TO BE IS TO BE RELATIONAL

A Revisit to Martin Buber Dialogical Philosophy

By: Ericzon D. Gutierrez
(A Reflection Paper presented to JRU-GS MAEd Students on May 17, 2014)

Introduction
Last March, I invited my Arabic clients for dinner at La Tienda Restaurant in Polaris St,
Bel-Air, Makati. I decided to be at the venue earlier than expected. So I went there
while our office driver was fetching my guests in their hotel. When I arrived in the
restaurant, I was ushered into one of the side rooms which I reserved ahead of time. I
sat back to the wall and had a view of the whole room.
There were only three other tables in use: one was to my right, the other was near
the entrance door and another, a table, across the room but in front of me, directly in
my line of sight. I started to look at the menu, while and I was quietly listening to the
gentle Spanish background music that music in restaurant played to soothe your
digestion, when suddenly that background music was overwhelmed by an incredibly
obnoxious and ongoing noise. I started to look around to see what it was and where it
was coming from. I noticed that it came from the table directly across from me. In that
table were three people: two adults, they looked like the parents of a young boy of
about 10 years old, who appeared to be their son. The noise I was heard was the boys
I-pad or some similar device. He was sitting on the table while watching a cartoon or a
movie. I thought deeply and told myself , Well, thats a sad situation. The parents are
not mingling with their child and not teaching him the joy of a family meal together.
Then, the father leaned to the side a bit to show that he was on his cell phone! I figured
once the food came, they would stop and speak with each other. Lo and behold! The
food came and the boy continued to watch his cartoon; the father continued on his cell
phone, and the mother just stared into space. And I thought to myself, How sad. These
three people are geographically together they are sitting in the same table but they
are not really together, they are not connected to each other, each one does not seem
to see and appreciate the gifts that are before them. They do not give the impression
that they see the beauty of communion and dialogue that they are neglecting. Or they
probably dont even know that they were missing something. Yet they might have gone
home and thought what a nice family dinner.
The world of today is about the dichotomy of life. It is full of contradictions and
misconceptions. The yes doesnt mean yes exclusively nowadays but as a song of
Beiber says: you can call (it) maybe worst is, sometimes the yes means
No..no..no way! What a sad fact. Every day, we are confronted with different choices
brought about by the advancement of science and technology. In the endin the end
we will realize we are trapped with our choices. And we are forced to choose all! But
the reality is, we have no choice at all!
I missed the time when you learn something and everybody celebrates. I missed
the moment when one skill is very important and everybody appreciates it with jubilant
exclamation. But these are all gone. The magical, enigmatic and thunderous sounds of a
heartfelt laugh are now coined into three letters with no sounds at all: lol (which stands
for laugh out loud).
What is in today is multi skills. Multi-tasking is the game of today. And that is
excellent. The problem comes in when you lack something. You will never be
appreciated particularly in work if you do not possess a variety of skills. You must be a
Jack of all trades so to speak. Man is measured through skills, capabilities and
potentials. You are in if you can close a deal and earn a substantial bucks for living.
Simply put, you are measured not of who you are but of what you have.
Gone were the days when you can seat and relax with someone special, without a
word, but in full communion with each other. Gone were the days when you can laugh
out loud with friends knowing that s/he is presently minding you, celebrating with your
joy and happiness without any distractions but only full attention with each other.
Today, in the midst of serious conversation, the other is forced to stop listening it
because ones your cell phone is ringing and you need to answer. Other times,
someone is crying, pouring out her painful experiences brought about by break ups and
you abruptly excuses because you need to reply to a text message sent to you by
someone. A lot are deaf to pay attention to the views and sentiments of others.
The trend of today is towards self. I am the center of the world. I am the main
actor, and you you.. and you are all just spectators. Selfie to the left. Boom Panes
to the right and twerking in the middle. Every activity is compelled to be tweeted,
shouted always with the motto of let it golet it go! as the song may go.
The world today promotes PRIVACY but is privacy really existing? Everyone upholds
privacy and this is very evident in our account in e-mail, facebook, twitter, instagram
and other forms of e-communications options for security settings are in finger tips.
But the irony is, we are the one who tear the walls of our own privacy. We are the one
who evades and break our own set of protocols by proclaiming to the world even the
very private act we do. Sexual activity is not anymore a celebration of love for each
other as a gift of oneself between husbands and wives and must be confided within the
four corners of matrimonial room. The two individuals in the act of sexual activity are
not anymore contented with secrecy and sacredness but worst sex is videoed,
uploaded it in the World Wide Web for public viewing. The result is, voyeurism is not
anymore a mental or psychological imbalance but considered now as very normal,
thrilling and exciting.
We are not only living in a world of irony but sadly we live our lives with fallacy.
Today, we will examine ourselves how authentic we are in living our lives as
persons. And the best way to approach this journey is in the realm of communion an
authentic relationship with the significant YOU!
Hence, I begin my discussion with this: TO BE IS TO BE RELATIONAL (A Revisit to
Martin Buber Dialogical Philosophy).

