Remembering Dag Hammarksjöld, Apostle of Mediation and Secular Pope (1905 - 1961) — Laurent Ladouce

As we mark the 80th anniversary of the creation of the UN, we may remember the life of UNSG Dag Hammarskjöld (born 120 years ago in 1905)

Remorsefully and not without exaggeration, President Kennedy presented him as “the greatest stateman of the 20 th century”

It is more appropriate to see Dag Hammarksjöld as a tormented person, and as a typical Paulinian figure, obsessed by man’s longing for goodness and weaknesses in front of evil. A man of integrity, Dag Hammarksjöld was also a master of self-criticism and thus a model of what a public figure should be.

This idealist was also a figure who loathed illusions, a Scandinavian anti-Don Quixote.

Dag Hammarksjöld was obsessed by purity and a strong sense of sacrifice, human responsibility, faith in the the Word. He constantly minded about maturity and growth. Yet, he suffered from solitude, remained single, was often thinking about death. He was exceptionally mature, yet incomplete.

He lived an inspiring life, but also carried a heavy burden. He knew he was born under a good sign, with many privileges, but was in existential anxiety most of the time. In this way, he remained a symbol of some European heroes until the end. Even when we reach the top level, we should remember how small we are.

Dag Hammarksjöld always challenged his peers who felt proud of their achievements. He was like a pastor for heads of States

A man of courage and virtue, he also detained huge powers, and tried to attend God in the most secular institution. He once described himself as the “secular pope”

Martin Buber constantly challenged him. They had very deep conversations on several occasions.

If you want to know more about him, here are some good reads.

Laurent Ladouce

A Reader’s Guide to Dag Hammarskjöld’s Waymarks

by Bernhard Erling

TO • .. ’ DAG HAMMARSKJOLD S

BlEl~J\I IHJJ\Rll)) lERILil N(Bj

A Reader’s Guide to Dag Hammarskjöld’s Waymarks

Bernhard Erling

Waymarks was originally published in Swedish as Vägmärken © Albert Bonniers Förlag AB 1963 © Bernhard Erling 1982 (Translation), 1987 (Reader’s Guide)

Guide combined with Translation 1999 Reprints 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2009, 2010

ISBN 978-0-9602240-3-6 St. Peter, Minnesota 56082

To Marilyn in gratitude for eleven lustrums of love and companionship

Abbreviations

DH - Dag Hammarskjöld

JB - The Jerusalem Bible

KJV - King James Version

NEB - The New English Bible

NRSV - New Revised Standard Version

RSV - Revised Standard Version

S-G - Secretary General

UN - United Nations

Where the Bible translation is not indicated, it is from the NRSV.

Introduction I. The Translation After Dag Hammarskjöld’s death in September 1961, a manuscript was found in his New York apartment entitled “Vägmärken” (Waymarks). Attached to the manuscript was the following undated letter, addressed to the Swedish Permanent Under-Secretary for Foreign Aﬀairs, Leif Belfrage: Dear Leif, Perhaps you remember that I once told you that I was after all keeping a kind of journal which I wanted you some time to take charge of. Here it is. It was begun without the thought that anyone else would ever see it. But in view of what has since happened in my life, all that has been written about me, the situation has changed. These notations give the only correct “proﬁle” that can be drawn. And therefore during recent years I have reckoned with the possibility of publication, though I have continued to write for myself and not for the public. If you ﬁnd these notations worth publishing, you have my permission to do so – as a kind of “white book” concerning my negotiations with myself – and with God.

The original manuscript consists of a collection of brief typewritten statements placed in a loose leaf folder. Hammarskjöld, it appears, from time to time typed out his journal entries and placed them in the folder. Nothing indicates that he considered the journal completed, or that he was not intending to continue it.

The manuscript was published in its entirety in 1963 by Alb. Bonniers, Stockholm, with nothing changed or excluded. The rubrics and dates, accordingly, are Hammarskjöld’s own.

An English translation, in the preparation of which W. H. Auden and Leif Sjöberg collaborated, appeared in 1964 entitled Markings, published by Alfred A. Knopf, New York, and Faber and Faber, London. Given Auden’s distinguished literary reputation, the question may be asked as to why another

vii | English translation should be attempted. The chief reason is to achieve a more accurate English translation. Auden acknowledged that he knew no Swedish and therefore needed a collaborator to give him a literal word by word translation, to which he gave fair form and for which ﬁnal version he took sole responsiblity. He also stated that there were passages which both he and Sjöberg found obscure. In some such cases Auden claimed the translator’s right to write intelligible English sentences, even if this meant alteration of the original meaning.

This translation was for the most part completed at Kansai University of Foreign Studies, Osaka, Japan, where during 1980 I was teaching a seminar on Hammarskjöld’s Markings to Japanese students. As I found more and more passages (which shall hereafter be called waymarks and identiﬁed by the year and number of the waymark during that year) that I felt needed revision, I ﬁnally decided to attempt a new translation.

An example of a waymark that was apparently thought to be obscure and which has been given an altered meaning is 25-30:13. With the words for which there is no basis in the Swedish text in italics, the Auden-Sjöberg translation reads as follow: “To be sure, you have to fence with an unbuttoned foil: but, in the loneliness of yesterday, did you not toy with the idea of poisoning the tip? (Markings, New York: Knopf, 1964, 8). A foil by deﬁnition has a ﬂat guard. If this protective device is removed the weapon ceases to be a foil. In the Swedish text, furthermore, the foil and the poison are kept separate, and the waymark may be interpreted as contrasting the relative safety of the one with the danger of the other, rather than, as in the Auden-Sjöberg translation, the two being brought together, so that the no longer blunt fencing sword becomes not only dangerous but treacherous.

Other waymarks that in this translation diﬀer signiﬁcantly from the Auden- Sjöberg translation are: 20-30:5, 41-42:14, 45-49:13, 50:35, 50:42, 50:44, 51:19, 55:1 (the second line has been added from the hymn Hammarskjöld quotes to make the waymark intelligible to the non-Swedish reader), 56:39 (the following sentence has been omitted in the Auden-Sjöberg translation: “It is this idea that demands your blood — not the defective creation in which it in this historical period has been incarnated”), 56:47, 57:6, 57:13, 57:46, 58:8, 59:81-82, 60:3.

There are, of course, many waymarks in this translation that do not diﬀer greatly from the Auden-Sjöberg rendering. There would be little point, for

viii | example, in trying to ﬁnd another way of translating “Not I, but God in me” (53:6). Generally, though, this translation is somewhat more literal than the Auden-Sjöberg translation. Hammarskjöld’s often elliptical style has also more often been retained.

This translation is being called “Waymarks,” which is a literal translation of Vägmärken. While “waymark” is not a common English word, it is to be found in unabridged dictionaries and it does signiﬁcantly appear in Jeremiah 31:21 in both the King James and the Revised Standard versions of the Bible. The 1917 translation of the Swedish Bible also has vägmärken in this verse. An additional reason for literal translation at this point is that it introduces “way” into the title. Hammarskjöld has much more to say about “the way” than about the marks or markings he makes along that way.

In the notes that accompany this translation Hammarskjöld’s quotations have been identiﬁed insofar as possible. Hammarskjöld does identify some of the sources he quotes (53:8, 55:2, 55:21, 56:30, 56:39, 56:53, 59:94, 59:95, 59:101, 59:112, 60:3, 61:15), but does not identify others. Use has been made of source identiﬁcations in the Swedish edition and the Auden-Sjöberg translation. In waymarks 53:8 and 55:21 Hammarskjöld refers only to “Thomas.” It was incorrectly assumed by the Swedish editors and Auden-Sjöberg that this was Thomas Aquinas, but the attribution should be to Thomas à Kempis. Where the source of a quotation has not yet been found, this is indicated in the notes. Hammarskjöld quoted the Psalter from a 1762 edition of the Anglican Book of Common Prayer. Auden stated that, while German quotations should be translated, it could be assumed that the average American reader would have no diﬃculty with the French quotations. In this translation all non- English quotations are translated. In the waymarks, where one ﬁnds words in parentheses, they are in the original Swedish text. Words in brackets have been added by the translator.

II. The Reader’s Guide When Dag Hammarskjöld’s posthumously discovered journal was ﬁrst published in 1963, the Swedish publisher, Bonniers, found within months that additional printings were needed. The following year the publishers of the English translation by Leif Sjöberg and W. H. Auden, Markings (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1964), had the same experience. The book was published on October 15. In November there had already been a seventh printing. In 1983

ix | Markings ﬁnally appeared in a paperback edition (New York: Ballantine Books) and again within the year ﬁve printings were needed. There has also been extensive distribution of translations of Vägmärken in several other languages, among which are Dutch (1965), French (1966), German (1965/2005), Italian (1966), and Japanese (1967).

Though DH’s (in what follows the initials “DH” will be used to refer to Hammarskjöld) journal has been widely sold and is now being called “a modern spiritual classic” (Markings, Ballantine edition, 196), many who have found in the book inspiring meditations have been puzzled by other passages. As a result some have placed the book on the shelf after a partial initial reading and thereafter rarely consulted it. It is to help such readers rediscover DH’s journal and to introduce new readers to this important text that this reader’s guide has been written.

Two extremely helpful interpretations appeared shortly after the publication of Markings : Dag Hammarskjöld: The Statesman and His Faith by Henry P. Van Dusen (New York: Harper & Row, 1967) and Dag Hammarskjöld’s White Book: An Analysis of Markings by Gustaf Aulén (Philadelphia: Fortress: 1969); Sw Dag Hammarskjölds vitbok (Stockholm: Bonniers, 1970). This Reader’s Guide diﬀers from these previous studies in that it is based upon my own new translation of Vägmärken, in which I have attempted to remove the translation errors in Markings to which Aulén called attention (Aulén, viii). This study of DH’s journal also diﬀers from previous studies in that it is a commentary in which, in addition to brief introductions to the waymarks of each year, each individual waymark is discussed.

It would seem that there are many waymarks that are in no need of comment. However, in discussing waymarks with students both in Japan at Kansai University of Foreign Studies and at Gustavus Adolphus College, I have found that several statements that seemed perfectly clear to me were puzzling to at least some students. Rather than trying to determine which waymarks needed comment and which did not, I have written about all of them. Where I oﬀer little more than my own paraphrase, this may stimulate the reader to attempt a similar restatement of the waymark, which may contribute to better understanding.

x | Since the waymarks are numbered, I have been able to provide many cross references. This makes it possible to compare DH’s thoughts over the thirty-six year period that the journal spans. The numbering of the waymarks has also facilitated the making of an index. It can be illuminating to examine waymarks throughout the journal dealing with the same subject, as well as the way in which DH alludes to or cites scripture.

In addition to interpreting each waymark, I have tried to identify insofar as possible the sources upon which DH drew in writing this journal. If the reader wonders why DH did not provide this information, it must be remembered that he never ﬁnally prepared his journal for publication. He had apparently himself typed the manuscript, which is to be found in the Swedish Royal Library in Stockholm. Since he did not regularly clean the type on his typewriter, there are groups of pages where the same unclarity of some letters suggests that those portions of the manuscript were typed at about the same time. Uno Willers, a friend of DH and director of the Royal Library, thinks that much work on the manuscript may have been done during May and June of 1957, with the undated letter to Leif Belfrage having been written later during the period of the Congo crisis. When DH completed a portion of the manuscript, he must have destroyed all earlier drafts, since no such material is found among his collected papers (Perspektiv på hemlandet [Stockholm: Bonniers, 1965], 84-85). Though the manuscript was in this sense completed, it is likely that had he given the manuscript a ﬁnal editing for publication he would have indicated more of the sources that he had used.

In the original 1963 Swedish edition of Vägmärken, which is a reproduction of the typewritten manuscript with no changes or additions, only twelve waymarks include names or initials indicating possible sources (53:8, 55:2, 55:21, 56:30-32, 56:39, 56:53, 59:95-94, 59:101, 59:112). There were, however, waymarks in quotation marks and others in English, French, and German, which suggested that they were also quotations. W. H. Auden in Markings provided additional information on some of the twelve waymarks in which there were names or initials, he identiﬁed twenty-two Bible citations, most of them, from the Psalms, where DH had used the version to be found in The Book of Common Prayer (cf. 54:26), and he also identiﬁed sources and allusions in twenty-seven other waymarks. Other translators, as well as those who prepared the 1966 annotated Swedish edition, have made use of Auden’s notes and added to them. I have drawn upon all of this information, completing it where possible, correcting it where necessary.

xi | Willers has pointed out that it is possible that some Swedish entries in DH’s journal may be unacknowledged translations of foreign authors. DH’s father, Hjalmar Hammarskjöld, especially in the years of his retirement, in order to develop his literary style translated on small slips of paper short selections from his favorite authors. Since this was for his own use, he did not indicate the names of the authors. DH recognized the value of such literary exercises and made similar translations. Willers thinks DH may have included some such material in Vägmärken (Willers, 85-86). Two such waymarks were identiﬁed by Auden, 61:1-2, translations from Chronique by St.-John Perse and The Antiphon by Djuna Barnes, respectively. In these cases, however, DH had translated the entire work in question (in the case of The Antiphon this had been done together with Karl Ragnar Gierow). Had he prepared his manuscript for publication, it is unlikely that DH would have failed to indicate the sources of those two waymarks. It is possible, however, that some other such waymarks, where DH had translated only that passage, remain to be discovered, though thus far I, at least, have found none.

In addition to interpreting waymarks and identifying sources, I have tried to acquaint the non-Swedish reader with the Swedish context that is presupposed in several waymarks. That DH enjoyed hiking in the mountains of Lapland helps explain the mountain climbing imagery in 25-30:1, 25-30:5, 25-30:7, 56:5, 56:62, 57:45, 59:114, 61:12, and 61:19. That DH served on a government commission studying unemployment casts light on 41-42:2 and 41-42:17. Though 51:9 is undated, it may reﬂect the old Swedish folklore that each Maundy Thursday the witches of Scandinavia gather at a certain mountain. That Midsummer is an important festival in Sweden makes 57:21-22 and 61:18 more intelligible. In the haiku poems written during 1959 (59:7-116) are many references to ﬂowers, insects, trees, and birds. This is not surprising when one notes that DH chose in his 1957 presidential address to the Swedish Academy to speak on “The Linnaeus Tradition and Our Time” (Public Papers of the Secretaries- General of the United Nations, eds. Andrew W. Cordier and Wilder Foote [New York: Columbia University Press, 1973], 701-709).

Auden has noted DH’s lack of participation in the liturgical and sacramental life of a church and ﬁnds no evidence in his journal of any desired commitment to a particular Christian body (Markings, xxii). If this were the case, it is hard to explain not only the many waymarks that take note of Christian festivals (e.g. 50:1, 55:50, 56:8-10, 56:58, 60:1, 60:3, 61:4-5), but DH’s reﬂection on the evil in human nature in 57:6, written on the Church of Sweden’s First Day of Prayer in 1957, devoted to the theme of repentance.

xii | At points comment is needed due to DH’s elliptical style of writing. This can be illustrated by reference to two citations DH makes. In 61:4 Auden and Anton Graf Knyphausen in the German translation (Zeichen am Weg [München: Knaur, 1965]) both agree that the lines cited from Henrik Ibsen’s Brand become more intelligible if introduced by the line that I have translated, “God, answer me, in the jaws of death!” These translators did not, however, see the need of including in 55:1 more than the one line of the Swedish Lenten hymn stanza DH has cited (“-- ty intet ﬁnns som inte vinns — --” ). This has posed problems in the translation of the line. Auden has made of it two lines: “Naught is given ‘neath the sun, Naught is had that is not won.” Quite a diﬀerent meaning, however, is found in this citation if the ﬁnal line of the stanza is also included: “For naught is found that can’t be won By the love that suﬀers.”

Auden opens his foreword to Markings by stating that DH does “not make a single direct reference to his career as an international civil servant, to the persons he met, or the historical events of his time in which he played an important role” (Markings, vii). It is true that persons and events are not named, but the dated waymarks are at times eloquent witnesses to how DH felt and thought as he carried out his duties as UN Secretary-General. It is helpful to know that 54:26-28 were written as he prepared to leave for conversations with Chou En-lai and that 55:22 and 55:25 express his reaction to the announcement that the imprisoned American ﬂiers were being freed by the Chinese. 56:44 and 55:48 relate to the Suez crisis and 55:57 expresses his gratitude to God for the way in which the crisis was resolved. 58:7 records his reﬂections as he entered his second term, recalling 53:4-13, written as he began his ﬁrst term. Almost all the waymarks written during 1960 and 1961 are dated, many of them reﬂecting his thinking during the development of the Congo crisis. I have sought in comments on dated waymarks to relate to the extent this is possible what DH has written to the signiﬁcance of that date. Two sources have been especially helpful in gathering this information, volumes 2-5 of Public Papers of the Secretaries-General of the United Nations (New York: Columbia, 1972-1975) and Hammarskjold by Brian Urquhart (New York: Knopf, 1973). For some details about DH’s private life during his years as Secretary-General I have drawn upon Dag Hammarskjöld: Strictly Personal by Bo Beskow (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1969).

Why should Waymarks be read now when soon ﬁfty years will have elapsed since the death of its author? One important reason is that the book has

xiii | become recognized as a modern spiritual classic. The Lutheran Book of Worship has included DH in its calendar of commemoration (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1978, 11). The basis for this inclusion is not only DH’s labors for justice and peace as UN Secretary-General but also what Waymarks reveals about the way in which he related his personal faith to his public responsibilities (see Bernhard Erling, “Discipleship at the United Nations: Hammarskjöld’s Religious Commitment, The Christian Century, 98 [Sept. 16, 1981] , 902-906). DH was not unwilling to indicate the nature of his faith. Shortly after becoming Secretary-General he stated his basic beliefs on Edward R. Murrow’s radio program “This I Believe.” His statement, which he called “Old Creeds in a New World” (see Appendix A), was published in l954. He also planned and supervised in every detail the creation of the United Nations Meditation Room and wrote the text to the leaﬂet that is given to those who visit the room (see Appendix B). It is in Waymarks that DH’s faith is more fully articulated.

The importance of the medieval mystics for DH has become apparent as the sources of DH’s citations in Waymarks have been determined. It is now known that he cites Meister Eckhart (1260-1327) at least nine times (see 51:l) and Thomas à Kempis (l380-l470) seven times (see 53:8). While these men spent their lives in the service of the church, one of them living in a cloister, DH wrote, “The way to sanctiﬁcation in our time necessarily passes through the world of action” (55:65). How he understood this essential interrelation between faith and action is spelled out in Waymarks. At a time when the urgent need to bring together into fruitful interrelationship personal faith and the common life in an increasingly pluralistic world is becoming ever more clearly recognized, DH’s journal merits careful study. This reader’s guide has been written to help those who would engage in such study.

Waymarks should also be read because of its importance for those who would support the United Nations. DH said of the UN that it is an idea “that must conquer if a humanity worth the name is to survive” (56:39). Many criticize the UN because of its inability to enforce its decisions. This, however, is to fail to understand the way in which nations must begin to learn how to relate to each other, now that weapons have been developed so destructive that they must never be used. The great powers must provide leadership in resolving controversies through negotiation, on the assumption that if they work at it long enough relatively just resolutions can be found that both sides of controversies are willing to accept until even more just solutions are found.

xiv | DH can serve as a model to indicate the kind of international civil servant that is needed to facilitate such multilateral diplomacy. It should not be forgotten that during his eight year tenure as Secretary-General the UN was relatively successful in resolving two serious crises, one aﬀecting the Suez Canal and the other related to formation of the Republic of the Congo. Much can be learned from volumes 2-5 of the Public Papers of the Secretaries-General of the United Nations. In this connection Waymarks should also be studied, for it is an honest portrayal, with little conceit or self-indulgence, of the inner life of a man with extraordinary ability and opportunities for leadership, who sought to dedicate himself wholly to the service of his fellow human beings.

Finally, would DH have wanted his journal to be the subject of a commentary? From a conversation in the fall of 1983 with DH’s friends, Leif Belfrage (to whom DH had entrusted the manuscript in an undated letter, (see above v) and Per Lind, I concluded that they would almost have preferred that Vägmärken had remained in the form in which it was ﬁrst published, with no introduction or annotation whatsoever. In the letter to Belfrage, however, DH did say that his notations drew a “proﬁle” of himself, revealing his negotiations with himself and with God. In 56:6 (cf. 52:23) he acknowledged, furthermore, that if his journal at the outset may have been written primarily for himself, his life had now changed to the point that he reckoned that it would have readers. There are readers who will need little assistance, yet even they may ﬁnd some waymarks where it can be of interest to them to compare their interpretation with the one proposed in this guide. Even a close associate of DH, such as Uno Willers acknowledges that DH’s journal contains extremely diﬃcult passages and says that it would be desirable that a commentary be written (Willers, 83-84, 86). Interpretations of the journal have been written. This one, by virtue of the fact that the comments on the waymarks are numbered, will permit the reader to concentrate his/her attention only on those where the guide may prove helpful.

It is a pleasure to express my appreciation to those who have assisted and encouraged me in this venture. I am grateful for interviews at an early stage of the project with Assistant Secretary-General Brian Urquhart and later with Ambassador Leif Belfrage, and Ambassador Per Lind. With Ambassador Peder Hammarskjöld I had both an interview and an extended correspondence. Students both at Kansai University of Foreign Studies, Osaka, Japan, and at Gustavus Adolphus College have stimulated me in my interpretation of the waymarks. The Bernadotte Library staﬀ, especially Mr. Howard Cohrt, have helped me gain access to the books I needed. For the sources of some

xv | citations I have been aided by Manuel Fröhlich’s newly revised edition (2005) of Knyphausen’s German translation Zeichen am Weg. My daughter, Birgitta, drew the frontispiece. The printing has been supervised by Brad Johnson and Eileen Holz. My wife, Marilyn, to whom the book is dedicated, has assisted in typing and has been unfailing in her support ever since the project was begun in Japan in 1980 to the present day.

St. Peter, Minnesota November 19, 2009

Table of Contents

Abbreviations …v Introduction …vi

1925-1930 So it was … 1 1941-1942 Middle years … 7 1945-1949 Towards new shores --… 16 1950 Soon night approaches …31 1951 …57 1952 … 84 1953 …95 1954 … 105 1955 …117 1956 … 147 1957 …185 1958 …213 1959 … 223 1960… 253 1961… 261 Appendix A … 281 Old Creeds in a New World … 281 Appendix B … 283 A Room Of Quiet … 283 Bibliography …285 Index …291

“Only the hand that erases can write the true account.” A quotation attributed to Bertil Malmberg, a Swedish poet (1889-1958), which states that if writing is to be done correctly, some of what has been written must be stricken out. DH’s use of the quotation implies that he has edited his journal in this way.

1925-1930 So it was These entries come from the period when DH was 20 to 25 years of age. He was living with his parents in Uppsala, where his father was governor of the province of Uppland. His home was the Uppsala Castle on a hill overlooking the city, built in the 16th century in Swedish Gothic style by the Vasa kings. During these years DH was a student at the University of Uppsala. In 1925 he had already completed the ﬁlosoﬁ kandidat (bachelor of arts) degree. The next three years were devoted to the study of economics. After two more years devoted to the study of law he received the juris kandidatexamen (bachelor of laws degree). An important event during these years was the Universal Christian conference on Life and Work, which met in Stockholm in 1925. Delegates had come from most Protestant and Orthodox communions. Nathan Söderblom, archbishop of Uppsala, had organized the conference. Hjalmar Hammarskjöld, DH’s father, welcomed the conference to events held in Uppsala. DH attended the conference as a “steward” or usher. In 1930 Hjalmar Hammarskjöld retired from his duties as governor and moved with his wife to Stockholm. DH accompanied his parents and engaged in graduate study in economics at the University of Stockholm. The heading “So it was” was most likely added when the manuscript was edited.

1. I am being driven farther Into an unknown land. The ground becomes harder, The air more sharply cold. Moved by the wind From my unknown goal The strings quiver In expectation. Still questioning, Shall I arrive, Where life rings out --

2 | One clear simple note In the silence.

DH enjoyed hiking in the mountains of Lapland and he compares life as he is experiencing it to climbing a mountain. As one climbs higher one walks on rock, the air becomes colder, and there may be a wind. He shifts to musical imagery to describe his expectations. Life’s goal is deﬁned in terms of clarity, simplicity, silence, all positive terms for DH.

For other waymarks containing mountain climbing imagery, see 25-30:5, 25- 30:7, 56:5, 56:62, 57:45, 59:114, 61:12. Remarkably the ﬁnal entry in Waymarks, 61:19, also contains this imagery. In 51:47 the imagery of depth is used to refer to the unknown toward which DH feels himself both drawn and driven.

2. Smiling, open, incorruptible — The body disciplined and free. The man who became what he could be And was what he was — Ever ready to gather everything Into one single sacriﬁce.

An ideal ﬁgure is here described. Despite DH’s tendency to be a very private person, “openness” is part of his ideal (cf. 41-42:11, 52:8, 53:7, 56:19). The importance of becoming what one can be (25-30:8) and the necessity of being prepared to sacriﬁce everything (50:46, 55:23, 59:81) are recurring themes in Waymarks. The person DH has in mind could be Bertil Ekman. See 51:24.

3. Tomorrow we shall meet, Death and I --. He shall thrust his rapier into a man fully awake.

But how painful is not the memory Of each hour I frittered away.

There are many waymarks in which DH reﬂects on death (e.g., 50:2, 50:4, 51:1, 52:19, 55:18, 57:42, 57:46). Here death is described as coming to someone in the midst of life, not as a result of the inﬁrmities of old age. Such a death may be one way of understanding the sacriﬁce to which the previous waymark refers. If one’s life may be terminated at an early age, the thought of wasted hours becomes extremely painful.

3 | 4. Beauty was a note which, as it ﬂew by, set the soul’s stretched strings quivering. It was the shimmer of blood beneath a skin translucent in the sun. Beauty was the wind that refreshed the traveler, not the suﬀocating heat in dark shafts where beggars sought riches.

The “soul’s stretched strings” suggest the strings referred to above in 25-30:l. In contrasting beauty as a cooling, refreshing wind with the suﬀocating warmth in a mining shaft, DH indicates that he prefers climbing mountains to digging into them. In 50:39, however, he associates such digging with damp, dripping cold. Though very few passages in Waymarks contain explicit sexual references (cf. 50:21, 50:28, 51:50, 58:10), there may be some slight adumbration of sexual imagery in the three descriptions of beauty.

5. Do not test each and every step as you go along. Only the one who looks far ahead ﬁnds the right way.

In hiking in the mountains one must look at the path and make sure that one is stepping on ﬁrm ground, but one need not do this with every step. One must also see the far horizon. In life also it is essential to have well deﬁned goals and keep them in sight.

6. Never accept what you win through making concessions or through appeasement. You live on stolen goods and your muscles get ﬂabby. Life yields only to the conqueror.

In opposing attempts to succeed through making concessions or appeasement, DH presupposes that such compromises are made at the cost of abandoning one’s principles. In 41-42:8 he will criticize the person who insists that everyone must meet his conditions.

7. Never measure the mountain’s height until you have reached the top. Then you will see how low it was.

What one hopes to achieve should not measured until it has been accomplished. DH’s goals for himself were such that he was never able to relax in self-satisfaction (cf. 50:42, 50:47, 57:40).

4 | 8. “Better than others.” Sometimes: I am that in any case. More often: Why should I be? — You either are or are not what you can be — like the others.

Two kinds of comparison are here touched upon. In some respects DH admits that he is better than others, academically perhaps, or in terms of physical abilities of various kinds. But if each person is tested according to the extent to which he/she realizes his/her own potentiality, then the comparison is with this standard, not with other persons. One either realizes one’s own potentiality or one does not. At this point all are alike and it is this comparison that is most important. Cf. 59:4.

9. What you must dare — to be yourself. What you could achieve — that life’s greatness might be mirrored in you according to the measure of your purity.

This is the ﬁrst time the word “self ” appears, an important word for DH. The theme of being oneself, being measured according to one’s own standard, is again aﬃrmed. The linking of “life’s greatness” with “purity” indicates how DH understands the former. On purity, see 41-42:10, 50:46, 55:3, 55:5, 55:27, 59:114. On mirror imagery, see 41-42:10, 56:45, 57:1.

10. Silence is the space around every act and every human relationship. Friendship needs no words — it is a solitude freed from the anguish of solitude.

Positive, supportive relationships with other people need not be verbal. Simply being with another person can be suﬃcient. It is strange, however, that DH can equate silent being with another person with solitude. Cf. 50:19.

11. If your goal is not hallowed by your most inner passion, even a victory will make you painfully aware of your own weakness.

There must be congruence between one’s goals and one’s most inner passion. If the latter, however, is to “hallow” the former, it must have an appropriate character. In later waymarks (55:23, 61:5), DH emphasizes that the goal cannot be self-enhancement but must be consist of self-surrender.

5 | 12. Your own ability is the only measure of life’s demand. And your only possible achievement — not to have deserted.

Here, as in 25-30:8 and 25-30:9 the emphasis is on one’s own ability, one’s own potentiality. There is no way that one can do more than is required and thus receive praise (cf. 57:40), which suggests Luke 17:7-10. The phrase “not to have deserted” refers to military discipline.

13. To be sure, you fence with a foil. But in yesterday’s loneliness — did you not play with poison?

The foil is a fencing sword so made that it cannot inﬂict injury. DH may be saying that in competing with others the weapon he is using is such that he need not fear hurting either them or himself. In his loneliness, however, he is exposed to a greater danger. One thinks of “the anguish of solitude” mentioned in 25-30:10 (cf. 50:4, 52:19, 52:24), which can be overcome through friendship, though when such a relationship is absent there can be real danger. “Poison” need not be taken literally, but can refer to patterns of thinking that are later recognized as destructive of the self.

14. We carry a nemesis within us: yesterday’s self-admiration is the legitimate father of that day’s guilt.

Nemesis in Greek mythology is the goddess of retribution. The term is used more generally for the notion that penalties for wrongdoing are interwoven in the very nature of things and thus inescapably function to punish the transgressor. DH is saying that yesterday’s self-admiration was the legitimate father of that day’s guilt. The point is not that he feels guilty today, but he passes such a judgment upon his behavior of yesterday. Other waymarks strongly critical of self-admiration are 55:27 and 56:24.

15. He bore the defeat without self-pity and the success without self-admiration. If he knew that he had paid the last penny, it did not matter to him how others judged the result. A Pharisee? Our Lord knows that he has never been righteous in his own eyes.

6 | DH is critical of both self-admiration and self-pity (cf. 56:40). While he could rejoice over success (56:18), he also knew its emptiness (50:47) and could even feel guilt because of it (50:39). There are two scriptural allusions in this waymark. One is to Matthew 5:25-26: “Come to terms quickly with your accuser, while you are on the way to court with him, or your accuser may hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison. Truly I tell you, you will never get out until you have paid the last penny.” The mention of the Pharisee refers to Luke 18:9-14, where the Pharisee in contrast to the tax collector is righteous in his own eyes. DH appears to be saying that one can know that one has paid “the last penny” as far as one’s relations to other persons are concerned and thus be unmoved by their opinions, without incurring the charge of self-righteousness.

1941-1942 Middle years After the ﬁrst entries dated 1925-1930, there are no entries until 1941. Upon arriving in Stockholm in 1930, in addition to studying economics, DH was appointed secretary of the Royal Commission on Unemployment. The appendix he wrote to the report of this commission, Konjunkturspridningen: en teoretisk och historisk undersökning (The Fluctuations of the Market: a Theoretical and Historical Examination, Stockholm: Nordiska bokhandeln, 1933), which dealt with the dispersion of prices during the business cycle and the inﬂuence of prices abroad on prices internally, also served as his doctoral dissertation. His public defense of his dissertation took place Nov. 4, 1933. For three years thereafter while remaining in government service he also taught political economy at the University of Stockholm. He thereupon joined the Swedish civil service as permanent undersecretary in the Ministry of Finance, in which ministry he served until 1947. In 1941 DH is 36 years of age and has just been elected chairman of the board of the Bank of Sweden. One factor that might have led him to begin writing entries in his journal again in 1941 could have been the death the previous year of his mother, Agnes Almquist Hammarskjöld, to whom he had been deeply devoted.

1. He stood erect — like a whip top as long as the lash is swishing. He was modest — by virtue of robust feelings of superiority. He was not demanding: what he strove for was only freedom from anxiety, and the failures of others delighted him more than his own victories. He saved his life through never risking it. — And complained when he was not understood.

This may be a description of someone with whom DH had worked. The reference to a whip top may have been derived from Søren Kierkegaard (“The doubter is like a whipped top; he stands upright exactly as long as the lashes continue. He can no more stand erect by himself than can a top.” Either/ Or, vol. l, trans. David F. and Lillian Marvin Swenson [Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1959], p. 24). DH’s critique is rather devastating. There are four pairs of statements. In the ﬁrst two pairs he appears to compliment the man, then takes the compliment away. The man stood erect, but it was pressure from other sources that enabled him to stand. He was modest, but his modesty was coupled with unwarranted superiority feelings. The remaining statements are

8 | wholly negative. The man had no high goals for himself, taking satisfaction chieﬂy in the failures of others. He sought to save his life through adopting a no-risk strategy. DH’s work must have required him from time to time to evaluate other people. This is an example of a wholly negative evaluation.

2. “The army of misfortune” — why should it always be “the others”?

DH is calling for more identiﬁcation with those who suﬀer misfortune. Why do we so sharply distinguish between ourselves and those who have suﬀered failure for one reason or another, thinking of them as “the others”? This waymark and 41-42:17 may reﬂect some of DH’s thoughts about the problem of unemployment.

3. The human animal’s vital demands do not become a prayer just because you make God their addressee.

Some theologians (e.g., Martin Luther in his Small Catechism) say that one should feel free to speak to God, just as children speak freely to their parents. One will presumably discover in the conversation with God whether or not what one is saying is appropriate. DH, however, is saying that there are standards which prayer must meet in order for it to be prayer at all, though he does not at this point specify what those standards are. Other waymarks that set forth DH’s understanding of prayer are 41-42:6, 50:29, 52:14, 55:16, 58:7.

4. Is not the emptiness when the noise ceases the just reward for a day devoted to hindering others from neglecting you?

DH is critical of himself, of his tendency to be self-centered in relationships with others, preoccupied with the concern that he not be neglected. This, he says, leaves emptiness. For other negative references to emptiness, see 45-49:13, 50:55, 52:11. In 51:6 and 57:1 emptiness has a positive meaning.

5. That which gives life value you can attain — and lose. But never own. From ﬁrst to last this applies to “the truth about life.”

The fact that one can attain that which gives life value, but never own it, indicates that life is a process. It follows that the “truth about life” can never

9 | be ﬁnally deﬁned. DH does not even ﬁnd the expression very useful. Only in 50:30, 56:35, and 57:12 are the words “truth” and “life” (or an equivalent term) linked in the same waymark.

6. How will you be able to retain the ability to hear, when you will never listen? That God should have time for you, you seem to regard as equally self-evident as that you can’t ﬁnd time for God.

It is important to be able to listen. Those who do not listen may not actually become deaf, but they may become unable to hear what other persons are saying. The second sentence of the waymark in the Swedish text follows a colon, which indicates that DH is thinking about listening to God. In 41-42:3 he is concerned about speaking to God, here about listening to God. He goes on to imply that it takes time to listen to God. Prayer must be understood as a conversation, so that God responds to what we say, but we must develop the capacity to hear what God says. For other waymarks that stress the importance of listening, see 41-42:10, 54:8, 55:19, 55:24, 55:58.

7. The demons come unbidden when the house stands empty. For other guests you must politely open the door.

In this waymark there is an allusion to the parable of Jesus recorded in Luke 11:24-26 in which what has been called “the peril of the empty soul” is described. The empty life will be ﬁlled by evils that enter unbidden. We must, on the other hand, make an eﬀort to see that good guests enter the soul. At this point DH may be thinking of Revelation 4:20: “Listen! I am standing at the door, knocking; if you hear my voice and open the door, I will come in to you and eat with you, and you with me.”

8. “On my conditions.” To live under that sign is to buy knowledge about life’s journey — at the price of loneliness.

DH is commenting on a quotation from Vilhelm Ekelund (1880-1949), a Swedish poet and aphorist. “On my conditions” could seem to be equivalent to “life yields only to the conqueror” in 25-30:6. However, while one must hold to one’s principles, one must also be able to adjust to the needs and concerns of others. If one does not, what one will learn about life is that it is a lonely aﬀair.

10 | 9. There is only one path out of the steamy, dense jungle, where the struggle goes on for glory and power and privileges — among ensnaring hindrances which you yourself have created. And that is: to accept death.

Three things are to be noted in this waymark: 1) the jungle imagery used to describe the place where the struggle for glory, power, and privileges occurs; 2) the recognition that one has oneself created ensnaring hindrances that impede the path; 3) the identiﬁcation of acceptance of death as the way of escape. What does it mean to accept death? It could mean that the struggle will not end until one’s death occurs and that one must therefore learn to live in the jungle and perhaps seek to make fewer ensnaring hindrances for oneself. But accepting death can have another meaning. It can mean living according to another principle, losing one’s life, as in Mark 8:35-36, and thereby saving it. DH will develop this theme in 45-49:5, 55:43, 57:42, and 59:81.

10. The more faithfully you listen to the inner voice, the better you will be able to hear what is sounding around you. And only the one who hears can speak. Is this the way that leads to the union of the two dreams: in clarity to be able to mirror life — in purity to be able to mold lives?

This waymark returns to themes of two previous waymarks, 25-30:9 and 41- 42:6. DH here makes it explicit that there is a voice within to which one is to listen. Hearing this voice enables one to hear more generally and to speak. One of the dreams to which DH refers has already been touched upon in 25-30:9. “Clarity” and “purity” probably mean about the same thing. It is not clarity of mind that DH is thinking about, so much as clarity of character, like clear water which for that reason can serve as a mirror. The second dream, to be able to mold lives, has not been speciﬁcally referred to before. DH recognizes that the person who aspires to do this must himself/herself be pure. For other references to dreams, see 51:44, 55:20, 55:47, 55:55, 61:19; to mirror imagery, 25- 30:9, 56:45, 57:l.

11. Openness to life grants a lightning-swift insight into the life situation of others. One requirement: to push from emotional discomfort to a clearly conceived intellectual formulation of the problem — and to act accordingly.

11 | If one is open to life (cf. 25-30:2, 53:7) one will again and again become aware of the problems of others and feel deeply about these problems (cf. 55:39). In order to help, however, one must think through these problems so that they are clearly understood and then act on the basis of that understanding.

12. It makes one’s heart ache when one fully realizes how someone has staked his whole soul on some end, the hopeless imperfection and futility of which only he does not immediately recognize. But is this not merely a question of degree? Is not the pathetic grandeur of human life in part bound precisely to the eternal disproportion between the honesty of the striving and the nullity of the result — in this world where self-delusion is necessary to life? That we all — every one of us — take ourselves seriously is not only ridiculous.

In DH’s opinion “the honesty of the striving” is more important than the perfection of the result. Since so much of our striving, however, is motivated by anticipated results, it is almost essential that the nullity that so often occurs at this point should be hidden from us. In this sense self-delusion appears necessary to life. We must take ourselves with suﬃcent seriousness so that the honesty of our striving can be sustained.

13. He tends a garden the boundaries of which have, apart from his knowledge, been determined by his own ability. His feeling that he tends the garden well and his blindness to everything that lies beyond its boundaries make him a bit self-satisﬁed. But is this failing any greater than the easily aroused contempt for him which one who cannot deceive himself and therefore has chosen to ﬁght outside the walls can be tempted to feel?

This waymark can be compared with 41-42:1. In both there is negative critique of others, but here DH goes on to criticize himself. It is wrong, he suggests, to feel contempt for a person whose failing is related to a limitation over which he has no control. What does DH mean by ﬁghting outside the walls? Is he perhaps referring to the need to think not only in terms of Sweden, but also in terms of the larger world? Is he suggesting that there are some who, by reason of the limitations of their abilities, are incapable of responding to this challenge, or even recognizing its existence?

12 | 14. “… but do not have love.” If the fulﬁllment of duty toward others is not an expression of our innermost will, then let it be: why torture ourselves — in order to hurt others?

DH quotes and interprets the recurring theme of 1 Corinthians 13:1-2. Only if the requirement that what we do for others is an expression of a basic disposition of love is met is such behavior worthwhile. DH holds that apart from this disposition, not only do we torture ourselves, but we also hurt others. Certainly it is preferable that good deeds be linked to a loving motive. It can also be extremely diﬃcult to do the right thing if one doesn’t want to do it. (See the reference in 41-42:22 to “altruism as a thinly disguised masochism.”) It does not follow, however, that others will necessarily be hurt if the good deeds they encounter from us are prompted by other than loving motives. Perhaps in the intimacy of the family there can be such hurt, but the larger social structures are designed precisely so that needed duties will be performed whatever be the innermost will of those who perform them.

15. Praise nauseates you — but woe to that person who does not recognize your worth.

DH speaking in judgment upon himself describes two sides of his personality, one that ﬁnds praise nauseous, but another that insists that his worth be recognized. Or, no praise satisﬁes him, but he is also oﬀended by its absence and can be hard on those who neglect to oﬀer it (cf. 50:16).

16. The narrow way — to live for others in order to save one’s self. The broad way — to live for others in order to save one’s self-esteem.

There is a slight play on words in the Swedish text. The Swedish word for “soul” is själ and for “self ” is själv. In the 1917 Swedish Bible that DH used, one ﬁnds the words själ and själv closely related in Matthew 16:24,26 (cf. Luke 9:25). Since “soul” and “self ” are somewhat equivalent, I have used the latter word twice to convey the word play in the translation. The distinction between the narrow and broad ways is drawn from a saying of Jesus in Matthew 7:13-14. How does one save one’s self (soul) in living for others? It must be out of love for them rather than concern about one’s own self-esteem. See above, 41-42:14.

17. That it should be so, that misfortune should be considered the fault of those it strikes — a fault which develops into full-blown crime if the unfortunate one does not silently accept his fate!

13 | This waymark relates to 41-42:2, where DH calls for identiﬁcation with those who suﬀer misfortune. They are not to be simply “the others.” Here he attacks what he regards as a perverse kind of thinking. Those who suﬀer misfortune are regarded as to blame for their own sad lot. Furthermore, their blame increases to the stature of a full-blown crime if they do not quietly accept their fate. DH had some years earlier served as secretary of a government commission studying unemployment. He may have been distressed by the attitude of many, who regarded their own security as their own achievement and who opposed eﬀorts on the part of the poor to better their situation.

18. You cannot play with the animal within you without becoming wholly animal, play with falsehood without forfeiting the right to the truth, play with cruelty without losing sensitivity of mind. He who would keep his garden clean does not reserve a plot for weeds.

DH discusses the meaning of purity to which reference has been made in 25-30:9 and 41-42:10. It is not possible to intend to retain just a little evil in one’s life, for this will have a corrupting eﬀect upon the whole. “The animal within you” and “weeds” appear to be equated. In several waymarks DH tends to view “the animal” and animals negatively, especially wolves. See 41-42:20, 41-42:22, 45-49:11, 50:6, 50:10, 57:45. A more positive evaluation of the human relationship to the animal world is found in 52:9. In 58:8 there is the suggestion that only at the level of the human are the adjectives good and evil in a moral sense appropriate. For another use of the imagery of a garden, see 41-42:13.

19. If you do not speak more ill of others than you do, it is not from any lack of will to do so. But you know that slander gives you elbowroom only if it is used in carefully measured doses.

In this waymark DH admits to a desire to speak ill of others. By calling the ill he is tempted to speak “slander,” he suggests that it is also unjust. But though the injustice of speaking ill of others does not restrain him, the utility of doing so does. If one satisﬁes the desire to speak ill of others too often, such speaking will prove counterproductive and lose its value. For another reference to slander, see 55:28.

20. You are your own god — and are surprised that the wolfpack pursues you over the dark desolation of the wintry ice ﬁelds.

14 | One can make oneself into a god by recognizing nothing that transcends one’s own self-interest, but the cost of worshiping oneself is an utter loneliness and the sense of being hunted in desolate spiritual wastes by others similar to oneself (cf. 41-42:22). God is for DH the basis for human fellowship and thus the god who is worshiped must be a god who can be shared.

21. “Hallowed be your name.” Where your strength should be concentrated into a ray of light piercing the darkness, you let it be dissipated in a peat bog ﬁre in which nothing is consumed but all life is smothered.

DH cites the ﬁrst petition of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt. 6:9). Though he has just criticized himself for making himself his own god, in this waymark he aﬃrms what he feels his faith ought to be. God’s name is hallowed by lighting a light and focusing it in the darkness. Other waymarks in which the imagery of light and ﬁre appear are 50:27, 57:16, 57:16, 57:28, 58:10, and 61:7.

22. When it becomes silent around you and you stop in terror: you see that your work has become a ﬂight away from suﬀering and responsibility, your altruism a thinly disguised masochism; you recognize within you the steppe wolf ’s malicious, cruel heartbeat — then do not desensitize yourself by returning again to the chase. But hold fast the vision until you have plumbed its depths.

This waymark relates to 41-42:20 and reveals how strict DH could be in his judgment of himself. He even interprets his attempts to do good deeds as a form of masochism (cf. 41-42:14). No eﬀort must be made to escape this harsh vision. He must gaze at it until he has seen it to the very bottom. A more positive vision is described in 52:14.

23. God is a comfortable formula on the bookshelf of life — always at hand, but seldom used. In the cleanwashed peace of the hours of birth he is a jubilation and a fresh wind — whose nearness the memory is unable to retain. But when we are compelled to look ourselves in the face — then he rises above us in awful reality, beyond the parameters of all discussion and “feeling,” stronger than all protective forgetfulness.

15 | There are three images of God in this waymark. The ﬁrst is the comfortable, taken-for-granted concept of God, always at hand, but seldom used. In the second, God in moments of high experience is near and a source of joy, but this felt nearness cannot be retained. The third is God encountered as a condemning judge. This occurs when we must face ourselves, as in the previous waymark. When God is so experienced neither arguments, nor feelings of salvation we may previously have had, nor eﬀorts to forget at all avail.

24. The way to insight does not pass through faith. First through the insight we gain by pursuing the ﬂeeting light in the depth of our being do we reach the point where we can grasp what faith is. How many have not been driven out into the darkness by empty talk about faith as holding something to be true.

DH distinguishes between insight, faith, and “holding something to be true.” He strongly opposes identifying faith with the latter. Insight, on the other hand, must precede faith and appears to have to do with “pursuing the ﬂeeting light in the depth of our being.” A more detailed account of DH’s understanding of faith is to be found in 54:7, 55:15, 56:63, and 58:7.

25. Our innermost creating will intuits its counterpart in others, experiences its own universality — and thus opens the way to knowledge of the power of which it itself is a spark within us.

Here DH may be saying more about what in the previous waymark he calls “the ﬂeeting light” within us. If it can be identiﬁed with “our innermost creating will,” it is shared with others and thus has universality (cf. 56:14). Through it we gain knowledge of the power of which this creating will is a spark. The next step is to have faith in that power, not in ourselves.

1945-1949 Towards new shores — Two years have passed (1943-1944) for which there are no waymarks, the concluding years of World War II. DH is undersecretary in the Ministry of Finance and chairman of the board of the Bank of Sweden. He leaves the Ministry of Finance in 1947, moving to the Foreign Ministry. In 1948 he leaves the Bank of Sweden. In that year he becomes the Swedish delegate to the Organization for European Economic Cooperation charged with the implementation of the Marshall Plan. He serves as vice-chairman of the OEEC’s executive committee, spending much of his time in Paris while carrying out this assignment, returning to Sweden on weekends to visit his father. While DH was leading the Swedish delegation to the Organization for European Economic Cooperation, he was also being given larger responsibilities in the Swedish Foreign Ministry. After having been special advisor for ﬁnancial aﬀairs he became on April 22, 1949, the ministry’s Secretary-General.

During the four-year period these waymarks represent DH is 40-44 years of age. He moves in 1945 to his own apartment, for the ﬁrst time in his life living apart from his parents, since he had continued living with his father for ﬁve years after the death of his mother in 1940. In editing his journal DH has inserted the heading “Towards new shores --?” to identify these years. He may be referring to the many changes that occurred in his life and the new opportunities they presented.

Dashes are signiﬁcant punctuation marks for DH. He often divides sentences this way. Dashes provide occasions to pause and reﬂect and as the thought continues it often takes a slightly diﬀerent direction. Or what follows may be dialectically related to what came before, stating an opposing, contrasting idea. Another possibility is that the dash is inserted to emphasize what follows it. In the heading “Toward new shores --?” DH suggests that he is moving towards new shores, but he also inserts a question mark after the dash. Will that really be the case, or to which new shores is he headed?

This group of waymarks diﬀers from all of the others by reason of their length. They also have a common theme which has to do with what one does with one’s life. One must ﬁnd and properly use the talent with which one has been entrusted (45-49:1). There are moments when one can recognize those persons who have succeeded in living good lives (45-49:2). Those who have administrative responsibilities must at times signal the failure of those under

17 | their direction (45-49:3, 10). Some persons will react to their failures by suicide (45-49:4, 6, 7). Very few have dared to ﬁnd through self-surrender the richness that life can bring (45-49:5). The failure of one generation can be passed on to the next (45-49:8). One must struggle to overcome childishness and weariness if one is to live responsibly (45-49:9, 12). DH ﬁnally thinks of two models, the gull, a well-fed bird of carrion, comfortably at home among us all (45-49:11), and Jesus, who is willing as he accepts his calling also to accept condemnation as its fruit and presupposition(45-49:13). Perhaps in these waymarks we have some indication of the new shores to which DH alludes.

1. In every moment you choose your self. But do you choose — your self? The body and the soul have a thousand possibilities from which you can build many selves. But only one of these gives congruence between the chooser and what is chosen. Only one — which you ﬁnd only if you choose to exclude all the chances to be something else which you in curiosity, lured by wonder and desire, toy with, too shallow and too ﬂeeting to preserve anchorage in the experience of life’s deep mystery and the consciousness of the entrusted talent which is “I.”

DH emphasizes that whereas a thousand possibilities lie before the individual as he/she chooses, only one set of choices enables one to choose one’s true self. Thus choosing means excluding possibilities that would prove too shallow and too ﬂeeting. One must seek life’s deep mystery and preserve one’s anchorage there. One must become aware of the entrusted talent which deﬁnes one’s self.

The reference to the entrusted talent is an allusion to one of Jesus’ parables (Matt. 25:14-30). In this parable a master entrusts his servants with various amounts of money, each sum adapted to the servant’s ability, to be used while the master is away on a long journey. When he returns the servants must give an account of how they used what was entrusted to them. All who have used their talents and thus gained more talents are rewarded, but the servant who has done nothing with his talent is punished. “Talent” thus has come to mean the gifts and endowments which each of us has. It is important that we should know what our abilities are and use them well.

What DH does not discuss in this waymark is what a person can do who is conscious of having made many wrong choices. Is there any way of

18 | developing one’s self if one has gotten oﬀ to a bad start in life? Some choices are irreversible. It may not be possible to go back and ﬁnd the course that one should have taken. There is no suggestion in this waymark that one can begin where one is and build a new life, in this way also ﬁnding one’s true self, even if there have been many bad choices in one’s past life. That such a possibility exists is what the Christian gospel of repentance and forgiveness proclaims. DH has not yet expressed awareness of this aspect of the Christian message. For later waymarks dealing with the theme of forgiveness, see 56:6, 57:6, 57:9, 57:30, 60:1.

2. Wet dark wool. Waiting averting glances. Tired mouths. It is late — The work proceeds with business-like indiﬀerence. At the polished black marble tombstone of the counter many are still waiting. The sexless light from white ﬁxtures is reﬂected in glass and enamel. Outside there is darkness. The door slams — and a draft of raw dampness cuts against the dryness of the chemical-saturated air. “Life, you embracing rich, warm, blessed word --”

Then he looks up from behind the scales on one of the high desks: wise and friendly, absent in his concentration. Deep wrinkles in a gray skin witness to experience’s gentle irony and a long life within four walls. Here and now --. Only this is real: An old man’s good face, Naked for an unguarded moment Without past and without future.

DH is describing an experience in a pharmacy. It is late in the day and apparently raining outside. Many are standing at the counter waiting for their prescriptions. DH cites a line from a poem, “Jairi dotter” ( Jairus’ Daughter), by Verner von Heidenstam (1859-1940) [Samlade verk, vol. 6, Dikter, Stockholm: Bonniers, 1944, p. 168]. A wandering begging Bacchus priest is encouraging the daughter of Jairus (Mark 5:22-43), unhappy about having been called back from paradise, to return to life again. DH has altered the line somewhat. The priest says, “Live! Embracing rich, warm, blessed word!” As DH cites the line it has become an apostrophe to life. There is, however, nothing in the preceding

19 | description of the scene in the pharmacy that suggests such an aﬃrmation of life. Yet what follows does support the citation. DH sees for a moment the pharmacist, lost in thought, and he rejoices in the old man’s good face. The line from the poem, given the goodness that DH has seen, embraces also the whole of the pharmacy that late afternoon, with its wet dark wool garments, tired waiting customers, clerks doing their job, a tomb-like counter, and all the traces of past prescriptions mingled in the air. Another possible interpretation is that since DH can think of life as embracing in a rich and warm way the scene in the pharmacy, he is able to see the signiﬁcance of the unguarded moment as the old pharmacist looks up.

3. She knew that nothing would improve, that it would never be otherwise. He no longer did anything, had lost interest in his work. He said it was because they wouldn’t give him a free hand. And now she sat here and begged for his freedom, begged because she wanted to believe that he was unreasonably bound and really would become a man again if only he received his freedom. Wanted to believe, in order to be able to preserve her faith in him. She knew the answer, but still had to force herself to hear it: he was as free as anyone can be in a modern society’s economic labyrinths, and each external change would only give him new disappointments, only lead to a recurrence, when he discovered that all was as before.

Yes, yes --. And she knew more: that there was not and could not be any way out. Because behind his talk about freedom was hidden a child’s wish to overcome death, an indiﬀerence for any work the result of which should not be his even long after his death. — And yet she sat here and begged.

Here is another negative estimate of a person (cf. 41-42:1), perhaps a subordinate who was under DH’s supervision. The man’s wife has come to plead her husband’s case. The man has lost interest in his work and no longer does anything, because, he says, he has not been given a free hand. His wife is begging that he be given the freedom he wants, so that he might become a man again. Yet, DH says, she really knows that this will not help. Her husband is as free as anyone can be in our modern society. His problem is that he is unwilling

20 | to accept the kind of world this is, where one must be willing to lose oneself (in this sense die, cf. 41-42:9) in an enterprise larger than oneself, where one’s own contribution becomes a part of a larger whole, where no individual will be remembered for what he/she accomplished. The wife knows her husband’s faults and yet she begs, for she wants to believe in her husband. This DH understands.

4. Before what had happened was clear to us he was already far out. We could do nothing. We saw only how the undertow was faster and faster drawing him away from land. We saw his fruitless, tiring eﬀorts once again to touch bottom. It was only instinct that drove him to defend himself. In his consciousness he isolated himself from reality. When, however, momentary glimpses of his actual situation forced themselves upon him, he told himself that we others were in a worse condition. And when we nonetheless took it all so calmly --! He would certainly still be ﬁrmly clinging to that thought when he was pulled down in the ﬁnal gurgling whirlpool. It had always been that way. Childishly dependent on admiring aﬀection, he had presupposed uncritical friendship even among the indiﬀerent and hostile. He had acted on this basis — though often with an instinctive yielding to the interests of others, at the same time also out of fear of collision with reality, which could tear apart his web of illusion, and in an unreﬂective striving to develop the friendship that perhaps did not exist. When words he had spoken were quoted against him, he in good faith denied having said them. And when this denial was called by its right name, he interpreted this as a symptom of the critic’s mental imbalance; in time psychosis became a more and more common word in his mouth. What was it that we felt, when for the ﬁrst time we realized that he had gone too far out ever to be able to regain foothold?

This is the ﬁrst of a series of waymarks in this section that deal with death. In this waymark a man is drowning. It may be accidental but it is more

21 | likely a case of suicide. Apparently several are observing him but notice his predicament when it is too late to rescue him. DH knows the victim and sees in the manner of his death an illustration of the pattern of the man’s life. DH reﬂects, “What was it we felt, when for the ﬁrst time we realized that he had gone too far out . . . ?” This had ﬁrst happened in his tangled personal relationships. Finally it happened, probably by the man’s own choice, in the watery current that drew him to his death.

A theme to which DH will return is the thought that the strong have responsibility for the weak. When a person makes shipwreck of his life by his wrongful behavior, others are also to blame. It is not easy to say, however, what ought to have been done in such cases.

5. What is one to do on a bleak fall day but stroll for a while through the streets — drifting with the stream?

Slow, with the weight of an inanimate object, with stoppages and listless lazy gyrations where currents meet. Slow — and gray. The November day has reached that hour when the light has retired beyond the low, frozen cloud cover, but twilight has not yet brought reconciliation. Slow and gray --. He searches every face. But the people who aimlessly ﬂow through the gray ditches of the streets are all like himself: atoms in whom the radioactivity is extinguished and the energy has bound its eternal circuit around nothing. “. . . to be enabled to disappear in light and become song” (Erik Blomberg). To let go of the image which before the world bears a name, built up in the consciousness, through social ambition and under the restraints of the forming will. To let go in order to fall, fall — in the trust of blind devotion. To something else, to someone else --.

To dare — He searches every face, but sees in the niggardly light only endless variations on the theme of his own niggardliness. So Dante might have imagined the

22 | punishment for those who never dared. — Into the fulﬁlling death of self-surrender each one goes alone. And on this side of it one will never ﬁnd the way to anyone who has gone through it.

The setting for this waymark is a November afternoon very likely in Stockholm. There is a saying that in Sweden October, November, and December are gray. There is very little sunshine, which does aﬀect the mood of the people. DH compares himself and the people he meets to inanimate objects slowly drifting on a stream through the gray ditches of the streets. He thinks of a line from a poem by Erik Blomberg (1894-1965) which suggests that human life can become light and song. But this, DH is convinced, requires self- surrender, a willingness to give up the self-image and the name that one has tried so hard to build up over the years (in this waymark “social ambition” is in English). One gives it up through falling in blind devotion to something else, to someone else, the latter expression suggesting a personal God (cf. 61:5).

This, however, requires daring. DH sees very little of this daring in the faces of those he encounters. Their self-centered narrowness is very similar to his own. They are almost in his imagination walking dead persons, already suﬀering the punishment that Dante might have prescribed for those who had never dared, Nor is it likely that anything they encounter as they drift along through life will help them, for each must go alone into the fulﬁlling death of self- surrender. DH seems to be implying that one will never understand what this self-surrender means until one has experienced it oneself. Even if one should meet a person who had dared in this way, unless one had oneself also so dared one would fail to recognize this quality in the person one was meeting. This waymark casts light upon 41-42:9. The death that DH insists one must accept is not suicide. It is daring to lose one’s life in the service of others. This is what DH feels called to do but which he ﬁnds it so hard to will to do.

6. It was no doubt a bit early for snake’s head fritillaries. But the May sky stood high over the plain. The warbling of larks and light were bound together in a cool ecstasy. And the river’s clay brown water was still ﬂowing with the spring thaw’s rapid freshness.

Out in the stream a dark bundle turns slowly. A glimpse of a face, a whimper, a willed movement that again presses the face under the surface.

23 | No cloud obscured the sun. The song of the lark was not silenced. But the water is suddenly dirty and cold — the thought of being pulled to the bottom by the heavy body which out there is ﬁghting for its death gives rise to a raw nausea. And this nausea paralyzes, more than the feeling of fear. Cowardly? The word must still be said.

She went to the end of the esplanade and then waded out in the mud until it was deep enough and the current pulled her along. But she did not sink. The water pushed her back. With open mouth she pressed her head again and again, ever wearier, under the surface. It must not fail again this time. She heard cries from the shore. If they should --

During eﬀorts at resuscitation they have uncovered the upper part of her body. There she lies stretched out on the river bank — beyond all human nakedness, in the inaccessible loneliness of death. The pale, ﬁrm breasts are lifted in the white light, a heroic torso of blonde marble stone in the tender grass.

DH describes a suicide by self-chosen drowning that he himself witnesses. It is May, one of the most beautiful times of the year in Sweden. As DH views the scene of a woman struggling to drown, the day loses its beauty for him. He thinks of diving into the river to rescue her, but has mingled feelings of disgust (for what she is trying to do in the dirty, cold water) and fear. Is he a coward? He grants that at least that possibility must be mentioned. Others apparently also notice what is happening and manage to bring the woman to shore, but are too late in their eﬀorts at artiﬁcial respiration. The waymark ends on an aesthetic note. DH is impressed with the woman’s beauty in death.

The waymark raises a number of questions. To what extent are we obligated to risk our own lives to save those who are seeking to end theirs. Are there diﬀerent kinds of courage? Are we required, in order to avoid the charge of cowardice, to be able to display all of them. Does a person have the right to die if that person chooses to end her/his own life? Is that right the same whatever one’s age? Can a person become so defeated in life that no return to an acceptable quality of life is any longer possible?

24 | 7. When the shot was ﬁred, he fell on his side in the gravel under the maples. The air stands still in the late July day’s rainy gloom, which is increased in the heavy leafy shadow. The head lies in proﬁle, with features ﬁnely chiseled, but still immature — pale against the gray sand, with a little sore in the temple. Only the dark blood which slowly ﬂows out of the nose has color in this dead light. Why --? Over the growing pool of blood no questions can reach into the land you have sought. And no words can any longer call you back. — This eternal “beyond” — that can separate us from those chosen by death long before the bullet hits the temple.

In yet another suicide, a young man takes his life. It is late in July, the vacation month in Sweden, toward evening, under some maple trees. One wonders how DH happened to be there. He asks why this happened and expects no answer, for no communication is possible with one who has entered the eternal beyond. His reference to a suicide victim being “chosen by death” long before the death actually occurs seems to imply that death has a power over some people. DH may be saying that if one would save a suicide victim one must begin long before that person’s situation has become so desperate that death begins to choose him.

8. It must have been late in September. Or perhaps the situation in my memory has itself created the atmosphere which ﬁts its nature. “We sisters and brothers were so happy at home. I remember the Christmases when we all gathered. Who could then believe that life would become so tattered --?” I remember the words and the silenced voice, when — thirty years later — her daughter writes the same epitaph over her childhood and her life.

Each of the last four waymarks has indicated the time of the year. We have passed from gray November to sunny May to late July, and now to late September. DH isn’t sure it was just then, or if late September simply was suggested by his memory as the appropriate atmosphere for what he recalls. Someone has told him of a happy childhood, especially at Christmas when

25 | everyone gathered together. But life later became so tattered, so ragged and torn. This DH says he remembers having heard 30 years earlier. Now the daughter of the unfortunate woman (very likely deceased) says much the same about what has happened in her life. The waymark seems to suggest that such failure, such a tearing apart of what at the outset appears so promising, can be passed on from one generation to another.

This waymark poses problems. Even if it were written in 1949, DH would have been at most 14 years old when the ﬁrst conversation he remembers took place. The 30 years are almost necessary, however, if the daughter is to tell the same story. It does seem strange that DH should have had such memories from his early teens. He may, however, have been the kind of young lad who could receive such conﬁdences and also remember them. Another problem concerns the repetition of the same experience in two successive generations. How could the daughter have had a happy childhood if her mother’s life had become so tattered and torn? Perhaps, though, children can be shielded from such sadness.

9. In the last curve down toward the valley he lost control of the car. When it plunged out over the edge of the road his only thought was: So then I have done my bit — His only, tired, happy thought.

It was not to be so: he was to continue his life. But not this journey. When the world again took shape around him he found it hard to keep back the tears — of self-pity and disappointment that his vacation plans had been shattered.

The one reaction was no less genuine than the other. We can be ready to turn our backs on life, but still complain like children if it does not fulﬁll our wishes.

It is not clear as to whether DH himself experienced this automobile accident, or whether someone else described it for him. We have no other information about any such accident in which DH was ever involved. The driver, as the accident is occurring, thinks it may prove fatal and reﬂects with mingled weariness and happiness that his life’s work is now over. When he ﬁnds that he is going to live, he feels sorry for himself because his vacation plans are ruined.

26 | DH compares the two reactions, an almost grateful readiness to have one’s life end; complaint, when life does not end, that one’s immediate wishes have been frustrated. He regards the latter reaction as childish. Those who are ready to die should have attained greater maturity than this.

10. He was impossible. Not in the sense that he didn’t do his work: on the contrary he devoted endless pains to the tasks one gave him. But his manner brought him into conﬂict with everyone and began at last to harm the whole enterprise. When the crisis came and everything had to be brought to light he blamed the rest of us. In him there was nothing, absolutely nothing to criticize. Clearly his self- respect was so strongly bound to the thought that he was without fault, that one felt it repugnant to demonstrate step by step contradictions in his defense, piece by piece to unclothe him before his own eyes. But justice to others required it. When the last rag of deceit was taken from him and we knew that there was nothing more to say, out it came with convulsive sobs: “But why have you never helped me, why did you not correct me --? I have had the feeling that you were against me. And the fear and the uncertainty has driven me farther and farther in the direction that you now condemn. It has been so hard, everything. One day, I remember, I was so happy: one of you had said that something I had accomplished was very good --”

So in the ﬁnal analysis the fault was still ours. We had kept silent with our criticism — but let it hinder us from giving him the slightest recognition, and in this way barred all the roads to recovery. So it is always the stronger one’s fault. We lack life’s patience. We seek instinctively to eliminate a person from our sphere of responsibility, as soon as the outcome of this experiment of life appears in our eyes to be a failure. But life continues its experiments far beyond the boundaries of our valuations. For this reason also life at times appears to be so much more diﬃcult than death.

27 | This painful waymark presupposes a situation in an oﬃce where it is ﬁnally necessary to call one of the workers to account. The problem is not that he doesn’t work hard enough, but his way of doing his work creates conﬂict and has produced a crisis which makes this confrontation necessary. The man defends himself but his defenses are ﬁnally broken down. In tears he reproaches the others for not having helped him and laments the isolation he has felt for so long.

DH reﬂects that in the ﬁnal analysis it is the strong who are to blame (cf. 45-49:4). When one withholds criticism, that may also lead one to withhold encouragement and in this way to bar the way to improvement. There is a tendency to try to eliminate from our sphere of responsibility those whom we consider to be failures. But such people go on living and we must ﬁnd ways to relate creatively and redemptively with them. This makes it even for the strong at times more diﬃcult to live than to die.

11. It stands alone in the fog on the moist black stone embankment along the water, fat and heavy in the rump, with feathers padding the rounded curves of the body and the reptilian musculature of the arched neck. Shameless amber eyes without the expression for anything else than naked voracity. A yellow powerful bill made for prey, but without predator’s spare, ﬁerce elegance. I have seen them ﬂoat with the current ﬁghting over rotting food remnants. Seen them sweep down to investigate the condoms which after the holidays have drifted round in the backwaters by the wharves. I recall them heavily swaying on the clayey plowed furrows on raw autumn days — clumsy worm pickers on the broad earth slices, whose cut wet sides were shiny, oily, slippery.

How far away it is: Shrill gull cries tear apart the last of the night darkness’s skin-soft, thin ﬁlm of stillness --. Cries interwoven with swift, white play over the swell, with the saltness and the awakening breeze. The rest had been light — like an animal’s in freedom. And in sleep the senses had stretched themselves toward the new day.

28 | Not until I am very close does it move with an indolent ﬂap of the wings a few meters to the side — a well-fed bird of carrion, who feels comfortably at home among us all.

This is a waymark about the seagulls DH sees as he walks to work along an embankment in the Stockholm harbor. DH has mixed feelings about the gulls. They represent a shameless appetite. They live on rotting food, worms picked in the ﬁelds, and carrion. Yet their shrieks in the early morning mark for the light sleeper the beginning of a new day, with all that it may promise. DH notes how the gulls are not afraid of him, moving just a few meters to get out of his way. These birds of carrion have learned to live well with the people of Stockholm. DH implies that perhaps the people among whom the gulls live share some of their characteristics.

12. Silent — as when a long bitterness has been broken by tears. Bare ground. The wide water’s moist glitter in the soft light — Around me the soft walls of the mist and the low cloud cover with the mauve shimmer from the setting winter sun. In the water’s mirror world, between pale olive against pewter, the bare branches of the alder are slowly swaying in the slow wind of the imperceptible waves.

And later: Around the single ﬂame a womb of warm light in the soft darkness. The hyacinth’s white cloud above the mirror’s deep well of darkness. Glimpses of stems in the whispering forest of books.

Not for us, perhaps never for us: The silence is always broken by the ringing telephone calling us to a conversation from which we ﬂed, but from which we shall not escape. When quiet returns memory whispers promises of the peace of conscience a shared burden brings. No rest which is not everyone’s, no stillness until all has been accomplished.

29 | In this impressionistic waymark DH tells of enjoying the out-of-doors on a late winter afternoon as the sun is setting. He describes the water, the mist, the setting sun, and the way the trees are reﬂected in the water’s gently rippled surface. Later he is in his room. One ﬂame creates a warm circle of light. White hyacinths are reﬂected in the mirror surface of the table. Books in the bookcase look almost like tree trunks. Just as forests are thought to whisper as the wind blows lightly through them, so the books give promise of conversation. But the silence is broken by the ringing telephone. DH is unable to escape from the duties to which it calls him. He concludes that there is to be no rest until all will be able to rest, no silence until all that should be done is ﬁnished. It is possible that the last words, “all has been accomplished,” are intended to suggest the last words of Jesus on the cross, according to John 19:30. If so, DH may be saying that there will be no rest until life is ended. It would seem, however, that there should be some rest stops, some periods of relative relaxation along the way (see, however, 61:12).

13. Provide for one’s own comfort — and be rewarded with glimpses of satisfaction followed by long, exhausting, ashamed emptiness. Struggle for one’s own position — weakly defended against the self-revealing disgust behind the talk about the necessary preconditions for an achievement. Give oneself to the task — but at the same time in doubt about the task’s value and therefore constantly waiting for recognition: perhaps slowly en route to gratitude for not being criticized, but far, far from being ready to accept criticism.

You asked for burdens to carry --. And complained when they were laid upon you. Was it another burden you had been thinking of? Did you believe in the sacriﬁce’s anonymity? The sacriﬁcial act’s sacriﬁce is to be regarded as its opposite. O Caesarea Philippi: to accept condemnation as the fruit and the presupposition of the endeavor, to accept it when the endeavor is conceived and chosen.

DH criticizes himself, confessing a divided self, that seeks comfort but is ashamed of these eﬀorts, that struggles for positions of advantage but rejects

30 | the rationalizations given for these eﬀorts, that works hard but isn’t sure that the work is worth doing, therefore wants reassurance from others and is overly sensitive to criticism. He has asked for burdens but complained about carrying those he received. He is beginning to see that sacriﬁce will be recognized, but then also criticized and condemned. Accepting this condemnation is itself a part of the sacriﬁce (Aulén, p. 52). DH thinks of Jesus at Caesarea Philippi (Mark 8:27-35), where in response to the confession of the disciples that he is the Christ he predicts his passion. This, DH says, is to accept what one feels oneself called to be and to do, fully recognizing at the time the choice is made that it involves one’s own condemnation. It is in sharp contrast to such behavior that DH views his own.

What did Jesus anticipate when he faced the cross? Since the passion predictions in the gospels received their present form in the post- resurrection period, many of them include references also to anticipated resurrection. DH does not think Jesus anticipated his resurrection, whatever that term should be understood to mean. Jesus thus is not certain that going the way of the cross will have any successful outcome (see 51:29, 57:13). This is why his decision to go to Jerusalem is, according to DH, even more remarkable.

1950 Soon night approaches In 1950 DH is 45 years old. He has returned to Stockholm after the termination of his duties as head of the Swedish delegation to the Organization for European Economic Cooperation in Paris. He is appointed to the Swedish Cabinet as a Minister without Portfolio, while he is Secretary- General in the Foreign Ministry. He is at the top of his career as a Swedish civil servant. Henry Pitney Van Dusen says that while he was at the pinnacle of civic oﬃce in Sweden, as far as his inner life was concerned, the next three years were years of darkest night, for he passed through a period of extreme dejection (Van Dusen, 68). These years “witnessed the depths of his inner despondency verging on despair … He experienced the most acute phase of self-questioning and self- accusation, of solitariness and dejection, a long twilight and black midnight … which continued until a wholly unforeseen and unexpected burst of dawn shortly before sudden elevation to climactic responsibilities at the United Nations transported him to a new world and a new life” (Ibid., 68). This interpretation of the waymarks written during the next three years relates to some extent to Van Dusen’s opinion that DH experienced a kind of conversion and that this religious transformation was preceded by a period of despondency and depression. We shall have to examine the waymarks during this period to see whether this is a correct interpretation of them.

It is important to understand what is meant by the heading “Soon Night Approaches.” Except for headings for four collections of haiku poems, this is the last time such a heading appears together with the year to introduce a new group of waymarks. DH does repeat the words, “Soon night approaches,” however, in connection with his New Year’s entry six times during the next eight years. He is quoting a line from a Swedish hymn by Franz Mikael Franzén (1772-1847) which his mother used to read aloud each New Year’s Eve (Den svenska psalmboken 1937 [Stockholm: Verbum, 1972],  119). It is not a New Year’s hymn, but a hymn for the Sundays after Easter. It tells of the risen Jesus as the good shepherd, who guides his sheep and feeds them. There is a prayer not to be led astray from this leader and then the last stanza reads:

How empty all the world can give, How brief the joys it oﬀers! Soon night approaches, when each one Of us will make departure. What, then, is all happiness here

32 | Compared with the promise: “Where I am, There you shall be also.”

DH makes three words from this last stanza of the hymn, “Soon night approaches,” a heading for almost all that is to follow in Waymarks.

1. “- - - and then, what is all happiness here compared with the promise: ‘Where I am, there you shall be also.’”

The ﬁrst waymark quotes three lines from the hymn stanza cited above, which closes with words from John 14:3, one of the most important of the New Testament expressions of the Christian hope. We must assume that in citing these words from the hymn DH was thinking of the whole hymn, though this does not necessarily mean that he understood the hymn in quite the same way as his mother understood it. Perhaps he was at this point chieﬂy interested in the contrast between a life given over to the pursuit of pleasure and a life devoted to the discipline called for in Christian discipleship.

2. In a whirling ﬁre of annihilation, In the complete destruction Of the icy sacriﬁcial act You welcome death. But when it slowly grows within you, Day by day, You suﬀer anguish, Anguish under the silent judgment which goes forth over your life, While leaves fall in the fool’s paradise.

DH contrasts his feelings about sudden death and the complete destruction it represents, as compared with the daily dying that growing older represents. “The silent judgment” may not be so much the fact that death is approaching, as the fact that one’s life is constantly being judged, though those who live in “the fool’s paradise” may not realize that this is the case. In the Swedish text the words “the fool’s paradise” are in English When DH uses as images of complete destruction not only ﬁery annihilation but also “the icy sacriﬁcial act,” one wonders whether he may in the latter reference have been thinking of Ibsen’s Brand. The waymark for Maundy Thursday, 1961 (61:4), is a signiﬁcant citation from Brand.

33 | 3. The chooser’s happiness in congruence with the chosen, The iron ﬁling’s peace in the magnetic ﬁeld’s energy line — The security of the consciousness’s reposing harmony When emptied of all content — This happiness is here and now, In the eternal cosmic moment. A happiness in you — but not yours.

This waymark indicates that despite DH’s intensive self-criticism, despite the loneliness he at times felt, he also experienced happiness and security. This happiness belonged to the present, to an eternal cosmic moment. It was in him, though not his possession. Thus it was not a happiness at his command, at his beck and call. But it was possible to seek for it and even ﬁnd it. Cf. 54:4, 56:21, 57:52.

4. The anguish of loneliness brings drafts from the storm center of the anguish of death. Only that exists, which is another’s, for only what you have given — if only through being receptive — is lifted out of the nothing which shall some day have been your life.

