LEVINAS AND BUBER: TRANSCENDENCE AND SOCIETY DAMIEN CASEY School of Studies in Religion, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia A number of articles have been written in recent years, dis- cussing the relationship between Martin Buber and Emmanuel L&inas. According to Robert Bernasconi; 'The proximity between Martin Buber and Emmanuel L&inas which is so striking to the external observer was not always so apparent to Buber and L6vinas themselves.'1 Bernasconi describes the relationship between these two great thinkers as one more appropriately characterised by misunderstanding than dispar- ity, but which, nevertheless, exhibits the characteristics of the ideal model of dialogue expounded by both Buber and L6vinas in their recognition of the alterity of the other. In a more recent essay, Andrew Kelly, defending Buber against L6vinas' criti- cisms states that 'both thinkers stress the social or ethical aspect of religion.'2 And yet, as I hope to show in this paper, it is precisely in their respective understandings of the social or ethical aspects of religion that Buber and IAvinas part compa- ny. This divergence hinges upon the role and status of the Other. It will be my argument, that it is one's approach to the question of the other -whether in terms of equality or of dif- ference - that is determinative of one's understanding of the social and ethical aspects or religion. IAvinas was fully aware of this and it was for this reason that IAvinas remained pre- occupied with distancing himself from Buber, whom he other- wise held in great respect and whose influence on IAvinas was pervasive.3 L&inas, inspired by the philosophers of dialogue, Sophia Vo138 No 2 1999, September-October. 69