conquer; th ey l i v e in
f a i l u r e ,
Buber c i t e s f iv e k in d s o f B ib lic a l le a d e rs h ip , ac
co rd in g to su c c e ssiv e s i tu a t io n s . The P a tria rc h i s r e a lly
not th e r u le r , he is th e f a th e r , from home t h i s t r i b e , t h is
people proceeds "and when God speaks to them, when God
b le s s e s them, the same th in g i s always in v o lv ed : co n cep tio n
and b i r t h , th e b eg in n in g of a p eo p le. The Leader i s "he
who se rv e s in a human way as a to o l f o r th e a c t which God
pronounces, *I b o re you on eagles* w ings, and b rought you
u n to myself* God h im se lf i s chosen as King and th e people
go "c o n tra ry to h is to ry " and tr y to b u ild up a s o c ie ty w ith
out a ru lin g power save th a t o f God. Anarchy s e ts in and
th e n ex t le a d e r is th a t o f Judge - who is th e in stru m en t used
to re tu r n th e people to God out o f c a p tiv ity - o u t o f t h e ir
co n tin u ed f a l l i n g away. He attem p ts to b rin g th e people to
accept God* s dominion and to be su b je c t to His w i ll . The
King - th e b eg in n er o f a dynasty - b rin g s the fo cu s o f
37 I b id . . p . 135.
95
f a il u r e away from th e people as does th e Judge and fin d s i t
d ire c te d to h im se lf. L a s t, th e P rophet i s ap p o in ted to op
pose th e King and h is to r y . He i s co n sid e re d th e enemy of
th e people as w e ll. He s e ts h im self up a g a in st h is own
n a tu ra l i n s t i n c t s and h in d s h im self to th e community. In
th e se th e re i s ag ain seen th e b e a rin g o f r e la tio n s h ip .
The b i b l ic a l q u e stio n of le a d e rs h ip is concerned
w ith som ething g r e a te r th an m oral p e r fe c tio n . The
b i b l i c a l le a d e rs are the foreshadow ings o f th e d ia -
lo g ic a l man, o f th e man who commits how whole b ein g
to God’s d ialo g u e w ith th e \fo rld , and who sta n d s firm
throughout t h i s d ia lo g u e . The l i f e o f th o se people
to whom I have r e f e r r e d i s absorbed in t h i s d ia lo g u e ,
w hether th e d ialo g u e comes about through an i n t e r
v e n tio n , as in Abraham’s ta lk w ith God about Sodom,
or Moses* a f te r th e s in o f th e golden c a lf ; o r whether
i t comes about through a re s is ta n c e they o f f e r a g a in st
th a t which comes upon them and t r i e s to overpower them;
b u t t h e i r r e s is ta n c e ends in sub m issio n , which we fin d
documented from Moses to Jerem iah; o r w hether th e d ia
logue comes about through th e s tru g g le f o r a purpose
and a ta s k , as we know from th a t d ia lo g u e which took
p la c e betw een David and God; w hatever th e way, man
e n te rs in to th e d ialo g u e ag ain and ag a in ; im p erfect
e n try , b u t y e t one which is not re fu s e d , an e n try
which is determ ined to p e rse v e re in th e d ia lo g ic a l
w orld. A ll th a t happens is here ex p erien ced as d i a
lo g u e, what b e f a l ls man is tak en as a sig n , what man
t r i e s to do and what m is c a rrie s i s tak en as an attem pt
and a f a il u r e to answ er, as a stam m ering attem p t to
respond as w ell as one oan.®8
The power o f th e s p i r i t . " S p ir it" i s not som ething
th a t is a l a t e bloom on th e t r e e of Man, Buber states,® ®
38 I b id . . pp. 131-133,
39 I b id . . p . 175.
96
S p ir it i s not one human fa c u lty among o th e rs . I t i s th e
t o t a l i t y o f man which has become co n scio u sn ess and "com
p r is e s and in te g r a te s a l l h is c a p a c itie s , powers, q u a l i t i e s ,
and u rg e s. When a man th in k s , he th in k s w ith h is e n tir e
body; s p i r i t u a l man th in k s even w ith h is f i n g e r ti p s .
In th e domain o f th e human s o u l, s p i r i t appears as f a it h f u l
courage and f a i t h f u l lo v e. Judaism is a " r e a lity sy stem ,"
and " r e a lity " i s d e fin e d as fo llo w s:
The term " r e a lity " i s h ere used to d e sig n a te th a t
b a s ic u n ity of a g re a t community which r e la t e s a l l
th e f i e l d s of s o c ia l, fa m ily , and p e rso n a l l i f e , o f
p o l i t i c s , econom ics, and c u ltu r e , to a s in g le under
ly in g p r in c ip le which cannot be d e riv e d from any one
o f th e se f i e l d s , b u t which perm eates and g iv es mean
ing to them a l l . 31
