What Can Be Learned From Buber’s Moses About Education And Art
By: Shtelman Rina
Ben-GurionUniversity
The Kay Educational College
In his book Moses, written during the Second World War, Martin Buber states that he concentrated upon the history of faith.[i] Not upon history of religion or religious dogmas, symbols and institutions, but rather on the essence of theology, as an imminent part of communal life. Moses centers upon the coming into being of that communal faith which was manifested through the special directive bond of forming and molding public, spiritual, intellectual and political actions.
The book centers upon Moses the man, who was summoned to lead his people into being a nation by the embodiment of faith. Martin Buber struggles to recreate the monumental figure of Moses the leader, the man of faith and justice, the giver of worthy direction. Buber indicates that history is made up not only of chronological events but also of a Faith that shapes, interprets and sometimes transforms these events in the religious imagination of mankind. Hence the picture of Moses, the great prophet, the lawgiver, and statesman, is bound up with the impress that he made on his people. Buber explains that in shaping the common life of that community, with all its social political and spiritual functions, the faith dealt with undertook to become “flesh in a people”. That is the subject matter of the book Moses.
Reading Buber’s Moses, some questions aroused in my mind: What can educators learn from Moses who took it upon himself to lead people into undergoing such colossal changes? What are the educational truths that can be learned from Moses and from Bubers’ approach towards Moses?
It is interesting to add that Buber was an art-lover. He studied art history during his student days at the University of Vienna. Yet, Buber did not write a major treatise on art. To the best of our knowledge in his few writings on art, he never mentioned Moses. But in his major work I and Thou (1923), and in numerous other papers like “Education” (1925), “The Education of Character” (1939), “Culture” (1962), he speaks extensively about education and art.
Buber’s dialogical philosophy and his insights on genuine dialogue, on living dialogically, and on I-Thou relationships are the basis for his special approach toward Moses. I also suggest that learning from Moses in way of relating towards God and towards people may enable educators to open up to educational truths the beauty of art.
A Buberian approach towards education and towards art can be enlightening, and can open new vistas of relating to great art, beauty and education. My paper concentrates on how Buber’s insights on Moses, might help the educator respond to the difficulties and challenges of education. In the process I hope to unveil and partially ground Buber’s unique contribution to educating students to relate to works of art.
In his major work I and Thou Buber begins by presenting the sketch of an ontology; he points out that the world is twofold for every person, in accordance with one’s twofold attitudes. Each attitude accords with a primary word. One primary word is the combination I-Thou, the other is I-It. The I-It attitude and the relations, which spring from it, govern most of the human concerns in everyday life. In dealing with these concerns a person is usually not relating with one’s entire being. Buber states clearly that the I-Thou is spoken with one’s whole being. In contrast, the I-It is never spoken with one’s whole being. He writes:
“I perceive something I am sensible of something. I imagine something. I feel something. I think something. The life of human beings does not consist of all this and the like alone. This and the like together establish the realm of it.”
But the realm of Thou has a different basis.[ii]
The different basis to which Buber refers is established when the word Thou is spoken. At that moment, the speaker stands in relation with one’s whole being to one’s partner in the relationship. One is fully present to the Thou.
Buber points to three spheres in which such a relationship comes into being: life with nature, life with other persons, life with spiritual beings. A person who endeavors to open oneself to the possibility of relating with one’s whole being, as a Thou, may find partners in each sphere. But one’s endeavors to open oneself, persistent as they may be, cannot ensure that an I-Thou relationship will come into being. As Buber often repeated: “The Thou meets me in a moment of grace”. In I and Thou, in Moses and in other writings he describes quite a few such moments of grace.