Martin Bubers I and Thou
1

Martin Buber (1878-1963), a Jewish thinker who was born in Vienna, Austria and
later lived in Israel, is famous for his Philosophy of Relationship. His writings made an
impact on several fields such as philosophy, psychology, counseling and religion. Unlike
many other thinkers, Buber envisioned a self-transformation that is not an inner
transformation. It is not a change inside me but rather between me and others.
Relationships are central aspect of who we are. As Buber (I and Thou, 11) puts it: All real
living is meeting.
Bubers I and Thou (Ich und Du, 1923)
2
discusses our relations to others. It tells us
that human existence may be defined by the way in which we engage in dialogue with
each other, with the world, and with God.

1
Martin Buber, I and Thou, posted here: https://archive.org/details/IAndThou_572 visited: May 6, 2014.
According to Buber, human relations are usually twofold: I-Thou or I-It. I-Thou is a
relation of subject-to-subject, while I-It is a relation of subject-to-object. In the I-Thou
relationship, human beings are aware of each other as having a unity of being. The I do
not perceive the Thou as consisting of specific, isolated qualities, but engage in a
dialogue involving each other's whole being. In the I-It relationship, on the other hand,
human beings perceive each other as consisting of specific, isolated qualities, and view
themselves as part of a world which consists of things. I-Thou is a relationship of
mutuality and reciprocity, while I-It is a relationship of separateness and detachment.
Buber explains that human beings may try to convert the subject-to-subject relation
to a subject-to-object relation, or vice versa. This happens when we analyze other
people, when we examine them, use them, guess what they have I mind, judge them
and so on. At those times we do not live fully, authentically.
However, as Buber postulates, we have a fuller kind of relationship, a togetherness.
In this togetherness, we live fully, meaningfully, authentically. This happens in a
subject-to-subject relation. This kind of relationship affirms each subject as having a
unity of being. This is the I-Thou relations. But what exactly does Buber mean by I-Thou
relations? And how can we attain them? Buber tells us that the I-Thou relations cannot
be analyzed and defined. This is because it does not consist of separate elements and
cannot be broken down into components.
Buber (I and Thou, 26) says that the I-Thou relation is a direct interpersonal relation
which is not mediated by any intervening system of ideas. No objects of thought
intervene between I and Thou. We can say that in I-Thou relations, the Thou are not a
specific things for me. My thoughts and feelings are with the Thou.
Love, as a relation between I and Thou, is a subject-to-subject relation. Buber claims
that love is not a relation of subject-to-object. In the I-Thou relation, subjects do not
perceive each other as objects, but perceive each others unity of being. Love is an I-
Thou relation in which subjects share this unity of being. Love is also a relation in which I
and Thou share a sense of caring, respect, commitment, and responsibility.
Buber argues that, although the I-Thou relation is an ideal relation, the I-It relation is
an inescapable relation by which the world is viewed as consisting of knowable objects