Van Dusen points out that during the three-year period, 1950-52, there are many waymarks that deal with loneliness (Van Dusen, 73-74). Despite the many friends DH had, he did lead a solitary life. He was unmarried, now living in his own apartment. His father was 88 years of age. The prospect of what could be a long, lonely old age lay before him. Did he suﬀer greatly from loneliness? He probably did, and yet each waymark that refers to loneliness must be interpreted in terms of what that waymark actually says. Aulén in discussing the meaning of loneliness in Waymarks writes: “It is deﬁnitely not suﬃcient to take into account only human relationships. In fact, loneliness has far deeper roots. It can be described as a cosmic loneliness, or, still more to the point, as a loneliness in respect to existence as a whole” (Aulén, E 20; Sw, 34). Aulén then goes on to refer to this waymark as an illustration of such a sense of cosmic loneliness. This would mean that DH is not here referring to his own yearning for human companionship, but to the human situation as such. Loneliness anticipates the ultimate loneliness of death. DH goes on to tell how one can face the loneliness of death by having made one’s life a part of the lives of others through what one has given, if only by being receptive. It is the

34 | interrelationship with others so achieved that endures, that is lifted out of the nothing that in other respects our lives some day will be. For other waymarks on loneliness, see 51:32, 52:16, 52:18, 52:24, 58:9.

5. With the paravanes of bluﬀ friendliness always extended, he thought that, despite his unskillful navigation, he could escape the danger of mines.

A paravane is a torpedo-shaped underwater protective device with sawlike teeth on its forward end, for use by vessels to sever the moorings of mines. DH likens life to living in mined waters. He describes a person who is attempting to use an artless friendliness as a means of disarming situations of possible danger to him, despite his lack of skill in navigating in social contexts.

6. The pet dog disguised himself as a lamb, but tried to hunt with the wolves.

A domestic pet dog would be more dangerous than a lamb, but not as dangerous as a wolf. DH is describing a person who is trying to appear less of a threat than he actually is, but also trying to play the game with those who are more ﬁerce and ruthless than he. For other references to wolves, see 41-42:20, 22.

7. Indiﬀerence, ignorance, consciousness of an audience (if only your reﬂected image in yourself ) — for such reasons I have seen you take a risk or assume a responsibility.

DH lists poor reasons for doing good things. He would perhaps grant, however, that it is good that we are driven in this way to do what we ought to do. In 41-42:14 he does, on the other hand, say that when the proper disposition of love is lacking, one can hurt others in one’s eﬀort to do good to them.

8. A blown egg ﬂoats well and follows easily every gust of wind — suﬃciently light for this, since it has become only a shell, without germ and without nutriment for growth. “A good mixer!” Without reserve and reticence, eager to please — with a speech without form and words without weight. Only shells --.

35 | DH is criticizing a person whom he regards as utterly superﬁcial. He is very distrustful of those who have mastered the skills of getting along in social situations but have little substance in their personalities. He is concerned about the abuse of language that takes place under such circumstances. Words, like the persons who speak them, can be “mere shells.” Aulén interprets this waymark as an example of DH’s criticism of himself (Aulén, E 17; Sw 30), but this is unlikely. DH did criticize himself rather harshly, but he also criticized others. The person described in this waymark is quite foreign to DH’s temperament.

9. — one of those who has had the wilderness for a pillow and called a star his brother. Alone. But solitude can be a communion.

DH may here be speaking about himself. Solitude or loneliness can be described in positive terms, for there can be communion with nature, as well as with oneself. Cf. 51:46, 51:50, 55:38.

10. A blood pulsing together with sap and rivers, a body with the earth’s rhythm in its movements --. Instead: a mind shut oﬀ from the oxygen of the open senses, exhausted by “plans and stratagems” — of importance only within four walls. A tame animal — in whom the race empties its energy, to no purpose.

Life in tune with nature is contrasted with life in the cities “within four walls,” wholly occupied with “plans and stratagems.” DH suggests that the evolutionary development of the human race is being adversely aﬀected by the urban life style. Despite the “stratagems,” the people planning them are “tame animals” and no useful purpose is being served by the energy the human race expends in them.

11. The overtones are lost and what is left are conversations which, in their poverty, cannot hide the lack of fellowship. We drift apart from each other. But why, why --? We reach out towards the other. In vain — because we never dared to give ourselves.

Conversation, according to DH, should establish real contact between two persons. When it fails to do this, this can be because the persons in question have lacked the courage to give themselves to each other.

36 | 12. Posture as a requirement for health — something diﬀerent, something wholly diﬀerent from the hard carapace within which we seek shelter in our imposturing.

A carapace is a hard protective outer covering. The word can be used metaphorically to refer to an attitude or state of mind (such as indiﬀerence) serving to protect or isolate from external inﬂuence. In this waymark there is a play on the word “posture” (Sw. hållning) and DH contrasts the inner and the outer. An erect posture is required for health, but this must not to be confused with the hard outer shell with which we attempt to hide our inner lack of character (our imposturing). According to Auden, the thought in this waymark is borrowed from Wilhelm Ekelund (Markings, 40; cf. 41-42:12).

13. A modest wish: that our doings should have a somewhat greater signiﬁcance for life than a man’s dinner jacket has for his digestion. And yet a good deal of what we describe as our achievement is surely only a garment with which we seek on festive occasions to hide our nakedness.

The imagery has to do with dressing formally for dinner, though formal dress has little to do with the digestive process. DH is distinguishing between what is real and what is superﬁcial and looking with a sharply critical eye on what are regarded as achievements. He wants his achievements to be signiﬁcant, the measure being the extent to which they have been contributions to the lives of others. Cf. 50:4, 50:27.

14. You ﬁnd it hard to forgive those who early in life gained the advantages of maturity. Apart from all else: why do you not put in the balance the long spring an extended period of youth has given you?

A distinction must be made between actual maturity and the advantages that go with maturity. DH prizes maturity greatly and is very critical of behavior that he regards as childish (cf. 45-49:3, 45-49:4, 45-49:9, 50:45, 50:48, 52:22). It does not necessarily follow that those who early in life enjoy the advantages that go with maturity have therefore themselves actually attained maturity. They may simply appear mature. It would seem, of course, that marrying and having one’s own home would certainly contribute to maturity. DH lived for a very long time with his parents. He also retained a youthful appearance. In this waymark he calls attention to the advantages that can attend “the long spring” of an extended youth.

37 | 15. After having breathed an atmosphere ﬁlled with the products of his spiritual combustion, one recalls that it is only in the lee of the wind from a sulfur works that a sparse vegetation is able to survive. — One asks oneself: When did this happen — and for how many generations will the eﬀects be traceable?

Using the imagery of a sulfur works, DH reﬂects on the negative inﬂuence a person can exert, very likely through language (“products of . . . spiritual combustion”), language that apparently many have heard. Only by being sheltered from this inﬂuence is the survival of wholesome discourse possible. DH even reﬂects about how many generations it will take until this inﬂuence is overcome. For a strong statement on the proper use of language, see 55:37.

16. Your low esteem for your fellow human beings does not in any case prevent you, with your own self-esteem intact, from seeking their esteem.

This waymark suggests that if one really has a low opinion of others, one should not care very much about their opinion of oneself. Or, if one did care about their opinions, this should tend to lower one’s opinion of oneself. DH wryly observes that these rules do not apply to him. He does not think highly of others, but seeks nonetheless to win their respect, while retaining a high opinion of himself. Cf. 41-42:15, 56:39.

17. Time passes, reputation increases and competence decreases.

Advancing age does not necessarily mean improvement in performance. DH observes that it is possible as the years go by for reputation to grow, while actual competence declines.

18. Giving and receiving sympathy: his friendliness is undoubtedly genuine — considered as a constitutive tendency to ﬁll his own life with the contents of the lives of others.

Is a negative criticism of the person described in this waymark being implied? DH has written: “Only that exists, which is another’s, for only what you have

38 | given — if only through being receptive — is lifted out of the nothing which shall someday have been your life” (50:4). Would such a statement apply to the person here described? Perhaps DH is thinking of a person more concerned about ﬁlling his life with the contents of the lives of others than with giving himself to them. Yet giving and receiving are reciprocal relationships. DH is not so interested, however, in the giving and receiving of sympathy. Also much of the giving he emphasizes is anonymous. The other need not be fully aware of the source of what has been received. Giving must furthermore be willed and would accordingly not be a person’s constitutive tendency. There may therefore be a somewhat mild criticism implied in this waymark.

19. Perhaps a great friendship is never reciprocated. Perhaps, had it been warmed and protected by its counterpart in another, it could never have grown to maturity. It “gives” us nothing. But in the space of its silence it leads us up to heights with wide — insights.

DH does not require mutuality in friendship. In some cases a friendship is more apt to grow to maturity if it is not reciprocated. The important thing about such a friendship is not what one gets out of it. In “the space of its silence” (cf. 25-30:10), in the ensuing loneliness, one is led to heights, where, instead of viewing wide vistas, one gains a broader knowledge of oneself.

20. When he abruptly told me that he had many friends, could easily make new ones, and with them had “ever so much fun,” it struck hard like a blow that had been well aimed. A question would have been meaningless. Only much later was I able to understand. Understand that the words hurt so much because my friendship still had a long way to go before it ripened into — friendship. I understood that he intuitively reacted in justiﬁed self- defense, sensing my true way and his.

This waymark very likely tells of an earlier experience, the rupturing of a friendship. DH suggests that what he at that time thought was “friendship” was a relationship from which the other person was in his own self-defense justiﬁed in terminating, in order to go his own way. This in turn enabled DH to ﬁnd his true way and helped him gain a more mature understanding of friendship.

39 | 21. A line, a shadow, a color — their ﬁery expressiveness The language of ﬂowers, mountains, shores, human bodies: a momentary interplay of light and shadow, the aching beauty of a neckline, the white crocus’s grail in the morning light of the Alpine meadow — words in a transcendental language of the senses.

DH expresses his sensitivity to the beauty of nature, of which the human body is a part. He indicates that he was not unresponsive to feminine beauty. He describes what he sees as might an artist, speaking of lines, shadows, and colors. At the same time a kind of communication is taking place. What the senses observe becomes a language by which the senses are transcended. Cf. 51:50.

22. Delight in the “ego” has an aspect of gourmandise for which our language lacks the right intonations: Mon cher moi — âme et corps — tu me fais un grand plaisir! [My dear self — soul and body — you give me great pleasure!] Your delight in yourself does not bloom without protection. The commandments are simple: don’t ever bind yourself to anyone and therefore don’t let anyone get into your life. Simple and destiny determining. The striving to protect one’s delight in oneself casts around the ego a frigid circle which slowly eats its way in towards the core.

This waymark corrects possible misunderstandings that the statements on friendship in 50:19-20 might occasion. Whereas there is a kind of solitude that belongs to true friendship (25-30:10), isolation can also be an expression of egocentricity, a delight in one’s own self to the exclusion of all others. This way of thinking can be expressed most aptly, DH feels, in the French language. But the isolation that this attitude engenders is not without its cost, a frigidity that in the ﬁnal analysis becomes self-destructive. In this waymark there is very likely an implied self-criticism.

23. The farce — your farce, O masters of men! The master of the hounds knows that he is king for but a day in a realm of rogues. And he knows that there are better ways to overcome a fox than the one he represents. While on the other hand --

40 | This is a commentary on the structuring of society, especially insofar as one man is the master of others. It can be likened to a fox hunt, which no one takes seriously. It is a game that is played despite the fact that there are better ways to handle foxes. DH concludes with the words, “While on the other hand — “, leaving the other side of the matter unexpressed. Perhaps if one understands what one is doing and does not take oneself too seriously, human leadership in the structures of modern society need not be a farce. The words, “O masters of men! The master of the hounds,” are in English in DH’s Swedish text.

24. On whatever social level the intrigues are planned and the struggle takes place, and irrespective of its external conditions even in other respects, when one’s own position is at stake, even the “best head” unfailingly reveals its naiveté. The tricks are so few. And the one who is out on such errands is as blind and deaf as a cock capercaillie in the courtship routine — not least when he thinks himself most sharp-sighted. A grace to pray for: that self-interest — which is inescapable — will never paralyze the capacity for self-scrutiny with a sense of humor, which alone can save the situation.

This waymark may have to do with the procedures by which one becomes “a master of men” (50:23). DH must have had many opportunities to observe the struggle for advancement. His own early success and the security his competence gave him made it possible for him to view the process with some objectivity, at the same time that he recognized that he was not himself wholly immune to its temptations. The capercaillie is the largest European grouse. For other references to self-interest, see 52:3, 57:6.

25. To tell only what is signiﬁcant for others. To ask only about that which one needs to know. In both cases limited to what actually is in the possession of the speaker. — To discuss only in order to reach a conclusion. “Think out loud” only with those for whom this has meaning. Between two who are in tune with each other let small talk and silence ﬁll the time only as carrier waves for the unexpressed. A good prescription for those who have experienced the truth that “for every careless word . . . .” But hardly popular in social life.

41 | DH oﬀers rules for guarding one’s speech. He applies a form of Occam’s razor, that words are not to be multiplied beyond necessity. With those in tune with each other, who can hear the overtones (50:11), conversation is to be quite intense. The complete biblical reference is: “I tell you, on the day of judgment you will have to give an account for every careless word you utter; for by your words you will be justiﬁed, and by your words you will be condemned” (Matt. 12:36-37). DH also cites this passage in 55:37. For other critiques of conversation he considers inappropriate, see 50:8, 50:32, 50:55, 51:12.

26. Why this longing in all of us that the thoughts of the living should now and again touch upon our name, even for some time after our obliteration? Just our name Anonymous immortality we cannot, of course, escape. The consequences of our lives and of our deeds can as little be annihilated as they can be identiﬁed and properly labeled — to our honor or our shame. “You always have the poor with you.” Also the dead --.

DH criticizes the yearning to be remembered after one’s death. He insists that we cannot escape anonymous immortality. Though we ourselves are obliterated (DH uses a very strong word for death), what we have done cannot be obliterated. All that we are and do has permanent consequences, but these consequences cannot be identiﬁed with particular individuals either for praise or blame. In this way we do have the dead always with us, like the nameless poor. The scripture reference is to Matthew 26:6-13. For another waymark critical of the desire to be remembered, see 56:53.

27. All are alike. — True in his ruthless obliteration of the diﬀerence between those who received few and those who received many talents. But not when it has to do with the stewardship of these talents: then the boundary between life and death remains as it was drawn eternally. Finally, nonetheless true, because we all constantly have before us the possibility of taking the step over this boundary — in both directions. To burn everything in the ﬁre of clear vision and still to hope that of what can be washed out of the ashes something will have value --

This waymark continues the thought of the previous waymark. In one sense death obliterates the distinctions between people (“his ruthless obliteration”

42 | suggests that it is God who brings this about); in another sense it does not. What is ultimately important is not the talents that were received but the use made of them. Of particular interest is DH’s statement that the boundary between life and death can always be crossed in both directions. This must mean that those who are not properly using their talents are in a sense already dead, but it is possible for them to come to life again. The reference to talents calls to mind Jesus’ parable of the talents in Matthew 25:14-30. Cf. 1 Cor. 3:13- 15. See 51:44, 51:47, and 52:6 for the signiﬁcance the term “boundary” comes to have for DH.

28. This incurable impulse to acquire — in the crassest sense to assimilate — the medium for the experience of beauty. Like the mountain troll, we want to eat the princess — in order constantly to repeat again the mountain troll’s experience. We pick the ﬂower. We press body against body — and crush the human beauty which is the body’s only through a linear animation, inaccessible to physical touch.

Here, as in 50:21, we have an analogy drawn between the beauty of the human body and the beauty to be found in nature, in this case the beauty of the ﬂower. DH states that such beauty is to be observed and in this sense enjoyed, but the urge to acquire its medium is to be resisted. The reference to the mountain troll wanting to eat the princess is an allusion to the poem “Ett gammalt bergtroll” by Gustaf Fröding (Samlade dikter, vol. l [Stockholm: Bonniers, 1910], 53-55). “The aching beauty of the neckline” is to be viewed (cf. 55:51); it is implied that an embrace would destroy it. A ﬂower is in some respects destroyed when picked, especially the wild ﬂower (cf. 51:58). DH might have noted, however, that physically touching resilient bodies need not harm their beauty.

29. When the streams of the subconscious separate to form sucking whirlpools, the masses of water can again be gathered into one stream if the ﬂoodgate is opened to the sluice of prayer — and this channel has been dug deep enough.

Prayer is a way of ordering the subconscious, but it requires discipline. Prayer can be an answer to life’s problems, but it is not an easy answer. For other discussions of prayer, see 41-42:3, 52:14, 55:16, 58:7.

43 | 30. To take warning from all the times we on meeting are ashamed because while separated from each other we accepted the impermissible oversimpliﬁcations which distance prompts, and the removal of all the decisive qualiﬁcations which force themselves upon even the blindest — face to face. With us human beings it really is the case that nothing is true — from a distance — the contrary of which is not also true — given the insight of immediate confrontation.

One wonders what DH means by “distance” in this waymark. Is it simply being separated from another person in space and time, or does it also imply the absence of communication during such a separation. Is it not possible to retain contact by letter or by telephone, or is there an all-important body language which is thereby missed? About what kind of inter-personal relationships is DH speaking, relationships among members of the family, romantic relationships, relationships between friends, or relationships among fellow workers? DH seems to have been very conﬁdent in his ability to interpret the true nature of a relationship when meeting another person. Do all people share this ability?

31. An observation: In the window across the street I see her day after day, evening after evening, playing patience. Patience, patience — death will very likely not keep you waiting so much longer.

Patience is a card game, a form of solitaire. DH does not think it is a very proﬁtable way to spend one’s time. He apparently ﬁnds it hard to imagine a person simply waiting to die. Such a point of view was expressed in 25-30:3. In 51:7 he indicates a greater understanding of the problems of aging.

32. — chatters on about this and that, muddles along the brier path of gossip, disloyal both to himself and to others. It is a matter of captivating — in order to own, at least for a while, a person whose feelings he doesn’t dare test through revealing his own. Rather this degrading clown role than to be left alone as not suﬃciently entertaining — or contemptible due to a ﬁxation to which there is no response.

44 | “Fixation” (Sw. ﬁxering) in this waymark means an excessive, obsessive, or unhealthy attachment. DH may have regarded some forms of infatuation in this light. The waymark can refer to a young man’s blundering attempts to relate to a young woman, but it can also refer to anyone’s attempts to gain attention. What can be at issue is failure to avow honestly one’s own true concern, lest there be no response. This is another waymark in which DH is sharply critical of the kind of conversation that can take place in many social situations. For other similar critiques, see 50:8, 50:11, 50:55, 51:12.

33. The feeling of shame for yesterday when the consciousness again rises from the night’s ocean. How devastating must not the confrontation between waking life and the springs of life have been for the verdict to be betrayal. It was not the repeated mistakes, the whole sequence of falsiﬁcations with which the inquisition was concerned — though God must know that they were a suﬃcient reason for self-contempt and unrest — but the great mistake, the falsiﬁcation of that within me which is greater than I — in docile adaptation to alien demands.

DH is critical of psychological explanations of human personality (51:40, 51:54), but in this waymark he is discussing what might be called the conﬂict between the ego and the superego. It is in the subconscious, which can exert its inﬂuence during the sleeping hours, that contact is made with “the springs of life.” The judgment takes place upon awakening (58:6). References to judgment are also found in 51:36, 57:9. The strong word “betrayal” also appears in 57:17, 57:32.

34. Between experiencing and having experienced: the moment when the experience gives us its last secrets. A moment we ﬁrst discover we have already passed when the cracks, stains, and peeling gilt lead us to ask what it was that once attracted us.

If this is a general statement, it reveals considerable pessimism with respect to what life has to oﬀer. DH may, however, be referring to particular kinds of experience, for there are experiences that do not live up to their advance billings.

35. Despite everything, bitterness can ﬂare up in you because others enjoy what you have not received. It can be limited

45 | to a few days of sunshine. But at this inexpressibly vulgar level lies ﬁnally the bitterness of death itself, in that others are allowed to go on living.

DH is rigorously honest in recording his reaction to experiences of deprivation. He says “despite everything,” for, aside from loneliness, he was not to any signiﬁcant extent deprived. Yet on a brief holiday in Lapland he could perhaps feel bitter if he was robbed of days of sunshine (cf. 51:34). This leads him to think of the fact that all are not given the same span of years. He acknowledges that it is inexcusable to begrudge others length of days. This waymark indicates, however, that DH valued life and wanted to live to enjoy it.

36. Like the bee, to distill a self-defensive poison from honey — the use of which, as is known, means the destruction of the bearer.

It is ironical that it should be possible to produce poison from honey. That the bee in using this poison not only harms others but destroys itself simply increases the irony. DH must have seen this to be an apt description of human behavior, especially when one thinks of the proliferation of armaments.

37. Do you actually any longer “have feelings” for anyone or anything else than yourself — if even that? Without the capacity for personal involvement your experience of others will at best be merely aesthetic. Yet even such an impaired experience brought you in touch today with a portion of spiritual reality which revealed your own utter poverty.

This waymark is a harsh self-criticism. Sometimes in such confessions DH is describing the human situation more generally. Here he seems, however, to be focusing on his own problems and suggests that he had recently met someone who did not share his poverty at this point. One might ask how accurate DH’s perceptions of others were (cf. 50:30). He was very severe in his judgments on himself but could be generous in his evaluation of others. This, however, is hardly a fault. If the waymark is not wholly accurate as a self-description, it does clearly state DH’s aspirations. The use of the term “aesthetic” in this context (cf. 57:12) may reﬂect the thought of Søren Kierkegaard in Enten/ eller (Either/Or, vol. l, trans. David F. and Lillian M. Swenson; vol. 2, trans.

46 | Walter Lowrie [Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1959]) and Stadier paa Livets Vej (Stages on Life’s Way, trans. Walter Lowrie [New York: Schocken Books, 1967]). Danish editions of both works were in DH’s library.

38. What must come to pass should come to pass. Within the boundaries of what must be you are therefore invulnerable.

It is a mark of maturity to have made one’s peace with that which is inevitable. DH goes a step further and states that what must be ought to be. Against these boundaries he does not struggle, but he also does not feel threatened by them. All of his energy can be used toward changing that which can, and perhaps should, be changed. For references to boundaries in other waymarks, see 41- 42:13, 50:27, 51:44.

39. He who works for daily bread. He who performs for a position. He who enjoys his rights. He for whom the problem has ceased to exist — as he rests on his laurels. And you yourself — ?

Within the narrow mine shaft, illuminated only by the headlight, the mechanical shovel cut through the mountain like caterpillar jaws at the head of a worm’s progress. Always dark. Always the same damp, dripping cold. Always the same loneliness — shut in by rock walls, without the rock’s security.

In this way he brought material out of the earth that was useful, provided money. Money which in part was to go to the other three and to yourself. For what? In order at least for you to feel into the marrow of your bones that you work not for the superego of career perfection but that you work for him, that he has a claim on you that takes preference over your claim on him.

Atonement for the guilt you bear in your success: to give all you are in order in this way at least morally to justify what you have, without lenience toward yourself or toward others, and in consciousness of your rightful claim upon others as long as you follow this way.

47 | This is a waymark about work. It begins with a description of diﬀerent levels of achievement, working for daily bread, performing (the Sw. spelar could suggest even “gambling”) so as to gain a position, having reached that goal and enjoying it, resting on one’s laurels. Before DH identiﬁes his own situation, he describes the gratitude and sense of obligation he feels, very likely to his father. He uses the image of a miner supporting his family by diﬃcult work in a mine. As far as we know none of DH’s immediate ancestors were so employed. A mine shaft is also mentioned in 25-30:4, though there it is associated with suﬀocating heat, here with damp, dripping cold. The image may suggest the diﬃculty and loneliness with which DH’s father, Hjalmar Hammarskjöld, carried out his life work. The elder Hammarskjöld’s labors not only provided for the needs of his four sons but also obligated them. It is therefore not enough for DH to be successful in his career. He must satisfy the claim his father has on him. His remarkable success becomes in a sense an occasion for guilt. He must achieve a moral justiﬁcation for what he has achieved by making a total commitment to his work. He does this by not being lenient with himself or with those who work under him, conﬁdent that the demands he makes upon himself he has a right also to make upon others. Thus none of the alternatives listed at the beginning of the waymark really ﬁts DH. He must go his own way.

40. Resounding silence Floodlit darkness Light Which seeks its counterpart In melody Stillness Which strives for deliverance In words Life In the soil’s darkness How seldom growth and ﬂower How seldom fruit These poor attempts to make an experience apprehensible (for myself, for others?) — the next day’s tasks — Y’s friendship or X’s noting of my achievement: paper screens which I set out against the void in order to keep my gaze from losing itself in the inﬁnity of space and time. Small paper screens. Blown to pieces by the ﬁrst waft

48 | of wind, burned by the smallest ﬂame. Tenderly cared for — but constantly changed. This dizziness before les espaces inﬁnis (the inﬁnite spaces) — overcome only if we dare look into them, unprotected. And acknowledge them to be the reality before which we must justify our existence. For in order to live, this is the truth to which we must attain, that everything exists and only in this we are.

The poem that begins this waymark contains a number of internal tensions, opening with apparent contradiction (“resounding silence”), then moving from one concept (“light”) to its equivalent in another medium (“melody”). It is suggested that words can resolve diﬃculties implicit in silence. The close of the poem is pessimistic, however. There is life in the soil but seldom growth, ﬂower, or fruit.

There is also tension in the remainder of the waymark, between the immediate here and now and the inﬁnite spaces. DH feels that so much of what he does and thinks he does to keep himself from considering inﬁnite time and space, though he does not succeed in these eﬀorts. It is in terms of inﬁnite time and space that our existence must be understood. It is in this context, in kinship with all other existent beings, that we also exist.

41. Time’s ﬂight. Our ﬂight in time — ﬂight from time. Flying on strong wings — with time. Never delaying, never anticipating: A rest in the movement — our victory over the movement. Lightly, lightly — Soaring over the restless waters. In the moment of performance, With all strength concentrated, one’s whole life at stake, Plunging into the deep. But no rest on the waves, bound by the currents. Again above the waters, stillness above the swell, Borne by the winds with one’s own wings’ strength. Never land, never a nest --. At last the ﬁnal plunge, When the deep again takes back its own.

Life in time is compared to the ﬂight of a bird above an endless expanse of water. The bird dives into the sea from time to time, but it can never rest on the

49 | waves. It is constantly soaring aloft, never resting on land or in a nest, until the ﬁnal plunge, when the deep at last takes back its own.

42. Hunger is my domicile in the land of the passions. Hunger for fellowship, hunger for righteousness — a fellowship founded on righteousness and a righteousness attained in fellowship. Only life meets life’s demands. And this hunger is satisﬁed only as life is formed so that my individuality is realized through becoming a bridge to others, a stone in the heavenly structure of righteousness. Not to be anxious about oneself, but to live out one’s individuality — wholly, but for the good of others. Not to follow others in order to buy fellowship, not to make convention into a law instead of living righteously. Freedom and responsibility. Each person is a unique creation, and if he fails, the achievement which could have been his will eternally be lacking.

DH expresses his deepest aspirations, his passion for fellowship founded on righteousness and righteousness achieved in fellowship (Matt. 5:6). He wants his individuality to be of beneﬁt to others, his life a bridge to others and thus also a building stone. The latter image may allude to Ephesians 2:19-22 and 1 Peter 1:4-5. When this waymark is compared with 45-49:1, one notes a much greater awareness of the social context in which the individual lives. DH emphasizes the fact that each individual has a unique contribution to make, which if not made by that person will be eternally lacking. In a later waymark (57:31) he states that for this reason even God can be limited by human irresponsibility.

43. I read about some, long since dead. Unnoticed other names creep into the text, and now it is about us that I read, when we will belong to the past. Most of what was is wholly gone. Once burning problems spread themselves over the pages as cold abstractions — simple, but nonetheless misjudged by us. And we resemble quite stupid, quite foolish and self-seeking puppets, moved by easily seen, sometimes somewhat entangled strings. It is not a caricature which I encounter in this research’s fool’s mirror. Only the proof that all of it was vanity.

50 | As DH reads about the past, he wonders what the judgment of history will be upon decisions he and his associates are making. Though he insists that one should not long to be remembered (50:26), he knows that those who hold public oﬃce are remembered. He fears that the judgment that will be made will be a negative one. It will be said that problems to which much attention was given were misunderstood. Those who seemed to act so self-conﬁdently were actually puppets moved by their own foolish, self- seeking desires. DH suggests that such historical research can function as a “fool’s mirror” (cf. 56:60, 58:6), a distorting mirror used by court jesters, who were often men of keen insight and caustic wit. What appears to be caricature should not be rejected but accepted as revealing the emptiness of so much that is done in public aﬀairs.

44. Out of his own self he knew — I know what is in man: of vulgarity, lust, pride, envy — and longing. Longing --. Also for the cross.

This waymark contains an allusion to John 2:24-25 (“ . . . Jesus did not trust himself to them, because he knew all men and needed no one to bear witness to man; for he himself knew what was in man” RSV). DH suggests that a part of Jesus’ knowledge was his by virtue of the fact that he was a human being and therefore was a knowledge we can share. By knowing ourselves we know also the vulgarity, the lust, the pride, and the envy of others. But that is not the whole story. There is also longing, longing even for the cross. Longing represents the positive side of human nature and can include the longing to be sacriﬁced (25-30:2, 50:46, 51:26, 52:7, 54:5, 55:9, 55:23, 57:47, 58:10, 59:81). There is good as well as evil in human beings and through self-knowledge one can become acquainted with both.

45. Is life poor? Are not instead your hands too small, your vision blurred? You are the one who must mature.

In this waymark about maturity (cf. 53:2, 7) DH states that if one complains about life, it is one’s inability to receive what it oﬀers (too small hands), one’s own inability to see its riches (blurred vision), that is at fault. DH is convinced that this can be remedied by increased maturity.

46. We may not choose the parameters of our destiny. But we give it its content. The one who wills the adventure shall also experience it — according to the measure of his

51 | courage. The one who wills the sacriﬁce shall be sacriﬁced — according to the measure of his purity.

Our destiny has boundaries that are beyond our control (cf. 50:38), but within those boundaries we can make signiﬁcant choices. Two important virtues in this connection are courage (cf. 54:23, 55:30, 56:24, 57:47) and purity (cf. 25-30:9, 55:27, 58:9). The reference to the one “who wills the sacriﬁce” recalls the longing for the cross of 50:44. DH stresses that this requires purity. Self- sacriﬁce is not a way of atoning for one’s impurity, for one will be sacriﬁced “according to the measure” of one’s purity.

47. Never to let the success hide its emptiness, the achievement its insigniﬁcance, the life of toil its dreariness. And in this way to retain the spur to further attainment — the pain in the soul that drives us beyond ourselves. Whither? That I don’t know. That I don’t insist on knowing.

DH wants constantly to be aware of the emptiness of success, the insigniﬁcance of achievement, and the dreariness of toil, in this way to retain an inward pain that spurs him to continuing eﬀorts to transcend himself. He does not require that the goal of this striving be seen. This is a sharp rejection of the psychological theory that human beings can only be motivated by positive reinforcement. DH’s ethic is one that strongly emphasizes duties (55:32,57:25) rather than rewards and satisfactions.

48. The little fellow takes a few awkward hops on one leg without falling down. And is ﬁlled with admiration for his own proﬁciency, doubly so because there are spectators. Don’t we ever grow up?

The theme of the previous waymark to some degree continues. A child is a symbol for a tendency DH observes more generally. We are too easily satisﬁed by our achievements, sometimes reinforced at this point by the applause of others. DH regards this as evidence of continuing immaturity.

49. O all the self-discipline, the nobility of spirit, the exalted evaluation of life that we can attribute to ourselves, we for whom all has gone well and who have made a success in

52 | everything --. Cheap, hardly even a bit better than to see in success a reward for virtue.

In several waymarks DH struggles with how to live with success. He feels guilt because of it (50:39). He reminds himself of its emptiness (50:47). To be too impressed by it is to be immature (50:48). One must not give oneself too much credit just because all has gone well. DH takes it for granted that no one would imagine that success is a reward for virtue, so that one could infer the latter from the former, though there may be some who are also tempted to think in this manner.

50. The dust settles heavily, the air dies, the light loses its radiance in the room that we are not constantly prepared to leave. Our love becomes impoverished if we do not have the courage to sacriﬁce its object. Our will to live remains vital only so long as we will life without regard to whether it is our own.

In this waymark the need to move on is stressed. There is no possibility to settle down and enjoy that which one has already attained (cf. 45-49:12, 50:41). DH’s reference to love that must have the courage to sacriﬁce its object is, however, misunderstood if it is thought he is speaking of love of other persons, as in 52:7, 56:13, 57:9, and 60:1. DH does speak of an interpersonal love in which the lovers are not bound to each other (51:48, 55:51). Here, however, he speaks of the love of desire directed toward objects or even goals. That which we desire we must be prepared to sacriﬁce. The life about which we are to be concerned must be life in more general terms, inclusive of others, not merely our own.

51. God does not die on the day that we no longer believe in a personal deity, but we die on the day that life for us is no longer made luminous by the constantly renewed, wondrous radiance from sources beyond all reason.

This waymark indicates that the endorsement of beliefs once handed down to him, to which DH was to refer in his 1953 radio speech, “Old Creeds in a New World,” (see 1953 Introduction) had begun to occur. Van Dusen, who regards 1950-52 as “the darkest night” in DH’s spiritual life, gives this waymark only the merest mention (Van Dusen, 200). Aulén refers to it as revealing “a growing

53 | yes” (the reference is to the Pentecost 1961 waymark, 61:5), but suggests that DH is hesitating to speak of God in personal terms (Aulén, E 23-24; Sw 37- 38). We have already seen in 45-49:5 (“ . . . to fall, fall — in the trust of blind devotion. To something else, to someone else”) that DH uses both impersonal and personal language in speaking of God, just as he does in 61:5 (“I once did answer yes to someone — or something”). Here he is acknowledging that the faith in a personal God one was taught as a child may have to be rethought. The reality to which faith refers does not, however, for that reason cease to exist, nor does the need for the radiance by which faith can illuminate one’s own existence diminish.

52. “To treat others as ends and never as means.” And myself as an end only in my capacity as a means: to shift the boundary between subject and object in my being all the way to the point that the subject, even if it is still in me, is outside and above me — and my whole being is thus an instrument for that in me which is more than I.

The quotation is from Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). A copy of Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten (Metaphysical Foundations of Morals) was in DH’s library. The complete statement is as follows: “Act so as to treat that which is human in your own person, as well as in the person of anyone else, always as an end, never merely as a means” (Grundlegung . . . , 3rd ed. [Stuttgart: Reclam, 1955] , 81). DH goes on to qualify the statement. Whereas Kant states that one is to treat both oneself and others as ends and never merely as means, DH says that one may treat oneself as a means. Indeed one may treat oneself as an end only in one’s capacity as a means. How is one’s use as a means to be determined? Here DH turns away from a Kantian autonomous ethic. The subject is no longer one’s own ego. Though this subject is still within the self, it is at the same time transcendent, outside and above, using the whole being of the self for the purposes this transcendent subject deﬁnes. If DH deﬁnes what faith in God means to him in 50:51, he here deﬁnes the ethic to which he feels himself committed. He does not discuss whether or not he feels that he is living up to this ethical ideal, though it does not seem that he regards it as an impossible ideal.

53. It is in this moment that I pay for what I have received. The past is recorded with the debt balanced up to the present. And on the future I have no claim. Is not the beauty in every meeting between a person

54 | and life created as the person repays his debt through concentrating in the existential moment all the energy which has been life’s obligating gift to him? The beauty — for the one who pays his debt. Probably also for others.

DH did feel an indebtedness because of the gifts and beneﬁts he had received. It was an indebtedness he thought could be repaid. He is not thinking here of making payment for guilt by reason of wrongs done, though he could also speak of guilt in relation to his debt for beneﬁts received (50:39, the Swedish word skuld can mean either “guilt” or “debt”). His understanding of the forgiveness of sins will be expressed in later waymarks (cf. 56:6, 57:30, 60:l). Here he is thinking of his obligation to give his all in return for all that he has received. This must be done now, in each present moment. It cannot be deferred to the future (cf. 51:6, 57:18). There is a beauty when this is done for all who are concerned.

54. The longest journey Is the journey inwards. The one who has chosen his destiny, Who has begun the trek Towards his own ground (does such a ground exist?) Still among you, He is outside the fellowship, Isolated in your feelings As one condemned to death, Or one whom imminent departure Prematurely dedicates To each person’s ﬁnal solitude.

Between you and him is distance Is uncertainty — Respect.

He himself will see you Ever farther away, Hear your enticing calls Become fainter.

55 | This poem describes the inward journey DH felt impelled to make. There is no one term he uses to indicate the direction of this journey. The word here translated “ground” is botten (bottom). In 41-42:24 he speaks of det innerstas ﬂyende ljus (the innermost’s ﬂeeting light, which I have translated “the ﬂeeting light in the depth of our being”). In 55:55 he does speak of walking in a dream with God through “the depth of being” (väsensdjupet). In 56:21 he uses other language and asks whether one’s own life can possess a meaning as a fragment of Life, which leads to a question (“If Life exists --?”) similar to the one found in this poem (“does such a ground exist?), which in 56:21 he answers by saying, “Try and you shall experience: Life as reality. . . . Try though daring the leap into a subordination without reservation.” In this poem the question remains unanswered. He does suggest, however, that the one who seeks the ground of his being becomes inescapably estranged from those around him. This is because so few share this quest (cf. 45-49:5). Nonetheless, despite the distance and the uncertainty, there is respect (or consideration) for the one who in this way is moving away from ordinary human fellowship.

55. The feeling of emptiness bordering on guilt after the evening’s social event, an activation of the anxiety which is the unfailing companion of sluggishness and inadequacy — Perhaps only because the evening not only was meaningless but also unnecessary — but nonetheless was staged out of consideration, which in a human relationship of such self-evidence is a concession to the mortal sin of sluggishness. The comedy then had to be played to the end, despite the fact that in this situation it had to be ﬁlled by a chatter that degraded the living reality.

DH is protesting against what he regards as meaningless conversation (cf. 50:8, 51:12). On this occasion he is commenting on a social event, possibly devoted to honoring someone whom DH did not consider worthy of such attention. For this reason very little that was signiﬁcant could be said.

56. How unveiled was your solitary thick-skinned self- satisfaction before his manifest anguish in striving for living contact! How diﬃcult was it not to help when you in another encountered your own problems — uncompounded.

56 | DH criticizes himself for not responding to an appeal for fellowship. He acknowledges that there are two aspects of his personality, one that appears satisﬁed with solitude (cf. 50:9, 55:60), another that yearns for meaningful relationships with others (50:42). He reﬂects that it is precisely one’s own need for fellowship that makes it so diﬃcult to help others ﬁnd it.

57. Suddenly I understood that he in himself was more real than I am, and that what was being required of me was to experience his reality not as an object but as a subject and as more than my own.

The thought of the previous waymark is continued. DH recognizes in the person he has met, despite this person’s frustrated striving to make contact with others, greater reality than he ﬁnds in himself. He distinguishes between experiencing the reality of such a person as an object and as a subject, which relates to the distinction between end and means in 50:52. Given DH’s later interest in Martin Buber’s I and Thou (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1937), which book he was translating from the original German into Swedish at the time of his death, this could be an early reference also to the distinction between regarding a person as a thou/you and a he/she.

1951 During this year DH continued in the Swedish Foreign Ministry as Secretary- General and a nonparty Minister without Portfolio in the Swedish Cabinet. Also in 1951 he became vice-chairman of Sweden’s delegation to the United Nations.

From this year on, while a new section begins with each new year, there are not other titles for the years. For several years, however, DH introduces the ﬁrst journal entry of the year with the words of the hymn, “Soon night approaches,” ﬁrst cited in 1950.

1. “Soon night approaches --.” Well, yet another year. And if this day were to be the last: “-- How can we be cut short or swindled: we who in every possible way have been long since overpaid. . .”

The pulley of the passing days draws us ineluctably forward. One relief in all this is that there is no detour around it. Everything else I can as a chooser attempt to tamper with, everything — except this. Which melts together days and years into one single moment — a moment before death, in each of its parts illumined by the light of death, to be measured by death’s measure.

In this meditation on advancing age DH states that if his life should end during the coming year, there could be no complaint that death had come prematurely, or that he had been cheated out of years of life that should have been his, for life has already given him more than he deserves. The citation concludes a poem “Neigung” by Rainer Maria Rilke, (1875-1926),Werke in drei Bänden (Wiesbaden: Insel Verlag, 1957, vol. 2, 140). Leif Sjöberg and W. H. Auden in their translation of DH’s journal attribute this citation to John Eckhart (1260-1327), a German Dominican mystic known as Meister Eckhart, a volume of whose writings was included in DH’s library ( John Eckhart, Meister Eckehart Schriften, ed. Herman Büttner [ Jena: Eugene Diederichs Verlag, 1934, 1943). DH did not identify Eckhart as the author of nine German citations in Vägmärken (55:28, 56:11, 56:12, 56:34, 56:57, 56:58, 57:33, 58:2, 58:3) from Eckhart’s writings, though he did mention Eckhart in 56:30 and 56:31.

There is no escaping life’s termination, no udenom (detour around it). The use of the Norwegian word is an allusion to Henrik Ibsen’s play, Peer Gynt (Samlede

58 | værker, vol. 3 [Kristiania: Gyldendalske boghandel, 1914] , 212, 313-314). DH may also have a passage in Strödda blad ur Bertil Ekmans efterlämnade papper ([Stockholm: Norstedt & Söner, 1923] , 32) in mind (see 51:24). He says that it is good to think of life as bounded and measured by death, to estimate everything in the light that the certainty of one’s approaching death casts upon it.

2. When before a great decision someone grasps your hand — a gleam of gold in the iron gray, the proof of all that you did not dare believe.

While DH states in 50:56 and 52:4 that he did not relate easily to other individuals, this waymark indicates that he appreciated the support of a colleague, even if the sign remained unarticulated. This made it possible for him to dare to believe that he was not alone.

3. The time is always long for the child who is waiting — for Christmas, for next summer, for becoming grown up. Long also when the child gives its whole soul to every moment of a happy day. Later --

DH reﬂects on childhood experience and suggests that time is long for a child not only during the period of waiting but also during the moments of enjoyment. He implies that this experience changes in later life but does not indicate the nature of these changes. In 50:48 he is critical of the immaturity of the child. Here he seems to want to be able to recover and hold on to the positive qualities of anticipation and wholehearted enjoyment in a child’s experience. See also 53:18.

4. Out of loyalty to others he was driven to aggressiveness by their feelings of inferiority.

It is not clear as to whether the person of whom DH is writing was driven to be aggressive on behalf of a group needing help, or whether he was reacting aggressively to that group’s feelings of inferiority, seeking in this way to help them. 25-30:8 reminds us that DH was aware that many regarded him as a superior person. He may have felt it important, however, that those who admired certain persons as leaders not underestimate their own gifts and capabilities.

59 | 5. “To repose in the indiﬀerence of others.” And at the same time hunger for sympathy!

DH is commenting on a quotation that has thus far not been identiﬁed, introducing a dialectic, which may not have been recognized by the author of the passage cited. One can enjoy the indiﬀerence of others but at the same time be hungering for expressions of real concern. 50:56 is another example of this dialectic. For other references to sympathy, see 51:16, 51:29, 57:3, 57:12.

6. The present is meaningful through its own content, not as a bridge to a future. And its content is our content in the present, that by which our emptiness is ﬁlled, if we are capable of being receptive.

DH may be indicating what it means to view life in the light of death (51:1). It is to place the chief emphasis on the present, not viewing it simply as a bridge to a future. Clearly the present leads to the future, but it has meaning in its own right. Its meaning is the meaning of our lives at the present moment (54:18, 57:35), though in order to experience this meaning we must be receptive (55:58, 57:1), open to the content by which our lives could now be ﬁlled.

7. “Old men ought to be explorers.” Some must be — because the human everyday world is closed to them. Few discover new worlds.

The three sentences of this waymark contain three modalities. The opening quotation from T. S. Eliot (1888-1965, “East Coker,” Four Quartettes [New York: Harcourt, Brace: 1943], 17) speaks of what ought to be. DH’s comment points out what in some cases must be. The ﬁnal observation tells of what in fact is the case. DH may have been made conscious of the problems of aging by the experiences of his father. Though the waymark is undated, it may have been written about the time of Hjalmar Hammarskjöld’s eighty-ninth birthday, February 4. For other waymarks relating to DH’s father, see 50:39, 58:13, 59:35.

8. Narcissus stooped over the spring — bound by the only human being in whose gaze he had dared or been able to lose himself. Narcissus stooped over the spring — captivated by his own ugliness, because he ﬂattered himself for having the courage to acknowledge it.

60 | Narcissus in Greek myth was a beautiful youth who refused all oﬀers of love, including that of Echo, a mountain nymph. Seeing his reﬂection in a pool, he fell in love with his image and pined away, dying for love of himself. DH suggests two sources of such self-centeredness. One can be bound up with oneself by reason of lack of courage or ability to relate to anyone else. One can also, because one is willing to acknowledge them, take a perverse pride in the ﬂaws one ﬁnds in oneself. DH is saying that the person who is preoccupied with his/her own failings and inﬁrmities does not thereby escape self- centeredness. Reference to the spring/ springs recurs in 55:46 and 57:22.

9. The witches’ ride to the devil’s castle, where we meet only ourselves, ourselves, ourselves --

According to old Swedish folklore, each Maundy Thursday the witches of Scandinavia gather at a certain mountain. The old tale now prompts little girls on that day to go about the neighborhood in costume collecting candy, much like American children do on Halloween. DH interprets the tale in another way. The evil of which it tells is within ourselves. The ride to the mountain is a ride inwards, though in another sense than the journey inwards described in 50:54. Maundy Thursday in 1951 was March 22.

10. We cannot aﬀord to forget even that which has been most painful.

DH stresses the importance of memory. We are constituted by that which we remember and we need to remember also that which has pained us. The tendency toward a protective forgetfulness of that which has been most painful should be resisted.

11. We remember our dead. When they were born, when they passed away — as people of promise, or of fulﬁllment.

This waymark implies that there are many more who were people of promise than those who were also people of fulﬁllment. DH has said in 50:26 that we should not strive to be remembered, though many persons are remembered (50:43). In such a case it is desirable that they should have realized the possibilities that their lives represented. For other references to “fulﬁllment,” see 57:16, 57:42.

61 | 12. To be “sociable” — and to talk merely because convention forbids silence. What an example of la condition humaine [the human condition]: to rub shoulders with others in order to create the illusion of kinship and contact. Moreover tiring, like all inadequate use of the resources of our being. In this little format one of the many ways in which humankind successfully functions as its own scourge — in the hell of spiritual death.

DH protests strongly against small talk, a theme already expressed in 50:8, 50:25, 50:55. He must frequently have found himself in situations where such conversation was thought to be necessary. He suﬀered from what he regarded as such exchanges of “careless words.” This misuse of human communication is a kind of mutual self-scourging that leads to spiritual death. DH was unrelenting in his demand for honesty in human relationships.

13. “Unoriginal --.” We confuse so often the fearfulness to assert one’s own opinion, the tendency to be inﬂuenced more strongly by the views of others than by one’s own conviction — or quite simply the lack of a point of view — with the need the strong and mature feel to give the arguments of others their full value. A game of hide-and-go-seek: when the devil wants to take advantage of our unoriginality he calls it broadmindedness, and when he wants to kill an attempt at broadmindedness he calls it unoriginality.

In Waymarks a recurring theme is that things are not what they seem. What appears to be unoriginality may be a broadminded tolerance of the views of others, but it may also be a lack of courage to set forth one’s own convictions. DH insists that it is necessary to have opinions and to be willing to express them, though there can also be a valid restraint at this point to give place to the views of others. He warns against the temptations that can arise at this point. Unoriginal pusillanimity must not be confused with open-mindedness, nor should there be retreat from eﬀorts to achieve the latter for fear of being charged with unoriginality.

14. The aura of victory surrounding a man of good will, the sweetness of his spirit — a taste of cranberries and cloudberries, of frost and burning sun.

62 | DH celebrates the kind of person he admires, drawing upon images from nature, the taste of well loved Swedish berries, the extremes of frost and hot sun. All these are suggested by the virtue of a man of good will.

15. The immodesty of great pride: it lifts the crown from the pillow and with its own hands places it upon its brow. The estrangement of great pride from all that constitutes the human hierarchy. A fable to relate: about the crown that was so heavy that it could be borne only by the one who was able to live in complete forgetfulness of its splendor.

Among those who have crowned themselves is the Swedish king, Charles XII (cf. 59:26). DH here speaks positively of the human hierarchy. Those of great pride who refuse the legitimation it can oﬀer are to be criticized. There is a true radiance which a person may carry, but only if he/she is oblivious to the fact. The words of Exodus 34:29 suggest themselves: “Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone because he had been talking with God.”

16. Your role’s costume, the mask you put on with such care in order to appear advantageously, was the wall between you and the sympathy you sought. A sympathy you won the day you stood there naked. The voice that commanded was only obeyed when it cried in helplessness.

DH does not ordinarily seek sympathy. He points out that Jesus did not need it (51:29) and is mildly critical of one for whom “giving and receiving sympathy” seemed to play too large a role (50:18). Yet here he acknowledges needing and seeking sympathy, winning it only as he is stripped of his role’s costume. Not only in the quest for sympathy, but also in order to be able to command eﬀectively, a kind of divesting is necessary. The relationships of the human hierarchy are more willingly accepted when there is acknowledgment that we share a common humanity with its attendant needs. See 5l:5, 51:29, 57:3, 57:12 for other references to sympathy.

17. Faithful to his future --. Even if it only means “se préparer à bien mourir.”

63 | DH could say that there is no better way to be faithful to one’s future than to prepare oneself for a good death, “se préparer à bien mourir.” He has described the kind of living he calls for as a kind of dying (45-49:5). The one who so lives is both faithful to his future and well prepared to die.

18. Only that person deserves power who daily justiﬁes it.

The stress in this waymark must be on the word “daily.” Most would agree that one must justify one’s possession of power. DH insists that this justiﬁcation must occur daily (cf. 55:12).

19. The mixture of motives. In a great decision our whole being is involved, its meanness as well as its goodness. Which part is it that has gotten the better of the other when we feel ourselves united behind an act? — Even when Mephistopheles afterward smilingly reveals himself as a victor in the choice, he can be overcome through the way in which we accept its consequences.

This waymark reveals realism with respect to the mixture of motives in two respects. First, there is the awareness that one’s meanness as well as one’s goodness is involved in choices that are made. Second, it is acknowledged that despite one’s conscious intent meanness may ex post facto be found to have gained the upper hand in a given choice. The battle with evil can, however, yet be won through the way in which one deals with the consequences of such a choice. Mephistopheles, in the German Faust legend, is the personiﬁcation of the devil, to whom Faust sells his soul. Among authors who have developed this theme, in addition to Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832), are Marlowe, Gounod, Berlioz, and Boito. A 1925 edition of Goethe’s Faust was in DH’s library (Goethes Werke, vol. 2 [Stuttgart: F. G. Cotta’schen Buchhandlung, 1887] , 1-295).

20. “They expected to see him step forward as a leader.” He --? Whose courage and independence consists in the fact that he lets himself be led, an Ahab driven over the oceans by his ﬂeeing goal.

The literary reference is to Captain Ahab’s pursuit of the white whale in Moby Dick (New York: New American Library, 1961) by Herman Melville (1819-189l). A leader must ﬁnd guidance in that which transcends himself, but he should not be driven by an impassioned pursuit of a ﬂeeing goal.

64 | 21. He was one of the crew on Columbus’s caravel — and he wondered whether he would be back in his home village in time to establish himself as shoemaker before someone else took over after the old one.

There is irony in the fact that one can be sharing in the discovery of a great new world and yet be preoccupied about one’s hopes for preferment in the small old one.

22. There is a point where everything becomes simple, where there is no longer any choice, because everything you have wagered is lost if you look back. Life’s own point of no return.

The “point of no return” is an aeronautical expression, referring to the point in an overseas ﬂight when one no longer has suﬃcient fuel to return to one’s port of departure, so that one must continue, whatever befall, to the goal. DH points out that when this point is passed in our decision making life is simpliﬁed for us and for that we can be grateful. The reference to not looking back (cf. 53:12, 56:13, 57:35, 61:5) alludes to the words of Jesus in Luke 9:62: “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is ﬁt for the kingdom of God.”

23. Around the one who is thrown forward in the limelight legends begin to form as around one already deceased. But the deceased does not risk falling for the temptation to feed the legend, to accept its image as his reality. How poor is the one who falls in love with his image, as it has been sketched by the media during the honeymoon of publicity.

DH had perhaps experienced being to some extent in the limelight, but was to experience it to a much greater extent upon his election as Secretary-General of the United Nations. In such a case legends form but they are temporary. One must not fall in love with them or be deceived by them. When the honeymoon of publicity ends other images will be projected and a diﬀerent kind of fortitude will then be required (cf. 54:9).

24. Not to encumber the earth --. No pathetic excelsior, but only these simple words: not to encumber the earth.

65 | The poet, Erik Lindegren, DH’s successor in the Swedish Academy, relates this waymark to the following citation from Strödda blad ur Bertil Ekmans efterlämnade papper, the posthumously published papers of Bertil Ekman (1894-1920): “Death should produce longing for life, not longing to escape from life. When shall death’s freshness make our tread on the earth springy and light-footed? Where life acts as a law of gravitation, death functions as a law of levitation. Where life separates, death unites” (Ekman, 20; Lindegren, Dag Hammarskjöld: Inträdestal i Svenska Akademien [Stockholm: Norstedts, 1962], 13-14). Ekman studied in Uppsala 1913-1920. Despite heart disease, from which he had suﬀered since childhood, he was very active as a cyclist, swimmer, and mountaineer. On a mountain-climbing expedition with a friend in Norway he became gravely ill. Some hours after help reached him he died. A small volume of his papers including short essays, poetry, and journal entries was published in 1923. It may be signiﬁcant that DH’s ﬁrst waymarks date from 1925. DH was inﬂuenced by Ekman’s idealism and by what Ekman had to say about death (see Sven Stolpe, Dag Hammarskjöld: A Spiritual Portrait, trans. Naomi Walford [New York: Scribner’s, 1966], 35-37). In 53:4 DH borrows a German citation from Ekman. Other waymarks in which there may be allusions either to Ekman or to his posthumously published papers are 25-30:2, 51:1, 56:67, 61:4. While DH does want to tread the earth lightly (cf. 56:67), there is no direct reference to death, and high-ﬂown striving is rejected. “Excelsior” is the comparative of the Latin excelsus (elevated, lofty). In its use as a motto it means “still higher, ever upwards.”

25. To remain in the swift joy of becoming, to be a channel for life’s bright spirit, its hurrying, cool water with the gleam of sun --. In a world of sluggishness and anxiety and indiscretion. To exist by means of the future of others without being smothered by their present.

While DH emphasizes living in the present, as far as his own life is concerned (51:6, 57:18, 57:35), he also recognizes the responsibility to contribute to the quality of the future of others (54:18, 57:36, 59:3, 59:94). If such a contribution is to be made, there must be vital process occurring in the present. DH uses imagery from nature to describe this “swift joy of becoming,” contrasting its “hurrying, cool water” with the sluggishness, anxiety, and indiscretion (cf. 50:55) he so often encounters. In 56:43 also he discusses the problem of living, intensely involved in eﬀorts to bring about a better human future, without being smothered or drowned by the present state of the human condition (cf. 45-49:5).

66 | 26. How far from the muscular heroism or the soulful tragic sacriﬁcial spirit, which gives the coﬀee party an unctuous supplement to the sponge cake, is not the colorless fact that someone gives himself wholly to that which he has found life to be.

While DH thinks of life as calling for sacriﬁce, he does not expect this sacriﬁce necessarily to be muscularly heroic or soulfully tragic. To give oneself wholly to what one has found life to be may appear colorless to many. But one must not be deterred by the fact that the account of one’s commitment does not provide a good story to enliven a coﬀee party. It must also be remembered that sacriﬁce must often be anonymous (cf. however, 45-49:13).

27. Should the one who has the external possibility of realizing his innermost destiny take the risk of not doing so only because he did not want to give up everything else?

An extremely important term in Waymarks is “destiny” (öde). It can mean the given, unchosen circumstances of one’s life (50:46, 52:3, 57:39, 57:46). The meaning DH more often gives this term is that one’s destiny is one’s calling, the divine intention for one’s life (53:7, 53:11, 55:26, 55:60, 56:1, 56:39, 57:24, 57:35, 57:37, 61:13). So understood, one may either aﬃrm or fail to aﬃrm one’s destiny. In this waymark DH speaks of an inner destiny and favorable external circumstances, but at the same time the danger that one will not be willing to make the sacriﬁces required to realize one’s destiny. Thus, for example, the freedom that ﬁnancial aﬄuence and high social status aﬀord could even prove to be a hindrance. One thinks of the story of the rich man in Mark 10:17-22, who failed to accept Jesus’ invitation to discipleship because he had great possessions. There is also the saying of Jesus: “Whoever of you does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:33 RSV).

28. If one does not accept the axiom that to go one way implies turning away from the other ways, one will presumably have to seek to persuade oneself of the appropriateness of remaining at the crossroads. But do not criticize the one who goes ahead — neither criticize nor commend.

It is possible to remain at the crossroads rather than making a decision to go one way rather than another, but one must persuade oneself of the

67 | appropriateness of such a stance. On the other hand, DH says that the one who goes ahead is not to be criticized. Neither is that person to be commended. It is the merit of the decision itself that must be evaluated.

29. A young man, adamant in his life commitment. The one who was closest to him relates that the last evening he arose from supper, laid aside his garments, and washed his companions’ and followers’ feet — a young, hard man, alone before his ﬁnal destiny. He had seen the little game about his — his! friendship. He knew that none of his companions perceived why he must act as he did. He understood how frightened they would become, how they would doubt --. And one of them had informed against him and would very likely soon give a signal to the police. He had counted on a possibility in his being and destiny, intuited when he came back from the wilderness. If God wanted to achieve something through him, he would not fail. Only recently had he thought he could see more clearly and he understood that the way the possibility deﬁned could be one of suﬀering. But he knew that he must nonetheless follow it, uncertain if he was “the one who [is to come] -,” but conscious that the answer could be gained only through following. The end could be a death without signiﬁcance — beyond the fact that it was the end of the way the possibility indicated. It was thus the last evening. A young, hard man: Do you know what I have done to you? — I tell you this now, before it occurs. — One of you will betray me. — Where I am going you cannot follow me. — Will you lay down your life for me! Truly --. — My peace I give to you. — This happens in order that the world may know that I love the Father and do as he has commanded me. Rise, let us go hence. Is the hero in this eternal, brutally simple drama “the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world”? Controlled by faithfulness to an intuited possibility — in that sense God’s, in that sense a sacriﬁcial victim, in that sense a redeemer. A young man, adamant in his life

68 | commitment, who in the destiny he himself has chosen walks the way of his possibility to the end, without self-pity or needing sympathy — sacriﬁcing also the fellowship of the others when they do not follow, into a new fellowship.

This, the longest of the waymarks, tells of Jesus in the upper room in Jerusalem as he spends his last evening with his disciples prior to his cruciﬁxion. It recalls the ﬁrst reference to Jesus, his foretelling his passion at Caesarea Philippi (45-49:13). DH uses the account of the last supper as found in the Gospel according to John. He tells of Jesus washing his disciples’ feet ( John 13:1-11) and through a series of citations ( John 13:12, 19, 21, 36, 38; 14:27, and 14:31, a translation of the Swedish 1917 version) he gives in miniature Jesus’ farewell discourse. See also Matthew 11:3 and Luke 7:19-20.

What is notable is that DH presents us with an extremely human Jesus, who had earlier responded to God’s call and who now sees that this most likely will mean suﬀering and death for him. Beyond this Jesus does not see clearly. His death “could be a death without signiﬁcance.” This emphasis on Jesus’ humanity DH had very likely gained from his reading of Albert Schweitzer’s Von Reimarus zu Wrede (Eng. tr. The Quest of the Historical Jesus [New York: Macmillan, 1961], a book included in his library, see Aulén, 50-57). DH also, however, takes into account the church’s confession that Jesus is “the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world” ( John 1:29). Given his understanding of the historical Jesus, can such an interpretation of Jesus’ life and work be aﬃrmed? DH answers that Jesus, through his faithfulness to the intuited possibility that deﬁned the call to which he had responded, can properly be said to have belonged to God, to have been a sacriﬁcial victim, and thereby also a redeemer.

DH stresses Jesus’ loneliness. None of his followers understand why he must act as he does. Where he is going they are as yet unable to follow. He, however, does not need their sympathy. Nor will he ultimately be alone, for in what he is doing there is the promise of a new fellowship.

30. To count on his possibility --. Why? Does he oﬀer himself for others, but for his own sake — in sublime egocentricity? Or does he realize himself for the sake of others? The dividing line is the one separating the inhuman and the human. “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another.”

69 | This and the following waymark continue DH’s reﬂection on the meaning of Jesus’ suﬀering and death. It is conceivable, he suggests, that there could after all have been an egocentric motivation behind Jesus’ oﬀering of himself. DH has already commented upon the fact that the same act may issue from diﬀerent motives (41-42:16, 51:19). In this instance he implies that such an egocentrically motivated self-sacriﬁce would be inhuman, though it is unlikely that he is at all seriously proposing such an interpretation of Jesus’ suﬀering and death.

There can be love oriented toward God as the highest good that is basically egocentric. In 51:29, however, to love the Father implies doing what the Father commands, which excludes egocentricity. In this waymark Jesus commands, “ . . . that you love one another” ( John 13:34 RSV).

31. The inner possibility --. In dangerous interplay with an external one. The way possibility deﬁned led to the entry’s cries of Hosanna — which opened up other possibilities than those he chose.

If Jesus’ inner possibility called for disinterested self-sacriﬁce, the gospel narrative’s account of the triumphal entry into Jerusalem tells that there may have been other external possibilities (Mark 11:1-10) The need for signiﬁcant, consistent choosing continued to the very end (cf. 53:11).

32. That our anxiety and longing is thousandfold and can be anaesthetized in a thousand ways is just as banal a truth as that it ultimately is only one and can be overcome in only one way. What you most of all need is to experience — or believe you experience — that you are needed. Forced upon us or self-sought — the prospect of future loneliness therefore ﬁnally leaves us only the choice between to despair in desolation or to count so highly on ‘the possibility,’ that we win the right to life in a fellowship transcending the individual. But for this latter choice is not a faith that moves mountains required?

DH turns from waymarks devoted to reﬂection about Jesus to consider his own situation. He thinks of his loneliness and his deep yearning to feel needed (cf. 50:42). He sees no way of escaping the prospect of continuing loneliness other than through “the possibility” of life in a fellowship transcending the individual. This, however, requires faith. It is not enough simply to resolve to

70 | obey the new commandment (cf. 51:30). DH is not yet sure that he has the faith this requires. In speaking of a faith that moves mountains, DH is referring to Matthew 17:20 and 1 Corinthians 13:2. For other waymarks in which DH speaks of his loneliness, see 52:16, 52:18, 58:9.

33. March sun. In the slender birch’s thin shadow on the snow the air’s frozen silence crystallizes. Then — suddenly — the blackbird’s tentative call note, a reality outside your own, the real world. Suddenly: the paradise from which we have been excluded by our knowledge.

Sometimes DH’s solitary isolation is overcome by experiences in nature. In early spring he enjoys the March sun and sees the slender birch’s shadow on the snow, but it is the blackbird’s call that makes him aware of reality outside his own, in this case a paradise from which his knowledge (of good and evil? cf. Genesis 3:22-23) has excluded him.

34. He came with his little girl. She was wearing her best clothes. You saw how careful she was with her ﬁne coat. Others saw also — saw, with indiﬀerence, that it had been another little girl’s ﬁne coat, which had been ﬁne another year. In the morning it had been festive in the sunshine. Now most people had already gone home. The balloon sellers were counting the day’s receipts. Even the sun had kept abreast with the others and gone to rest behind a cloud. So it was quite bleak and deserted when he came with his little girl to taste the joy of spring and to be warmed in a newly polished Easter sun. But she was satisﬁed. They were both of them satisﬁed. For they had learned a humility which you have yet to grasp. A humility which never compares, which does not reject that which is for ‘something else’ or for ‘more.’

It is an Easter day. There has been some sun and many have been out enjoying it, but now it has clouded over again. DH sees a father and daughter, the little girl wearing a neat hand-me-down coat, though for her it is new. They have come a bit late to enjoy the best of the day but they are nonetheless satisﬁed. DH admires their acceptance of life, a humility which is not constantly asking for something else or for more (cf. 59:4).

71 | 35. Lean fare, ﬁxed form. Brief joy, few words. A low star In cool space — A morning star. In sparsity’s pale light Lives the thing, — We are.

This terse poem, which may reﬂect experiences while hiking in the mountains of Lapland, puts human life in its cosmic setting. There is not much to eat, a ﬁxed regimen, moments of joy, little conversation. But as the morning dawns one becomes aware of the life one shares in the great vastness with all else. The dashes in the ﬁnal line have been inserted to distinguish between “the thing” and what we are, a distinction that the Swedish text does suggest.

36. Upon the continuing cowardliness, the repeated deceits, judgment falls the day on which an in itself perhaps insigniﬁcant manifestation of your weakness robs you of further opportunities to choose — rightly. Do you at least feel thankful for the grace of still being constantly tested, for not having been taken at your word?

DH castigates himself for his cowardliness and deceits (cf. 45-49:6, 50:33) and says the consequence of this pattern of behavior can be ﬁnding oneself in a situation in which one is still able to choose, but no longer able to make right choices. As long, however, as he experiences constant testing, he tells himself that he should feel grateful that this judgment has not yet fallen.

37. As a careerist you have a broad area of activity even after you may possibly have reached your goal. You can always try to hinder others from becoming better qualiﬁed.

DH speaks ironically of the meanness that can characterize the life of a successful person. Having reached one’s goal, one can devote one’s eﬀorts to trying to prevent others from approximating one’s own success.

38. There is a ﬂash of insight in this: You could just as well never have existed. With regular salary, a bankbook, and a brief case under your arm, it can, however, be presupposed

72 | that you take yourself for granted. What you are can be of interest, not that you are. About one’s pension — not death — there is reason to think “while it is yet day.”

That one exists cannot be taken for granted (cf. 55:38, 59:105-106). It is certain that one’s existence will end with death and DH emphasizes the importance of reﬂecting about this fact (51:l, 51:17, 55:18, 57:43). At the same time it is life’s content, even at the level of bankbook and brief case, that gives life signiﬁcance. We are therefore to work “while it is day” ( John 9:4). Even one’s pension belongs to that portion of the “day” for which one has responsibility. Cf., however, 57:18.

39. “Far too much the bother . . . I so little require --.” If dying also must become a social function, then give me the grace to steal out on tiptoe, without disturbing anyone.

The cited lines are from the poem “Bleka dödens minut” (Pale Death’s Minute) by the Swedish poet, Birger Sjöberg (1885-1929), a self-educated journalist and troubadour (Samlade dikter [Stockholm: Bonniers, 1954], 100). Sjöberg has observed a funeral procession and, thinking of the formal dress and the ceremonies associated with the rite of burial, says that he would prefer simply to fall as a leaf and be lost in the earth. DH suggests by the dashes at the end of the cited lines that he has the whole poem in mind. Just as one can say to a hostess that all too much fuss has been made over one’s visit, so one can protest about the bother that may attend one’s interment. DH imagines the possibility of stealing quietly out of life’s party without disturbing by one’s leave-taking the other guests.

40. In X outer restlessness, inner asceticism, and an emotional antifeminism are equivalent aspects of one and the same personality, without internal causal connection. While “more normal” types carry the oﬃce and bedroom atmosphere with them out into the open, with him you escape into the reality of free space even within thick walls and under a low ceiling. His contacts are casual, but nonetheless more nakedly intensive than others: a vocal inﬂection can bind, a glance unite. My friend, the popular psychologist, has completed his diagnosis. And has understood nothing, nothing at all.

73 | In this waymark DH could be objecting to someone’s attempt to describe him. In 51:54 he criticizes the misuse of psychological diagnoses. He did have conﬁdence in his own ability to analyze others (45-49:3-4, 50:30), but here he may be saying that the secret of a person’s being can only be known through that person’s voluntary self-disclosure. In the letter to Leif Belfrage found with the Vägmärken manuscript DH states that the notations found in it “give the only true ‘proﬁle’ that can be drawn” (supra, v). If so, there are waymarks that do support some parts of the description. There are signs of inner asceticism (50:33, 55:2, 55:27). DH clearly loved the out-of-doors and may have brought some of its ambience into the oﬃces in which he worked (45-49:12, 50:10, 51:41, 51:50). He was intense in what he required of a conversation and alert to other subtle clues body language could communicate (50:11, 50:25, 51:12, 54:4, 55:51).

41. Spiritual liberation has its sensual component and the soul’s claustrophobia a physical symbolism and a physiological breeding ground.

In the previous waymark’s description we are told,” . . . with him you escape into the reality of free space even within thick walls and under a low ceiling.” Here DH states that spiritual liberation does have a sensual component. The soul’s claustrophobia can presumably have thick walls and a low ceiling as its breeding ground. For this reason vacations in the open spaces of Lapland must have been especially important for DH (cf. 51:56-57, 60-61).

42. The courage not to compromise what is purest in oneself is at best judged as pride. And the judge can ﬁnd support for his opinion when he sees consequences which to him must appear much like punishment for a mortal sin.

If the courage not to compromise one’s purest resolve is “at best” judged as pride, it must also be subject to other less favorable evaluations. What are apparently bad consequences of uncompromising behavior can, furthermore, seem to lend support to such negative assessments. DH is describing the burden one form of sacriﬁce continues to require (cf. 45-49:13, 50:46, 51:29-30). At the same time one has the responsibility to communicate as eﬀectively as possible “what is purest in oneself.” Need one assume that one will always be misunderstood?

43. The illiberality in a person of power --. And vice versa: the power of one who is liberated.

74 | Two kinds of power are contrasted, of which one can contain an illiberal element. DH does not tell us what happens when these two kinds of power encounter each other, which of them must yield. Nor is DH saying that there is necessarily something illiberal in all persons of power. DH does imply that one who is liberated can also be a person of power. What kind of power does such a person exercise? Did DH try to exercise such a power?

In the Swedish language there are some words that have roughly the same meaning, though one word is used only in a religious context, while the other is used in ordinary speech. There are, for example, two words for “neighbor,” nästa used in the biblical commandment, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself ” (Leviticus 19:18, Mark 12:31), and granne used to refer to the person living next door. The verbs förlösa and förlossa provide another example of this linguistic usage. Both can be translated “to deliver,” förlossa having the added religious meaning “to redeem.” In 51:29 DH speaks of Jesus as an återlösare or förlossare (redeemer). In this waymark, oförlösta (illiberality) and den förlöstes (the one who is liberated) are derived from förlösa. DH is not using speciﬁcally religious language and yet he must have recognized that there is a relationship between deliverance/liberation religiously understood and a deliverance/ liberation that has implications in the social order (cf. 55:1).

44. Where is the boundary? Where do we arrive in these dreams of satiated beauty, laden with signiﬁcance but without comprehensible content, etched in the mind much deeper than the witness of the eyes? Well — without fright, without desire. The memory of bodily reality, whither does it vanish? Meanwhile the world pictured in these dreams does not age. It lives — as the memory of a memory. So the dream about the birds. So also the dreams of the morning and the night. Tired birds, large tired birds rest on the high, enormous cliﬀ facing the dark waters, awaiting the night. Tired birds turn their heads toward the ﬁery western sky. The ﬁre becomes blood, the blood is mixed with soot --. To see over the water, way toward the west, up toward the steep endless arches. Still --. To participate in this great distant world’s entrance into night. — The only words (my words, his words?) spoken, unspoken, die away: Now it is too dark for us to ﬁnd the way back.

75 | In this waymark DH begins to speak of “the boundary.” In 51:47 he will use the phrase “the boundary of the unheard of,” an expression to which he will return in several later waymarks (51:62, 52:6, cf. 54:20, 54:25). Here it appears that he feels that he approaches a boundary in dreams. Is there a spiritual world in which that of which one dreams exists? DH refers to dreams of birds and of morning and night. The dream of the birds is then described. The two waymarks that follow may also have dream content.

The birds are tired and await the night on a huge cliﬀ overlooking the western sea. In an awesome ﬁery sunset DH sees a distant world enter into night. He appears to have a companion. With the night there is silence and such darkness that DH and his companion cannot ﬁnd their way back to whence they have come. DH’s mood seems nonetheless to be characterized by transcendence of both fright and desire.

45. Night. Before me is the road — passing by. Behind me is the path curving up toward the house, as a clearing in the darkness under the park’s dense trees. I know that people are passing by out there, veiled in darkness. I know that life quivers about me, hidden by the night. I know that something awaits me in the house. Out of the darkness of the park a solitary bird’s cry: and I go — up there.

This may be a dream about the night. DH is standing outside a house surrounded by a park. He is facing the street. There is life all about him among the trees of the park. People are passing by on the street. Everything is veiled in darkness. DH has an appointment in the house where someone awaits him. A solitary bird’s cry out of the darkness prompts him to go to keep his appointment.

46. Light without a source, the pale gold of a new day. Silky gray, soft leaves on low bushes, silvered with dew. The cat’s-foot’s cool redness blooming on the hills. The blue of the horizon --. From under the dark brook ravine’s leafy vault I step out on the wide slope. Drops of water glittering on my hands, my forehead cooled by sprinkling from resilient branches, evaporating in a warm morning breeze.

76 | This could be the dream about the morning. No sunrise is described, simply the pale light, without apparent source, of a new day. DH emerges from the dark ravine of a brook out on a wide slope. There are hills in the distance on which cat’s-foot (a trailing Eurasian mint, Nepeta hederacea, with rounded leaves and rather showy ﬂowers) is blooming and the blue horizon promises a fair day. DH is cooled by the dew on the bushes, but also dried by a warm morning breeze.

47. Now. Since I have overcome my fear — of others, of myself, of the darkness underneath: at the boundary of the unheard of. Here the known ends. But from beyond something ﬁlls my being with the possibility of its origin. Here desire is puriﬁed into receptivity: each action a preparation for, each choice a yes to the unknown. Hindered by the duties of life on the surface from giving attention to the depths, but in these duties slowly prepared to step down as a shaping agent into the chaos from which the white wintergreen’s fragrance bears the promise of a new kinship. At the boundary --

In this waymark DH does arrive “at the boundary of the unheard of.” Aulén says “the unheard of ” could also be translated “that which transcends all imagination” (Aulén, E 25-26). In later waymarks the expression is enclosed in quotation marks (51:62, 52:6). It is not certain as to whether DH intends thereby to indicate that he is quoting himself, or whether the expression has some other literary source. In 54:20 DH states that “the unheard of ” is to be in the hands of God. This waymark may be his ﬁrst attempt to state what this means.

Fear is overcome, of others, of himself, of the depths of darkness. One wonders whether DH encounters the depths of darkness in dreams (cf. 51:44). He has reached the limits of knowledge, but beyond these limits is the possibility of what he was meant to be. To this possibility he is receptive, his actions and choices aﬃrming what for him is thus far unknown. His duties have up till now prevented him from deep probing of life’s depths, but he ﬁnds that he has nonetheless been slowly prepared to take the role of a shaping agent in the chaos that precedes the imposition of created order (Genesis 1:1-2). He uses nature imagery, the fragrance of the white wintergreen (a plant of the genus

77 | Gaultheria with white bell-shaped ﬂowers followed by spicy red berries and shining aromatic leaves that yield a useful oil), to indicate the promise of the new kinship he anticipates with all that is.

48. When you have come to the point that you do not expect a response, you will at last be able to give so that the other can accept — and rejoice in the gift. When the lover is himself freed from dependence on the loved one through love’s maturing into a radiance whose essence is its own dissolution in light, then the loved one will also be perfected through being freed from the lover.