Consider the example of the burning bush from Moses: Moses while tending the flocks of his father-in-law, leads them out of the accustomed steppe on one occasion; just as the Bedouins of the region still do. (Bedouins of the region I leave in do). They move their flocks into the hills, where the animals find pastures that are still green. Moses finds himself at the “Mountain of God” or mount Sinai the name used only when the nation reaches the mountain in order to receive the revelation. Here Moses sees the “burning bush” or the Seneh as it is called in Hebrew. The bush burns the blaze flares up, and in the blaze the “messengers of YHVH” is seen by Moses. The flame does not consume the bush. The bush blazes but is not consumed: and in the blaze shining forth from it, YHVH reveals himself to Moses. Moses experiences a moment of grace. He is not intimidated or afraid, and does not flee from the place, not even after God spoke. But once he hears the voice and after God reveals himself in the burning bush, he covers his face with his hands. The moment of grace is gone but a real dialogue develops between Moses and God. As the bible tells us, YHVH revealed Moses the chosen one is entrusted with the purpose of the message that. Moses is commanded to “lead out my people the children of Israel from Egypt”. Moses listens, but he is reluctant at first to take the mission upon himself. He does not argue with the purpose of the task. But, he asks questions, and objects because of his inadequacy and his inability to tell the people what they would demand namely, the character of that God the God of their ancestor fathers. The dialogue continues and Moses asks how he can demonstrate Gods message to the people, and he is instructed to perform wonders.
What kind of dialogue occurs between Moses and God? Looking closely at the existential situation pictured by the biblical narrative, we can see that Moses is entirely present in the situation before God; he has faith in his partner in dialogue, and therefore dares to confront, to ask, he explicitly expresses his ideas, he is a full partner in the dialogue. There are no manipulations, no seeming, between the partners in this dialogue. In this dialogue Moses is the I fully present to his Thou.
Going back to Bubers ontology, I believe this dialogue between Moses and God, is at the basis of the Buberian dialogical philosophy. I should add here that Buber teaches us that worthy dialogue is not a one-time occurrence, but rather a way of life.
What can be learned from this astounding dialogue? The biblical narrative tells us about Moses living a dialogical life. There are no differences of attitude between Moses relating towards God, or towards the Paroah, the Hebrew slaves, and later towards his people whom he took out of Egypt. The same direct, honest dialogical relation occurs between Moses and his brother Aaron, his wife Tsipora and his father in-law, Yithro. Moses is always straightforward presenting his ideas fully present to his partners in dialogue. He believes in people, reacts authentically and even though he is not always successful in his missions, he continues to take on the responsibilities of the mission he was chosen for.
Buber explains that the resistance offered to the mission, which was opposed to all the natural tendencies of the one charged, and the breaking down of this resistance by the Divine Power, belong, as shown us by the autobiographical notes of Jeremiah and the pragmatic little book on Jonah to the most intimate experience of the prophetic man. The objection probably derives out of the smallness of man compared with the vastness of the task.
Some conclusion can be drawn: prophets are often courageous humans. Moses more than any other biblical prophet is first a man, struggling to bring forward the holy mission he took upon himself. Taking on vast responsibilities puts humans in a position of distress and struggle. Genuine dialogue may lead us in our struggle and sometimes opens up the possibility of a direction that might change our perspectives in the world.
As mentioned, Buber suggests that the I-Thou relationship come into being in three spheres. In the sphere of nature Buber describes relating with one’s whole being to a tree. In the human sphere he describes I-Thou relations in great detail. In the sphere of spiritual beings Buber writes of art, prophets and God. He holds that in creating a worthy work of art, a person speaks the primary word Thou, with one’s entire being. In, I and Thou, Buber states that the eternal origin of art derives when a human being confronts a form that wants to become a work through him. Not a figment of his soul but something that appears to the soul and demands the soul’s creative power. What is required is a deed that a man does with his whole being: if he commits it and speaks with his being the basic word to the formthat appears, then the creative power is released and the work comes into being.”[iii]
From this brief passage it can be discerned that artists relating dialogically may encounter the possibilities of giving worthy directions to their partners in dialogue.
Moses teaches us how his deeds, done with his whole being, with faith and commitment, through real dialogue between him, God and his people, released those creative artistic powers, which enabled to bring the work into being; meaning, the creation of law, based upon the ten commandments carved in stone by God. The work of education towards liberation from slavery into independent worthy way of living, implementation of law and justice comes after.