I t i s th e s p i r i t which hallows th e w orld, a bond betw een the
community o f man and i t s o r ig in . The "Jew ish s p i r i t is
som ething which tim e and ag ain w e lls up, strea m s, pours i t
s e l f o u t, and s e t t l e s ; in s h o rt, man’s bond w ith God which
i s always ta k in g p la c e . "33 The " r e a li ty system " o f th e
Jews hallow s th e elem en tal fo rc e s and u rg e s. The body,
so u l, hunger, sex - a l l axe g l o r i f i e d , hallow ed and tr a n s
form ed. "H allow ing tran sfo rm s the u rg es by c o n fro n tin g
30 Loo, c i t .
31 I b i d . , p . 180.
33 Loc. c i t .
97
them w ith h o lin e s s and making them re sn o n sib le tow ard what
i s h o ly ."33 S p i r i t i s n o t a segment of man, but h is t o t a l
i t y . This s p i r i t in r e la t i o n to the h o lin e s s o f God m ist
be th e only ru le in lif e * "In h allo w in g , th e t o t a l man is
ac cep ted , confirm ed, and f u lf ille d * This i s th e tr u e in
te g r a tio n o f man.
N atio n alism and Hebrew Humanism. A N atio n i s pro
duced when " i t s ac q u ired s ta tu s undergoes a d e c is iv e in n er
change which is accep ted as such in th e p e o p le ’ s s e lf-c o n
sc io u sn e ss, "33 soys Buber, an aw areness of i t s e x is te n c e
d if f e r in g from th a t of o th e r p eo p les. Next may come
n a tio n a lism .
At c e r ta in moments in n a tio n a l l i f e a new pheno
menon makes i t s appearance. W e c a l l i t n a tio n a lism .
I t s fu n c tio n i s to in d ic a te d is e a s e . B odily organs
do not draw a tte n tio n to them selves u n t i l th ey are
a tta c k e d by d is e a s e . S im ila rly , n a tio n a lism is a t
bottom th e aw areness o f some la c k , some d is e a s e or
a ilm e n t. . . What we term n a tio n a lism i s t h e i r s p i r i t u ^
r e a c tio n to i t . . . A people is a phenomenon o f l i f e , a
n a tio n one of aw areness, n a tio n a lism one o f overem
p h asize d aw aren ess.36
There can be two p o s s ib le consequences of a n a tio n
a l i s t developm ent. E ith e r a h e a lth y r e a c tio n w ill s e t in
33 I b id . . p. 181.
34 I b id . . p. 182.
35 I b id . . p . 318.
36 I b id . . pp. 318-319.
98
which w ill overcome th e danger h e ra ld e d by n a tio n a lis m and
th u s i t s e l f , or n a tio n a lism w ill exceed i t s fu n c tio n and
e s ta b lis h i t s e l f perm anently. So lo n g as a n a tio n c o n sid e rs
i t s e l f as an end in i t s e l f , so lo n g w ill i t grow s t e r i l e .
Buber g iv es a d e ta ile d p arag rap h on what the norm al n a tio n
w ill have f o r i t s o u tlo o k - a m eeting o f r e s p o n s ib ility
fa c e to fa c e .
For him to whom p eo p les are elem ents, th ey are
th e b a s ic su b stan ces which go to b u ild mankind, and
th e only means to b u ild up a more homogeneous mankind,
w ith more form and more meaning. But such elem ents
cannot be compared to chem ical elem ents which can
e n te r in to s o lu tio n and be s e p a ra te d out a g a in .
S p ir itu a l elem ents must m a in tain them selves because
they are th re a te n e d w ith th e lo s s of th em selv es. But
j u s t because they are elem en ts, they are not p re se rv e d
f o r t h e i r own sak e, b u t to be put to u se . A people
f u lly aware o f i t s own c h a ra c te r re g ard s i t s e l f as
an elem ent w ithout com paring i t s e l f to o th e r elem ents.
I t does not f e e l s u p e rio r to o th e r s , but c o n sid e rs i t s
ta s k incom parably su b lim e, n o t because t h i s ta s k i s
g re a te r th an a n o th e r, b u t because i t is c r e a tio n and
a m issio n . There i s no s c a le of v alu es fo r th e func
t io n of p e o p le s. One cannot be ranked above a n o th er.
God wants to use what he c re a te d , as an a id in h is
work. In an hour of c r i s i s , tru e n a tio n a lism ex
p re s s e s th e tru e s e lf-a w a re n e ss o f a people and
t r a n s l a t e s i t in to a c ti o n .37
The n a tio n a lism o f Judaism i s not an a r b itr a r y b u t
r a th e r a le g itim a te c r i s i s . The community i n P a le s tin e
tow ards which Jew ish n a tio n a lis m must lo g ic a lly s t r i v e ,
" is a s t a ti o n in t h i s h e a lin g p r o c e s s , "38 ^he n a tio n a lism
37 I b id . . p. 221,
38 I b id . . p . 223.
99
o f Judaism , though c o rru p te d "w ith" slo g an s and p a ro le s o f