In 50:19 DH states that he does not believe that friendship requires mutuality. This seems to be a strange understanding of friendship, as well as of love, but the point may be that the response need not be directed back to the lover. DH is calling for independence and freedom. The lover must not be dependent on the one that is loved. When love is in every sense freely given, this makes possible the perfection of the loved one (cf. 55:51). The image of “a radiance whose essence is its own dissolution in light” may refer to the way a lesser light is wholly absorbed in a greater light, such as in the light of the sun (cf. 56:16, 57:16, 57:28). In a similar way a mature love loses itself in the great love of God, which is also freely given.

One does not ﬁnd much said in Waymarks about the acceptance of love from other persons. DH sought to give love to others (54:19, 56:13, 56:26), but he found it diﬃcult to develop intimate relationships in which he received love in return (52:17, 55:42). He did, however, speak in general terms of being receptive (55:58, 57:1). With respect to the God relationship, he was aware that God grants independence, but the result is not that one is freed from God, the lover. Instead one ceases to seek such independence in order to become more fully identiﬁed with God (55:52). This would seem to have implications also for interpersonal relationships.

49. In which dimension of time does this feeling possess its eternity? It was, it ﬁlled me with its richness. Born in me, felt by no one else, vanished from me — but formed of a material beyond time and space, by a heart which will become dust.

78 | “This feeling” may well be “love’s maturing into a radiance whose essence is its own dissolution in light” of the previous waymark. If the eternal can in this way be experienced in time, what relation does it have to the temporal? It is temporally delimited in that it comes to be, is felt, after which it is gone. Its source transcends space and time, but at the same time a heart bearing the marks of mortality has formed this transcendent “material.” DH is suggesting that to be human is to possess such a creative possibility.

50. So rests the sky against the earth. In the tarn’s dark stillness the forest’s womb opens. And as the man enfolds the woman’s body in his abiding tenderness, so the nakedness of the ground and the trees is enfolded in the morning’s still, high light. I myself feel a smart which is a longing for union, for participation, for sharing in this meeting. A smart which is identical with the desire of earthly love — but directed toward ground and water and sky, answered by the whispering of the trees, the earth’s fragrance, the wind’s caresses, the light’s and the water’s embrace. Satisﬁed? no, no, no --. But refreshed, rested — in expectation.

The union of earth and sky can be likened to a tender marital embrace. DH feels a longing to share in such a union. He suggests that sexual desire can be oriented toward ground and water and sky. It can be answered by what one hears and smells and feels and sees out-of-doors. DH does not claim the feeling of satisfaction that follows sexual intercourse, but he is refreshed and rested (cf. 55:60, 58:9). There is also continuing expectation. We are not told what is expected, but DH may be looking forward to the ultimate union with the natural order that death will represent (cf. 52:9).

51. He received — Nothing. But for this he paid more than others for their riches.

This waymark can be interpreted in two ways. It can tell of a foolish person who gave unwisely and received nothing in return. It can also describe a giving that does not seek return, the anonymous sacriﬁce (45-49:13), which can even be described as a payment. This is a love that does not require mutuality (51:48) and which is prepared to suﬀer.

79 | 52. To step out of his relationships does not lead to life but to death for the revolutionary who is not in the very act of revolting driven by love for that which is apparently being rejected, and thus at this basic level remains faithful to the relationships.

DH addresses himself to the issue of revolution (or what today is often called “terrorism”) and states that there must not only be a commitment to an envisaged future, but also, at a more basic level, to human relationships, the present ordering of which is being rejected. Some social roots must be permitted to remain if there is to be hope for new life and growth.

53. In the devil’s deck the cards of damnation and destruction lie side by side with those of consummation. It is only those of love that are lacking. — Did he himself understand that he was for this reason the destiny of many? For the one he became a God-surrogate. For the other he represented a binding relationship that had to be defeated.

The ﬁrst part of this waymark states that whereas the devil oﬀers the promise of consummation, though there is also the closely related risk of destruction, the devil knows nothing of love. Quite clearly it is self-giving love of which the devil is ignorant, not self-seeking love that can be rewarded by consummation. The second part of the waymark is ambiguous. Auden- Sjöberg translate it so as to suggest that DH continues to refer to the devil (Markings, 77) and Aulén accepts this interpretation (Aulén, E 92). In so translating this waymark, however, Auden-Sjöberg change DH’s past tenses in the second part of the waymark into present tenses and “binding relationship” becomes “tyrant.” DH may, however, in these two concluding sentences be referring to Jesus. That Jesus became the destiny of many may refer to the words of Simeon in Luke 2:34: “This child is destined for the falling and the rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be opposed.” Jesus did for some become the deputy of God (“God- surrogate” being taken in a positive sense as referring to the doctrine of the incarnation). For others he represented a binding relationship, the gift as well as the demand of self-giving love, which they not only rejected but struggled to overcome.

54. What possibilities does not psychology give us to screen oﬀ the disturbing unknown with a label which gives it a place in the list of common aberrations.

80 | The “disturbing unknown” may be that which lies beyond “the boundary of the unheard of ” (51:47, 51:62; cf. 51:44). If so, DH is protesting against disposing of this dimension of life by giving it a psychological label. That psychological labels can in other respects be useful may be granted.

55. What occurs tacitly between two persons can never be repaired through what they say — not even if they cooperate in the eﬀort, in a shared awareness of what happened.

This waymark stresses the importance of unspoken communication (cf. 50:11). What we communicate through what we do is often more signiﬁcant than what we say. If damage has been done to a relationship, speaking about what occurred may not be suﬃcient, even if both parties to the relationship cooperate in such an eﬀort. It need not follow, however, that the possibility of repairing the relationship through what the two persons thereafter do is also excluded.

56. The extra-human in the experience of the greatness of nature. It does not permit itself to be mastered so that human reactions can be expressed. We also cannot through serving it express a human reaction. If we cannot ﬁnd the way to resound as an organic part of the whole, we will only be able to observe ourselves observing the interplay of the thousand components in a harmony that is independent of our own experience of it as harmony. Landscape: only in your immediate experience of its details do you provide soil in your soul where the beauty of the whole can grow.

Waymarks 56-58 and 60-61 record DH’s reﬂections related to visits to Lapland. DH visited northern Sweden at least twice in 1951, in the early summer and again in the fall (Willers, 89). The grouping of these waymarks indicates that DH’s entries in his journal are sometimes arranged topically rather than chronologically.

In describing the experience of the greatness of nature, DH states that what we ﬁnd here transcending the human can neither be mastered nor served. Only as we become an organic part of the whole are we caught up in its harmony

81 | instead of being merely external observers. We achieve this not by trying to grasp the signiﬁcance of the whole, but by an immediate experience of the details of some portion of nature, such as a landscape. In this way the pre- conditions are provided for an appreciation of the beauty of the whole. For another meaning of “landscape,” see 53:17.

57. The arctic summer night’s sacrament: a fragrance of ice and bursting buds — rusty brown sheen on bare stems, glitter among resinous new leaves — the rustling of water and ice in the open channels, the willow warbler’s trills — the ice block’s death luster when seen against the sun, the rhododendrons’ purple wave breaking on the moory shore — among brown sere scrub Pinguicula’s white spoondrift on sunlit cool waters. Victory --

Uno Willers believes that we can more speciﬁcally identify the occasion that prompted this waymark. The manager of a mountain hostel at Abisko on Lake Torneträsk in northern Lapland recalls that shortly before midsummer in 1951 DH spent the night there on his way from Kiruna to Narvik. Being told that the ice was breaking in the lake and the rhododendrons were in bloom, before retiring he took a walk in the beautiful spring weather. The next morning at an early breakfast he spoke enthusiastically of the previous night’s experience (Willers, 88-89).

The Swedish word nattvard (supper) is now used only for the Lord’s Supper (see the comment on 51:43 for a discussion of this kind of Swedish linguistic usage). In this waymark DH uses another old Swedish word, dagvard (breakfast), to describe with sacramental overtones the burgeoning forth of life in Lapland, which does not cease even during the brief summer nights. There is a particularly intense experience of the renewal of nature within the Arctic Circle, where after winter months of almost total darkness there is during the summer hardly any darkness at all. The mingled sights, smells, and sounds become nature’s sacrament celebrating a renewed victory of life.

The willow warbler is a small songbird (Phylloscopus trochilus) that is delicate greenish above and white below. The rhododendron is a genus of shrubs or trees (family Ericaceae) that have alternate short-petioled often leathery leaves scattered or in clusters at the branch ends and ﬂowers in terminal umbellate racemes. Pinguicula is a large genus of apparently stemless bog herbs having

82 | showy solitary purple, yellow, or white ﬂowers on naked scapes, and leaves that capture insects in the viscid secretion on the leaf surface, after which the insects are digested.

58. Humility before the ﬂower at the timberline opens the way up the mountain.

The plants at the timberline may have taken years to grow to the point that they bloom. One does not pick these ﬂowers nor tread upon them. Recognizing in humility the wonder of vegetation at these altitudes is the spiritual prerequisite for continuing one’s ascent.

59. Ardent about the possibility of a larger contribution, because life has not yet demanded everything. But if it has already taken what it has found useful? It is good and well to want to give everything, if I have been able to enrich my being so that everything has received value. Otherwise --. And why tense? What streams of ambition ﬂow through my striving as a person?

DH does hold that life calls for a total sacriﬁce (25-30:2, 50:46). But this means that one must be willing to let life take of oneself what it can use. One must enrich one’s being so that one has something to contribute. At the same time the one who wishes to oﬀer himself sacriﬁcially must have a relaxed mood. Personal ambitious striving and total sacriﬁce are not wholly consistent with each other. What I want to give may not be what is needed just now, nor may as much as I want to give be needed. It is what is required by life (God, others) that determines what my contribution should be, not my desire (ambition) to give.

60. Autumn in the wilderness: life as an end in itself even in its individual annihilation, the vista’s high clarity, the calm of what surrounds me at its extinction — before an execution squad I would this evening say yes, not out of tiredness or deﬁance, but in solidarity’s bright conﬁdence. — To bring this into my life among people.

This and the following waymark are reﬂections about the fall in the arctic wilderness, the beauty and clarity that attend the dying of the vegetation. DH’s sense of solidarity with the nature he is observing is so complete that on

83 | this evening he feels he also himself could be prepared to die, even before an execution squad. He wishes that in his life among people he could achieve such a calm acceptance of the rhythm of life and death.

61. Autumn in Lapland. The gentle, rain-laden east wind blows down the dry riverbeds. On the banks the yellowing birches shake in the gale. The ﬁrst measures in the great hymn of annihilation. Not a hymn to annihilation. Not a hymn in spite of annihilation. But the destruction which is a hymn.

If the arctic summer night can have sacramental character, the arctic fall can be likened to a great hymn of annihilation. Its ﬁrst measures are the gentle, rain-laden east wind, but soon the birch trees are shaken by the gale. The destruction that is to take place is itself the hymn. So to designate it is to indicate that the rhythm of nature is being wholly accepted and aﬃrmed.

62. “At the boundary of the unheard of --.” The unheard of — probably quite simply Lord Jim’s last meeting with Doramin, when he has attained absolute courage and absolute humility in an absolute faithfulness to himself. With a living feeling of guilt, but at the same time conscious that he has paid his debt to the extent that this is possible in this life — through what he has done for those who now demand of him his life. Calm and happy. As on a solitary walk along the seashore.

DH repeats the phrase “at the boundary of the unheard of ” from 51:47. He will refer to “the unheard of ” later in 54:5, 54:20, and 54:25. The quotation marks in this waymark may suggest that DH is quoting himself (51:47), or that he is quoting someone else, possibly Joseph Conrad in Lord Jim (New York: Doubleday, Doran & Co., 1937). Lord Jim is a story of a man who in his youth makes a serious mistake, so that he feels overwhelmed by guilt. He spends his life seeking to atone for what he did, only to have the people whom he has been helping turn against him by reason of the treachery of an interloper. This costs Lord Jim his life, but he dies without regret. He has ﬁnally attained absolute courage and absolute humility in an absolute faithfulness to himself.

1952 During this year DH became more involved in the aﬀairs of the United Nations, becoming chairman of Sweden’s delegation to the UN General Assembly. During the summer a crisis arose in Sweden as Swedish planes were shot down by the Russians over the Baltic. Since the foreign minister, Östen Undén, was on holiday in Italy, DH, as vice-foreign minister, was put in charge of the exchange of notes with Moscow. His skill in these negotiations earned him the respect of the Soviets. He was at the peak of his career as a Swedish governmental oﬃcial. Nonetheless, Van Dusen ﬁnds him in this year’s waymarks expressing “the nadir of private despondency” (Van Dusen, 98). We must carefully examine what DH writes to see whether this is in fact a correct interpretation of DH’s frame of mind.

1. “Soon night approaches --.” How long the way is. But the time it has already taken, how much have I not needed it in order to learn what it is leading — past.

DH begins another year with the words from the hymn he has cited the past two years (50:1, 51:1). He speaks of “the way” (52:21, 53:11, 57:23, 60:6, 61:5, 61:12) as long, and yet he states that he has needed its length in order to learn essential lessons of self-denial. We have in this waymark an example of DH’s use of dashes (cf. 1945-1949 Introduction). One is expecting him to say that the way is leading to some goal. Instead he wants to call attention to what it in his case is requiring him to pass by.

2. “I am being led further --.” Yes, yes — but you have not been blind to the opportunities.

The ﬁrst words of this waymark are within citation marks. DH is probably conversing with himself (note the word “leading” in 52:1). He confesses that he is being led, but he also admits that he has not been blind to the opportunities he has noted along the way. This suggests that he has not so easily learned the self-denial to which the previous waymark refers.

3. “Your will be done --.” Let be the fact that you have permitted self-interest to give the push to small attempts to assist destiny; let be that you have even for others sought to interpret this in the noblest terms — if only you let the ﬁnal outcome be determined entirely over your head, in faith.

85 | “Your will be done --.” To let the inner take precedence over the outer, the soul over the world — wherever this leads. And in so doing not to let an inner value become the mask for an outer value — but to make oneself blind to the value the inner can give the outer.

This waymark also begins with a quotation, in this case from the Lord’s Prayer (cf. 41-42:21, 56:7, 56:55, 58:9). DH tells himself that insofar as he has permitted self-interest to inﬂuence his understanding of his destiny ( 51:27, 53:7, 56:1), the decisive consideration is whether he will permit the ﬁnal outcome to be such that God’s will is done (50:42, 57:31). The inner must take precedence over the outer. Should this inner dedication contribute to outward success, this must be wholly ignored. He must be prepared to follow wherever his inner dedication may lead him.

4. Work as an anesthetic against loneliness, books as substitutes for people --! You say that you are waiting, that the door is open. But is it for people? Is not the Etna for which Empedocles waits a destiny beyond human fellowship?

DH struggles with what he considers his deﬁcient interest in other people. In his loneliness he turns to work. Books are preferred to living voices. The door to his oﬃce is open, but it is not certain that he is waiting for people to enter through it. He refers in this connection to Empedocles (ca. 490-430 B.C.E.), the Sicilian philosopher, waiting on Etna, an active volcano, in Sicily. According to one tradition Empedocles perished in Etna’s ﬂames, though according to another tradition after leaving Sicily he died in southern Italy or Greece. Hjalmar Sundén suggests that this waymark could reﬂect DH’s reading of Friedrich Hölderlin’s Den Tod des Empedocles (Kristus-meditationer i Dag Hammarskjölds Vägmärken[Stockholm: Diakonistyrelsens bokförlag, 1966], 26, 89; Hölderlins Werke und Briefe, Friedrich Beissner and Jochen Schmidt, eds., vol. 2 [Frankfurt: Insel Verlag, 1969], 461-587).

5. The hardest thing of all: to die rightly. An examination no one escapes — how many pass it? And you yourself prayed for strength for that test — but also that the judge might be lenient.

In Hölderlin’s Den Tod des Empedocles “the destiny beyond human fellowship” that Empedocles seeks is to be attained through death. It is possible, therefore,

86 | that this waymark continues the reﬂection begun in 52:4. DH asks why is it so diﬃcult to die rightly? It is not the experience of dying he fears (45-49:9-10), but he thinks of the fact that in death judgment is passed on the life that was lived (50:26-27, 51:11). He wonders how many pass the test. While he prays for strength, he recognizes his own need that the judge in his case be lenient. Though, according to Christian teaching, salvation is by grace alone, this does not alter the fact that there will be a ﬁnal judgment over what each person has done. “For all of us must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive recompense for what has been done in the body, whether good or evil” (2 Cor. 5:10).

6. Birth and death, surrender and pain — the reality behind the dance under the ﬂoodlights of social responsibility. How well do I not understand the mirror symbolism in Cocteau’s Orphée: to break through that which in the encounter with reality hinders encounter with oneself — to break through at the price of entering the domain of death. But nonetheless — what do I want more than just this? When and how do I encounter the possibility? Or is it already lost? Is my contact with people more than a mirror? Who, what gives me the opportunity to change it to a portal? Opportunity or compulsion. Am I not too “intelligent and well-balanced” — that is, too socially self-directed — to yield to anything other than necessity? Which can be demonstrated! “At the boundary of the unheard of --.” Conscious of the deep-sea dive’s consummatio [consummation] — and from instinct, experience, nurture, “discretion,” afraid to put my head under the water. Even ignorant as to how it is done!

The theme considered in the previous waymark continues in this one. Birth and dying, surrender and pain, are the reality with which one has to do when one exercises social responsibility, though this may not be fully realized. In dealing with this reality, DH feels the need to break through that which hinders him from encountering himself. He refers in this connection to the mirror symbolism used by Jean Cocteau (1891-1963), a French poet, dramatist, and ﬁlm writer of the modernist school, especially in his play and ﬁlm Orphée.

87 | Orpheus in Greek mythology went to Hades in search of his deceased wife, Eurydice. The gods, charmed by his music, restored her to him, but forbade him to look at her until they had returned to earth. When Orpheus disobeyed this command Eurydice vanished. Cocteau has recreated this myth in modern dress in a play (1926) and a ﬁlm (1950). The device Cocteau uses to make possible passage between this world and the other world is dissolving mirrors, which are the gates through which Death comes and goes (Elizabeth Sprigge and Jean-Jacques Kihm, Jean Cocteau: The Man and the Mirror [New York: Coward McCann, 1968], 105).

How does DH use this imagery? One does encounter one’s external image in a mirror. To break through, or to let go of this image (45-49:5), is to encounter one’s inner self, though this can be done only at the cost of death. Death in this case does not mean physical death. The death involved is the death of self- surrender (41-42:9), which does involve pain. This is what DH wants, though he wonders if for him it is still possible.

DH goes on to ask whether in meeting people he is encountering more than a mirroring of his own self-interest. The enabling agent by which this can be changed can be conceived either personally or impersonally. DH can, furthermore, be given an opportunity to which he is free to respond, or he can somehow be driven to break through the mirror barrier. Given what he knows about himself, he thinks that if it is to happen it must be in the latter way.

The boundary through which he wants to pass is “the boundary of the unheard of.” He combines the mirror/ boundary imagery with the metaphor of the deep-sea dive. He has referred to plunging into the deep before (50:41), to immersion into the depths (51:47). He admits, however, that he doesn’t yet know how even to begin to bring this about. His instincts, previous experience, training, socializing, lead him to fear even to put his head under the water!

7. The stream of life through millions of years, the human stream through thousands of years. Evil, death and distress, the will to sacriﬁce and love --. What do “I” signify in this perspective? Does not reason compel me to seek what can be mine, my pleasure, my power, people’s respect for me. And yet I “know” — know, without knowing — that precisely in this perspective nothing could be less signiﬁcant. An insight in which God is.

88 | DH reﬂects on the evolutionary process, the life that is older than the more recent human stream. It is in this latter stream that both evil and the will to sacriﬁce are found (50:44, 58:8). The signiﬁcance of his own individual presence in this stream is inﬁnitesimal. He is conscious of the tension between the self-seeking that reason prompts and a perspective from which judgment is passed on such striving. In this latter insight DH is convinced that God is present.

8. To preserve the inner silence — in the midst of the hubbub. To remain open, calm, moist soil in the fruitful darkness where the rain falls and the seed germinates — however many in the arid daylight tramp across the ﬁelds in whirling dust.

There are two images used in this waymark, inner silence (25-30:1, 50:40, 55:55) as opposed to outer hubbub, and moist soil (52:9, 59:92) in fruitful darkness as opposed to the dust raised by those tramping across an arid ﬁeld. Darkness is also sometimes related to silence (54:8). That which is most important must develop within the individual’s inner solitude.

9. When the feeling for the ground meets the feeling for the body — to become earth of earth, a plant among plants, an animal grown out of the soil and fertilizing it. A pantheism of the body with its own empowering covenant.

DH stresses his feeling of solidarity with the natural order (cf. 51:56). There is progression from soil to plants to animals and the suggestion of the cycle by which at death the individual returns to dust, fertilizing it. There is here an empowering covenant, a strong sense that in this body, which includes the totality of nature, there is a divine presence.

10. It is easy to be friendly even to the enemy — from lack of character.

It is the inner reason for behavior that determines how it should be evaluated. Friendliness, which is good, can, however, issue from lack of character.

11. Shall the disgust over the emptiness be the only living content with which you ﬁll the emptiness?

89 | “Emptiness” is for the most part a negative term in Waymarks (41-42:4, 45- 49:13, 50:47, 50:55, 52:11). It is not enough, however, to confess one’s emptiness or to be disgusted with it. DH has stated that our emptiness can be ﬁlled with positive content (51:6). Indeed to be in one sense empty is a prerequisite for being receptive to what each new day will bring (57:1).

12. Now you have been there — it was no more than that! All through life, how many steps, how many hours in order to follow along, to have heard, to have seen — what?

Sometimes the issue of a quest is disappointing (50:34). Is DH reﬂecting about the striving his career has thus far represented? He suggests that social pressure leads one “to follow along.”

13. It is in the Void, Sleeps in the silence, Weeps in the darkness — Little incubus, When, when?

According to medieval lore an incubus was a male demon who haunted the sleep of mortal women and was responsible for the birth of demons, witches, and deformed children. The word can also refer to anything that oppresses and burdens. DH describes the incubus in diminutive terms. It sleeps and weeps. It is not certain whether in the concluding question DH is asking when the incubus will perform its evil deed or when it will be overcome.

14. Thus — when work thought patterns lose their grip, this experience of light, warmth, and strength. From the outside --. A sustaining element, like air for the glider, water for the swimmer. An intellectual doubt that requires proof and logic hinders me from “believing” — also this. Hinders me from developing this in cognitive terms into an interpretation of reality. But through me sweeps the vision of a psychic energy ﬁeld created in a continual present by the many, in word and deed constantly praying, living in holy obedience. — -- — “the communion of saints” and — in this — an eternal life.

90 | Both Van Dusen and Aulén comment on this waymark. Van Dusen calls it one of the most notable, a ﬂeeting illumination, a shaft of light during DH’s darkest night (Van Dusen, 93-94, 194). Aulén notes references to intellectual diﬃculties, to the church, and to eternal life (Aulén, E 26, 141, 154; Sw 42, 203-204, 221-222). DH suggests that his work thought patterns constitute a hindrance keeping him from the kind of self-surrender that is the true meaning of life (45-49:5, 45-49:13, 52:6). As he becomes freed from them he experiences support coming from outside himself. Though he cannot rationally account for this experience (52:7), he traces its source to those whose obedience is a constant prayer and whose fellowship is eternal life.

15. Not “for the sake of peace” to deny one’s own experience and convictions --!

We do not know to what extent DH articulated and shared with others the experience described in the previous waymark (cf. 50:51-52, 51:25). Here he states that he should not in order to avoid controversy deny what he had experienced, or the convictions based on these experiences.

16. Give me something to die for --! “The walls stand Speechless and cold, in the wind The weathervanes clatter… ` It is not this that makes loneliness a torment: That there is no one to share my burden, But this: That I have only my own burden to bear.

This waymark has two parts: an introductory cry for a cause to die for, which suggests the lines from the German poet, Friedrich Hölderlin (1770-1843, “Hälfte des Lebens,” Hymns and Fragments, translated and introduced by Richard Sieburth [ Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984] , 46-47), and a reﬂection on what it is that makes loneliness so diﬃcult. The poem was ﬁrst published when Hölderlin was thirty-ﬁve years of age. It consists of two stanzas, one describing summer, with pears and roses, swans swimming in the water, the other inquiring where ﬂowers and sunshine will be found in the winter, the stanza closing with the cited lines. The German words, die Fahnen klirren im Winde, which seem to speak of ﬂags clattering in the wind, have been diﬃcult to translate. Leif Sjöberg explains that Fahne, “ﬂag” in German,

91 | developed from Old High German fano, akin to Old English fana, “banner,” which in turn is related to “vane” or “weather vane.” (“Translating with W. H. Auden,” Comparative Criticism, vol. 1 (1979), 189).

DH has not yet begun to give dates to certain waymarks. This could, however, have been written about the time of his birthday, which was July 29 (cf. 55:21, 56:34, 58:9, 59:4). He is also in the second half of his life. What he is hungering for most of all is human fellowship, not that another may share his burden, but that he may have the privilege of bearing another person’s burden (cf. 51:32). Other waymarks in which DH speaks of his loneliness are 50:4, 51:32, 52:18, 52:19, 55:46, 58:9.

17. Without blinding desire, Without feeling the right to intrude in another’s life, Shy about the nakedness of my own being, Requiring complete harmony as a prerequisite for life together: How could it have been otherwise?

Why did not DH overcome his loneliness through marriage? He may be trying to answer that question in this waymark. The level of harmony that he sought between himself and a possible mate was so high that he may never have found anyone with whom he wanted to propose marriage. He was shy about exposing his own inner self to another person and didn’t feel he had the right to intrude into the more intimate privacy of women to whom he may have been attracted. Nor did he experience a blinding desire that overcame all these inhibitions. He also became married to his work. To a friend in Stockholm he once acknowledged that though he had reconciled himself to bachelorhood as “what must be,” he was not without a continuing and acute awareness of the price (Van Dusen, 80).

18. Pray that your loneliness may spur you to ﬁnd something to live for, great enough to die for.

In this waymark DH prays that his loneliness may help him ﬁnd something for which he may both live and die. He does think that life’s deprivations and adversities can spur one to greater achievement. In 58:9, a waymark written on his 53rd birthday, he seems to be saying that he believes this prayer was eventually answered.

92 | 19. Tiredness deadens the pain and enticingly suggests death. So you can be tempted to overcome the loneliness — and be invited to a ﬁnal ﬂight from life. — But, not this! Death must be your ﬁnal gift to life, not an act of treachery against it. “Give oneself ” — in work, for others: by all means, only if it isn’t simply in order to promote oneself (perhaps even with a claim for esteem from others).

As 45-49:4,6,7 indicate, DH had experienced the suicides of others and in this waymark he acknowledges that he was aware of the temptation that suicide could represent. Tiredness and loneliness could combine to provide the context in which one might seek such an escape from life. He strongly rejects the thought, however. If one’s death is not to be due to natural causes, it must be one’s ﬁnal gift to life, an act of self-sacriﬁce (cf. 57:42). It must not be ﬁnal betrayal of that to which one has been called.

One’s sense of calling must, however, be critically evaluated. It is possible to give oneself in such a manner as to be promoting oneself, so that there is a hidden self-interest in such apparent altruism (cf. 51:30). There must therefore be total devotion to what is being done for others (58:9).

20. I demand what is unreasonable: that life should have a meaning. I struggle for what is impossible: that my life shall acquire a meaning. I dare not believe, do not know how I should be able to believe: that I am not alone.

This waymark reveals a basic conﬂict in DH’s life. He insists that life should have a meaning, but grants that such a demand is unreasonable. He struggles for meaning in his own life, but considers this impossible. The hardest of all, with respect to which he doesn’t know how to begin, is to dare to believe that he is not alone, that it is possible to have fellowship with God. There are other waymarks, however, that indicate that DH confronted these problems with greater hopefulness (cf. 50:51, 51:32, 52:14, 57:22).

21. The barrenness of this world of mine, does it reﬂect poverty or honesty, is it a sign of weakness or strength,

93 | does it mean that I have lost my way or that I am following it? — Shall despair give the answer?

DH confesses to the barrenness of his life, but is not certain what it means. Is he simply poor, or can it be due to his honesty? This barrenness can signify either strength or weakness, being lost or headed toward the goal. The ﬁnal words suggest that faith rather than despair is to give the answer (cf. 51:32, 54:19).

22. “-- a meaning.” When a seventeen-year-old, in accord with his age, so speaks, he is ridiculous in his ignorance of what he is saying. Thirty years older, I am myself ridiculous, when complete insight about what I am putting down on paper does not hinder me from writing this.

A young person can be ridiculous through speaking out of ignorance, an older person through speaking despite all that he/she knows. DH has come to the point where he apparently is not so worried about being ridiculous in the latter sense. He is preparing to let faith rather than despair provide the answer to the quest for life’s meaning. The seventeen-year-old could be a youth with whom DH had been conversing. He could also be commenting on something he had written in 1922, which he chose not to include in the manuscript of Vägmärken.

23. Ridiculous, this need to communicate! Why should it mean so much that at least someone should have seen the inside of your life? Why do you write this? Certainly for yourself — but, perhaps also for others?

DH goes on also in this waymark to refer to his journal (cf. 56:61). He who was so shy about exposing the nakedness of his own being (52:17) nonetheless felt the need to communicate, so that at least someone would know his innermost thoughts. He did so through the years in this journal. It was for his own use, but he may also early on have begun to think of other possible readers. It is unlikely, however, that he could have imagined how widely Vägmärken has actually been read.

24. Loneliness is not a sickness unto death. No, but is it not only through death that it can be overcome? And does it not become worse the closer we come to death?

94 | Loneliness was a problem with which DH had to struggle throughout his life (25-30:13, 50:4, 51:32, 52:16, 52:18, 52:19, 55:46, 56:41, 58:9). He does not regard it, however, as a “sickness unto death.” The expression suggests John 11:4. Søren Kierkegaard has also written a book with this title (The Sickness unto Death, trans. Walter Lowrie [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1954]). If, however, loneliness is overcome only through death, it can become more intense with advancing age. DH may have been thinking of the loneliness of his aged father. Death in another sense, total surrender to God in the performance of the duties of one’s calling (41-42:9, 45-49:5, 52:6), might also have been for DH an answer to the problem of loneliness.

1953 During the early months of 1953 the United Nations was seeking a new Secretary- General. Trygve Lie had resigned due to the fact that the Soviet Union had for over two years ignored his existence and refused all communication with him, because of the support he had given to the Security Council’s backing of the United States’ decision to resist by force the invasion of South Korea by North Korea. (The Security Council had acted during a period that the Soviet Union was boycotting its meetings.) DH became a compromise candidate, acceptable to all permanent members of the Security Council. Elected and inducted in April, he spent much of the year organizing the staﬀ of the UN Secretariat and defending it against pressures from Senator Joseph McCarthy, then in the heyday of his power, who was charging US citizens working at the UN with disloyalty. As is evident from the waymarks of previous years, DH does not discuss the details of his public life in this journal. He does this year, however, express in a number of waymarks his reactions to the new responsibilities he has received. He also during this year made a brief address on a radio program directed by Edward R. Murrow entitled “This I Believe.” DH’s 600-word statement, which he called “Old Creeds in a New World,” and which was published in 1954 with 80 other similar statements made on that program (This I Believe, vol. 2, written for Edward R. Murrow, edited by Raymond Swing [New York: Simon and Schuster, 1954], 66-67. See Appendix A) indicates that he was willing to be known as a confessing Christian. Though not much attention was given to DH’s credo, much of what was later to be found more fully articulated in Waymarks had already been aﬃrmed in this brief statement.

1. “ — Soon night approaches.” For that which is past: thanks. To that which is coming: yes!

Prior to his election as Secretary-General of the United Nations DH appears to have experienced a profound aﬃrmation of faith, which he expresses in the ﬁrst waymark for this year. Faith has been a strong undertone in his life all along, but he now is able to accept more fully than before all that has been and to say yes to all that is to come. Night is still approaching, but he is certain that God has use for him and in the waymarks that follow he again and again in the most positive terms expresses this certainty. Though DH does not often, as in this waymark, express gratitude (see 54:4, 55:22, 56:66, 61:12), he recognizes the need to be grateful (51:36, 54:19, 55:58). For other references to the past, see 50:43, 54:18, 57:9, 59:3. Other waymarks in which DH speaks of saying yes are 51:47, 51:60, 53:14, 56:7, 57:37, 61:5.

96 | 2. Maturity: also — not to hide one’s strength, not out of shyness to show it to live below one’s best.

Three waymarks written this year are comments about maturity (cf. 53:7, 53:18). DH implies that he feels he has achieved it. Among its meanings is a readiness to be oneself, revealing one’s strength, daring to live at one’s best.

3. Goodness is something so simple: always to be available to others, never to seek one’s own advantage.

DH has always striven for goodness but he has from time to time been troubled by what he has regarded as his deﬁcient interest in other people (50:37, 52:4). Now he sees that always being available to others and not seeking one’s own advantage are not simply requirements of goodness, they are its deﬁnition, and through the aﬃrmation of faith he has experienced he can state what had been a diﬃcult imperative for him in the indicative mood. This does not mean that further struggle on his part will no longer be needed to live in this way (cf. 56:26), but it does mean that he will be greatly aided by his faith.

4. When God acts it happens in the decisive moments — such as now — with a hard purposefulness, a Sophoclean reﬁnement. When the time is ripe he takes his own. But what do you have to say? — Your prayer has been heard. God has use for you, even if it does not seem to suit you at the moment, God “who crushes the person, when he exalts him.”

Waymarks 53:4-13 can be regarded as a series of comments by DH on the theme of his election as Secretary-General of the United Nations, of which fact he was ﬁrst notiﬁed on April 1, 1953. This waymark is in such a case his ﬁrst reaction to this information. He interprets what has occurred as God acting “with hard purposefulness, a Sophoclean reﬁnement.” Of interest is the way in which he uses imagery drawn from Greek tragic drama to describe what he believes is God’s involvement in what is happening.

Sophocles (c. 495-405 B.C.E.) was a Greek tragic poet, a younger contemporary of Aeschylus and an older contemporary of Euripides. Many regard his Oedipus the King, on the plot of which drama DH comments in 57:7, as unsurpassed in Greek tragedy. Sophocles diﬀers from Aeschylus in

97 | that his characters, though majestic, are nearer the human level. He diﬀers from Euripides in that, though a divine will unfolds in his dramas, the gods do not miraculously intervene. The actions of the characters are complete and intelligible in themselves, though at the same time part of a larger divine design. Through the interaction of a human being with the circumstances befalling in that person’s life a divinely intended tragic destiny unfolds. (H. D. F. Kitto, Greek Tragedy [Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1955], 141, 144-145).

DH’s reference to Sophocles lends a sober note to his reﬂections on his election as UN Secretary-General. He is suggesting that his life up to this point can be viewed from two perspectives. On the one hand there have been circumstances, to which he has responded, whereby his competence and reputation have developed to the point that this election could be possible. On the other hand a divine plan has also been developing, the purpose of which, now that the time is ripe, can in this decisive moment be descried. DH has been praying to be used by God (cf. 51:59, 56:13, 56:57). Such an opportunity has come, though it is not entirely what DH had in mind. He acknowledges, however, that God is claiming what is his own. He also sees himself being crushed by the exaltation that is approaching (cf. 53:11).

The concluding words are quoted in German. DH may have borrowed them from Strödda blad ur Bertil Ekmans efterlämnade papper (cf. 51:24). In Ekman’s text the German citation comes at the conclusion of the following paragraph: “I am tired of talking about myself. What is great and glorious is that God lives and directs poor mortals, no, directs happy mortals toward death’s strong glory. Life is great, you glorious, you glorious hard life, which gives us this destiny, ‘Which exalts the person, when it crushes the person’” (63). It is signiﬁcant that DH changes “which” and “it” to “who” and “he” in the citation, and also reverses the order of the clauses. The source Ekman cites is Friedrich Schiller (1759- 1805) in the poem “Shakespeares Schatten. Eine Parodie,” 1796, Schillers Werke, Leipzig, vol. 1, 200.

5. “Will it come, or will it not, The day when joy becomes great, The day when grief becomes small?… So, then, it came — the day when grief became small. Because the diﬃculty I encountered was meaningless in the light of the demands God made. But how hard to feel that this also — and therefore — was the day when joy became great.

98 | The cited lines are from “Prästkrage säg”(Oxeye Daisy Tell), a poem by Gunnar Ekelöf (1907-1968). The poem develops a theme found in a line from a Swedish folk song “Glädjens blomster” (Flowers of Joy), according to which ﬂowers of joy do not grow on earth, but for hope and faith bloom forever above. The poet asks whether the time will ever come when joy becomes great and grief is small. In commenting on the concluding lines of the poem, DH states that for him the grief has become small because of the great demands God is making. For the same reason he acknowledges that the joy should also be great, though this he ﬁnds it diﬃcult to feel.

Five years later the secretariat staﬀ held a surprise party to celebrate the beginning of DH’s second term as UN Secretary-General. In his words of appreciation on that occasion DH again referred to these concluding lines from the poem “Prästkrage säg” and interpreted them as follows: “ . . . what we are trying to do here is to make our small contribution, during our short time, to a development which will ﬁnally lead us to the day ‘when joy is great and sorrow is small’” (Public Papers of the S-G, 4:65, 68). For DH’s dated waymark at the beginning of his second term, see 58:7.

6. Not I, but God in me.

This brief entry is similar to the words of Paul, “ . . . not I, but the grace of God which is with me” (1 Cor. 15:10, cf. Gal. 2:20). Paul, however, is looking back at what has been already achieved, while DH is looking forward to what lies ahead. He is conscious of God’s indwelling presence and believes that God is working out his purpose through him. Other waymarks where the words “God in me” or their equivalents appear are 53:13, 54:5, 54:13, 54:19, 55:8, 57:4, 58:7.

7. Maturity: also a new lack of self-consciousness — which you achieve only when you have become wholly indiﬀerent to yourself through an absolute aﬃrmation of your destiny. The one who has placed himself in God’s hand stands free vis-à-vis other people: he is wholly open because he gives them the right to judge.

In view of the new responsibility he is receiving, DH returns to the theme of maturity discussed in 53:2. “Lack of self-consciousness” is perhaps the best way to translate the Swedish omedvetenhet (unconsciousness). Such escape from

99 | self-consciousness is achieved through aﬃrming one’s destiny, the consequence of which is that one becomes wholly indiﬀerent with respect to previously held ambitions and desires. Having placed oneself in God’s hand (cf. 54:20, 55:8) also creates a new relationship of openness and freedom in relation to others (cf. 53:3).

8. April 7, 1953 “Being grounded and strengthened in God, they are incapable of any kind of pride; and since they return to God all the gifts with which he has blessed them, they do not at all receive glory from each other; but they seek only the glory of God alone.” Thomas [à Kempis] II:10.

This is the ﬁrst waymark that is dated. DH received oﬃcial notiﬁcation of his election as Secretary-General on April 1. April 7 was the last day he spent in Sweden before leaving to assume his new oﬃcial responsibilities. As he prepares to leave Sweden he uses the language of a French translation of The Imitation of Christ to express his response to this new calling.

This is the ﬁrst of seven citations from The Imitation of Christ in Waymarks. The other citations are found in 55:3, 55:21, 55:53, 55:66, 56:8, and 56:57. The citations are in French from De l’imitation de Jesus-Christ, translated by le sieur de Beüil, Prieur de Saint Val, derniere ed. (Brussels: Eugene Henry Frick, 1689). It should be noted that the sixth edition had been published in Paris in 1667. DH identiﬁes the source of the citations in this waymark and in 55:21 as “Thomas,” also stating that this citation is from book II, chapter 10 (de Beüil, 119). In the 1964 English translation, Markings, and the 1966 annotated edition of Vägmärken (Stockholm: Bonniers), it was supposed that this was Thomas Aquinas.

The Imitation of Christ, which stresses that following Christ means sharing his suﬀerings, is attributed to Thomas à Kempis (1380- 1470). He received his early education from the Brethren of the Common Life at Deventer, a community founded by Gerard Groote (1340-1380). He spent the remainder of his long life at the monastery of Mount St. Agnes, near Zwolle, The Netherlands, a monastery in which the rule of the Augustinian Canons was being followed. While The Imitation of Christ was published by Thomas à Kempis in 1441, many believe the book is largely based on the writings of earlier members of the Brethren of the Common Life, especially Groote’s Admonitions Concerning Interior Things.

100 | An indication of the importance of The Imitation of Christ for DH is the fact that he had taken it with him on what proved to be his fatal trip to the Congo. His leather-bound copy of the above cited French edition of this book was found on the table next to the bed in the Linnér villa in Leopoldville, where he had spent his last night. In the book as a bookmark was a card with the Secretary-General’s oath of oﬃce typed on it (Urquhart, 587; Van Dusen, 184). This book is presently to be found in the portion of DH’s library kept at the Royal Library in Stockholm.

DH uses the citation in this waymark to emphasize the fact that his election as Secretary-General cannot be for him an occasion for pride. His gifts have all been received from God and he is obligated to return them again to God. Thus he is to seek only God’s glory and he is unwilling to accept glory for himself.

9. I am the vessel. The drink is God’s. And God is the thirsty one.

DH combines the imagery of the drink oﬀering with imagery Paul uses in 2 Corinthians 4:7: “But we have this treasure in clay jars, so that it may be made clear that this extraordinary power belongs to God and does not come from us.” This is another way of saying that the gifts God has given are to be returned to him. See 54:2.

10. What meaning does the word “sacriﬁce” ultimately have? Or even the word “gift”? The one who has nothing cannot give anything. The gift is God’s — to God.

Even the words “gift” and “sacriﬁce” are, however, inappropriate, though DH makes frequent use of these words (sacriﬁce/oﬀering - 25-30:2, 45-49:13, 50:46, 51:29, 54:5, 55:9, 55:23, 55:29, 57:13, 57:44, 57:46-47, 58:9, 59:81-82, 60:l; gift - 50:53, 52:19, 53:8, 55:56, 56:59). DH thinks of himself as so identiﬁed with God that he cannot claim that his abilities and endowments are his own. Only the divine purpose for which the gifts have been received is to be considered.

11. That the way deﬁned by one’s calling ends on the cross, the one who has accepted his destiny knows — even when it leads him through the jubilation around Gennesareth or the triumphal entry into Jerusalem.

101 | Despite the fact that DH strongly aﬃrms his faith in the waymarks of this year in positive terms, he does not forget that commitment to God involves total sacriﬁce. At the time that he is enjoying the high experience of beginning his service as UN Secretary-General he reminds himself that even such a high achievement can lead to the cross, to suﬀering, and even death (cf. 53:4). The life and destiny of Jesus play a very important role in the deﬁnition of DH’s faith. In 45-49:13 he points out that Jesus accepted condemnation as the fruit and the presupposition of his endeavor at the time that this endeavor was conceived and chosen. In 51:31 DH states that Jesus later was aware of other possibilities but did not choose them. Here DH reminds himself that in accepting the destiny his calling is deﬁning he must also be prepared to go the way of the cross.

12. To be free, to be able to stand up and leave everything — without looking back. To say yes --.

For DH to say yes to the future that lay before him required that he be free to leave the context in which his life had thus far been lived. He was grateful for his past but also willing now to turn to new duties without looking back. He may in this waymark be alluding to these words of Jesus: “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is ﬁt for the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:62). For other references to looking/turning back, see 51:22, 56:13, 57:26, 57:35, 61:5; to saying yes, see 51:47, 51:60, 53:1, 53:14, 56:7, 57:37, 61:5.

13. No one is humble except in faith. For the masks of weakness or pharisaism are not the naked face of humility. No one is proud except in faith. For the spiritually immature person’s variations on the theme of conceit are not pride. Humble and proud in faith: it is to live this, that in God I am nothing, but God is in me.

Humility and pride were themes upon which DH on a number of occasions reﬂected (humility - 51:62, 53:22, 54:2, 54:19, 55:7, 55:58, 56:1, 56:26, 56:33, 56:45, 56:49, 59:4; pride - 50:44, 51:15, 51:42, 54:2, 56:40, 61:16). He valued humility above pride, though here he speaks positively of both humility and pride when they appear in the context of faith (cf. 54:2, 55:41). In God one is both abased and exalted (cf. 53:4). Masks of whatever kind are of no use before God, while no conceit can be compared with the consciousness of God’s indwelling presence.

102 | This is the last in a series of waymarks (53:4-13) that have been interpreted as expressing DH’s reﬂections upon his election as UN Secretary-General. It is signiﬁcant that in all but two of these waymarks God has been named. This indicates the religious devotion with which DH entered upon these duties.

14. To say yes to life is also to say yes to oneself. Yes — even to that attribute which most unwillingly permits itself to be transformed from a temptation into strength.

To say yes to what is to come (53:1, 53:12) is also to say yes to life, which includes oneself. DH is keenly aware of his faults (cf. 41-41:22, 50:33, 51:36, 55:8, 55:27, 57:6), but he dares to hope that those of his attributes that could be hindrances can be transformed and used in the furtherance of the cause to which he is committed.

15. The strange moment when a person’s features dissolve in a shimmering watery surface through whose ripples you see into the depths without seeing the bottom. You are enticed to dive and tempted to grasp — but the water cannot be grasped and under its surface you cannot breathe. One step further, and the contact is broken in bewilderment and error: you think you have won a person and you lose him, you intend to break through the boundaries of personality and you create for yourself a new prison.

DH describes what can be an experience of frustration in interpersonal relationships. There are boundaries of personality that must be respected, for if one seeks to break through them, contact with that person is broken. What one thought one had gained is lost. Instead of achieving greater communion, one has become even more isolated in a new imprisonment. There are some similarities between the problem DH discusses in this waymark and the problem discussed in 52:6.

16. Even in our healthiest, brightest human relationships lurks the abyss — created by the distrust which binds our view to the possibilities of the night side.

103 | This waymark and the preceding one are the only waymarks this year containing negative comments. DH may here be explaining why there are boundaries of personality which limit interpersonal communion. They are due to distrust which is never wholly overcome (cf. 50:11), always suggesting “the possibilities of the night side.” Despite faith’s positive aﬃrmation, the presence of this threatening abyss must be remembered (cf. 61:11). DH discusses his understanding of “the night side” more fully in 57:6.

17. A landscape can sing about God, a body about spirit.

The Swedish word landskap refers to an area or region, as well as to that portion of land the eye can comprehend in a single view, especially in its pictorial aspect. Very likely the former meaning is intended in this waymark (cf. 51:56). Nature has a relationship to God analogous to the body’s relation to spirit. Both the outdoor world and the body can sing about the spiritual power present within them (cf. 54:15-16, 55:54, 59:115). God’s presence, according to DH, can, of course, be felt in the human individual as well as in nature.

18. Maturity, also this: the bright self-possession this moment of a child at play, in unquestioned solidarity with his playmates.

DH is often critical of childish behavior (cf. 45-49:4, 50:48), but he ﬁnds also characteristics of maturity preﬁgured in the child, especially in the child at play. There is artless, cheerful self-possession. That one plays with and thereby identiﬁes oneself with others is taken for granted. These characteristics must be retained as one moves from play to life’s growing responsibilities.

19. A human nearness — free from the earth, but blessing the earth.

This waymark, in which Auden-Sjöberg translate närhet (nearness) as “intimacy” (Markings, 93), has been interpreted as referring to marriage (Van Dusen, 82). DH may, however, be reﬂecting more generally on the human relationship to the earth. While human beings are of the earth and intimately related to it, they also have a freedom from the earth that other animals do not share. This freedom may be used to exploit and destroy, but it can also be used to care for the earth and bless it. See the following waymarks referring to nature or the earth, in one of which marital imagery is used: 51:50, 51:56, 52:9.

104 | 20. If I may continue: ﬁrmer, simpler — quieter, warmer.

The four adverbs indicate qualities that DH wanted to characterize his leadership. A leader must be ﬁrm. The simplicity he sought is what in biblical language is called “singleness of heart” (Eph 6:5, cf. 25-30:1, 59:5). DH valued silence (25-30:10, 45-49:12), preferring it to empty chatter (50:32, 51:12), but also because silence implies a willingness to listen to others and to God (41-42:6, 52:8, 54:8). He felt the need to develop closer interpersonal relationships and sharply criticized his deﬁciency at this point (50:37). He was later to stress the importance of loving concern for individuals, especially in the large context in which he worked (56:26).

21. You are without support if in anything you chose for yourself.

An essential rule that DH set for himself was that his own self-interest must not govern his choices, for the support he experienced insofar as he was surrendered to God’s will required such a discipline (cf. 55:8). In 55:39 he points out that choosing for himself would also weaken his eﬀorts on behalf of others.

22. The humility which is born out of the trust of others.

That others place trust in you can be a source of pride, but it can also prompt humility, when one recognizes the greatness of the obligation and the limits of one’s own abilities (cf. 51:2).

1954 DH spent much of 1954 completing his reorganization of the UN Secretariat. During the summer (August 20) he addressed the Second Assembly of the World Council of Churches in Evanston, Illinois, recalling his own early acquaintance with the ecumenical movement during his student days. He challenged the churches to ﬁght for an ever-wider recognition of their own ideals of justice and truth and to help people see the strength that follows from the courage to meet others with trust (Public Papers of the S-G, 2:351-356). Following the death of his father (October 10, 1953), Hjalmar Hammarskjöld, who was a member of the Swedish Academy, DH was elected to take his seat, the ﬁrst time in the history of the academy that a son had succeeded his father. The inaugural address of a new academy member is to be devoted to the life and work of his predecessor. While in Stockholm in December to deliver this address, DH was also preparing to visit the People’s Republic of China on behalf of American airmen, some who had strayed into Chinese air space, others who had been shot down over North Korea, whom the Chinese had sentenced as spies. Their continued imprisonment despite the armistice ending the Korean War was causing considerable tension between China and the U.S. While fully conscious of the risks involved, DH hoped that this diplomatic venture could contribute toward reducing this tension. Some dated waymarks express the feelings with which he traveled to Beijing.

1. “ — Soon night approaches.” Let me ﬁnish what I have been permitted to begin. Let me give everything even without certainty of growth.

For the ﬁfth consecutive year DH begins his entries for the new year by citing the words “Soon night approaches.” He is approaching the end of his ﬁrst year as Secretary-General. He prays that he may be allowed to ﬁnish that which he has been permitted to begin. He reminds himself, however, that it is not essential that he should see the fulﬁllment of the projects that he has initiated. He must be prepared to give himself unreservedly to his duties without any certainty that his eﬀorts will be crowned with success. In his August 20 address to the Assembly of the World Council of Churches he had stated, “ . . . our work for peace should be pursued with the patience of one who has no anxiety about results, acting in the calm self-surrender of faith” (Public Papers of the S-G, 2:356). For other references to growth, see 50:40, 55:37, 59:93.

106 | 2. The pride of the cup is in the drink, its humility in serving. Of what importance, then, are its ﬂaws?

This waymark calls to mind 53:9, where DH has called himself the vessel and that which is drunk from it God’s. If so, the pride of the cup is in its contents and its humility in that it exists to be used. In this context what might otherwise be viewed as defects do not matter (cf. 53:14).

3. Salty and windswept, but warm and glistening. Strides in step under the task’s ﬁxed stars. — To what a great extent are not personal failures due to distrust of this strict and gentle harmony among human beings.

This and the following waymark tell of days DH spent at the seashore with his staﬀ. Very likely there were several long walks along the beach. It is the practice of some persons, perhaps due to the inﬂuence of military training, to prefer to walk in step when they walk with another person. DH thinks of being guided in his work by walking in step with “the task’s ﬁxed stars,” but he suggests also that he must walk in step with his associates. The result is both a strict and a gentle harmony, which if disrupted by distrust of others can lead to personal failure (see 53:16 and the reference in 54:1 to DH’s address to the WCC Assembly).

4. With all the body’s strength concentrated in the hand on the rudder, with the mind wholly concentrated on the goal beyond the horizon, you catch laughing the salt spray in the second of rest before a new wave — Sharing the moment’s happy freedom with those who share your responsibility. Thus — in concentration’s self-eﬀacement — the consummation of living togetherness occurs,

A shared, timeless happiness, conveyed through a smile, a movement of the hand.

Thanks for the people who taught me this. Thanks for days which taught me this.

107 | In addition to walking on the beach, DH and his staﬀ also sailed. He reﬂects that what can be learned from play (cf. 53:18, 57:50) is applicable to the common endeavor in which they are engaged. But most of all he values and is grateful for the fellowship that developed among them as they shared in sailing tasks, a sense of togetherness that was expressed in several nonverbal ways. For other references to nonverbal communication, see 50:30, 50:40, 51:55.

5. Then I saw that the wall had never existed, that “the unheard of ” is here and this, not something else, that “the sacriﬁce” is here and now, always and everywhere — this, “surrendered” to be what God of himself, in me, gives to himself.

In this waymark a discussion of faith begins that will continue through the following three waymarks (54:6-8). DH has previously spoken of “the boundary of the unheard of ” (51:47, 51:62, 52:6). At times he appears to have thought of this boundary as a barrier or a wall, restricting passage to “the unheard of.” He is aware of other barriers, his role’s costume being a wall between him and the sympathy he sought (51:16), the boundary of another’s personality that must not be violated (53:15). In 52:6 he uses mirror imagery to describe that which hinders encounter with one’s inner self. In this waymark, however, he states that he has ﬁnally learned that “the unheard of ” does not lie beyond an impassable boundary. No wall separating him from it has ever existed. “The unheard of ” is to be surrendered and thereby sacriﬁced here and now to God. This happens within a person, so that the person is fully involved in the surrender, but it is also God who of himself gives to himself. In 55:19 a similar discovery is described using other imagery.

6. Only the one who always is all he can be has hope of being furloughed from the front before he disappears in the darkness. For the sentries of the enemy do not sleep.

This waymark makes it clear that what God does in the committed believer (54:5) does not leave the person wholly passive with no responsibilities. Using military language DH suggests that the sentries of the forces of evil will signal an attack if at any time the believer fails to be all that he/she can be (55:8, 55:26, 56:60). It is diﬃcult to imagine how and when anyone so obligated can ever expect to be “furloughed” (cf. 25-30:12, 50:42, 57:31, 57:40).

108 | 7. “Faith is God’s union with the soul.” Faith is — cannot therefore be comprehended, much less identiﬁed with the formulas in which we paraphrase that which is. — en una noche oscura [in a dark night]. Faith’s night — so dark that we cannot even try to believe. It is in the night of Gethsemane, where the last friends are sleeping, all others seek your ruin, and God is silent, that the union is consummated.

In 1953, shortly after coming to New York as UN Secretary-General, DH appeared on a radio program arranged by Edward R. Murrow in which well- known persons from all walks of life made brief statements on the topic “This I Believe.” DH entitled his statement “Old Creeds in a New World.” In it he quoted the words of the Spanish Carmelite mystic of the counter-reformation period, St. John of the Cross (1542-1591): “Faith is the union of God with the soul” (Dark Night of the Soul, book 1, ch. 11, The Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross [London: Burns, Oates & Washbourne, 1947], vol. 1, 384). He continued, “The language of religion is a set of formulas which register a basic spiritual experience. It must not be regarded as describing in terms to be deﬁned by philosophy, the reality which is accessible to our senses and which we can analyze with tools of logic” (Public Papers of the S-G, 2:195. See Appendix A). Now some months later DH writes in his journal the same deﬁnition of faith (cf. 41-42:24, 55:15, 56:63). He goes on to describe what the union of God with the soul ultimately implies. The account of Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane tells us what to expect. The night is so dark we cannot even see by faith. What friends there are are sleeping, while those who are awake are hostile. What may be hardest to understand is that God is silent. No explaining illumination occurs, but nonetheless the union is consummated. DH is not saying that the union begins in this manner, but this is its fulﬁllment. Other waymarks in which all or part of the statement “Faith is God’s union with the soul” appears are 55:9, 56:25, 57:47, 58:7.

8. To be directed by that which lives when “we” no longer live — as interested parties or know-it-alls. To be able to listen and give heed — to that within us which is in the darkness. And the silence.

The discussion of faith begun in 54:5 continues in this waymark. In saying that “we” no longer live DH explains what it can mean to accept death (cf. 41-42:9,

109 | 45-49:5). It is the self preoccupied with its own interests, or certain that it has a better understanding of all things (DH uses the German word Besserwisser). On the other hand, the radically diﬀerently oriented self listens, gives heed, and thereby becomes aware of that which actually is in the darkness and the silence (52:8, 53:20). Quite clearly such an understanding of faith cannot be fully explained, but DH suggests it can be lived.

9. Tomorrow you will have to play a more diﬃcult role — tomorrow when the public begins to search for faults and you no longer have me in the wings. Then you will discover what you really can do --.

DH is anticipating the end of “the honeymoon of publicity” (51:23) which has attended the beginning of his term as Secretary-General. It is not wholly clear as to who will no longer be in the wings as the public begins to search for faults. This cannot be a reference to God. DH may be personifying the popularity enjoyed by the newly elected oﬃcial. He will discover what he really can do when those evaluating his work become more critical (cf. 56:39, 57:14, 57:49).

10. We have responsibility for our perﬁdies, but no credit for our achievements. Man’s freedom is a freedom to betray God. God surely loves us — but the answer is voluntary.

It is often held that if we must take responsibility for our mistakes, we should also receive credit for our achievements. DH insists that the good that we do is God’s doing in us (53:10, 55:22, 56:46, 56:57). Our freedom is the freedom to frustrate and betray God (50:33, 57:17, 57:31, 57:32). We may also surrender this freedom as our answer to God’s love (55:52).

11. Your obligation is “to --.” You can never save yourself through “not to --.”

Human obligation must be deﬁned in positive terms. While there is much that we must not do, there is no salvation in simply avoiding wrong acts.

12. A crack in the ware? Then you have let it get cold.

In the process of ﬁring pottery, if it is heated or cooled too rapidly it can crack. The imagery DH is using suggests the need for patience.

110 | 13. You who have created us free, who see all that happens — and nonetheless are certain of victory. You who now are the one of us who suﬀers the utmost loneliness, You — who also are I, May I bear the burden of this, when my hour comes, May I --.

This is the ﬁrst of a number of prayers in Waymarks (cf. 54:19, 56:7, 56:55, 61:13, 61:16). It is also a theological statement. God has created free human beings and is fully aware of how they use and misuse this freedom. Yet God is not reduced to being a spectator but is certain of victory (cf., however, 57:31). Since God is identiﬁed with the believer, the believer experiences the tension between the conﬁdence that good will triumph and the awareness of the evil that pervades so much of what actually happens. DH states that God suﬀers loneliness. One might ask, however, cannot the believer have fellowship with other believers? DH would perhaps answer that to exercise one’s freedom so that God’s cause triumphs is a profoundly individual matter, which can also become an increasingly heavy burden. He prays that he may be enabled to bear this burden when his hour of special testing comes.

14. See yourself as an exception — but then write oﬀ the hope of “resting in the security that created the world.”

DH alludes to a poem, “Ja visst gör det ont” (Yes indeed it hurts), by the Swedish poet Karin Boye (1900-1941), published in För trädets skull (For the sake of the tree, 1935; Dikter [Stockholm: Bonniers, 1946], 175-176). Boye, with whom DH was acquainted, studied in Uppsala, was extremely radical in her social and religious beliefs, and ﬁnally committed suicide. In the poem she imagines that it hurts for buds in the spring to break out of their protective covering and that drops of water are apprehensive about falling. The last stanza of the poem reads:

Then, when it is worst and nothing helps, The buds of the tree break as if rejoicing; Then, when no fear any longer binds them, The drops fall in a glitter from the branch, Forget that they were afraid of the new, Forget that they were anxious about the journey --

111 | For a second feel their greatest security, Rest in the trust that creates the world.

DH has rephrased the last line of the poem. His concern is not so much inhibiting fear as the temptation occasioned by his loneliness. To believe is an extremely individual matter and one can be tempted to over-emphasize one’s singularity. The security that God oﬀers is lost, however, if in one’s loneliness one separates oneself from the human family.

15. The body: not a thing, not “his” or “hers,” not an instrument for your deeds or pleasure. In the ultimate nakedness: the human being.

One must identify oneself not only with all of humankind but also with one’s own body. Karen Boye, to whom reference is made in the previous waymark, rejected the dualism between body and soul that she felt was characteristic of traditional Christianity. Though DH can distinguish between the body and the mind (61:7), here he identiﬁes the human being with the body. Our bodies to not belong to us, nor may we do with them whatever we choose. Our bodies are ourselves, the locus of the mystery of human life.

16. Besides the need for a meaning, also this: a need for human nearness, divested of all outworks — the experience of a closed world of energy, interpreted in a meaningfully beautiful pattern of lines. The numen of human life before which we bow in devotion.

DH here combines themes from the two previous waymarks. He emphasizes the need to escape the isolation of loneliness and experience human nearness. He wants direct encounter with other persons, all outworks (minor defenses beyond the main body of a fortiﬁed structure) having been divested. Here DH may be thinking of masks, costumes, formal dress, and other accoutrement of the self (50:13, 51:16, 57:16, 58:12). Note the reference to “ultimate nakedness” in 54:15. It does not seem, however, that the human nearness he is seeking requires actual physical contact (cf. 50:28). He is content to observe the body’s linear animation, perhaps “the aching beauty of a neckline” (50:21). The body of another person can be for him a source of wonder as he considers the locus of energy it represents, its aesthetic harmony. “Numen” in Roman religion was a divine power or spirit, whose presence was felt but whose nature was but vaguely known.

112 | 17. Blood and dirt, sweat and soil — where are these in your world of will? Everywhere — as the ground from which the ﬂame erectly rises.

Despite what DH has said about human beings as bodies (54:15), it could appear that there is little place for blood and dirt, sweat and soil in his vision of what it means to be human. His strong emphasis upon being surrendered to the indwelling God could suggest a world of will, with the material stuﬀ of the world having little signiﬁcance. Yet it is precisely out of the material world that the ﬂame of the spirit rises and from which, as a plant from the ground, it is constantly nourished (cf. 52:9, 58:10).

18. Fruit of the past, pregnant with the future, the present is at the same time always in eternity as a point of intersection between time and faith’s timelessness in freedom toward past and future.

The present has a dual relationship to time (past and future) and eternity. The past ﬂows through the present into the future, but eternity also intersects this ﬂow, for in the present faith’s timeless freedom is exercised (cf. 50:3, 51:49). Faith is not bound by the past. It trusts God who is certain of victory (54:13) and thus is also free in its relation to the future.

19. You who are over us, You who are one of us, You who are — also in us, may all see you — also in me, may I prepare the way for you, may I be grateful for all that then befalls me. May I at the same time not forget the needs of others, Keep me in your love as you would that all should remain in mine. May everything in my being be directed to your glory and may I never despair. For I am under your hand, and in you is all power and goodness.

Give me a pure heart — that I may see you, a humble heart — that I may hear you,

113 | a loving heart — that I may serve you, a believing heart — that I may remain in you.

This is the second prayer in Waymarks (cf. 54:13). It begins with a trinitarian invocation. The Father is over us, the Son is one of us, the Spirit is in us (for a more explicit reference to the Trinity, see 56:1). The next lines are arranged chiastically. DH prays that the Spirit’s presence in him may be visible to all, that (like John the Baptist) he may prepare the way for the coming Son, and that he may be grateful to God for all that in consequence may befall him. He does not, however, want this concentration on his own role in God’s purpose to make him unmindful of others. He is aware that total devotion to God’s glory will not exempt him from the temptation to despair, and he therefore reminds himself of God’s power and goodness. He concludes by praying for purity and humility that he might see (Matt. 5:8) and hear God, for love that he might serve him, and for faith that he might remain in fellowship with God. That “a believing heart” is mentioned last suggests that for DH faith does not initiate the God relationship but represents its culmination (cf. 41-42:24, 54:7). These ﬁnal petitions are repeated in the plural number in one of DH’s last prayers in Waymarks (61:13).

20. The “unheard of ” — to be in God’s hand. Again a reminder that this is the only permanent thing in your life — and again this disappointment which shows how slow you are to learn.

In the previous waymark (54:19) DH speaks of himself as “under God’s hand” and of the accompanying assurance of God’s power and goodness. In this waymark he uses again the expression “the unheard of ” (cf. 51:47, 51:62, 52:6, 54:5) and states that this is “to be in God’s hand.” This awareness is both a source of strength and of disappointment: of strength, for this relationship is the continuing cantus ﬁrmus of his life; of disappointment, because his slowness in learning the life style appropriate to this relationship is again and again made evident.

21. Never at the destination — the larger task is only a higher class in this school where you approach an examination which no one will know, because you are then completely alone.

The learning process in which DH is engaged will never be completed (55:6). The larger responsibility is from another vantage point an advanced class in life’s school. The ﬁnal testing is not public. Only DH will know when and how it is taking place (cf. 52:5).

114 | 22. Certainly God tempts — with “equality,” with every attribute that entices to some other use than his gloriﬁcation. The more he demands, the more dangerous is the raw material he has given us for our contribution. Be grateful — also for the key to the gates of hell.

This could be a rejoinder to the denial in James 1:13 that God tempts us. If we receive everything from God, both what we have in common with all others and that which distinguishes us can be sources of temptation, insofar as we fail to glorify God with these gifts. In this respect all are equally tempted. Greater responsibilities and opportunities, furthermore, which are evidences of increasing divine demands, provide more perilous occasions for transgression. In gratefully receiving these added gifts one is ironically accepting the key to the gates of hell.

23. Righteous in your sight, With your courage, In your stillness --

The trinitarian structure of this fragmentary prayer is made more explicit in 56:1. DH seeks the righteousness God the Father acknowledges, he would share Jesus’ courage, and experience the stillness of the Spirit. The three terms, righteousness, courage, and stillness, recur in 56:1, 56:10, 61:13.

24. “For man shall commune with all creatures to his proﬁt, but enjoy God alone.” Then no one is a source of continuing pleasure for another --

The quotation is cited in English from a source thus far unknown. The thought is Augustinian. Only God is to be enjoyed, while creatures may be used. The distinction between use and enjoyment as far as God is concerned may pose problems for DH, for he ordinarily thinks of God as a will to be obeyed rather than a highest good to be enjoyed. Should one, on the other hand, seek one’s own proﬁt in communing with other human beings? DH’s comment explores the implications of the statement for human relationships. No human relationship can be a source of continuing pleasure (Sw. lust). It should be noted that in Vägmärkenfour other references to lust (pleasure) are negative (52:7, 54:15, 55:27, 57:45) and only one (57:50) is positive. The statement, furthermore, seems to exclude the possibility that God can be

115 | encountered in human fellowship, thus granting such relationships continuing signiﬁcance, though this possibility appears to be recognized in 52:14. DH does suggest, to be sure, in 51:48 and 55:51 (cf. 50:50) that human love relationships may be impermanent. Perhaps the concluding dashes suggest that he has not completed his reﬂection on this Augustinian statement. Such reﬂection may continue in the following waymark (54:25).

25. In the unheard of you are beyond and above — to hold fast to this must be the ﬁrst commandment in your spiritual discipline.

To be in fellowship with God, in “the unheard of ” (51:47, 51:62, 52:6, 54:5), is to share in some measure God’s transcendence. This may mean that one is above and beyond the distinction between enjoyment and use, as far as relationships with both God and other human beings are concerned. If so, this is not a condition that can be taken for granted. DH must constantly hold fast to it. This is the ﬁrst requirement of the spiritual discipline under which he lives.

26. December 10 “God spake once, and twice I have also heard the same: that power belongeth unto God; and that thou, Lord, art merciful: for thou rewardest every man according to his work.”

This and the following two dated waymarks relate to DH’s decision to go to Beijing to seek the release of the imprisoned American airmen (see above the introduction to the 1954 waymarks). On December 10 after heated debate the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution authorizing the Secretary- General to seek the release of the airmen “by the means most appropriate to his judgment.” On the same day DH sent a cable to Chou En-lai requesting the opportunity to take this matter up with him personally (Public Papers of the S-G, 2:415-424). As DH is making these plans he uses the language of the Psalms to express his feelings. The citation is in English from The Book of Common Prayer, a version of the Psalms DH continues to cite in later waymarks. He had two copies of The Book of Common Prayer, one printed in 1762 and the other in 1792. The citations do not diﬀer, however, from the text of more recent editions, e.g., The Book of Common Prayer (New York: Oxford, 1938). DH quotes Psalm 62:11-12. Very likely the whole psalm is in his mind. In light of what was said about “stillness” in 54:23, these verses at the beginning of the psalm must also have been extremely signiﬁcant to him: “My soul truly

116 | waiteth still upon God; for of him cometh my salvation. . . . Wait thou still upon God; for my hope is in him” (Ps 62:l, 5).

27. December 25 Believe — not to hesitate!

DH received a reply from Chou En-lai on December 17 informing him that he would be received for conversations in Beijing. He left the next day for Stockholm, where on December 20 he delivered his inaugural lecture as a member of the Swedish Academy. He also met with the Chinese ambassador to Sweden, General Keng Piao, to discuss arrangements for the trip. He then returned to New York. DH was keenly aware of the risk he was making in visiting Beijing, both insofar as his own reputation as a diplomat and the eﬀectiveness of the oﬃce of Secretary-General in reducing international tensions were concerned. These concerns were uppermost in his mind as he observed Christmas Day. In this brief waymark he tells himself to believe and therefore not to hesitate. He will repeat this exhortation to himself again in 56:25.

28. December 30 “If I take the wings of the morning and remain in the uttermost parts of the sea; even there also shall thy hand lead me.”

DH and his party left New York for Beijing on December 30. Again he cites a Psalm passage (Ps 139:9-10), this time to assert his conﬁdence that he can be assured of God’s presence with him as he travels and God’s guidance as he negotiates.

1955 The year began with DH’s arrival in Beijing for conversations with Chou En-lai about the possible release of imprisoned American airmen. These included four U.S. Air Force jet pilots who had strayed into Chinese air space and eleven B-29 crew members who had been shot down while conducting leaﬂet-dropping operations over North Korea and who were later convicted of espionage by a Chinese military tribunal and sentenced to prison terms. The US insisted that these airmen should have been repatriated in connection with the Armistice Agreement that had ended the Korean War. DH went to China not to represent the US position but to speak for the UN Organization. In the conversations, while no agreement was reached regarding the release of the airmen, both DH and Chou En-lai developed mutual respect for each other. Negotiations continued during the spring and into the summer. In May the four jet pilots were released and ﬁnally, the occasion being in part related to DH’s 50th birthday on July 29, it was announced in Beijing on August 1 that the remaining eleven airmen were also being released. As a result of the success of the mission to Beijing DH’s diplomatic skills were widely recognized and his role in the oﬃce of Secretary-General was strengthened. Though he was disappointed that further progress could not be made at that time toward bringing the People’s Republic of China into the UN, during 1954 there was some relaxation of tension between the U.S. and China.

1. “For naught is found that can’t be won [By the love that suﬀers.]”

Just as the last waymarks of 1954 reﬂected DH’s thoughts as he left for Beijing for conversations with Chou En-lai, it can be assumed that the ﬁrst waymarks of 1955, though undated, may also reﬂect reactions from those conversations. 55:1-5 will be so interpreted.

As the ﬁrst waymark for 1955 DH cites a line from a Swedish Lenten hymn, 140 in the collection of 325 hymns common now to ﬁfteen diﬀerent church groups in Sweden (Den svenska psalmboken 1986 [Stockholm: Verbum, 1986] ). The author of the hymn is Erik Gustaf Geijer (1783-1847), who was a poet and a professor of history at the University of Uppsala. The hymn is a meditation on what Jesus achieved through bearing his cross. The stanza from which the line is quoted reads:

118 | You bore your cross. Your glory, which Is praised in all the heavens, Your power, which no limits knows, You laid aside, to show us That naught is found that can’t be won By the love that suﬀers.

DH cites only the italicized words, having changed the initial “that” in the line to “for.” In my translation of this waymark I have added the ﬁnal line of the hymn stanza in order to make the citation intelligible to those not familiar with Geijer’s hymn. DH is saying that suﬀering love has power relevant not only in the wholly spiritual realm but also in the political struggle for justice and peace. In his work as Secretary-General, in addition to using all his administrative and diplomatic skills, he was depending also on what could be achieved through the patience and the persistence of persons of good will, among whom he wanted to be numbered (52:14, 55:9).

2. Rumi: The lovers of God have no religion but God alone.

Rumi is the pen name of the Mevlana (Grand Master) Jalal al-Din (1207-1273), a Persian Islamic Suﬁc mystic poet. DH’s contacts with his UN co-workers may have introduced him to non-Christian and non-Western authors, if he was not already acquainted with them. As he began to cope with problems in the Far East, he found it important to acquaint himself with the spiritual resources in Far Eastern thought. Other waymarks containing non- Western references or citations are 56:17, 56:30, 56:32, 56:34, 57:37, 57:41. Rumi’s statement, cited in English, need not be interpreted as referring depreciatively to religion, but as describing a religion wholly centered in the love of God.

3. “The purer the eye of the intention is, the more strength the soul ﬁnds within itself. . . . But it is very rare to ﬁnd a soul entirely free, whose purity is not at all sullied by some stain of a secret searching for itself. . . . Work, therefore, to purify the eye of your intention in order that it might be single and upright.”

This is the second of seven citations in Waymarks of The Imitation of Christ by Thomas à Kempis. The citation is in French from DH’s copy of the French translation, De l’imitation de Jesus-Christ, De Beüil, 249-250). In the chapter from

119 | which the citation is taken (III:33) the disciple is being advised not to trust his feelings or aﬀections but to direct all the powers of his mind to God, his true end. At this point Thomas à Kempis is saying much the same thing as Rumi. Given 55:1, DH is thinking of a God who has been manifested through suﬀering love. It is to such a God he wants to be wholly devoted, ridding himself of all self-centeredness. The ethical interpretation DH gives to the citation from The Imitation of Christ will be found in the two following waymarks.

4. On a clean cloth the smallest spot oﬀends the eye. At great heights a moment’s self-indulgence can mean death.

In this waymark two images are used, one that is aesthetic, referring to how the smallest spot mars the beauty of a clean cloth. The other is drawn from mountain climbing, indicating the danger of momentary lack of self-discipline (cf. 56:5, 56:62, 59:114). Implicit in the imagery is the recognition that the carelessness of one climber can lead to the death of other climbers. DH is aware that the welfare of many others depends on how he discharges his responsibilities. He must make certain that the eye of his intention remains single and upright (55:3).

5. One who is pure may ﬁnd everything pure, but if what he achieves is gained only through compromises, for him it becomes impure — and here there are no diﬀerences of degree.

DH has in mind Titus 1:15, “To the pure all things are pure.” Can this statement be used to excuse anything a person who is single and upright in intention may do? How does the statement apply to the calling of a diplomat, where ﬂexibility and the ability to make compromises are required? DH answers that if what is achieved is gained only through compromises, the personal integrity of the diplomat can be lost and this is not a matter of degree. In these compromises there may, furthermore, be unbeknownst some stain of a secret searching for what will beneﬁt the one making the compromises (55:3, cf. 51:42, 55:39).

Given the interpretations suggested we have in these ﬁrst ﬁve waymarks for the year 1955 an indication of the kind of spiritual resources DH drew upon to give him the inner strength he needed in his negotiations with Chou En-lai in Beijing, as well as in the exchange of communications that followed.

120 | 6. “Shall he now try to teach me?” — Why not? There is no one from whom you cannot learn. Before God, who speaks in everyone, you are always in the ﬁrst preparatory class.

DH converses with himself, chiding himself for his reluctance to learn from someone whom he does not hold in high respect. If God speaks to us through everyone, we must always be prepared to listen. In God’s school we always remain in the beginning class (cf. 54:21). DH does not often, however, refer to what he has learned from others (cf. 50:39, 54:4).

7. Before you in humility, with you in faithfulness, in you in stillness --.

This waymark may be compared with 54:23 and 56:1 and has a trinitarian structure. DH sees himself as standing before God the Father in humility. He is with Jesus, the Son, in faithfulness or loyalty. He is in the Spirit in stillness. In this waymark it is the prepositions that suggest these trinitarian distinctions.