The creation of the law was not enough, and the people did not instantly turn into a just, law obedient, cultured society. More than once God calls the people a “stiff-necked”, obstinate and stubborn people. Forty years of wandering in the desert were not enough. The work of education never ceases but always begins.
Consider some of Martin Bubers’ statements from his essay “Education” written during 1925. Martin Buber at the Third Pedagogical Congress presented this paper, (1925), in Hidleburg Germany:
“What we term education, conscious and willed, means to give decisive selection by man of the effective world: it means to give decisive effective power to a selection of the world which is concentrated and manifested in the educator. The relation in education is lifted out of the purposelessly streaming education of all things, and is marked off as purpose. In this way, through the educator, the world for the first time becomes the true subject of its effect.”[iv]
The concern of the educator, while educating, should be remaining a true mediator, a selector, and a giver of direction. This should be done through real dialogue, responsibility, and faith. The model for such education “remains the classical master”, and through him the selection of the effective world reaches the pupil.[v]
What can be learned about education from the way Moses relates towards the people of Israel ? Let us see how Moses reacted after he descended from the Mountain of God with the carved Tablets in his hands. He sees his people dancing around a golden bull, pretending that is God. Moses breaks the Tablets in anger. He is always authentically human in his relating towards people, nature and divinity. In his anger, he brakes the most important original creation ever done in the history of mankind. According to the biblical narrative, Moses returns to ascent the mountain, once again, with stone tablets in his hand. But, this time he leaves only after explicit punishment measures and directions were left behind in the hands of Joshua and Aaron.
Moses teaches us that education cannot come into being without constant struggle. Failures are part of the educational struggle. Moses never gives up his dialogical faith in God, in his people, and in the mission he was summoned to do, even though he knows that he will never enter the Promised Land.
Through Moses we can see that release of creative actions involve sacrifice and risk, both in education and in art. Sacrifice is pictured as the infinite possibilities surrendered on the altar of form, and risk as the commitment of being able to speak only with one’s whole being. During creating art, education and education of art, man cannot seek “relaxation in the It world”, meaning that while creating art and educating, artists and educators have to struggle and give their whole self. Not serving properly or holding back part of ourselves becomes ruinous for the artist, the art creation and the educator.
Buber teaches us through Moses, what is a true dialogue, faith, authenticity, and partnership, as a way of life. Through Moses we can learn about responsibility, justice, struggling for a cause, distinction and failure. In all of Moses deeds we can trace, I believe, the beauty of wholeness. He is always a selector of form, giver of just and worthy directions, and by those deeds he widened humanities perspectives in the world.
In summary, Buber’s call through Moses and the Biblical narrative to live a life of genuine dialogue can help the educator and the artist to encourage one’s students to relate in a worthy manner to the world, to persons and to works of art. Such will only occur, however, if the educator endeavors to live a life of genuine dialogue and conveys one’s way of life in his or her daily interactions with one’s students.
Buber indicates through Moses that the I-Thou encounter, and genuine dialogue, will often bring about a change of perspective. This change of perspective often brings with it new knowledge and helps unveil forgotten truths. Such knowledge will frequently persuade persons who live a life of dialogue to enlarge the realm of dialogue by relating dialogically in areas in which they previously related to persons and things as Its. Thus the dialogical educator, by striving for authentic relations with one’s students will hopefully convince them to approach works of art as possible partners in dialogue. Such an approach indicates not only the bringing about of enlarging the realm in which one relates dialogically. It can also lead to personal enhancement that occurs when a person enters and becomes intimate with a new realm of beauty of art.
1
[i]Martin Buber. Moses. OxfordLondon. East & West Library. 1945.
[ii]Buber------. I and Thou. (Translated by Ronald Gregor Smith. (New-York: Collier Bppks, 1987) p.4.
[iii] ------.I and Thou. (Translated by Walter Kaufmann). New York: Touchstone, 1970. P.60.
[iv]------. Between Man and Man.”Education”. Boston: Beacon Press, 1955. P.89.
[v]Ibid. p. 90