Abstract
Martin Buber (1878–1965) is considered one of the twentieth century’s greatest thinkers, contributing to the fields of philosophy, theology and education. After Buber’s death the appreciation of his considerable legacy became rather muted, but was never completely forgotten. Recently, interest in Buber’s thought has increased and a number of journal articles and books dealing with both general and specific aspects of his philosophy have appeared. However, the number of commentaries on the importance of his socio-political thought are still small in number, and it is arguable that only Mendes-Flohr and Avnon have provided significant discussions on this aspect of Buber’s philosophy. This article adds to the debate in this area by referring to Buber’s concept of the ‘living-centre’, and assesses the Mendes-Florian and Avnonian [my terminology] interpretations of this fundamental idea so as to establish which provides a more sustainable reading of Buber’s ideas.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
NB. This is the Kauffman translation. The Smith translation reads: The true community does not arise through peoples having feelings for one another (though indeed not without it), but through first, their taking their stand in living mutual relation with a living Centre, and, second, their being in living mutual relation with one another. The second has its source in the first, but is not given when the first alone is given . Living mutual relation includes feelings but does not originate with them. The community is built up out of the living mutual relation, but the builder is the living, effective Centre. (cf. Buber 1958:45)
It is interesting to note that Susser (1981) offered this same reading, but in a more detailed manner and specific framework.
It is important to draw attention to the German word Du, which is present in the original German title as well as in the foundational concept Ich-Du. Walter Kauffman in his important and modern translation of the work points out that Du is the German personal pronoun one uses to address friends or family, people with whom one has a close relationship. Du is the informal personal pronoun and this is in contrast with Sie which is the personal pronoun used to address people one is not familiar with or that one does not have a close relationship or that is used as a sign of respect (e.g. to elders). This distinction is present in many languages (e.g. French: Tu and Vous); however, it has been lost in English. The English archaic personal Thou, which was the equivalent of Du, has lost its informal connotation in modern times, and as such it does not capture the idea of informality present in Buber’s text. Perhaps, Du is better translated in English as you, which is something Kauffman actually does in his translation—he only kept the original Thou of the title (cf. Buber 1970). That said, I have opted to keep Thou throughout the text so to follow the conventional terminology of the secondary literature.
Hasidism is a popular religious movement that emerged in the second half of the eighteenth century in Eastern Europe. During the nineteenth and twentieth century it spread to other regions, notably Palestine and the United States. It has a focus on communal life and charismatic leadership as well as on ‘ecstasy’,‘mass enthusiasm’, and close-knit group cohesion (cf. Hasidism 2007).
This is the Kaufmann translation. The Smith translation reads: “True public and true personal life are two forms of connexion. In that they come into being and endure, feelings (the changing content) and institutions (the constant form) are necessary; but put together they do not create human life: this is done by the third, the central presence of the Thou, or rather, more truly stated, by the central Thou that has been received in the present. (cf. Buber 1958: 46)”
This is the Kauffman translation. The Smith translation reads: “The moments of supreme meeting are then not flashes in darkness but like the rising moon in a clear starlit night. Thus, too, the authentic assurance of constancy in space consists of the fact that men’s relations with their true Thou, the radial lines proceed from all the points of the I to the Centre, form a circle. It is not the periphery, the community, that comes first, but the radii, the common quality of relation with the Centre. This alone guarantees the authentic existence of the community. (cf. Buber 1958:115)
This passage refers to the July Revolt of 1927, which was a clash between Social Democrats and an alliance of industrialists and the Roman Catholic Church. 84 demonstrators and 4 policemen died and some 600 individuals were injured. These protests led to the fall of the right-wing government of Chancellor Ignaz Seipel.
The argument in Herut (Freedom) by Buber, and in Die Baulete (The Builders), Rosenzweig’s open reply to Buber is centred around the notions of Gebot (divine bidding) and Gesetz (Law). For Buber, Gesetz should not be understood as something crystallised, but as a potential-Gebot (cf. Putnam 2008:16). Rosenweig disagreed and emphasised that hyphenated Jews (e.g. communist Jews, secular Jews etc.) could return to being full Jews through bidding to Gesetz (cf. Greenberg 2011: 265; Rosenzweig (1998:134–135). Buber and Rosenzweig exchanged numerous letters in 1924 on this issue (Buber 1991;314–320; cf. also Mendes-Flohr 1991:283–284; 300; Bernat-Kunin 2007:72–78; Huston 2007:191–192; Levenson 2006: 92–94).
References
Agassi, J. (2006). The legacy of Martin Buber for an Israeli society after Zionism. In M. Zank (Ed.), New perspectives on Martin Buber. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Avnon, D. (1993). The living center of martin Buber’s political theory. Political Theory, 21(1), 55–77.
Avnon, D. (1998). Martin Buber: The hidden dialogue. Lantham and Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Babylonian Talmud. (1977). Tractate Berakot, Tractate Sanhedrin. Cambridge: CUP.
Bernat-Kunin, G. (2007). Renewing the People of the Book: Theory and Practice for Building Jewish Interpretative Learning Communities, PhD Dissertation, University of Southern California (available online on http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p15799coll127/id/552135; last accessed 22/02/14).