a n a tio n a lis m th a t has n o th in g to do w ith th e c a te g o ry o f
f a i t h , is a le g itim a te d e s ire to re g a in i t s n a tu r a l holy
l i f e .
Buber c a l l s f o r Hebrew Humanism in o p p o sitio n to
th a t Jew ish n a tio n a lism which re g a rd s i t s e l f as a n a tio n
l i k e u n to o th e r n a tio n s , re c o g n iz in g no o th e r ta s k th an
th a t o f p re se rv in g and a s s e r tin g i t s e l f . He f e e l s th a t
th e Z io n ist movement must decide e it h e r fo r n a tio n a l ego
ism, which i s n a tio n a lism d is e a s e d , o r f o r n a tio n a l human
ism. The n a tio n a lism not s e t t i n g th e n a tio n a s u p e rn a tu ra l
ta s k w ill p ass in to m eaningless e x is te n c e .
Hebrew humanism means th e r e tu r n to th e l i n g u i s t i c
t r a d i t i o n of our own c l a s s i c a l a n tiq u ity , th e r e tu r n
to th e B ib le ; in th e second p la c e , i t means re c e p tio n
of th e B ib le , not because of i t s l i t e r a r y , h i s t o r i c a l ,
and n a tio n a l v a lu e s, im portant though th e se may b e ,
b u t because o f th e norm ative v alu e of th e human p a t
te r n s dem onstrated in th e B ib le ; t h i r d l y , d is tin g u is h
ing betw een what i s c o n d itio n e d by th e tim es and what
i s tim e le s s , in o rd er to make th a t re c e p tio n achieve
i t s p u rp o se; and f o u rth ly , s e t t i n g th e liv in g human
p a tte r s n th u s o b ta in e d b e fo re th e eyes of our tim e
w ith i t s s p e c ia l c o n d itio n s , ta s k s , and p o s s i b i l i t i e s ,
f o r only in term s o f s p e c ia l c o n d itio n s can we tr a n s
l a t e th e co n ten t we have re c e iv e d in to r e a l i t y , 39
Buber p o in ts out th a t w hether th e Jew ish people f e e l chosen
or not does not a l t e r th e a c tu a lly unique r o le th ey are
p la y in g in h is to r y . T heir God i s not one whom th e people
39 I b id . . p. 344,
100
have "c re a te d i n t h e i r own image, as t h e i r su b lim a tio n ," ^ ^
b u t one who c o n fro n ts th e people and opposes them. He
makes demands o f them and judges them. He demands " tru th "
and "rig h te o u sn e ss" and ex p ects t h i s n o t from is o la te d
sp h eres but from th e whole of l i f e . He wants th e people
to be "w holehearted" w ith him. B ib lic a l man does not p re
ten d to be what he i s n 't . He v io la te s and re p e n ts ; fends
o ff and su rre n d e rs ; and he ac cep ts and r e j e c t s .
C la s s ic a l b i b l ic a l man absorbs t h i s demand f o r r ig h t
eousness so w holly w ith h is f le s h and b lo o d , t h a t ,
from Abraham to Job, he d ares to rem ind God o f i t .
And God, who knows th a t human mind and s p i r i t cannot
grasp th e ways o f h is j u s t i c e , ta k e s d e lig h t in th e
man who c a l l s him to account, because th a t man has
absorbed th e demand fo r rig h te o u sn e ss w ith h is very
f le s h and blo o d . He c a l l s Job h is se rv a n t and
Abraham h is b elo v ed . He tem pted b o th ; both c a lle d
him in to account, and b o th r e s i s t e d te m p ta tio n .
That is Hebrew h u m a n i t y ,41
I f th e Z io n is t, Buber c o n tin u e s, wants m erely a
norm alcy, he s h a ll soon cease to e x i s t . The s a lv a tio n fo r
th e Jew is to become I s r a e l ag ain , "to become a whole, th e
unique whole of a people and a r e lig io u s community; a r e
newed p eo p le, a renewed r e lig io n , and th e renewed u n ity of
b o th .
40 I b id . . p . 250.
41 I b id . . p. 251.
42 I b id , , p. 353.
CHAPTER VII
S U M M A R Y A N D CONCLUSIONS
Summary. A study o f M artin Buber was found to be
co n fro n ted w ith a tw o -fo ld d i f f i c u l t y . The f i r s t was th a t
o f tr a n s la tin g and p a ra p h ra sin g . I t i s d i f f i c u l t to p ara
p h rase him and say " th is is r e a lly what he m eans." The
d ialo g u e of l i f e , w ith which Buber in t e r e s t s h im se lf and
h is re a d e r, i s th e e x p re ssio n of th e Jew 's ex p erien ce of
d iv in e c o n v e rsa tio n , th e B ib le being th e re c o rd .
B u b er's in flu e n c e was found to be fa r-re a c h in g in
European Jew ish c i r c l e s and in th e P a le s tin ia n movements
as w ell as in th e a re a o f P ro te s ta n t Theology. In doing
t h i s , he was also shown to have done more th an anyone e ls e
