😂 I found myself explaining this a while back at a party. Only to realize how outlandish I sounded because it is such a peculiar language. You did a great job 👍🏽
I think you make perfectly sense of the matter at hand, and thank you for sharing! If we try to define us as human beings, we will only be able to fully understand this, if we take in the consideration of us interacting with other human beings, therefore a definition of the “ I “ or self will always be in relation with others Cheers...
Thank You for this series, I am trying to gain insight from I though to support my own writing on the relationship that all mankind needs to share with one another and I and Thou seemed to fit as a resource. As you know it is difficult to grasp very easily so your series provide a great deal of guidance. Now I can review it and glean the ideas from it that will support my assertions, Thanks Again.
Good stuff. I myself write philosophy and I have to state that it sounds kind of Kantian- Hegelian in it's system of thought, but I think personally i get what Buber is trying to state, which is a little confusing! Have you ever tried to lecture on the ideas of Carl G Jung or even the philosophy behind Franz Kafka's writing?
Its not deep, its German translated into English. German language has Die, Der, and Das. This is how relative communication is playing against us. This text should be read in German where it makes more sense. Not a bad lecture though. Keep it up.
" What D.T. Suzuki did for Zen, Buber has done for Hassidism. Both have done a tremendous service for seekers. But Suzuki became enlightened; sorry to say, Buber could not. Buber was a great writer, philosopher, thinker, but all those things are toys to play with. Still, I pay my respects to him by including his name, because without him the world would not have even known the word Hassid. Buber was born into a Hassidic family. From his very childhood he was raised among Hassids. It was in his very blood, bones, in his marrow, so when he relates it, it sounds so true, although he is only describing what he has heard, nothing more. He has heard correctly; that must be on record. Even to hear correctly is very difficult, and then to report to the world at large is even more difficult, but he has done it beautifully. Suzuki is enlightened, Buber is not - but Suzuki is not a great writer, Buber is. Suzuki is an ordinary writer. Buber towers very high as far as the art of writing is concerned. But Suzuki knows, and Buber knows not; he is only relating the tradition in which he was brought up... of course, relating authentically. Tales of Hassidism should be read by all seekers of truth. These tales, small stories, have such a flavor. It is different from Zen, it is also different from Sufism. It has its own flavor, unborrowed from anyone, uncopied, unimitated. The Hassid loves, laughs, dances. His religion is not of celibacy, but of celebration. That′s why I find a bridge between my people and the Hassids. It is not accidental that so many Jews have come to me; otherwise, I am always shattering the heads of the Jews as much as I can... and still they know that I love them. I love the essential in Judaism, that is Hassidism. Moses had not heard of it of course, but he was a Hassid; whether he knew it or not does not matter. I declare him to be a Hassid - and so I declare Buddha, Krishna, Nanak and Mohammed. Hassidism came after Baal Shem. The word does not matter, the spirit matters. Martin Buber′s second book, I and Thou, is his most famous work, the book for which he was given the Nobel prize. Forgive me, but I disagree with it completely. I mention it because it is a beautiful work, written artistically, with great profundity and sincerity. But still there is no soul in it, because the soul was missing in Buber himself. How could the poor man manage to bring it into his book, his masterpiece? I and Thou is very much respected by the Jews because they think it represents their religion. It does not represent any religion at all, neither Jew nor Hindu; it only represents the ignorance of the man called Martin Buber. But the man was certainly an artist, a great genius. When a genius starts writing about something of which he knows nothing, he can still produce a masterpiece. I and Thou is basically wrong because Buber says it is a dialogue between man and God. I and Thou! Nonsense! There cannot be any dialogue between man and God, there can only be silence. Dialogue? What will you talk to God about? The devaluation of the dollar? or Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini? What are you going to have a dialogue with God about? There is nothing you can talk about. You can simply be in a state of awe... utter silence. There is no ′I′ and there is no ′Thou′ in that silence; hence I refute not only the book but even the title. I and Thou? That means one remains still separate. No, it is like a dewdrop slipping from a lotus leaf into the ocean. The dewdrop disappears, or in other words becomes the ocean, but there is no I and Thou. Either there is only I or there is only Thou. But when there is no I, there cannot be any Thou, it won′t have any meaning. If there is no Thou, there can be no I either, so in fact there is only silence... this pause.... My being silent for a moment says much more than what Martin Buber tries to say in I and Thou, and fails. But even though it is a failure, it is a masterpiece."
Thanks for the lecture，but I gave you a down. Cause I don’t think you understand the I-thou of Buber. Many people haven’t read Buber and may watch your video before reading. I think your graphic is a quite misunderstanding of the relationship between I-it and I-thou. It’s not folded but two ways, I would say, how people treat everyone everyone and himself.
maybe kafka had has nothing to offer him..kafla write in rodh hashanah services i yane and dozed through the many hours,i dont think i was ever again so bored except later at dance by lessons.is i and thou the famouds three speeches from buber?i canot seperate from thou..a world of constant elements=thou, and the world of substance=i are for buber rent apart.i call it a deep schism.this teacher is not bad.
I am so sad to see that these have been on here 9 years and I am only now seeing them. Thank you very much for doing this
😂 I found myself explaining this a while back at a party. Only to realize how outlandish I sounded because it is such a peculiar language. You did a great job 👍🏽
Excellent lecture. I have been reading Buber’s book many times and I like a lot the way you explain the concepts. Great job. Thank you.
O very much appreciate your intelligent analysis!
Awesome lecture, thank you for putting this out!
That's amazing. Thanks Prof!
I think you make perfectly sense of the matter at hand, and thank you for sharing! If we try to define us as human beings, we will only be able to fully understand this, if we take in the consideration of us interacting with other human beings, therefore a definition of the “ I “ or self will always be in relation with others
Cheers...
I didn't understand diddlysquat, but thank you for your kind lecture.
Thank You for this series, I am trying to gain insight from I though to support my own writing on the relationship that all mankind needs to share with one another and I and Thou seemed to fit as a resource. As you know it is difficult to grasp very easily so your series provide a great deal of guidance. Now I can review it and glean the ideas from it that will support my assertions, Thanks Again.
Excellent!
thanks so much... 감사합니다. from Korea
YOU ARE KING
Thanks for sharing this lecture.
I began watching this series but it ended with the 3rd lecture. I would like to see the rest of the lectures. Also the link to the notes did not work.
I can't download the PDF
Good stuff. I myself write philosophy and I have to state that it sounds kind of Kantian- Hegelian in it's system of thought, but I think personally i get what Buber is trying to state, which is a little confusing!
Have you ever tried to lecture on the ideas of Carl G Jung or even the philosophy behind Franz Kafka's writing?
wow great wow
Thanks
super helpful !!!!!
Nice
That's why you look so familiar because you look like Louise from life 4 dead
i love pdf bring them to me please :D
tks
The ultimate I-Thou relationship is Jesus Christ
Its not deep, its German translated into English. German language has Die, Der, and Das. This is how relative communication is playing against us. This text should be read in German where it makes more sense. Not a bad lecture though. Keep it up.
Thank you.
" What D.T. Suzuki did for Zen, Buber has done for Hassidism. Both have done a tremendous service for seekers. But Suzuki became enlightened; sorry to say, Buber could not.
Buber was a great writer, philosopher, thinker, but all those things are toys to play with. Still, I pay my respects to him by including his name, because without him the world would not have even known the word Hassid.
Buber was born into a Hassidic family. From his very childhood he was raised among Hassids. It was in his very blood, bones, in his marrow, so when he relates it, it sounds so true, although he is only describing what he has heard, nothing more. He has heard correctly; that must be on record. Even to hear correctly is very difficult, and then to report to the world at large is even more difficult, but he has done it beautifully.
Suzuki is enlightened, Buber is not - but Suzuki is not a great writer, Buber is. Suzuki is an ordinary writer. Buber towers very high as far as the art of writing is concerned. But Suzuki knows, and Buber knows not; he is only relating the tradition in which he was brought up... of course, relating authentically.
Tales of Hassidism should be read by all seekers of truth. These tales, small stories, have such a flavor. It is different from Zen, it is also different from Sufism. It has its own flavor, unborrowed from anyone, uncopied, unimitated. The Hassid loves, laughs, dances. His religion is not of celibacy, but of celebration. That′s why I find a bridge between my people and the Hassids. It is not accidental that so many Jews have come to me; otherwise, I am always shattering the heads of the Jews as much as I can... and still they know that I love them. I love the essential in Judaism, that is Hassidism. Moses had not heard of it of course, but he was a Hassid; whether he knew it or not does not matter. I declare him to be a Hassid - and so I declare Buddha, Krishna, Nanak and Mohammed. Hassidism came after Baal Shem. The word does not matter, the spirit matters.
Martin Buber′s second book, I and Thou, is his most famous work, the book for which he was given the Nobel prize. Forgive me, but I disagree with it completely. I mention it because it is a beautiful work, written artistically, with great profundity and sincerity. But still there is no soul in it, because the soul was missing in Buber himself. How could the poor man manage to bring it into his book, his masterpiece?
I and Thou is very much respected by the Jews because they think it represents their religion. It does not represent any religion at all, neither Jew nor Hindu; it only represents the ignorance of the man called Martin Buber. But the man was certainly an artist, a great genius. When a genius starts writing about something of which he knows nothing, he can still produce a masterpiece.
I and Thou is basically wrong because Buber says it is a dialogue between man and God. I and Thou! Nonsense! There cannot be any dialogue between man and God, there can only be silence. Dialogue? What will you talk to God about? The devaluation of the dollar? or Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini? What are you going to have a dialogue with God about? There is nothing you can talk about. You can simply be in a state of awe... utter silence.
There is no ′I′ and there is no ′Thou′ in that silence; hence I refute not only the book but even the title. I and Thou? That means one remains still separate. No, it is like a dewdrop slipping from a lotus leaf into the ocean. The dewdrop disappears, or in other words becomes the ocean, but there is no I and Thou. Either there is only I or there is only Thou. But when there is no I, there cannot be any Thou, it won′t have any meaning. If there is no Thou, there can be no I either, so in fact there is only silence... this pause.... My being silent for a moment says much more than what Martin Buber tries to say in I and Thou, and fails. But even though it is a failure, it is a masterpiece."
Thanks for the lecture，but I gave you a down. Cause I don’t think you understand the I-thou of Buber. Many people haven’t read Buber and may watch your video before reading. I think your graphic is a quite misunderstanding of the relationship between I-it and I-thou. It’s not folded but two ways, I would say, how people treat everyone everyone and himself.
maybe kafka had has nothing to offer him..kafla write in rodh hashanah services i yane and dozed through the many hours,i dont think i was ever again so bored except later at dance by lessons.is i and thou the famouds three speeches from buber?i canot seperate from thou..a world of constant elements=thou, and the world of substance=i are for buber rent apart.i call it a deep schism.this teacher is not bad.
akkiznazan schnell n
Way too complicated.