8. So, then, once again you chose yourself — and opened the door to chaos. This chaos which you become when God’s hand does not rest on your head. The one who has once been under God’s hand has lost his innocence: he alone knows the terrible explosive power of compliancy. But how strong is he not in that concentration, beyond and above, which is his when God is in him because he is in God. Strong, and free, because he himself no longer exists.

DH is extremely critical of any instances of what he regards as self-centered choosing on his part (cf. 55:3-4), for in this way radical disorder is introduced into his life. It is when one has been under God’s hand (54:19) that one sees how great the diﬀerence is between a life so ordered and a life without this direction. It is in this sense that a person who has experienced what it means to be guided by God and then goes another way has lost his/her innocence. There is, on the other hand, great strength and freedom that is attained when the self- centered self no longer exists because one is in God and God is in the self (cf. 53:6, 53:13, 54:13, 54:19, 58:7).

121 | 9. How could reason’s — and society’s — moral code of decency have been formed without faith’s martyrs? And more: how could this morality escape atrophying without the renewal, without the inﬂux of strength which comes from those who have lost themselves in God? The rope over the abyss is held taut by those who give it anchorage in heaven — through ﬁdelity in a faith which is the constant, ultimate sacriﬁce. They who in “Gods union with the soul” are judged to be the salt of the earth — woe to them if they lose their saltness.

Faith’s martyrs are essential to the moral health of a society. Through their witness the moral code has been formed. It must constantly be maintained by those living at any time who have lost themselves in God. DH envisages a rope held taut across the abyss of moral decay and destruction, on one side by martyrs who give it anchorage in heaven, on the other by those who here and now live with a faithfulness that is sacriﬁcial (cf. 52:14). It is essential that those who are in this way united with God retain this distinguishing characteristic, for the preservation of the society depends on them. The reference to the possibility of those who are the salt of the earth losing their saltness is drawn from Matthew 5:13. For other references to “God’s union with the soul,” see 54:7, 56:25, 57:47, 58:7.

10. Never is answering yes more diﬃcult than when the circumstances prevent you from coming to the defense of someone whose guilelessness makes him defenseless.

DH knew that there were times when giving a simple aﬃrmative answer to a question could be damaging to certain individuals, if the circumstances were such that one was unable to do what was necessary to defend them from the injustice to which they were liable. While no indication of the particular situation DH has in mind is indicated, he does suggest that guileless individuals can be the extremely vulnerable to certain kinds of attack (cf. 51:42, 55:5). DH may, for example, have been thinking of the diﬃculty of defending some who were victimized in hearings before Senator Joseph McCarthy’s committee investigating possible Communist inﬁltration in US government agencies. DH had during his reorganization of the UN Secretariat in 1953 ﬁrmly resisted McCarthy’s eﬀorts to continue investigation of American

122 | Secretariat members (Urquhart, 66-67). There was by this time considerable public awareness of the evils of “McCarthyism” and McCarthy had been censured by the U.S. Senate on December 2, 1954.

11. On a working day, real only in God, only that poem is yours before which you yourself become real under God — that poem yours, that art true. You don’t have time for — pastimes.

DH was greatly interested in the arts and in poetry. He wants to relate his interest in the arts, however, to his concern to become real under God. Art that contributes to this has signiﬁcance for him (55:54). It cannot, on the other hand, be for him simply a way to pass the time (cf. 50:31).

12. Your position never gives you the right to command. Only the obligation to live so that others can accept your commands without being humiliated.

The rule DH sets for himself as Secretary-General is that his authority to command must be for him not a right but an obligation so to live that his commands can be obeyed with dignity (cf. 51:18). For other rules that he set for himself, see 55:39.

13. Deﬁciencies and errors in the past burden you in relation to others if there is evidence in the present that they can be repeated.

It is unlikely that anyone has served in a position of leadership for any length of time without being burdened by the memory of some serious mistake, some error in judgment. To what extent need such a person be burdened by past failures to live up to rules he/she had set up for him/ herself? DH answers, only insofar as there is evidence that they can be repeated. One is to remember the embarrassments of the past in order to avoid them in the present and the future (cf. 55:27, 56:36, 57:39).

14. Only that dignity is genuine which is not diminished by the indiﬀerence of others.

DH in other waymarks acknowledges that he has sought the esteem of others (41-42:15, 50:16, 52:19), but he tells himself that he should seek a dignity unaﬀected by the presence or absence of popular acclaim.

123 | 15. There is a self-complacency of faith, more unforgivable and dangerous than that of the intellect. It reveals a cleavage in the personality in which faith is “observed” and valued in denial of the unity in self-eﬀacement which is the essence of faith. Is valued — as a metaphysical magic formula, whose advantages should be reserved for the specially chosen?

DH strongly criticizes a self-complacent faith because it makes faith a quality that can be observed and valued by the self. Faith instead should mean the denial, the surrender, the eﬀacement of the self (54:7, 54:19, 55:31, 56:21, 56:63, 58:7). Nor is faith a means by which a few gain special advantages. One must constantly be on guard lest the corruption of the best becomes the worst.

16. Prayer, crystallized in words, deﬁnes again and again a wave length on which the dialogue must be continued further, even when our consciousness is directed to other goals.

DH may be thinking of the Pauline exhortation to pray constantly (1 Thess. 5:17). Prayer that takes verbal form, limited to some times and places, has the function of deﬁning a wave length upon which the dialogue that prayer represents can continue, even when the consciousness is engaged in the pursuit of other matters. For other waymarks discussing prayer, see 41-42:3, 50:29, 58:7.

17. To furnish this second home is like arranging a tomb: you know that you will never live there — after this.

In the summer of 1953 DH’s artist friend, Bo Beskow, bought a modest vacation home, Hagestad, for him along the seacoast of southern Sweden. DH did not see it until the summer of 1954 and he returned again for a visit of ten days on July 23, 1955. Later Beskow was to purchase for DH a somewhat larger farmstead in the same area known as Backåkra (now a museum containing some of DH’s library and a collection of works of art and other gifts he had received). For an account of what Beskow did on DH’s behalf in this connection, see Beskow, Dag Hammarskjöld: Strictly Personal, 19-33, 41, 123-135.

Very likely waymarks 55:17-25 record reﬂections from DH’s ten day vacation during the summer of 1955. In such a case Hagestad may be the home referred to in this waymark. DH is aware that his life has now changed so much that he

124 | will never be able to make more than brief visits to this home. The comparison of the home to a tomb may be due to the fact that DH was at this time thinking about death.

18. Earlier death was always along in the company. Now it is a table mate: I must become a friend with it. In this intuitive “rediscovery” which has become the Ariadne-thread in my life — step by step, day after day — life’s termination is now just as apprehensible as tomorrow’s felt duty.

Death has been included in DH’s thinking from the earliest waymarks (25-30:3), but now he feels that it is coming much closer and that he must establish a more intimate acquaintance with it. He suggests by use of the word “rediscovery” that this is a return to an earlier awareness (50:2, 50:4, 51:1, 52:19, 52:24). It has become the Ariadne-thread by which he is guided through life, death and tomorrow’s felt duty having the same tangible presence in his mind.

The reference to the Ariadne-thread is drawn from Greek mythology. Theseus, an Athenian hero, volunteers to go as one of seven Athenian youths, together with seven Athenian maidens, who are to be oﬀered as a tribute to a man- eating monster, the Minotaur, who lives in the labyrinth in Crete. Arriving at Crete, Theseus meets Ariadne, the daughter, of Minos, king of Crete. Ariadne falls in love with Theseus and gives him a sword with which he is able to slay the Minotaur and a thread by which he is able to ﬁnd his way out of the maze of the labyrinth. DH will also use this mythological reference in 61:5.

19. “To listen” — in faith — to ﬁnd one’s way and have the feeling of actually under God rediscovering it. Like playing blindman’s buﬀ: deprived of sight, to exert instead all the other senses, groping with the hands over the faces of friends — and so ﬁnding what was already mine and which had all the time been there. Which I should all the time have known was there, if I hadn’t had the blindfold over my eyes.

Three senses are mentioned in this waymark, hearing, touching, seeing. Listening, in faith, in order to ﬁnd one’s way is likened to touching in the absence of sight so that one can identify a friend. What is found is in both cases

125 | rediscovered (cf. 55:18). In the 1953 radio address “Old Creeds in a New World” DH stated, “ . . . a never abandoned eﬀort frankly and squarely to build up a personal belief in the light of experience and honest thinking has led me in a circle; I now recognize and endorse, unreservedly, those very beliefs which were once handed down to me.” When he ﬁnally reached the point of understanding faith in the sense described in 54:7, he says, “ … the beliefs in which I was once brought up and which, in fact had given my life direction even while my intellect still challenged their validity, were recognized by me as mine in their own right and by my free choice. I feel that I can endorse those convictions without any compromise with the demands of that intellectual honesty which is the very key to maturity of mind” (Public Papers of the S-G, 2:194-196. See Appendix A). In the process by which he came to this point listening, broadly conceived, was extremely important (cf. 41-42:6, 41-42:10, 54:8). For an earlier account of his ﬁnding the meaning of faith, using other imagery, see 54:5.

20. In a dream: meeting with an earlier experience which has the real feature of causal relationships backwards and forwards in time — but which nonetheless must have belonged only to a dream.

DH on a few occasions tells of dreams (cf. 51:44, 55:47, 55:55, 61:19). Here he notes that a dream can have real features so that the distinction between dream and reality cannot be sharply drawn. Yet, somehow one does make that distinction, excluding dreams from one’s waking experience.

21. 550729 Thomas [à Kempis]: Why do you seek rest, you who were born only for labor?

The signiﬁcance of the date of this waymark is that July 29, 1955 was DH’s 50th birthday, an anniversary ordinarily celebrated in Sweden with great festivity. In order to escape the Swedish press, DH and Bo Beskow went ﬁshing on the Baltic from the nearby port of Kåseberga (Beskow, 49-54). As a text for the day DH cites for the third time his French translation of The Imitation of Christ (De l’imitation de Jesus-Christ, De Beüil, 116). He identiﬁes the source as “Thomas” (Thomas à Kempis) and the citation is taken from the same book and chapter (II:10) as the citation for April 7, 1953 (53:8). That citation stressed the fact that since all of one’s abilities and the opportunities to exercise them are gifts from God, there can be no reason for pride in one’s own accomplishments. This citation calls attention to what DH has discovered

126 | to be the burden of his oﬃce. Though he is on vacation, he is unable to put the work that must be done out of his mind. He was a tireless worker, but he will eventually confess that he experiences deep weariness (58:16, 61:12). The word he cites from Thomas à Kempis tells him that he has no reason to seek for rest, for the meaning of life is to be found in the work one does for God. A similar thought is expressed in 57:40.

22. Shame mixed with gratitude: shame for all the outbreaks of conceit, envy, and self-indulgence — gratitude for all to which not the achievement but only the intention possibly could entitle me. God sometimes gives us the credit — for his work. Or retains it in his solitude. At our capers on the stage he smiles ironically — so long as we do not tamper with the weights.

The Chinese charge d’aﬀaires in Stockholm, having been informed of DH’s coming birthday, had inquired of Uno Willers, the director of the Swedish Royal Library as to what present DH would like on that occasion. Willers had told him that the release of the eleven remaining imprisoned American airmen would please him best (Urquhart, 125). Beskow tells us that either on the evening of July 29 or the next day a telegram came from Chou En-lai with birthday greetings and stating that he was releasing the American airmen (Beskow, 54). The oﬃcial announcement of their release was made in Beijing on August 1 (see 55:25). This waymark may be DH’s ﬁrst response to that extremely welcome information.

It is a response in which shame and gratitude are mixed. Self- criticism is a recurring theme in Waymarks (cf. 41-42:4, 50:33, 51:36, 52:11). DH charges himself with thinking too highly of himself, with resenting the advantages of others, with yielding too easily to his own desires, for all of which he is ashamed. But he is also grateful, for much that he has hoped would happen has come to pass, though he cannot claim it as his own achievement (cf. 56:49, 56:51). Using imagery from the theater he says that it is God who is the stage manager, responsible for the whole production. Actors may receive credit for the parts they play, or the credit may be withheld. God tolerates the capers they cut on the stage, even though these capers are not part of the script. The actors must not, however, tamper with the weights. DH may be referring to the sandbags and iron ingots used as counterbalances in the hoist system by which

127 | stage scenery is raised or lowered. Safety requires that the stage manager retain control of how these weights are used. DH may be saying that the most basic rules which govern the context within which the human drama takes place must be respected lest the welfare of many be threatened.

23. “Yours --.” The sacriﬁce — and the liberation — to be under a will for which “I” is in no sense a goal. “Dedicated --.” The reward — or the price — for this: by this will to have been bound to a task in comparison with which nothing I myself could seek is of value.

The words in quotations marks, “Yours --” and “Dedicated --,” appear to be drawn from a prayer/meditation found in 56:1 This would suggest that the placement of an entry in Waymarks does not always indicate when that entry was originally written. For DH to belong to God means that God’s will is his destiny. This requires that he oﬀer himself, but at the same time he is liberated from narrow self-centered aims. He is dedicated, which means that his destiny is to be used and consumed. This is the price, but there is also a reward. The task to which he is bound has a value transcending anything he might seek for himself (cf. 57:25, 58:9).

24. We listen badly and we read even worse. You note this so well when it has to do with others in relation to yourself. Are you equally observant when it has to do with yourself in relation to others?

This waymark somewhat counterbalances the previous waymark. Preoccupation with one’s own agenda makes it diﬃcult to hear or understand the concerns of others. DH notes that he can see this very clearly in the behavior of others, but wonders if he monitors his own conduct with equal vigilance (cf. 41-42:6, 50:37, 55:58).

25. 550801 “God spake - - -” And before that: “As for the children of men, they are but vanity. The children of men are deceitful upon weights. Give not thyself unto vanity.”

The signiﬁcance of the date of this waymark is that on August 1 it was oﬃcially announced in Beijing that the eleven American airmen were being released. The

128 | diplomatic eﬀort to which DH had given so much attention during the ﬁrst half of 1955 had been brought to a successful conclusion. He responds to the announcement by citing verses from Psalm 62, which he had cited December 10, 1954 (54:26) upon receiving authorization from the UN General Assembly to make this diplomatic eﬀort, after which he had sent his ﬁrst cable to Chou En- lai. The two words from vs. 11 cited ﬁrst, “God spak… . ,” recall the earlier citation aﬃrming the power and mercy of God. DH is grateful for what the Chinese authorities have done, but his primary gratitude is directed to God.

The other verses cited remind him not to give himself to vanity. It is such considerations that are most often operative in human aﬀairs. DH was very likely critical of both the American and the Chinese protagonists in the controversy over the imprisoned airmen. After his conversations in Beijing he had written to Bo Beskow describing Chou En-lai as a man “with a brain of steel, blood on his hands, strict self-discipline and a very cordial smile” (Sten Söderberg, Hammarskjöld, A Pictorial Biography [New York: Viking, 1962], 63. (Of interest is the fact that Beskow in a later account of his reception of this letter omits the words “blood on his hands” [Beskow, 36].) There has so far been no publication of any statements DH may have made about Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, Senator William Knowland, or the US China Lobby intent on excluding the People’s Republic of China from the UN. Some indication of his thoughts can, however, be derived from the verses he cites from Psalm 62.

DH does take some liberty in his citation of the psalm. The Book of Common Prayer version of verses 9-10a reads: “As for the children of men, they are but vanity; the children of men are deceitful; upon the weights they are altogether lighter than vanity itself. O trust not in wrong and robbery ; give not yourselves to vanity.” DH omits the italicized words and changes “yourselves” to “thyself.” It is not clear in DH’s citation as to how he intends “weights” should be understood. In the psalm it clearly means a balance or scale on which the human beings being referred to are weighed. Since, however, DH uses the word “weights” in 55:22, he may be intending the meaning suggested there. If so he is saying that the political authorities are inacceptably tampering with the system whereby competing national interests are counterbalanced so as to provide a context of justice and peace within which human beings can live. At the same time he could make use as well of a modern translation of Psalm 62:9, “In very truth men are a puﬀ of wind, all men are faithless; put them in the balance and they can only rise, all of them lighter than wind” NEB.

129 | 26. “Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto thy name give the praise - - -.” This unrest? Is not the causal chain evident: when you covertly sought your own glory, you could no longer turn your own weakness into strength. In this way you were “led into temptation” and lost the basis for faith’s self- evident aﬃrmation of destiny, which presupposes that this destiny has in no way been formed by such treachery.

DH received much acclaim for his diplomatic skill in helping bring about the release of the American airmen. He was aware, however, that many factors had been involved, including the fact that the US had ﬁnally agreed to begin direct talks with China on the ambassadorial level in Geneva on August 1. DH’s hopes for continued contacts with Chou En-lai were, furthermore, to be disappointed. The psalm citation in this waymark (Ps. 115:1) emphasizes that rather than accepting praise ourselves, all praise is to be given to God. DH suggests that his unease, possibly over the fact that further negotiations with China proved impossible, may have been related to his covertly seeking his own glory. By placing the words “led into temptation” in quotation marks, he makes it evident that he is alluding to the Lord’s Prayer. He is unusually harsh in his self-criticism, calling his inability to turn his weakness into strength treachery (cf. 50:33, 57:20, 57:32). “Faith’s self-evident aﬃrmation of destiny” does not, however, mean that one will always succeed (cf. 55:15), but that one will be unmoved by whatever transpires when one has been faithful in the performance of one’s duty.

27. Do you need to call forth memories of a self-torturing humiliation in order to quench a smoldering self- admiration? Purity is also to be free from all these half measures: a tone of voice which places you yourself in the light, a covert acceptance of sensual pleasure in forgetfulness of that which is of the spirit, a self-righteous reaction to others in their times of weakness. See yourself in that mirror when you would be praised — or would judge. Do that without despairing!

Despite the strength of DH’s faith, he did not escape continuing spiritual struggle. He struggled with how to deal with a smoldering self-admiration (25-30:14, 56:24). His insistence on purity required the abandonment of all

130 | compromises with its demands (54:15, 55:5, 56:37, 56:60, 59:114). He prepares a mirror designed to detect the slightest tendencies toward unallowable error, to be used whenever he seeks praise or would judge others. He tells himself, however, that when he uses this mirror he should not despair ( 56:32, 56:40, 58:6).

28. It is not enough daily to place oneself under God. What is required is to be only under God: every disruption opens the door for the daydream, the careless talk, the hidden boasting, the little slanders — all the little henchmen of the urge to destruction. “’But how, then, should I love God?’ — You should love him as though he were a non-God, a non-spirit, a non-person, a formless one: much more only sheer, pure, clear unity, far from all duality. And in this One we should eternally sink from being to nothingness. To this may God help us.”

DH continues to restate the discipline under which he feels he must live. He must place himself under God in every respect. The slightest deviation from what this requires, whether the behavior is hidden or manifest in apparently trivial ways, contributes to destruction. Yet who is the God who requires this? Here DH draws upon the tradition of medieval mysticism, citing a passage from Meister Eckhart in which God is described in largely negative terms (Meister Eckehart Schriften, Büttner, 153; see also Meister Eckhart, Die deutschen Werke, Predigten, Josef Quint, ed., vol. 3 [Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1973] , 448/586). DH prays to God, as we have seen (54:13, 54:19), using the second personal pronoun. He also acknowledges his debt to the medieval mystics, saying that from them he had learned “the explanation of how man should live a life of active social service in full harmony with himself as a member of the community of the spirit” (Public Papers of the S-G, 2:195- 196. See Appendix A). What is perhaps most important in the citation for DH is the emphasis on God’s “sheer, pure, clear unity,” which implies that a corresponding singleness of mind is required of the worshiper. Also extremely important for DH is the reference to sinking “from being to nothingness” in God, which he understood to mean the complete self-eﬀacement that dedication to God’s will and purpose required of him (cf. 55:8).

29. You are dedicated to this task — as the sacriﬁce in a still barbarian cult by reason of the divine intention behind

131 | it: a poor piece of human work — but you are obligated to give your all to the dream which only in this has gotten a toehold in reality.

In this and two other waymarks (55:43, 56:39) DH very explicitly refers to the UN. He has served as Secretary-General long enough to recognize both the importance of his responsibilities and the diﬃculties under which he must work. He compares the UN to a barbarian cult that is justiﬁed not by its practice but by the divine intention it so poorly realizes. It is to the dream the UN so inadequately expresses that he must give his unqualiﬁed devotion.

30. He broke a new way — because, only because, he had the courage to go farther without asking whether others followed, or even understood. He did not have the need for that protection against ridicule, which others seek in a divided responsibility, because he had a faith which abstained from seeking conﬁrmation.

There are a number of waymarks in which DH reﬂects on the life and ministry of Jesus. Thus far we have noted 45-49:13, 50:44, 51:29-31, 53:11. In 51:29 DH sees Jesus as walking, despite the incomprehension of his disciples, “the way of his possibility to the end, without self-pity or needing sympathy.” Though Jesus is not explicitly named in this waymark, DH may be thinking of how Jesus was able to break a new way. He had the courage to go on alone, he did not fear ridicule, and he had a faith which did not require conﬁrmation.

31. — a contact with reality, light and strong as the touch of a loved hand: unity in a self-surrender without self- obliteration, with clarity of feeling and warmth of understanding. How near in sun and wind. How far --. How diﬀerent from what the wise ones call mysticism.

In the Auden-Sjöberg translation (Markings,100), 55:30-31 are combined to form one waymark, though they are separate in the Swedish editions (Vägmärken [1963], 88-89; [1966], 88) and in DH’s typewritten manuscript. For other waymarks that begin with dashes as though in the middle of a sentence, see 41-42:7, 50:9, 50:32, 56:38, 57:20. While 55:30 can be understood as referring to Jesus, in this waymark DH appears to be describing his own experience of God. Nature imagery is used, but there is also the feeling of

132 | personal relationship. If 53:13, 55:8, 55:28, 57:47 could be interpreted to mean that the self is wholly lost in the God-relationship, in this waymark there is self-surrender without self-obliteration (cf. 59:4). This is what he ﬁnds in the mystical experience, though he acknowledges that “the wise ones” interpret mysticism diﬀerently. For additional interpretations of this important waymark, see Aulén, E 66, 74; Sw, 102, 112, 122-123; Van Dusen 188.

32. To let oneself be bound by a duty from the moment it is intuited is a part of the integrity which alone entitles one to assume responsibility.

The concept of duty is extremely important for DH (45-49:12, 55:18, 57:19, 57:25, 57:40). Here he states that duties are intuited (cf. 51:29) and from that moment become absolutely binding. This must be acknowledged by those who intend to discharge their responsibilities with integrity.

33. The style of conduct that gives weight requires ﬁrmness even in concessions: you must be strict with yourself in order to have the right to be lenient toward others.

The concessions to which reference is made in this waymark are quite possibly concessions to one’s own needs as a human being. At this point one must be strict with oneself, in order to justify leniency toward others. Perhaps in adjusting the work load DH felt that he could give consideration to others working with him only if he was certain that he was taking his full share of what had to be done.

34. “Those marked by suﬀering, those who have seen --.” You can, by your own choice enter their consciousness. You can — without having gone through their hard school — teach yourself to see and hear as one who has nothing and from whom will be taken also what he has.

DH did not often reﬂect about the suﬀerings of others (cf. 41-42:17, 45-49:8, 51:26, 55:9, 56:24, 60:5). Here he wonders if one who has not suﬀered can understand the experiences of those who have. He believes this is possible, that one can teach oneself to see and hear (cf. 55:39, 55:58, 59:33, 61:14) as one who has experienced the loss of everything. DH may be citing words he remembers from a conversation. The scriptural allusion is to Matthew 13:12, 25:29 (para. Mk 4:25, Lk 19:26).

133 | 35. The researcher registers what is deﬁnitively established. Only that which stands out in his experience is worth being noted, for his own and others’ remembrance and guidance. So also the explorer leaves it to others to ﬁnd time for the picturesque notation about the customs of the people, or the telling reﬂection regarding the weakness of one of the fellow travelers. Well then — what do we do?

The interest of the observer determines the data that is gathered. The picturesque notice about native customs or the foibles of the traveler, ignored in some research, may in another frame of reference be extremely signiﬁcant. DH may be suggesting the importance of a broad perspective in viewing the world.

36. How tiring it is in the role which is ours to be compelled to play a role which is not ours: what you basically must be in order to fulﬁll your task, you may not reveal yourself as being, in order to be permitted to fulﬁll the task. How tiring — and inescapable, given the way people now as a rule organize their social life.

If DH in 55:35 argues for a broad perspective in viewing the world, here he complains about some of the activities that are required of him. He found certain social functions tiring and unproﬁtable (cf. 50:55, 51:12). Yet at the same time he recognized their necessity. In social life a certain masquerading takes place (cf. 50:13, 51:16, 57:16, 58:11). True identities are not revealed, though in other contexts they do become known. In the next waymark, however, DH will insist that there be thoroughgoing honesty in language, presumably also in social life.

37. Respect for the word is the ﬁrst requirement in the discipline through which a human being can be nurtured to maturity — intellectually, emotionally, and morally. Respect for the word — using it with strictest care and in uncompromising inner love of truth — is also for the society and the human race a condition for growth. To misuse the word is to show contempt for the person. It undermines the bridges and poisons the springs. In this way it leads us backward on the long road of human emergence. “I tell you, - - - for every careless word - - -.”

134 | “Respect for the word” is of the utmost importance, DH insists, for the individual as well as for the race. This respect has intellectual, emotional, and moral implications. There must be careful use of language and uncompromising devotion to the truth (41-42:18, 55:39, 56:6, see also 57:2). In this waymark DH speaks of the long human emergence (58:8), in which there can be either progress or retrogression. The passage from Matthew 12:36-37 RSV reads in its entirety: “I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter, for by your words you will be justiﬁed, and by your words you will be condemned.” There is an allusion to this passage also in 50:25.

38. 551119-20 In the low clouds the light died. The dusk was swallowed by the falling snow. Making my bed in silence, the branches covered me with their security. When contours were no longer visible, once again the wonder: that I exist.

This is a dated waymark, though the precise signiﬁcance of the date (a Saturday and Sunday) has not been established. DH may have spent a weekend in northern Sweden, where snow at this time in November would not be unusual. Sten Söderberg writes that DH during his years in the Ministry of Finance in Stockholm “after a hard week’s work, could take the train on Friday night, get oﬀ the next morning at some station in Jämtland and set oﬀ alone, with a cooking pot, some oatmeal and raisins in his rucksack. He would spend the night in a mountain hut, tramp on all Sunday and take the night train back again to turn up for work on Monday morning, quite restored” (Söderberg, 56-58; cf. 50:9, 51:50). This time he apparently did not sleep in a mountain hut, but made his bed under the shelter of the branches of a tree. Enveloped in the security nature in this way provided, he is ﬁlled with wonder that he exists. In 50:40, 52:7, 59:104-105 he also contemplates from diﬀerent perspectives the wonder of selfhood.

39. “Of human beings and their way to unity --?” The truth is so simple that it is regarded as pretentious banality. And yet it is constantly denied in action. Every day provides examples: It is more important to recognize the reasons for one’s own behavior than to understand the motives of others. The other’s face is more important than your own. If you seek something for yourself, you cannot hope for success in your pleas for others. You can hope for permanent solutions only through a

135 | relationship in which you see the other from the outside, but at the same time experience his diﬃculties from the inside. The one who “likes” people displaces the one who has contempt for them. All experienced knowledge is of value and the one who has stopped searching shall soon ﬁnd — that he lacks what he needs: rigidity is weakness, and the one who goes to people or to art and poetry without the youthful ambition to force himself forward through a new language to light others have not seen, he should take care. A lie that succeeds is a double lie, a mistake corrected weightier than truth: only an “honesty” free of compromise plumbs the depths of a decency which you should expect even where there is deep hostility. Adroitness must not mean fearing to criticize sharply, lest the appearance of inﬂuence be sought at the cost of its reality.

DH must have from time to time been asked to comment on how unity among human beings might be achieved. He says the true answer to this question is simple, but it is again and again denied in action. He oﬀers the following rules: Know your own motives. Care deeply about others. Continue the quest for new insights. Tell the truth without compromise. Do not let hesitation to speak sharply when this is necessary mean that you preserve only the appearance of inﬂuence.

As to how well DH practiced these counsels, Brian Urquhart, who worked with DH for eight years, states, “I can testify that unlike many public ﬁgures, he made a vigorous attempt to live and act by the rules he prescribed for himself ” (“International Leadership: The Legacy of Dag Hammarskjöld,” Development Dialogue, 1987:1, 10-13; cf. Urquhart, 1973, 32-33).

In view of DH’s interest in Martin Buber, whose Ich und Du (I and Thou) he was translating into Swedish at the time of his death, it may be noted that Andrew Cordier, one of DH’s colleagues, ﬁnds in one of these rules a direct reference to Buber’s analysis of the I-thou relationship: “You can hope for permanent solutions only through a relationship in which you see the other from the outside, but at the same time experience his diﬃculties from the inside” (Andrew W. Cordier and Kenneth Maxwell, Paths to World Order [New York: Columbia University Press, 1967], 3; cf. 50:57, 55:34).

136 | 40. Always ﬂeeing, always waiting. Prepared — when I shall meet my — Images, images — with secret connection Which create or destroy, in life as in dream, So also in poetry.

To understand this poem one must imagine the word omitted at the end of the third line. The word could be “destiny” (50:46, 50:54, 51:27, 51:53, 52:3, 53:7, 53:11, 55:26, 55:60, 56:1, 56:27, 56:39, 56:59, 57:2, 57:24, 57:35, 57:37, 57:39, 57:46, 61:13). If so, this waymark may express an ambiguous attitude toward what DH considers his destiny. Insofar as he regards it as forbidding he may be ﬂeeing it. He prefers, however, to emphasize that he is waiting for it and is also prepared for it. This leads him to reﬂect upon the diﬀerent images he entertains of this destiny. They are secretly connected, encountered waking or dreaming, and can create or destroy. As poetically expressed it would seem, however, that the power of the images could be directed to creative ends.

Martin Buber visited DH in New York and later after DH’s death told of this visit in a talk for the Swedish Radio in 1962 published in his Nachlese under the title “Erinnerung an Hammarskjöld.” He said, “When we sat facing each other, in the house of the ‘United Nations,’ we both recognized, Dag Hammarskjöld and I, what it basically was that bound us together. But I felt, looking at him and listening to him, something more, which I could not explain, something fateful, that was somehow connected with this hour of the world, with his function in this hour of the world” (italics added; Urquhart, 1973, 40-41).

41. Le courage de nos diﬀèrences [the courage of our diﬀerences]. To accept responsibly that which separates — in humility and pride. It is in the “new ones” that humankind is either betrayed or saved.

During the fall of 1955 the deadlock on the admission of new UN members was broken so that sixteen new states, some of them former colonies, gained entrance to the UN. DH had hopes that with this infusion of new members the UN might provide the locus for new possibilities in multilateral diplomacy (Urquhart, 1973, 133). Many of these states were small and weak, but DH was convinced that they could make a signiﬁcant contribution nonetheless. States as well as individuals must accept in both humility and pride the characteristics

137 | by which they diﬀer from others. (Note also the combination of humility and pride in 53:13 and 54:2.) The cause of humankind could be betrayed, but it could also be signiﬁcantly bettered, depending on how these states viewed their responsibility to the world community.

42. Even in the most intense activity, for the one who has never come “close” to another person — this feeling of unreality. As in the old fairy tale: only through the love of another does the one who has been made invisible or changed into a beast regain his human shape.

The “intense activity” to which DH refers could very well be diplomatic negotiations. He was constantly engaged in interpersonal relationships of this kind, but at the same time he confessed the need for becoming “close” to another person (54:16). In 56:26 he suggests that love on his part oriented toward speciﬁc individuals was a prerequisite for success in the larger ventures in which he was engaged (cf. 55:1). That love constitutes and restores our humanity is an ancient insight, not only found in the Bible but also expressed in old fairy tales.

43. A jealous dream that does not share you with anything or anyone else: humankind’s greatest — the dream about humankind. Humankind’s greatest in which it is the individual’s noblest dream — to lose himself. Therefore: willingly death or shame if that is what it requires. Therefore: how easy to forgive.

The “jealous dream” is the United Nations (cf. 55:29), a dream about what world community might be. Though the United Nations Organization realizes this dream in only the must rudimentary way, it makes a total demand upon those called to its service. DH must be prepared to surrender his life or accept living with a besmirched reputation. It should, he says, be easy to forgive, but in 56:39 he acknowledges that this can at times prove diﬃcult.

44. ‘Thou art the God that doest wonders: and hast declared thy power among the people.”

When DH quotes a psalm passage, in this case Ps. 77:14, he often also presupposes the context of the entire psalm. Psalm 77 is a call to God for help. The

138 | psalmist is experiencing troubles that beset him day and night, but he remembers what God has done in the past and thus has reason to believe that the God who has manifested his might in both nature and history will again save his people.

45. Coquettish — even in the taking note of your coquettishness.

In this waymark, an example of self-criticism, DH acknowledges his eﬀort to appear in the best light before others (cf. 56:60). Indeed he even ﬁnds himself masquerading before his own inner court of self-awareness.

46. Alone beside the spring on the heath you again feel your loneliness — as it has always been. As it has always been — even when the nearness of others for a time hid its nakedness. But the spring lives. And your sentry duty remains.

DH has avowed his need for love (55:42), and he also tells of continuing loneliness (cf. 50:4, 52:16, 52:18, 52:24, 58:9, 61:12). In some measure he was able to sublimate his desire for physical intimacy through identiﬁcation with nature (51:50, cf. 58:10). For this reason he valued so greatly visits to the mountains of Lapland (51:57-61). Beside a spring which in the solitude of the wilderness continually gives of itself he keenly feels his loneliness. But the spring also symbolizes life and using another image DH likens the life to which he is to return to sentry duty, a lonely yet also essential calling.

47. Nothing was easier than to shift from the one step to the other — over the abyss. But in the dream you failed because you experienced the possibility of falling.

Upon arriving in New York, April 9, 1953, to take up his new responsibilities as UN Secretary-General DH told the press that it was true that he was interested in mountaineering, though his experience was limited to Scandinavia where, he said, mountaineering calls more for endurance than for equilibristics. He went on to say that the qualities the sport of mountaineering requires are those which he felt were then needed: “perseverance and patience, a ﬁrm grip on realities, careful but imaginative planning, a clear awareness of the dangers but also of the fact that fate is what we make it and that the safest climber is he who never questions his ability to overcome all diﬃculties” (Public Papers of the S-G, 2:30).

139 | In the dream recounted in this waymark, DH experienced how the fear of falling can lead to failure (cf. 59:91). For a reference to an abyss in a somewhat diﬀerent context, see 55:9). For a more positive dream experience, see 55:55.

48. Aladdin — giver of happiness, it was not too much, whatever it was you paid for this, which those in the street regarded only as “success.”

Aladdin and his magic lamp is one of the characters in Thousand and One Nights. DH highly prizes the capacity to give happiness (54:4, 57:52) and is willing to pay dearly for it, but objects to this capacity’s being identiﬁed merely as “success,” about which he had ambivalent feelings (see 50:47, 56:3, 57:8, 60:6).

49. Before the constancy of things — stands possession’s ironic commentary on our claims.

Many “things” have more permanence than we as human individuals have. When this is taken into account our “possession” of these things to some extent changes its meaning and our claims must be adapted to our limited tenure. The “constancy of things” can also refer to a basic integrity of things that we tend to take for granted, but which stands in judgment upon the claims implicit in our all too often selﬁsh and shortsighted use of the world’s resources.

50. 551224 “O God, thou art my God - - - - - - in a barren and dry land, where no water is. Thus have I looked for thee in holiness, that I might behold thy power and glory.”

DH often wrote waymarks at the time of the Christian festivals (cf. 54:27, 55:53, 56:9-10, 56:57, 57:52, 6O:1, 60:3). At ﬁrst sight the psalm passage he cites (Ps. 63:1- 2) seems a strange choice for Christmas Eve (though see the comment on 55:51- 52). The psalmist’s words, “a barren land dry land, where no water is,” may, however, relate to DH’s concern about the deterioration of the situation in the Middle East. His ﬁrst visit to this area was to take place in January. Though the times were diﬃcult he sought assurance that he might behold God’s power and glory.

51. Two inklings from the past with recently found relevance: Through the senses But beyond them. Near, Also absent. 1955

140 | The glance a shy caress, Complete in the meeting of eyes. And: The lover wishes the perfection of the beloved — which requires also liberation from the lover.

This and the following waymark continue DH’s Christmas Eve reﬂection. He may still be thinking of Psalm 63, where after the cited opening verses the psalmist goes on to rejoice in his relationship to God: “My mouth praises thee with joyful lips… . for thou hast been my help, and in the shadow of thy wings I sing for joy.” DH refers to two inklings from the past, by which he may have in mind earlier waymarks. One of them may be 50:21 and Aulén suggests the other is 51:48 (Aulén, E 96; Sw 141-142). We have noted in 55:42 and 55:46 DH’s speaking of his need for love and of his loneliness. This feeling of loneliness may have been especially keen at Christmas. Here he is saying that he must be content with only the slightest expression of physical love. He can be aware of “the aching beauty of a neckline” (50:21), but he must be satisﬁed with the shy caress of a glance, “complete in the meeting of eyes.” More important is that there must be liberation of the beloved from the lover. He must come to the point that he does not expect a response to expressions of aﬀection. As he had written earlier, “When the lover is himself freed from dependence on the loved one through love’s maturing into a radiance whose essence is its own dissolution in light, then the loved one will also be perfected through being freed from the lover” (51:48).

Sven Stolpe observes that this waymark reﬂects the thought of the diplomat and dramatist Paul Claudel, especially as set forth in his play, Le soulier de satin (The Satin Slipper [New York: Sheed & Ward, 1945]; Stolpe, 89-90), a copy of which play was included in DH’s library. Central to the plot of the drama is the fact that Don Rodrigue and Dona Prouhèze can never forget their love for each other, yet deprive themselves of the possibility of living together.

52. God desires our independence — in which we “fall” back into God when we cease ourselves to seek it.

The new insight DH ﬁnds as he returns to his earlier reﬂections (50:21, 51:48) is that what he had previously sought in a human love relationship can be fulﬁlled in the God relationship (Aulén, Sw 142). But God also desires and grants our independence. Here also the beloved is liberated from the lover (55:21), though the God relationship is not for this reason broken. Were it actually to be broken, this would mean human betrayal (54:10). Instead at the

141 | same time that we receive this unsought independence we “fall” back into God. Aulén observes that this has ethical implications. The one who lives in the closest fellowship with God has at the same time complete responsibility for the moral decisions that are made, which can at times be frightening (cf. 57:31, Aulén, E 97, Sw 142-143). At this point the words of Psalm 63:8 may prove reassuring: “My soul clings to thee; thy right hand upholds me.”

53. 551225 “But when in this way they taste God, be it in himself, or in his works, they recognize at the same time that there is an inﬁnite diﬀerence between the creature and the Creator, between time and eternity. - - - Enlighten my soul, and make it ﬁnd its life and its joy in you, so that, as if transported outside of itself by the excess of its gladness, it becomes devoted to you with all its power and motions.”

This is the fourth of seven citations in Waymarks from DH’s French translation of The Imitation of Christ (De l’imitation de Jesus-Christ, De Beüil, 252). On Christmas Day DH continues to reﬂect on the meaning of fellowship with God. As one tastes God one becomes keenly aware of the diﬀerence between the creature and the Creator. The citation concludes with a prayer for enlightenment that will lead to a joy which expresses itself in total devotion to what God would have done in the world.

In the chapter (III:34) from which the citation is taken, Thomas à Kempis commends as truly wise those who despise worldly things and mortify bodily desires. Illusion is to be abandoned for truth, the body for the spirit. Thomas then goes on to describe what enjoyment of the Creator can mean and prays for such an experience. He is aware, however, that the lower nature is still strong within him, is not yet wholly cruciﬁed, nor entirely dead. Likening the conﬂicts he experiences to a storm at sea, he prays Christ who rules the waves to come to his help.

In several of the waymarks that follow (55:54-57, 55:59, 55:63), DH comments on this citation from The Imitation of Christ, as well as on other themes of the chapter in which it is found.

54. You take the pen — and the lines dance. You take the ﬂute — and the tones shimmer. You take the brush — and the colors sing. In this way everything becomes meaningful and beautiful in that space beyond time which you are. How then can I keep anything back from you?

142 | DH states that he does know what it means to taste God, to ﬁnd his joy in God. But this does not mean that worldly things must in every sense be despised. This waymark is a celebration of God as the source of beauty. The Creator DH encounters enlivens in a person every kind of competence, the ability to write, to make music, to paint. Everything becomes meaningful and beautiful because eternity interpenetrates time. How can one then withhold anything from God?

55. I walked thus in the dream with God through the depth of being: walls receding, doors opened, room after room of silence and darkness and coolness — of the intimacy of souls and light and warmth — till around me the boundlessness in which we all ﬂowed together and continued to live was like the rings after falling drops on wide, calm, dark waters.

Next DH describes a mystical dream experience. With God he walks through the depth of being, spaces opening to him. There is silence, darkness, and coolness, but also intimacy of souls, light and warmth. Life ﬂows together and continues in a boundless context suggesting rings formed by falling drops on wide, calm, dark waters. Aulén suggests that this may be a waymark in which DH intimates an understanding of eternal life (Aulén, E 154; Sw 221-222).

56. The gift burned in your hand, so beyond the resources of the giver that it must have been. It scorched you like a hot ﬂame, not fed by any “economic” considerations, but because it showed without the possibility of evasion your self-satisﬁed, worldly-wise coldness: even in the smallest gift you must have the will to give everything.

After these two extremely positive waymarks, DH indicates that he is also aware of the potentiality of evil in his life. He must have received a Christmas gift which he felt the giver could hardly aﬀord to give. What impressed him the most was not what the gift must have cost the giver, but that it made clear to him what all gifts, whatever their ﬁnancial value, should signify, the willingness to give everything. He has written this Christmas season about the God relationship. This relationship, however, expresses itself in human relationships, where self-satisfaction and worldly-wise coldness are inappropriate. If one is committed to give everything to God, one can do so only by willing to give everything in one’s service to others in inter-personal relationships.

143 | 57. When you are irritated by his “pretension,” you reveal the nature of your own. It is as it should be that he is increasing and you are decreasing. Choose your opponents: to the wrong ones you cannot even aﬀord to give a thought, and the right ones, help them, and yourself, in relaxed competition.

Though DH’s oﬃce as UN Secretary-General gave him preeminence of rank, there could still be competition such that his actual inﬂuence was aﬀected. In such cases what he was tempted to regard as the “pretension” of another could reveal his own. He reminds himself that he can choose his competitors. Some should be ignored (cf. 57:4). In the case of worthy opponents the jousting, if properly done, could prove mutually helpful. “It is as it should be that he is increasing and you are decreasing,” recalls the saying of John the Baptist to his disciples in John 3:30.

58. To remain a recipient --. Out of humility. And in order to retain your sensitivity. To remain a recipient — and to be grateful. For this: for being permitted to listen, see, understand --

The closing days of the year were a time of self-evaluation and a time for DH to remind himself of the virtues most important for the work in which he was engaged. In this waymark he stresses being receptive (cf. 50:4, 51:6, 51:47, 55:65, 57:1). Receptivity expresses humility, the need for which he often emphasized (54:19, 55:7, 56:1, 56:26, 56:43, 56:45, 61:13). In 53:22 and 59:4 he indicates his understanding of humility as it related to his position as Secretary-General. Receptivity also contributes to sensitivity, a greater awareness of the feelings of others (cf. 56:37). DH reminds himself to be grateful for the privilege of being able to listen and thereby to see more clearly and thus to understand.

59. In the deepest causality of personality the height of ambition is also the measure of the possible ruin.

DH was aware of the temptations linked to ambition (cf. 51:59, 56:40, 57:39). Due to the “causality of personality” (55:26), the fact that attitudes and behaviors are linked to consequences, the greater the ambition, should a person succumb to the temptations associated with it, the greater the risk of ruin.

144 | 60. For the one who has heeded the appeal of an unknown achievement’s possibility, solitude can become essential. Let be that such a solitude includes also a fellowship which goes deeper than any union of bodies. Your body will, however, not be put oﬀ with a bluﬀ. What you deny it in order to follow this admonitory appeal from your own destiny, it will demand in return if you fail — demand in return in forms that you will not be in a position to choose.

The achievement seeks us, not we the achievement. Therefore you are faithful to it, if you wait prepared. And act — when you face the demand.

Though DH understood the dangers of ambition, he did not propose settling for more modest goals. In this waymark he comments on the cost of heeding “the appeal of an unknown achievement’s possibility.” In his case that cost involved loneliness (58:9), a loneliness which fellowship with God did not wholly remove. DH possibly alludes to wrestling with this problem in 55:51. Here he warns himself of the consequences of failure should he prove unfaithful in responding to his destiny’s stern summons. His body was accepting the discipline to which he was subjecting it, but spiritual failure on his part would have unpredictable eﬀects in the way his body could be expected to behave. The achievement, however, was not ﬁrst of all something for which he was striving, but the achievement was seeking realization in his life. To this demand he must be prepared to make a faithful response.

61. In many instances the greatest seriousness is expressed merely in a friendly relaxed detachment — such as you can expect in someone who, though deeply engaged in human aﬀairs, has no ulterior motives and has nothing to hide.

The greatest seriousness does not necessarily call for a tense, hurried, stern life style. Those who are not seeking to advance their own self-interest and who have nothing to hide can, while deeply engaged in the human enterprise, view more impartially the issue of their eﬀorts and relate more easily and positively to their fellow workers.

62. Acts of violence --. Whether on a large or a small scale the bitter paradox: death’s meaning — and the meaninglessness of killing.

145 | As Secretary-General DH was committed to reduce the amount of violence in the world. He reﬂects on the profound diﬀerence between the triviality of the act of killing and the meaning implicit in the fact that a life has been terminated (cf. 51:1, 51:11, 56:39, 57:42, 57:44). He refuses to consider any presumed purposes that can be served by assassinations, preemptive warfare, or genocide. If there ever was an ancient good in such human behavior, time has long since made it grotesquely uncouth.

63. Sun and stillness. Through the jade green water you see the monsters of the deep playing on the reef. Is this the occasion for fear? Do you feel yourself more secure when the raging sea obscures what is hidden under the surface.

The imagery is drawn from a visit to an underwater observatory, or viewing ﬁsh and other marine life through a glass-bottom boat. What one sees can appear to be “monsters of the deep playing the reef.” DH is soon to begin his ﬁrst world tour as Secretary-General. He may be asking himself whether he would prefer to be unable to see the threatening forces which this imagery for him symbolizes. On the other hand, what one is able to see in sun and stillness can provide the insight needed to cope with the raging sea.

It is also possible that there is some relation between the imagery of this waymark and the prayer in The Imitation of Christ, III:34, from which the citation in 55:53 is taken. Thomas à Kempis beseeches Christ, who rules the power of the sea and quells its raging waves, to come to help him with the conﬂict in his soul between the spirit and his lower nature. If so, DH is asking whether he wants to view this conﬂict or whether he would prefer that it remain hidden in his subconscious.

64. You see deeper into him than he himself was able to see. And report your discoveries in words which he himself would have rejected, precisely if he could have seen to the bottom of his own being!

Diplomacy involves dealing with contending national forces, which takes place through the negotiations of individuals. DH was conﬁdent that he was able to evaluate others (41-42:1, 45-49:10, 50:30). It is signiﬁcant, however, that during his years as Secretary-General he more often writes waymarks critical of himself than of others. The person he is here describing was unable to acknowledge the truth about himself. DH felt that he was able to do this (cf. 56:26, 56:36-37, 57:11, 57:39). 1955

146 | 65. The “mystical experience.” Always: here and now — in that freedom which is one with detachment, in the stillness that is born out of tranquillity. But — this freedom is a freedom during activity, this tranquillity is a tranquillity among people. The mystery is a constant reality in the one, who in this world is himself free, a reality in calm maturity during aﬃrmation’s receptive attentiveness. The way to sanctiﬁcation in our time necessarily passes through the world of action.

In this waymark DH sets forth his understanding of the mystical experience. It is here and now and it takes place in the midst of activity among people. There are many who are convinced that in order to come close to God one must withdraw from the world to devote oneself entirely to meditation and prayer. DH says that we encounter God in the world of action. In the concluding statement, one of the most signiﬁcant that DH wrote, the word translated “sanctiﬁcation” could also be translated “holiness.”“Sanctiﬁcation,” however, expresses more accurately the technical theological term DH is using. Theologians distinguish between doctrines having to do with creation and the fall, justiﬁcation through Jesus’ atoning work, and sanctiﬁcation, often regarded as the work of the Holy Spirit. Sanctiﬁcation is the growth and development in the Christian life which follows justiﬁcation, or being made righteous through God’s gift in Jesus Christ. DH says we grow as Christians through becoming fully involved in what God is doing in the world, in all the areas in which human beings live and work. Sometimes the area of government and politics is thought to be so fraught with compromise and moral ambiguity that one can hardly express one’s faith in this area. DH thought diﬀerently. For him the way to sanctiﬁcation meant Christian discipleship at the United Nations.

66. “One must give everything for everything.”

This is the ﬁfth of seven citations in Waymarks from The Imitation of Christ by Thomas à Kempis, cited from his French translation (De l’imitation de Jesus-Christ, De Beüil, 227, 261). In the case of this citation, it appears that DH has combined words from III:27 and III:37, in both of which chapters statements to the eﬀect that one must give everything for everything appear. With these words DH expresses in another way how sanctiﬁcation in our time is to be achieved. There must be willingness to give oneself wholly and unceasingly (54:1, 55:56, 56:52). As one does so one discovers that one has already received much more than one can ever give (56:66, 58:9).

1956 During this year the diplomatic skills DH had demonstrated in his negotiations with the Peoples Republic of China were fully utilized. The primary center of attention was the Middle East which DH visited during his ﬁrst world tour as Secretary-General, January 15 - February 24. At the request of the Security Council he returned to the Middle East in April and spent a month securing cease-ﬁre assurances from Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, and pledges to keep armistice agreements. While these eﬀorts had some success, the decision of the United States to withdraw ﬁnancing for Egypt’s Aswan High Dam and the subsequent withdrawals of the British and World Bank oﬀers led President Gamal Abdel Nasser to nationalize the Suez Canal Company. While progress was being made toward a negotiated settlement of the Suez crisis, Great Britain, France, and Israel attempted a military seizure of the canal. Israel attacked Egypt on October 29 and shortly thereafter the British and the French joined the hostilities. An emergency special session of the General Assembly on November 4 requested DH to submit within forty-eight hours a plan for setting up an emergency international United Nations force (later known as the UN Emergency Force, UNEF) to secure and supervise the cessation of hostilities. DH was able to meet this deadline, organize the UNEF, secure the cease-ﬁre, and also direct the clearance of the canal.

During the height of the Suez crisis there was also a crisis in Hungary and a request for help from the UN. The Western nations were outraged by the nature of the Soviet intervention in Hungary, but by November 5 a new government had been established in Hungary that informed DH that it objected to any further discussion of the Hungarian question by the UN. Though it was impossible to arrange a visit to Hungary by UN representatives, a committee was appointed which interviewed Hungarian refugees in Austria and which later reported to the UN.

During 1956 DH wrote eighteen dated waymarks, many of which reﬂect his response to political developments that were taking place.

1. Before you, Father, in righteousness and humility, With you, Brother, in faithfulness and courage, In you, Spirit, in stillness.

Yours — for your will is my destiny, Dedicated — for my destiny is to be used and consumed, according to your will.

148 | In this trinitarian meditation the prepositions, which are italicized, are signiﬁcant. There is the greatest distance suggested in the relation to the Father. DH is before the Father. The Father requires righteousness, which, according to the Christian gospel, God also gives. This righteousness is received and exercised in humility (cf. 56:43, 56:45, 57:9, 59:4). DH is with Jesus, the Brother. He is loyal to Jesus, sharing his commitment. The commitment requires courage (cf. 56:38). Finally, DH is in the Spirit. This expresses the kind of mysticism that characterized DH’s religious experience. It was marked by stillness, a word which DH uses again and again (50:40, 50:41, 54:23, 55:7, 55:65, 56:10, 56:12, 56:58, 61:13). In the second part of the waymark the unity of the triune God is implied. It is the one God’s will that is DH’s destiny. DH has dedicated himself to be used and consumed according to this will. The words “Yours --” and “Dedicated --”, cited in 55:23, appear to refer to the concluding part of this waymark.

2. These days I have been searching back in my memory. And suddenly I found it — Mona Lisa’s smile. That time, the hour after her death, I saw it: secret insight, certainty’s stillness, reposing bliss — Saw and believed I understood its message.

Eﬀorts have been made to interpret the enigmatic signiﬁcance of Mona Lisa’s smile in Leonardo da Vinci’s famous painting. DH suggests that the smile may bear witness to that which becomes known after death. The waymark is not dated. DH states, however, that “these days I have been searching back in my memory.” If “these days” were in January, he may have recalled the death of his mother, which occurred on January 21, 1940. If so, this waymark is the ﬁrst speciﬁc reference to his mother. The following year there is a dated waymark (57:5) on the seventeenth anniversary of Agnes Hammarskjöld’s death. In both waymarks there is reference to a blissful smile. There may be two other reference to DH’s mother in 59:42 and 59:44.

3. Through “success” you have gotten something that can be lost. Therefore — as suddenly aware of the risks — this question, if you (if anyone) can “succeed.” If you begin in this way thoughtlessly to mirror yourself in an obituary, you will be writing your own epitaph — in two senses.

Reﬂecting on success, DH observes that once gotten it can be lost, which leads to the question as to whether anyone can in the long term succeed. DH warns himself not to spend time thinking about such matters. Preoccupation with

149 | an imagined ﬁnal evaluation of one’s achievements can mean the termination of signiﬁcant life and growth here and now. For other references to success, see 50:39, 50:47, 50:49, 56:18, 57:8, 60:6.

4. Do what you can — and the task will lie easily in your hand, so easily that with anticipation you will stretch toward the more diﬃcult test which can follow.

For DH to say, “Do what you can,” does not imply a lessening of the demand a task represents (25-30:12, 56:20, 57:31, 57:40). It literally means that all one’s energies are to be marshaled for that task’s performance. DH is convinced that when this is done the task will be found to be easier than it was anticipated to be and that one will then look forward to the performance of even more diﬃcult tasks (cf. 54:21, 57:25).

5. It is when the morning’s freshness has been changed to midday weariness, when the leg muscles quiver under the strain, the trail seems endless, and suddenly nothing will work out just as you wish — it is then that you must not hesitate.

DH has earlier exhorted himself to believe, not to hesitate (54:27, cf. 56:25, 56:66). In this waymark in which the imagery is drawn from mountain climbing, what could prompt the hesitation is not doubt but weariness and repeated frustration. In such a case one must nonetheless continue (cf. 61:7, 61:12).

6. Forgiveness is the answer to the child’s dream of the miracle through which that which is torn is once again whole and that which is soiled is still clean. It is in this sense that we need and must give forgiveness. In the experience of God nothing stands between him and us, we are forgiven. But we cannot experience him, if anything is permitted to stand between others and ourselves.

This is the second of a number of waymarks in which there is reference to forgiveness (cf. 55:43, 57:6, 57:9, 57:30, 58:1, 60:1, 61:16). Despite the stringent demands DH placed upon himself, despite confessions of his own failures to attain to ideals he set for himself, he has not thus far had much to say about forgiveness. One cannot assume, however, that he had not experienced forgiveness. In this waymark the reference to “a child’s dream” of miraculous restoration of that

150 | which is torn or soiled could suggest a critique of the concept of forgiveness. DH can speak rather sharply of what he regards as childish patterns of thinking (45- 49:3, 4, 9, 50:48, 56:18, 56:22). Here, however, he goes on to say that “it is in this sense that we need and must give forgiveness.” He identiﬁes the experience of God with recognizing that we are forgiven, which experience requires that we permit nothing to stand between ourselves and others, i.e., that we must freely give to others the forgiveness we receive from God. This is what keeps “the child’s dream” from being childish in an objectionable sense.

7. — Lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil; Let everything in me serve You, And thus free me from fear. You dare your yes — and experience a meaning. You repeat your yes — and everything receives a meaning. When everything has meaning, how can you live anything other than a yes?

This poem begins with a prayer citing two petitions of the Lord’s Prayer. The preceding dashes may be intended to indicate that the petition requesting forgiveness is also being presupposed, thus linking this waymark with 56:6. DH fears above all the temptation and evil threatening his inner dedication. If through God’s help he is enabled to serve God with all of his being, his fear will be removed.

In 52:20 DH described his struggle to ﬁnd meaning in his life (cf. 56:21, 57:25). In 53:1 he expresses gratitude for the past and declares his yes to that which is coming. He now states that it is this daring yes that enables him to experience meaning. As it is repeated more and more meaning results. This being the case he sees no other way to live than in this life aﬃrming way.

8. 560321 “Then stood Phinehas and prayed: and so the plague ceased. And it was counted unto him for righteousness.” These deeds — justiﬁed only by faith — which lift us into a new context where the struggle is between ‘principalities and powers.” These deeds in which — by grace — the attempt is everything. “For your holy life is our way, and your adorable patience is the road by which we must be directed towards you.”

151 | On Wednesday before Holy Week DH cites The Book of Common Prayer version of Ps. 106:30-31 (cf. 54:26), which refers to the Numbers 25 account of an interposition (RSV), intervention ( JB), intercession (NEB, NRSV), execution of justice (Sw. 1917) by Phinehas stopping a plague. W. H. Auden in commenting on this waymark calls the account of Phinehas spearing to death a man and a woman apparently engaged in sexual intercourse a “horrid story” and says he is afraid DH must have been ignorant of what Phinehas actually did (Markings,125). In view of the comment that follows, it is, however, gratuitous to question DH’s biblical literacy at this point. When DH speaks of “these deeds — justiﬁed only by faith,” he most likely refers to the Numbers narrative. The reference to “principalities and powers” is an allusion to Ephesians 2:21, 6:12. Numbers 25 can be read so as to aﬃrm that Phinehas in his violent act was engaged in such a struggle, though the appropriate behavior in a context of that kind would have to take a very diﬀerent form now, as DH’s reference to grace indicates.

To make this diﬀerence even more explicit DH cites, again in French, for the sixth time Thomas à Kempis’ The Imitation of Christ (III:18, De l’imitation de Jesus-Christ, De Beüil, 196) to indicate the course that religious zeal and devotion must follow in our time. The life of Jesus is our example and his patience is to be emulated. Thus DH recognizes something that can be aﬃrmed in an old story and goes on to describe the kind of behavior that those in crisis situations in our time should attempt.

At this time there was considerable tension in the Middle East with Palestinian Arab incursions into Israeli territory and Israeli retaliatory raids. DH believed that diplomatic eﬀorts could help the leadership on both sides recognize that restoration of the armistice regime, ending the state of partial belligerency, would be a better and safer course than the continuing drift toward war. On March 21 the United States proposed that the Security Council adopt a resolution requesting DH urgently to survey the state of compliance by Israel and the Arab states with the armistice agreements and to arrange measures to reduce tensions along the armistice lines, which resolution was later adopted unanimously on April 4 (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:69-70). This dated waymark may indicate DH’s reﬂections as he anticipated the mission that lay before him.

9. 560329 “-- and they loved not their lives unto the death.” Further: “For there is mercy with thee; therefore shalt thou be feared.” Nevertheless — and therefore — Gethsemane.

152 | This dated waymark was written on Maundy Thursday. The citation (Rev. 12:11) is in English from the epistle for St. Michael and all Angels in The Book of Common Prayer (cf. 54:26). In Revelation 12:7-12 Michael and his angels ﬁght in heaven against Satan, the dragon, who is cast out of heaven. G. B. Caird in A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John the Divine explains: “Everything that John sees in heaven is the counterpart of some earthly reality. When the victory is being won in heaven, Christ is on earth on the Cross. Because he is part of the earthly reality, he cannot at the same time be part of the heavenly symbolism. The heavenly chorus explains that the real victory has been won by the life-blood of the Lamb. Michael’s victory is simply the heavenly and symbolic counterpart of the earthly reality of the Cross” (New York: Harper & Row, 1966, 153-154). Satan cast down to earth has great wrath and therefore the struggle continues. Those who conquer do so by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony. They are also willing to die.

The Psalm passage (130:4), which DH also cites from The Book of Common Prayer, states that there is mercy or forgiveness with God. Yet it is precisely this attribute of God that leads Jesus to Gethsemane. It is through Jesus’ obedience to his Father’s will that the divine mercy and forgiveness become extended to the many who had not dared to believe that this was the nature of God.

10. 560330 The third hour. And the ninth --. That is now. And now --. It is now! “Jesus will be in agony even to the end of the world. We must not sleep during that time.” We must not --. And for the one who remains awake that which is distant in time becomes present — present also in contact with today’s humanity, where Jesus in every moment dies in someone who has followed the course the inner markings designate to the end: love and patience, righteousness and humility, faithfulness and courage, stillness.

This waymark is written on Good Friday. Citing words from Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), French mathematician and philosopher of religion, DH reﬂects that Jesus is still in agony, present and suﬀering in those who are “in contact with today’s humanity” and who follow Jesus to the end. The cited words are from a section of Pascal’s Pensées entitled “The Mystery of Jesus” (Œuvres

153 | complétes, ed. Jacques Chevalier [Paris: Gallimard, 1954], 1313; Pascal’s Pensées [New York: Dutton, 1948], 148). Pascal combines themes from both the Maundy Thursday agony in Gethsemane, when the disciples sleep, and the Good Friday suﬀering on the cross. The way that is to be followed is deﬁned by three pairs of virtues, love and patience, righteousness and humility, faithfulness and courage, and in addition to these, stillness (cf. 54:23, 55:7, 56:1, 56:12, 56:33, 56:38, 56:43, 56:45, 57:9, 61:13).

11. 560408 “There is a contingent and nonessential will. And there is a destined and creative, an ‘habitual’ will. ---Never ever does God give himself in an alien will: where he ﬁnds his will, there he gives himself.”

This dated waymark was written in Rome where DH was consulting with General E. L. M. Burns, head of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO), which was responsible for supervising the armistice agreements between Israel and the four neighboring Arab states. Renewed hostilities in Gaza made it necessary for DH to shorten the consultation and proceed to Beirut (Urquhart, 1973, 140-14l). The citation is in German from Meister Eckhart (Meister Eckehart Schriften, Büttner, 204; see also Die deutschen Werke, Traktaten, Quint, 5:280-281/530). Gustaf Aulén comments: “This is a statement concerning the possibility of and prerequisites for receiving that gift of God which is no less than the gift of himself. . . . What God seeks is ‘His own will.’ It would not be wrong here to think of ‘the spark within us’ (cf. 41-42:25) . . . . This spark has its origin in God and is in itself a gift of God. However, union with God is not realized in that spark; it is being realized, here and now, through the action of God’s providential and creative will, which is in process of becoming a habitual will within us” (Aulén, E 64).

12. 560422 Understand — through stillness, Act — from stillness, Win — in stillness. “If the eye is to perceive the color, it must ﬁrst itself be divested of all colors.”

This dated waymark is written on a Sunday in Beirut, as DH having received cease ﬁre assurances from Israel and Egypt is still attempting to secure them from Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. He may have heard of an incident that evening on the Sea of Galilee between Israeli and Syrian ﬁsherman,

154 | during which shots had been ﬁred (Urquhart, 1973, 144-146). One notes the importance of the word “stillness” in this waymark (cf. 54:23, 55:7, 56:1, 56:10, 61:13). Stillness provides the background, the prerequisite for the required understanding, which can lead to action with the hope of the successful results he is seeking. The quotation, which is in German, is from Meister Eckhart (Die deutschen Werke, Predigten, Quint, 1:201/478; cf. Meister Eckehart Schriften, Büttner, 224). The concept Eckhart uses has been gotten from Aristotle (De Anima, bk. II, ch. 7, 418b, 26-27; Richard McKeon, Introduction to Aristotle [New York: Random House, 1947], 190). The meaning of the Eckhart citation in this setting may be that in order to recognize the truth in an extremely controversial situation one must oneself be freed from all biases.

13. To love life and people with God’s love — for the sake of the inﬁnite possibilities, Like him to wait, Like him to judge Without condemning. To obey the order when it is given And never to look back — Then he can use you — then, perhaps, he will use you. And if he still does not use you — in his hand each moment nonetheless has a meaning, has exaltation and radiance, peace and coherence. To “believe in God” is in this perspective to believe in oneself. Just as self-evident, just as “illogical”, and just as impossible to explain: if I can be, God is.

This waymark may also have been written in Beirut. If so it continues the reﬂection found in the previous waymark. One is to love people with God’s love, not because of the inﬁnite values one ﬁnds in their lives but because of the inﬁnite possibilities, because of what can happen as in the lives of more and more individuals God’s will is done. Love that can bring about such a result requires God’s patience. One must be able accurately to analyze situations without passing judgment upon them. One must act decisively in obedience to God’s will and not in so doing look back. Here there may be an allusion to the saying of Jesus, “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is ﬁt for the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:62, cf. 51:22, 53:12, 57:35, 61:5). That the prerequisites for God using a person in a particular way are fulﬁlled does not mean that God will use that person (cf. 51:59, 53:4, 56:1, 56:57). The course of

155 | history is not to this extent subject to human design. The one who orders his life according to God’s will ﬁnds, however, meaning, exaltation, and peace in every moment (cf. 56:7). Because the believing individual is closely identiﬁed with God, DH can relate believing in God with believing in himself. Though he can oﬀer no rational proofs, his own self-identity and God’s being are equally self-evident to him (cf. 41-42:23, 50:51, 52:7, 54:13, 58:7).

14. “The blessed spirits must be sought within the self which is common to all.”

This waymark is an English citation from W. B. Yeats (1865-1939; Nobel prize in Literature 1923), A Vision 1938 (New York: Collier Books, 1977, 22). DH believes there is a self common to all (41-42:25, 57:36) and he sometimes, as in the previous waymark, ﬁnds God in the deepest understanding of selfhood (cf. 58:8). If the blessed spirits can be identiﬁed with “faith’s martyrs” (55:9), DH may interpret this statement as describing a unity to be found between these spirits, God, and our deepest awareness of our spiritual aﬃnity with all other human beings.

15. A poem, like every deed, should be judged as a manifestation of its maker’s personality. This neither excludes “perfection” according to aesthetic criteria, nor authenticity in the sense of congruence with one’s innermost reaction to life.

Three ways of evaluating a poem are here being distinguished. There are aesthetic criteria. A poem can be more or less perfect at this point. Another question is whether the poem is authentic. Does it honestly express the poet’s innermost reaction to life? To these two criteria DH adds a third. A poem, like any other deed, is a manifestation of the poet’s personality. Here a kind of ethical criterion is suggested. It is not enough that the poem be authentic. One can ask, what is the quality of the personality that is here being manifested? In the Auden-Sjöberg translation, these latter two criteria are not distinguished (Markings, 128). According to Erik Lindegren, this waymark expresses DH’s mature aesthetic credo (Dag Hammarskjöld, 22- 23). For other waymarks referring to poetry, see 55:11, 55:39, 55:40, 59:4.

16. “The wind blows where it chooses . . . . so it is with every one who is born of the Spirit.”

156 | “The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.” Like wind --. In it, with it, of it. Of it — like a sail, so light and strong that, even though bound to the earth, it gathers all the power of the wind without impeding its course. Like light --. In light, translucent, transformed to light. Like the lens which disappears in the light when it focuses it to new strength. Like wind. Like light. Only this — on these expanses, these heights.

In this waymark, possibly reﬂecting an experience on a cliﬀ overlooking the sea, DH cites two passages from the Gospel according to John and concentrates attention on two symbols for God, the wind referring to the divine Spirit ( John 3:8; cf. 55:31, 57:52), the light referring to the incarnate Word ( John 1:5, cf. 52:14, 56:34, 57:16). DH sees himself as a sail in relation to the wind. The sail becomes wholly identiﬁed with the wind. Though bound to the earth, the sail gathers the wind’s power. The wind, however, is not impeded by this fact. DH sees himself also as identiﬁed with the light, functioning as a lens that focuses the light to new strength and intensity, but is not itself seen (cf. 57:28).

17. On the arena where Ormuzd has taken up the struggle with Ahriman, the one who chases away the dogs wastes his time.

In Zoroastrianism, the religion of ancient Iran, Ormuzd (Ahura Mazda), the god of light, and Ahriman (Angra Mainyu), the spirit of darkness, are locked in eternal combat. Since Ormuzd is not omnipotent, he needs the help of his creatures in the struggle. Activity that does not contribute to the victory of the good should therefore be avoided. In Zoroastrianism dogs are clean animals and to kill a dog is a great sin. To chase dogs away from a temple would accordingly be unproﬁtable behavior and a waste of time.

18. To rejoice at success is not the same as to take credit for it. To deny oneself the ﬁrst is to be a hypocrite and a denier of life; to indulge oneself in the second is a pleasure for children which will keep them from growing up.

157 | DH is concerned with how to deal with the fact that he has been successful (50:39, 56:3, 57:8). One may rejoice over one’s success, but one should not take credit for it (54:10, 55:22). A middle way must be found between vainly seeking to deny the gratiﬁcation one feels (cf. 50:47, 50:49) and indulgence in the pleasure of thinking that one’s success is wholly one’s own doing. Such thinking can keep one from attaining to maturity.

19. Beyond the obedient concentration the goal elicits: freedom from fear. Beyond fear: openness. And beyond that: love.

DH describes a progression that leads to love. Where there is the obedient concentration of eﬀort a goal can bring forth, there can also be freedom from fear (cf. 51:47, 56:7, 56:55). A self-conﬁdent person, free by reason of obedience from the fear of failure, can also be open and need not be defensive (cf. 25-30:2, 41-42:11, 53:7). Such a person is, in turn, able to love (cf. 57:47, 58:10). Love is therefore a manifestation of personal strength.

20. And after this? Why ask? After this a new demand about which you know all you need to know. That its sole measure is your own strength.

When one goal is achieved one may expect to be confronted with another. DH does not feel that much attention need be given as to what the new demands will be. He will be asked to respond according to the measure of his ability. More knowledge than this of what will be expected of him is not needed. He stated this principle very early in 25-30:12 (cf. 56:4).

21. For self-defense — against the system builders. Your personal life cannot have a lasting, speciﬁc meaning. It can gain a derived meaning only as ordered in and under something which is “lasting” and which itself has a “meaning”. Does this latter refer to what we intend to designate when we speak of Life? Can your life possess a meaning as a fragment of Life? If Life exists --? Try and you shall experience: Life as reality. If Life has a “meaning”? Experience Life as a reality and you will ﬁnd the question meaningless. “Try --?” Try through daring the leap into a

158 | subordination without reservation. Dare that when you are challenged, for only in the light of the challenge can you see where the road divides and hope seeing clearly to choose to put your personal life behind you — without the right to look back. You will ﬁnd that “in the pattern” you are freed from the need to live “with the herd.” You will ﬁnd that subordinated to Life your life retains all its meaning, irrespective of the context given you for its realization. You will ﬁnd that the freedom of constant farewell, constant self-surrender, gives your experience of reality the purity and the sharpness which is — self-realization. You will ﬁnd that subordination as an act of will requires constant repetition and terminates if, in anything, our individual lives are permitted to drift back into the center.

Who “the system builders” are against whom DH is defending himself is not indicated. He does feel the need, however, to give a more extended account of the way of living to which he is committed. He begins by discussing the question of the meaning of his life (cf. 52:20, 56:7, 56:13, 57:25). By itself, in isolation no individual life can have its own lasting meaning. It must be ordered in and under that which endures and has meaning. Is there, however, anything that has such a comprehensive, all-inclusive meaning? Could Life, perhaps, be so regarded?

The term “life” recurs again and again in Waymarks, having several diﬀerent meanings. There is the life that pervades nature (50:40, 51:45, 52:7), life as opposed to death (50:27, 51:52, 52:19, 55:18), the life of the individual person (50:2, 52:23, 54:20, 59:2, 61:5), and life in more general terms (25-30:1, 25-30:6, 41-42:10, 41-42:11, 50:51, 56:13). In some waymarks “life” can for DH be another way of referring to God (45-49:10, 50:53, 51:59, 53:14, and 57:47). In this waymark to suggest this meaning Life as distinguished from DH’s personal life is capitalized. Does, however, life so understood exist? Can life have such a meaning? DH says that the answer to these questions is to be found in experience. One must dare unreservedly to subordinate oneself to the Life that transcends one’s own individual existence (45-49:5, 56:7). There a pattern is to be found (50:3) that diﬀers from being submerged in the sluggish ﬂuid of

159 | “the herd.” One’s own life as a fragment of Life will have meaning, whatever the context in which it is lived. There will even be self-realization. The act of self-surrender must, however, be constantly repeated and there must be strict vigilance lest at any point one’s own individual concerns are permitted to become central (55:8, 55:26).

22. The “great” endeavor is so much easier than the everyday one — but so easily shuts our hearts to the latter. So the highest sacriﬁcial intention can be joined with and lead to a great hero’s insensitivity. You thought yourself unmoved by an expression of appreciation which you should not have accepted as appropriately coming to you and which — should you nonetheless have been tempted to accept it — far exceeded what the events justiﬁed. You thought yourself unmoved — until you felt jealousy ﬂare up at his childish eﬀorts “to make himself ” important, and your self-conceit was exposed. Of the heart’s hardness — and smallness --. Let me with open eyes read the book my days are writing — and learn.

DH has been successful and engaged in “great” endeavors. He reminds himself that these are often easier than everyday tasks. One must not lose one’s sensitivity for those whose lives are engaged with what appears commonplace (51:26, 56:24). Another problem is how one should respond to praise, especially if it is somewhat undeserved (55:26, 56:49, 59:4). One’s reaction to attention given to others can indicate that one is not as indiﬀerent to the presence or absence of praise as one imagines (56:42, 57:4). DH wants to be aware of the kind of person he is, of how hard and how small his heart can be.

23. 560604 “For He spake, and it was done: He commanded and it stood fast.”

The Security Council in requesting DH to go as a mediator to the Middle East (cf. 56:11) asked him to report in one month. On June 4 the Security Council in accepting his report unanimously commended his eﬀorts and asked him to continue them. Urquhart observes, however, that “the debate both before and after the vote reﬂected the emotional divisions and mutual fears and suspicions that persisted between the conﬂicting parties” (Urquhart, 1973, 153). The Psalm

160 | passage cited from The Book of Common Prayer (Ps 33:9, cf. 54:26) celebrates God’s power in creation. DH may also have reﬂected on the two following verses: “The LORD brings the counsel of the nations to nought; he frustrates the plans of the peoples. The counsel of the LORD stands forever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations” (Ps. 33:10-11).

On this same date DH received an honorary degree from Upsala College, East Orange, New Jersey, a college named after DH’s alma mater, the University of Uppsala. At this occasion DH spoke brieﬂy about the Uppsala tradition and the implications of this heritage for world citizenship, suggesting that in Sweden representatives of this tradition at their best had learned patience in dealings with mightier powers and the importance of speaking for peace. Their spirit, he added ﬁnally, is one of peace (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:164-165).

24. 560610 How poor is not the “courage” which is recognized as meaningful, compared with the quiet heroism an unreﬂecting mind can reveal before the most inglorious, the most degrading of tests. How favored by the gods is the one whose worth is tested in a context where courage for him has meaning — perhaps even a tangible reward. How little he knows of his potential weakness, how easily does he not become caught in blinding self-admiration.

In describing the Uppsala tradition (see 56:23) DH had also spoken of the courage shown in following the guidance of one’s ideals to ends which sometimes, at least temporarily, could be very bitter. On the following Sunday he reﬂects about a diﬀerent kind of courage, the quiet heroism that is unrecognized and does not expect recognition (cf. 51:26, 56:22). While there are advantages in having one’s courage tested in what appears to be a meaningful context, there is also the danger of succumbing to blinding self-admiration (cf. 25-30:14, 50:24, 55:27)

25. “Believe — not to hesitate,” but also: not to doubt. “Faith is God’s union with the soul” — yes, but thereby also the certainty of God’s omnipotence through the soul: For God everything is possible, because faith can move mountains.