Biale, D. (1982). Gershom Scholem, Kabbalah and counter history. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Buber, M. (1930; 1933). Wie kann Gemeinschaft werden. In Kampf um Israel: Reden und Schriften (1921–1932). Berlin: Schoken Verlag.
Buber, M. (1938). Wie kann Gemeinschaft werden. In Worte an die Jugend. Berlin: Schocken.
Buber, M. (1949). Paths of Utopia. Boston: Beacon Press.
Buber, M. (1958). I and Thou. Smith, R.G., (trans.). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Buber, M. (1967a). Meetings. ed. and trans., Mendes-Flohr, P. La Salle: Open Court Publishing.
Buber, M. (1967b). The philosophy of Martin Buber. Lasalle: Open Court Pub.
Buber, M. (1969). Between man and man. London: Fontana Books.
Buber, M. (1970). I and Thou. Kauffman, W., (trans.). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Buber, M. (1975). Tales of the Hasidim: The early masters. New York: Schocken.
Buber, M. (1978). Leadership in the Bible. In Darko Shel Mikrah (The Way of the Scripture). Jerusalem: Bialik.
Buber, M. (1988a). My way to Hasidism. In Hasidism and the Modern Man. Friedman, M., (ed. and trans.). Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press International.
Buber, M. (1988b). My way to Hasidism. In Hasidism and the Modern Man. Friedman, M., (ed. and trans.). Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press International.
Buber, M. (1991). In N. N. Glatzer & P. Mendes-Flohr (Eds.), The letters of Martin Buber. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
Buber, M. (1995). Herut: On youth and religion. In N. N. Glatzer & P. Mendes-Flohr (Eds.), On Judaism. New York: Schocken Books.
Buber, M. (2004). What is man?. In Between man and man. London: Routledge.
Canetti, E. (1982). The torch in my ear. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Canetti, E. (1984). Crowds and power. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Fischoff, E. (1958). ‘Introduction’ to M. Buber. Paths in utopia (pp. ix–xxv), Boston: Beacon Press.
Friedman, M. (2002). Martin Buber the life of dialogue. London: Routledge.
Greenberg, G. (2011). Modern Jewish thinkers: From Mendelssohn to Rosenzweig. Brighton: Academic Studies Press.
Hasidism. (2007). In M. Berenbaum & F. Skolnik (Eds.), Encyclopaedia Judaica (pp. 393–434). Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA.
Herzl, T. (1896; 1946). The Jewish State. Sylvie D’Avigdor (trans.). New York: The American Zionist Emergency Council. Available at http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/herzl2.html. Accessed 20 Sept 2013.
Huston, P. (2007). Martin Buber’s journey of presence. New York: Fordham University Press.
Kramer, K. P. (2003). Martin Buber’s I and Thou: Practicing living dialogue. Mahwah: Paulist Press.
Levenson, A. T. (2006). An introduction to modern Jewish thinkers: From Spinoza to Soloveitchik. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Mendes-Flohr, P. (1976). Martin Buber’s concept of the center and social renewal. Jewish Journal of Sociology, 18(June), 19–20.
Mendes-Flohr, P. (1985). Prophetic Politics and Metasociology / Politique prophétique et métasociologie. In Archives des sciences sociales des religions, No. 60/1, pp. 67–82.
Mendes-Flohr, P. (1991). Divided passions: Jewish intellectuals and the experience of modernity. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Morgan, W. J., & Guilherme, A. (2013). Buber and education: Dialogue as conflict resolution. London: Routledge.
Murphy, D. (1988) Martin Buber’s philosophy of education. Blackrock, Co. Dublin: Irish Academic Press.
Olsen, G. (2004). Dialogue, phenomenology and ethical communication theory. Proceedings of the Durham-Bergen Postgraduate Philosophy Seminar, II, 13–26.
Putnam, H. (2008). Jewish philosophy as a guide to life: Rosenzweig, Buber, Levinas, Wittgenstein. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Rosenzweig, F. (1998). Franz Rosenzweig: His life and thought. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.
Rosenzweig, F. (2002). The builders. In On Jewish Learning. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Schilpp, P. A. (1967). The philosophy of Martin Buber. London: Cambridge University Press.
Silberstein, L. J. (1989). Martin Buber’s social and religious thought – alienation and the quest for meaning. New York: New York University Press.
Susser, B. (1981). Existence and Utopia: The social and political thought of Martin Buber. London: Associated University Press.
Theunissen, M. (1984). The other: Studies in the social ontology of Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre and Buber (C. Macann, trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tönnies, F. (2001). Community and civil society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Walzer, M. (1988). Search for Zion. In Tikkun, 3, No. 3, March–April.
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organisation. New York: Free Press.
Wodehouse, H. (1945). Martin Buber’s ‘I and Thou’. Philosophy, 20(75), 17–30.
Yosef, I. A. B. (1985). Martin Buber on adult education. Tel-Aviv: Rotem Publishers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Guilherme, A. Reflexions on Mendes-Flohr’s and Avnon’s Interpretations of Buber’s ‘Living-Centre’: Implications for the Gemeinde. Philosophia 43, 821–841 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-015-9605-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-015-9605-7