i n th e tw e n tie th cen tu ry to I n te r p r e t H asidism in the
W estern World,
H asidism was d e fin e d and shown to be an in flu e n c in g
agency in th e l i f e and philosophy o f M artin B uber. B uber's
em phasis on th e concept o f r e la tio n s h ip s was tr a c e d to th e
l i t e r a t u r e o f H asidism , t h i s l i t e r a t u r e b ein g f a c tu a l and
legendary m a te ria l d e p ic tin g th e l i f e o f Jewry in th e
e ig h te e n th and n in e te e n th c e n tu rie s .
The e x p o s itio n o f th e concept o f "between" began
more c le a r ly in th e a n a ly s is of h is philosophy as found
103
in h is work I and Thou. Much em phasis i s p la c e d on what i s
c a lle d th e "tw o -fo ld a t t i tu d e o f man," There i s th e relar-
t io n o f man to th in g s , which does n o t in clu d e th e whole be
ing o f man. The o th e r a t ti tu d e o r r e la ti o n i s t h a t shown to
b ein g s and th in g s w ith th e whole o f o n e 's b ein g . The f i r s t
a t ti tu d e i s th e I - I t r e la tio n s h ip ; th e o th e r is th e I-Thou
r e la tio n s h ip . One does not ex p erien ce o th e rs in th e Thou
r e la ti o n , b u t sta n d s in r e l a t i o n to them or th e in d iv id u a l.
Things are ex p erien ced ; r e a l r e l a t i o n and m eeting is liv e d .
True bein g s are liv e d in th e p re s e n t, w hile th e l i f e
of o b je c ts is in th e p a s t, i t was found.
R eal love i s found to be betw een I and Thou. While
th e w orld o f It. is found in th e c o n te x t of space and tim e,
th e w orld o f Thou is found in n e ith e r of th e s e . Love i s th e
r e a l i t y of th e r e l a t i o n betw een X and Thou.
The realm o f th e s p i r i t i s not so much in th e in d i
v id u a l as i t i s th e a re a betw een th e % and th e Thou. I t i s
not l ik e th e blood c ir c u la tin g through th e v e in s , i t i s l i k e
a i r which i s b re a th e d . I t i s a resp o n se of a man to h is
Thou.
The developm ent o f th e fu n c tio n o f e x p e rie n c in g and
u sin g comes about m ostly through d ec rease o f m an's power to
e n te r in to r e la tio n . True community a r is e s through p eo p les
ta k in g t h e i r sta n d in liv in g m utual r e la tio n w ith a liv in g
103
C en tre, and t h e i r b ein g in liv in g m utual r e la ti o n w ith one
a n o th er. S tru c tu re s o f m an's communal l i f e draw t h e i r
liv in g q u a lity from th e ric h e s o f th e power to e n te r in to
r e la ti o n , which p e n e tr a te s t h e i r v a rio u s p a r ts , and o b ta in
t h e i r b o d ily form from th e b in d in g up o f t h i s power in th e
s p i r i t ,
Buber was found to h o ld no b r i e f f o r th e dogma o f
g rad u al p ro g re ss . There is more th a n a ch o ice between
r e s o lu te and h o p e le ss r e b e llio u s s la v e ry . The only th in g
th a t can become f a te f o r a man i s b e l i e f in f a te ; fo r t h i s
su p p resse s th e movement o f r e v e r s a l.
The d iffe re n c e between th e tw o -fo ld X was seen to
be th a t th e I - I t makes i t s appearance as a p erso n . In
d iv id u a lity makes i t s appearance by being d if f e r e n t ia te d
from o th e r in d iv id u a li t ie s . A p e rso n makes h is appearance
by e n te rin g in to r e l a t i o n w ith o th e r p e rso n s.
Speaking o n to lo g ie a lly , th e aim of r e la ti o n was found
to be r e l a t i o n 's own b ein g , th a t i s , c o n ta c t w ith th e Thou.
The p erso n says "I am" and knows h im se lf to have b ein g ; th e
in d iv id u a l says "I am such-and-such" and th ereb y d if f e r e n
t i a t e s h im se lf from o th e rs and re n d e rs h im self rem ote from
tru e b e in g . The extended lin e s of r e la tio n s meet in th e
e te r n a l Thou. There i s no a b so rp tio n in to b e in g , th e re i s
r e la tio n to b e in g .
104
Complete r e l a t i o n is b ip o la r. One needs God more
th an ev e ry th in g ; b u t God needs th e in d iv id u a l a ls o . One
complements th e o th e r. Every f e e lin g i s c o n d itio n e d by i t s
o p p o s ite . There is th e co in cid en ce o f o p p o sitio n s o f f e e l
in g s which makes u n d ersto o d com plete r e la tio n only in a b i
p o la r way. P r ^ e r and s a c r i f i c e are th e two s e rv a n ts pacing
throug h th e ages. In p ra y e r, man pours h im self out in unre