During June DH was preparing for oﬃcial visits in July to Warsaw, Helsinki, Moscow, Prague, Belgrade, Vienna, and Geneva. This trip would bring him for

161 | the ﬁrst time to the Soviet Union. Though the Middle East had not originally been included in the itinerary, the fact that there was lack of progress in converting what he called the legal cease-ﬁre into a state of mind led him to return also to Jerusalem, Amman, and Cairo.

Before his January 1955 trip to Beijing for negotiations with Chou En-lai, DH charged himself, as he does in this waymark, to believe, not to hesitate (54:27). In 56:5 he states that midday weariness and lack of success must not be occasions for hesitation. Here he adds that he must also not doubt. There are only two other references to doubt in Waymarks. In 52:14 DH speaks of an intellectual doubt that hinders his interpretation of the spiritual reality he experiences. In 61:16 he prays that his doubt may be forgiven. Here doubt is contrasted with St. John of the Cross’s deﬁnition of faith as God’s union with the soul (54:7, 55:9, 57:47, 58:7). DH also alludes to the saying of Jesus (Matt 17:19, Mk 11:23) that where there is no doubt faith can move mountains. DH interprets this to mean that God’s omnipotence is exercised through the soul united with God in faith. To speak of omnipotence, aﬃrming that everything is possible, and that mountains can be moved is to use what might appear to be exaggerated ﬁgurative language. At the same time, given the negotiations DH was anticipating, it was more appropriate that he discover the limits of possibility than that he should have sought to prescribe them in advance.

26. The “large” context so easily obscures the “small” one. But without that humility and warmth which you must achieve in your relationship to those in whose personal lives you have become involved, you will not be able to do anything for the many. Without this you live in a world of abstractions where your solipsism, your hunger for power, and your destructive impulse will lack their only superior opponent: love. Love, which is the outﬂowing, without orientation toward an object, of a power freed in self-surrender, but which would remain a sublime form of transhuman-human self-assertion, powerless against what is negative within you, if it were not submitted to the discipline of human nearness and ﬁlled with its intimacy. It is better wholeheartedly to make one person good than to “oﬀer oneself for humankind.” For the one who is mature these are not alternatives but self-realizations implicit in the same decision, which mutually support one another.

162 | In this waymark DH emphasizes the essential role of intimate personal relationships in his life, even in carrying out his responsibilities as Secretary- General. He was aware of tendencies in his life toward solipsism (52:4), hunger for power (51:43), and destructive impulses (55:28, 57:6) which only love could tame. But even love, were it only a general disposition, could become powerless against these tendencies, even “a sublime form of trans-human self-assertion” (one thinks of the question DH asks about Jesus, “Does he oﬀer himself for others . . . in sublime egocentricity?” [51:30] ), were it not disciplined by what takes place in intimate daily personal relationships. It is in this context that one recognizes that it is better to make one person good than to oﬀer oneself for all humankind. If one has suﬃcient maturity one recognizes that these are not mutually exclusive alternatives but ventures that give support to each other. DH’s experience at this point was limited, since he lacked the daily relationship that marriage would have provided and had to seek its equivalent in other ways (cf. 54:4). He was never wholly successful at this point and suﬀered from great loneliness (58:9).

27. It is better that one dies for the people than that the whole people perish. “Who has this great power to see clearly into himself without tergiversation, and act thence, will come to his destiny.”

The waymark begins with the statement of Caiaphas in John 11:50. The Fourth Evangelist regards the statement as a prophecy foretelling the gathering of a new people of God through the death of Jesus, which was, of course, not what Caiaphas had in mind. The fact that DH emphasizes “is” in the passage indicates that he believes that there are situations that do call for such a sacriﬁce.

Under what circumstances, however, is it better that one person dies rather than the whole people perish? DH answers this question in the citation that follows. It is the ﬁrst of ﬁve citations from Confucius: The Great Digest & Unwobbling Pivot, translation and commentary by Ezra Pound (New York: New Directions, 1951), 135 (cf. 56:30-32, 34). This citation is from the second of the Four Classics, known as The Unwobbling Pivot, which consists of discussion of three theses attributed to Tsze Sze, who was a disciple of Confucius.

As DH interprets the citation he is not saying that the one person may be made a sacriﬁce by others, but an individual who sees clearly that such an

163 | oﬀering can be of great beneﬁt to others can oﬀer himself/herself. This must be done unequivocally (without tergiversation [the misspelling, “tergivisation,” in DH’s Swedish text comes from Pound]). When this is actually done such a person comes to his/her destiny. DH may have believed that this in some way was to be his destiny (53:11, 55:23, 55:29, 55:43, 56:39).

28. Courage? In the situation where the only thing that matters is a man’s faithfulness to himself the word lacks meaning. — “Was he courageous? — No, but logical.”

What must be determined in the interpretation of this waymark is what is meant by “a man’s faithfulness (loyalty) to himself.” DH speaks of faithfulness in three contexts. In 56:10 and 61:13 the virtues of faithfulness and courage are listed as characteristic of those who follow the way of Christian discipleship. In 55:7, 56:1, and 56:38 faithfulness is expressed with Jesus the Brother. In 51:62 Lord Jim in his last meeting with Doramin is said to have attained an absolute faithfulness to himself. It does not seem that the meaning of faithfulness in these diﬀerent contexts diﬀers signiﬁcantly. It follows, therefore, that faithfulness to oneself can be consistent with being dedicated to live so that one’s destiny is to be used and consumed according to God’s will (56:1). While DH usually links faithfulness and courage, in this waymark he suggests that there can be situations where, if there is faithfulness, only that is at issue, for, given faithfulness, there is no choice but to do what may appear to be the courageous act. DH says such behavior should not be called courageous; one is simply being logical.

29. “Watchman, what of the night? Watchman, what of the night? The watchman said, The morning cometh, and also the night.” “And the Lord said, If I ﬁnd in Sodom ﬁfty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. — Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for the ten’s sake.” “But when they shall deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.”

164 | The three scripture passages are cited in English from the KJV. The ﬁrst passage, Isaiah 21:11-12. is an oracle concerning Edom from the time of the conquests of Assyria. The prophet is saying that there is to be a time of deliverance (morning) followed by renewed oppression (night). In the second passage, Genesis 18:26, 32, Abraham is interceding with Yahweh regarding Sodom, pleading that if only ten righteous be found there God might spare the city, to which condition God agrees. In the third passage, Matthew 10:19-20, there is a promise to those who go forth to proclaim the kingdom that when they are delivered up to oppressors they will be Spirit-led in their responses to the interrogations that may then occur.

These passages spoke to DH as he viewed what was happening in the summer of 1956. His hopes that there might be greater compliance with the armistice agreements in the Middle East were being disappointed. The situation further worsened as the United States and Great Britain abruptly withdrew their oﬀers to help Egypt ﬁnance the Aswan Dam project, which led Egypt’s president, Gamal Abdel Nasser, to nationalize the Suez Canal Company. There were to be greater troubles in the fall. DH may well have wondered whether there were enough righteous persons in positions of leadership, so that the world situation would not wholly deteriorate. He needed all the more the assurance that he might be enabled to give the leadership that the United Nations required. In the following waymarks (56:30-32) he draws upon Confucian thought to articulate more fully the kind of leadership to which he aspires.

30. The ultimate experience is one. “Only the most absolute sincerity under heaven can bring the inborn talent to the full and empty the chalice of the nature. He who can totally sweep clean the chalice of himself can carry the inborn nature of others to its fulﬁllment, - - - this clarifying activity has no limit. It neither stops nor stays. - - - it stands in the emptiness above the sun, seeing and judging, interminable in space and time, searching, enduring - - -. - - - unseen it causes harmony; unmoving it transforms; unmoved it perfects --.” Tsze Sze, not Eckhart.

The next three waymarks contain three citations from the Confucian Classics as translated by Pound. The ﬁrst citation is again from The Unwobbling Pivot, attributed to Tsze Sze (cf. 56:27). DH wants to show that the ultimate mystical

165 | experience is one, whether the context of the experience be the East or the West. The citation is taken from four diﬀerent paragraphs of Tsze Sze’s third thesis (Pound, 173, 179, 181, 183). The chalice that must be emptied is the self. This makes possible service to others (53:21, 57:41). One shares in this way in an unlimited clarifying activity, which though invisible is eﬀective, though unmoved it transforms and perfects. This, DH says, sounds like Meister Eckhart, but it is the teaching of a Chinese philosopher.

31. Semina motuum [the origin of the motion]. The forming power in us became will. In order to grow beautifully as a tree we must reach that rest in unity where the forming will again becomes instinct. — Eckhart’s “habitual will.”

DH comments on the citation relating it to Eckhart’s “habitual will” (cf. 56:11). There is ﬁrst a forming power (the inborn talent or nature) that becomes will (sweeping clean the chalice). Through reaching rest in unity (standing in emptiness above the sun) this forming will again becomes instinctive (unmoving it transforms; unmoved it perfects). Thus there is movement from instinct, to will, to instinct again, though now the instinct is at a diﬀerent level. The Latin expression, semina motuum (the origin of the motion), with which DH introduces his comments, and the reference to the growing tree are derived from Pound’s translation of The Great Digest, attributed to Confucius himself (cf. 56:27). The complete passage in Pound reads: “One humane family can humanize a whole state; one courteous family can live a whole state into courtesy; one grasping and perverse man can drive a nation to chaos. Such are the seeds of movement [semina motuum, the inner impulses of the tree]. That is what we mean by: one word will ruin the business, one man can bring the state to an orderly course” (Pound, 59, 61).

32. “-- Looking straight into one’s own heart — (which we can do in the Father ﬁgure’s mirror) — watching with aﬀection the way people grow (as in imitation of the Son) — coming to rest in perfect equity.” (as in the fellowship of the Spirit) The unity of the ultimate experience corresponds to the unity of ethical experience. Even the Confucian world has its “trinity” of life’s way.

166 | In this waymark DH inserts his comments in the citation, which is from the ﬁrst paragraph of The Great Digest, attributed to Confucius. The paragraph as Pound has translated it reads as follows: “The great learning [adult study, grinding the corn in the head’s mortar to ﬁt it for use] takes root in clarifying the way wherein the intelligence increases through the process of looking straight into one’s own heart and acting on the results; it is rooted in watching with aﬀection the way people grow; it is rooted in coming to rest, being at ease in perfect equity” (Pound, 27, 29). In this Confucian description of ethical experience DH ﬁnds something largely equivalent to his understanding of the Christian trinity. There is the searching judgment of the self by the Father (41-42:23, 55:27), the aﬀectionate observation of others by the Son (56:13), and rest in equity, which likens the fellowship of the Spirit (56:31). Finally DH observes that the unity of the ultimate mystical experience is at the same time a description of the unity of the ethical experience (cf. 55:65).

33. With the love of the one who knows everything, With the patience of the one whose now is eternal, With the righteousness of the one who has never deceived, With the humility of the one who has experienced all possible deceits.

The four virtues listed in this waymark, love, patience, righteousness, and humility, appear in this order in 56:10 (cf. 56:43, 56:45, 57:9), where they, together with faithfulness, courage, and stillness, are the inner markings that designate the course the Christian disciple is to follow. Five of these virtues are given a trinitarian identiﬁcation in 56:1, righteousness and humility related to the Father, faithfulness and courage to the Son, and stillness to the Spirit. In this waymark DH is stressing the unity of God. Since he never identiﬁes love and patience primarily with any one person of the Trinity, he very likely intends the four virtues to refer simply to God. It is God who knows everything, whose now is eternal, who has never deceived, though in relation to humankind God has experienced all possible deceits. It may seem surprising, however, to speak of God’s humility. DH may be thinking of the fact that God is dependent on human beings and can through their unfaithfulness fail humanity (57:31). God in love knows everything but is eternally patient. He has the righteousness of having never deceived but accepts in humility the deceits of others. God is the source of the virtues of love, patience, righteousness, and humility. Being surrendered to God DH hopes to be able to share and manifest these virtues in his own behavior.

167 | 34. 560729 560816 “I believe verily to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living. O tarry thou the Lord’s leisure: be strong and he shall comfort thine heart.” “But if nothing other than God is able to comfort you, surely he will also comfort you.” “Tragic is the man who possesses the light which is the hidden God . . ; he is no longer able to live the average life, he must live without rest in the tension from exclusive demands.” “In the process of this absolute sincerity one can arrive at a knowledge of what will occur.”

This waymark has two dates, the ﬁrst of which, July 29, is DH’s 51st birthday. Beginning with his 50th birthday in 1955, there are dated waymarks on or very near his birthday for six of the remaining seven years of his life (55:21, 57:28, 58:9, 59:4, 61:14). While DH had celebrated his 50th birthday at his summer home in southern Sweden, this year he found it necessary to remain in New York. The background for the second date, August 16, is the fact that on July 26 President Nasser had announced the immediate nationalization of the Universal Suez Canal Company. Also on July 24-26 there had been exchanges of ﬁre across the Jordan-Israeli demarcation line. DH had issued a statement expressing his deep regret and strongly urging that the general cease-ﬁre be implemented. For the next three weeks it appeared that the incidents had been contained. On August 16, however, there were breaches of the cease-ﬁre on the Israeli-Egyptian demarcation line in which four Israeli citizens had been killed and eight wounded. The following day there were two retaliatory raids in which nine Egyptians were killed. In an eﬀort to prevent further deterioration of the situation, DH issued statements on both August 16 and August 17 deploring these incidents (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:218-231). This is the context in which the citations in this and the following waymark are to be understood.

DH ﬁrst cites The Book of Common Prayer version of the last two verses of Psalm 27 (cf. 54:26). The psalm, a prayer of a person falsely accused, concludes with an expression of conﬁdence that God’s goodness will be experienced. The second citation is in German from Meister Eckhart (Meister Eckehart Schriften, Büttner, 224; see also Die deutschen Werke, Traktaten, Quint, 5:29-130/481). The ﬁrst two citations are linked by the word “comfort.” In the psalm passage “comfort” has the older meaning of “strengthen,” whereas in the Eckhart citation trösten has what is now the more common meaning of “comfort,”

168 | to relieve mental distress. The third citation is in French and has been attributed to Julien Gracq (pseudonym of Louis Poirier [1910-]), in the novel Le Rivage des Syrtes (1951). Though this book was well liked by DH (Beskow, 100), I have been unable to ﬁnd the citation there. Its source remains thus far unknown. In this French citation DH indicates why comfort in both of the senses distinguished above is needed, for the person who possesses the light which is the hidden God is constantly subject to many demands that are often in tension with each other. The ﬁnal citation is from Tsze Sze’s third thesis in The Unwobbling Pivot, as translated by Ezra Pound (Pound, 175). It promises that a certain foreknowledge is gained through absolute sincerity.

35. “I cannot go to cure the body of my patient, but I forget my profession, and call unto God for his soul.” “We carry with us the wonders we seek without us.” Statements with many meanings — because they contain the truth about all work for the one who seeks the kingdom of God.

The two citations in this waymark are from Thomas Browne, an English physician and philosopher, who confesses his faith in Religio Medici ( J. C. Martin, ed., Oxford: Clarendon, 1964, II:6, 63; I:15, 15). In II:6 Browne states that the true object of our aﬀection in others should be the soul and he tells of his practice of intercessory prayer. In I:15 Browne reﬂects on the wonders of nature and concludes that he need not travel to ﬁnd them, for in “the cosmography” of his own self are found “all Africa and her prodigies.” For DH these statements may have been important because they emphasize the wonders to be found in the self and the importance of the spiritual strength an individual self can exercise. He may also have observed that Browne in II:6 also adds, “ . . . if God hath vouchsafed an eare to my supplications, there are surely many happy that never saw me, and enjoy the blessing of mine unknowne devotions. To pray for enemies, that is, for their salvation, is no harsh precept, but the practise of our daily and ordinary devotions.” DH’s ﬁnal comment may refer to the citations in 56:34, as well as those in this waymark. On the occasion of his birthday and during the weeks that followed DH sought words from various sources that spoke to his condition, as he worked to bring about justice and peace in a bitterly alienated part of the world (cf. 55:65,58:2,58:3).

36. 560826 Uneasy, uneasy, uneasy — Because — where opportunity gives you the obligation to create — you are satisﬁed to meet the demands of the hour, from day to day. 1956

169 | Because — concerned about the esteem of others and jealous of their opportunities to gain “glory” — you lowered yourself to wondering about the fate that shall befall what you have done and been. How dead cannot a man be behind a facade of great competence, conscientiousness — and ambition! Bless the uneasiness as a sign that there is still life.

August 26 was a Sunday. On August 23 DH had responded to questions at a press conference that had dealt chieﬂy with the Suez Canal dispute and the status of the cease-ﬁre on the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and Jordan and Egypt, in view of the serious incidents of July and August. DH insisted that the cease-ﬁre agreed upon in April had been given a legal status independent of other aspects of the armistice agreements. None of the parties to the cease-ﬁre agreements had thus far formally rejected these obligations. At the same time de facto the cease- ﬁre was in danger of breaking down (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:232-238).

As DH reﬂects on this situation he ﬁnds himself uneasy. He traces this uneasiness in part to his own faults. He has been satisﬁed to respond to the demands of the day and the hour, not recognizing suﬃciently obligating opportunities to create (50:42, 56:39). He has been too much concerned about how the recognition given to him compares with that given to others (55:57) and has given more thought than he should to what will become of his achievements (56:3). He reminds himself that a person with great competence, conscientiousness, and ambition can in fact be dead, whatever appearance the external facade of such a life may give. What is meant is that in such a case there is contradiction between day by day behavior and the inner springs of life (50:33). DH takes some comfort, however, from the fact that the uneasiness he feels can be counted as evidence of continuing life in his case, for which he is grateful.

37. Two times now you have done him an injustice. Despite the fact that you were “right.” Or more correctly: because you were right, and therefore in self-righteousness and unintelligent exercise of authority you stumbled along through ground where each step gave him pain.

DH must be thinking of his relations with an associate. Twice there have been occasions in which he exercised his authority and he can justify the decisions that were made and the actions that were taken. But he is nonetheless not satisﬁed with what he did. He feels that he acted self-righteously and unintelligently and caused this person unnecessary pain. Therefore he did him 1956

170 | an injustice. Because one is “right” one can, if one is insuﬃciently sensitive, act in this way. Cf. 51:18, 56:26, 57:3, 57:48.

38. “- - with you: in faithfulness and courage.” No — in self-discipline, faithfulness and courage.

DH is quoting an earlier waymark (56:1), trinitarian in structure, where he spoke of being before the Father in righteousness and humility, with the Brother in faithfulness and courage, and in the Spirit in stillness. Now he revises this list of virtues by adding self-discipline to those he seeks to share with Jesus the Brother. For other waymarks in which these virtues are listed, see 56:10 and 61:13.

39. 560830 E. L.: “To capture death”! Beyond all faith questions. “To capture death.” This is an idea you serve — this idea that must conquer if a humankind worth the name is to survive. It is this idea that demands your blood — not the defective creation in which it in this historical period has been incarnated. It is this idea that you must help to victory with all your strength — not the human construction which just now gives you a public responsibility and responsibility- creating opportunities to move it forward. Given this insight it should be easy for you to smile at critique of misunderstood decisions, ridicule of misinterpreted expressions of “idealism,” and declarations of death upon what you to all outward appearances are giving your life. But is it so? No — because the baseness you yourself reveal in your reactions to others, about whose motives you know nothing, makes you — rightly — vulnerable before the pettiness you see in the interpretations of your own striving. Only on one level are you what you can be. Only along one line are you free. Only at one point are you beyond time. The success of “Sunday’s child” is only this: that he meets his destiny at this point, along this line, on this level.

The initials E. L. stand for Erik Lindegren (1910-1968), a Swedish poet, who was to be the successor to DH’s seat in the Swedish Academy. During the ﬁrst year

171 | of World War II he wrote mannen utan väg (the man without direction, Dikter [Stockholm: Bonniers, 1964], 9-21), a series of poems expressive of catastrophic destruction and human misery. The strophes of some of the poems were introduced by a series of inﬁnitives. The beginning of such a strophe is suggested in the phrase “to capture death” that Lindegren had used in a letter to DH. The signiﬁcance of the date, August 30, with which the waymark begins, is not known, unless it was the date the letter was received. The phrase “to capture death” could be taken as alluding to 1 Corinthians 15:26, “The last enemy to be destroyed is death.” Very likely, however, Lindegren was not thinking of the phrase in this ultimate, religious sense. In addition to the diﬀerent ways in which death is interpreted in the teachings of the several faiths, there is the death and destruction that the United Nations was designed to control. This is the idea DH says he is serving. It is an idea which he contrasts with the present reality of the UN, an idea for which he is willing to give his life if need be. It is this commitment that enables him to cope with the hostile critique to which he is often exposed. He chides himself for not fully living up to this commitment and thus being vulnerable to attack.

The expression “Sunday’s child” very likely comes from the following children’s rhyme:

Monday’s child is fair of face, Tuesday’s child is full of grace, Wednesday’s child is full of woe, Thursday’s child has far to go, riday’s child is loving and giving, Saturday’s child works hard for its living, And a child that’s born on the Sabbath day Is fair and wise and good and gay.

“Sunday’s child” is a ﬁgurative expression. DH was born on Saturday, July 29, 1905.

40. Two traits observed in today’s mirror: Ambitious: perhaps not a fault, but how short is not the step to pride, or self-pity! Unhappy — and a killer of joy.

DH recognizes that he is ambitious and is aware of ambition’s attendant dangers: pride if one succeeds, self-pity, if one does not. To be unhappy and therefore destructive of the joy of others is perhaps a more serious charge. For other waymarks in which references are made to ambition, see 45-49:5, 51:59, 55:39, 55:59, and 57:39.

172 | 41. In the suction from the vacuum when a nervous strain lets go — without the nerves being able to relax — the lust of the ﬂesh gets its chance to reveal the loneliness of the soul.

DH held himself under a taut discipline and was again and again subjected to severe stress. He thought of the body as the playmate of the mind (61:7), but was aware that it had demands that must be met and there could be times when one was especially vulnerable to these demands (55:60). Here he describes such a situation. There were times that he felt both in body and soul an overwhelming need for human aﬀection (cf. 51:50, 58:9). He did not, however, feel it necessary to satisfy these desires.

42. These “who have arrived,” these self-assured ones who go around among us dressed in the shining armor of their success and their responsibility. How can you let yourself be irritated by them? Let them enjoy their triumph — on the level to which it applies!

It is strange that DH as Secretary-General of the United Nations should have been irritated by those who ﬂaunted the signs of their achievements and success. Perhaps it was the fact that such persons felt they had arrived, where he felt himself still in process, striving towards goals he was not certain he would achieve. This suggests the level to which he felt their triumphs properly belonged. Cf. 56:22.

43. To live submerged in the heavy ﬂuidum of the lower- human: lower-human in insight, feelings, and striving. Beware of the double danger — to drown and to “ﬂoat on top”, to sink to accepting this condition below the clear surface of the human, or to maintain your standard in a vacuum of “superiority”. Certainly, even in this situation, “love and patience, righteousness and humility” are already conditions for your own salvation.

In the previous waymark DH has distinguished himself from certain “self- assured ones,” but as his thought continues he reminds himself that he must live in the sluggish ﬂow such a human environment represents, where a lower- human style of thinking, feeling, and willing predominates. There is a two-

173 | fold temptation, to succumb by accepting such a standard as one’s own, or to maintain a standard of “superiority” that does not relate to the needs of those among whom one lives. The “love and patience, righteousness and humility,” that DH reminds himself are the conditions of his salvation, refer to 56:10 and 56:33. As 56:33 indicates, these are divine virtues, including the virtue of humility. It is humility that can lead a person who could feel superior to accept in love, patience, and righteousness a servant role. For earlier reﬂections on whether it is acceptable to regard oneself as “better than others,” see 25-30:8,12. See the following references to humility: 53:13, 56:1, 59:4, 61:13.

44. 561101-7 “I will lay me down in peace, and take my rest: for it is thou, Lord, only, that makest me dwell in safety.” “Hold thee still in the Lord - - - fret not thyself, else shalt thou be moved to evil.”

During the week November 1-7, 1956 both the Suez crisis and the Soviet invasion of Hungary occurred. In response to the former DH was able to organize and deploy the United Nations Emergency Force, secure the withdrawal of British, French, and Israeli troops, and supervise the cleanup and reopening of the Canal. No comparable international settlement was possible in the case of the Hungarian invasion. In this time of extreme stress DH turns to the Psalms. Psalm 4:8 is from a lament, a prayer for deliverance from personal enemies. There was not much rest that week, but DH ﬁnds his rest in God. Psalm 37:7,8 is from a wisdom psalm in which the argument is directed to those discouraged by the injustices which apparently dominate the world. DH frequently reminds himself to be still before God (cf. 54:23, 55:7, 56:1, 56:12). Being still before God makes for patience and excludes the anger that tends only to evil.

45. Every moment Eye to eye With this love Which sees everything But overlooks In patience, Which is justice, But does not condemn If our eye Mirrors its own In humility.

174 | One does not fret oneself over those who carry out evil devices (Ps. 37:7) because one’s inner attention is centered on God. We ﬁnd in this poem the four virtues that in 56:43 DH stated were the conditions for his salvation: love and patience, justice (righteousness) and humility. The omniscient loving God is also patient. The righteous God does not condemn those who share the divine humility (cf. 56:33).

46. It was when Lucifer congratulated himself for what he achieved in his angelic ways that he became the tool of evil.

The identiﬁcation of Lucifer (morning star) with the devil as a fallen rebel archangel may have arisen from a misinterpretation of Isaiah 14:12-14. DH in any case uses the Lucifer myth to reﬂect on the dangers of pride, not least with respect to what one achieves “in angelic ways.” With respect to the Suez crisis DH had proved remarkably successful and was receiving much praise. He tells himself that even that which is achieved through love, patience, and righteousness can become the tool of evil if humility is lacking. Cf. 55:7, 56:1, 56:10, 56:26, 56:45, 56:49.

47. Imperceptibly our ﬁngers are guided so that a pattern is formed as the threads are woven into the fabric.

In this waymark and in 56:49 and 56:51 DH aﬃrms his conviction those who are surrendered to God’s will are guided so that a larger purpose is served by what they do. It does not appear that DH thought of the divine will as achieving its ends more generally in this manner, so that even those carrying out evil devices (Ps. 37:7,14-15; cf. 56:44) were being guided in this fashion.

48. 561117 My motto — if any: Numen semper adest [a protecting power is always present]. Therefore: if uneasy — why?

DH’s most signiﬁcant achievement during the Suez crisis was the successful formation of the United Nations Emergency Force, the ﬁrst historical example of a quasi-military force with purely international responsibilities. It was formed in response to a UN General Assembly resolution of November 4 requesting the Secretary-General to submit a plan for such a force within forty-eight hours. DH was able to meet this deadline. The force was intended to keep the peace after the withdrawal of British, French, and Israeli troops from Egyptian territory and to ensure a satisfactory reopening of the Suez

175 | Canal. Egypt agreed in principle to the establishment of the UNEF. Questions remained as to how the UNEF could be constituted so that its foreign contingents would be acceptable in Egypt. More diﬃcult was the question as to when and under what circumstances the UNEF would withdraw. DH wanted Egypt to agree that the UNEF should remain until the purposes for its coming had been achieved, this issue being subject to negotiation between Egypt and the UN. President Gamal

Abdel Nasser was understandably concerned that Egypt’s national sovereignty be maintained. There was an interchange of messages between DH and the Egyptian Foreign Minister, Mahmoud Fawzi, which led to suﬃcient agreement so that UNEF contingents could begin to arrive in Egypt. DH accompanied the ﬁrst Danish contingent on November 15 and went on to Cairo for further discussions the next three days with the Egyptian Government of this matter. On November 17 DH met with Foreign Minister Fawzi during the day and with President Nasser from 6 p.m. till 2 a.m. that night. In his November 20 report to the UN about these discussions, DH stated that in the functioning of the UNEF in Egypt it was expected that there would be “good faith” on the part of both the UN and Egypt (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:375-376, cf. 371, 381). This expectation of “good faith” could very likely be attributed to the numen which DH in his waymark dated November 17 states is always present. While he had reason to be uneasy (cf. 56:36) in these discussions, it was this conﬁdence that reassured him. For an earlier use of the term “numen,” see 54:16.

49. How humble the tool when it is praised for what the hand has done.

As has been indicated above, DH was successful in his eﬀorts as UN Secretary-General to resolve the Suez crisis and he received much praise for his remarkable energy and his skill and wisdom as a negotiator. President Dwight Eisenhower at a November 14 press conference stated: “The man’s (DH’s) abilities have not only been proven, but a physical stamina that is almost remarkable, almost unique in the world, has also been demonstrated by a man who night after night has gone with one or two hours’ sleep, working all day and, I must say, working intelligently and devotedly” (Urquhart, 1973, l94). In this waymark DH explains why he received such praise with humility. He was only the tool that had been used by a power greater than his own (cf. 56:51).

50. Through injustice — never justice. Through justice — never injustice.

176 | DH states the principles that guided him not only during the Suez crisis but more generally as Secretary-General. The result of injustice would never prove to be justice. When a wrong move had been made, such as the Anglo-French invasion of Egypt to resolve the Suez crisis, the only course to be taken was to retrace those steps. If one, on the other hand, intended to act justly, one must take extraordinary care lest some part of the result be injustice. This is the requirement that made his task so diﬃcult (cf. 56:37, 57:48).

51. Someone put the shuttle in your hand. Someone had arranged the threads.

Once again using the imagery of weaving, as in 56:47, DH aﬃrms his conviction that he has been aided and guided during this diﬃcult period by a greater power. Note that in 56:49 DH is the tool in another hand, whereas in this waymark the tool (shuttle) is placed in DH’s hand. This illustrates the ﬂexibility with which DH uses this imagery.

52. 561125 “If, save for life, you give everything, Then know you’ve still not given anything.”

November 25 was a Sunday, which may have provided some occasion for relaxation. The previous day the UN General Assembly had approved the content of DH’s report on his dealings in Cairo, including the agreement about the functioning of the UNEF in Egypt (Urquhart, 1973, l95-l96). In this waymark DH makes the ﬁrst of two citations from Brand by Henrik Ibsen (1828-1906), a Norwegian dramatist (Samlede værker, vol. 3, 37). The second citation was made on Maundy Thursday, 1961 (61:4). Ibsen wrote Brand in l866 in protest against the failure of Sweden and Norway to come to the aid of Denmark in her 1864 war with Germany, that led to Denmark’s loss of the duchies of Slesvig and Holstein. Brand, the main character in the drama, is a rural priest who rejects compromises. One must give all or nothing. The citation comes from the second act just before Brand accepts the call to be pastor in his home parish.

In interpretations of Ibsen’s drama, there are diﬀerent estimates of Brand, some regarding his demands as inhumane. He refuses to go to the deathbed of his mother, for she has not repented in the manner he has stipulated. Both his child and his wife die, in part as a result of Brand’s refusal to let concern for their health interfere with his understanding of his duty. How did DH

177 | understand Brand, as an ideal ﬁgure or a misled and misleading fanatic? It may not be possible to answer that question. DH did, however, take seriously the thought that it might be necessary for him to give his life in the line of duty (cf. 53:11, 56:39). At this time of general satisfaction with his leadership, he anticipates future crises when a more costly sacriﬁce on his part may be required.

53. 561129 Faulkner: Finally our wish remains to have drawn on the wall our “Kilroy was here.” The last redoubt of the enemy --. We can oﬀer ourselves wholly for that which is beyond and above us — and still hope that the memory of our choice shall remain bound to our name, or at least that at some future time it will be understood why and how we acted. It can at times seem that the bitterness we feel due to an unsuccessful achievement relates to the fact that the failure submerges the eﬀort itself in oblivion. O contradiction! O ﬁnal resistance! If the goal alone can justify the sacriﬁce, how can you give even a shadow of importance to whether the achievement shall be remembered as connected with your name? How clear does it not thereby become that your action is also inﬂuenced by the vain, dead dream of “remembrance.”

On January 25, 1955 William Faulkner (1897-1962), an American novelist who received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1950, also received the National Book Award for Fiction. He introduced his response to this award with the following words: “By artist I mean of course everyone who has tried to create something which was not here before him, with no other tools and material than the uncommerciable ones of the human spirit; who has tried to carve, no matter how crudely, on the wall of that ﬁnal oblivion beyond which he will have to pass, in the tongue of the human spirit, ‘Kilroy was here.’” This response was published in the New York Times Book Review, February 6, 1955, where DH must have seen it (William Faulkner, Essays, Speeches and Public Letters, ed. James, B. Meriwether, New York: Random House, 1965, p. l43). During World War II the words “Kilroy was here” were graﬃti commonly used by American soldiers in occupied areas. DH does not quote Faulkner exactly, but he appears to take issue with him. There is this diﬀerence. Whereas Faulkner was speaking of creating texts, such as Waymarks, that would outlive their authors, DH is

178 | thinking of sacriﬁces, choices, achievements. Reﬂecting perhaps on his eﬀorts during the past weeks, he insists that his commitment must be to a cause that transcends his own individual life history and that it is the success of that cause that matters, not the memory of his own individual achievement.

Whether DH was to be successful in the resolution of the Suez crisis was, as of the date of this waymark, not as yet determined. Despite the fact that 1,374 UNEF troops had come to Egypt as of November 27, the Anglo-French withdrawal was still being delayed and the question of how the canal was to be cleared of ships that had been sunk in it remained undetermined. DH was also still hoping that UN observers could be sent to Hungary, though thus far no reply had been received from the Hungarian government (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:311-312, 412-437; Urquhart, 1973, 197-200). For other waymarks referring to the theme of being remembered, see 50:26, 50:43, 51:11, 56:67, 57:18.

54. The answer was obvious: “I believe that we should die with decency so that at least decency will survive.”

This waymark may refer to the Soviet intervention in Hungary. See above, p. 155, Public Papers of the S-G, 3:311-313. DH apparently assumes that the reader will be able to infer the question implied in this waymark from the answer, which answer he states was obvious. The answer is cited in English, though its source is not identiﬁed. DH may be reporting a conversation. He is saying that there are times when people must be prepared to die so that the values for which they have lived and which are manifested in the manner of their dying may survive. This theme has already been alluded to in 56:52. For other references to decency, see 55:9 and 55:39.

55. Hallowed be Your name, not mine, Your kingdom come, not mine, Your will be done, not mine, Give us peace with You Peace with others Peace with ourselves And free us from fear.

179 | In this prayer the ﬁrst three petitions of the Lord’s Prayer are in each instance followed by the emphasized words not mine. The primary emphasis is to be on the holiness of God’s name, on the coming of his kingdom, on the doing of his will. Other waymarks that include petitions of the Lord’s Prayer are 41-42:21, 52:3, 56:7, and 58:9.

Two petitions not cited in this or the other waymarks are, “Give us today our daily bread. Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us,” petitions that deal with food and forgiveness (though DH does pray for forgiveness in 61:16). It should be noted, however, that the concluding portion of the prayer in this waymark is a prayer for peace. The prayer at this points shifts to the plural number, for peace must be social. This may be the way DH prefers to pray for food and forgiveness. If so, the prayer to be freed from fear could refer to the last two petitions of the Lord’s Prayer, which is to some degree suggested in 56:7.

56. “He brought me forth also into a place of liberty: he brought me forth, even because he had a favour unto me. The Lord shall reward me after my righteous dealing: according to the cleanness of my hands shall he recompense me.” And once again: “For there is mercy with thee: therefore shalt thou be feared.”

These passages from Psalms 18 and 130 may express DH’s relief as he saw the approaching resolution of the Suez crisis. Psalm 18 is a thanksgiving psalm. V. 19 describes the deliverance that was experienced. The following verse (v. 20) is also in the past tense, but in the Prayer Book version DH cites it is in the future tense. The verse could thus indicate the basis upon which DH anticipates God will continue to deal with him. He reminds himself, however, of God’s mercy by citing Psalm 130:4 . This Psalm verse was previously cited in 56:9, when DH added the words, “Nevertheless — and therefore — Gethsemane.” That possible future development may also be implied here.

57. 561224 Your own eﬀorts “did not bring it about,” only God — but rejoice that God found use for your eﬀorts in his work. Rejoice that you felt that what you did was “necessary,” but understand that even so you were only the tool of him

180 | who through you added a tiny bit to the whole he formed for his purposes. “It is in this abyss that you reveal me to myself: — I am nothing, and I did not know it.” “If, without any side glances, God is certainly our goal, he must be the doer of our deeds. - - - This man does not seek rest. He is not disturbed by any trouble, - - - he must learn an inner solitude, wherever and with whomever he may be. He must learn to break through things, within them to lay hold upon his God.”

This dated waymark is written on Christmas Eve. DH often made dated entries in his journal on the Christian festivals (cf. 54:27, 55:50, 55:53). This year he was thinking about the Suez crisis. On December 19 the United Nations Emergency Force had taken over all civil aﬀairs responsibilities in Port Said at the entrance to the Suez Canal. On December 21 UN salvage ships had entered the canal to begin the clearance operation. On December 22 the Anglo- French troop evacuation had been completed, while the Israeli withdrawal had begun (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:406-409). DH attributes this favorable issue of events to God. He is grateful that his eﬀorts were of some use, while stressing the fact that he has only been God’s tool (cf. 56:49, 56:51) and that his contribution has been but a tiny part of a much larger whole. He reinforces this interpretation by citations from Thomas à Kempis and Meister Eckhart. He found in the writings of his favorite medieval mystics words that spoke to him on signiﬁcant days in his life. The ﬁrst citation from Thomas à Kempis (III:8) is the last of seven citations from The Imitation of Christ in Waymarks (De l’imitation de Jesus-Christ, De Beüil, 165-166). It concerns the need for humility. Thomas is saying that if one confesses one’s nothingness grace will come. The second citation from Meister Eckhart is from a treatise concerned with detachment and the possession of God (Meister Eckehart Schriften, Büttner, 181, 182; see also Die Deutschen Werke, Traktaten, Quint, 5:202,206, 207/509,510). If God is the doer of our deeds we need not seek rest, nor are we disturbed by any trouble. It is essential for us, however, to break through things and to ﬁnd and lay hold on God within them.

58. 561225 “Concerning the eternal birth” — for me now this says all that can be said about what I have learned and have still to learn. “So the soul in which the birth is to occur must live quite nobly: wholly uniﬁed and wholly self-contained.

181 | - - - You must have an exalted disposition, a burning disposition in which nevertheless an untroubled silent stillness rules.”

On Christmas Day DH selects citations from two sermons by Meister Eckhart preached on texts related to the Christmas season, one on The Wisdom of Solomon 18:14, entitled “The Birth of God in the Soul,” and the other on Luke 2:49, entitled “To See and to Do” (Meister Eckehart Schriften, Büttner, 63, 85). At the time of the celebration of the birth of Jesus, DH thinks of the eternal birth to which, according to Eckhart, all who follow Jesus are called. A high quality of life is required. There must be burning zeal, but at the same time an inner silent stillness. The repetition of the concept (silent stillness) emphasizes its great importance. For other waymarks in which DH stresses the importance of stillness, see 55:7, 55:65, 56:1, 56:10, 56:12, 61:13.

59. 561226 “It merely happens to one man and not to others - - -, but he can take no credit to himself for the gifts and responsibility assigned to him. - - - destiny is something not to be desired and not to be avoided. - - - it is a mystery not contrary to reason, for it implies that the world, and the course of human history, have meaning.”

This waymark, cited in English, comes from a source thus far unknown. It is the third of a series of dated waymarks during the Christmas holidays. December 26, the Second Day of Christmas, is the Day of St. Stephen the Martyr. The passage cited suggests that not all persons are persons of destiny. It happens to one and not to others. Credit may not be taken for the gifts and responsibilities received. That there are persons of destiny, however, implies that the world and the course of human history have meaning, despite the mystery that also remains. One is reminded of the agonizing quest for life’s meaning expressed by DH in 52:20.

60. Vanity raises its ridiculous little head and holds the fool’s mirror before you. For a moment the actor smiles and adjusts his features for the role. Only for a moment — but one too many. It is at such times that you invite defeat and betray the one you serve.

DH did think of himself as a man of destiny (53:7, 53:11, 55:60, 56:1, 56:59, 57:37, 61:13), though he did not think that he should take any credit for

182 | the capabilities and opportunities that had been given him (56:51, 56:57). Nonetheless to think of oneself as a man of destiny very easily becomes an occasion for pride. One is tempted to strike the appropriate pose, to play the role before an imaginary audience. DH reminds himself that such games, even if they last but a moment, are self-defeating and involve betrayal of that to which one is called (cf. 55:26).

61. You ask if these notes are not in the ﬁnal analysis a betrayal of the way of life which they themselves would stake out. These notes --? They were waymarks set up when you reached a point where you needed them, a ﬁxed point which must not be lost. And so they have remained. But your life has changed and you now reckon with possible readers. Perhaps you even desire them. Still, for someone it can be meaningful to trace a destined way of which the person in question did not wish to speak while he was alive. Yes, but only if your words have an honesty beyond conceit and self-indulgence.

This is the second waymark in which DH reﬂects about the signiﬁcance of the journal he is keeping. In an earlier waymark (52:23) he mentions the possibility of readers. Here he says he may even desire that others read what he is writing. Yet he asks whether the entries in his journal may not themselves be a betrayal, an example of the vanity he criticizes in the previous waymark (56:60). He answers that what he has written are waymarks which at one time he needed, and once having set them up they became ﬁxed points in the history of his life’s development, which he has taken care to preserve. The changes that have taken place in his life lead him to believe that there will be those who will take interest in tracing the route over which his destiny has led him. But these reﬂections can only be published posthumously and they must be strictly honest and wholly free of all self-conceit.

It is strange to think that if DH had lived out his normal life expectancy as much as 25 years or more could have been added to his life, during which period no one would have seen this journal. What additional waymarks might he have written? How might he have edited the earlier waymarks? He very likely did edit an earlier draft of this manuscript by excluding some waymarks, for he introduces his journal with the motto, “Only the hand that erases can write the true account.”

183 | 62. Forward! Your orders are given in secret. May I always hear them — and answer. Forward! Whatever the distance that I have put behind me, it doesn’t give me the right to stop. Forward! It is care with respect to the ﬁnal steps below the summit which determines the value of all that may have gone before.

DH thrice summons himself to move forward. He is responding to orders given by God (56:13), given in secret when the soul listens, in stillness, to the voice of God (Aulén, E 65, Sw 100). The extent of the distance traveled thus far does not aﬀect the summons to move on, nor can it ever be an excuse to stop. DH ﬁnally uses imagery from mountain climbing (cf. 25-30:1, 56:5, 59:114, 61:12) and points out how the ﬁnal steps below the summit are the most important, determining the value of all that may have preceded them. He does not indicate, however, whether life is characterized by one ascent or by several ascents, each of them having its ﬁnal steps.

63. We act in faith — and wonders occur. Then we are tempted to make the wonder the basis for faith. In order to make amends for our weakness in losing the conﬁdence of faith. Faith is, creates, and bears. It is not derived, not created, not borne by anything beyond its own reality.

Faith is a concept to which DH gave much attention. In his ﬁrst reference to faith he rejects identifying it with assent to doctrines (41-42:24). He accepted St. John of the Cross’s deﬁnition of faith as God’s union with the soul (54:7). This calls for self-eﬀacement, which implies that faith must escape observation (55:15), but at the same time faith is the certainty of God’s omnipotence through the soul (56:25). If for God everything is possible, when we act in faith wonders occur. DH may be thinking of the way in which the Suez crisis had been resolved (56:58). He goes on to observe that the occurrence of wonders can mean that they become the basis for faith, rather than faith remaining the basis for wonders. Faith, he insists, must have primacy, having attributes that might otherwise be attributed to God. It cannot be derived from anything else.

64. 561231 “In the volume of the book it is written of me, that I should fulﬁl thy will, O my God: I am content to do it; yea, thy law is within my heart. I have declared thy righteousness in the great congregation; no, I will not refrain my lips, O Lord; and that thou knowest.” 1956

184 | The last four waymarks of the year were very likely written on New Year’s Eve. DH cites Psalm verses (Ps. 40:7-9) in which the Psalmist is summoned to fulﬁll God’s will and indicates a willingness to do this. The passage continues with a reference to public confession of God’s righteousness (RSV, “the glad news of deliverance”). DH makes such a confession in this journal. That is perhaps why it was important for him that Waymarks should eventually be read (cf. 52:23, 56:61).

65. Your trust was small. So much deeper should you bow, when it nonetheless happened to you according to your faith.

In this waymark two closely related words are used, trust (tillit) and faith (tro). In DH’s use of these terms, trust implies an object to a somewhat greater extent than does faith (cf. 53:22). DH does not quantify his faith, but he does say that his trust was small. He is therefore all the more grateful for the divine response his faith has encountered (cf. 56:58, 56:65).

66. Gratitude and readiness. You received everything for nothing. Do not hesitate, when it is required, to give what in fact is nothing for everything.

The gratitude expressed in the previous waymark obligates DH to be ready without hesitation to give in return. He has gratuitously received everything. He is unable to ﬁx any comparative value on that which he gives in return (cf. 55:66).

67. For every deed less and less bound to your name, for every step more lightly treading the earth.

Waymarks 64-67 are the reﬂections that the Psalm verses cited above have prompted. DH has been exhorting himself to manifest the readiness that gratitude calls for. He is grateful as the year closes that his deeds as Secretary- General are less and less bound to his name (cf. 50:26, 56:53). As he faces the future he is ready with every step to be more lightly treading the earth. (This language recalls a passage from Strödda blad ur Bertil Ekmans efterlämnade papper, 20, to which reference was already made in the comment on 51:24.) If death should be what is required, DH is prepared for it (55:43, 56:27, 56:39, 56:54).

1957 DH’s eﬀorts during this year were to a large extent devoted to the aftermath of the Suez crisis. While he had succeeded in organizing the United Nations Emergency Force and thereby achieving withdrawal of the British, French, and Israeli forces from the canal area, much negotiation continued with respect to the deployment of the UNEF in the Gaza Strip. Egypt was determined that Israel should reap no beneﬁts from her aggression. Israel, on the other hand, sought security from fedayeen raids originating on the Egyptian side of the border and claimed the right to passage through the Suez Canal. No formal resolution of the diﬀerences between Egypt and Israel was achieved, but DH was able to establish good relations with Prime Minister David Ben Gurion of Israel and with Foreign Minister Mahmoud Fawzi of Egypt, as well with President Nasser. This personal diplomacy led to some relaxation of tension. Since, however, the agreements, especially on Egypt’s side, could not be fully made public, lest there be a hostile reaction on the part of the Egyptian people, as well as the Arab world, the role of the UN was constantly vulnerable to unfavorable interpretation in the press (see 57:2).

DH gave much thought and personal attention in 1957 to the creation of the United Nations Meditation Room. His friend, the Swedish artist Bo Beskow, came in the fall and painted a fresco on the front wall. DH wrote the leaﬂet that is given to visitors. See Appendix B, 265-266; Public Papers of the S-G, 3:710-711.

During this year there are ﬁfteen dated waymarks. DH notes the anniversary of the beginning of his work as Secretary-General and his re-election September 26 to a second term, but does not express his reaction to events during the year to the extent that he did in 1956. While he at no time entertained exaggerated hopes for success in his eﬀorts as Secretary-General, he became during this year increasingly aware of the factors limiting what could be accomplished.

1. Soon night approaches — -- Each day the ﬁrst --. Each day a life. Every morning the bowl of our being should be held forth to receive, to bear and to give back. Held forth empty — for that which has gone before is to be mirrored only in its clarity, its form, and its breadth. “. . . and those things which for our unworthiness we dare not, and for our blindness we cannot ask, vouchsafe to give us . . .”

186 | DH again, as in 1950-1954, begins the year by citing the words “Soon night approaches,” from the hymn his mother used to read on New Year’s Day. This will be the last time these words are cited. He goes on to emphasize the importance of each day. One begins each day anew and each day one’s life is lived in miniature. “The bowl of our being” is an Eastern metaphor, where rice is the staple food and the rice bowl the chief dish used in eating. The day is to be marked by receiving, bearing, and giving back, or rendering an account, at the day’s end. The bowl, which represents the whole of one’s life, is to be empty at the day’s beginning. That which has gone before should have been assimilated, so that it is recognizable (mirrored) only insofar as it has contributed to one’s life’s clarity, its form, and its breadth. For other similar uses of the imagery of “mirroring,” see 25-30:9, 41-42:10. The waymark closes with citation of a portion of a general collect from The Book of Common Prayer (cf. 54:26). The complete text of the collect is: “Almighty God, the fountain of all wisdom, who knowest our necessities before we ask, and our ignorance in asking; We beseech thee to have compassion upon our inﬁrmities; and those things which for our unworthiness we dare not, and for our blindness we cannot ask, vouchsafe to give us, for the worthiness of thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.”

2. The most dangerous lesson: how we can be compelled to suppress the truth in order to help it gain the victory. If this is our duty in the role which destiny has assigned us, how straight must not our course be if we are not to founder.

DH holds that in our time the way to sanctiﬁcation passes through the world of action (55:65). He is convinced that one should be able to carry out one’s duties in public life without inacceptable moral compromise (cf. 56:50). In this waymark, however, he acknowledges that those who have certain kinds of work may have to suppress the truth in order to help it be victorious. In view of the strong statements he has made about “uncompromising inner love of truth” (55:37) and “an ‘honesty’ free of compromise” (55:39), he would be sharply aware of the moral ambiguity such a course of action could appear to involve. It should be noted that he speaks of being compelled “to suppress the truth,” i.e., withholding certain information. He is not referring to disseminating misinformation. He may be referring to the fact that he could not report agreements that had been reached, especially with the Egyptian leaders (Urquhart, 1973, 219-222). DH implies that there is a straight course which can be followed in such cases whereby one can escape foundering, but he is aware of the diﬃculty of ﬁnding and remaining on this course.

187 | Additional light has been cast on this waymark by Kay Rainey Gray, a UN correspondent during DH’s tenure as Secretary-General, who served on the executive committee of the United Nations Correspondents Association (UNCA). She recalls that late in 1956 during the Suez and Hungarian crises Wilder Foote, UN spokesman, suﬀered a heart attack, reducing communication with the press. Much of what was taking place, furthermore, was diplomatic and could not be made public. Gray writes: “In an unusual action the UNCA Executive Committee, meeting in camera, criticized the Secretary-General’s ‘withholding of news’ from correspondents and was about to pass and make public a resolution critical of the S-G. When Hammarskjöld heard of this, he immediately informed the members through an aide that he would see them all immediately. As all 15 elected members sat around the conference table on the 38th ﬂoor, Hammarskjöld . . . listened to the complaints, admitted there was little he could say about some of the diplomatic negotiations, but ‘withholding of the news? Never.’ However he did state that if it were a question of peace, he would do the same again. . . . Returning to their own meeting after hearing from Hammarskjöld, the Executive Committee immediately decided not to pass the resolution of censure” (“United Nations Notebook: The Relationship of Dag Hammarskjöld with the Press,” Development Dialogue, 1987:1, 46).

3. You saved him from victory and, after the defeat, out of badly needed malicious pleasure you fooled him. Certainly — you have reason for sympathy.

The reader can only guess the circumstances to which DH refers. He speaks ironically to himself. He has “saved” an opponent from victory. Thereafter, badly needing “malicious pleasure” (Schadenfreude), he has misled the defeated opponent, perhaps, as Auden-Sjöberg suggest (Markings, 148), by showing him kindness.

The last sentence in which DH says he has reason for sympathy is somewhat ambiguous. “Sympathy” (the Swedish word is förståelse) is to be understood in the sense of sympathetic understanding, entering into or sharing the feelings or interests of another. Is DH again speaking ironically, saying that there is reason that he should be given such understanding, or is he saying that he should give such sympathetic understanding to this opponent? Auden’s translation (“You have, indeed earned the right to a sympathetic audience”) suggests the former. DH did not, however, as far as we know discuss with others his practice as an administrator in order to receive either critique or moral support. He may

188 | in this ﬁnal word be exhorting himself to take some additional appropriate initiative toward the person whom he has bested. He may, on the other hand, be ironically referring to an imaginary audience (cf. 56:60), saying that he should not expect any, who might come to know what he has done, to give his behavior their approval. He may indeed have made the reference deliberately ambiguous to suggest both meanings.

4. Did the attack wound you — despite its preposterousness — because it showed the absurdity of a little clerk playing the hero’s role? If so: could it have wounded you if the clerk had not begun to believe himself to be the hero? — Not I, but God in me!

That DH did not seek sympathetic understanding for himself does not mean that he was invulnerable to what he considered unjust attacks from others. This waymark indicates how he sought to cope with such an attack. He says the attack was preposterous. He asks himself, however, whether he was reacting to the absurdity of someone far down in the institutional hierarchy being cast in a hero’s role in the aﬀair, or whether it was because this person also began to believe he actually was a hero. Not wholly translatable is the term DH uses for this person, calling him a “pinneberg.” Pinneberg is the main character in the novel Kleiner Mann - was nun? (1933) by Hans Fallada (pseudonym of Rudolf Ditzen, 1897-1947 [Reinbeck bei Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1964]), a moving tale about the hardships of a lower middle class young couple in Germany during the period of great economic depression and political instability just preceding the establishment of the Third Reich. In view of DH’s use of the term “pinneberg,” one can inquire as to how much sympathetic understanding he had for this kind of a person (cf. 41-42:17, 55:56, 56:22).

In the ﬁnal words of the waymark DH reminds himself that he must always remember God’s presence in himself (53:6, 53:6, 54, 13, 54:19, 58:7). He had also in other waymarks referred to God’s presence in the situations he encountered (55:6, 56:48). He has also said that it should be easy for him to smile at misunderstood critiques (56:39). It was in fact not easy, but each such occasion became an opportunity for renewed self-examination.

5. 570121 Destruction! What fury in your attack, how pitiful your victory in that old body. You demolished everything, you hurled a mind into abysses of pain — and freed that smile of ﬁnal bliss.

189 | This dated waymark is written on the 17th anniversary of the death of DH’s mother, Agnes Almquist Hammarskjöld. DH reﬂects upon the destructive attack of her ﬁnal illness, the pain and distress she had to suﬀer. But he remembers also the ﬁnal smile with which she entered the repose of death. This waymark recalls 56:2, in which he suggests his understanding of the signiﬁcance of that smile. 56:2 is undated but was very likely written on or about the time of the anniversary of DH’s mother’s death the previous year. 59:42 and 59:44 may also refer to DH’s mother.

6. 570224 One arrives at the point of acknowledging — and feeling — original sin, evil’s dark counterpoint which is in our nature, yes, of our nature, yet not our nature. This, that something aﬃrms the destruction of what we ourselves seek to serve, the misfortune even of those of whom we are fond. Life in God is not a ﬂight away from this, but the way to full insight about it: it is not our depravity which forces us into a ﬁctitious religious solution, but the experience of a religious reality which brings the night side out into the light. It is when we remain before the all-seeing eye of righteous love that we are able to see, dare to acknowledge and consciously suﬀer because of this, that something in us welcomes the catastrophe, wishes the failure, is stimulated by the defeat — when it has to do with the sphere outside our narrowest self-interest. Thus the living God relationship is a precondition for the self-knowledge which enables us to follow a straight path and, in that sense, triumph and be forgiven — from outside ourselves and by ourselves.

Until the 1983 revision of the church year in the Church of Sweden, four Sundays each year were observed as days of prayer, devoted to the four themes of repentance, the Reformation, missions, and thanksgiving. Hjalmar Sundén has called attention to the fact that the First Day of Prayer, with the theme of repentance, in 1957 fell on Sunday, February 24, the date of this waymark (Sundén, 14). DH observes the day by writing a dated waymark reﬂecting on the evil in human nature, which he calls original sin. This evil is in us, though our nature is not in its essence evil. It is destructive of everything outside of the narrowest sphere of self-interest. The closer one comes to God the more aware of this aspect of human nature one becomes. It is, therefore, not this

190 | dark fact about human nature that leads to the positing of “a ﬁctitious religious solution.” Instead it is the fact that one has experienced the reality of God that enables one to acknowledge this human depravity, to bring “the night side” out into the light, and also to overcome it. This involves being forgiven, the third time forgiveness is mentioned in Waymarks (cf. 55:43, 56:6, 57:9, 57:30, 58:1, 60:1, 61:16). In this waymark DH speaks of being “forgiven by ourselves.” This is repeated in 57:9, but is later rejected in 57:30.

7. Oedipus, son of a king, winner of a throne — favored by fortune and blameless — is forced to consider the possibility, ﬁnally its actuality, that he also carries a guilt which makes it just that he should be sacriﬁced in order to save the people.

Oedipus is a hero of Greek mythology who is born in Thebes and abandoned at birth by his parents, because a Delphic oracle has declared that he is destined to kill his father. He is, however, spared from death and reared in Corinth as a foundling. When grown, not knowing his true parentage, he hears the same oracle about himself and leaves Corinth, in order to escape fulﬁlling it. Encountering a group of men who attempt to drive him oﬀ the road, among them Laius, the king of Thebes, Oedipus gives battle and unwittingly does kill his father. Going on to Thebes, in return for solving the riddle of the Sphinx and thereby bringing about the death of this monster, that has kept the city in a state of siege, he wins the throne of Thebes and marries the widowed queen, who is in fact his mother. The classic literary treatment of the myth is Sophocles’ tragedy, Oedipus the King, which unfolds the discovery by the mother and her son of their incest (cf. 53:4). Jocasta, the queen, upon learning the truth commits suicide and Oedipus blinds himself and goes into exile.

The myth presents an interesting study of guilt. While Oedipus is guilty of manslaughter committed in hot temper, with respect to parricide and incest he is the victim of a cruel fate. In what sense is it “just that he should be sacriﬁced”? While DH elsewhere speaks of sacriﬁce as the complete surrender of the individual to the doing of God’s will, which could mean advancing the common good of both the people and that individual (cf. 54:5, 55:9, 55:23), here sacriﬁce appears to mean the destruction of an individual as the result of evil circumstances, these circumstances being such that the welfare of the people requires that this destruction be willingly accepted (cf. 55:29, 56:27, 61:6).

191 | 8. Success — for God’s glory or your own, for the peace of other human beings or your own? The answer determines the outcome of your striving.

DH has earlier raised the question of the meaning of success (50:47, 56:3, 56:18). In this waymark he examines his striving for success. He wants to be certain that he has the right motivation in this eﬀort. Is it for God’s glory (54:19), or is he seeking his own? Is he striving for the peace of the world, or simply his own peace of mind (52:15)? He implies that it is his own motivation at this point that will profoundly inﬂuence the outcome of his eﬀorts as Secretary-General.

9. 570407 How to live freeborn in constant awareness of all that is wrong in the past, all that is despicable in my present. How to be able — daily — to forgive myself? Life judges me — with the love of which I myself am capable. Judges with the patience which corresponds to the honesty in my striving to meet its demands and with a righteousness before which self-assertion’s trivial attempts at explanation carry no weight.

The date of this waymark is the 4th anniversary of DH’s leaving Sweden to take up his duties as Secretary-General. He does not look back with satisfaction upon his achievements during these years. Instead he asks how it is possible for him to live as a free person, given his constant awareness of all that is subject to criticism in the past, all that he regards as petty and mean in his present. How can he forgive himself, as this seems to be daily required? This is the fourth waymark in which there is reference to forgiveness (cf. 55:43, 56:6, 57:6, 58:1, 60:1, 61:16). He expresses an understanding of forgiveness he will later reject (57:30). He is judged by life (which in 56:21 is equivalent to God) with the love of which he himself is capable. Love and the process of judging are sometimes seen as in tension. Here love is one of the attributes that enters into the judging process. Love is a human possibility and is required of the one being judged. Another of life’s attributes is patience, which examines the honesty of DH’s striving to meet life’s demands, though not necessarily his success at this point (see the relation between success and striving in the previous waymark). The ﬁnal attribute is righteousness, which does not permit any rationalizations which DH might self- assertively attempt. See 56:33 where DH also links together love, patience, and righteousness in speaking of God.

192 | 10. What has life lost in the happiness he might have enjoyed had he lived? What has it gained in the suﬀering he escaped? How foolishly we talk! The one who lives is the measure of life and the number of his days is reckoned in other terms.

In this waymark DH is thinking of how life-spans of diﬀerent individuals may be longer or shorter. If a person’s experience in its totality is that person’s contribution to life, how does life gain or lose when a given individual life is long or short? What kind of judgment or measurement can here be made? This question, DH says, is a foolish one. The measure of a person’s life is not taken in retrospect, but while one lives (cf. 50:46, 51:1). The actual chronological length of a person’s life is another matter, which does not aﬀect this measurement.

11. To see my pettiness, not in scourging self-disgust, not in pride at confessing it — but as a threat to the integrity of my actions if I let it drop out of sight.

DH returns to the self-analysis found in 57:8 and 57:9. He uses an uncommon Swedish word for pettiness derived from the French mesquinerie, a fault to which he gives special attention. He rejects the alternatives of self-ﬂagellation and a perverse pride in such confession (cf. 51:8). It is, however, essential for him to keep in constant view this tendency he ﬁnds in himself in order to safeguard the integrity of his actions.

12. How selﬁshly aesthetic our “sympathy” as a rule is, we see in those moments when we momentarily can make the basis for another’s — always threatened — vital conﬁdence our own, that is, when we can make that which for him makes it possible “to continue” the condition for our own self-preserving self-esteem. In this — as in other things — realism is the opposite of profanation. The truth we must endure is reality without the reconciliation of time.

In the Swedish text this and the following waymark are joined together as one waymark with four paragraphs. DH does, however, appear to be discussing two somewhat diﬀerent themes, though there may also be a relationship between them. In this waymark he questions what appear to be our good intentions

193 | and actions. Where our sympathy, our feeling of solidarity with another, can be the basis for that person’s ability to continue to live at all, we can place the chief emphasis on what we are getting out of the relationship, the way in which it builds up our sense of our own importance. In such a case what is termed “sympathy” has really only the appearance of actual sympathy. “Aesthetic” may here be intended in a Kierkegaardian sense, as referring to a self-centered stage of life, when the question of what it means to live the moral life has not yet been seriously raised (cf. 50:37; see Søren Kierkegaard, Either/Or and Stages on Life’s Way). DH insists that to be realistic about this matter is not to introduce profanation into an area of life that should be protected from critical disclosure. We must be willing to endure a true account of what is now taking place, even if only momentarily. It is well that this occurs prior to the reconciliation of what was with what ought to have been, which the passage of time can introduce into our remembrance of our relationships with others.

13. For the one being sacriﬁced — who is also making the sacriﬁce — only one thing counts: faithfulness — alone among enemies and skeptics — faithfulness despite the humiliation which has become the consequence and presupposition of faithfulness, faithfulness without any other support in hopes of restoration than can be found in a faith which reality seems so thoroughly to refute. Would the sacriﬁcial act have sublimity and meaning if the sacriﬁced one saw himself in the transﬁguring light of martyrdom? What we have added was not there for him. And we must overcome it in order to hear his command.

This waymark has two parts, one referring to self-sacriﬁce more generally and the other to Jesus’ sacriﬁce and the fact that he could not at the time he was making it foresee its outcome. DH insists that the one who oﬀers himself/ herself totally in the service of God cannot expect much support from others. He/she may well be surrounded by enemies and skeptics. The sacriﬁce will almost certainly involve humiliation (cf. 45-49:13, 57:44, 61:5). One’s only support will be faith, which will all the time appear refuted by the reality one is constantly encountering.

But this, DH says, is precisely what Jesus experienced (cf. 5l:29). This, furthermore, is what makes his sacriﬁcial act sublime. If he had been able to see beyond the cross to the light of the resurrection, the cross would not have the meaning it has for us. What we have added in our gloriﬁcation of the cross

194 | was not there for Jesus when he suﬀered and died. And we must overcome this gloriﬁed understanding of the cross by getting back to the historical cruciﬁed Jesus if we are to be able to hear and respond to Jesus’ summons to take up our own crosses and follow him.

14. To win a security in which we give all criticism its due weight and humble ourselves before the words of praise.

DH describes a goal toward which he strives. He wants to feel so secure (cf. 50:3, 54:14) that he is able to accept and evaluate all criticism he receives (cf. 45- 49:13, 56:39, 57:20, 57:49). With respect to praise, the appropriate response is humility. If his sense of security is due to the fact that God is working through him, he should not accept praise for what God does (cf. 55:26, 56:49, 59:4).

15. 570428 “There is no history but the soul’s, there is no ease but the soul’s.”

April 28 was a Sunday. During the preceding week on April 24 the Egyptian government issued a declaration concerning the Suez Canal and the arrangements for its operation which it registered with the United Nations as an international instrument. Though the canal was declared open, Israeli shipping through the canal was still not permitted. At an April 25 press conference questions were raised with respect to Egypt’s noncompliance at this point with the Armistice Agreement (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:561-577).

The citation from St.-John Perse. The words, “ . . . there is no ease but the soul’s,” were perhaps relevant to DH’s situation at that time. St.-John Perse is the pen name of the French diplomat and poet, Alexis Léger (1887-1975). DH ﬁrst met Perse in 1955, but had been interested in his poetry for some time before that. He promoted the translation of Perse’s poetry into Swedish and translated the poem Chronique himself, a passage of which translation he cites in 61:1. As a member of the Swedish Academy DH participated in the nomination and selection of candidates for the Nobel prize for literature, which Perse received in 1960.

Perse separated his careers as diplomat and poet quite sharply, which in part accounts for his use of the pen name St.-John Perse. From 1933-1940 he held the post of Secretary General of the French Ministry of Foreign Aﬀairs, from which position he was forced to resign by intrigues relating to the Fall of France, which, in turn, forced him into exile. He remained in exile from 1940 to 1957,

195 | living during that time in the United States. During these years he returned again to literature, which had been set aside during his years as administrator in the French foreign ministry (St.-John Perse, Letters, translated and edited by Arthur J. Knodel [Princeton: Princeton U. Press, 1979], xiii-xiv). The poem that especially marks this return is Exil (1941), from which the citation in this waymark is taken (St.-John Perse, Collected Poems [Princeton: Princeton U. Press, 1971], v, 156-157, translation by Denis Devlin). In this poem Perse writes “about human exile, terrestrial exile in all its forms” (Letters, 548).

DH ﬁnds in the words he cites emphasis on the importance of the inner life of the individual. There the moving force of history is to be found. In the human soul is also to be found refuge from surrounding unease, even the possibility of returning to the home one has been forced to leave, as in the words preceding those cited Perse writes, “Behold, I am restored to my native shore . . .”

16. Dressed in this self which was created by judgments of the indiﬀerent, meaningless honors, duly recorded “achievements” --. Strapped into the strait jacket of the near at hand. To step out of this, naked, on the edge of dawn — accepted, invulnerable, free: in the light, with the light, of the light. One, real in the one. Out of myself as a hindrance, into myself as fulﬁllment.

This could be a comment on the citation from St.-John Perse in the previous waymark, though the theme developed has been expressed earlier (cf. 45-49:5). DH distinguishes between an inner self and an external self, which is an image and a reputation worn like clothing (50:13) and created by others, some of them indiﬀerent, others bestowing meaningless honors, yet others compiling a list of “achievements.” All the while one is strapped into the expectations a daily routine deﬁnes.

DH imagines himself stepping out of all of this, beginning a new day as though it were a new life (57:1). The light symbolism of 56:16 may be recalled. The self can become a transparent lens by which the light is focused. DH is conﬁdent that in such an act of self-dedication he is accepted, protected from ultimate harm, and free. Aulén suggests that the ﬁnal words of this waymark strikingly express DH’s conviction that the way of loving service is a combination of self- surrender and self-realization (Aulén, E 99; Sw 144-145; cf. 56:21).

196 | 17. 570525 Why deny yourself, you say, when it harms no one and does you good? Yes, why — if it isn’t in conﬂict with the choice you made. Your own reaction when you have forgotten this condition — a reaction as before a betrayal and a humiliating weakness — is a suﬃcient answer to your question.

May 25 was a Saturday. Earlier in May DH had made a trip to Europe and the Middle East. He had spoken with Pope Pius XII and leaders of the Italian government in Rome, he had planned a second Geneva conference on the peaceful uses of atomic energy to be held in 1958, and he had had friendly conversations with David Ben-Gurion and Golda Meir. On May 16 there had been a press conference in which he was questioned about developments in the Middle East (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:577-585).

There does not appear, however, to be a direct relationship between these events and DH’s reﬂections in this waymark. He did feel obligated to deny himself (55:60, 57:39). Yet how far must he go in this direction? It would seem that there could be no objection to doing that which harms no one else and does good to oneself. DH points out, however, that such behavior may conﬂict with the basic choice he has made (cf. 45-49:1, 53:21, 56:21, 57:47, 58:8). When he recalls this he reacts quite strongly. The words “a betrayal and a humiliating weakness” will appear again in 57:20 (cf. 57:32).

18. Everything in the present, nothing for the present. And nothing for your future reputation or your future ease.

This is one of several waymarks in which DH stresses the importance of the present (cf. 50:53, 51:6, 54:18). The present to which everything is to be devoted is God’s eternal now (56:33), which by reason of God’s patience may extend into the future. As to the future that is unrelated to God’s eternal now, one is not to consider either one’s future reputation (50:26, 56:53) or future ease and comfort, for which one may seek to make provision. (Note, however, the reference to a pension in 51:38.)

19. Suddenly — without your help — diﬃculties you have given your all to overcome are resolved. And you are tempted to keep yourself in the forefront whether it helps

197 | the matter or not, perhaps even if it can do harm. Do you then want to spoil even that to which your eﬀort can entitle you? Only if your striving has been guided by a devotion to duty in which you have wholly forgotten yourself can you retain conﬁdence in its value. But if that has been the case, your striving toward the goal should have taught you to rejoice when others reach it.

DH reminds himself that while it is important that goals be reached, it is not at all essential that he receive credit for such achievements (cf. 56:53). Others should be given the credit that is due them. Apparently a problem to which he has devoted great eﬀorts has ﬁnally been resolved without his help. DH recognizes the temptation to keep himself in the forefront, though this may harm the cause. He insists that his devotion to duty must be such that he wholly forgets himself and thus is able to rejoice when others reach goals toward which he has been striving (cf. 57:8).

20. 570620 “-- a betrayal and a humiliating weakness --” Therefore also this: that you suﬀer under criticism which is not justiﬁed? Yes, and weakened encounter your duty.

June 20 was a Thursday. The introductory words quoted are from 57:17. The reference to unjustiﬁed criticism that follows suggests that both dated waymarks have some relation to DH’s responsibilities as Secretary-General. Urquhart reports that on June 8 the London Daily Telegraph published an article stating that the Gaza Strip was now to all intents and purposes under the control of Egypt. The article asserted that there were large numbers of Egyptian soldiers and two thousand Palestinian Arab policemen in the Gaza Strip, fedayeen were being trained, and UNEF soldiers were engaging in black-market activities. General E. L. M. Burns, the commander of the UNEF protested against these false reports, stating that they were typical of Western journalism at the time and followed strictly the Israeli line (Urquhart, 1973, 126). Meeting with the press on June 19, DH expressed himself more hopefully about the situation in the Middle East, calling it a period of convalescence, when too much attention should not be given to the lingering symptoms of the illness, while it was realistic to anticipate real and active reconstruction and rebuilding. DH may at the same time, however, privately have shared much of the impatience of his questioners. Using language from Shakespeare’s Macbeth, he called it a time “full of sound

198 | and fury.” He acknowledged that his correspondence with various capitals in the Middle East had recently been somewhat one-sided, in that response to letters he had written was being delayed (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:593- 601). Given the strict standard by which he judged himself, he may have blamed himself in some measure for the slow progress that was being made. Nonetheless, whatever his own “weakness” had contributed to the situation, he insists that the criticism under which he is suﬀering is unjustiﬁed (cf. 56:39), and its eﬀect could be to further weaken him in his discharge of his duties.

21. 570623 “For he maketh the storm to cease: so that the waves thereof are still. Then are they glad, because they are at rest: and so he bringeth them unto the haven where they would be.”

The date of this waymark was Sunday of the weekend that the Nativity of St. John the Baptist and the summer solstice were celebrated in Sweden. DH’s custom was to mark such dates with citations that spoke to his spiritual need. On this occasion he cites The Book of Common Prayer version of Psalm 107:29-30 (cf. 54:26), words from a psalm of thanksgiving perhaps sung by groups of pilgrims who came to Jerusalem to celebrate one of the feasts, oﬀering thanks for escape from various dangers. While the NRSV translates the verbs in the past tense, the Prayer Book version is in the present tense. God is the one who makes the storm to cease and brings his people to the haven to which they are bound. It is in this way that the sound and fury of the world situation will be quieted so that the needed healing can take place (see above the comment on 57:20).

22. “The ﬁfes of exile --.” Always among strangers to that which has formed you — alone. Always thirsting for water from the springs — captive, not free to seek it. The answer — the hard, clean, severe answer: in the One you are never alone, in the One you are always at home.

This waymark may be a comment on the text cited in 57:21. DH begins with words from St.-John Perse’s poem “Exile” (Collected Poems, 156-157). DH may have been unable to be in Sweden for the Midsummer celebration. In a deeper sense, however, he could have felt that he was in exile, just as Perse found himself, living among those who had little understanding or appreciation

199 | of that which had formed him, while he was so “strapped into the strait jacket of the near at hand” (57:16) that he was unable to ﬁnd refreshment from the springs upon which his spirit depended.

It is at this point that the psalm passage speaks to him. The answer is not easy to accept, it is hard and severe, but in fellowship with God (here called the One, cf. 55:28, 56:33, 57:16, 57:47) whatever his circumstances he is not alone, indeed he is always at home. In terms of his life journey he can have conﬁdence that he will be brought safely through the storms to the haven he is seeking.

23. Result and reaction --. The strength of your rising uneasiness reveals the extent of your actual lack of freedom and of your isolation — from unity. Do not therefore concern yourself about this or that, but follow the way you know even when you have left it. “Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou --”

DH continues his reﬂection about his relationship to the One. His eﬀorts have brought about a result to which he has reacted with uneasiness (cf. 56:36). This has revealed his lack of freedom and his isolation. Note the stressed words “captive” and “alone” in 57:22. He is isolated, however, not from other people, but from unity, from the One. It is in the One that he is never alone. Thus, rather than concerning himself with anything else he must follow the way to which God has called him (52:1, 53:11, 55:39, 61:5, 61:12), a way that he knows even when he is not following it. DH cites ﬁnally the words of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, which expressed Jesus’ submission to the will of his heavenly Father (Matt. 26:39 RSV, cf. 54:7, 56:9), omitting vill/wilt, the ﬁnal word of verse 39.

24. He who is challenged by destiny does not take oﬀense at the terms.

While DH has cited an author who states that not everyone is a person of destiny (56:59), he believes that he himself has been challenged by destiny (53:7, 55:60, 56:1, 57:37, 61:13). For this reason the principle, that one who receives such a challenge must accept it, not complaining about the terms that destiny oﬀers, does apply to him.

200 | 25. For one whose task so obviously mirrors the unheard of in human possibility and duty, there is no excuse if he loses the feeling of “being called.” But in that feeling all that he is capable of has a meaning, nothing a price. Therefore: if he complains, he accuses — himself.

DH uses the expression “the unheard of ” (cf. 51:47, 51:62, 52:6, 54:5, 54:20, 54:25). He reminds himself that his task obviously has to do with this human possibility and that he must therefore not lose his awareness of his calling (59:4). It is in this context that everything he is able to accomplish receives meaning (55:54, 56:7, 56:13, 58:7), while nothing is to be regarded as a price he must pay (cf. 55:23, 57:38). There must therefore be no complaints, for they can be directed only against himself.

26. The myths have always condemned those who “turned back”, condemned them, whatever the paradise may have been that they left. Therefore this shadow over every deviation from your choice, “Journeyer to the East.”