2
Original review posted here: http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/buber.html visited: May 6,
2014.
or things. The I-It relation is the means by which the world is analyzed and described.
However, the I-It relation may become an I-Thou relation, and in the I-Thou relation we
can interact with the world in its whole being.
In the I-Thou relation, the I is unified with the Thou, but in the I-It relation, the I is
detached or separated from the It. In the I-Thou relation, the being of the I belongs both
to I and to Thou. In the I-It relation, the being of the I belongs to I, but not to It.
According to Buber, God is the eternal Thou. God is the Thou who sustains the I-
Thou relation eternally. In the I-Thou relation between the individual and God, there is a
unity of being in which the individual can always find God. In the I-Thou relation, there is
no barrier of other relations which separate the individual from God, and thus the
individual can speak directly to God.
Buber contends that the I-Thou relation between the individual and God is a
universal relation which is the foundation for all other relations. If the individual has a
real I-Thou relation with God, then the individual must have a real I-Thou relation with
the world. If the individual has a real I-Thou relation with God, then the individuals
actions in the world must be guided by that I-Thou relation. Buber sums it up by saying:
Meeting with God does not come to man in order that he may concern himself with
God, but in order that he may confirm that there is meaning in the world (I and Thou,
115).

To be is to be relational
Human beings are born as relational beings. From the moment of our conception,
we are dependent on others. While the nature of our dependency changes over time,
we will always be looking to others for something and we cannot get on without some
kind of relating.
Bubers dialogical philosophy gives emphasis on the importance of finding meaning
of ones being thru other being. There can be no self without the other. I can only come
into being through my relationships with others. A person is never an isolated atom but
always a person-in-relation. My identity as a person is based in my relationship with my
friends, family members, with colleague and neighbors, with trees, animals, nature and
most importantly with God, the Eternal Thou. These relationships are essential part of
who I am. I cannot be separated from them. I cannot live separate from others.
To be relational is an attitude, an act of building togetherness with other beings. It
is an experience of authentic presence that transcends boundaries and distance. I am
with the other person or with the animal or tree or whatever. I do not try to dissect and
analyze your physical appearance. I do not examine you from a distance. I am in full
togetherness with you. And no distance separate between us. Although we continue to
be two people and not one, after all, relationships can only exist between two different
individuals. Nevertheless, we are fully with each other. This togetherness involves my
entire being.
To understand Buber idea of I-Thou, you can think for example, about those special
moments when you seat quietly with your friend or with your loved one, no word is
spoken between you. You are not trying to impress him, to analyze him or even to
understand him. You are simply with him. Or to give another example, in some magical
moments in nature: you are totally with the forest around you. You dont try to identify
the names of the trees. You dont try to compare or analyze. You are simply with
nature, totally in your entire being.
We see that for Buber, I-Thou relation is when I express my full being and I am
authentic. In contrast, I-It relations are distant, fragmentary, partial and in some case,
alienating. But I-It relations are necessary for practical purposes. I cannot be all the time
in full togetherness with every bus driver, with every colleague, with every neighbor but
although it is impossible to maintain the I-Thou all the time, this relation is a source of
meaning and value to all my interactions and to life in general. As Buber (I and Thou, 34)
sums it up: Without the It, a human being cannot live. But whoever lives only with It is
not fully human.
In many ways our world today rewards and encourages I-It relations in the guise of a
transactional and virtual approach wherein self-interested behavior is the call of the
game. In a world with billions of people cohabitating in the planet earth, we are in
many ways all anonymous actors. When we interact with another person in different
circumstances, we can assume that we will never interact with them again like a
smoke passing in the air. When faced with a choice of how to act in relation to a person
that we assume we will never interact or meet again, we approach him with a coldly
rational, logical choice just to maximize our self-interest. The relationship with that
other person is of no value and not a consideration. The approach is just like weighing
the risk and return of investment, and making a calculation to gain as much as possible.
Classic examples are a student cheating off another kids paper in school, a driver
cutting in front of someone in traffic or running a red light, a shopper buying something,
taking it home and using it and then returning it asking for a full refund, the restaurant
patron demanding great service and leaving no tip, a customer ignoring and never even
making eye contact with a cashier. Many of these transactional actions are simply
frowned at and ignored; rarely do they have any immediate or even long term
consequences. But these acts erode the spirit of our community and when we are takers
and not givers, it affects everyone around us.
One thing that is used to justify a transactional or virtual approach is the idea of
competition. It might be said it's a competitive world, compete to get what you want
and let the other guy compete to get what he wants too thats fair, right? And yes,
competition is healthy in some contexts like in sports and in business, but competition
is not a way of life. It is not an approach to living in a world where resources are scarce
and need to be shared in order to meet the basic needs of other person. It is not an
approach to life where we have more to think about than our material needs and
desires, where the health of our soul has to do with loving God and other people, not
about how much wealth and comfort and power we can acquire.
Sadly, there are prevailing cultures that little by little erode the life of true dialogue,
of true friendship, of meeting between the I and Thou. An online submits one notion of
the term culture as a set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that
characterizes an institution, organization or a group.
3
The cultures that I am pointing
to that threaten the life of authentic dialogue are: the culture of corruption and highly
individualistic culture which often are characterized by apathy, pessimism and
indifference. These cultures are often living in the realm of I-It relations in the guise of I-
Thou relationships. This kind of relationship is prevalent and spread like virus that
destroys mans cells. It is more than corona virus, HIV-AIDS and the like.
When I was with my Shacho (Japanese term for president of the company) during the
construction of Subic Bay Port Project in 2008, at that time it was almost finished, one
lobbyist from Malacanang boastfully relayed to us how their group underhandedly
manipulated or rigged the public bidding and with all gutsy attitude exclaimed: dapat

3
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture visited: May 7, 2014.
marunong kayong maglaro at makisama alam nyo dapat kung ano ang kalakaran.
This manifestation of corruption is such an unfortunate attitude. Equally worst is the
spirit of pessimism and apathy that linger in every corner of our being.
Today those who are implicated in the PDAF scam have all the courage to scream
that they are victims of political persecution. It is so disgusting and awful thing to learn
how few people amassed government money for their personal gains in order to sustain
their vices, whims and caprices while majority of our countrymen are grappling with
suffering caused by poverty, lack of education, hunger and sickness. Corruption is so
rampant. Insatiable desires for fame, power and prestige are engulfing. The quest for
individual comfort and survival is the menu of the day. Selfishness, greed and avarice
are everywhere. And worst still, the rest of us are so indifferent. We become stoic and
numb of what is happening around us.
Immoral and criminal acts happen when people disregarded intentionally the existence
of the Thou as a subject. These actions further lead to alienate the Thou as significant
others and reducing the Thou existence into an object in promoting the I dont care
attitude of people living in it.
Where is the value and dignity of man as Thou? What is the meaning of being
human? Who am I? We stop to introspect to gain wisdom. We acquire knowledge to
fool people. We befriend others to use them when opportunities linger. We are users,
liars and hypocrites! We reduce ourselves into savage beasts!
Wake up my friends! Wake up. We are all humans. We have godly gifts endowed to
us by the Eternal Thou. Give me your hand and together we can build once again a
community where we are fully human and fully alive.
But How? How to begin? By reviving and re-living the true meeting between the I
and the Thou.

Being-in-Communion
In our society today, many have lost an understanding of what it means to be truly
together without diminishing our own uniqueness. We have lost an understanding of
authentic friendship, authentic communion. We forget the value of the gift of presence,
of intimate dialogue, of engagement. Disharmony, miscommunication, conflict,
divisiveness are all floating in the air like roaring lion waiting for someone to be
devoured. There are many relationships that mask themselves as authentic friendship
and communion, but they are just that, masks that only reach to the surface and have
no depth. That is why there is such an ache in us, a longing for true and authentic
connection. Although, technologies of today offer us fastest pace and innovative
approach of interconnectedness, still, there is often emptiness in us, a hole that never
seems to get filled. The superficial masks can never heal that wound or fill that hole.
People of today are often trapped in situations of standardization and loneliness,
especially in large urban centers, and they become even more appreciative of the value
of communion and dialogue. Even in a city, surrounded by so many people, we can be
alone. Even with seeming to share the journey with others, we can be actually strangers
to each other - and alone. This is the danger posed by e-communication when we
allow ourselves to put our communications in our finger tips rather than allowing our
hearts and minds to come and converse with the significant Thou exploring the depths
and richness of what it means to be fully human and fully alive.
One of the salient features of the modern world is the growing interdependence of
men, one on the other, a development promoted chiefly by modern technical advances.
Nevertheless brotherly dialogue among men does not reach its perfection on the level
of technical progress, but on the deeper level of interpersonal relationships and
dialogue.
Pope Paul VI (Gaudium et Spes, 12) stated: But God did not create man as a solitary,
for from the beginning "male and female he created them" (Gen. 1:27). Their
companionship produces the primary form of interpersonal communion. For by his
innermost nature man is a social being and unless he relates himself to others he can
neither live nor develop his potential.
In the world of more individualistic, pragmatic and privatized approach to life, we
need to make our home, our community a school of communion and dialogue even
more. Today, allow me to share some points of reflection that would be of help in our
dealing with ourselves, with others and with things around us.
Let us draw our inspiration from the mind of Pope John Paul II (Novo Millennio
Ineunte, 43), who was greatly influenced by Buber. For the good pope, Being-in-
Communion is a way of life and it means:
1. To inflame within our hearts a contemplative attitude that God dwells in us, and
whose light we must also be able to see shining on the face of the brothers and
sisters around us.
2. Ability to think of our brothers and sisters as "those who are a part of me". This
makes us able to share their joys and sufferings, to sense their desires and attend
to their needs, to offer them deep and genuine friendship.
3. The ability to see what is positive in others, to welcome it and prize it as a gift
from God: not only as a gift for the brother or sister who has received it directly,
but also as a "gift for me".
4. To know how to "make room" for our brothers and sisters, bearing "each other's
burdens" (Gal 6:2) and resisting the selfish temptations which constantly beset us
and provoke competition, careerism, distrust and jealousy.
From the given points, we can surmise that Being-in-Communion means living in
relation with others, an authentic living between I and Thou in recognition of our
interconnectedness with others and a great desire to be in union with the Eternal Thou.

Conclusion
In conclusion, I am inviting you to reflect once again the meaning of who we are in
this world. We educators are the light of the world. Let our light shine not only in the
classroom or in faculty room but more so in our community. Equally important is what
Buber calls the educator as the healer of the soul for it is true indeed. We are healer
not only of ignorance of the people but more so of different cultures that threaten to
destroy the moral fibers of our society. Let us be agents of relational transformation.
With our tender loving care and our steadfast commitment to wipe out ignorance in
different forms, and to combat selfishness and greed thru charity and genuine service, it
is possible that the new offspring of authentic and genuine community of people will be
born. And only then that we can truly say, I meet the Eternal Thou here and now
because of the meeting between the I and Thou.
Thank you!


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Buber, Martin. I and Thou. Posted here: https://archive.org/details/IAndThou_572
Accessed: May 6, 2014.
Pope John Paul II. Novo Millenneo Ineunte. Posted here:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp
-ii_apl_20010106_novo-millennio-ineunte_en.html Accessed: May 8, 2014.
Pope Paul VI. Gaudium et Spes. Posted here: http://www.vatican.va/
archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207 gaud
ium- et-spes_en.html Accessed: May 7, 2014.
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/buber.html Accessed: May 6, 2014.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture Accessed: May 8, 2014.