s tr a in e d dependence and y e t knows th a t in an incom prehen
s ib le way he has an e f f e c t upon God. Through s a c r if i c e man
has a lso known th a t he can and ought to give to God.
The m eeting of t h i s r e la tio n i s one of going out
which has to do w ith th e w ill and a lso one of g race where
i t comes upon one, how one does not know. The Thou co n fro n ts
and man s te p s in to d ir e c t r e la tio n w ith i t .
In expanding th e r e la tio n between man and man, r e f e r
ence was made e x te n s iv e ly to B u b er's work Between Man and
Man. D ialo g ic r e la tio n s h ip s are found in communie a t i one
which are s i l e n t . I t i s found in a tu rn in g one to an o th er.
There a re d if f e r e n t k in d s of d ialo g u e - Genuine d ialo g u e
which is one o f liv in g m utual r e la tio n ; th e second i s
prom pted s o le ly by th e need o f o b je c tiv e u n d ersta n d in g ; and
th e t h i r d i s monologue d isg u is e d as d ialo g u e - id le c h a tte r .
This d ialo g u e is not r e s t r i c t e d , th a t i s th e genuine d ia
lo g u e, to th e a re a o f th e i n t e l l e c t u a l s and arm c h a ir
105
p h ilo s o p h iz in g , i t is f o r th e fa c to ry worker bb w ell as th e
in d u s t r ia l e x e c u tiv e . The s o c ia l im p lic a tio n s o f t h i s r e
la tio n s h ip are fa r-re a c h in g .
Speaking o f r e s p o n s i b i l i ty , Buber suggested th a t
genuine r e s p o n s ib ility e x is ts only where th e re i s r e a l r e
sponding. I t is a responding to th e c r e a tio n as i t happens-
to what i s seen , heard and f e l t . I t i s e n te rin g upon th e
s i tu a t io n . R e s p o n s ib ility presupposes th e address o f one
to a n o th e r. In r e la ti o n to community, th e f e e lin g of com
m unity was found not to re ig n where th e d e s ire d change o f
i n s t i t u t i o n s is w rested in common, b u t w ithout community,
from a r e s i s t i n g w orld. Buber was found to d i f f e r from
K ierkegaard in th e em phasis on th e in d iv id u a l. For K ierk
egaard th e em phasis i s on th e r e la ti o n o f th e in d iv id u a l
and h is God in th e a re a o f s o l i t a r i n e s s . In such s o l i t a r i
n e ss , Buber fin d s no r e la tio n s h ip to God w ith in 4;he fram e
work o f community and su g g ests th a t in such d s i tu a t io n
trhere is no in d iv id u a l. Again, th e re was a d iffe re n c e of
o p in io n in th e r e la ti o n of th e in d iv id u a l in th e crowd.
For K ierkegaard i t i s not p o s s ib le to m ain tain r e la tio n s
w ith th e group and y e t m a in ta in a good r e la tio n to God,
whereas f o r Buber i t i s .
In ed u catio n i t is n ec essary to sh are in an under
ta k in g and to e n te r in to m u tu a lity . No com pulsion w ill
106
s u f f ic e ; i t is a n e g a tiv e r e a l i t y ; communion is th e p o s itiv e
r e a l i t y . The r e la ti o n in ed u c atio n i s one o f pure d ia lo g u e .
There must be a g a th e rin g th e c h ild u n to o n e 's s e l f .
P h ilo so p h ic a l anthropology was found to be th e answer
to th e q u e stio n "what i s m an," There must be a d e a lin g w ith
th e unbroken w holeness of e v e n ts, e s p e c ia lly w ith th e un
broken n a tu r a l connexion betw een f e e lin g s and a c tio n s ; and
t h i s connexion i s most pow erfu lly in flu e n c e d in s e lf - o b s e r
v a tio n .
The s y n th e s is betw een in d iv id u a lism and c o lle c tiv is m
was found to be t h a t of community. In e ith e r of th e o th e r
o u tlo o k s, th e re i s a d e n ia l of r e a l r e s p o n s ib ility fo r man.
The realm o f "between" was found to be th e r e a l a re a
o f r e la tio n . The X and Thou meet on th e narrow rid g e be
tween man and man. That which emerges a f te r the adding o f
two in d iv id u a ls in r e la ti o n , b u t which i s in n e ith e r p a rty ,
i s th e p lu s in th e m eeting p la c e betw een man and man.
Redemption was found to be th e w orking to g e th e r of
God and Man. N e ith e r i s com plete alo n e. God has w ille d to
be lim ite d by man. Redemption i s not an in sta n ta n e o u s a c t,
b u t r a th e r co n tin u o u s. I t i s not p o s s ib le to determ ine how
f a r m an's a c tio n reach es and where G od's grace b e g in s.