DH referred more often to not looking back (51:22, 53:12, 56:13, 57:35, 61:5; cf. Luke 9:62) than to not turning back, though the two concepts have about the same meaning. In this waymark he speaks of the condemnation of such behavior in the myths. This also is to remind him not to deviate in any way from the choice he has made (56:21, 57:17, 57:27).

The expression “Journeyer to the East” (Morgenlandfahrer) is derived from the novel, Morgenlandfahrt (1932, Eng. trans., The Journey to the East, 1961), by Hermann Hesse (1877-1962). The novel, which DH had wanted to translate (Lindegren, 27-29), tells of an esoteric order led by one who appears as a servant. To be received into the order, one must have a purpose of one’s own, comparable to the high dedication of the order.

27. 570720 Stealthily — furtively. Shut out from the room, you must not peep through the keyhole. Either break down the door, or withdraw. Stealthily — furtively. Only because it would have appeared to people as a denial of the choice! All the same — how correct the feeling of shame for what must for such reasons be kept secret, though it may later nonetheless turn out for the good.

201 | From June 29 to July 18 DH visited Copenhagen, Geneva, and Paris (Van Dusen, 229). Some time was also spent in Sweden. He had a summer home, Hagestad, a ﬁsherman’s cottage along the coast of southern Sweden. During the summer of 1957, with the help of his friend, Bo Beskow, he bought a nearby farmstead having a larger acreage. It is possible that in this waymark he is reacting to the way in which the negotiations for that purchase took place. When he had himself indicated interest in the farm a rather high selling price was named, whereas Beskow was able to buy it for considerably less (Beskow, 128-129). If the waymark relates to that transaction, DH expresses himself critically about the secrecy which, it was thought, had to be practiced. He could appear to have been acting contrary to his basic commitment. He approves of his feeling of shame, though at the same time he observes that the way he acted may ﬁnally have good consequences. DH was planning to return the ﬁelds to open heath, which met the approval of the Swedish authorities concerned with nature preservation, who wanted to save some such farms from being sold to real estate speculators. Backåkra, the name of the farm, is now administered by the Swedish Tourist Association as a memorial to DH. Articles he received on his extensive travels are displayed and a part of his library is kept there.

28. 570728 You are not the oil, not the air — only the combustion point, the focus, where the light is born. You are only the lens in the ﬂood of light. Only like the lens can you receive, give, and own the light. If you seek yourself, “in your own right,” you hinder the meeting of the oil and the air in the ﬂame, you rob the lens of its transparency. Sanctiﬁcation — to be the light or in the light, eﬀaced, so that it may be born, eﬀaced so that it may be gathered and spread.

This dated waymark was written on a Sunday, the day before DH’s ﬁfty-second birthday (cf. 58:9 and 59:4, the birthday waymarks for 1958 and 1959). DH was at his summer home, Hagestad (Van Dusen, 146). He reﬂects about the meaning of his life, casting himself in the role of a catalytic agent, one who helps things happen, but is not the decisive agent in the happening, though he can frustrate that which might otherwise happen (54:10, 57:31). The images he uses have to do with light, its source, its gathering and focusing, and also the means by which it is spread (cf. 56:16). DH for a second time uses the term “sanctiﬁcation.” Whereas in 55:65 he stresses that sanctiﬁcation requires involvement in the world of action, here he emphasizes the self-eﬀacement that is required if the light is to be born, gathered, and spread.

202 | 29. You will know life and be acknowledged by it, according to the degree of your transparency — that is, according to the extent of your ability to disappear as an end and remain solely as a means.

DH continues to reﬂect on the imagery of light. In earlier waymarks he has thought of himself as reﬂecting life according to his clarity or purity (25-30:9, 41-42:10, 57:1). In 56:16 and 57:28 he thinks of the essential transparency of a lens through which the light passes. If his life is to be a lens focusing the light, the passage of the light will be impeded to the extent to which he engages in self- seeking. This means that the degree of his transparency will depend on the extent to which he is able to disappear as an end in the life process, while remaining only as a means. The language DH uses is borrowed from the philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), who said that one should regard other persons as ends in themselves and never merely as means (see 50:52). If so, in one’s relation to them one should regard oneself as a means to bring about what is good for them, rather than seeking to use them as a means to further one’s own ends. Transparency means not to have mixed motives at this point.

30. 570903 “To forgive oneself ” --? No, that isn’t possible: we must be forgiven. But we can believe in forgiveness only if we ourselves forgive.

DH’s Annual Report to the UN General Assembly was dated August 22, but the date of publication was September 4. A press conference to discuss questions related to the report was scheduled for September 5 (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:624, 629-656). On the date of this waymark he may, however, have remembered the wedding anniversary of his parents (September 3, 1890), both of whom were deceased, his mother, Agnes Almquist Hammarskjöld in 1940 (cf. 57:5), and his father, Hjalmar Hammarskjöld in 1953 (cf. 58:13). If he was noting this date, this is the only time he does so. He picks up the expression “to forgive oneself ” from 57:9 and 57:6 and now rejects this as impossible, for “we must be forgiven.” This requires, however, that we forgive others, which he stressed in his ﬁrst reference to forgiveness (56:6, cf. 60:1). He could conceivably be thinking of the need for children to forgive their parents, not least when they are deceased. At this point they certainly are unable to forgive themselves. As long as we are alive, however, we are able to forgive others.

203 | 31. How frightful, our responsibility, If you fail it is God who, through your unfaithfulness to him, fails humanity. You imagine yourself able to be responsible before God; can you be responsible for God?

Though DH did not want to discuss the matter, at press conferences both on August 22 and September 5 questions were raised about whether he would accept appointment to a second term as Secretary-General (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:624-625, 653, 656). We may have in this and the following waymark some indication of his thinking on this matter. He had a very strong sense of his own responsibility (50:42, 54:10, 55:32, 58:7, 59:3). God is in a sense dependent on us, for through us God can fail humanity. This is what DH elsewhere calls God’s humility (56:33). DH does not think he can bear the responsibility of answering to humanity on God’s behalf why what should have been done was not done.

32. “Betray” --. Are you satisﬁed if you have checked and channeled the worst in you? The human condition is such that to fail at every moment to be one’s best is a betrayal. How much more so in a situation where others have faith in you.

The Swedish words svika (fail, betray), svek (unfaithfulness) recur ﬁve times in this and the previous waymark (cf. 54:10, 57:17, 57:20). DH reminds himself that it is not enough simply to curb one’s worst tendencies. One must at every moment be at one’s best (cf. 25-30:12, 53:2, 56:20) or one is guilty of betrayal. This becomes even more important for the person in whom others have faith (cf. 51:2, 53:22).

33. 570926 “The best and most glorious to which one in this life can attain is that you are silent and let God work and speak.” Once you have grasped me, Slinger. Now into your storm. Now towards your goal.

On the date of this waymark DH was re-elected to a second term as UN Secretary-General. He was unanimously recommended by the Security Council and except for one spoiled ballot the vote in the General Assembly was unanimous (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:662). He reacts to this aﬃrmation of

204 | his leadership by quoting from a sermon by Meister Eckhart (Meister Eckehart Schriften, Büttner, 67). If one must be one’s best, the best is to surrender one’s own will in such a way that God is permitted to work and speak. The comment that follows the citation suggests that DH anticipates that the next years will be more diﬃcult than the years of his ﬁrst term. The expression “Slinger” may come from St.-John Perse. In the poem “Anabasis”, translated by T. S. Eliot, Perse writes, “Instigator of strife and discord! fed on insults and slanders, O Slinger! crack the nut of my own eye! my heart twittered with joy under the splendour of the quicklime, the bird sings O Senectus!” (Collected Poems, 109; Senectus in Latin mythology was the goddess of old age). For other citations from St.-John Perse, see 57:15, 57:22, 61:1.

34. 571001 “It’s saying: everything is here Awaiting you in good repair, Thousands of beautiful songs; Where have you been, yes, where?”

On October 1 the ﬁrst session of the International Atomic Energy Agency opened in Vienna. DH had high hopes for the future potential of this new member of the UN family. Since he was unable to be present, his message to the meeting was read by Under-Secretary Ralph J. Bunche. In it he expressed his expectation that within a few decades nuclear energy could become one of the principle sources of power in the world and that this had immense potential signiﬁcance for economic and social progress, especially in the economically less developed regions (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:666-669).

The poet cited is Erik Axel Karlfeldt (1864-1931). Karlfeldt was a contemporary of DH’s father and for thirteen years both were members of the Swedish Academy. He was posthumously awarded the Nobel prize for literature in 1931. The lines are from a poem entitled “Det förgångna” (The Past; Erik Axel Karlfeldts Dikter [Stockholm: Wahlström & Widstrand, 1943], 196-198), which tells of spring in a rural Dalecarlian community as experienced by someone who has come back but is about to leave again. DH may have been wanting to relate optimism with respect to technological possibilities to the possibilities yet to be found in the rural countryside in Sweden, as well as throughout the world.

35. Don’t look back. And don’t dream of the future: it will not give you back the past, nor satisfy other dreams of happiness. Your duty and your reward — your destiny — are here and now.

205 | In addition to the conference on atomic energy, DH may have been thinking about his re-election as Secretary-General. If one takes into account the title of the poem from which the lines in 57:34 were cited, “Det förgångna” (the past), as well as the lines, “ . . . everything is here Awaiting you in good repair,” this waymark can be viewed as a comment on the lines cited, relating them to his situation. He strongly emphasizes living in the present (cf. 50:53, 51:6, 54:18). He must not look back (51:22, 53:12, 56:13, 61:5). The future will not give him what he misses from the past, nor satisfy other dreams of happiness. The “thousands of beautiful songs” are to be found here and now. Not only his duty, but also his reward (cf. 55:23) is in the present. Here his destiny is to be found.

36. Jesus’ “lack of principles”: he sat at table with tax collectors and sinners, he associated with prostitutes. Was it in order to win at least their votes? Did he perhaps think that he could convert them through such “appeasement”? Or was it because his humanity was deep and rich enough so that he also in them could make contact with that which is common, indestructible, on which the future must be built?

Three possible explanations of Jesus’ consorting with what were thought to be the wrong kind of people are suggested. The ﬁrst, to win votes, DH implies could have been self-serving. DH had not himself in Sweden engaged in campaigns to win votes, since he had worked in the civil service. Though he was elected to his position in the UN, it had not been necessary for him to campaign in order to be re-elected. The second possible explanation, that Jesus sought to achieve conversions by “appeasement, “ DH implies would have been ill-advised. He prefers to think of a third explanation, that Jesus sought to make contact with something common, indestructible, to be found in all people (cf. 41-42:25, 56:13, 56:14). The diﬀerence between the explanations does not have to do with what Jesus did, but with what his motives were (the ﬁrst explanation) and how he regarded those with whom he had fellowship (the second and third explanations). DH does not explain what it might mean to attempt to convert by “appeasement,” though he is probably suggesting that human nature is being evaluated more negatively when such a strategy is used. Insofar as “conversion” is sought, the practice of agape (the kind of love of which the New Testament speaks) requires conﬁdence in its power, though it need not require any particular understanding of human nature. Aulén states that this waymark is interesting because it clearly indicates DH’s aim of maintaining in all situations his positive view of human beings (Aulén, E 37; Sw 58). At the same time DH did acknowledge that he found original sin within himself (57:6). At this point a

206 | distinction should be made between human depravity before God and a general human capacity for civil righteousness, which even Martin Luther, despite his emphasis on human depravity, recognized. This was the basis on which the future with which DH as UN Secretary-General was concerned could be built (cf. 55:39). He will ﬁnd such a positive understanding of human nature strongly emphasized in the Chinese classic, the Tao Te Ching (57:41).

37. 571006 Yes to God: yes to destiny and yes to yourself. If this is reality, the soul can perhaps be wounded, but it has the power to be healed. “Endless the series of things without name On the way back to where there is nothing.”

November 6, the date of this waymark, was a Saturday and DH may have been able to spend the weekend at his country house near Brewster, New York. In this and the next four waymarks he reﬂects about his unanimous reelection to a second ﬁve-year term as UN Secretary-General. The “yes” of 53:1, 53:12, and 56:7 is repeated. To say “yes” to God is to aﬃrm both one’s destiny and oneself. There is optimism that though there may be wounds, there will also be healing. The quotation that follows is from chapter 14 of Arthur Waley’s translation of the Tao Te Ching, attributed to Lao-tzu and written in China sometime during the 3rd century B.C. (Arthur Waley, The Way and Its Power, [New York: Macmillan, 1934, 1956], 1959). DH had very likely purchased Waley’s translation and The Parting of the Way: Lao Tsu and the Taoist Movement by Holmes Welch (Boston: Beacon Press, 1957) about this time. Both of these books are to be found in the portion of DH’s library kept in the Royal Library in Stockholm. DH must have become interested in philosophical Taoism. He had a general interest in the thought of the Far East. The fact that Tao means “way” and the fact that there are some apparent parallels between the Tao Te Ching and the New Testament (Welch, 5-6) may have made him want to investigate this text more closely. The Tao Te Ching was written, furthermore, in large part as a guide to those having ruling responsibilities. According to Welch, the passage cited comes from a description of what Lao-tzu saw in a trance (63, 67). There will be another reference to the Tao Te Ching in 57:41, so that this group of waymarks is framed by references to this Chinese text.

38. The opportunity was given you anew — as a privilege and a burden. The question is not: why did it so happen; or, where is it leading; or, what is the price? It is only: how do you make use of it? And about that only one can judge.

207 | The opportunity to which DH refers is his second term as Secretary-General. He was well aware of the burden this responsibility represented, but regarded it also as a privilege. In his statement to the UN General Assembly upon his reappointment he said: “The signiﬁcance of what this Organization stands for, as a venture in progress towards an international community living in peace under the laws of justice, transforms work for its aims from a duty into a privilege” (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:663-664). His only concern had to do with the use he would make of this opportunity. With respect to the evaluation of that use, he felt himself primarily answerable to God.

39. You yourself said that you would accept the decree of destiny. But you lost your equilibrium when you discovered what this demanded of you: then you saw how bound you still were to the world which formed you, but which was denied you. You felt it was like an amputation, like a little “death,” and even listened to those who insinuated that out of ambition you had deceived yourself. All will be lost. Why, then, whimper in the face of this little death? Take it to yourself — quickly — and with a smile, die this death and in freedom go further — united with your task, whole in the moment’s endeavor.

Though the theme of waymarks 57:37-41 has to do with DH’s reappointment as UN Secretary-General, it does not follow that they were all written at the same time. In the following weeks he must have discovered some demand, some sacriﬁce, with which he had not fully reckoned previously. He could have been thinking about living in Sweden when he wrote about the world that had formed him and was being denied him. He reminds himself, however, of the commitment he had already made (57:37). Since all is eventually to be lost, he must be prepared to accept little “deaths” along the way. In 57:42-46 he will give thought to the larger death that also awaits him.

40. You have not done enough, you have never done enough, so long as the possibility remains that something of you can be of value. This is the answer when you groan under what you regard as a burden and a risk prolonged ad inﬁnitum.

208 | It may have been suggested to DH that he had already made a suﬃciently signiﬁcant contribution to the UN. He could with good conscience leave his task to others. He answers, however, that one has never done enough when it is possible that one could still be used for good in the position one occupies. During the fall of 1957 DH’s artist friend, Bo Beskow, had come from Sweden to paint a mural on the wall of the United Nations Meditation Room that DH had planned (Beskow, 77-117). This and the previous waymark could reﬂect their conversations during the fall months of 1957.

41. The Uncarved Block --. Remain in the Center, your own and that of human responses. Act in terms of the goals this gives your life to the extent that this in every moment is possible for you. Act in this way without thought of consequences and without in anything seeking your own good.

“The Uncarved Block” is a concept DH has borrowed from the Tao Te Ching (Waley, chs. 19, 28, 32, 57). The Chinese word being translated is p’u, which has also been translated “original nature,” “uncarved wood,” “simple and honest” (Lin Yutang, The Wisdom of Laotse [New York: Random House, l948], 120, 160, 266. This book was also included in DH’s library.). P’u refers to the original, unspoiled, blank, childlike, untutored nature of the human being (Welch, 35- 49). The word is generally used to mean simplicity or plainness of heart and living and implies the original goodness of human nature (Yutang, l06). We have noted above (57:36) that DH prefers to think of human nature in these terms. The term “Center” may also come from the Tao Te Ching (Yutang, 64). If so, it translates chung, the core, the original human nature, what is in the heart (cf. Waley, l47). DH refers to this concept again in 59:5. He uses the terms “Uncarved Block” and “ Center” in expressing what has been for him a long-standing commitment. At the same time he may have been impressed to ﬁnd that the three treasures or rules of the teaching in the Tao Te Ching are pity, frugality, and the refusal to be foremost of all things (Waley, ch. 67). Beskow tells us that Waley’s translation of the Tao Te Ching was one of four books to be found after DH’s death on the bedside table in his New York apartment (Beskow, l00).

42. Do not seek death. It will ﬁnd you. Seek the way that makes death a fulﬁllment.

209 | This is the ﬁrst of a series of ﬁve waymarks devoted to reﬂection on death. If DH in his earlier years may have had moments when he sought death (e.g., “Give me something to die for --!” 52:16), he now says that one need not seek death. One will be found by death. What one must seek is a way of living that can be fulﬁlled in death. In the Swedish text the word translated “death” (förintelse) could also be translated “annihilation” or “destruction.” This makes it clear that DH was not thinking of death in romantic, sentimental terms.

43. Your body must become familiar with its own death — in all its possible forms and degrees — as a self-evident, close at hand, and emotionally indiﬀerent step on the way towards goals you have found worth your life.

Though death is not to be sought, one must prepare for it. Its inevitability must be totally accepted and the possibility of its imminence must be recognized. Only in this way can it cease to be a factor that frustrates one’s progress toward the goals to which one is committed (cf. 55:23, 56:19, 57:33, 61:5). Needless to say, what DH calls for is not easily achieved.

44. Death, as a stage in the sacriﬁce, is no doubt the completion, but often abasement and never exaltation.

That death is referred to as a “stage in the sacriﬁce” indicates that for DH living sacriﬁcially meant not simply being prepared to die but a total pattern of life which could eventuate in death. He stresses here that death, the completion of the sacriﬁce, can often appear to be the culmination of the humiliation preceding it (cf. 57:13). The sacriﬁce may, furthermore, not at all be recognized for what it is (cf. 45-49:13). As was indicated above (57:42), DH is not thinking sentimentally about death.

45. The ridge to the summit separates two abysses: a pleasure- tinged death wish (perhaps with an element of narcissistic masochism) and the animal fear arising out of the physical instinct for self-preservation. Only the one whose body has learned to treat itself as a means is free of dizziness.

Using mountain climbing imagery DH describes ascending a narrow ridge with the threat of falling into abysses on either side. There is both the death wish and the instinct for self-preservation that may prevent one from moving

210 | steadfastly in the direction that one’s duty deﬁnes. The body must be strictly disciplined so that one is not distracted.

46. No choice is unaﬀected by how the personality sees its destiny, the body its death. It is ﬁnally at the level of the idea of sacriﬁce that decision is made in all the questions that life asks. Therefore it requires its time and its place — if necessary with the right of precedence. Therefore the necessity for preparation. This is the last of this series of ﬁve waymarks, which all in varying ways deal with death. There is a dualism of body and personality. Both must accept death. How this fact is viewed is decisive for all the vital decisions one makes. Death must therefore be given time, place, and even precedence in one’s thinking. There must also be preparation.

47. Courage and love: equivalent and connected expressions for your bargain with life. You are willing to “pay” what your heart bids you to give. These are two interrelated responses of the sacriﬁce as an active contribution conditioned by the personality’s self-chosen annihilation in the One. “God’s union with the soul” — in its fruit a union with people who do not check themselves before complete self-giving.

This is one of three waymarks (50:50 and 56:10 are the other two) in which the two words “courage” and “love” both appear. Love, however, in 50:50 is the love of desire and does not have the same meaning it has in 56:10 and in this waymark. Here and in 56:10 love has to with a willingness to sacriﬁce oneself rather than the object of one’s desires. But to do this requires courage. From one vantage point complete self-giving is self-annihilation, from another “God’s union with the soul.” Cf. 54:7, 55:9, 56:25, 58:7.

48. Did you choose your words correctly; what impression did you make; did they think that you wanted to ingratiate yourself — and so on? Is it questions such as these that keep you awake? Have you lost the conﬁdence that your intuitive reactions lead in the right direction? If so, you know the reason: that you have permitted hunger for “justice” to make you

211 | self-conscious and to expel you from self-forgetfulness in performing the task. In this way, only in this way, can you be harmed by the opinions of the many.

DH was aware of the ambiguity related to the hunger for “justice.” His principle was “through justice — never injustice” (56:50), yet he knew that despite being right one could through an unintelligent exercise of authority be unjust and cause pain (56:37). Here he suggests that he could avoid such errors by greater conﬁdence in a self-forgetful, intuitive approach to his task. This would also have the beneﬁt of making him less concerned about the impression he was making, less vulnerable to the opinions of the many (cf. 56:39).

49. Praise your critics, those for whom nothing is up to standard.

While it is possible to be harmed by criticism (cf. 57:48), one can also beneﬁt from it. Those who are not satisﬁed even by one’s best eﬀorts deserve praise. DH has come a long way from the attitude toward criticism that he describes in 45-49:13.

50. In its play the body can learn the pattern for acting. Its pleasure can show the way to suﬀering.

DH did not have much time for play, but he recognized its value. He admired the bright self-possession of a child at play (53:18). He felt that he had learned much from a sailing expedition with his staﬀ (54:4). He calls his body a playmate and challenges it to be ready when the moment for the impossible comes (61:7). Mountain climbing, a form of play in which he did engage, did suggest for him a pattern for acting (56:5, 56:62). As for the relationship between pleasure and suﬀering, DH knows that the death wish can be pleasure-tinged (57:45). He may, however, be suggesting that the body that has experienced pleasure is better prepared, when this becomes necessary, to accept suﬀering.

51. 571222 The fool shouted in the marketplace. No one stopped to answer. In this way it was conﬁrmed that his theses were irrefutable.

212 | On December 22, the Sunday before Christmas, DH was in Sweden, having the previous Friday delivered the Presidential Address at the annual meeting of the Swedish Academy on “The Linnaeus Tradition and Our Time.” After the Academy’s meeting he ﬂew to Gaza to spend Christmas with the soldiers of the United Nations Emergency Force (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:701). This waymark indicates that DH may have been troubled by the charges of a Danish diplomat, Povl Bang-Jensen, deputy secretary of a UN committee appointed to interview Hungarian refugees. Bang-Jensen was insisting that other members of the committee had sabotaged the committee’s report. He had taken his allegations to the press and this had led to attacks on DH and other UN staﬀ by a number of anti-Communist agitators (Urquhart, 1973, 244-245). The reference to the fool shouting in the marketplace may be drawn from Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), who in The Joyful Wisdom (The Gay Science), 125, tells of a madman proclaiming in the marketplace the death of God (The Complete Works of Nietzsche, ed. Oscar Levy, vol. 10, The Joyful Wisdom, trans. Thomas Common [Edinburgh: T. N. Foulis, 1910], 167-169). Bang-Jensen’s charges were refuted. Even if they had not been refuted, it does not follow that theses that are unanswered are therefore irrefutable.

52. 571224 In your wind --. In your light --. How small is everything else, how small are we — and happy in that which alone is great.

At Christmastide in Sweden there are short days and much darkness. At Gaza on the shore of the Mediterranean, on the other hand, where DH was spending Christmas with the UNEF troops, there could have been much light as well as wind. DH explains his use of the symbols of wind and light in 56:16. He reﬂects on God’s greatness and on how good it is, despite one’s smallness, to be caught up in “that which alone is great.”

1958 The Middle East continued to claim a major part of DH’s attention in 1958, though the area of primary concern shifted from the Gaza Strip to Lebanon. At the beginning of the year Egypt and Syria merged to form the United Arab Republic. In response, the kingdoms of Jordan and Iraq federated to form the Arab Union. In Lebanon the inﬂux of Palestinian refugees had upset the Christian-Muslim balance and guerrilla activity against the pro-Western policy of President Camille Chamoun was being supported from the United Arab Republic. DH sought to deal with these problems through the United Nations Observer Group in Lebanon (UNOGIL) and negotiations with the United Arab Republic. A coup d’etat in Iraq, however, led the United States to react by sending troops to Lebanon, while Britain sent troops to Jordan. Despite diﬃculties the UNOGIL continued to function in Lebanon, a new president was elected who gave a larger role in the government to Muslims, Western fears of greatly increased Russian inﬂuence in the Middle East subsided, and negotiations resulted in the withdrawal of American and British troops from Lebanon and Jordan.

There are six dated waymarks during 1958, one noting the day that DH was inducted for his second term as Secretary-General. On three successive Sundays of October he writes a number of poems, a form in which many of the remaining waymarks are written.

1. So shall the world each morning be created anew, forgiven — in you, by you.

As at the beginning of the previous year, DH relates the beginning of the year to the beginning of a new day. Each day the world is created anew, which requires that it be forgiven. This is the sixth of eight waymarks in which there is reference to forgiveness (55:43, 56:6, 57:6, 57:9, 57:30, 60:1, 61:16). God, who is addressed in this waymark, is both the author and the locus of forgiveness. It is in God, in the creative, redemptive process which is God’s being, that forgiveness takes place.

2. 580216 “-- show the light of thy countenance; and we shall be whole.” “Believe me: to perfection belongs also this, that one so rises in one’s work that all one’s activity comes together in one work. This must happen in the kingdom of God - - -. For

214 | I tell you truly: all the works that a human being achieves outside the kingdom of God are dead works, but those accomplished in the kingdom of God are living works. - - - as little as God is deprived of peace or changed by all his works, so little is also the soul, as long as it works according to the order of God’s kingdom. These persons, therefore, whether they work or do not work, remain quite unmoved. For works give them nothing, and take nothing from them.”

As background for this dated waymark it may be noted that on February 1 Egypt and Syria announced the formation of the United Arab Republic and on February 14 Jordan and Iraq announced the formation of the Arab Union (Urquhart, 1973, 262). At the UN press conferences during the ﬁrst weeks of the year, most attention was given to the problem of disarmament. Mention was also made of a dispute that had arisen over a Tunisian blockade of French troops that had remained in Tunisia after Tunisia became independent in 1956. DH had used his good oﬃces to win agreement that there could be transport of foodstuﬀs and other supplies needed for the sustenance of the troops (Public Papers of the S-G, 4:11-23, 31-36; Urquhart, 1973, 309-310).

February 16 was the Sunday before Lent, known in the Swedish calendar as Shrove Sunday. It was DH’s custom to observe such days by citing passages from the Bible or from other authors (50:50, 56:9, 56:10, 56:57, 56:58, 57:21, 60:1, 61:4, 61:5). The ﬁrst citation is part of a refrain in Psalm 80, which psalm is a group lament, a prayer for deliverance from national enemies, probably originating in the Northern Kingdom (Israel). The refrain recurs in verses 3 and 7, as well as providing the conclusion of the psalm. It is possible that the psalm was a liturgy in which the congregation made this recurring response. The prayer that God would show the light of his countenance (let his face shine) recalls the Aaronic benediction (Num. 6:25) and is a prayer for God’s favor (cf. Ps. 31:16). In most of the versions (KJV, RSV, NEB), the prayer of the people is that they might be saved, which in the context of the psalm means that they are seeking victory, security, and freedom. In The Book of Common Prayer version, which DH cites, the prayer is to “be whole.” This concept of wholeness (Vollkommenheit, perfection), especially as it applies to the life of the individual, is the theme of the citation from Meister Eckhart (Meister Eckehart Schriften, Büttner, 315). Wholeness requires unity in one’s activity, which is achieved only in the kingdom of God. Only here are “living works” accomplished. At the same time a distinction is drawn between the soul (or

215 | the person) and the works that are performed. These works neither add nor detract. Whether they are performed or not, the person living according to the order of God’s kingdom retains his/her tranquillity.

3. “- - in the kingdom of God, - -; - - all works are there the same, my smallest is there my greatest, and my greatest is my smallest. - - in themselves works are something diverse and bring the person into diversity. Therefore with them one always ﬁnds oneself close to the boundary of disharmony.”

The theme of works in the kingdom of God continues in another citation from Meister Eckhart (Meister Eckehart Schriften, Büttner, 315). In the kingdom of God there is no way in which the size or relative value of works can be evaluated. Viewed in themselves their diversity can threaten the unity of the life lived in God. Preoccupation with works can introduce disharmony into such a life.

4. “After the ﬁreworks”; how much simpler life is, and how much more diﬃcult. How much cleaner, and how frightening.

The words “After the ﬁreworks” are in English. DH must have found the expression useful for describing situations in human relationships in which strong words have been spoken, feelings freely expressed, the pretenses that have enabled persons in fundamental disagreement to work together cast aside. This does simplify these relationships, but it can be diﬃcult to continue them.

The expression could also be used to refer to relationships between nations. DH may have been thinking of France’s bombing of Tunisia (see above 58:2). Violent actions did deﬁne more cleanly the diﬀerences between nations, but the consequences were frightening. DH deplored every resort to violence. He saw the role of the UN as blunting the edges of conﬂict among the nations and through diplomatic processes wearing away the many diﬀerences so that solutions in the common interest could be found (Public Papers of the S-G, 3:653, 658).

5. This blasphemous anthropomorphism: that it is through suﬀering that God would nurture us. How far from this the aﬃrmation of suﬀering when it strikes us because we followed what we saw to be God’s will.

216 | DH objects to facile and well meaning explanations of suﬀering. He uses strong words to condemn the notion that God uses suﬀering as part of an educative process. Suﬀering, on the other hand, can be inescapable for those who seek to do God’s will (51:29, 55:1, 61:10). Such suﬀering we should be prepared to endure, though it need not be interpreted in terms of a theodicy, as though it were all a part of God’s plan. DH would perhaps be willing to say that there are practical but not theoretical solutions to the problem of evil.

6. The morning’s pure, simple self — and the ﬁrst thing that it sees: the grotesque image in the fool’s mirror of yesterday.

This waymark recalls 50:33, though there a particular experience seems to have been described. Here DH writes in more general terms of the diﬀerence between the awaking self emerging from its encounter with the springs of life in the night’s ocean. The self possesses the potentiality for a wholly new beginning and then sees the grotesque image of its own immediate past. This image is seen in a fool’s mirror (50:43). Why is what one sees so distorted? Is it because what one recalls is so often acts of self-admiration (25-30:14, 56:60)? Perhaps what is criticized here is simply the orientation towards yesterday. What is needed is a new beginning. The bowl of our being is to be held forth empty to receive the content of the new day (57:1).

7. 580410 In that faith which is “God’s union with the soul” you are one in God and God is wholly in you, just as he for you is wholly in all that you meet. In this faith you descend in prayer into yourself in order to meet the Other. In the union’s obedience and light, you see all stand like yourself alone before God. Each deed is a continued act of creation — conscious, because you have a human being’s responsibility, but also directed by that power beyond consciousness which created man. You are free from things but meet them in an experience which has revelation’s liberating purity and disclosing activity. In that faith which is “God’s union with the soul” everything therefore has meaning. So to live, and so to use what has been put in your hand

217 | On April 10, 1958, DH was inducted for his second term as Secretary-General. This waymark recording his reﬂections on this occasion may be compared with 53:4-13, his reﬂections as he began his ﬁrst term. He continues to understand faith as unity with God, God in him, he in God (54:20, 55:8, 56:25, 57:47). He ﬁnds God present in all that he encounters (41-42:25, 55:6, 56:14), but also through prayer in profound inwardness he meets God, the Other, and with the insight his obedience gives him he sees how each individual stands alone before God. Through his deeds there is continued creation. These deeds include a conscious component in which human responsibility is exercised, but there is also transcendent direction from the power that created human beings. There is freedom in relation to event and circumstance, but also the capacity to recognize in them an unfolding divine purpose, so that everything has meaning (55:54, 56:7, 57:25). It is in terms of this awareness that DH wants to live and to use the opportunities and responsibilities that have been entrusted to him as Secretary-General.

8. Only in the human being has the creating evolution reached the point where reality confronts itself in evaluation and choice. Apart from the human being it is neither evil nor good. Only when you descend into yourself do you experience, therefore, in the encounter with the Other, goodness as the ultimate reality — uniﬁed and living, in him and through you.

DH continues in this waymark to reﬂect on God’s creating activity. It has taken place through the evolutionary process (cf. 52:7) and it is at the level of human emergence, where there is for the ﬁrst time the possibility of evaluation and choice, that one can speak of good and evil. Apart from this human capacity good and evil do not exist. The source of goodness is found through descending into oneself in order to encounter the Other (58:7). One does not simply encounter oneself. One encounters a transcendent ultimate reality, uniﬁed and living. One then lives in this reality and it in turn expresses itself through the instrumentality of one’s self (50:52, 55:31, 57:37, 59:l).

9. 580729 Did you give me this inescapable loneliness in order that I should more easily be able to give you everything? A few more years, and then? Life has value only through its content — for others. My life without value for others is worse than death. Therefore — in this

218 | great loneliness — to serve everybody. Therefore: how incomprehensibly great what has been given me, how insigniﬁcant what I “sacriﬁce.”

Hallowed be thy name, Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done --

These reﬂections are written on DH’s ﬁfty-third birthday. He asks whether the meaning of the suﬀering his loneliness imposes upon him is that he might thereby be enabled to give everything to God (50:4, 51:32, 52:18). To this extent he is willing to see a divine purpose in suﬀering (cf. 58:5). He does not know how long he may have to live, but he does know that only in service to others does his life have value (50:42, 50:52, 53:3). Since he has been given such a great opportunity for such service, what he has had to give up pales into insigniﬁcance (55:23, 57:25). He cites the ﬁrst three petitions of the Lord’s Prayer, which express and undergird his commitment.

10. When you waken from the dream of doom and — for a moment — know: beyond all the noise, beyond all the fuss, the one real thing, love’s cool, erect ﬂame in the dimness of an early dawn. It burns this body’s ﬁre to purity, elevates it in the ﬂame of self-giving, destroys its closed microcosm. Through it some have been chosen to be led to the threshold of ﬁnal victory, to the creative act of sacriﬁce instead of that of bodily union — in a thunderclap of the same dazzling power.

DH describes an awakening, this time not from encounter with the springs of life (50:33) but from the dream of doom, yet knowing in the early dawn, even if only for a moment, beyond all the confusion, the one real thing, which is love’s cool erect ﬂame. It may seem strange to speak of a cool ﬂame. DH is speaking, however, of a ﬂame that can purify the body’s ﬁre, so that the ﬁre of sexual passion is transmuted into a ﬂame of self-giving and the self ’s closed microcosm is destroyed. He goes on to compare the experience of the creative act of sacriﬁce with the experience of sexual intercourse. He suggests that the former also may have its dazzling orgasmic consummation. This is one way in which DH ﬁnds meaning in his celibacy (cf. 51:50, 52:17, 55:60). It must be remembered, however, that he also recognizes the importance of the intimacy of close personal

219 | relationships, even for the person who wants to live sacriﬁcially (cf. 56:6). He would perhaps not make the intense loneliness he experienced a prerequisite for the life of self-giving and sacriﬁce to which he felt himself called.

11. 581005 Fading beeches bright against The cloud’s darkness. The gale whips the forest mere’s Water steel gray. Between bloodstains on the ground Run tracks of deer --

The silence breaks its way through The mind’s defenses, Leaving it naked before Fall’s clarity.

The remaining entries for this year are a series of poems that appear to have been written on three successive October Sundays. In the ﬁrst poem the brightness of the beeches and the cloud’s darkness are contrasted. The gale aﬀects the color of the water, while on the ground is the crimson trail left by the badly wounded deer. In the second part of the poem the gale appears to have subsided. The silence exposes the mind to the clarity of the brightness with which the poem begins. In this and the following poems, where possible, DH’s syllable count has been followed.

12. Endlessly are the Pavanne’s patterned steps Repeated. Words without content Are dully bandied Between us

The spider webs of Forgotten intrigues Snare our hands.

Choked in its fool’s mask My mind now moulders All dried out.

220 | The pavane is a stately court dance by couples in ceremonial costume. A connection may be intended between the ﬁrst two stanzas. Conversations may be as repetitious as the movements of the dance and may serve a less useful purpose. Intrigues have consequences even after they are forgotten and their webs can be strong enough to be ensnaring. A mask should not aﬀect what is behind it, but when the mind projects a fool’s image the eﬀects can be deleterious.

13. 581012 The day slowly bleeds to death Through the long gash Where the horizon’s edge has Opened the sky. Into its emptying veins Seeps the darkness The corpse stiﬀens Enfolded by the night’s chill.

Over the dead one are lit The silent stars.

October 12 was the ﬁfth anniversary of the death of DH’s father, Hjalmar Hammarskjöld (1862-1953). He had died in the late afternoon as the sun was beginning to set. In the poem the imagery of dying is used to describe nightfall. The fading of the crimson sky is likened to the onset of death, the chill of the night to the cold corpse, the stars to candles lit at a wake. For other waymarks referring to DH’s father, see 50:39, 51:7, 59:28, 59:35.

14. Lord — yours is the day, … I am the day’s.

DH does not continue to reﬂect about the night. Instead two lines stress the importance of the day. It belongs to God and DH states that he belongs to the day. The couplet leads one to think of 1 Thessalonians 5:5 RSV, “For you are all sons of light and sons of the day; we are not of the night or of darkness.”

15. “Single Form”

The falling ground swell, the Muscle when it stretches Obey the same law.

221 | The line’s light curve gathers The body’s play of strength In a bold balance.

Shall my mind at last ﬁnd This austere curvature On its way to form?

DH has given this poem a title to indicate that it is written about a piece of sculpture called “Single Form” by the British sculptor Barbara Hepworth. He borrowed this piece, a pure wooden column, from her 1956 New York exhibition and placed it in his oﬃce. He retained contact with her and received in 1961 a wooden abstract sculpture, “Churinga III,” which she had made specially for him. He expressed deep appreciation for it and had it installed in his oﬃce. After DH’s death Barbara Hepworth executed, as a memorial to DH, the great abstract sculpture “Single Form,” which stands at the entrance to the Secretariat Building at the UN Headquarters (Urquhart, 1973, 43).

There is one law throughout nature, which includes the human body. A slightly curved line can show how in the body forces are balanced. The mind, which must seek to be formed, can be guided by the form that is discovered in the body.

16. 581019 Too tired for people … You seek solitude, … Though too tired to use it.

On the third Sunday in October DH confesses his weariness. Too weary for fellowship with others, he ﬁnds himself also too weary to use fruitfully the solitude he has sought. He had great capacity for work, little need for sleep, and did not often complain of weariness. The burden of the oﬃce must, however, have become greater in the ﬁnal years (cf. 56:5, 61:12).

17. Wall of strength In attack, Wave of light In repose, Blown apart, Falling back From the lip’s Bleached pale shore In froth, foam — 1958

222 | This poem is about breakers on the seashore. The ﬁrst four lines contrast the attacking strength with the light reﬂected in the water when the wave has spent itself. The last ﬁve lines describe the process by which the wave disintegrates, remaining only as froth and foam on the sea’s sandy lip.

1959 During 1959 DH made two world tours visiting ten Asian countries in March and embarking on a trip to Africa in late December. He considered it important to be personally acquainted if at all possible with the leaders of nations who might have reason to turn to the UN for assistance. Such a request came in 1959 from Laos. This country found it diﬃcult to achieve unity since its southern lowlands were oriented toward Thailand and the West and its northern highlands had ties with the pro-Communist North Vietnamese. When the right-wing Laotian government sought help from the UN to counter what was claimed to be Communist guerrilla activity, DH exerted all his eﬀorts to prevent this crisis from becoming another skirmish in the cold war. While a UN subcommittee was sent to Laos despite Soviet objections to investigate the situation, DH placed more emphasis upon stationing a personal representative in Vientiane, the Laotian capital. A coup d’etat at the end of the year and the emergence of a military regime in Laos diminished the possibility of a successful resolution of the tensions in Laos through the agency of the UN, though negotiations continued through 1960.

DH wrote only ﬁve prose waymarks in 1959, but there are one hundred eleven waymarks written in the poetic “haiku” form. Titles for sections of these haiku identify them with his early years in Uppsala, summers in Sweden, and the site of his country house at Brewster, New York, in the Hudson river valley. A group of haiku (59:63-70) recall also his trips to Asia and Africa. At Eastertide he was at Katmandu, Nepal, and he spent Christmas in Guinea, West Africa.

1. 590208 “But lo, thou requirest truth in the inward parts. and shall make me understand wisdom secretly.. In “faith” — a constant, living contact with everything. “Before God” the soul is therefore in reality.

The ﬁrst entry for 1959 has the date of the Sunday before Lent (Shrove Sunday, cf. 58:2). DH quotes from a penitential psalm, a prayer for healing and moral renewal (Ps. 51:6). There is parallelism in the two strophes of the verse, both stressing the importance of a person’s inner life. In the NRSV the verse reads: “You desire truth in the inward being; therefore teach me wisdom in my secret heart.” DH has repeatedly stressed the decisive signiﬁcance of the inner encounter with God. There is parallelism also in DH’s comment. Faith and being “before” God are equivalent (cf. 55:7 and 56:1). DH now wants to stress

224 | that one is at the same time thereby in contact with all things. To be before God and in God is to be in reality. This is the truth and the wisdom that is required, but also given in faith. “Reality” is a term DH often uses. Cf. 55:31, 55:65, 56:21, 56:63, 58:8, 59:101, 59:106.

2. — conscious of the reality of evil, the tragedy of the life of the individual, and the demand for “dignity” in the shaping of one’s life.

The dashes that introduce this waymark suggest that it is a continuation of the reﬂection in the previous waymark. Before God the soul is in reality, but conscious also of the reality of evil and of the tragedy that does befall many individuals. Nonetheless life is to be ordered with dignity. By dignity here is meant elevation of character, intrinsic worth, excellence, not simply the appearance of these virtues. Cf. 55:14.

3. 590209 That which distinguishes “the elite” from the masses is only an insistence on “quality”. And this with a sense of responsibility to all for all and to the past for the future, which reﬂects a humble and spontaneous integration in life — in its inﬁnite vistas and its never recurring present.

The reference to “dignity” in the previous waymark leads to reﬂection the following day on what it means to belong to those who are socially superior. It means to insist on quality and to do so with a sense of responsibility. There must be responsibility to and for the total human population, with concern for both the values of the past and the hopes of the future. Those who are in this sense “the elite” are at the same time conservatives and futurists. They are aware of inﬁnite vistas and of the need for making the most of the present moment. The ordering of life they achieve is not labored, but it is marked by humility.

4. 590729 Humility is just as much the opposite of self- abasement as it is of self-exaltation. Humility is not to make comparisons. Resting in its reality the self is neither better nor worse, neither larger nor smaller, than something or someone else. It is — nothing, but simultaneously one with everything. In this sense humility is total self-eﬀacement.

225 | To be nothing in humility’s self-eﬀacement, and yet, by virtue of the task, embody all its weight and authority, is the deportment of the one who is called. Before people, works, poetry, and art, to give what the self is able to contribute, and to receive, simply and freely, what is its due by virtue of its inner identity. Praise and blame, the winds of success and adversity, blow over this life leaving no trace and without disturbing its balance. To this may the Lord help me --

Months have passed and the next entry is written on DH’s 54th birthday. He picks up the reference to “a humble and spontaneous integration of life” in the previous waymark and reﬂects on the meaning of humility. Humility is a virtue that he seeks to exemplify, but its meaning is easily misunderstood. The key to its understanding is to recognize that humility does not call for making comparisons with anyone or anything else. In early waymarks (25-30:8,9,12) DH has insisted that each person is to be himself/herself and should be judged in terms of his/ her abilities and potentialities. This self-realization is also paradoxically total self-eﬀacement. The self resting in its reality and thus also in living contact with all reality (59:1) is by itself nothing. It exists only in its unity with everything . Humility is the willingness to accept the combination of being nothing and yet one with all things. This self-eﬀacement does not, however, call for self- abasement in relation to others. The weight and authority of the task to which one has been called must be embodied. Similarly one gives and receives culturally as one is able to do so, simply and freely, expressing one’s own inner identity. The one who lives in this way is indiﬀerent to praise or blame, success or adversity. For other references to humility, see 53:13; 53:22, 54:2.

5. 590804 Simplicity is to experience reality not in relation to ourselves but in its holy independence. Simplicity is to see, judge, and act from that point in which we rest in ourselves. How much does not then fall away. And how does not everything else fall into place! Resting in our being’s center we encounter a world where everything in the same way rests in itself. Thereby the tree becomes a mystery, the cloud a revelation, the human being a cosmos, the riches of which we grasp only in glimpses. For the simple one, life is simple, but opens a book in which we never get beyond the ﬁrst syllable.

226 | About a week later in another dated waymark DH reﬂects on the meaning of simplicity, a term which for him has positive implications (cf. 25-30:l, 53:20, 58:6). He has just written of the self giving and receiving “simply and freely, what is its due by virtue of its inner identity” (59:4). Simplicity has to do with how “reality” is experienced. In the previous waymarks “reality” has had a number of meanings, the reality which is God (59:1), the reality of evil (59:2), the reality of the self (59:4). In this waymark it is the reality of the natural and human world that is experienced. Humility has to do with how one views oneself, simplicity with how one views other persons and things. One is not preoccupied with their relation to oneself but grants them their “holy independence.” It is from this perspective that one sees, judges, and acts. This implies that one rests also in one’s own being’s center. Aulén commenting on this waymark points out that this does not mean self-centeredness but its exact opposite (Aulén, E 68; Sw 105). DH goes on to point out what this means for our understanding of nature and other human beings. We begin to recognize a richness of being, a richness that we are never able to exhaust.

The ﬁrst ﬁve waymarks for 1959, though written in February, July, and August, are a connected chain knit together by the key-words reality, dignity, quality, humility, and simplicity. Together they form an extended meditation on the implications of faith, which is the life before and in God, for culture. In the poems that follow DH will share glimpses of the riches he has experienced.

6. 590804 Seventeen syllables Opened the door To memory, its meaning.

This waymark has the same date as the previous waymark. Here also a key- word relates these two waymarks. DH has said that in the book of life “we never get beyond the ﬁrst syllable.” He now introduces a series of poems, all of which are written in seventeen syllables. This is a Japanese poetic form called “haiku” consisting of three lines, the ﬁrst and third having ﬁve syllables and the second line having seven, a form of poetry especially practiced by Japanese Zen Buddhists. As UN Secretary-General DH traveled widely in Asia and he became increasingly interested in the thought and art forms of the East (cf. 56:30, 56:32, 57:l, 57:37, 57:41). He never had occasion, however, to visit Japan. Among his books was An Introduction to Haiku, An Anthology of Poems and Poets from Basho to Shiki, by Harold G. Henderson (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1958). DH has in the following poems followed the rule of writing three lines limited to seventeen syllables. He has not, however, sought to

227 | follow the ﬁve-seven-ﬁve rule for the number of syllables in each of the lines. A characteristic of the haiku poetic form is the inclusion of some word or expression that indicates the time of year (Henderson, 5). DH has observed this rule in many of the following haiku.

• From Uppsala 7. 590807 Red March evenings.. Death notices. Begin anew --. What has ended?

The ﬁrst group of haiku recall Uppsala, the city of DH’s youth. Related to these poems is the last article DH wrote during the summer of 1961, “Slottsbacken” (Castle Hill, Svenska turistföreningens årsskrift 196. [Stockholm: Svenska turistföreningens förlag, 1962], 9-16) in which he describes the changing scene through the months of a year in Uppsala.

In the summer of 1959 DH had some days of vacation, ﬁrst in Sweden and then at his country home at Brewster, New York. The date, Friday, August 7, the beginning of a weekend, very likely indicates when he began to write these poems. This haiku speaks of the end of days and the end of lives. There is also a summons to a new beginning as well as a query as to what ending that summons implies.

8. Plain night. Deserted hall. The woman in the window niche Awaits dawn.

There is an area adjoining Uppsala known as the Uppsala plain, to which ther. are references also in 59:13, 59:15, and 59:16. The Uppsala Castle, built in the sixteenth century in Swedish Gothic style by the Vasas, in which DH lived with his parents while in Uppsala (see the introduction to 1925-1930) is situated so that on one side of the castle one can look out over the city of Uppsala, whereas on the other side one looks out on the Uppsala plain. In “Slottsbacken” DH states that Queen Kristina had an apartment in the castle and mentions the castle’s high window niches . He wonders what the queen thought of “in the large, empty halls when the plain lay in darkness and rain beat against the windows. A charwoman cleaning oﬃces in the building tells of one night with some surprise encountering her (“Slottsbacken,” 11-12).

228 | 9. Cockchafers. Whitebeam ﬂowers. The lilacs conversing After bedtime.

The cockchafer is a large European scarab-like beetle (Melolontha melontha) destructive to vegetation. The whitebeam is an European ornamental tree (Sorbus aria or Pyrus aria) having leaves with white hairy undersurfaces, ﬂat-topped clusters of white ﬂowers, and red fruits. In “Slottsbacken” (9) DH writes, “Around the whitebeams on the Green Mound swarm the cockchafers.” DH’s interest in the various branches of biology is evident in several of the haiku. In 57:51 it was noted that he chose as the topic for his presidential address at the annual meeting of the Swedish Academy “The Linnaeus Tradition and Our Time.”

10. The trees sway. Silence. A drop furrows hesitantly The pane’s darkness.

There is rhythmic movement in the trees but not enough wind to break the silence. As one looks through the window into the darkness one sees a drop of water slowly descending.

11. The lamp’s light cone in the haze. Winter moth’s play Around the shiny post.

Winter moths are any of several geometrid moths (as Operaphtera brumata or Erannis tiliaria) in which the females are often wingless. They are extremely destructive to vegetation. See “Slottsbacken,” 12.

12. Gray snowbanks. Warm horse dung. Farmyards rouse themselves Surly in the morning.

Farmers begin to clean the barn somewhat glumly on an early winter morning.

13. 590809 The plain’s horizon And the perpendicular wall Cross like fate lines.

229 | The date is a Sunday, two days later than that indicated for 59:7. The next dated haiku is 59:81 and the date about a month later. In this haiku a wall standing out against the Uppsala plain’s horizon suggests the practice of telling fortunes by reading the lines of the palm, known as palmistry or chiromancy The main lines are: the life line, which encircles the base of the thumb; the head line and the heart line (nearest the base of the ﬁngers) which lie across the palm; and the fate line from the wrist to the second ﬁnger, which crosses the other lines. Since fortunes are read from these lines, all of them may be called fate lines.

14. Swollen streams ‘neath Easter skies. Evening. On the table sweet violets.

No blossom ﬁgures more prominently in European literature than the English, March, or Sweet Violet (Viola odorata). Spring is strongly indicated.

15. This stone age night The church spire on the plain Erect like a phallus.

In stone age fertility cults, monuments were set up as phallic symbols. Ironically, church spires on the rural plain can suggest this bygone practice.

16. The sky opened in the East. Blue sacriﬁcial smokes Rising on the plain.

The recurring reference to the plain suggests the same theme as in the previous haiku. Smoke rises from farm homes like smoke from ancient morning sacriﬁces.

17. Boy in the forest. Throwing oﬀ his Sunday outﬁt He plays naked.

A young boy in the forest on a warm summer day returns to nature.

18. The fountain plays. Among white peonies The digger wasp is hunting.

230 | The digger wasp (any of numerous wasps of the family Specidae) excavates a nest in soil or wood, which it provides with prey paralyzed by stinging.

19. Black falling stars. The swallows’ shrill cries As meeting they mate in midair.

Swallows eat insect food, drink from water surfaces, and mate while on the wing. Their feet are small and weak from disuse.

20. In the naked poplar This tune whose melody Burst forth in the air.

Birdsong heralds spring before leaves have begun to appear.

21. The Easter lily’s dew-drenched calyx. The drop pauses Twixt earth and sky.

The calyx is the outermost whorl of the typical ﬂower formed by the sepals, which are usually green. The calyx of the Easter lily suggests the chalice Jesus used according to the Latin Vulgate version’s accounts of the Last Supper. The drop about to fall from this calyx can be viewed as a sacrament in nature. Cf. 51:57.

22. New leaves at sunset, After May rain. A tergiversant fall to sin.

A Swedish spring can suggest the Garden of Eden, but one can incur guilt if enjoyment of spring leads to evasion of duties. Cf. 56:27.

23. Catchﬂy, brier --. The hedgehog walked his beat Around the sleeping castle.

The ﬂytrap and the greenbrier are both carrion ﬂowers. The hedgehog is also insectivorous. In “Slottsbacken” (9) DH states that the hedgehogs active during the night are also lovesick.

231 | 24. The stone quarry’s dead pools. In scrubby heather The peacock moth ﬂutters.

The peacock moth, also known as the emperor moth, is of the family Saturniidae. Despite its beauty it is found in drab surroundings.

25. In the castle’s shadow The ﬂowers’ petals closed Long before evening.

The Uppsala Castle is so massive that evening comes somewhat earlier on its east side.

26. The castle windows saw them. In gray blowing snow Charles the Twelfth was ﬁlmed.

Charles XII (1682-1718) was king of Sweden 1697-1718. He invaded Russia, was disastrously defeated and had to spend ﬁve years in exile in Turkey. He was killed while besieging a fortress in Norway. His imperial plans were the ruin of his country. DH refers to the manner of his coronation in 51:15.

27. Smell of bread. Plain language. The light faded In the snow’s whirling ashes.

As in the previous haiku there is blowing snow. Here it provides the context for everyday conversation near a bakery on a late winter afternoon.

28. More than years separate them That evening stroll On the empty street.

In a letter to a friend DH stated that he had experienced perpetual conﬂict with his dominating father whom he felt was deeply unlike himself and whose pressure he resented (Van Dusen, 15). This haiku may recall diﬃculties they had understanding each other. Forty-three years separated them. For other references to DH’s father, see 50:39, 51:7, 58:13, 59:35.

232 | 29. During the New Year’s night The shadows of black elms Protected the graves.

DH’s parents lie buried in the Uppsala cemetery, where DH is also buried in the family plot. Note the series of New Year’s waymarks (50:1, 51:1, 52:1, 53:1, 54:1, 57:1) in which the words “Soon night approaches” from the hymn DH’s mother used to read on New Year’s Day are cited.

30. Ten years maturing. Ten years of waiting. Soon: twenty years in the earth.

DH could be recalling visiting the grave of his brother, Åke, whose career as general secretary of the Permanent Court of International Justice at The Hague was cut short by his early death in 1937.

31. Arzareth’s morning light Long spring evenings Which sought for their own meaning.

Arzareth (a Hebrew name that means “another land”) is mentioned in the explanation in 2 Esdras 13:45 of the vision of the coming of the Messiah (“Through that region there was a long way to go, a journey of a year and a half; and that country is called Arzareth” RSV). It is said that the ten northern tribes were wondrously brought to this country, from whence they will return in the last times. In Deut. 29:28 (“The LORD uprooted them from their land in anger, fury, and great wrath, and cast them into another land, as is now the case”), which passage purports to be from a sermon by Moses foretelling the future but which was quite likely written during the period of the exile, those being brought into “another land” are being punished. DH, however, is thinking of the hope the 2 Esdras reference suggests.

32. He lowered his eyes So as not to see the body And desire it.

DH recalls how on one occasion he coped with sexual desire. Cf. 50:21, 51:50, 59:100.

233 | 33. My home sent me out To deserted spaces. Few seek me. Few hear me.

This and several of the following haiku express loneliness that DH may have begun to feel at an early age. He is neither sought, nor, insofar as he calls, heard. For other references to loneliness, see 25-30:13, 50:4, 51:32, 52:16, 52:18, 52:19, 52:24, 55:46, 58:9.

34. Denied the sought one, He longed himself to deserve To be the one sought.

An early unsuccessful attempt at friendship leads DH to strive to be the one whom others court. Cf. 50:20, 59:40.

35. The box on the ear taught the boy His father’s name Was hateful to them.

From 1914-1917 during World War I, DH’s father, Hjalmar Hammarskjöld, was prime minister of Sweden. His administration was unpopular and he found it necessary to resign, returning to his position in Uppsala as governor of the province of Uppland. During the period the Hammarskjöld family lived in Stockholm, DH must have experienced some of the public antipathy against his father.

36. He fell in the somersault. All could laugh At one who was so timid.

It is recalled that DH was proﬁcient in gymnastics (Van Dusen, 24). He may have observed another boy being ridiculed for failing to execute a somersault due to an all too timid approach. Cf. 55:47, 59:91.

37. His moral lecture Fumed with hate. What could have driven a child that far?

234 | A child expresses extreme moral indignation. DH suggests that the aversion expressed was not wholly righteous and wonders how a child could be driven to hate to this extent.

38. They laid the blame on him. He did not feel to blame But he confessed it.

Just as a child can be driven to condemn unduly, he can also be driven to confess an oﬀense that was not his own.

39. He was not wanted. When he nonetheless came He could but watch them play.

This and the following haiku could be a remembrance of DH’s loneliness as a child. Cf. 59:34.

40. School was over. The yard empty. Those he was seeking Had found new friends.

A child being educated privately comes to the public schoolyard, but those with whom he had hoped to play have found other friends.

41. Caprifolium. In the gray twilight He awakened to his sex.

Due to the abiding inﬂuence of Linnaeus, botany is an important subject in Swedish secondary education (cf. 59:9). The caprifolium is a plant of the family Caprifoliaceae (as the honeysuckle or the woodbine). DH may have learned about his own sexuality from studying this ﬂower or he may recall an incident he associated with this ﬂower.

42. By the lilac hedge Free from “duties” She found again the land of youth.

235 | The reference could be to DH’s mother, to whom DH was deeply devoted. She was nearly forty when he was born. He may have felt as a child that she was much occupied with “duties,” but if so he may be recalling how on one occasion by the lilac hedge she joined him in the land of youth. For other references to DH’s mother, see 56:2, 57:5, 59:44.

43. Winter twilight darkens Beyond the window pane. The caged bird’s breast bleeds.

There are only a few hours of winter daylight in Sweden. The stress of long period of darkness and being caged could lead a bird to self-destructive behavior.

44. The parcels fell in slush But she smiled away fear After the mishap.

One can imagine DH dropping into slush parcels he was carrying for his mother and being deeply grateful for the smile with which she removed his dismay. Cf. 59:42.

45. Spring-clear morning light Wakened the butterﬂy cotillions To new life.

Butterﬂies emerge from their cocoons to new life in the spring and their graceful ﬂight is likened to an elaborate formal dance.

46. You will never return. Another man Will ﬁnd another city.

DH is aware that he cannot go home again to Uppsala, nor will he be the same person that he once was as his life destiny leads him even to new shores.

236 | • Summers 47. Crowberry tickles the neck. Above the azure depths Floats a buzzard.

The haiku 47-62 are entitled “Summer.” DH is recalling his memories of summers in Sweden. He was an active member of the Swedish Tourist Association and had a keen appreciation of Sweden’s natural beauty. The crowberry (Empetrum nigrum) is a small low growing shrub of arctic and alpine regions. DH is lying looking up into the sky and sees a ﬂoating buzzard, from whose vantage point what lies below must be like a deep azure sea.

48. Gray lichens. Red berries. Strokes upon the shore’s harpstring. Hush — the loon sleeps.

The setting is a lakeshore on which waves are beating as though a harpstring were being plucked. There is lichen on the rocks and the red berries may be lingonberries. The loon, skillful in diving for ﬁsh, is resting.

49. He found a new ranunculus. Saw no more than we, But went further.

Ranunculus is a large and widely distributed genus of herbs, including buttercups, which have mostly yellow ﬂowers with ﬁve petals and ﬁve sepals. The new ranunculus was found not because the ﬁnder was more observant, but because he made a greater eﬀort and went further.

50. Fragrance of linden trees. Dusk. We dreamed about ﬁnding The death’s-head moth.

Linden trees have fragrant blossoms. The death’s-head moth is a very large European hawkmoth (Acherontia atropis) with markings resembling a human skull on the back of the thorax.

237 | 51. The humus under the alder trees Hid from us The orchid’s secrets.

The alder (Alnus) is a tree of the birch family that grows in the wet soils of Europe. By the orchid’s secrets may be meant the symbiotic relationship between a mycorrhiza fungus and the roots of the orchid, enabling it to grow.

52. In an oak copse a stone slab For oﬀering men To appease the sea wind.

While there is evidence that there was human sacriﬁce in ancient Sweden, few details are known about this practice. A large ﬂat stone near the sea could have been used for such a purpose. The god of the sea, according to the Edda, was Njörd. DH frequently refers to sacriﬁce. Cf. 55:29 and 61:6.

53. West cuckoo, the best cuckoo. Her husband was dead And the two cows sold.

A Swedish rhyme derives omens from the call of the cuckoo, depending on the direction from which the cuckoo is heard. In Swedish, as in English, “west” and “best” rhyme. The complete rhyme from which the ﬁrst line of this haiku is cited is: “North cuckoo, good cuckoo; south cuckoo, death cuckoo; east cuckoo, consoling cuckoo; west cuckoo, best cuckoo.” The farmer’s widow has experienced some of what the earlier portions of the rhyme refer to as well.

54. The northern warbler’s ﬁrst trill Over the pale ice ﬁelds Thaws the heavens.

European warblers of the family Sylviidae are noted songsters, in contrast to the cuckoo. When this migratory bird is ﬁrst heard in the spring in Lapland, the heavens begin to be freed from the icy grasp of winter.

55. White glacier crowsfoot, Alone among the rocks. Frost where the shadow falls.

238 | The white glacier crowfoot also belongs to the genus Ranunculus (cf. 59:49). It blooms in the mountains of Lapland before the frost is wholly gone.

56. The window’s glow faded away, The gate closed: Lark song, wings’ quivering --

The window’s glow may have been due to either the rising or the setting sun. Since the lark sings as it ﬂies, quivering wings can be associated with its song.

57. Orient of pilgrimage years By the dark river Under the lindens.

DH alludes to a collection of poems by Verner von Heidenstam (1859-1940, cf. 45-49:2) entitled Vallfart och vandrings år (Years of Pilgrimage and Wandering, l888; Samlade verk, vol. 1, [Stockholm: Bonniers, 1943]), the ﬁrst section of which was entitled “Memories and Myths from the Orient.” Heidenstam received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1916.

58. Clattering steps on the wharf. Glitter. Gull cries. A new day born guiltless.

Another waymark about gulls is 45-49:11. In that waymark DH walking along a Stockholm quay views a gull as a shameless, well-fed bird of carrion, but also recalls gulls in another context, their shrill cries, his awakening to a new day. This haiku expresses this latter recollection.

59. Midge dance. Blast furnace smoke. Viper asleep Near the wild strawberry patch.

There are in Sweden ironworks in the countryside, using charcoal for the smelting of iron. This is why midges, vipers (Vipera berus), and wild strawberries can coexist with a blast furnace (cf. 59:61).

60. Thunder muted rooms. The river’s roar round the isle Where he sought tansies. 1959

239 | Ironworks were often located near rivers in the forest regions of middle Sweden. The tansy (Tanacetum vulgare) has small, round, yellow ﬂowers, a strong aromatic odor, and its leaves have a very bitter taste. Tansy tea was thought to cure all ills. The herb’s Latin name is derived from the Greek word athanasia, meaning immortality.

61. When lightning struck Ironmasters stepped down From their portraits’ shadowed land.

In the manor house of a rural ironworks portraits of several generations of ironmasters are hung. For a moment lightning makes these portraits fully visible.

62. Steep Swedish hills. Before the coachman Tugged the horse cruppers sweaty.

DH recalls riding in a carriage up steep hills that made the horses become sweaty. It appeared as though the hindquarters were doing all the work.

• Far away 63. Like glittering sunbeams The ﬂute notes reach the gods In the birth grotto.

The haiku 63-70 are entitled “Far Away.” On a trip to Katmandu, Nepal, in March, l959, DH visited the birth site of Gautama Siddhartha, known as the Buddha, which is in Kapilavastu in NE India on the frontier between Nepal and Sikkim.

64. Himalaya’s icy cliﬀs Beyond the hills In Easter’s Vézelay.

While in Katmandu DH was able to arrange a ﬂight into the Himalayas to view and photograph Mt. Everest and other surrounding peaks. He wrote a report of his visit to Katmandu and this ﬂight in “A New Look at Everest,” The National Geographic, 119 ( January 1961), 86-93. The evening before making this ﬂight he visited the Buddhist shrine of Swayambhunath outside the city of Katmandu.

240 | Since the mountains are holy to the people of Nepal as the abode of the gods, DH felt it appropriate that they be approached in the spirit prompted by the visit to the shrine. He writes of that visit. “The air had the freshness of a spring night at Easter time in Burgundy. The association may seem farfetched, but the hills around led my thoughts to the land about Vézelay, where a shrine rises in the same way as a goal of pilgrimage” (89). Vézelay, about l40 miles southeast of Paris in the former duchy of Burgundy, is a village built around the historic basilica of St. Mary Magdalene, where what are said to be relics of this saint are preserved. From the time that the basilica was dedicated in the beginning of the 12th century it became an important pilgrimage center, though the inﬂux of pilgrims has dwindled in recent years.Large numbers of people come, however, for July 22, the feast day of St. Mary Magdalene. DH had visited Vézelay when in 1948 he worked in Paris for the Organization for European Economic Cooperation. Apropos the reference to Easter, it should be noted that in 1959 the date of Easter was March 29.

65. Monkeys. The moon woke them — Round the earth’s navel Turned the ladder’s prayer wheels.

When DH and those guiding him visited at night the shrine of Swayambhunath, monkeys were awakened and chattering gathered around them. DH states that two Tibetan monks in high boots walked around the stupa, turning the prayer wheels as they passed. Buddhist stupas are cone shaped mounds of varying sizes, sometimes having an earthen core, sometimes containing a temple or a chamber for sacred relics within its mass. They are decorated with images of the Buddha. Some stupas are burial sites, containing the ashes of religious leaders. Others commemorate places where the Buddha supposedly halted in his journeys. The stupa shape suggests to DH the myth of the earth’s navel. The idea that certain holy places are the navel (center) of the earth is widespread. Jerusalem is so regarded in Ezekiel 5:5 and 38:12.

66. Rest place. Charcoal ﬁres are lit — Submerged in the mirror pool Vishnu rests.

Another evening while in Katmandu, DH visited a site called the Twenty- two Fountains. Cold waters of a mountain stream burst forth through many openings from a long stone ramp. A small square pond built of stone lies beside

241 | the ramp. Resting in the pond lies a statue of the sleeping Vishnu, submerged so that only the upper parts of the body break the surface of the water. The charcoal ﬁres, to which DH refers, were at a nearby rest site where pilgrims on their way to the Swayambhunath shrine were preparing food. DH felt that the sleeping Hindu god and the Buddhist monks at the Swayambhunath shrine “crystallized two of the great spiritual currents that have grown out of the meeting between man and the mountains” (“A New Look at Everest,” 92).

67. With trumpet fanfare The Christmas night mass’s sacriﬁce Was announced.

On a ﬁve-week tour of Africa beginning December 22, 1959, DH spent Christmas in Guinea. The haikus 67-70 reﬂect on this experience. In this haiku he may be suggesting that a triumphalist interpretation of Jesus’ death is somewhat inappropriate. Cf. 57:44 and 60:3.

68. Sounds of soughing palms and beating waves Joined the hymns from the land of snow.

Guinea is near the equator and even the Holy Land enjoys a Mediterranean climate. Many Christmas hymns, however, were written in northern lands and presuppose snow and ice in the bleak midwinter.

69. The bodies’ orgasms In the warm summer night’s Flickering thunderbolts.

In 58:10 DH also relates sexual orgasm to the discharge of lightning and accompanying thunder. Here it would appear that it was lightning that made this behavior visible.

70. With the thrill of desire The sun drenched body sank In the swell’s saltness.

There is the suggestion of sublimation in this haiku. Enjoying the sun and the freshness of the ocean was sensual gratiﬁcation that DH could fully experience. Cf. 51:50, 55:60.

242 | • Hudson Valley 71. Moonlight on this path A warm autumn evening --. Far away a heart stops.

DH had a country home near Brewster, New York, in the Hudson Valley (see Beskow, 108-116). Some or all of the following haikus may have been written there. In this haiku, life at Brewster, pleasant on a warm moonlit autumn evening, is contrasted with death far away. DH could have been thinking of Laos or the Middle East.

72. A balcony in the forest: A thousand bow-strokes, Short light signals.

In this haiku DH may be contrasting his weekend home, where someone could have played a violin, with scenes from a novel by Julien Gracq, Un balcon en forêt (1958, Balcony in the Forest [New York: George Braziller, 1959]). The setting of the novel is the beginning of World War II. A French lieutenant has been assigned to command an isolated blockhouse overlooking a road in the middle of the forest near the Belgian border and the Meuse River. There is no action during the winter, but during a night in late spring light signals are ﬁnally seen heralding the long anticipated attack.

73. April snow. The cardinal sought refuge In the white forsythia.

This haiku is a study in red and white. There is the unexpected late white April snow from which the cardinal seeks refuge in the white forsythia. Forsythia is an ornamental shrub named after the British botanist, William Forsyth (d. l804). Its ﬂowers, which are usually yellow, appear before the leaves in early spring.

74. The car ripped open the belly, But it was silent When borne aside.

243 | One of DH’s Swedish friends recalls that he and DH witnessed this accident while walking near DH’s country home in Brewster (Van Dusen, 164).

75. The trees rustle in the wind. Sails out on foggy seas Beyond earshot.

On land the rustling trees can be both seen and heard, while on sea fog hides the sails from sight and they are too distant for any sound to be heard.

76. She came out of the birdhouse At my whistle. But turned disappointed.

DH could apparently achieve an eﬀective birdcall, but the bird having seen who was calling turned away.

77. Your body, your mind — Only entrusted goods For a baton bearer.

DH does not identify himself with either his body or his mind. He is a baton bearer running a lap in a relay race and his body and mind have been entrusted to him so that he might run his part of the race most eﬀectively. Cf. 61:7.

78. When he saw them all ﬂee The skunk concluded He was king of the beasts.

One can be left alone, not only due to fear and respect but also by reason of disgust and aversion. One should be able to tell the diﬀerence between these two kinds of reactions in others.

79. On the parlor table The book became dusty And the text was lost.

A book can be honored by being given a favored place, but if the dust on the book indicates it is never read, the message it contains is eﬀectively lost.

244 | 80. When the gods play They seek a string That has not been touched by human hands.

This is another way of expressing the total demand of religious commitment. DH speaks of “gods” playing on a human instrument. Whatever the religion, the claims made are exclusive and absolute.

81. 59091 May I be oﬀered To what ﬂed not the oﬀering In the oﬀered one.

September 13 was a Sunday. During the previous week DH had been involved in what were to him frustrating maneuvers in the Security Council between a Western majority and the Soviet Union over the situation in Laos (Urquhart, 1973, 340-346). DH writes about Jesus and prays that he might be oﬀered to the same commitment that in Jesus led him to be willing to go the way of the cross. Hjalmar Sundén suggests that this haiku completes the ﬁnal “May I --” of 54:13 (Sundén, 69-70). To follow Jesus is to share Jesus’ willingness to be sacriﬁced. Cf. 50:46, 54:5, 55:23.

82. God took human form In the oﬀered one When he chose to be oﬀered.

This is a statement about the incarnation. DH is saying that the decisive moment in which the divine took human form was when Jesus chose to be sacriﬁced, so that the will of God could be done. It follows that the incarnation continues as the will of God is done through human lives, and especially so when there is repetition of Jesus’ choice to go the way of sacriﬁce. Cf. 45-49:13, 51:29.

83. Denied any outlet Heat metamorphosed The coal into diamonds.

Diamonds are formed as under extreme heat carbon crystallizes to form the hardest substance known. DH is suggesting that the heat and pressure of circumstance can have a comparable eﬀect on a human life.

245 | 84. Beauty. Goodness. In the wonder’s here and now Suddenly became real.

DH does not want to base faith upon wonders (56:63), but he does not deny that wonders occur. His very existence can be regarded as a wonder (55:38). The awareness to which this haiku refers may be similar to the one described in 55:54.

85. Since he knew not the question He found it easy To give the answer.

The questions DH wrestled with were. Does life have a meaning? (56:21) How do you make use of the opportunities you receive? (57:38) Do you create. Do you destroy. (59:86) Those not clearly understanding the questions life asks (57:46) might think them easy to answer.

86. Do you create? Do you destroy? These are the questions For your ordeal.

The word used for “ordeal” (järnbörd) means holding a piece of glowing iron in order to establish one’s innocence. DH was constantly examining himself (e.g., 50:33, 55:8, 55:27). Aware that the alternatives were to create or destroy (55:40), he recognized destructive urges in himself (55:28, 56:26, 57:6). At the same time he had a strong sense of how through faith one could become linked with and expressive of the creating will active in the world (41-42:25, 56:63, 58:7-9).

87. The cicadas shrieked, The air glowed a ﬁery red Their last evening.

The cicadas (Cicadidae) are insects the larger portion of whose life span is spent in the nymph stage. Adult males have drums on the sides of the abdomen, with which sounds thought to be sexual calls can be made and heard for long distances. They appear at harvest time and the ﬁery air may refer to the heat as well as the rays of the setting sun.

246 | 88. Nebulae of starlings Whirling by In the cold regions of space.

DH makes frequent references to birds (cf. 51:33, 51:44, 51:57, 59:19, 59:54, 59:56, 59:58). The starling (Sturnus vulgaris) is a gregarious European bird introduced into the United States in l890 and now very common in some parts of the East. It gathers in enormous ﬂocks in the autumn and such a ﬂock on the wing is a memorable sight, the simultaneous turns of the birds in the air being very remarkable.

89. Trees, waters, the moon’s crescent — All this night In trembling osmosis.

Osmosis here refers to a process of interaction, probably the reﬂection of trees and moon on the rippled surface of the water, this accounting for the trembling.

90. To live so as to suit others? It is with yourself That you must live.

DH may in this haiku be referring to David Riesman’s description of the “other- directed person” in his book The Lonely Crowd (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1952), which book was in DH’s library. DH repeatedly emphasizes that he must live for others (50:42, 50:52, 53:3, 55:39, 58:9), but it does not follow that he must therefore constantly be seeking the approval of others (cf. 55:30, 56:39).

91. He fell from the ledge When he tried to crawl, Too afraid to walk erect.

To proceed with too great caution can in some situations be more dangerous than to master one’s fears and to proceed in a more usual fashion. Cf. 55:47, 59:36.

92. The grass was rain drenched. His bare feet sought the source of their growth In the soil.

247 | This haiku recalls 52:9. Walking barefoot on the wet grass, DH is made keenly conscious of the fact that he, together with other plants and animals, has grown out of the soil.

93. Alone in his hidden growth He found fellowship With all growing things.

Though DH aﬃrms the distinctiveness of what creating evolution has reached in the human being (58:8), in this waymark he aﬃrms his kinship with all living creatures. The growth that has to do with evaluation and choice is, however, a hidden growth, as compared with more readily recognizable physical development.

94. When he interprets What he’d rather forget He speaks to the future. (Paul La Cour)

Paul La Cour (1902-1956) was a Danish poet. Five of his books were in DH’s library. One of them, Fragmenter af en Dagbok (1948, Fragments of a Journal [København: Gyldendal, 1951]), in which he discusses poetry, but also oﬀers a personal testimony on how to live in the modern world, became an inspiration to many Danish writers. La Cour was concerned about the crisis in Europe dating back to World War I. It is his interpretation of these painful memories that is of value for the future.

95. Our oneness, creating Beyond the body’s bounds, With it as input. (T. E. Lawrence)

DH felt a kinship with T. E. Lawrence (l888-1953), also known as Lawrence of Arabia. Lawrence’s book, Seven Pillars of Wisdom (London: Jonathan Cape, 1935) was in his library. Both Lawrence and DH had manifested a remarkable bodily stamina, Lawrence in order to achieve an Arab unity that transcended tribal divisions, DH in order to achieve a world order transcending national divisions.

96. On the Barbary coast This barren outpost for the Queen of Heaven.

248 | The Barbary coast is the coast of the Mediterranean from Egypt to the Atlantic ocean. Though North Africa is largely Muslim, some Christian churches are to be found, the one to which DH refers dedicated to Mary, Mother of our Lord.

97. 591025 The books having been balanced, Nothing binds me. All awaits me, prepared.

October 25 was a Sunday. DH has earlier spoken of balancing the books as a “person repays his debt through concentrating in the existential moment all the energy which has been life’s obligating gift to him” (50:53). He has found it more diﬃcult not to be bound to the world that formed him (57:39), or to the name and reputation he was seeking to achieve (56:53, 56:67). As he writes this haiku, however, he does feel free, prepared, and open to all that may come.

98. Wherever we may hide ourselves: These salt sprays From the sun-lit breakers.

This and the following haiku tell of experiences while sailing. DH had much appreciated an earlier sailing expedition with members of his UN staﬀ (54:4).

99. Still far from the shore The ocean’s freshness frolicked In shiny bronze leaves.

The imagery DH uses to describe the ocean’s freshness is drawn from the forest with which he was more familiar. Cf. 61:10.

100. Because it did not ﬁnd a mate, They called the unicorn A pervert.

Rumors that DH was homosexual have made it necessary for his biographers to discuss this question (see Emery Kelen, Hammarskjöld [New York: G. P. Putnam’s, 1966], 153-165; Van Dusen, 83-84, 221-222). Their investigations indicate that these rumors were groundless. The following explicit references to sexual desire in Waymarks are heterosexual (50:21, 51:50, 58:10). DH felt that

249 | he could only be celibate (52:17), though he did not ﬁnd this an easy course to follow (55:60, 56:41, 59:32). He was especially aware of the loneliness such a way of living entailed (52:18, 52:24, 55:46). This haiku is a protest against the way in which his celibacy was interpreted.

101. 591106 Stripped of the self ’s secure splendor, He ﬁnds, naked, His reality. (O’Neill: Billy Brown)

November 1 was also a Sunday. DH was interested in the dramas of Eugene O’Neill (1888-1953). After O’Neill’s death, he, together with Karl Ragnar Gierow, arranged for the premier production of the unpublished play, Long Day’s Journey into Night, by the Royal Dramatic Theater in Stockholm (Urquhart, 1973, 41-42). Billy Brown is the lead character in the play, The Great God Brown (Eugene O’Neill, Nine Plays, New York: The Modern Library, n.d.). A feature of the play is that the characters wear masks. In the ﬁnal scene Billy Brown, stripped of his clothes and having laid aside his mask, ﬁnally discovers who he is. Cf. 51:16, 54:15, 57:16.

102. He oﬀered his life For the welfare of others, But wished them evil.

DH is aware of the ambiguity of motives, that a life could be oﬀered in sublime egocentricity (51:30). Here he suggests that if a sacriﬁcial act represents simply external obedience, it may be coupled with an evil wish directed at the act’s beneﬁciaries.

103. What the satyr In the mirror ridiculed He purchased with his life.

Satyrs, according to Greek mythology, were hairy little men, with short tails and pointed goat-like ears, who lived in forests and mountains, were fond of wine and revelry, and followed Dionysus, the Olympian god of the power of nature shown in the vine. There could be an allusion in this haiku to The Great God Brown (cf. 59:101). Dion (Dionysus?) wears a mask representing Pan and refers to Silenus (a satyr). In Act 2, Scene 3, Brown seizes Dion by the throat

250 | and calls him a drunken bum, whereupon Dion staring into Brown’s eyes says triumphantly, “Ah! Now he looks into the mirror! Now he sees his face!” Dion, who is very ill, then dies. Brown begins to wear Dion’s mask and attempts to play a double role as both Dion and Brown. At the end of the play Brown is himself killed, accused of having murdered Dion.

104. Let them keep All the small secrets They have so anxiously protected.

Much of the eﬀort to achieve national security concerns itself with keeping secrets. DH here may be suggesting that many such secrets are insigniﬁcant and not worth the eﬀort made to guard them. He must, nonetheless, as Secretary-General have had to keep secrets, and he was aware of the moral problems this could involve (cf. 57:2).

105. This contingent Encounter of possibilities Calls itself “I”.

DH has reﬂected that he might never have existed (51:38). Yet what might never have been has come to have this strong sense of self-consciousness.

106. I ask. Why this “I”? Why here? — And the “I” loses Its reality.

Problems arise if the self is not taken for granted. If one seeks explanations as to why the self should be, or why it should exist in this time and place, the self can lose its reality.

107. This morning the birds’ song Filled the mind With the night’s cool tranquility.

This is an example of literary impressionism well suited for the haiku form. The birds’ song in the morning prolongs in the mind the cool restfulness of the night.

251 | 108. The words did not exist, Which would have captured His desire and his fear.

Not all experiences, whether they have to do with what is wanted or what is dreaded, can be articulated.

109. The book remained unopened — Naked I saw Death’s instruments naked.

DH was apparently planning to read, but on this occasion he saw armaments for what they are, instruments of death, and felt himself denuded in their presence, while the book he had brought with him remained unopened.

110. The goldenrod shakes. The wind blows open The milkweed’s white parachute.

The wind that shakes the goldenrod also spreads the seed of the milkweed, which is carried by what appears to be a white parachute.

111. Like dishonest stewards We squander his goods For our salvation.

The allusion is to the parable of the dishonest steward (Luke l6:1-9), who was accused of squandering his master’s goods and who when he saw that he was to lose his position sought to provide for his future welfare by substantially reducing the stated obligations of his master’s debtors. The parable concludes with the suggestion that there was prudence in the steward’s behavior and that worldly wealth, which belongs to God, can be used so as to contribute to salvation. DH very likely does not believe, however, that such an extenuating explanation can be oﬀered for our squandering of what God has given us.

112. The heavens so blue As over the snow crest During his last ski-run. (Gösta Lundquist)

252 | Gösta Lundquist (1905-1952), photographer, editor of Svenska turistföreningens årsskrift, and, like DH, a member of the Swedish Alpine Club, had hiked with DH in Lapland. DH had published two articles in the 1947 and the 1951 issues of this annual about such expeditions, in which articles some of the photographs had been provided by Lundquist, who appears to have been particularly interested in photographing northern Sweden.

113. While the shots reverberated He sought the life of words For life’s sake.

Much of DH’s eﬀort as Secretary-General consisted in seeking to activate the living power of words in the midst of armed hostility, so as to save lives.

114. Risk, purity — This struggle with the mountain My self resistant.

DH uses mountain climbing imagery to comment on his life’s struggle. It involves risk and he wants to maintain integrity. There are external diﬃculties to be overcome, but at the same time he constantly encounters opposition within himself. For other examples of the use of mountain climbing imagery, see 25-30:1, 25-30:7, 56:5, 56:62, 61:12, 61:19.

115. No verbal lashes Disturbed his peace In a space resoundingly singing.

As 59:113 indicates, DH made use of the power of words in his struggle. He also suﬀered from verbal assaults. Here he recalls undisturbed peace in an ambient nature, the harmony of which he describes musically.

116. For him who believes The last miracle Shall be greater than the ﬁrst.

DH not only believes but also hopes. He has stated that when we act in faith miracles occur, though we must avoid the temptation of making such miracles the basis for faith (56:63). Nonetheless he anticipates a ﬁnal miracle even greater than the miracle of his becoming Secretary-General (cf. 52:20, 53:4).

1960 DH was in Africa at the opening of this year on a tour which had begun December 21 and which continued until the end of January, during which time he visited twenty-four countries, territories, or regions. Problems continued during the year in Laos and DH sought to cope with them by sending a special representative to Vientiane to coordinate UN activities there. These eﬀorts did not prevent Laos from becoming increasingly involved in the struggle between the superpowers in Indo-China, which struggle was ﬁnally to draw the U.S. into the Vietnam war. These concerns were wholly overshadowed, however, by the Congo crisis which began in July and which was to occupy DH throughout the remaining months of his life.

The Republic of Congo was formed as the Belgian Congo received independence on June 30. DH had anticipated problems since the Belgians had not prepared the Congolese to accept their new responsibilities. On July 7 the new republic sought and received membership in the UN. Disorders soon developed and on July 13 the Congo requested military assistance from the UN to help maintain public order. The Security Council authorized DH to respond to this request and he organized the Operation des Nations Unies au Congo (ONUC, the UN Force in Congo) composed largely of troops from other African countries. He also sought to provide UN technical assistance to replace departing Belgians. The situation in the Congo was complicated by the secession of the mineral rich Katanga province, unsuccessful attempts to secure the departure of Belgian troops, lack of discipline in the Congolese army, and division in the central government, with the president, Joseph Kasavubu, attempting to dismiss the prime minister, Patrice Lumumba, and the head of the army, Joseph Mobutu, announcing a coup and expelling the Soviet-bloc embassies. DH sought to maintain an impartial UN presence in the Congo and became for this reason attacked from all sides. There were increasingly harsh Russian attacks on the UN action in the Congo, led by Nikita Krushchev, including a call for DH’s resignation. DH had said he would resign if his service was no longer in the best interests of the UN Organization. Since, however, Krushchev was proposing that the Secretary-General be replaced by three persons representing the Western powers, the socialist states, and the neutralist states, each having veto power over the others, DH stated that this arrangement would make it impossible to maintain an eﬀective executive. He therefore told the General Assembly that he would remain at his post as long as especially the smaller nations wished him to do so, which evoked a tremendous standing ovation from the overwhelming majority of delegates (Public Papers of the S-G, 5:194-201).

254 | In the leadership crisis in the Congo, the U.S. sided with President Kasavubu and was successful, despite DH’s eﬀorts to postpone such a decision, to seat the faction led by President Kasavubu in the General Assembly. Toward the end of the year the Congo crisis deepened, as Lumumba, who had been receiving ONUC protection at his house in Leopoldville, attempted to join his supporters in Stanleyville, because he was troubled by the UN recognition Kasavubu had received. Before Lumumba reached Stanleyville, however, he was arrested and detained with the consent of both Kasavubu and Mobutu, his rivals for leadership in the Congo. Neither the Security Council nor the General Assembly could agree on how to respond to this situation.

There are only six waymarks for this year, ﬁve of them dated. DH did engage in other literary activities, however, writing an article for The National Geographic magazine on his visit to Nepal (see 59:63-66) and translating St.- John Perse’s poem Chronique into Swedish, which translation he cites in 61:1 (cf. 57:15, 57:22).

1. Easter 1960 Forgiveness breaks the chain of causality through the fact that the one who “forgives” — in love — takes upon himself the responsibility for the consequences of what you did. It therefore always involves sacriﬁce. The price of your own liberation through the sacriﬁce of another is that you yourself must be willing in the same way to liberate, irrespective of the cost.

On Easter Day 1960 DH reﬂects again about forgiveness (cf. 56:6, 57:6, 57:9, 57:30). Whereas he has previously said that in the experience of God we are forgiven and that it follows that we must in turn forgive, he now examines more closely what it means when a person “forgives.” What occurs is that the chain of causality which binds bad consequences to the evil deeds that have been committed is broken, as another person by forgiving takes upon himself/herself these consequences. Forgiveness for this reason always involves sacriﬁce. The date DH has given this waymark clearly indicates that he relates forgiveness to what Jesus achieved through his suﬀering and death, for Easter is the celebration of the great liberation Jesus’ sacriﬁce has brought to humankind. This liberation continues in our time as those who are themselves forgiven are willing to live sacriﬁcially so that others might be forgiven (cf. 56:10). Each of us must share in breaking the chain of causality between the evil deeds of others and the bad consequences following upon such deeds by taking upon ourselves those consequences. We must do so, DH insists, irrespective of the cost. What

255 | Jesus did for all humankind, we as his followers must do for those whom we meet every day in the network of human relationships in which we live.

Imagery DH used at a February 18 press conference suggests that DH may have believed such an understanding of forgiveness could have implications also for relations between nations. Speaking of the situation in the Middle East, where in an atmosphere of general distrust reactions to reactions tended to become increasingly stronger, he said, “ … we have to, if possible, break a chain reaction … . How you break such a chain reaction is extremely diﬃcult to say, because in fact you must come to grips on both sides with the situation” (Public Papers of the S-G, 4:543-544).

2. When I think of those who have preceded me, I feel like it is the dead time remaining at a party after the guests of honor have left. When I think of those who will follow — or remain — I feel that I am helping to prepare for a celebration, the joy of which I shall not share.

This is the only undated waymark written during 1960. It may have been written after the events of the summer. On May 18 an American U-2 spy plane was shot down over the Soviet Union. This led to the collapse of the Paris summit meeting and terminated the Ten Nation Committee on Disarmament. The period of “peaceful coexistence” between the USA and the USSR that had obtained for the past four years came, temporarily at least, to an end. While the USA and the USSR were at the outset able to agree to support DH’s eﬀorts to resolve the Congo crisis, the expulsion of the Soviet-bloc embassies from Leopoldville and DH’s refusal to take sides in the struggle between Lumumba (supported by the USSR) and Kasavubu (supported by the USA), led Krushchev to become increasingly bitter in his attacks upon DH’s Congo policy, charging him with dangerously exceeding his powers and calling for his resignation (Urquhart, 1973, 467-472).

DH was aware that implacable Soviet opposition had led to the termination of Trygve Lie’s tenure as Secretary-General. He can see a similar opposition forming against himself. In this waymark he sees himself living between the times. There have been high moments in the past, but those who were the actors in those events have left the scene. How far back in time his thinking at this point goes we cannot tell. As far as his present activity is concerned, DH feels that he is preparing for a coming celebration in which he does not expect

256 | to share. The historical period in which he is living is characterized more by ebb than by ﬂow. This does not alter his insistence that in his own life the primary stress must be placed on the present (51:6, 54:18, 57:18, 57:35). The reference to the future is at the same time basically optimistic. DH anticipates a coming celebration.

3. Christmas Eve 1960 How ﬁtting it is that Christmas follows Advent. — For the one who looks ahead the manger is located on Golgotha and the cross is already raised in Bethlehem. “Struggle, suﬀer Death’s aﬄiction, That our conscience Peace be given And might ﬁnd an opened heaven.” “I will lay me down in peace, and take my rest: for it is thou, Lord, only, that makest me dwell in safety” (Psalm IV) “Thou hast showed thy people heavy things: thou hast given us a drink of deadly wine. Thou hast given a token for such as fear thee: That they may triumph because of the truth.” (Psalm LX)

This waymark was written on Christmas Eve 1960. Thus it comes before three dated waymarks written in late November and early December. This is the only instance in Waymarks where dated entries have not been placed in chronological order. DH may have wanted this year to stress the relationship between his meditations at Easter and Christmas. Christmas Eve is the high point of the Christmas celebration in Sweden. On that day in the late afternoon people often attend a Christmas prayer service and return home for a festive Christmas dinner and the exchanging of gifts. DH meditates on the Advent season that precedes Christmas, a time of preparation and penitence, having some of the same relationship to Christmas that Lent has to Easter. Advent also reminds us that Christmas will be followed by Lent, for it draws our attention to the sin and evil that Jesus comes to overcome. He overcomes it, however, only through suﬀering. Therefore in the midst of the joy of Christmas we look forward to the cross.

This understanding of Christmas is set forth in Sweden’s best loved Christmas hymn, “All Hail to You, O Blessed Morn,” by Johan Olof Wallin (1779-1839, Den svenska psalmboken 1937,  55). DH cites the last lines of the third stanza of that hymn. The stanza begins as follows:

257 | He will shed tears just as we do, Perceive our need, support us too With his own spirit’s power. Reveal to us his Father’s will, Our cup of woe with mercy ﬁll To sweeten sorrow’s hour.

At this point the lines DH cites follow, which I have translated quite literally. In the midst of the joy of Christmas DH recognizes its deeper meaning, which he ﬁnds expressed in the hymn used to open the early Christmas morning service (julotta) in the Swedish churches.

Two psalm passages follow (Ps. 4:9; 60:3-4), one expressing the conﬁdence of the believer, the other, however, referring to times of trouble during which that conﬁdence may be tested, when the assurance of the faithful ones has to do not so much with their own personal safety, as with their certainty that the cause to which they are committed will conquer.

4. 601126 The winter moon Is caught in the branches. The promise heavily demanded my blood.

Round about the trees slept, Naked against the night sky. “Nevertheless, not as I will . . .”

The burden remained mine. They did not understand my entreaty. And all was silence.

Then the torches and the kiss. Then the gray dawn In the palace.

How does their love help? Now all that matters is Whether I love them.

258 | November 26 was the Saturday before the ﬁrst Sunday in Advent. In the lectionary of the Church of Sweden Matthew’s account of Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem is read on that Sunday. DH had already in 53:11 stated that one must not permit the jubilation of the triumphal entry to hide the fact that beyond it was the cross. Thus the passion motif found in 60:1 and 60:3 is continued in this poem.

DH combines his own conviction that he is being called to give himself sacriﬁcially with reﬂection on Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane (cf. 54:7, 56:9, 56:10). Like Jesus, DH feels that he has a commitment which others do not understand. While the setting is a winter night, the words, “Nevertheless, not as I will, (but what thou wilt)” (Matt. 26:39 RSV), recall Jesus’ prayer. The fourth verse of the poem makes the reference to Jesus’ arrest and trial more explicit. DH knew that many third world nations had great aﬀection for him, but was not certain that their help would be suﬃcient to see him through the dangerous period that lay before him. In any case the basic question was not how much others loved him, but the extent of his love for them.

The crisis in the Congo had begun in July when UN troops were requested to help maintain public order by the newly formed Republic of Congo. During the fall the situation had deteriorated and there was no longer united support in the Security Council for the policies DH had initiated (see above the introduction to 1960). He very likely felt that he had been betrayed by those who should have sustained him. Yet he felt a continuing strong obligation to the people of the Congo.

5. 601202 The tension heightened. In the noonday heat Wills slackened.

The night ﬂared up. Phosphorescently The jungle groaned in the grip of the storm.

They paid The full price of love For what the others won.

259 | Morning mist. The ﬁrst warbling of birds. Who recalled the night’s sacriﬁces?

On November 27 Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba, troubled by the UN’s recognition of President Joseph Kasavubu’s delegation to the General Assembly, left his residence in Leopoldville, which was being guarded by ONUC troops and sought to join his supporters in Stanleyville, his political base. He was arrested and mistreated by Colonel Joseph-Désiré Mobutu’s troops, which were loyal to Kasavubu. DH wrote letters on December 3 and 5 to Kasavubu asking that due legal process be followed in the case of Lumumba and that representatives of the International Red Cross be permitted to visit him (Public Papers of the S-G, 5:237-241).

This poem, written on a Friday, may reﬂect DH’s premonitions with respect to the arrest of Lumumba, as well as his distress over other military action in the Congo. Due to the heat not so much happened during the day. At night there could be ﬁghting, as well as a storm. Victory for some meant death for others. DH did not want to see Africans killing Africans (cf. 55:62). He feared also that the night’s sacriﬁces would be forgotten.

6. 601203 The way, You shall follow it.

Success, You shall forget it.

The cup, You shall empty it.

The pain, You shall conceal it.

The answer, You shall learn it.

The end, You shall endure it.

260 | The following day DH states his own commitment in poetic terms. He has throughout the years sought to follow “the way” (52:1, 53:11, 57:23, 61:5, 61:12). The word, lycka, translated “success” (cf. 56:39) can also be translated “happiness” (cf. 50:1, 50:3, 54:4, 57:10, 57:35). The cup refers to Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane (cf. 54:7, 56:9, 61:4). Pain for DH can have a positive signiﬁcance, but it must be concealed (50:47, 51:10). For DH the answer is not something he continues to seek. It is something he already knows and yet still must learn (57:8, 57:17, 57:22, 57:40). He is ﬁnally determined to endure to the end (cf. 61:12).

1961 As the Congo crisis continued the event that cast a dark shadow over the year of 1961 was the death of Patrice Lumumba, who the previous November after leaving the UN protection provided him was arrested, kept in custody, and on January 17 taken to the secessionist Katanga province, where he was murdered. That Lumumba was in fact dead was not acknowledged until February 13. Many charged DH with being responsible for Lumumba’s death, though neither the Security Council nor the General Assembly had authorized the ONUC (the UN force in the Congo) to intervene in the struggle for political power taking place in the Congo in such a way that this tragedy, once Lumumba had been arrested, could have been prevented. In response to Lumumba’s death and the subsequent killing of six of his political supporters a somewhat stronger mandate was given to the ONUC, though this action was opposed by both Russia and France, who refused to give any further ﬁnancial support to the UN action in the Congo.

During the spring and summer some progress was made in reconstituting the central Congo government and there were hopes that the secession of Katanga could be ended. In September DH came to the Congo hoping to arrange a meeting between Cyrille Adoula, Congo’s prime minister, and Moise Tshombe, the leader of secessionist Katanga. Just prior to his coming, however, an ill advised and poorly executed ONUC action in Katanga to arrest foreign mercenary soldiers caused several days of ﬁghting in which the ONUC was forced to take a defensive posture. In order to negotiate a cease-ﬁre DH decided to meet Tshombe in Ndola, Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia). On the night of September 17 his plane crashed as it approached the Ndola airport leaving no survivors.

Several commissions investigated the circumstances of the crash but were unable to determine the exact cause of the disaster. More recently an explanation has been oﬀered by David Beaty, himself an experienced pilot, in Strange Encounters: Mysteries of the Air (New York: Atheneum, 1984, 121-129). Beaty states that there is reason to believe that Tshombe, the man whom DH was ﬂying to meet, was responsible for DH’s death. Somehow DH’s plane was left unguarded for some hours in Leopoldville. One of Tshombe’s secret agents posing as a technician is said to have boarded the plane and removed the map carrying the ﬂight information about the landing ﬁeld at Ndola. On the plane was a manual containing an approach chart for another airﬁeld with the very similar name Ndolo and this manual was found in the wreckage, opened and folded back to

262 | show the Ndolo chart. The height of Ndolo above sea level is 951 feet. The height of Ndola, however, is 4,160 feet. It is also alleged that when the pilot of DH’s plane approached Ndola and radioed for a position check, the traﬃc controller there gave him incorrect information. The cause of the accident would then be that DH’s pilot coming into the Ndola airport and unacquainted with it allowed the aircraft to descend too low. As a result it struck trees and crashed.

Another detail in the mystery diﬃcult to explain is the fact that sixteen hours elapsed between the time of the crash and the discovery of the wreckage. Though the Secretary-General’s plane had been sighted as it ﬂew over the Ndola airport while making its approach, though there were eighteen aircraft stationed at Ndola, which could have been sent up on an hour’s notice, and though the crash occurred only nine miles from the airport, a search for the missing plane did not begin until late the following morning, the plane being found in the early afternoon. Had the search been made earlier, though DH’s injuries were so severe as to be fatal, Sergeant Julien, one of the crew, might have survived (Kelen, 268-271).

DH’s death left the Congo crisis unresolved, but a decade after the Congo had received its independence its president, Joseph Mobutu (later Mobutu Sese Seko) declared: “The Democratic Republic of the Congo is a living testimony to what the United Nations Organization is capable of when it is given the appropriate means. In the Congo, the United Nations defended the sovereignty of a country which certain covetous interests were ready to compromise. The United Nations fulﬁlled one of the essential functions which the Charter prescribed to our Organization, that of assuring and guaranteeing the respect of the territorial integrity and the independence of each State Member” (Urquhart, 1973, 594).

The waymarks written during 1961 reveal suﬀering and weariness, but also DH’s continued dedication and willingness to follow to the end the way he believed he had been called to go. Of the nineteen waymarks, all but ﬁve are dated. The undated waymarks are, however, closely related to the preceding dated waymarks.

1. 610213-610313

“O You who led us to this naked life of the soul, destiny Hovering over the waters, will You relate, some earthly evening, Whose the hand is that clothes us with fable’s burning tunic - - -?”

263 | On February 13 it became known that Patrice Lumumba and two of his associates, Maurice Mpolo and Joseph Okito had been killed, very likely shortly after they had been taken to Elizabethville in Katanga province on January 17. Some days later six of Lumumba’s supporters were secretly arrested, ﬂown to Bakwanga in South Kasai, and summarily executed. In reprisal ﬁfteen Kasavubu and Mobutu supporters were executed by ﬁring squad in Stanleyville. These were the ﬁrst political assassinations that had occurred during the Congo crisis. On February 14 the Soviet government issued a statement in the Security Council containing the following charges against DH: “The murder of Patrice Lumumba and his comrades- in-arms in the dungeons of Katanga is the culmination of Hammarskjöld’s criminal activities. … His actions place a dark stain on the whole United Nations. Not only can such a man not enjoy any conﬁdence; he deserves only the contempt of all honest people. There is no place for Hammarskjöld in the high oﬃce of Secretary-General of the United Nations and his continuance in that oﬃce is intolerable” (Public Papers of the S-G, 5:342). In replying to these charges DH said, “It is vain to argue with those for whom truth is a function of party convenience and justice a function of party interest. But for others it may be essential that some facts are recalled and clearly and simply put on record” (Ibid., 343). He went on to point out that, given the way in which the UN Charter and the resolutions of the Security Council limited the use of the United Nations Force in the Congo, after Lumumba had ﬂed from his residence in Leopoldville, where he was receiving UN protection, the UN Force had neither the power nor the right to liberate him from his captors. A Security Council resolution was ﬁnally adopted on February 21 calling for measures to prevent the occurrence of civil war in the Congo, urging the immediate withdrawal and evacuation of all Belgian and foreign military and paramilitary personnel and political advisers not under UN command, requesting all states to prevent the entry of such personnel into the Congo, and ordering an immediate and impartial investigation to ascertain the circumstances of the death of Lumumba and his colleagues (Ibid., 356-357). The following weeks were devoted to strong eﬀorts on DH’s part to secure compliance with this resolution on the part of the recalcitrant Belgian and Congolese authorities.

In the ﬁrst three waymarks for 1961 DH expresses his feelings during these weeks in three citations. The ﬁrst is from his Swedish translation of the poem Chronique by St.-John Perse (Krönika, Bonniers, 1960, 21; Perse, Collected Poems, 586-587; cf. 57:15, 57:20, 57:33). The translation had been made in the summer of 1960 prior to the Congo crisis (Public Papers of the S-G, 5:459). It was read by other members of the Swedish Academy and used in the deliberations that led to Perse’s being awarded the Nobel Prize for literature on October 26, 1960.

264 | In a letter to DH, Perse states that the poem has America as its setting (Letters, 666-667). The last line of the citation alludes to a story about the Greek hero, Hercules, known for his strength but not his intelligence. When he sends a beautiful captive maiden, Iole, home to his wife, Deianira, she responds by sending a splendid robe as a gift to Hercules. She has anointed the robe with the blood of the centaur, Nessus, whom Hercules had killed when it sought to kidnap Deianira. Nessus before dying had told Deianira to take some of his blood and use it as a charm if Hercules were ever to love another woman more than her. Hercules on putting on the robe is seized with fearful pain, as though he were in a burning ﬁre. He remains in such pain until he brings about his own death through lying down on a great funeral pyre on Mt. Oeta (Edith Hamilton, Mythology [New York: New American Library, 1953], 171-172).

In the ﬁrst two lines that DH cites from his translation of Chronique, clearly God is addressed. In the second line DH has used the Swedish word svävar, which recalls Genesis 1:1 (“God’s spirit hovered over the water” JB) to translate the French word errante (wandering). Interestingly svävar is a change from irrar (roving aimlessly), which DH uses in the 1960 published translation and may thus be a revision. The burning tunic can represent the pain inescapably attendant upon the exercise of power, sometimes done unwisely. The question is whether God has ordered things in this way, or whether some other hand is here at work.

2. “Be not your own pathetic fallacy, but be Your own dark measure in the vein, for we’re about a tragic business - - -.”

The second citation is from the play The Antiphon (1958) by Djuna Barnes (Selected Works of Djuna Barnes [New York: Farrar, Straus and Cudahy, 1962], 205). Barnes (1892-1982) was an expatriate American author in Paris from 1920-1940. DH had bought her novel Nightwood (1936) in Paris in 1948 and upon coming to New York discovered her in semi-retirement. They occasionally dined together and when The Antiphon appeared in 1958 he persuaded her to allow him and Karl Ragnar Gierow, the director of the Swedish Royal Dramatic Theater, to translate it for a premiere production in Stockholm. It was translated in the early summer of 1960 and ﬁrst performed on February 17, 1961. Due to the Congo crisis DH could not be present. The setting of the play is an English manor house, badly damaged by German bombardment during World War II. The cast is a family that has been called

265 | together at this ancestral home. The family has been so long divided that they are strangers to each other. An interpreter of the play writes: “For all real purposes, the civilized world of Western man has already died when this play begins. No hope is possible. … Miranda (whose lines DH cites) … voices the play’s dark theme: to have been born at all is a disaster. Conception is murder, and all men stand condemned. The human race is grasping, power mad, and status seeking” ( James B. Scott, Djuna Barnes [Boston: Twayne, 1976], 132).

It may seem strange that a play with such a bleak, pessimistic theme should have interested DH. The play did, however, articulate a reality about the human situation that had to be faced. DH was also challenged by its esoteric language, the narrow audience to which it was addressed. From the Swedish translation he uses the cited lines to exhort himself not to be his own appealing falsiﬁcation, but to be his own hidden measure in life’s vein, for a tragedy is in the process of unfolding.

3. “I became also a reproach unto them: they that looked upon me shaked their heads. Help me, O Lord my God: O save me according to thy mercy.”

DH concludes this series of waymarks expressing his reactions to the consequences of the death of Lumumba and the other assassinations in the Congo by citing The Book of Common Prayer version of Psalm 109:25-26 (cf. 54:26). The psalm is a lament of one who has been falsely accused. While there are those who do support him, DH has become a reproach to people in the Congo, to the nations of the Communist bloc, to some Western powers, and to some also of the neutralist states. He prays to God for help.

4. Maundy Thursday 1961

[“God, answer me, in the jaws of death!] Is it of no saving worth What man’s striving will can prove? He is the God of love.”

“Then thought I to understand this; but it was too hard for me, Until I went into the sanctuary of God.”

266 | Maundy Thursday came on March 30 during renewed debate in the General Assembly on the situation in the Congo. DH for the second time quotes from Henrik Ibsen’s Brand (Samlede værker, vol. 3, 167, see 56:52). The lines cited are the concluding lines of the play. As Brand sinks down before the descending avalanche which is to bury him, he cries out in extremis asking God whether the human will’s achievement can contribute anything at all to that person’s salvation. A voice heard through the thunder states that God is love.

DH may in a similar sense feel himself overwhelmed by power… beyond his control. Can the human will avail at all under such circumstances? If one links the answer that God is love to the date of this waymark, which suggests the love implicit in the account of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, DH has already aﬃrmed the power of such love (55:1). (It can be noted that Bertil Ekman makes reference to the passage DH has cited, observing that the lonely mountain upon which Ibsen’s Brand expires does not become a Golgotha [Strödda blad, 33]).

A further answer to the question with which DH is struggling is given in the psalm passage (Ps. 73:16-17) cited in The Book of Common Prayer version (cf. 54:26). The Psalmist inquires about the prosperity of the wicked. In the sanctuary of God he perceives that their prosperity is only temporary, for they will be destroyed. What is more important, he ﬁnds that the righteous person experiences a nearness to God that exceeds anything that could otherwise be desired.

5. Pentecost 1961

I don’t know who — or what — put the question. I don’t know when it was put. I don’t remember that I answered. But I once did answer yes to someone — or something. From that time comes my certainty that existence is meaningful and that my life, therefore, in self-surrender, has a goal. From that time I have known what it means “not to look back,” and “not to be anxious about tomorrow,” Led through life’s labyrinth by the Ariadne-thread of the answer, I reached a time and a place where I knew that the way leads to a triumph which is a catastrophe and to a catastrophe which is triumph, that the cost of life commitment is reproach and the depth of humiliation the

267 | exaltation that is possible for a human being. After that the word “courage” lost its meaning, since nothing could be taken from me. As I continued on the way, I learned, step by step, word by word, that behind every saying of the hero of the gospels stands one man and one man’s experience. Also behind the prayer that the cup might pass from him and the promise to empty it. Also behind each word from the cross.

Christian festivals were important to DH, not only Christmas and Easter, but also Pentecost. He often chose such occasions to write waymarks. In this waymark, written a few months before his death, he tells about his life commitment and what it has meant for him. He does not know who or what posed the question, but he did give an aﬃrmative answer to someone or something (cf. 45-49:5). He doesn’t try to ﬁx the time, not even with the help of this journal (though he might have referred to 51:47, 53:1, 54:5, 55:19). Very likely his “yes” was a growing aﬃrmation of a destiny that he only gradually was able to understand, but which led to a certainty that life is meaningful and that one reaches its goal through self-surrender.

Though he can speak of God in both personal and impersonal terms (who or what, someone or something), his commitment is related to Jesus. Since making it he has understood the meaning of Jesus’ teaching, “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is ﬁt for the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:62 RSV; cf. 51:22, 53:12, 56:13, 57:35), as well as, “So do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring worries of its own. Today’s trouble is enough for today” (Matt. 6:34).

The reference to being led through life’s labyrinth by the Ariadne-thread of his commitment is imagery drawn from Greek mythology, the second time DH has used this imagery. For an account of the myth see the comment on 55:18. In the myth Theseus slays the Minotaur and uses the Ariadne-thread to ﬁnd his way out of the labyrinth. While DH makes some use of this myth, his understanding of victory does not come from Greek mythology, for the way that he is following is one in which triumph and catastrophe, exaltation and humiliation, are strangely linked. His guide along this way has been Jesus, especially Jesus’ words in the Garden of Gethsemane and from the cross (cf. 45- 49:13, 51:29, 56:10).

268 | DH has in following this way gained a new understanding of courage, a virtue that he prizes most highly (cf. 50:46, 51:62, 54:23, 56:1, 56:10, 56:24, 56:38). The meaning of courage changes somewhat when total self-surrender has taken place (cf. 55:15, 57:47, 59:4). One need not defend oneself, for one has nothing left to lose (cf. 56:28). Insofar, however, as courage refers to fearless service on the behalf of others, the need for courage remains (cf. 61:13).

6. Lifted out of my torpor, Freed from all that bound me, Washed, trained, adorned, I reach the threshold.

Asked if I have the courage To go my way to the end, I give the answer Irrevocably.

Blinded I see the gate Open to the arena And go out naked To meet death.

The combat begins. Calm In exultant strength I ﬁght Till they throw the net And I am caught.

I have seen the others. Now I am the chosen one Who is tied ﬁrmly to the block To be sacriﬁced.

Dumb, my naked body endures The blows as it is stoned. Dumb, as I am cut open and My heart laid bare --

600707 - Spring 1961

269 | The dates appended to this waymark related it to the whole period of the Congo crisis. On July 7, 1960 the Republic of Congo’s application for membership in the UN was accepted by the Security Council. Due to the fact that the Belgian colonial rulers had not helped the Congolese to prepare for self-government, within a week the new republic was falling apart in conﬂict and chaos. On July 12 UN military assistance was requested, to which request the Security Council responded on July 13 (Public Papers of the S-G, 5:16-27). From this date on DH had oﬃcial responsibility to attempt to bring about an orderly, peaceful development in the newly independent nation, an eﬀort that was to continue until his death. In this poem he expresses his premonition that this eﬀort may cost him his life.

DH imagines possible ways in which he might die. One should not, however, allow the fact that he did actually die within a few months to lead to a too literal interpretation of this imagery. He may have been thinking chieﬂy of the termination of his eﬀectiveness as UN Secretary-General. The ﬁgurative speech in the ﬁrst stanzas is drawn from the way in which Roman gladiators were expected to ﬁght to the death in the arena. DH imagines himself entering the arena and ﬁghting with exultant strength, though there is no indication that he kills others in so doing. The imagery changes as he imagines death as a human sacriﬁce on an altar (cf. 55:29). Yet again the imagery changes as he is stoned. The fact that he remains dumb suggests Isaiah 53:7. The second stanza of the poem may express DH’s commitment to follow the way to the end (60:6), whatever the consequences might be.

7. 610608 Body, My playmate! Neither master Nor slave, You shall be sustained By the mind’s vitality, And in return stimulate it With your light ﬁre.

But body, Playmate, You must not hesitate, Nor fail me, If the moment comes For the impossible.

270 | June 8 was a Thursday. The previous week on May 30 DH had received an honorary degree at Oxford, where he had also delivered his last major address, “The International Civil Servant in Law and in Fact” (Public Papers of the S-G, 5:471-489). Upon his return to New York he was able to give some thought to the construction and decoration of the new UN library, which after his death was to become his memorial.

In this waymark DH recognizes the needs of his body, given the unceasing pressures being brought to bear upon him. He uses the language of body- mind dualism. The body is the mind’s playmate, thus neither master nor slave. In a sense DH implies a tripartite anthropology, for the self who is speaking (neither body nor mind) might be identiﬁed with the spirit. The body is both sustained by the mind and stimulates it with its “light” ﬁre (cf. 58:9). What will at last be required may be impossible. Nonetheless the body must not fail or hesitate (cf. 56:5).

8. Late night hours’ Sleepless questions; Did I act correctly? And why did I act As I did? To take again the same steps, Repeat the same words, Without ﬁnding the answer --

This poem may express second thoughts about DH’s decisions and actions during the Congo crisis. He has consistently been concerned about why he acts as he does (cf. 55:39, 57:8). He does not imagine, however, that if he were able to retrace his steps he would be able to ﬁnd better answers. The human situation is such that one must act obediently in faith and hope without being able to see the ﬁnal issue of what one does (cf. 57:48).

9. I wait Where they place me Naked against the target, Nailed fast By the ﬁrst arrows. The bow is bent once again. The arrow whistles — by me. Are they playing?

271 | Did the hand tremble? Or was it the wind?

What do I fear? If they strike And kill, What is this To bewail?

Others have gone before. Others follow --

In this poem DH imagines death by execution. He is already nailed to the target by the ﬁrst arrows, but thereafter the arrows miss, which fact he does not understand. He tells himself that it doesn’t matter. Whether he lives or dies is insigniﬁcant. Others have died in this way before and yet others will follow. The poem may symbolically refer to the opposition he is experiencing as Secretary- General and the fact that he is nonetheless permitted to continue. Whether he is driven out of oﬃce or not does not matter. It has happened to others. He must continue to serve as long as he can.

10. 610611 Called To bear it, Separated To test it, Chosen To suﬀer it, Free to Deny it, I saw For a moment The sail In the sun storm, Alone On the wave crest, Distant, Bearing from land.

I saw, For a moment.

272 | June 11 was a Sunday. The poem bearing this date has two parts, one which refers to DH’s commitment, the other to the hope that sustains him. He is called, separated, chosen, but also free to deny all this. At the same time he sees the distant sail in the sun storm, bearing away from land. Aulén calls this poem “a vignette of farewell,” and suggests that we have here one of the few waymarks in which DH thinks of victory over death (Aulén, E 154; Sw 221-222). If so, two other waymarks that touch upon this theme are 52:14 and 55:55.

11. 610618 He will come Between two gendarmes Lean and sunburned, A little bent As though he apologized For his strength. His features tense, But with a calm gaze.

He will throw his jacket And with his shirt opened Take his place against the wall To be shot.

He has not betrayed us And he meets the end Without weakness. When I am anxious, It is not for him. Do I fear an urge in myself To be thus destroyed? Or is there In the abyss of my being One who awaits permission To ﬁre the shot?

For the following Sunday, June 18, there is a dated poem in which an execution is imagined, though DH is not himself the victim. The vividness of the description suggests that DH may be thinking of an actual individual. The fact that the man is sunburned would suggest that he is Caucasian. DH ﬁnally asks himself whether he seeks such destruction (cf. 57:45), or whether there is in the abyss of his being

273 | the desire to destroy. He does not deny that he may share the destructive impulses, which impulses others permit themselves to express (see 57:6).

12. 610706 Tired and alone. So tired Your heart aches. The melting snow Trickles down the rocks. Your ﬁngers are numb, Your knees tremble. It is now, Now, you must not let go.

The way of the others Has resting places In the sun Where they meet. But this Is your way, And it is now, Now, that you must not fail.

Weep, If you can, Weep But do not complain. The way chose you — And you must be thankful.

During the summer of 1961, in addition to the continuing Congo crisis, there was also tension in Tunisia. On July 6, President Habib Bourguiba of Tunisia requested new talks concerning the total evacuation of French troops from the Bizerte base in Tunisia, to which request President Charles de Gaulle was to give a negative reply (Urquhart, 1973, 532). The date for this waymark, a Thursday, was just before DH left for Paris where he was to attend the meeting of the Economic and Social Council July 8-15.

DH was known for his remarkable ability to work almost night and day with very little rest. This was often required in order to respond to crises which

274 | required immediate attention. Though he rarely mentions it, he was at times very tired (cf. 58:15). The Swedish artist, Bo Beskow, had spent a week with DH in late June and remarks about how tired, restless, and pessimistic he had found DH to be (Beskow, 181).

In this waymark he is thinking of his work and of how diﬃcult it is to continue when tired and alone. He uses the imagery of mountain climbing to describe what is being required of him (cf. 56:5, 56:62, 57:45, 59:114). A climb can become more and more diﬃcult as one approaches the summit, Despite the strain he must not let go. Others may have it easier, with frequent resting places in the sun. His, however, is a diﬀerent way and it chose him. He may weep, but he must not complain. He must be thankful.

13. 610719 Have mercy Upon us. Have mercy Upon our striving, That we Before you, In love and faith, Righteousness and humility, May follow you, In self-discipline and faithfulness and courage, And meet you, In stillness.

Give us A pure heart That we may see you, A humble heart That we may hear you, A loving heart That we may serve you A believing heart The we may live you.

You Whom I do not know But to whom I belong.

275 | You Whom I do not understand But who have dedicated me To my destiny. You --

On July 19, the date of this waymark, shooting did break out in Bizerte, with large Tunisian casualties. DH had planned to go on from Paris to Cairo and Delhi, but found it necessary to return to New York for a Security Council meeting about the events in Bizerte (Urquhart, 1973, 532-533). On this occasion DH writes a prayer which Van Dusen calls the longest and fullest declaration of his faith (Van Dusen, 202). It begins in the plural number with a plea for mercy. We pray for mercy upon our striving. Words important for DH follow: love, faith, righteousness, humility, self-discipline, loyalty, courage, stillness. It is as one has a believing heart that one may “live God,” not simply live in God, but “live God” (cf. 54:19). The prayer closes with reference to the mystery of God. DH does not claim to know or to understand, but he is convinced that he belongs to God and that God has dedicated him to his destiny. He addresses God in personal terms. Finally the prayer which begins in the plural number ends with singular pronouns. DH is speaking for himself to God. “You --.”

14. 610730 Awakened I heard anew, Awake, The cry that waked me.

Kept watch, Resting like one drowned In the ocean depth’s darkness Fretted by light From everywhere, Nowhere.

Heard One last time Far away The cry From terror’s loneliness, In adversity’s fellowship.

276 | Who the hunted one, Who the silent hunter Over the foggy sea Among the black trees Long before daybreak?

The date, July 30, is a Sunday, the day following DH’s 56th birthday. He has just returned from a trip to Tunisia to ascertain the facts regarding the hostilities between the French and the Tunisians at Bizerte, where he had not been well received by the French authorities (Urquhart, 1973, 534-541).

The experience recorded in this poem occurred at night, “long before daybreak.” There is a cry that awakens him. He can only keep watch as one submerged in the deep darkness of the sea, a darkness interlaced by mysterious light. He hears again the cry from far away, telling of lonely terror, but also of the fellowship of those in such need. He wonders, who is hunting whom in the sea mists and under the dark trees?

15. 610802 “Thou hast moved the land, and divided it; heal the sores thereof, for it shaketh.” “- - - then I understood the end of these men. Namely, how thou dost set them in slippery places; and castest them down and destroyest them.” “And they remembered that God was their strength --”

Three days later on August 2 DH cites The Book of Common Prayer version of three psalm passages (cf. 54:26). The ﬁrst (Ps. 60:2) is from a group lament expressing distress over the fragmentation of the one-time Hebrew empire under the united monarchy. DH also cited this psalm in the Christmas Eve 1960 waymark (60:3). He may be thinking of the fragmentation of the Congo and of the wounded condition of the land. The second passage (Ps. 73:17-18) is from a psalm meditation on the relation between evil and God’s justice. DH reminds himself that the prosperity of the wicked is only temporary. This psalm was previously cited on Maundy Thursday 1961 (61:4). The ﬁnal passage (Ps. 78:35) is from a psalm recounting God’s glorious deeds and Israel’s unfaithfulness. Even in the midst of their faithlessness the people from time to time remember that God was their strength. It is to this assurance that DH clings.

277 | 16. Almighty One . . . Forgive My doubt, My anger, My pride. Bend me By your grace. Raise me By your severity.

The repeated instances of Israel’s faithlessness enumerated in Psalm 78 cited in the previous waymark may have prompted this prayer. DH has confessed such faults as preferring his own will to God’s (55:8), seeking his own glory (55:26), being jealous of others (56:22, 56:36). This, however, is the only prayer in Waymarks in which he explicitly asks God for forgiveness, mentioning speciﬁcally his doubt, anger, and pride. He asks God to bend him with his grace and raise him with his severity or strictness. One would perhaps have expected the attributes with which the two petitions are related to be reversed. This prayer suggests, however, that for DH the grace of God is the source of the greatest judgment (cf. 45-49:13). God’s grace is, however, intimately related to the severity of his justice and his saving strength. Those who unrepentantly oppose God’s will shall ultimately be defeated. Those, on the other hand, who have suﬀered themselves to be abased by God’s grace can hope to be raised by his severity.

17. 610806 Far from the chattering troop, From the green dusk under the treetops And the branches over the jungle paths Where leopards’ eyes Gleamed in the night. Alone, In the white plastered room With the banister and the dangling rope,

He sat on the window sill And saw the snow fall And the cars rush by With their ﬁery eyes.

278 | No one saw When one day he jumped for the rope’s loop, Got entangled, his breast constricted, And choked to death. No one saw — And who had ever understood His eﬀorts to be happy, His moments of conﬁdence, His constant uneasiness In longing for something He only vaguely remembered? And yet we were all fond of him And we missed him For a long time.

W. H. Auden has entitled this dated waymark “Elegy for my pet monkey, Greenback” (Markings, 219). While on a visit to Africa, DH was given a pet monkey in Somalia, which he kept in his apartment (Gray, 52-53). On one occasion when no one was present the monkey became accidentally entangled in a loop of rope, which was part of the play equipment provided for him, and choked to death. DH expresses his grief over the death of his pet in this poem.

In view of DH’s own impending death, the elegy becomes a haunting parable. DH had come to be very much at home in New York and yet he longed for much that he, of course, well remembered from his homeland. As is evident from several of this year’s waymarks, he may have wondered whether on some occasion he in the performance of his duties would become entangled in circumstances that would cost him his life.

18. 610806 The meadow’s huge Green wave Over the rolling ridge Crowned by white spume, A thousand ox-eye daisies Blushing When the midsummer sun Sinks red In the hot haze Over Poughkeepsie.

279 | Seven weeks have gone And seven kinds of ﬂowers Have been mowed. Now the corn broadens In expanding fruitfulness. Was it here, Here, that paradise appeared For a moment During the midsummer night?

Given the same date (August 6, a Sunday) is a poem telling of his experience of summer at his country home at Brewster, New York. DH recalls being there at midsummer (cf. 57:21). In the weeks that have passed many diﬀerent kinds of ﬂowers have come and gone and the harvest is approaching. That he is much more at home in New York than was his pet monkey is evidenced by the fact that on the midsummer night, though far from the Swedish festivities, paradise appeared, if but for a moment!

19. 610824 Is it a new land In another reality Than that of the day? Or have I lived there, Before the day?

Awakened, An ordinary morning with gray light Reﬂected from the street, Awakened — From the dark blue night Above the timberline With moonlight on the moor And the ridge in shadow. Remembered Other dreams, Remembered The same mountain country: Twice I was on the ridges, I stayed by the remotest lake And followed the river

280 | To its sources. The seasons have changed And the light And the weather And the hour But it is the same land. And I begin to know the map And the directions.

The last waymark dated less than a month before his death deals also with memories of Sweden, in this case hiking in Lapland, and the diﬀerent setting of the life that he is now living. He wonders about the relation of dreams and memory to everyday reality. He concludes that despite changes and diﬀerences they do belong to the same land. The poem ends on the hopeful note that he is beginning to know the map and the directions.

Waymarks thus begins and ends with mountain climbing imagery. In the ﬁrst waymark DH writes, “I am being driven farther into an unknown land, the ground becomes harder, the air more sharply cold.” Then follows a question: “Shall I arrive? Where life rings out — one clear simple note in the silence” (25-30:1). He speaks later of the struggle of the climb, “when the morning’s freshness has been changed to midday weariness, when the leg muscles quiver under the strain, the trail seems endless, and suddenly nothing will work out just as you wish” (56:5). He reminds himself that “it is care with respect to the ﬁnal steps below the summit which determines the value of all that may have gone before” (56:62). In recent weeks he has confessed his weariness: “Tired and alone. So tired your heart aches. The melting snow trickles down the rocks. Your ﬁngers are numb, your knees tremble. It is now, now, you must not let go” (61:12). Yet in this ﬁnal recorded entry he recalls, “Twice I was on the ridges, I stayed by the remotest lake and followed the river to its sources.” There have been and will be many changes, but he is conﬁdent that it is the same land and that he is beginning to know the map and the directions.

281 | Appendix A

Old Creeds in a New World The world in which I grew up was dominated by principles and ideals of a time far from ours and, as it may seem, far removed from the problems facing a man of the middle of the twentieth century. However, my way has not meant a departure from those ideals. On the contrary, I have been led to an understanding of their validity also for our world of today. Thus, a never abandoned eﬀort frankly and squarely to build up a personal belief in the light of experience and honest thinking has led me in a circle: I now recognize and endorse, unreservedly, those very beliefs which once were handed down to me.

From generations of soldiers and government oﬃcials on my father’s side I inherited a belief that no life was more satisfactory than one of selﬂess service to your country--or humanity. This service required a sacriﬁce of all personal interests, but likewise the courage to stand up unﬂinchlingly for your convictions concerning what was right and good for the community, whatever were the views in fashion.

From scholars and clergymen on my mother’s side I inherited a belief that, in the very radical sense of the Gospels, all men were equals as children of God, and should be met and treated by us as our masters in God.

Faith is a state of mind and the soul. In this sense we can understand the words of the Spanish mystic, St. John of the Cross: “Faith is the union of God with the soul.” The language of religion is a set of formulas which register a basic spiritual experience. It must not be regarded as describing, in terms to be deﬁned by philosophy, the reality which is accessible to our senses and which we can analyse with the tools of logic. I was late in understanding what this meant. When I ﬁnally reached that point, the beliefs in which I was once brought up and which, in fact, had given my life direction even while my intellect still challenged their validity, were recognized by me as mine in their own right and by my free choice. I feel that I can endorse those convictions without any compromise with the demands of that intellectual honesty which is the very key to maturity of mind.

The two ideals which dominated my childhood world met me fully

282 | harmonized and adjusted to the demands of our world of today in the ethics of Albert Schweitzer, where the ideal of service is supported by and supports the basic attitude to man set forth in the Gospels. In his work I also found a key for modern man to the world of the Gospels.

But the explanation of how man should live a life of active social service in full harmony with himself as a member of the community of the spirit, I found in the writings of those great medieval mystics for whom “self-surrender” had been the way to self-realization, and who in “singleness of mind” and “inwardness” had found strength to say yes to every demand, which the needs of their neighbours made them face, and to say yes also to every fate life had in store for them when they followed the call of duty, as they understood it. “Love”- -the much misused and misinterpreted word--for them meant simply an overﬂowing of the strength with which they felt themselves ﬁlled when living in true self-oblivion. And this love found natural expressions in an unhesitant fulﬁllment of duty and in an unreserved acceptance of life, whatever it brought them personally of toil, suﬀering--or happiness.

I know that their discoveries about the laws of inner life and of action have not lost their signiﬁcance.

This I Believe, vol. 2, ed. Raymond Swing (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1954), 194-196; Public Papers of the S-G, 2:194-196

283 | Appendix B

A Room Of Quiet

This is a room devoted to peace and those who are giving their lives for peace. It is a room of quiet where only thoughts should speak.

We all have within us a center of stillness surrounded by silence. This house, dedicated to work and debate in the service of peace, should have one room dedicated to silence in the outward sense and stillness in the inner sense.

It has been the aim to create in this small room a place where the doors may be open to the inﬁnite lands of thought and prayer.

People of many faiths will meet here, and for that reason none of the symbols to which we are accustomed in our meditation could be used.

However, there are simple things which speak to us all with the same language. We have sought for such things and we believe that we have found them in the shaft of light striking the shimmering surface of solid rock.

So, in the middle of the room we see a symbol of how, daily, the light of the skies gives life to the earth on which we stand, a symbol to many of us of how the light of the spirit gives life to matter.

But the stone in the middle of the room has more to tell us. We may see it as an altar, empty not because there is no God, not because it is an altar to an unknown god, but because it is dedicated to the God whom man worships under many names and in many forms.

The stone in the middle of the room reminds us also of the ﬁrm and permanent in a world of movement and change. The block of iron ore has the weight and solidity of the everlasting. It is a reminder of that cornerstone of

284 | endurance and faith on which all human endeavour must be based.

The material of the stone leads our thoughts to the necessity for choice between destruction and construction, between war and peace. Of iron man has forged his swords, of iron he has also made his ploughshares. Of iron he has constructed tanks, but of iron he has likewise built homes for man. The block of iron ore is part of the wealth we have inherited on this earth of ours. How are we to use it?

The shaft of light strikes the stone in a room of utter simplicity. There are no other symbols, there is nothing to distract our attention or to break in on the stillness within ourselves. When our eyes travel from these symbols to the front wall, they meet a simple pattern opening up the room to the harmony, freedom, and balance of space.

There is an ancient saying that the sense of a vessel is not in its shell but in the void. So it is with this room. It is for those who come here to ﬁll the void with what they ﬁnd in their center of stillness.

UN Headquarters leaﬂet, April 1957, revised December 1957. Public Papers of the S-G, 3:710-711.

285 | Bibliography Aulén, Gustaf. Dag Hammarskjölds Conrad, Joseph. Lord Jim. New York: vitbok. Stockholm: Bonniers, 1970. Doubleday, Doran & Co., 1937.

-- Dag Hammarskjöld’s White Book. Cordier, Andrew W. and Maxwell, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969. Kenneth. Paths to World Order.

Barnes, Djuna. Selected Works of New York: Columbia University Djuna Barnes. New York: Farrar, Press, 1967. Straus and Cudahy, 1962. Den svenska psalmboken 1937. Beaty, David. Strange Encounters: Stockholm: Verbum, 1972. Mysteries of the Air. New York: Atheneum, 1984. Den svenska psalmboken 1986. Stockholm: Verbum, 1986. Beskow, Bo. Dag Hammarskjöld: Strictly Personal. Garden City, NY: Eckhart, John. Meister Eckehart Doubleday, 1969. Schriften. Ed. Herman Büttner.

The Book of Common Prayer. New Jena: Eugen Diederichs Verlag, 1934. York: Oxford, 1938. Eckhart, Meister. Die deutschen Boye, Karin. Dikter. Stockholm: Werke, vols. 3 and 5. Ed. Josef Quint. Bonniers, 1946. Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer, l973, l963. Browne, Thomas. Religio Medici. Ed. J. C. Martin. Oxford: Clarendon, Ekman, Bertil. Strödda blad ur 1964. Bertil Ekmans efterlämnade papper. Stockholm: P. A. Norstedt & Söner, Buber, Martin. I and Thou. 1923. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1937. Eliot, T. S. Four Quartettes. New Caird, G. B. A Commentary on the York: Harcourt, Brace, 1943. Revelation of St. John the Divine. New York: Harper & Row, 1966. Erling, Bernhard. “Discipleship at the United Nations: Claudel, Paul. The Satin Slipper. New York: Sheed & Ward, 1945. Hammarskjöld’s Religious Commitment,” The Christian Century, Confucius: The Great Digest & 98 (Sept. 16, 1981), 902-906. Unwobbling Pivot. Trans. Ezra Pound. New York: New Directions, 1951.

286 | — “The Imitation of Christ in Dag — Merkstenen. Trans. R. F. M. Hammarskjöld’s Waymarks,” Lutheran Boshowers. Brugge, Utrecht: Quarterly, l(1987). Desclée DeBrouwer, 1965, 3rd Fallada, Hans. Kleiner Mann — printing 1966. was nun? Reinbeck bei Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1964. — Michi Shirube. Trans. Nobushige Ukai. Tokyo: Misuzu Shobo, 1967. Faulkner, William. Essays, Speeches and Public Letters. Ed. James B. — “A New Look at Everest,” The Meriwether. New York: Random National Geographic, 119 ( January House, 1965. 1961), 86-93.

Fröding, Gustaf. Samlade dikter, vol. 1. — “Old Creeds in a New World,” This Stockholm: Bonniers, 1910. I Believe. Vol. 2. Written for Edward R. Murrow, Ed. Raymond Swing. Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. Faust. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1954. Goethes Werke, vol. 2. Stuttgart: F. G. Cotta’schen Buchhandlung, 1887. — “Slottsbacken.” Svenska turistföreningens årskskrift 1962. Gracq, Julien. Balcony in the Forest. New York: George Briziller, 1959. Stockholm: Svenska turistföringens förlag, 1962. English Gray, Kay Rainey. “United Nations Notebook: The Relationship of translation, Castle Hill. Uppsala: The Dag Hammarskjöld with the Press,” Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, 1977. Development Dialogue, 1987:1, 33-58. — Vägmärken. Stockholm: Bonniers, Hammarskjöld, Dag. Jalons. Trans. E. 1963, 1966. G. Bjurström & Philippe Dumaine. — Zeichen am Weg. Trans. Anton Paris: Plon, n.d. Graf Knyphausen. München: Knaur, — Konjunkturspridningen: en 1965. teoretisk och historisk undersökning. Hamilton, Edith. Mythology. New Stockholm: Nordiska bokhandeln, York: New American Library, 1953. 1933. Heidenstam, Verner von. Dikter. — Markings. Trans. Leif Sjöberg & Samlade verk, vol. 6. Stockholm: W. H. Auden. New York: Knopf, Bonniers, 1944. 1964; New York: Ballantine Books/ Epiphany Edition, 1983. — Vallfart och vandringsår. Samlade verk, vol. 1. Stockholm: Bonniers, 1943.

287 | Henderson, Harold G. An Marvin Swenson. Vol. 2. Trans. Introduction to Haiku. Garden City, Walter Lowrie. Garden City, NY: NY: Doubleday, 1958. Doubleday, 1959.

Hesse, Hermann. The Journey to the — Fear and Trembling and The East. Trans. Hilda Rosner. New York: Sickness unto Death. Trans. Bantam, 1972. Walter Lowrie. Princeton: Princeton Hölderlin, Friedrich. Hymns and University Press, 1973. Fragments. Trans. Richard Sieburth. Princeton: Princeton University — Stages on Life’s Way. Trans. Walter Press, 1984. Lowrie. New York: Schocken Books, 1967. — Der Tod des Empedokles. Werke und Briefe, vol. 2. Eds. Friedrich Beissner Kitto, H. D. F. Greek Tragedy. Garden & Jochen Schmidt. Frankfurt am City, NY: Doubleday, 1955. Main: Insel, 1969. La Cour, Paul. Fragmenter af en Ibsen, Henrik. Brand, Peer Gynt. Dagbog. København: Gyldendal, 1951. Samlede værker, vol. 3. Kristiania: Lawrence, T. E. Seven Pillars of Gyldendalske boghandel, 1914. Wisdom. London: Jonathan Cape, 1935. Kant, Immanuel. Grundlegung zur Lindegren, Erik. Dag Hammarskjöld: Metaphysik der Sitten. Inträdestal i Svenska Akademien. Stuttgart: Reclam, 1955. Stockholm: Norstedts, 1962.

Karlfeldt, Erik Axel. Erik Axel — Dikter. Stockholm: Bonniers, 1964. Karlfeldts dikter. Stockholm:

Wahlström & Widstrand, 1943

Kelen, Emery. Hammarskjöld. New York: G. P. Putnam’s, 1966.

Kempis, Thomas à. De l’imitation de Jesus-Christ. Trans. le sieur de Beüil , derniere éd. Brussels: Eugene Henry Frick, 1689.

Kierkegaard, Søren. Either/Or, vol. l. Trans. David F. and Lillian

288 | Lutheran Book of Worship. Riesman, David. The Lonely Crowd. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing New York: Doubleday, 1952. House, 1978. Schweitzer, Albert. The Quest of McKeon, Richard. Introduction to the Historical Jesus. New York: Aristotle. New York: Random House, Macmillan, 1961. 1947. Scott, James B. Djuna Barnes. Boston: Melville, Herman. Moby Dick. New Twayne, 1976. York: New American Library, 1961. Sjöberg, Birger. Samlade Dikter. Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Joyful Stockholm: Bonniers, 1954. Wisdom. Complete Works, vol. 10. Ed. Sjöberg, Leif. “Translating with W. H. Oscar Levy. Edinburgh: T. N. Foulis, Auden,” Comparative Criticism, vol. l 1910. (1979). O’Neill, Eugene. Nine Plays. New Söderberg, Sten. Hammarskjöld: A York: The Modern Library, n.d. Pictorial Biography. New York: Viking, Pascal, Blaise. Œuvres complétes. Ed. 1962. Jacques Chevalier. Paris: Gallimard, Sprigge, Elizabeth and Kihm, Jean- 1954. Jacques. Jean Cocteau: The Man — Pensées. Trans. W. F. Trotter. and the Mirror. New York: Coward New York: Dutton, 1948. McCann, 1968. Perse, St.-John. Chronique — Stolpe, Sven. Dag Hammarskjöld: Krönika, i svensk tolkning av Dag A Spiritual Portrait. Trans. Naomi Hammarskjöld. Stockholm: Bonniers, Walford. New York: Scribner’s, 1966. 1960. Sundén, Hjalmar. Kristus-meditationer — Collected Poems. Princeton: i Dag Hammarskjölds Vägmärken. Princeton U. Press, 1971. Stockholm: Diakonistyrelsens bokförlag, 1966. — Letters. Trans. & ed. Arthur J. Knodel. Princeton: Princeton U. This I Believe, vol. 2. Ed. Raymond Press, 1979. Swing. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1954. Public Papers of the Secretaries-General of the United Nations, vols. 2-5. Eds. Urquhart, Brian. Hammarskjold. New Andrew W. Cordier & Wilder Foote. York: Knopf, 1973. New York: Columbia University — “International Leadership: The Press, 1972-1975. Legacy of Dag Hammarskjöld,” Development Dialogue, 1987:1, 10-13

289 | Van Dusen, Henry P. Dag Hammarskjöld: The Statesman and His Faith. New York: Harper & Row, 1967. Waley, Arthur. The Way and Its Power. New York: Macmillan, 1934. Welch, Holmes. The Parting of the Way: Lao Tzu and the Taoist Movement. Boston: Beacon Press, 1957. Willers, Uno. Perspektiv på hemlandet. Stockholm: Bonniers, 1965. Yutang, Lin. The Wisdom of Laotse. New York: Random House, 1948.

Index Scripture References

Verse Waymark Genesis 1:1 61:1 1:1-2 51:47 3:22-23 51:33 18:26,32 56:29

Exodus 34:29 51:15

Leviticus 19:18 51:43

Numbers 6:25 58:2 25 56:8

Deuteronomy 29:28 59:31

Psalms 4:8 56:44, 60:3 18:19-20 56:56 27:13-14 56:34 31:16 58:2 33:9-11 56:23 37:7,8 56:44 40:7-10 56:64 51:6 59:1 60:2 61:15 60:3-4 60:3 62:1,5 54:26 62:9-11 55:25 62:11-12 54:26 63:1-2 55:50 63:5,7 55:51 73:16-17 61:4 73:17-18 61:15 77:14 55:44 78:35 61:15, 61:16

291 | 80:3,7,19 58:2 106:30-31 56:8 107:29-30 57:21 109:25-26 61:3 115:1 55:26 130:4 56:9, 56:56 139:9-10 54:28

Isaiah 14:12-14 56:46 21:11-12 56:29 53:7 61:6

Ezekiel 5:5; 38:12 59:65

2 Esdras 13:45 59:31

Wisdom of Solomon 18:14 56:58

Matthew 5:6 50:42 5:8 54:19 5:25-26 25-30:15 6:9 41-42:21, 56:55, 58:9 6:10 52:3, 56:55, 58:9 6:13 56:7 6:34 61:5 7:13-14 41-42:16 10:19-20 56:29 11:3 51:29 12:36-37 50:25, 55:37 13:12 55:34 17:20 51:32, 56:25 25:14-30 45-49:1, 50:27 25:29 55:34 26:6-13 50:26 26:39 57:23, 60:4

292 | Mark 4:25 55:34 5:22-43 45-49:2 8:27-35 45-49:13 8:35-36 41-42:9 10:17-22 51:27 11:23 56:25 12:31 51:43

Luke 2:34 51:53 2:49 56:58 7:19-20 51:29 9:62 51:22, 53:12, 56:13, 57:26, 61:5 11:24-26 41-42:7 14:33 51:27 16:1-9 59:111 17:7-10 25-30:12 18:9-14 25-30:15 19:26 55:34

John 1:5 56:16 1:29 51:29 2:24-25 50:44 3:8 56:16 3:30 55:57 9:4 51:38 11:50 56:27 13:1-11 51:29 13:12,19,21,36,38 51:29 13:34 51:30 14:3 50:1 14:27, 31 51:29 19:30 45-49:12

1 Corinthians 13:1-2 41-42:14 13:2 51:32 15:10 53:6 15:26 56:39

293 | 2 Corinthians 4:7 53:9 5:10 52:5

Galatians 2:20 53:6

Ephesians 2:19-22 50:42 2:21 56:8 6:5 53:20 6:12 56:8

1 Thessalonians 5:17 55:16

Titus 1:15 55:5

1 Peter 1:4-5 50:42

Revelation 3:20 41-42:7 12:7-12 56:9

294 | Persons

Adoula, Cyrille - 245 Eckhart, Meister - xiii, 51:1, 55:28, Aristotle - 56:11 56:11, 56:12, 56:31, 56:34, 56:57, Auden, W. H. - v-vii, ix-x, 50:12, 56:8, 56:58, 57:33, 58:2, 58:3 61:17 Eisenhower, Dwight - 56:49 Auden-Sjöberg - v-vii, 51:53, 53:19, Ekelöf, Gunnar - 53:5 55:31, 56:15, 57:3 Ekelund, Vilhelm - 41:42:8, 50:12 Aulén, Gustaf - viii, 50:4, 50:8, 50:51, Ekman, Bertil - 25-30:2, 51:1, 51:24, 51:47, 51:47, 51:53, 52:14, 55:31, 53:4, 56:67, 61:4 55:41, 55:52, 55:55, 56:11, 56:62, Eliot, T. S. - 51:7, 57:33 57:16, 57:36, 59:5, 61:10 Empedocles - 52:4, 52:5 Erling, Bernhard - xi Bang-Jensen, Povl - 57:51 Barnes, Djuna - ix, 61:2 Fallada, Hans (Rudolf Ditzen) - 57:4 Beaty, David - 245-246 Faulkner, William - 56:53 Belfrage, Leif - v, viii, xii, 51:40 Fawzi, Mahmoud - 56:48, 137 Ben Gurion, David - 175, 57:17 Foote, Wilder - xi, xii, 57:2 Beskow, Bo - x, 55:17, 55:21, 55:25, Franzén, Franz Mikael - 30 56:34, 57:27, 57:40, 57:41, 61:12 Fröding, Gustaf - 50:28 Blomberg, Erik - 45-49:5 Bourguiba, Habib - 61:12 Gaulle, Charles de - 61:12 Boye, Karin - 54:14, 54:15 Geijer, Erik Gustaf - 55:1 Browne, Thomas - 56:35 Gierow, Karl Ragnar - ix, 59:101, 61:2 Buber, Martin - 50:57, 55:39, 55:40 Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von - 51:19 Bunche, Ralph J. - 57:34 Gracq, Julien - 56:34, 59:72 Burnes, E. L. M. - 56:11, 57:20 Gray, Kay Rainey - 57:2, 61:17 Groote, Gerard - 53:8 Caird, G. B. - 56:9 Charles XII - 51:15, 59:26 Hamilton, Edith - 61:1 Chou En-lai - x, 54:26, 54:27, 83, 55:1, Hammarskjöld, Agnes Almquist - 30, 55:5, 55:22, 55:25, 56:25 56:2, 57:5, 57:30, 59:29, 59:44 Claudel, Paul - 55:51 Hammarskjöld, Åke - 59:30 Cocteau, Jean - 52:6 Hammarskjöld, Hjalmar - ix, 1, 50:39, Confucius - 56:27, 56:31, 56:32 51:7, 52:24, 100, 57:30, 58:13, 59:28, Conrad, Joseph - 51:62 59:29, 59:35 Cordier, Andrew W. - x, 55:39 Hammarskjöld, Peder - xii Heidenstam, Verner von - 45-49:2, 59:57

295 | Henderson, Harold G. - 59:6 Malmberg, Bertil - 1 Hepworth, Barbara - 58:15 Maxwell, Kenneth - 55:39 Hesse, Hermann - 57:26 McCarthy, Joseph - 64, 55:10 Hölderlin, Friedrich - 52:4, 52:5, 52:16 McKeon, Richard - 56:11 Meir, Golda - 57:17 Ibsen, Henrik - x, 50:2, 51:1, 56:52, Melville, Herman - 51:20 61:4 Mobutu, Joseph-Désiré (Mobutu Sese Seko) - 238-239, 246, 60:5, John of the Cross, St. - 54:7, 55:9, 196, 61:1 56:25, 56:63, 57:47, 58:7, 286 Murrow, Edward R. - xi, 91, 54:7

Kant, Immanuel - 50:52, 57:29 Nasser, Gamal Abdel - 140, 56:29, Karlfeldt, Erik Axel - 57:34 56:34, 56:48, 137 Kasavubu, Joseph - 238-239, 60:5 Nietzsche, Friedrich - 57:51 Kelen, Emery - 59:100, 246 Kempis, Thomas à - vii, xi, 53:8, 55:3, O’Neill, Eugene - 59:101 55:21, 55:53, 55:66, 56:8, 56:57 Kierkegaard, Søren - 41-42:1, 50:37, Pascal, Blaise - 56:10 52:24, 57:12 Perse, St.-John - ix, 57:15, 57:22, 57:33, Kihm, Jean-Jacques - 52:6 246, 61:1 Kitto, H. D. F. - 53:4 Pound, Ezra - 56:27, 56:30, 56:31, 56:34 Knyphausen, Anton Graf - x Krushchev, Nikita - 238, 60:2 Riesman, David - 59:90 Rumi (Maulana Jalal-uddin) - 55:2, La Cour, Paul - 59:94 55:3 Lao-tzu - 57:37, 57:41 Lawrence, T. E. - 59:95 Schweitzer, Albert - 51:45, 209 Lie, Trygve - 91, 60:2 Scott, James B. - 61:2 Lind, Per - xii Sjöberg, Birger - 51:39 Lindegren, Erik - 51:24, 56:15, 56:39, Sjöberg, Leif - 52:16 57:26 Söderberg, Sten - 55:25, 55:38 Lumumba, Patrice - 238-239, 245, Söderblom, Nathan - 1 60:2, 60:5, 195, 61:1, 61:2 Sophocles - 53:4, 57:7 Lundquist, Gösta - 59:112 Sprigge, Elizabeth - 52:6 Luther, Martin - 41-42:3, 53:4, 57:36 Stolpe, Sven - 51:24, 55:51 Sundén, Hjalmar - 52:4, 57:6, 59:81

296 | Tao Te Ching - 57:37, 57:41 Tshombe, Moise - 245 Tsze, Sze - 56:27, 56:30, 56:34

Undén, Östen - 81 Urquhart, Brian - x, xii, 53:8, 55:39, 55:41, 56:23, 56:49, 56:53, 57:20, 57:51, 58:2, 58:15, 59:81, 59:101, 246, 61:12, 61:13, 61:14

Van Dusen, Henry P. - viii, 20, 50:4, 50:51, 51:56, 52:14, 52:17, 53:8, 57:27, 57:28, 59:28, 59:100, 61:13

Waley, Arthur - 57:37, 57:41 Wallin, Johan Olof - 60:3 Welch, Holmes - 57:37, 57:41 Willer, Uno - viii-ix, xii, 51:56, 51:57, 55:22

Yutang, Lin - 57:41

297 | Subjects

A Abasement - 57:44 Altruism - 41-42:11, 41-42:16, 51:30, Aberrations, common - 51:54 52:19 Ability - 25-30:8, 25-30:12, 41-42:13, Always - 54:5-6, 55:46, 55:65, 56:48, 50:30, 55:64, 59:4 56:62, 57:22, 60:1 Above - 54:25, 55:8, 56:53 Ambition - 45-49:5, 51:59, 55:59, Absolute - 51:62, 53:7, 56:30, 56:34 56:40 Abstractions - 50:43, 56:26 Amputation - 57:39 Abyss - 53:16, 55:9, 55:47, 57:45, 61:11; Anchorage - 45-49:1, 55:9 cf. depth of being, depths Anesthetic - 52:4 Accept, to - 51:48, 53:11, 55:12, 55:41, Anger - 61:16 56:22, 56:43, 57:16, 57:39 Anguish - 50:2, 50:4, 50:56 Achievement - 25-30:9, 50:13, 50:42, Animal, animals - 41-42:18, 41-42:20, 50:39, 50:47, 53:7, 54:10, 55:5, 41-42:22, 50:6, 50:10, 50:23, 52:9, 55:22, 55:60, 56:3, 56:42, 56:46, 56:17, 57:45, 58:8, 59:23, 59:62, 56:63, 57:16 59:65, 59:78, 61:17 Acquire, to - 50:28, 52:20 Annihilate, annihilation - 50:2, 50:26, Act, to; action - 41-42:11, 55:39, 55:65, 51:60, 51:61, 57:47 58:2, 59:5, 61:8 Anonymous - 45-49:13, 50:26 Adroitness - 55:39 Answer, to answer – 55:21, 55:10, Advantage, advantages - 53:3, 55:15 55:39, 57:22, 57:51, 59:85, 60:6, Advent - 60:3 61:4, 61:5 Adversity - 59:4, 61:14 Anthropomorphism, blasphemous - Aesthetic - 50:37, 56:15, 57:12 58:5 Aﬃrmation - 51:47, 53:1, 53:7, 53:12, Antifeminism - 51:40 53:14, 55:10, 55:26, 56:7, 57:37, 61:5 Anxiety, anxious, anxiously - 41-42:1, Aggressiveness - 51:4 50:42, 50:55, 51:25, 51:32, 59:104, Aging - 50:2, 50:4, 51:1, 51:7, 52:24, 61:5, 61:11 57:1 Anyone, anything - 50:37, 53:10, 53:21, Ahab, Captain - 51:20 55:43, 55:54, 56:3, 56:6, 56:21, Ahriman (Angra Mainyu) - 56:17 56:52, 57:41 Air - 50:50, 52:14, 57:28 Appear, to; appearance - 55:39, 56:39, Aladdin - 55:48 57:27, 61:18 All, all-seeing - 55:29, 57:6, 57:19, Appeasement - 25-30:6, 57:36 57:39, 59:3, 59:97, Arctic - 51:57 Alone - 45-49:5, 50:9, 50:54, 54:21, Ariadne-thread - 55:18, 61:5 55:46, 57:22, 58:7, 59:93, 61:12; cf. Arrange, to - 55:17, 56:51 loneliness, solitude Art - 55:11, 55:39, 59:4

