Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00942)

--- In theosophy_talks_truth@y..., "netemara888" <netemara888@y...> 
wrote:
"The book (I and Thou) is steeped in Judaism…The whole endeavor of 
translating the Hebrew Bible represented an attempt to get back to 
the roots of Judaism…Buber sought a way back beyond the Shtetle and 
Shulhan Arukh, back beyond the Talmud and the Mishnah…He went to the 
roots in the prophets and in Moses, and in some ways his own Judaism 
was pre-Mosaic."  

"The world exacts a price for calling teachers wise: it keeps 
discussing the paths they recommend, but few men follow them. The 
wise give men endless opportunities to discuss what is good."

"Men's attitudes are manifold…If there were road signs, all of them 
might bear the same inscription: I-I."

"In these five attitudes there is no You: I-I, I-It, It-It, We-We, 
and Us-Them. There are many ways of living in world without You. 
There are also many worlds with the two poles I-You."

************
The above quotes referring to Buber are from: "I and Thou" a 
Prologue -- by Walter Kaufmann. The Prologue was written in 1963, 
for a new edition and translation. I and Thou (around 1922)

****************

Comment: Hmmmm, I wonder why Mr. Kaufmann and how he has become so 
conversant in the I-I? The fact of the matter is that Buber was also 
a contemporary of Ramana Marharshi of India's Self-Realization fame 
whose signature writing is the Self and the I-I. Buber may not be 
familiar with RM, but Buber lived in Jerusalem part of his life. But 
also Germany and was a German citizen at one point because he has a 
great command of the German language per Kaufmann. Kaufmann is also 
one of Nietzsche's translators (10 books). And because they are both 
so conversant with Nietzsche Buber uses a quotes (which he qualifies 
in his discussion as "[when] Nietzsche who is still faithful to 
actuality in his report: One accepts, one does not ask who gives", 
from Zaranthustra, which Kaufmann footnotes. 

I might ask why does Buber bring in Nietzsche--the writer of superman-
-which left out the Jewish population, in his own works? What does 
this validate for him? 

While Buber has nothing to say about Freud directly Kaufmann does 
mention the use of the word ego "Ich" in German. He states that 
Buber's use of the word Ich is more the common usage than the way 
that Freud uses it as part of the consciousness of man. But Buber 
uses it to describe the sum of man's parts. In other words Buber (who 
studied Hinduism) was using Ego in much the same way that the Masters 
and gurus use the term ego. Kaufmann says common usage like Americans 
use the word today. But today was NOT the early 1900's, when the word 
was only coming into its own awareness and generally part of daily 
vocabulary. I would have to research it, but I dare say that `ego' as 
the Buddhist's and Hindus used the word was in common parlance. 

It (ego) was not unknown because by then Alice Bailey was starting to 
put out her books by the Tibetan and the works of Theosophy were 
world renown by this time as well. But were they available to the 
common man in the early 1900's? I don't think so.

Kaufmann, to be sure does not hide the fact that Martin Buber was 
extremely well read, he mentions this in fact. And Robert Smith 
(author of quote earlier about Buber and Jung) says that the two them 
were engaged in some sort of heated exchanges about Jung's use of God 
or religion in his work. I say what about Buber's use of Eastern 
philosophy, without giving it, its proper credit and due? How about a 
Western philosopher (Buber) using Eastern philosophy in 
his "original" work called "I and Thou"? I suggest that he point the 
finger that he pointed at Jung back at himself.

What's gets more interesting is the lack of agreement among Jewish 
authors and scholars about the use of Eastern ideas and philosophy. 
Because in a book (by a Jewish writer--I read this summer) 
entitled "Ominous Parallels" the author was a student of Ayn Rand. He 
(have to look up his name) argues that it was Hitler who mastered the 
use of the Eastern philosophies to set up the entire world, beginning 
with Germany for what was to become a mindset that allowed him to 
rule the world for a time, and to exterminate the Jews. Ominous 
Parallels argues that we in America are coming to that same 
crossroads that Hitler used in Germany. Is he saying that Americans 
are unable to choose what they will follow and think? That in itself 
would say that the Western mind is not kept sterile by brainwashing 
from Eastern sources but by Fascism by Western ones.


Netemara
--- End forwarded message ---