The e th ic s o f th e Love of God and love of o n e 's
neighbor was seen to be th a t love f o r e ith e r one au to -
107
m a tlo a lly in c lu d e s th e o th e r. I f i t is s a id th a t th e re i s
love fo r one b u t not fo r th e o th e r, th e re i s th e m isrep re
s e n ta tio n o f t r u t h , or more c o r r e c tly , th e re is no lo v e .
To love God w ill in c lu d e lo v e fo r man and to lo v e man w ill
in clu d e lo v e fo r God.
The concluding c h a p te r looked a t " l i f e s itu a tio n "
s e ttin g s and th e h e a rin g B u b er's concept o f "between" had
on them. This was in th e a re a o f th e h is to ry and problem
o f Judaism . The d ir e c t and in d ir e c t im p lic a tio n s were th a t
i t is th a t which i s making fo r r e la t i o n w ith men and God in
community th a t makes f o r in te g r a tio n , although th e n a tu re of
h is to ry would seem to in d ic a te o th e rw ise .
C on clu sio n s. Buber p o in ts o u t th a t knowledge i s not
re c e iv e d in a c ts o f f i n a l i t y . R e v e la tio n i s n o t c lo se d .
The em phasis made on dogma has encouraged th e c lo s in g o f
co n tin u ed re v e la tio n ;
Dogma, even when i t s claim o f o rig in rem ains un-
o o n te ste d , has become th e most e x a lte d form o f in v u l
n e r a b ility a g a in st r e v e la tio n . R ev elatio n w ill t o l
e r a te no p e rfe c t te n s e , b u t man w ith th e a r ts o f h is
c ra z e fo r s e c u rity props i t up to p e r fe c te d n e s s ,1
R e v e la tio n is dependent upon r e la tio n . "The liv e d moment
le a d s d ir e c tly to th e knowledge o f r e v e la tio n ," ^ I t i s
1 M artin Buber, Between Man and Man. e t c . , p. 18.
3 M artin Buber, I s r a e l and th e W orld, p . 101.
108
th ro u g h o th e rn e ss th a t ex p erien ces o f r e v e la tio n tak e
p la c e . E vents te a c h man th in g s and in p ro p o rtio n to th e
amount he re c e iv e s o f th a t g iv en , does he ex p erien ce rev e
la ti o n . 3
From th e p o in t o f view of th e B ib le , r e v e la tio n
i s , as i t w ere, focused in th e "m iddle," c r e a tio n in
th e " b e g in n in g ,” and redem ption in th e " e n d " ..,C e r
ta in ly both c re a tio n and redem ption are tru e only on
th e prem ise th a t r e v e la tio n i s a p re se n t e x p e rie n c e .^
Buber su g g ests th a t th e man of today cannot endure
th e r e v e la tio n , because he r e s i s t s th e S c rip tu re s . He
r e s i s t s because he d e s ir e s to evade th e r e v e la tio n o f re
s p o n s ib ility . R ev elatio n is th e end o f a r e la t i o n o f
ev en ts w ith th e in d iv id u a l and h is a b so rp tio n o f th e
B ib le . As has been seen , th e B ib lic a l re c o rd i s one o f
r e la ti o n a l ev e n ts - th u s r e v e la tio n comes in th e form of
a meaning o f p re se n tn e ss in th e a p p lic a tio n of h is to r y .
I f th e re are E te rn a l e sse n c e s, they are known only
in a liv in g r e la ti o n . For man, b ein g is not p a s t or f u tu r e ,
i t is p re s e n t. F u tu r is tic th in k in g in term s o f redem ption
robs th e in d iv id u a l of th e r e a l i t y o f th e moment and the
r e s p o n s ib ility to th e p re se n t r e l a t i o n o f 1 to Thou.
"Between" is an a t t i t u d e , a r e la ti o n , a liv in g
3 I b id . , p . 98,
4 I b id . . p. 96.
109
m utual r e la tio n . Between is th a t in te r a c tio n "between man
and man which makes f o r a l i f e which is r e la te d to a Thou.
Between i s th a t which makes f o r o th e rn e ss in th e in d iv id u a l.
Between i s th e a re a o f re sp o n se . Between i s th a t in man
which d i f f e r e n t i a t e s "between him and b e a s t. Between i s a
m eeting. Between i s a m eaningful, re s p o n s ib le , d ec id in g
f a c to r in th e man not l iv in g in s o l ita r i n e s s but in r e la
tio n to an o th er and to th e group. Between is th e answer to
th e co n v e rsio n o f s e l f i s h man liv in g a m eaningless e x is t
ence - a tu rn in g to th e O ther and to o th e rs in r e la ti o n .
I t is f e l t p e rso n a lly th a t g re a t p r o f i t can only
come from a study of th e man M artin Buber, Whereas th e re
may n o t be th e o lo g ic a l agreem ent w ith Buber, th e w rite r o f
t h i s pap er f e e ls a debt o f g r a titu d e to him f o r more c le a r
ly s ta tin g th e need of t h i s hour - th a t o f becoming r e la te d
to and w ith o th e rs in a re c ip ro c a l g iv e -a n d -ta k e a t t i tu d e .
I f th e in d iv id u a l i s to make an im p rin t in s o c ie ty , of
which he i s a p a r t, he must cease h is is o la tio n and become
a m eaningful, c o n trib u tin g p a r t .
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A. BO O K S
Berdyaen, N. A ., S p ir it and R e a lity . T ra n sla te d by George
Reavey. New York: G. S c r ib n e r 's Sons, 1939. 203 pp.
S o litu d e and S o c ie ty . New York: C harles
S c rib n e r 's Sons, 1938. 207 pp.
B r e t a l l, R ob ert, E d ito r, A K ierk eg aard A nthology. P rin c e to n ,
New J e rs e y ; P rin c e to n U n iv e rsity P re ss , 1946. 487 pp.
B runner, Em il, R e v e la tio n and R eason. T ra n sla te d by O live
fyon. P h ila d e lp h ia : The W estm inster P re s s, 1946. 440 pp.
Buber, M artin , Between Man and Man, T ra n sla te d by Ronald
Gregor Sm ith. London: Began P a u l, 1947, 210 pp.
- . P ialo g iB h es Leben: Gesammelte P h ilo so p h iseh e und
PadagoRische S c h rifte n ." Z u ric h : G. M uller. 1947. 459 pp.
, I and Thou. T ra n sla te d by R onald Gregor Sm ith.
Edinburgh, 38 George" S t . : T. & T. C l ^ k , - 1937. 120 pp.
, 4 ' ? ^ ' *
, I s r a e l and th e W orld.' (E ssays in a tim e of C r i s i s .)
New York:, Schocken Books, 1948, 255 pp.
, T ales o f th e H asidim . T ra n sla te d by O lga Marx.
New York: Shoeken Books, 1947, 1948, .I I V ols,
. 'j * ■ ■ ^ . ' ■*
H asidism . T ra n sla te d by 6 r e ta H ort. New York:
1945. P h ilo s o p h ic a l L ib rary , 208 pp.
_, Mamre, Essays in R e lig io n . T ra n sla te d by G reta
"Hort. Melbourne and London: Melbourne U n iv e rsity P re ss
in A sso c ia tio n w ith Oxford U n iv e rsity P re s s , 1946. 190 pp.
, Moses, London; Oxford, E ast and West L ib ra ry , 1947,
226 pp.
Ten Rungs, Has id le S ay in g s, T ra n sla te d by O lga Marx.
New York: Schoken Books, I n c . , 1947, 127 pp.
The P ro p h etic F a ith . T ra n sla te d by C a rly le W ilton
’D avies. New York: The M acmillan C o., 1949. 247 pp.
I l l
BIBLIOGRAPHY, CONT.
D ick ie, Edgar P ., R e v e la tio n and R eaponse. Hew York:
C harles S c r ib n e r 's Sons, 1938. 378 pp.
Farm er, H erbert H ., God and Men. N a sh v ille : Abingdon-
Cokesbury P re ss, 1947. 303 pp.
H eidegger, M artin, Kant und das problem d er M etaphvaik.
F ra n k fu rt A.M.: G erhard èchulte-B ulm ke, 1834, 336 pp.
K ierkegaard, Soren, The P o in t of View. T ra n sla te d by W alter
Low rie. London, Hew York, T oronto: Oxford U n iv e rsity
P re s s , 1939, 174 pp.
____________ , E ith e r /o r ; a Fragment o f L if e , T ra n sla te d by
David F. & L i l li a n Marvin Swenson. Vol. I I T ra n sla te d
by W alter Lowrie. London: H. M ilfo rd , Oxford U n iv e rsity
P re s s , 1944, 3 V ols,
Kohn, Hans, M artin B uber: S ein Werk und Seine Z e i t . V erlag
von Jakob Hegner in H e lle r an, 1930. 411 pp.
Landman, Is a a c , E d ito r, The U n iv ersal Jew ish E ncyclopedia,
Hew York: The U n iv ersal Jew ish E ncyclopedia I n c ., 10 Vols
Heebunr, Re in h o ld . The N ature and D estiny of Man. Hew York:
C harles S c rib n e r 's Sons, 1941-43. 3 V ols.
S c h e le r, Max, P h ilo so o h isch e W eltanschauung, Bonn: F.
Cohen, 1929, 158 pp.
Scholem, Gershorn G ., Manor Trends in Jew ish M ysticism .
Hew York: Schocen Books, Inc. 1946, 454 pp.
PERIODICAL ARTICLES
B lau, Joseph L ,, "M artin B u b er's R e lig io u s P hilosophy: A
Review A r tic le ," The Review o f R e lig io n , 1 3:48-64,
November, 1948,
Buber, M artin , "Ladder from Man to G od,” Commentary.
4:478-82, November, 1947.
Buber, M artin , "More T ales o f th e Hasidim , " Commentary,
3:175-80, F ebruary, 1947,
113
BIBLIOGRAPHY, CONT.
Kuhn, Helmut, "Between Man and Man, a book review " The
Jo u rn a l o f P h ilo so n h y , XLVI (February 3, 1949) 75-79,
P fu e tz e , P aul 1 ., "M artin Buber and Jew ish M y sticism ,"
R e lig io n in L if e . Vol. XVI, Autumn number, 1947, No, 4,
pp. 553-567.
T il lic h , P ., "M artin Buber and C h ris tia n Thought, h is
th r e e - f o ld c o n trib u tio n to P r o te s ta n tis m ," Commentary.
5:515-31, June 1948,
Trueblood, E lto n , SBetween Man and Man", " C r itic a l R eview s,"
The Jo u rn a l o f R e lig io n , XXVIII (O ctober 1948)
pp. 381-383.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

