User:AnonVisor/Martin Buber

Update to Lead
Martin Buber (Hebrew: מרטין בובר; German: Martin Buber; Yiddish: מארטין בובער; February 8, 1878 – June 13, 1965) was an Austrian Jewish and Israeli philosopher best known for his philosophy of dialogue, a form of existentialism centered on the distinction between the I–Thou relationship and the I–It relationship. Born in Vienna, Buber came from a family of observant Jews, but broke with Jewish custom to pursue secular studies in philosophy. He produced writings about Zionism and worked with the Zionist movement extensively over a nearly 50 year period spanning his time in Europe and the Near East. In 1923, Buber wrote his famous essay on existence, Ich und Du (later translated into English as I and Thou), and in 1925, he began translating the Hebrew Bible into the German language reflecting the patterns of the Hebrew language.

He was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature ten times, and Nobel Peace Prize seven times.

Pre-1915: Early Engagement with Zionism
Approaching Zionism from his own personal viewpoint, a young Buber disagreed with Theodor Herzl about their respective positions on Zionism. Herzl did not envision Zionism as a movement with religious objectives. In contrast, Buber believed the potential of Zionism was for social and spiritual enrichment. For example, Buber argued that following the formation of the Israeli state, there would need to be reforms to Judaism: "We need someone who would do for Judaism what Pope John XXIII has done for the Catholic Church". Herzl and Buber would continue, in mutual respect and disagreement, to work towards their respective goals for the rest of their lives. In 1902, Buber became the editor of the weekly Die Welt, the central organ of the Zionist movement. However, a year later he became involved with the Jewish Hasidic movement. Buber admired how the Hasidic communities actualized their religion in daily life and culture. In stark contrast to the busy Zionist organizations, which were always mulling political concerns, the Hasidim were focused on the values which Buber had long advocated for Zionism to adopt. In 1904, he withdrew from much of his Zionist organizational work, and devoted himself to study and writing, as in that same year, he published his thesis, Beiträge zur Geschichte des Individuationsproblems, on Jakob Böhme and Nikolaus Cusanus.

In a 1910 essay entitled "He and We," Buber established himself and Herzl as diametrically opposed in their perspectives on Zionism. Buber described Herzl by saying, "The impulse of the elementally active person (Elementaraktiver) to act is so strong that it prevents him from acquiring knowledge for the sake of knowledge," and, according to Buber, when a person like Herzl is aware of his Jewishness, "In him awakens the will to help the Jews to whom he belongs, to lead the where they can experience freedom and security. Now he does what his will tells He does not see anything else." In that same essay, Buber would draw a parallel between Herzl and Baal Shem Tov, the founder of Hasidism, arguing that both seek to reinstate the Jewish people, the difference coming in their approaches; Herzl affecting change indirectly via history whereas Baal Shem Tov sought to achieve improvement directly through religion.

1915-38: Further Development
Buber produced multiple writings on Zionism and nationalism in the during this time period, expanding upon broader ideas related to Zionism. In light of the outbreak of WWI, Buber engaged in debates with fellow German theologian Herrman Cohen in 1915 on the nature of nationalism and zionism. Whereas Cohen, whose argument was based in messianic principles, believed that a Jewish minority was essential to a broader German national identity, Buber argued that, "Judaism may well be taken up in messianic humanity, to be melted into it; we do not, however, consider that the Jewish people must disappear among contemporary humanity so that a messianic humanity might arise."

Buber continued to explore and develop his views on Zionism in these years. One such notable piece of writing is a letter to a professor entitled "Concepts and Reality" in 1916. In this letter, Buber addresses the issues of nationalism, Messianism, and Hebrew within the Zionist movement of the period. Buber argued that nationalism is not a natural phenomenon, and that Zionism is a movement centered around religiosity, not nationalism. However, according to Buber, the messianic movement within zionism is obscured by those in liberal Jewish and anti-Zionist circles, who argue that Messianism necessitates a diaspora. On the importance of the Hebrew language, Buber believed, "Hebrew is not first and foremost a vernacular but the single language that can fully absorb and express the sublime values of Judaism."

In the early 1920s, Martin Buber started advocating a binational Jewish-Arab state, stating that the Jewish people should proclaim "its desire to live in peace and brotherhood with the Arab people, and to develop the common homeland into a republic in which both peoples will have the possibility of free development." Buber rejected the idea of Zionism as just another national movement, and wanted instead to see the creation of an exemplary society; a society which would not be characterized by Jewish domination of the Arabs. It was necessary for the Zionist movement to reach a consensus with the Arabs even at the cost of the Jews remaining a minority in the country. In 1925, he was involved in the creation of the organization Brit Shalom (Covenant of Peace), which advocated the creation of a binational state, and throughout the rest of his life, he hoped and believed that Jews and Arabs one day would live in peace in a joint nation.

In a 1929 essay entitled "The National Home and National Policy in Palestine," Buber explores Jewish right to the land of Israel before engaging with the question of Jewish-Arab relations. According to Buber, the Zionist right to establish a country in Israel originates from their ancient, ancestral connection to the land, the fact that Jews have worked to cultivate the land in recent years, and the future prospect that a Jewish state offers as a both a cultural center for Judaism, but also as a model for creating a new social organization, referencing the emergence of kibbutzim. Buber goes on to discuss, broadly, the necessity for injustice in order to survive, and focuses it to the Zionist perspective by writing, "It is indeed true that there can be no life without injustice. The fact that there is no living creature that can live and thrive without destroying another existing organism has a symbolic significance as regards our human life. But the human aspect of life begins the moment we say to ourselves: We will not do more injustice to others than we are forced to do to exist." Buber then uses this perspective to argue in favor of Binationalism as means to establish a combination of potential coexistence and national independence.

Post 1938: Zionist fews from Israel and post-Independence Zionism
Living and writing in Jerusalem, Buber increased his political involvement, and continued to develop his ideas on Zionism. In 1942, he co‑founded the Ihud party, which advocated a bi-nationalist program. Nevertheless, he was connected with decades of friendship to Zionists and philosophers such as Chaim Weizmann, Max Brod, Hugo Bergman, and Felix Weltsch, who were close friends of his from old European times in Prague, Berlin, and Vienna to the Jerusalem of the 1940s through the 1960s.

Buber evaluated the competing strains of cultural and political zionism from a somewhat teleological perspective in a 1948 piece "Zionism and Zionism". He summarizes these two competing perspectives as, on the one hand, "returning and restoring the true Israel, whose spirit and life would once again no longer exist beside each other," and the other as a process of "normalization," and that to be, "normal" a, "nation needs a land, a language, and independence. Thus, one must only go and acquire those commodities, and the rest will take care of itself." According Buber, as Jews and Israel succeed at being a "normal nation," the drive for a spiritual and cultural rebirth is lost, and the war being waged over political structure threatens to become a war for survival. After the establishment of Israel in 1948, Buber advocated Israel's participation in a federation of "Near East" states wider than just Palestine. Buber outlines this concept in "Zionism and Zionism". For Buber, Israel has the potential to serve as an example for the "Near East" as, in his Binationalist perspective, two independent nations, could each maintain their own cultural identity, "but both united in the enterprise of developing their common homeland and in the federal management of shared matters. On the strength of that covenant we wish to return once more to the union of Near Eastern nations, to build an economy integrated in that of the Near East, to carry out policies in the framework of the life of the Near East, and, God willing, to send the "living idea" forth to the world from the Near East once again." During this same time period Buber remained critical of many policies and leaders of the new Israeli government. He was particularly vocal about the treatment of Arab refugees, and was unafraid to criticize top leadership like David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister.