In 1938, shortly after the November Reichspogromnacht, leaders of the Zionist movement turned to Gandhi with a request to support the Zionist enterprise in Eretz-Israel/Palestine. Gandhi, against their expectations, stated his strong objection to Zionism, suggesting that German Jews should stay in Germany and practice Satyagraha, even if it would result in massive martyrdom. In his response to Gandhi’s open letter, Buber questioned the wisdom of Satyagraha and effectively took a non-pacifist standpoint that justified violent resistance in extreme cases—such as the Nazi assault on defenseless Jews. He also tried to distinguish between the Zionist project and European colonialism, maintaining, however, that Zionism would only be successful if it could create a true Arab-Jewish cooperative.

Martin Buber’s concept of dialogue and Mahatma Gandhi’s concept of Satyagraha developed in response to violent conflict, World War I and the British colonial occupation, respectively. Both Buber and Gandhi advocated non-violence as new paths of resolution and peacemaking. But they also differed in their approaches to pacifism and martyrdom. In this lecture, we will consider the famous Gandhi-Buber correspondence of 1938 to understand some of these differences and their implications for today.”