An inquiry into the subject of religious authority in the thought of John Calvin

PDF

Concepts of the church

PDF

An inquiry into the derivation of the Apocryphal Acts of John

PDF

The meaning of Honen's Nembutsu as religious manifestation of Buddhahood

PDF

An interview-questionnaire investigation into the therapeutic value of pulpit communication

PDF

An inquiry into factors influencing the call into the ministry

PDF

The Kingdom of God in the teachings of Jesus

PDF

An inquiry into the use and significance of "cup", kos, in Old Testament literature

PDF

An examination of five elements in the religions of China

PDF

An inquiry into certain essentials of modern church membership as affecting young people between the ages of 18-24, arranged in thirteen lessons

PDF

An historical study of the Augsburg Confession as an influence on the creeds of certain Protestant churches

PDF

The relation between intellect and the creative imagination

PDF

Leibniz's doctrine of substance in the light of contemporary philosophy

PDF

The influence of Sidney Rigdon upon the theology of Mormonism

PDF

An inquiry into increasing lay participation in the local church through democratic administration

PDF

The economic background of the Reformation in Germany

PDF

The symbol of light in the works of Saint John of the Cross, Jan van Ruysbroeck, and Ramon Llull

PDF

The task of the church as interpreted by the Oxford and Edinburgh conferences

PDF

An interview study of counseling done by ministers of Methodist churches in the state of New Mexico

PDF

The development of the Baptist principle of liberty of conscience in the seventeenth century

Asset Metadata

Creator Friesen, Melvin J. (author)

Core Title An inquiry into the meaning of the concept of "between" in the work of Martin Buber

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Master of Arts

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,philosophy, religion and theology

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c39-356325

Unique identifier UC11313287

Identifier EP65193.pdf (filename),usctheses-c39-356325 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier EP65193.pdf

Dmrecord 356325

Document Type Thesis

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Friesen, Melvin J.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA