Buber and Levinas - And Heidegger

The Levinas-Buber relation is a deep and instructive relationship.1 Martin Buber is senior and far better known. His book, I and Thou, first published in 1923, was immediately and widely recognized as an important spiritual work and quickly translated into many languages, including Japanese. Buber is himself a recognizable figure, the bearded Jewish sage said to resemble a biblical prophet (even though, as Levinas once remarked, we have no photographs of the biblical prophets). Emmanuel Levinas, on the other hand, while a philosopher of the first rank, is never likely to be popular or well known. Although his many books and collections of articles have been translated into English, his name still often draws a blank - and this is almost as true within the academic community and the Jewish community as it is for the public at large. What makes grasping the differences dividing Levinas and Buber of special importance, beyond the intrinsic value of gaining a sharp understanding of their thought separately and in conjunction, is the fundamental role that the ontological thought of Martin Heidegger plays for both of them. Both Buber and Levinas are critics of Heidegger. In an interesting twist of thought, however, their respective critiques of Heidegger serve, at the same time, as their critiques of one another. Buber accuses Levinas of being Heideggerian, and Levinas accuses Buber of the very same allegiance. Because for both thinkers these accusations are damning, their critiques of one another hinge in an important sense on the validity and depth of their respective critiques of Heidegger. The central thesis of the present essay is that it is Levinas - and not Buber - who fully critiques Heidegger. Levinas's critique of Heidegger is thus also a critique of Buber for unwittingly remaining within the orbit of Heidegger's thought.