298 | Arzareth - 59:31 Binding, to be bound - 55:23, 55:32, Asceticism - 51:40 56:67, 59:97 Atmosphere - 50:15, 51:40 Birds, birdsong - 45-49:6, 45-49:11, Atonement - 50:39 50:41, 51:33, 51:44, 51:45, 51:47, Atrophying - 55:9 51:57, 59:19, 59:20, 59:43, 59:54, Attack - 55:10, 56:4-5 59:56, 59:58, 59:73, 59:76, 59:88, Attempt, attempts - 52:3, 56:8, 57:9 59:107 Attribute - 53:14, 54:22 Birth - 41-42:23, 51:11, 52:6, 56:58, Audience - 50:7 59:63 Authority - 56:37, 59:4 Birthday, DH’s - 52:16, 55:21, 56:34, Autumn - 51:60, 51:61 57:28, 58:9, 59:4, 61:14 Awake, awaken - 56:10, 57:48, 59:41, Bitter, bitterness - 50:35, 55:62, 56:63 61:14, 61:19; cf. waken, waking Blind, blindness - 52:2, 55:19, 56:24, Awful - 41-42:23 57:1 Bliss - 56:2, 57:5 B Block, the Uncarved - 57:41 Blood - 54:17, 56:39, 58:10, 60:4 Back, backward - 55:37, 57:1, 57:26; cf. Body - 50:21, 50:28, 52:9, 53:17, 54:15, look back 54:16, 55:60, 56:41, 57:45, 57:50, Bankbook - 51:38 58:9, 58:14, 59:32, 59:69, 59:70, Basis - 55:26, 56:63, 57:12 59:77, 59:95, 61:7 Bear, to - 52:16, 56:63, 57:1, 61:10 Books - 45-49:12, 52:4, 59:79, 59:109 Beauty - 25-30:4, 50:21, 50:28, 50:53, Born - 51:11, 51:49, 53:22, 55:65, 56:16, 51:56, 54:16, 55:54, 57:34, 59:84 57:28 Bee - 50:36 Boundary - 41-42:13, 50:27, 50:38, Becoming - 51:25 50:52, 51:44, 53:15 Begin, to - 54:1, 61:19 Boundary of the unheard of - 51:47, Being - 41-42:24, 55:28, 55:55, 57:1 51:62, 52:6 Belief, to believe - 45-49:3, 50:51, Bowl - 57:1 52:14, 52:20, 54:7, 54:19, 54:27, Box - 59:35 56:13, 56:25, 59:116, 61:13 Bridge - 50:42, 51:6, Bend, to - 61:16 Brothers, DH’s - 50:39 Berries - 51:14, 59:48 Buddha (Gautama Siddartha) - 59:63 Best, better - 53:2, 56:26-27, 57:32, Burden - 45-49:13, 52:16, 54:13, 55:13, 57:33, 59:4, 59:53 57:38, 57:40 Bethlehem - 60:3 Betray, to; betrayal - 50:33, 54:10, 55:41, 56:60, 56:61, 57:17, 57:32 Beyond - 51:47, 51:49, 54:25, 55:8, 55:51, 55:55, 56:19, 56:39, 56:53, 58:7, 59:95

299 | C Command, to; commandment - 51:16, 51:30, 54:25, 55:12, 57:13 Calling (vocation) - 53:11, 57:25, 59:4, Commitment - 45-49:5, 51:29, 61:5 61:10 Communication, nonverbal - 50:30, Calm - 51:60, 51:62, 52:8, 55:55, 55:65, 51:40, 51,55, 54:4, 55:51 61:6, 61:11 Communion of saints - 52:14, 55:9 Capers - 55:22 Comparison - 25-30:8, 25-30:9, 59:4 Career, careerist - 50:39, 51:37 Competition - 55:57 Careless words - 50:25, 55:28, 55:37, Compromise, to - 51:42, 55:5, 55:39 Caress - 51:50, 55:51 Conceit - 53:13, 55:22, 56:61 Castle (Uppsala) - 1, 59:23, 59:25-26 Condemn, to; condemnation - 45- Causality, chain of causality - 55:26, 49:13, 56:13, 56:45, 57:26, 59:37 55:59, 60:1 Condition, conditions - 41-42:8, 55:37, Celebration - 60:2 56:43, 57:12, 57:17 Center - 57:41, 59:5 Confess, to - 51:8, 57:11, 59:38 Certainty - 54:1, 56:2, 56:25, 61:5 Conscious, consciousness - 45-49:1, Challenged, to be - 56:21, 57:24 50:3, 50:33, 55:16, 55:34, 57:6, 58:7, Chaos - 51:47, 55:8 59:2 Chatter - 50:32, 50:55 Consequences - 50:26, 51:19, 51:42, Child, childish - 45-49:9, 50:48, 51:3, 57:41, 60:1 53:18, 56:6, 56:18, 56:39, 59:37 Consummation - 51:53, 52:6, 54:7 Choice - 45-49:1, 50:46, 51:19, 51:32, Contact - 50:56-57, 51:12, 51:40, 52:6, 51:47, 55:34, 56:53, 57:17, 57:26, 53:15, 55:31, 56:10, 57:36, 59:1 57:46, 58:8 Contempt - 41-42:13, 55:37, 55:39 Choose, to - 45-49:1, 50:3, 50:54, 51:31, Content - 50:46, 51:6, 52:11, 58:9 51:36, 53:21, 55:8, 55:57, 56:21, Context - 56:8, 56:21, 56:24, 56:26 59:82 Continue, to - 53:20, 54:1, 57:12, 58:7, Chosen - 45-49:7, 55:15, 58:9, 61:6, 61:5 61:10, 61:12 Contribution - 50:42, 51:59, 54:22, Christian holy days - 51:34, 56:9, 57:47 56:10, 56:57, 57:6, 60:1, 60:3, 61:4, Conversation - 25-30:10, 45-49:12, 61:5 50:8, 50:11, 50:15, 50:25, 50:32, Christmas - 45-49:8, 51:3, 54:27, 55:50, 50:55, 51:12, 55:37, 59:28 55:53, 56:57, 57:52, 59:67, 60:3 Conviction, convictions - 51:13, 52:15 Claim, claims - 50:39, 50:53, 52:19, Cost - 60:1, 61:5 55:49 Courage - 50:46, 50:50, 51:8, 51:42, Clarity - 41-42:10, 51:60, 57:1, 58:10 51:62, 54:23, 55:30, 55:41, 56:1, Clean, cleaner - 55:4, 56:6, 56:30, 56:10, 56:24, 56:28, 56:38, 57:47, 57:22, 58:4 61:5, 61:6, 61:13 Clerk (pinneberg) - 57:4

300 | Course - 56:10, 56:59, 57:2 Death (total self-surrender) - 41-42:9, Cowardliness - 45-49:6, 51:36 45-49:5, 52:6 Create, to; creating, creative - 41- Deceits, to deceive - 51:36, 55:25, 55:39, 42:25, 54:13-14, 55:21, 55:40, 56:11, 56:33 56:36, 56:63, 58:8, 59:86, 59:95 Decency - 55:9, 55:39, 56:54 Creation - 50:42, 56:39, 58:7-8 Decisions - 51:19, 57:46 Creator - 54:13-14, 55:21, 55:53, 55:21 Dedicated - 55:23, 55:29, 56:1, 61:13 Credit - 54:10, 55:22, 56:18, 56:59, Deep, depths - 50:29, 50:41, 51:47, 57:19 52:6, 55:63, 55:64, 57:36; cf. abyss Criticism, to criticize - 45-49:13, 51:28, Deliver, to, deliverance - 51:43 54:9, 55:39, 56:39, 57:14, 57:20, Demands - 50:42, 51:59, 52:20, 53:5, 57:49 54:22, 55:60, 56:20, 56:34, 56:39, Cross - 50:44, 53:11, 60:3, 61:5 57:9, 57:39 Cup - 53:9, 54:2, 60:6, 61:5 Deny, to - 52:15, 55:60, 56:18, 57:17, 57:39, 61:10 D Depravity, human - 57:6 Depth, depths - 41-42:22, 55:39, 61:14 Daily - 51:18, 55:28, 57:9 Depth of being - 41-42:24, 55:55 Danger, dangerous - 54:22, 55:15, Descend, to - 58:7, 58:8 56:43, 57:2 Desire - 45-49:1, 50:28, 51:44, 51:47, Dare, to - 25-30:9, 45-49:5, 50:11, 51:50, 52:17, 55:60, 56:41, 58:10, 50:32, 50:40, 51:8, 52:20, 56:7, 59:32, 59:70, 59:108; cf. longing 56:21, 57:6 Despair - 51:32, 52:21, 54:19, 55:27 Dark, darkness - 41-42:21, 50:39, Destiny - 50:46, 50:54, 51:27, 51:29, 50:40, 51:44, 51:45, 51:46, 51:47, 51:53 52:3, 53:7, 53:11, 55:23, 55:26, 52:8, 52:13, 54:6, 54:7, 54:8, 55:55, 55:40, 55:60, 56:1, 56:27, 56:39, 57:6, 58:13, 59:43, 61:2, 61:14 56:59, 56:61, 57:2, 57:24, 57:35, Dawn - 51:46, 51:50, 57:16, 58:10, 60:4, 57:37, 57:39, 57:46, 61:13 61:14 Destroy, to; destruction - 50:36, 51:53, Day, daylight - 45-49:5, 51:46, 52:8, 51:61, 55:28, 55:40, 56:26, 57:5, 58:14 57:6, 58:10, 59:86, 61:11 Dead, the - 50:26, 50:43, 51:11, 51:23, Devil - 51:9, 51:13, 51:19 58:13 (Mephistopheles), 51:53, 56:46 Death, to die, dying - 25-30:3, 41-42:9, (Lucifer) 45-49:3-4, 45-49:6-7, 45-49:9, Devotion - 45-49:5, 54:16, 55:53, 57:19 50:2, 50:4, 50:26-27, 50:31, 50:35, Diﬀerences - 55:41 51:1, 51:17, 51:29, 51:38, 51:39, 52:5, Dignity - 55:14, 59:2 52:16, 52:19, 52:24, 55:4, 55:18, Diplomacy - 55:39, 55:64 55:43, 55:62, 56:39, 56:54, 57:39, Discipline - 25-30:2, 54:25, 55:37, 57:42-46, 58:9, 59:109, 61:6 56:26

301 | Dogs - 50:6, 56:17 Evolution - 52:7, 58:8 Doubt - 52:14, 56:25, 61:16 Exalt, to; exaltation - 53:4, 56:13, Dream, dreams - 41-42:10, 51:44-46, 57:44, 61:5 55:20, 55:40, 55:43, 55:47, 55:55, Examination - 52:5, 54:21; cf. test 56:6, 58:10, 61:19 Exception - 54:14 Dust - 51:49, 52:8, 52:9 Exile - 57:22, 61:17 Duty, duties - 41-42:14, 51:47, 55:18, Exist, existence - 50:40, 51:25, 51:38, 55:32, 55:46, 57:2, 57:19, 57:20, 55:8, 55:38, 59:105, 59:106, 61:5 57:25, 57:35, 57:40, Expect, to; expectation - 51:48, 51:50 59:42 Experience, to experience - 50:34, 50:57, 51:32, 51:56, 52:14, 52:15, E 54:16, 55:39, 56:6, 56:21, 56:30, 56:32, 56:33, 57:6, 58:7, 58:8, 59:5, Earth - 50:10, 51:24, 51:50, 53:19, 55:9, 61:5 55:16, 56:67, 59:30, 59:92; cf. soil Eye, eyes - 55:51, 56:12, 56:45, 57:6, Easter - 51:34, 59:14, 59:21, 59:64, 60:1 59:32 Egocentricity - 50:22, 51:30 Elite, the - 59:3 Emptiness, empty - 41-42:4, 45-49:13, F 50:47, 50:55, 51:6, 52:11, 56:30, 57:1 Face - 45-49:2, 45-49:5, 50:30, 53:13, End - 50:52, 51:60, 57:29 55:19, 55:39 Energy - 45-49:5, 50:10, 50:53, 52:14, Fail, to; failing, failure - 41-42:13, 45- 54:16 49:10, 50:42, 51:29, 54:3, 55:47, Enjoy, to - 54:24, 56:42, 57:10 55:60, 56:63, 57:6, 57:31, 57:32, Enough - 57:40 61:7, 61:12 Envy - 50:44, 55:22 Faith - 41-42:24, 45-49:3, 51:32, 52:3, Epitaph - 45-49:8, 56:3 53:13, 54:7, 54:18, 55:9, 55:15, 55:19, Errors - 55:13 55:26, 55:30, 56:8, 56:25, 56:63, Esteem - 41-42:15, 50:16, 52:19 56:65, 57:13, 57:32, 57:47, 58:7, Eternal, eternity - 45-49:7, 50:3, 50:42, 59:1, 59:116, 61:13; cf. belief, to 52:14, 54:18, 55:9, 55:53, 55:54, believe 56:33, 56:58 Faithful, faithfulness (loyalty) - 51:17, Etna - 52:4 51:29, 51:52, 51:62, 55:7, 55:9, 55:60, Everything - 51:59, 53:12, 54:1, 55:56, 56:1, 56:10, 56:28, 56:38, 57:13, 55:66, 56:7, 56:25, 56:52, 56:66, 61:13 58:7, 58:9, 59:1, 59:4 Fall (autumn) - 45-49:5, 45-49:8, Everywhere - 54:5, 54:17 51:60, 51:61, 58:11 Evil - 50:44, 51:19, 52:7, 56:7, 56:44, Fall, to; falling - 45-49:5, 55:47, 55:52, 56:45, 56:46, 57:6, 58:8, 59:2, 59:36, 59:91 59:102

302 | Falsehood (lie), falsiﬁcation - 41-42:18, Forget, to; forgetfulness - 41-42:23, 50:33, 55:39 51:10, 51:15, 54:19, 57:17, 57:19, Fate - 41-42:17, 59:13; cf. destiny 58:12, 59:94, 60:6 Father (God) - 56:1, 56:32 Forgive, to; forgiveness - 55:43, 56:6, Father (Hjalmar Hammarskjöld) 57:6, 57:9, 57:30, 58:1, 60:1, 61:16 - 50:39, 51:7, 52:24, 58:13, 59:28, Form, to form - 57:1, 57:39, 57:43, 59:35 58:14, 59:82 Fault, faults - 41-42:17, 45-49:10, 54:9, Formula, formulas - 41-42:23, 54:7, 56:40 55:15 Fear - 45-49:6, 51:13, 51:47, 52:6, 55:63, Forward - 56:39, 56:62 56:7, 56:19, 56:55, 57:45, 59:44, Fragrance - 51:47, 51:50, 51:57, 59:50 59:91, 59:108, 61:9, 61:11 Free, freedom - 25-30:2, 45-49:3, Feel, to; feeling - 41-42:23, 45-49:4, 50:42, 51:48, 53:7, 53:12, 53:19, 45-49:6, 45-49:10, 50:32, 50:33, 54:10, 54:13, 54:18, 55:8, 55:65, 50:37, 50:54, 51:4, 51:49, 51:50, 56:19, 56:21, 56:55, 57:9, 57:16, 51:62, 52:9, 53:5, 55:18, 55:19, 55:31, 57:23, 57:39, 58:7, 61:10 55:42, 55:46, 55:63, 56:43, 57:6, Friends, friendliness, friendship - 25- 57:25, 57:27, 59:38, 60:2 30:10, 50:5, 50:18, 50:19, 50:20, Fellowship - 50:11, 50:42, 50:54, 51:29, 52:10, 54:7, 55:19, 59:40 51:32, 52:4, 55:60, 56:32, 59:93, Fruit, fruitful - 50:40, 52:8, 54:18, 61:14 57:47 Find, to - 55:19, 57:42, 59:101 Fulﬁllment - 51:11, 57:16, 57:42 Fire, ﬂame - 41-42:21, 50:2, 54:17, Further - 52:2, 59:49 57:28, 58:10, 61:7 Future - 45-49:2, 50:53, 51:6, 51:17, Fireworks - 58:4 51:25, 54:18, 57:18, 57:35, 57:36, Flight - 41-42:22, 52:19, 55:40, 57:6 59:3, 59:94 Float, to - 56:43, 59:47 Flower, ﬂowers - 50:28, 50:40, 51:46, G 51:57, 51:58, 59:9, 59:14, 59:18, Garden - 41-42:13, 41-42:18 59:25, 59:41, 59:42, 59:49, 59:50- Gethsemane - 54:7, 56:9, 56:10, 60:4, 51, 59:55, 59:60, 59:73, 59:110, 61:18 60:6, 61:5 Focus, to - 56:16, 57:28 Gift, gifts - 50:53, 51:48, 52:19, 53:8, Follow, to; following - 51:29, 52:12, 53:10, 54:22, 55:56, 56:11, 56:59 52:21, 55:30, 57:6, 57:23, 58:5, 60:6, Give, to; giving - 50:4, 50:11, 50:18, 61:13 50:19, 50:39, 51:26, 51:48, 51:59, Fool - 57:51 52:19, 53:10, 54:1, 54:5, 55:29, Fool’s mask - 58:12 55:48, 55:56, 55:66, 56:6, 56:66, Fool’s mirror - 50:43, 56:60, 58:6 57:28, 57:47, 58:9, 59:4 Fool’s paradise - 50:2 Glance - 51:40, 55:51

303 | Glory - 41-42:9, 53:8, 54:19, 54:22, Grateful, gratitude - 51:36, 54:19, 55:26, 55:50, 57:8 54:22, 55:22, 55:58, 56:67 Goal - 25-30:1, 25-30:5, 25-30:11, 51:20, Grave, graves - 59:29, 59:30 51:37, 54:21, 55:23, 56:19, 57:19, Gray - 45-49:5, 51:2, 59:12, 59:26, 57:33, 57:41, 57:43, 61:5 59:41, 60:4, 61:19 God - 41-42:3, 41-42:6, 41-42:23, Greek tragic drama - 52:4, 53:4, 57:7 50:33, 50:51, 51:29, 52:7, 53:4-10, Great, greatest, greatness - 51:56, 53:5, 53:13, 53:17, 54:5, 55:43, 55:61, 56:22, 57:52, 58:3, 54:7, 54:10, 54:20, 54:22, 54:24, 58:9 54:26, 55:6, 55:8, 55:9, 55:11, Ground, grounded - 50:54, 53:8, 54:17, 55:22, 55:25, 55:28, 55:44, 55:50, Grow, to; growth - 50:8, 50:40, 54:1, 55:52, 55:53, 55:55, 56:6, 56:11, 55:37, 56:31, 56:32, 59:92, 59:93 56:13, 56:25, 56:34, Grow up (become mature) - 50:48, 56:35, 56:57, 56:64, 57:4, 57:6, 51:3 57:8, 57:31, 57:33, 57:37, Guilt - 25-30:14, 50:39, 50:55, 51:62, 57:47, 58:2, 58:3, 58:5, 58:7, 59:1, 57:7, 59:38 59:82, 61:3, 61:4, 61:15, 61:16; cf. Gull, gull cries - 45-49:11, 59:58 Lord God (addressed as “You”) - 54:13, H 54:19, 55:7, 55:54, 56:7, 56:8, 56:9, Habitual will - 56:11, 56:31 56:38, 56:44, 56:55, Hand, hands - 50:45, 52:1, 54:4, 55:19, 56:62, 58:9, 58:14, 61:1, 61:13 55:31, 55:51, 58:7, 59:80, 61:1 God (implied but not named) - 45- Hand (God’s) - 53:7, 54:19, 54:20, 49:5, 50:33, 53:14, 54:14, 54:23, 54:28, 55:8, 56:13, 56:49 55:7, 56:33, 56:45, Happy, happiness - 50:1, 50:3, 51:62, 56:51, 57:10, 61:5 54:4, 55:48, 57:10, 57:35, 57:52 God, gods (other gods) - 41-42:20, Harmony - 50:3, 51:56, 54:3, 56:30 56:24, 59:80 Hear, to - 41-42:6, 41-42:10, 54:8, God, gods (other religions) - 55:2, 54:19, 55:19, 55:24, 55:34, 55:58, 59:63 56:62, 59:33, 61:14; God-surrogate - 51:53 cf. to listen God (the unheard of ) - 54:5, 54:20, Heart - 51:49, 54:19, 56:22, 56:32, 54:25, 57:25 57:47, 61:12, 61:13 God’s union with the soul - 54:7, 55:9, Heaven - 55:9, 60:3 56:25, 57:47, 58:7 Height, heights - 50:19, 55:4, 56:16 Golgotha - 60:3 Hell - 51:12, 54:22 Good, goodness - 50:42, 51:19, 53:3, Help, to - 55:57, 56:39, 60:2 57:41, 58:8, 59:84 Helplessness - 51:16 Grace - 50:24, 51:36, 51:39, 56:8, 61:16

304 | Here and now - 45-49:2, 50:3, 54:5, Humiliate, to; humiliating, 55:65, 57:35, 59:84 humiliation - 55:12, 57:13, 57:17, Hero, heroism - 51:26, 51:29, 56:22, 57:20, 61:5 56:24, 57:4, 61:5 Humility, to humble oneself - 51:34, Hesitate, not to - 54:27, 56:5, 56:25, 51:58, 51:62, 53:13, 53:22, 54:2, 54:19, 56:66, 61:7 55:7, 55:41, 55:58, 56:1, 56:10, 56:26, Hide, to; hidden - 55:61, 55:63, 56:34, 56:33, 56:43, 56:45, 56:49, 57:14, 59:51, 59:93 59:4, 61:13 Hinder, to; hindrances - 41-42:9, Humor, sense of - 50:24 51:47, 52:6, 52:14, 57:16, 57:28 Hunger, to hunger - 50:42, 51:5, 57:48 History, historical period - 50:43, 56:39, 56:59, 57:15, 60:2 I Holy - 52:14, 56:8, 59:5 Ice, icy - 41-42:20, 50:2, 51:57, 59:54, Home, at home - 55:17, 57:22, 59:33 59:64 Homosexual - 59:100, cf. sex, sexual Idea - 56:39, 57:46 desire Identity - 59:4 Honesty - 41-42:12, 51:12, 52:21, 55:39, Ignorance - 50:7, 52:22 56:61, 57:9 Image, images - 45-49:5, 50:7, 51:23, Honeymoon - 51:23 55:40, 58:6 Honor, honors - 50:26, 57:16, 60:2 Immaturity - 45-49:9, 50:48, 56:18; cf. Hope, to; hopes - 50:26, 56:3, 56:53, child, childish 57:13, 59:116, 60:2, 61:10 Immortality - 50:26 Hour - 25-30:3, 54:13, 56:2, 56:10, Impossible - 45-49:10, 52:20, 56:13, 61:19; cf. time 61:17 Human - 51:30, 51:56, 52:4, 53:16, Incarnated, incarnation - 56:39, 59:82 53:19, 54:16, 55:29, 55:42, 55:61, Incubus - 52:13 56:59, 57:25, 59:80, Independence - 55:52, 59:5 59:82 Indiﬀerence, indiﬀerent - 50:7, 51:5, Human being, human beings - 50:30, 55:14, 57:16 52:7, 54:3, 54:15, 55:25, 55:39, 57:8, Indiscretion - 51:25 58:2, 58:7-8, 59:5, 61:5 Individual, individuality - 50:42, 51:32, Human condition - 51:12, 56:43, 57:32 51:60, 55:43, 56:21, 59:2 Human hierarchy - 51:15 Individual formation - 25-30:2, 25- Human nature - 50:44, 56:30, 57:6, 30:8, 25-30:12, 41-42:18, 50:24, 57:36, 57:41 50:47, 51:27, 51:48, Humanity - 56:10, 57:31, 57:36 52:3, 53:2-3, 53:7, 53:20-21, 54:11, Humankind - 51:12, 55:37, 55:41, 55:43, 55:12, 55:14, 55:39, 57:8, 56:26, 56:39 57:40, 55:3-5; cf. life commitment

305 | Inferiority, feelings of - 51:4 Joy - 51:25, 51:34, 51:35, 53:5, 55:53, Inﬁnite - 50:40, 55:53, 56:13, 59:3 56:40, 60:2 Inﬂuence - 55:39 Jubilation - 41-42:23, 53:11 Inhuman - 51:30 Judge, to; judgment - 41-42:23, 50:2, Injustice - 56:37, 56:50 50:26-27, 51:11, 51:36, 52:5, 53:7, Inner, innermost - 41-42:24, 41-42:25, 55:27, 56:13, 57:30, 57:9, 57:16, 57:38, 52:3, 52:8, 55:37, 56:15, 59:4 59:5 Innocence - 55:8 Jungle - 41-42:9, 60:5, 61:17 Insensitivity - 56:22 Just, justice - 56:45, 56:50, 57:7, 57:48; Inside - 52:23, 55:39 cf. righteous, righteousness Insight - 41-42:11, 41-42:24, 50:19, Justify, justiﬁcation - 50:39, 50:40, 50:30, 52:7, 52:20-22, 56:2, 56:39, 51:18 57:6 Instinct - 52:6, 56:31, 57:45 K Instrument - 50:52, 54:15 Key, keyhole - 54:22, 57:27 Integrity - 55:32 Kill, to; killer - 55:62, 56:40, 57:7, 61:9, Intellect, intellectual - 41-42:11, 52:14, 61:11 55:15, 55:37 Kilroy was here - 56:53 Intention - 55:3, 55:29, 56:22 King - 50:23, 51:15, 57:7, 59:78 Interpret, to; interpretation - 52:3, Kingdom of God - 56:35, 56:55, 58:2, 52:14, 54:16, 56:39, 59:94 58:3, 58:9 Intimacy - 52:17, 55:55, 56:26 Kinship - 51:12, 51:47 Intrigues - 50:24, 58:12 Kiss - 60:4 Intuit, to; intuitive - 51:29, 55:18, 55:32 Know, to; knowledge - 41-42:8, 41- Invulnerable - 57:16 42:13, 41-42:25, 51:33, 51:47, 52:7, Ironmasters - 59:61 52:20, 53:11, 54:21, 55:17, 55:19, Irrefutable - 57:51 56:20, 56:33, 56:34, 57:23, 58:10, Irritated - 55:57, 56:42 59:85, 61:5, 61:13 Know-it-alls (Besserwisser) - 54:8 J Jealous, jealousy - 55:43, 56:22, 56:36 L Jerusalem - 53:11 Label - 51:54 Jesus - 45-49:13, 50:44, 51:29-31, 51:53, Labor - 50:39, 55:21; cf. work 53:11, 55:30, 56:1, 56:8, 56:10, Labyrinth - 45-49:3, 55:18, 61:5 57:13, 57:36, 59:81-82, 60:1, 60:3, Lamb of God - 51:29 61:5 Land - 50:41, 50:42, 55:50, 59:42, 61:15, Journal (Waymarks) - 52:22-23, 56:61 61:19 Journey - 41-42:8, 45-49:9, 50:54, Landscape - 51:56, 53:17 54:28

306 | Language - 50:15, 55:37, 55:39, 59:27 Life commitment - 25-30:11, 41-42:14, Lapland - 51:56-58, 51:60-61 41-42:16, 45-49:1, 50:1, 50:42, Lasting - 56:21 50:52, 51:22, 51:24, 53:1, 55:37, 56:21, Law - 50:42, 56:64, 58:15 60:6, 61:5 Lead, to; leader - 51:20, 52:1-3, 53:11, Light - 41-42:21, 41-42:24, 45-49:5-7, 55:26, 55:37, 57:38, 57:48, 58:9, 61:5 45-49:12, 50:21, 50:40, 50:50, 51:1, Learn, to - 52:1, 54:20, 55:6, 56:22, 51:35, 51:46, 51:50, 51:57,52:14, 55:38, 56:58, 57:50, 60:6, 61:5 56:16, 56:34, 57:6, 57:16, 57:28, Leave, to - 53:12 57:52, 58:17, 59:27, 59:31, 59:45, Legends - 51:23 59:72, 61:14 Lenience, lenient - 50:39, 52:5, 55:33 Light, lightly - 55:31, 56:67, 58:15, 61:7 Lens - 56:16, 57:28 Like, to - 55:39 Lesson (dangerous) - 57:2 Limelight - 51:23 Let go - 56:41, 61:12 Line, lines - 50:21, 50:28, 54:16, 58:15, Liberate, to; liberation - 51:41, 51:43, 59:13 55:23, 55:51, 56:56, 60:1 Listen, to - 41-42:6, 41-42:10, 54:8, Lie - 55:39; cf. falsehood 55:6, 55:19, 55:24, 55:58, 57:39; cf. Life - 25-30:1, 25-30:6, 25-30:9, 41- to hear 42:5, 41-42:11, 41-42:21, 41-42:23, Little - 52:13, 55:28, 56:60 45- 49:1-2, 45- Live, to - 50:35, 50:40, 50:50, 51:35, 49:10, 50:13, 50:27, 50:33, 50:40, 52:14, 52:18, 53:13, 54:8, 55:12, 55:17, 50:45, 50:49-51, 51:22, 51:25, 55:46, 56:7, 56:34, 56:58, 58:7-8, 51:45, 51:52, 52:7, 52:20, 54:16, 56:13, 59:90, 61:13, 61:19 56:15, 56:18, 56:32, 57:46, 58:4, 59:3, Lives - 41-42:10, 50:18, 50:26 59:5, 59:45, 59:113, 61:1 Living, the - 50:26 Life (equivalent to God) - 45-49:10, Logic, logical - 52:14, 56:28 50:53, 51:59, 53:14, 56:21, 57:47 Loneliness - 25-30:13, 41-42:8, 45- Life (eternal) - 52:14 49:6, 50:4, 50:39, 51:29, 51:32, 52:4, Life (individual existence) - 41-42:1, 52:16, 52:18, 52:19, 52:24, 54:13, 41-42:8; 41-42:12, 45-49:8-10; 50:2, 55:46, 56:41, 58:9, 61:14; cf. alone, 50:4, 50:14, 50:18, 50:41-42, 51:26, solitude 51:47, 51:60, 51:62, 52:12, 52:17, Long - 52:1, 55:37 52:19-20, 52:23, 54:20, 55:18, 55:53, Long, to; longing - 50:26, 50:44, 51:32, 56:8, 56:34, 56:39, 56:52, 56:61, 57:1, 51:50, 51:34, 61:17 57:6, 58:9, 59:2, 59:4, 59:102-103, Look ahead, to - 25-30:5, 60:3 61:5 Look back, to - 51:22, 53:12, 56:13, 56:21, 57:35, 61:5

307 | Lord (God) - 54:26, 55:26, 56:29, Mask - 51:16, 52:3, 53:13, 58:11 56:34, 56:56, 56:64, 58:14, 59:4, Masochism - 41-42:22, 57:45 60:3, 61:3 Masses, the - 59:3 Lord Jim - 51:62, 56:28 Master, masters - 50:23, 61:7 Lord’s Prayer - 41-42:21, 52:3, 56:7, Mate, to mate - 59:19, 59:100 56:55, 58:9 Mature, to; maturity - 50:14, 50:19, Lose, to; lost - 51:8, 52:6, 53:15, 55:8, 50:45, 51:13, 51:48, 53:2, 53:7, 53:18, 55:9, 55:26, 55:43, 56:3, 56:61, 56:63, 57:37, 55:65, 59:30 57:10, 57:25, 57:39, 57:48, 59:79 Mean, to; meaning, meaningful - 51:6, Love - 41-42:14, 50:50, 51:48, 51:50, 52:20-23, 53:10, 54:16, 55:54, 55:62, 51:52-53, 52:7, 54:19, 55:1, 55:37, 56:7, 56:13, 56:21, 56:24, 56:28, 55:42, 56:10, 56:19, 56:32-33, 56:43, 56:35, 56:59, 56:61, 57:25, 58:7, 59:6, 56:45, 57:6, 57:9, 57:47, 58:10, 60:1, 59:31, 61:5 60:5, 61:4, 61:13 Meaningless - 53:5, 55:62, 57:16 Love, to; lover, loving - 51:29, 51:30, Meanness - 51:19 54:19, 55:2, 55:28, 55:31, 55:51, 56:9, Means - 50:52, 57:29 56:13, 60:4 Measure - 50:46, 51:1, 55:59, 56:20, Lower-human - 56:43 57:10, 61:2 Loyalty - 51:4; cf. faithfulness Media - 51:23 Lucifer - 56:46 Meet, to; meeting - 50:30, 51:50, 51:62, Luminous - 50:51 55:40, 55:51, 57:28, 58:7, 59:19, 61:6, Lurk, to - 53:16 61:11, 61:12 Lust - 50:44, 56:41 Memory, memories - 41-42:23, 45- 49:8, 45-49:12, 51:44, 55:27, 56:2, M 56:53, 59:6 Mephistopheles - 51:19 Maker - 56:15 Mercy, merciful - 54:26, 56:9, 56:56, Man - 51:29, 51:50, 59:46, 59:52, 61:5, 61:3, 61:13 61:15 Metaphysical - 55:15 Man (human being) - 50:44, 54:24, Microcosm - 58:10 54:26, 56:28, 56:34, 56:57, 56:59, Midsummer (night, sun) - 57:21, 61:18 61:4, 61:15 Military imagery - 41-42:2, 54:6, Man of good will - 51:14 55:46, 56:42, 59:109, 59:113, 60:5 Manifestation - 56:15 Mind - 41-42:18, 50:10, 51:44, 54:4, Many, the - 52:14, 57:48 56:24, 57:5, 58:11-12, 58:15, 59:77, Map - 61:19 59:107, 61:7 Markings - 56:10 Mine (possessive) - 52:7, 56:55 Marketplace - 57:51 Mineshaft, mineshafts - 25-30:4, Marriage - 52:17, 59:100 50:39 Martyrdom, martyrs - 55:9, 57:13

308 | Miracle - 56:6, 56:63, 59:116; cf. Music (harmony, measures, melody, wonder note, overtones, sing, song, strings, Mirror, to mirror - 25:30:9, 41-42:10, tones) - 25-30:1, 25-30:4, 45-49:5, 45-49:12, 52:6, 55:27, 56:3, 56:32, 50:11, 50:40, 51:56, 51:61, 53:17, 56:40, 56:45, 57:1, 57:25, 59:66, 55:54, 59:20, 59:115 59:103; cf. fool’s mirror Mystery - 45-49:1, 55:65, 56:59, 59:5 Misfortune - 41-42:2, 41-42:17, 57:6 Mysticism, mystical experience - 54:7, Mistake, mistakes - 50:33, 55:39 55:2, 55:28, 55:31, 55:55, 55:65, Mold, to - 41-42:10 56:30-31, 56:57-58, 58:7-8, 59:1, 59:4 Moment, momentarily - 45-49:1-2, Myths, mythology - 52:4, 52:6, 53:4, 50:3, 50:34, 50:41, 50:53, 51:1, 51:3, 55:18, 55:42, 57:7, 57:26, 61:1, 61:5 53:4, 53:15, 53:18, 55:4, 55:32, 56:10, 56:45, 56:60, 57:12, 57:39, 57:41, N 58:10, 61:7, 61:10, 61:17, 61:18 Naked, nakedly, nakedness - 45-49:2, Mona Lisa - 56:2 45-49:6, 45-49:11, 50:13, 51:16, Money - 50:39, 51:38 51:40, 51:50, 52:17, 53:13, 54:15, Monkey, monkeys - 59:65, 61:17 55:46, 57:16, 58:11, 59:17, 59:20, Monsters - 55:63 59:101, 60:4, 61:1, 61:6, 61:9 Moon, moonlight - 59:65, 59:71, 59:89, Name, names - 41-42:21, 45-49:5, 60:4, 61:19 50:26, 50:43, 55:26, 56:53, 56:55, Moral (ethical), moral code - 50:52, 56:67, 57:37, 58:9, 59:35 55:9, 55:37, 56:32, 57:29, 59:37 Narcissus, narcissistic - 51:8, 57:45 Morning - 51:34, 51:44, 51:46, 51:50, Nature imagery - 45-49:5, 51:14, 51:47, 56:5, 56:29, 57:1, 58:6, 59:12, 59:31, 51:50, 51:56, 51:60-61, 55:38, 59:5 59:45, 59:107, 60:5, 61:19 Navel, earth’s - 59:65 Moth, moths - 59:11, 59:24, 59:50 Near, nearness - 53:19, 54:16, 55:46, Mother (Agnes Almquist 55:51 Hammarskjöld) - 56:2, 57:5, 59:42, Neckline - 50:21 59:44 Nemesis - 23-30:14 Motive, motives - 41-42:16, 50:7, 51:19, New ones, the - 55:41 51:30, 55:39, 55:61 Night - 50:1, 50:33, 51:1, 51:44-45, Motto - 56:48 51:57, 52:1, 54:1, 54:7, 56:29, 57:1, Mountain, mountains - 25-30:7, 50:39, 58:13, 59:8, 59:15, 59:29, 59:69, 51:32, 51:58, 59:114, 61:19 59:89, 60:4-5, 61:8, 61:17, 61:19 Mountain climbing imagery - 25-30:1, Night side - 53:16, 57:6 25-30:5, 25-30:7, 51:58, 55:29, 55:47, Noise - 41-42:4, 58:10 56:5, 56:62, 57:45, 59:114, 61:12, Non-God, non-person, non-spirit, 61:19 formless - 55:28 Notes - 56:61

309 | Nothing, nothingness - 50:4, 51:51, Ordeal - 59:86 53:10, 53:13, 55:28, 55:34, 56:57, Order, orders, to order - 56:13, 56:21, 56:66, 57:18, 57:37, 58:2, 59:4 56:62, 58:2 Now - 45-49:2, 50:3, 53:4, 54:5, 55:65, Organic - 51:56 56:10, 56:33, 57:35, 59:84, 61:12; cf. Orgasm, orgasms - 58:10, 59:69 here and now, present Orient - 59:57 Nuclear energy - 57:34 Origin - 51:47, 56:31 Numen, numen semper adest - 54:16, Original sin - 57:6 56:48 Ormuzd (Ahura Mazda) - 56:17 Nurture, to nurture - 52:6, 55:37, 58:5 Orpheus - 52:6 Other, the (another) - 50:11, 50:56, O 51:48, 52:17, 55:39 Other, the (God) - 58:7, 58:8 Obedience, to obey - 52:14, 56:13, Others - 41-42:2, 41-42:11, 41-42:14, 56:19, 58:7, 58:15 41-42:16, 41-42:25, 50:32, 50:35, Obituary - 56:3 50:37, 50:39-40, 50:42, 50:52-53, Obligate, to; obligation - 54:11, 55:12, 51:4-5, 51:12-13, 51:25, 51:29-30, 55:29, 55:32, 56:36 51:47, 52:3, 52:19, 52:23, 53:3, 53:22, Obliteration - 50:26-27 54:7, 54:19, 55:12-13, 55:24, 55:27, Oblivion - 56:53 55:30, 55:33, 55:46, 56:6, 56:30, Observe, to - 50:31, 55:15, 55:24, 56:40 56:39, 56:59, 57:19, 58:9, 59:90, Ocean - 50:33, 51:20, 61:14; cf. sea, 59:102, 60:5, 61:6, 61:9, 61:12 water Outcome - 52:3, 57:8 Oedipus - 57:7 Outer - 52:3 Oﬀend, to; take oﬀense - 55:4, 57:24 Outside - 52:14, 55:39, 55:53 Oﬀer, to; oﬀering - 51:30, 56:53, 59:52, Overcome, to - 52:19, 52:24, 56:16, 59:81-82, 59:102; cf. sacriﬁce 57:13, 57:19 Oil - 57:28 Overlook, to - 56:45 One (God) - 55:28, 56:33, 56:60, 57:16, Oversimpliﬁcations - 50:30 57:22, 57:38, 57:47 Overtones - 50:11 One, oneness - 56:30, 59:4, 59:95 Oneself - 52:6, 52:19, 53:14, 55:28; cf. self P Open, to open, openness - 25-30:2, 41- Pain, painful - 50:47, 51:10, 52:6, 52:19, 42:11, 51:58, 52:4, 52:8, 53:7, 55:55, 56:37, 57:5, 60:6 56:19 Pantheism - 52:9 Opinion - 51:13, 51:42, 57:48 Paradise - 51:33, 56:26, 61:18 Opponents - 55:57 Paradox - 55:62 Opportunity, opportunities - 51:36, Passion, passions - 25-30:11, 50:42 52:2, 52:6, 56:36, 56:39, 57:38 Past - 45-49:2, 50:43, 50:53, 53:1, 54:18,

310 | 55:13, 55:51, 57:9, 59:3 57:46, 59:5, 61:5, 61:9, 61:11, 61:12, Path - 41-42:9, 51:45, 57:6, 61:17; cf. 61:15 way Plain - 59:8, 59:13, 59:15-16 Patience - 45-49:10, 56:8, 56:10, 56:33, Play, to play, playmates - 25-30:13, 41- 56:43, 56:45, 57:9 42:18, 50:31, 50:55, 53:18, 54:9, 55:63, Patience (solitaire) - 50:31 57:4, 57:50, 58:15, 59:17, 59:39, 61:7, Patient (medical) - 56:35 61:9 Pattern - 54:16, 56:21, 56:47, 57:50, Pleasure - 52:7, 54:15, 54:24, 55:27, 58:12 56:18, 57:45, 57:50 Pay, to - 50:53, 51:51, 55:48, 60:5 Poem, poetry - 55:11, 55:39-40, 56:15, Peace - 41-42:23, 45-49:12, 50:3, 51:29, 59:4, 59:6 52:15, 56:13, 56:44, 56:55, 57:8, Point of no return, point of view - 59:115, 60:3 51:13, 51:22 Peep, to - 57:27 Poison, to poison - 25-30:13, 50:36, Pen - 55:54 55:37 Pension - 51:38 Poor - 50:45, 51:23, 55:29, 56:24 People - 51:45, 51:60, 52:4, 52:6-7, 53:7, Poor, the - 41-42:2, 41-42:17, 50:26 54:4, 55:35-36, 55:39, 55:44, 55:65, Position - 50:24, 50:39, 55:12 56:13, 56:32, 57:7, 57:27, 58:16, 59:4, Possession - 55:49 60:3 Possible, possibility, possibilities - 45- Perfection - 50:39, 55:51, 56:15, 58:2; 49:1, 51:27, 51:29-32, 51:47, 51:54, cf. purity 51:59, 51:62, 52:6, 53:16, 55:47, 55:59- Perﬁdies - 54:10; cf. betray 60, 56:13, 57:7, 57:12, 57:25, 57:40, Perform, to; performance - 50:41, 57:43, 61:5 57:48 Posture - 50:12 Permanent - 54:20,55:39, 55:49 Poverty - 50:37, 52:21 (constancy of things) Power - 41-42:9, 41-42:25, 51:18, 51:43, Permit, to; permission - 52:3, 53:14, 52:7, 54:19, 54:26, 55:8, 55:44, 55:50, 54:1, 55:36, 55:58, 56:6, 57:48, 61:11 55:53, 56:16, 56:26-27, 56:31, 56:37, Person, personal, personality - 50:32, 58:7, 58:10 50:51, 50:53, 51:40, 51:43, 51:55, Praise, to praise - 41-42:15, 55:26-27, 51:59, 53:4, 53:13, 53:15, 54:3, 55:15, 56:49, 57:14, 57:49, 59:4 55:37, 55:42, 55:59, 56:15, 56:21, Pray, to; prayer - 41-42:3, 41-42:6, 56:61, 57:46, 57:47, 58:2 50:24, 50:29, 52:5, 52:14, 53:4, 55:16, Perspective - 52:7, 56:13 56:8, 58:7, 59:65, 61:5 Pervert - 59:100 Prayers - 41-42:21, 52:3, 54:13, 54:19, Pettiness - 56:39, 57:11 54:23, 55:7, 55:23, 55:54, 56:1, 56:7, Pharisee, pharisaism - 25-30:14, 53:13 56:22, 56:38, 56:55, 56:62, 57:52, Physical, physiological - 51:41, 57:45 58:1, 58:9, 58:14, 61:13, 61:16; cf. Place, to place - 53:7, 55:27-28, 56:56, Psalm citations

311 | Precede, to; precedence - 57:46, 60:2 R Prepare, to; preparation - 51:17, 51:47, Race (human) - 50:10, 55:37 54:19, 55:40, 55:60, 57:46, 59:97, Radiance - 50:51, 51:48, 56:13 60:2 Raise, to - 61:16 Present - 50:53, 51:6, 51:25, 52:14, Reaction - 51:56, 55:27, 56:15, 56:39, 54:18, 55:13, 56:10, 57:9, 57:18, 59:3; 57:17, 57:23 cf. here and now Read, to; readers - 55:24, 56:61 Presuppose, to; presupposition - Real, reality - 41-42:23, 45-49:4, 50:37, 55:26, 57:13 50:55, 50:57, 51:23, 51:33, 52:6, 52:14, Price - 41-42:8, 52:6, 55:23, 57:25, 55:11, 55:20, 55:29, 55:31, 55:39, 57:38, 60:1, 60:5 55:65, 56:21, 56:63, 57:6, 57:12-13, Pretension - 55:57 57:37, 58:8, 58:10, 59:1-2, 59:4-5, Pride - 50:44, 51:15, 51:42, 53:8, 53:13, 59:101, 59:106, 61:19 54:2, 55:41, 56:40, 57:11, 61:16 Reason - 50:51, 52:7, 55:9, 56:59 Principalities and powers - 56:8 Receive, to; receptive, receptivity - Privilege, privileges - 41-42:9, 57:38 50:4, 50:18, 50:53, 51:6, 51:47, 51:51, Problem, problems - 41-42:11, 50:39, 53:8, 55:58, 55:65-66, 57:1 50:43, 50:56 Recognize, to; recognition - 45-49:13, Promise - 50:1, 51:11, 51:47, 60:4, 61:5 55:39, 55:53, 56:24 Proof - 51:2, 52:14 Reconciliation - 57:12 Prostitutes - 57:36 Redeemer, to redeem - 51:29, 51:43 Protection, protective - 41-42:23, Rediscovery, to rediscover - 55:18-19 55:30 Refute, to - 57:13 Psychologist, psychology - 51:40, 51:54 Rejoice, to - 51:48, 56:18, 56:57, 57:19; Publicity - 51:23 cf. joy Puppets - 50:43 Relation to God - 41-42:23, 50:3, Pure, to purify, purity - 25-30:9, 41- 50:51-52, 53:4-7, 53:9, 53:13, 54:5, 42:10, 50:46, 51:42, 51:47, 54:19, 54:7, 54:20, 55:28, 55:52, 56:13, 55:3, 55:5, 55:27-28, 56:21, 58:6-7, 56:16, 56:47, 56:49, 56:51, 56:57, 58:10, 59:114, 61:13 57:28, 57:31, 57:52, 58:7-8, 61:13, Purpose, purposefulness - 53:4, 56:57 61:16 Relationship, relationships - 51:52-53, Q 53:16, 55:39, 56:26, 57:6 Quality - 59:3 Religion, religious - 55:2, 57:6 Question, questions - 56:3, 56:21, Remember, remembrance - 50:26, 56:39, 57:38, 57:46, 57:48, 59:85-86, 50:43, 51:11, 55:35, 56:53, 56:67, 61:5, 61:5, 61:8 61:15, 61:17, 61:19 Quiet, quieter - 53:20, 56:24; cf. Renewal - 55:9 silence, stillness Repair, to - 51:55

312 | Repeat, to; repitition - 55:13, 56:7, Righteous, righteousness - 25-30:15, 56:21, 58:12, 61:8 50:42, 54:23, 56:1, 56:8, 56:10, 56:29, Reproach - 61:3, 61:5 56:33, 56:43, 56:56, 56:64, 57:6, Reputation - 50:17, 57:18 57:9, 61:13; cf. just, justice Require, to; requirement - 52:14, 52:17, Rigidity - 55:39 55:28, 55:37, 55:43, 55:51, 56:21, Risk, risks, to risk - 41-42:1, 50:7, 56:66, 57:46, 59:1 51:23, 51:27, 56:3, 57:40, 59:114 Resistance, resistant - 56:53, 59:114 River, rivers, riverbeds - 50:10, 51:61, Respect - 50:54, 52:7, 55:37 59:57, 59:60, 61:19 Response, responses - 50:32, 51:48, Road, roads - 45-49:9, 45-49:10, 51:45, 57:41, 57:47 55:37, 56:8, 56:21, cf. path, way Responsible, responsibility, Role - 50:32, 51:16, 54:9, 56:36, 57:2, responsibly - 41-42:22, 45-49:10, 57:4 50:7, 50:42, 52:6, 54:4, 54:10, 55:30, Room, rooms - 50:50, 55:55, 59:60, 55:32, 55:41, 56:39, 56:42, 56:59, 61:17 57:31, 58:7, 59:3, 60:1 Rope - 55:9, 61:17 Rest, to rest - 45-49:12, 50:41, 51:50, Ruin - 54:7, 55:59 54:4, 54:14, 55:21, 56:31-32, 56:34, 56:44, 56:57, 57:21, 59:4-5, 59:66, S 60:3, 61:12 Sacrament - 51:57 Restlessness - 51:40 Sacriﬁce, to sacriﬁce, sacriﬁcial - 25- Restoration - 57:13 30:2, 45-49:13, 50:2, 50:46, 50:50, Result - 41-42:12, 45-49:3, 57:23 51:26, 51:29, 52:7, 53:10, 54:5, 55:9, Reveal, to; revelation - 50:32, 55:15, 55:23, 55:29, 56:22, 56:53, 57:7, 57:13, 55:36, 55:57, 56:24, 56:39, 56:41, 57:44, 57:46-47, 58:9-10, 58:17, 56:57, 57:23, 58:7, 59:5 59:67, 60:1, 60:5, 61:6; cf. oﬀer, to; Revolt, to; the revolutionary - 51:52 oﬀering Reward, to reward - 50:49, 54:26, Sail, sails, to sail - 54:4, 56:16, 57:75, 55:23, 56:24, 56:56, 57:35 59:98-99, 61:10 Rhythm - 50:10 Saints, communion of - 52:14, 55:9 Riches, richness - 51:49, 51:51, 59:5 Salary - 51:38 Ridge - 57:45, 61:19 Salt, saltness, salty - 54:3-4, 55:9, Ridicule, to ridicule, ridiculous - 59:70, 59:98 52:22-23, 55:30, 56:39, 56:60, 59:103 Sanctiﬁcation - 55:65, 57:28 Right, the right, rightful, rightly - Satisfaction, satisﬁed - 45-49:13, 51:34, 41-42:18, 50:39, 51:36, 52:5, 52:17, 51:50, 56:36 53:7, 55:12, 55:33, 55:57, 56:21, 56:37, Save, to; salvation - 54:11, 55:41, 56:43, 56:39, 56:62, 57:46, 57:48 57:3, 57:7, 61:3

313 | Say, to; saying - 51:55, 52:22, 53:4, Self-admiration - 25-30:14-15, 55:27, 53:12, 53:14, 61:5; cf. answer, to 56:24 speak Self-assertion - 57:9 School - 54:21, 55:34, 59:40 Self-chosen annihilation - 57:47; cf. Scourge, scourging - 51:12, 57:11 annihilation Screens, to screen oﬀ - 50:40, 51:54 Self-complacency - 55:15 Sea, seas - 50:41, 52:6, 54:28, 55:63, Self-conceit - 56:22; cf. conceit 59:75, 61:14; cf. ocean, water Self-conscious, self-consciousness - Search, to - 54:9, 55:3, 55:39, 56:2, 53:7, 57:48 56:30 Self-contained - 56:58 Secret, secrets, secretly - 50:34, 55:3, Self-contempt - 50:33 55:40, 56:2, 56:62, 57:27, 59:1, 59:51, Self-criticism - 50:33, 50:37, 51:36, 59:104 55:8, 55:22, 55:26-27, 56:36, 56:40, Secure, security - 50:3, 50:39, 54:14, 56:60, 57:6, 57:9, 57:11, 57:32 55:38, 55:63, 57:14, 59:101 Self-defense, self-defensive - 50:36, See, to - 50:31, 52:12, 53:15, 54:5, 54:14, 56:21 54:19, 55:27, 55:34, 55:39, 55:58, Self-delusion - 41-42:12 55:64, 56:2, 56:30, 57:11, 57:39, Self-directed - 52:6 57:46, 58:5, 59:5, 59:32, 59:49, Self-discipline - 50:49, 56:38, 61:13 59:78, 61:6, 61:10, 61:13, 61:17 Self-disgust - 57:11 Seek, to - 52:3, 52:7, 53:3, 53:8, 54:7, Self-eﬀacement - 54:4, 55:15, 59:4 55:21, 55:23, 55:26, 55:30, 55:39, Self-esteem - 41-42:16, 50:16, 57:12 55:52, 55:60, 56:14, 56:35, 57:6, Self-exaltation - 59:4 57:22, 57:28, 57:41-42, 59:33-34, Self-forgetfulness - 57:48 59:40, 59:80 Self-giving - 57:47, 58:9 Self, himself, myself, oneself, Self-indulgence - 55:4, 55:22, 56:61 ourselves, yourself - 41-42:16, 45- Self-interest - 50:24, 52:3, 57:6 49:1, 50:22, 50:32, 50:37, 50:39-40, Selﬁshly - 57:12 50:44, 50:52, 51:9, 51:17, 51:19, 51:47, Self-knowledge - 57:6 51:50, 52:23, 53:7, 53:21, 54:11, 54:14, Self-obliteration - 55:31 55:8, 55:11, 55:23-24, 55:27-28, 55:32- Self-pity - 25-30:15, 45-49:9, 51:29, 34, 55:39, 55:52, 55:57, 56:6, 56:13- 56:40 14, 56:18, 56:22, 56:36, 56:39, 56:42, Self-possession - 53:18 56:55, 56:57, 57:6, 57:9, 57:16, 57:19, Self-preserving, self-preservation - 57:23, 57:25, 57:28, 57:37, 57:39, 57:12, 57:45 58:6-8, 59:4, 59:90, 59:98, 59:101, Self-realization - 56:21 60:1, 61:11 Self-respect - 45-49:10 Self-abasement - 59:4

314 | Self-righteous, self-righteousness - Silence, silent - 25-30:1, 25-30:10, 45- 55:27, 56:37 49:10, 45-49:12, 50:2, 50:19, 50:25, Self-satisﬁed, self-satisfaction - 41- 50:40, 51:12, 51:33, 52:8, 52:13, 54:7- 42:13, 50:56, 55:56 8, 55:38, 55:55, 56:58, 58:11, 58:13, Self-scrutiny - 50:24 59:10, 60:4, 61:14 Self-seeking - 50:43 Simple, simpler, simplicity - 25-30:1, Self-surrender, accepting death - 41- 53:3, 53:20, 58:4, 58:6, 59:4-5 42:9, 45-49:5, 50:27, 50:46, 51:60, Sin, sins - 50:55, 51:29, 51:42, 57:6, 52:18-19, 53:11, 55:18, 55:31, 56:21, 59:22 56:66-67, 57:39, 57:42-46, 59:81, Sing, to - 53:17, 55:54, 59:115 60:6, 61:5, 61:7 Sky - 45-49:6, 51:44, 51:50, 58:13, Self-torturing - 55:27 59:16, 60:4 Sense, senses - 50:10, 50:21, 55:19, Slander, slanders - 41-42:19, 55:28 55:51 Slave - 61:7 Sensitivity - 41-42:18, 55:58 Sleep, to; sleepless - 52:13, 54:6, 56:10, Sensual - 51:41, 55:27 59:23, 59:48, 61:8 Sentries, sentry duty - 54:6, 55:46; cf. Slinger - 57:33 military imagery Sluggishness - 50:55, 51:25 Separate, to - 50:30, 55:41, 57:45, Small, smallest, smallness - 53:5, 55:4, 59:28, 61:10 55:56, 56:62, 57:52, 58:3, 59:4 Seriousness - 55:61 Smile, to smile - 25-30:2, 54:4, 55:22, Serve, to - 51:56, 54:2, 54:19, 56:7, 56:39, 56:60, 57:5, 57:39, 59:44 56:39, 56:60, 57:6, 58:9, 61:13 Snow - 51:33, 55:38, 59:12, 59:26-27, Seventeen-year-old, seventeen - 52:22, 59:68, 59:73, 61:12, 61:17 59:6 Social ambition - 45-49:5 Severe, severity - 56:22, 61:16 Social awareness - 41-42:2, 41-42:11, Sex, sexual desire - 25-30:4, 50:21, 41:42:17, 51:18, 51:52, 55:29, 55:39, 50:28, 51:50, 52:17, 55:51, 55:60, 55:43, 55:65, 56:26-27, 56:39, 56:50, 56:41, 58:10, 59:32, 59:41, 59:69, 59:3 59:100 Social life, sociable - 50:25, 51:12, 55:36 Shadow - 50:21, 57:26 Society - 45-49:3, 55:9, 55:37 Shame, ashamed - 50:26, 50:30, 50:33, Soil - 50:40, 51:56, 52:8-9, 54:17, 59:92; 55:22, 55:43, 57:27 cf. earth Shape, to - 51:47, 59:2 Soiled - 56:6 Share, to - 51:50, 51:55, 52:16, 54:4, Solidarity - 51:60, 53:18 55:43, 60:2 Solitude, solitary - 25-30:10, 50:9, Shy, shyness - 52:17, 53:2, 55:51 50:54, 50:56, 51:62, 55:22, 55:60, 56:57, 58:16; cf. alone, loneliness Solution, solutions - 55:39, 57:6

315 | Someone - 52:23, 55:10, 56:10, 56:51, Strong, the strong - 45-49:10, 51:13, 61:5 55:8, 55:31, 56:16, 56:34 Something - 41-42:24, 52:16, 52:18, Struggle, to struggle - 41-42:9, 45- 54:5, 55:39, 56:3, 57:6, 57:40, 61:5 49:13, 50:24, 52:20, 56:17, 60:3 Son, the - 56:32 Subconscious - 50:29, 50:33 Soon night approaches - 50:1, 51:1, Subject, object - 50:52, 50:57 52:1, 53:1, 54:1, 57:1 Subordinate, to; subordination - 56:21 Sophoclean - 53:4 Success - 25-30:15, 50:39, 50:47, 50:49, Soul - 25-30:4, 41-42:12, 41-42:16, 45- 55:48, 56:3, 56:18, 56:42, 57:8, 59:4, 49:1, 50:22, 50:47, 51:3, 51:41, 51:56, 60:6 52:3, 54:7, 55:3, 55:9, 55:53, 55:55, Suﬀer, to; suﬀering - 41-42:22, 50:2, 56:25, 56:35, 56:41, 56:58, 57:15, 51:29, 54:13, 55:1, 55:34, 57:6, 57:10, 57:37, 58:2, 58:7, 59:1 57:20, 57:50, 58:5, 60:3, 61:10 Space, spaces - 50:40, 51:35, 51:40, Suicide - 45-49, 4, 45-49:6, 45-49:7, 51:49, 55:54, 56:30, 59:33, 59:88, 52:19 59:115 Summit - 56:62, 57:45 Spark - 41-42:25 Sun - 45-49:6, 45-49:12, 50:35, 51:14, Speak, to; speaker, speech - 41-42:10, 51:25, 51:33-4, 55:31, 55:63, 56:30, 41-42:19, 50:8, 50:25, 55:6, 56:29, 59:70, 61:10, 61:12, 61:18 56:61 Superego - 50:39 Spirit, spiritual - 50:37, 50:49, 51:12, Superior, superiority - 25-30:8, 41- 51:14, 51:25-26, 51:41, 53:13, 53:17, 42:1, 56:43, 59:4 54:25, 55:27, 56:14 Suppress, to - 57:2 Spirit, the - 56:l, 56:16, 56:29, 56:32 Surface - 51:47, 53:15, 55:63, 56:43 Spot - 55:4 Surrender, to surrender - 52:6, 54:5 Spring, springs - 50:33, 51:8, 55:37, Survive, to - 56:39, 56:54 55:46, 57:22 Sustain, to; sustaining - 52:14, 61:7 Star, stars - 50:9, 51:35, 54:3, 58:13 Sweat - 54:17 Stillness - 45-49:12, 50:40-41, 51:50, Syllable, syllables - 59:5-6 54:23, 55:7, 55:63, 55:65, 56:1-2, Symbolism - 51:41, 52:6 56:10, 56:12, 56:58, 61:13 Sympathy - 51:5, 51:16, 51:29, 57:3, Strength, to strengthen - 41-42:21, 57:12 50:41, 52:5, 52:14, 52:21, 53:2, 53:8, System builders - 56:21 53:14, 54:4, 55:3, 55:9, 55:26, 56:16, 56:39, 57:23, 58:17, 61:6, 61:11, 61:15 T String, strings - 25-30:1, 25-30:4, 59:80 Talent, talents - 50:27, 56:30 Strive, to; striving - 41-42:12, 50:22, Talk, to talk - 41-42:24, 45-49:3, 45- 50:40, 50:56, 51:59, 56:39, 56:43, 49:13, 50:25, 51:12, 55:28, 57:10; cf. 57:8, 57:19, 61:4, 61:13 to speak

316 | Task, tasks - 45-49:10, 50:40, 54:3, Tomb - 55:17 55:23, 55:29, 55:36, 56:4, 57:25, Tomorrow - 54:9, 55:18, 61:5 57:48 Tool - 56:46, 56:49, 56:57 Teach, to - 54:4, 55:6, 55:34, 57:19, Top, whip - 41:42:1 59:35 Torment - 52:16 Tempt, to; temptation - 41-42:13, Torn - 56:6 51:23, 52:19, 53:14-15, 54:22, 55:26, Torture, to - 41-42:14 56:22, 56:63, 57:19 Touch (rub shoulders) - 50:28, 51:12, Tense, tension - 51:59, 56:34, 60:5, 55:31, 59:80 61:11 Tragic, tragedy - 51:26, 59:2, 61:2 Terror - 41-42:22, 61:14 Traits - 56:40 Terrorism - 51:52 Tranquillity - 55:65 Test, tests, to test - 50:32, 51:36, 54:21, Transﬁguring - 57:13 56:4, 56:24, 61:10 Transform, to - 53:14, 56:16, 56:30 Thanks, thankful - 53:1, 54:4, 61:12; cf. Transparency - 57:28 grateful, gratitude Treachery - 52:19, 55:26 Theatre imagery - 55:22, 55:25, 56:60 Treading - 56:67 Thing, things - 51:35, 54:15, 54:20, Tree, trees - 51:45, 51:50, 51:61, 56:31, 55:49, 56:57, 57:37, 58:7 58:11, 59:10, 59:29, 59:50-52, 59:57, Think, to - 56:22, 60:2, 61:4 59:75, 59:89, 60:4 Thirst, to; thirsty - 53:9, 57:22 Trinity - 54:19, 55:7, 56:1, 56:32 Threads - 56:47, 56:51 Triumph, to triumph, triumphal - Threat, threatened - 57:11-12 53:11, 56:42, 57:6, 60:3, 61:5; cf. Thunder, thunderbolts, thunderclap - victory 58:10, 59:60, 59:69 Troll (mountain) - 50:28 Timberline - 51:58, 61:19 Trust - 53:22, 56:65; cf. faith Time, times - 41-42:6, 50:17, 50:26, True, truth - 41-42:5, 41-42:18, 41- 50:40-41, 51:3, 51:49, 52:1, 53:4, 42:24, 50:30, 50:40, 51:32, 55:11, 54:18, 55:11, 55:20, 55:27, 55:35, 55:37, 55:39, 56:35, 57:2, 57:12, 59:1, 55:46, 55:65, 56:10, 56:17, 56:30, 60:3 56:37, 56:39, 56:53, 56:60, 57:12, Try, to - 54:7, 55:6, 56:21; cf. attempt, 61:5; cf. hour attempts Timeless, timelessness - 54:4, 54:18 Tired, tiredness, tiring - 45-49:2, 45- U 49:4, 45-49:9, 51:12, 51:60, 52:19, Ulterior motives - 55:61 55:36, 58:16, 61:12 Ultimate, ultimately - 53:10, 54:15, Toehold - 55:29 55:9, 56:30, 56:32, 58:8 Togetherness - 54:4 Uncarved Block, the - 57:41 Toil, life of - 50:47; cf. labor, work Uncompromising - 55:37

317 | Undermine, to - 55:37 Vézelay - 59:64 Understand, to; understanding - 41- Victim - 51:29 42:1, 50:20, 51:40, 51:53, 52:6, 55:30- Victor, victory - 25-30:6, 25-30:11, 41- 31, 55:39, 55:58, 56:2, 56:53, 56:57, 42:1, 50:41, 51:14, 51:19, 51:57, 54:13, 59:1, 60:4, 61:4, 61:13, 61:15, 61:17 56:39, 57:2-3, 57:5, 58:10 Uneasy, uneasiness - 56:36, 56:48, Violence - 55:62 57:23, 61:17; cf. unrest Virtue - 50:49 Unforgivable - 55:15 Vishnu - 59:66 Unhappy - 56:40 Vision - 41-42:22, 50:27, 50:45, 52:14; Unheard of, the - 51:47, 51:62, 52:6, cf. to see 54:5, 54:20, 54:25 Vital, vitality - 57:12, 61:7 Unicorn - 59:100 Vocal inﬂection - 51:40 Unintelligent - 56:37 Voice, inner - 41-42:10 Union, to unite, unity - 41-42:10, Void - 50:40, 52:13 51:40, 51:50, 54:7, 55:9, 55:15, 55:28, Voluntary - 54:10 55:31, 55:39, 56:25, 56:31-32, 57:23, Vulgarity - 50:44 57:39, 57:47, 58:7, 58:10 Vulnerable - 56:39 United Nations - 55:29, 55:39, 55:41, 55:43, 56:39 Wait, to; waiting - 50:31, 52:4, 55:40, Unknown - 25-30:1, 51:47, 51:54, 55:60 56:13, 59:30, 61:9 Unmoved - 56:22, 56:30, 58:2 Waken, waking - 50:33, 58:10, 59:45; Unoriginal - 51:13 cf. awake, awaken Unreality - 55:42 Walk (stroll), to walk - 51:62, 55:55, Unreasonable - 52:20 59:28, 59:91 Unrest - 50:33, 55:26; cf. uneasy, Wall, walls - 41-42:13, 45-49:2, 50:10, uneasiness 50:39, 51:16, 51:40, 52:16, 54:5, 55:55 Unwillingly - 53:14 Warmth, warmer - 52:14, 53:20, 55:31, Urge - 55:28, 61:11 55:55 Use, to use, useful - 51:59, 53:4, 54:22, Water, waters - 45-49:4-6, 45-49:11- 55:37, 56:1, 56:13, 56:57, 57:38, 58:7, 12, 50:29, 50:41, 51:25, 51:44, 51:46, 58:16 51:50, 51:57, 52:6, 52:14, 53:15, 55:50, 55:55, 57:22, 58:11, 59:89, 61:1; cf. V ocean, sea Wave, waves, wave length - 50:41, Vacuum - 56:41 54:4, 55:16, 57:21, 58:17, 61:10, 61:18 Value, to value, valuations - 45-49:10, 51:59, 52:3, 55:15, 55:23, 55:39, 56:62, 57:19, 57:40, 58:9 Vanity - 50:43, 55:25, 56:60 Vessel - 53:9

318 | Way - 41-42:16, 41-42:24, 45-49:3, 53:10, 55:16, 55:37, 55:64, 56:28, 50:20, 51:28-29, 51:31, 51:44, 51:56, 56:61, 57:14, 58:12, 61:5, 61:8 51:58, 52:1, 52:21, 53:11, 54:19, 55:30, Work, to work - 41-42:22, 45-49:2-3, 55:39, 56:8, 56:32, 56:46, 56:61, 45-49:10, 50:39, 52:4, 52:19, 54:26, 57:23, 57:37, 58:15, 60:6,61:5-6, 55:3, 55:11, 55:22, 55:29, 55:53, 56:35, 61:12; cf. path, road 56:57, 58:2-3 Waymarks - 56:61; cf. journal Work thought patterns - 52:14 Weakness - 25-30:11, 51:36, 52:21, 53:13, World, worlds - 41-42:12, 45-49:5, 55:26-27, 55:35, 55:39, 56:24, 56:63, 51:7, 51:25, 51:29, 51:33, 51:44, 52:3, 57:17, 57:20, 61:11 52:21, 54:14, 54:16-17, 55:65, 56:10, Weariness - 56:5; cf. tired, tiredness 56:32, 56:59, 57:39, 58:1, 59:5 Weave, to - 56:47, 56:51 Worth - 41-42:15, 56:24 Weeds - 41-42:18 Wound, to - 57:4, 57:37 Weep, to - 52:13, 61:12; cf. 51:16, 57:39 Write, to - 52:22-23, 56:3, 56:22, 56:64 Weight, weightier - 55:33, 55:39, 57:9, 57:14, 59:4 Y Weights - 55:22, 55:25 Year, years - 51:1, 52:7, 58:9, 59:30 Whirlpools - 50:29 Yes - 51:47, 51:60, 53:1, 53:12, 54:14, Whole, the whole - 51:26, 56:6, 56:57, 55:10, 56:7, 57:37, 61:5 57:39, 58:2 Yesterday - 25-30:14, 50:33, 58:6 Wilderness - 50:9, 51:29, 51:60 Yours - 55:23, 56:1 Will - 41-42:14, 41-42:19, 41-42:25, Youth, youthful - 50:14, 55:39, 59:42 50:50, 52:3, 52:7, 54:17, 55:23, 55:56, 56:1, 56:11, 56:31, 56:55, 56:64, 58:5, 58:9 Win, to; winner - 53:15, 55:1, 56:12, 57:7, 60:5 Wind - 41-42:23, 50:8, 50:40-41, 51:50, 52:16, 55:31, 56:16, 57:52, 59:4, 59:52, 59:110, 61:9 Wish, to wish - 45-49:3, 50:13, 55:51, 56:53, 56:61, 57:6, 59:102 Wolf, wolves - 41-42:20, 41-42:22, 50:6 Wonder, wonders - 55:38, 55:44, 56:35, 56:63, 59:84; cf. miracle Word, words - 25-30:10, 45-49:2, 45-49:4, 45-49:7-8, 50:8, 50:20-21, 50:25, 50:40, 51:35-36, 51:44, 52:14,

critical Dag Hammarskjöld and Martin Buber met three times between 1958 and 1961. They conferred about the possibilities of true dialogue in the political and cultural setting of a United Nations confronted by the Cold War and an atmosphere of general mistrust. Hammarskjöld observed ‘Walls of Distrust’ between the superpowers’ representatives at the United Nations and in their currents Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation propaganda-fi lled speeches. Buber described the social atmosphere created by nuclear threat, the Palestinian question and the Cold War as an ‘Age of Occasional Paper Series Mistrust’. Both were in search of a common understanding of the political blockages of the time, while their perspectives on re-structuring society differed.

What significance does their exchange have for today’s problems? The Cold War has ended, but the atmosphere of mistrust prevails. The crucial questions of the Middle East remain unsolved. Only the concept of what constitutes the enemy has changed: fundamentalist terrorism has replaced the Soviet Union as a challenge for the West, while the West’s answer to all challenges remains war – the opposite of the word, as both Buber and Hammarskjöld affirmed. True dialogue seems to be as impossible as it was in Buber’s and Hammarskjöld’s times. However, remembering their discussions about the chances of true dialogue is simultaneously an inspiration for the quest for solutions in our times.

Critical Currents is an Can we save Occasional Paper Series published by the true dialogue Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation. It is also available online in an Age of Mistrust? at www.dhf.uu.se. The encounter of Printed copies may be obtained from Dag Hammarskjöld no.8 Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, Övre Slottsgatan 2 SE- 753 10 Uppsala, Sweden email: secretariat@dhf.uu.se and Martin Buber phone: +46 (0)18-410 10 00 January 2010

critical currents no.8 January 2010

Can we save true dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? The encounter of Dag Hammarskjöld and Martin Buber

Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation Uppsala 2010

The Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation pays tribute to the memory of the second Secretary General of the UN by searching for and examining workable alternatives for a socially and economically just, ecologically sustainable, peaceful and secure world.

In the spirit of Dag Hammarskjöld’s integrity, his readiness to challenge the Critical Currents is an dominant powers and his passionate plea Occasional Paper Series for the sovereignty of small nations and published by the their right to shape their own destiny, the Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation. Foundation seeks to examine mainstream It is also available online at understanding of development and bring to www.dhf.uu.se. the debate alternative perspectives of often unheard voices. Statements of fact or opinion are those of the authors and By making possible the meeting of minds, do not imply endorsement experiences and perspectives through the by the Foundation. organising of seminars and dialogues, Manuscripts for review the Foundation plays a catalysing role should be sent to in the identification of new issues and secretariat@dhf.uu.se. the formulation of new concepts, policy proposals, strategies and work plans towards Series editor: Henning Melber solutions. The Foundation seeks to be at the Language editing: Wendy Davies cutting edge of the debates on development, Design & Production: Mattias Lasson security and environment, thereby Printed by X-O Graf Tryckeri AB continuously embarking on new themes ISSN 1654-4250 in close collaboration with a wide and Copyright on the text is with the constantly expanding international network. authors and the Foundation.

Preface … 4 Introduction … 7 I » The ‘Walls of Distrust’ within the ‘Age of Mistrust’: The encounter of Dag Hammarskjöld and Martin Buber, phase 1 (1958/59) … 9

II » Perspectives on dialogue: The encounter of Dag Hammarskjöld and Martin Buber, phase 2 (1961 and after) … 38 III » Outlook: Can we save true dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? Discussion of Hammarskjöld’s and Buber’s alternatives if dialogue fails … 67 Literature … 78

Preface Dag Hammarskjöld was known for his wide his short speech to this engagement, which interests and contacts, and for his capacity to was such clear evidence of the attraction of interweave nature, art, science and politics thought between the second Secretary-Gen- into a tapestry of varied but complementary eral to the United Nations and Buber: colours and textures, creating a harmonious and integrated whole. For him, philosophy, … perhaps we can think that he found poetry and politics not only had their fi rst something that was essential to himself letter in common; combined, they consti- in the last book that he was engaged in tuted a passion, the fourth in this mutually translating, the powerful work Ich und Du reinforcing collection of ingredients that [I and Thou], in which the Jewish philos- made him such a remarkable international opher Martin Buber sets forth his belief civil servant with an enduring impact. that all real living is meeting. He himself believed that there were invisible bridges Hammarskjöld’s impressive correspon- on which people could meet as human dence, which went far beyond the limits of beings above the confi nes of ideologies, his professional duties as narrowly defi ned, races, and nations.’1 included exchanges with many individuals representing these various spheres of life and The notion of dialogue promoted by Buber thinking. Among the thinkers he engaged was similarly an integral and substantial part with intellectually was Martin Buber. Evi- of Hammarskjöld’s approach to life. In one of dence of this was even found in the debris his postings on his Hammarskjöld blog, biog- from the plane crash near Ndola in then rapher Roger Lipsey draws attention to this: Northern Rhodesia, in which Hammar- ‘His respect for the word was immeasurably skjöld died in the early hours of 18 Septem- great. His recognition of its frequent corrup- ber 1961. A copy of Buber’s Ich und Du was tion in public life was also great.’2 Lipsey also among the scattered items collected from reproduces an exchange from a press confer- the wreckage. During his last fl ight Ham- ence in January 1955, when a journalist en- marskjöld had been using the time to con- quired of Hammarskjöld what he would do tinue the translating of Buber’s work into with all the information from conversations Swedish, which he had recently started: a after he had visited China. Hammarskjöld’s task bordering on the impossible, but very recorded answer was: ‘Well, the risk of mis- much in keeping with the unlimited ambi- takes and false initiatives may be reduced. tions of Hammarskjöld’s intellect. The possibility of saying the right word at the right moment may be increased.’ Accepting on Dag Hammarskjöld’s behalf the posthumously awarded Nobel Peace Prize in 1 http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/ Oslo on 10 December 1961, the Swedish am- laureates/1961/hammarskjold-acceptance.html. bassador to Norway, Rolf Edberg, referred in 2 http://www.dag-hammarskjold.com/2009/07/ dialogue-part-1-right-word-at-right.html.

4 Critical Currents no. 8

Maurice S. Friedman is by far the hitherto terms of communication technology), the most authoritative author dealing with Mar- global divide has not been bridged, and an- tin Buber. He published several monographs tagonisms based on different religions and comprising the most comprehensive work other identity-forming beliefs and convic- on the philosopher (frequently referred to tions persist. More than ever, we are living in the following essay). In 1960 he added a in a world of fear and misunderstanding, in postscript to chapter 23 (on ‘social philoso- which differences dominate over common- phy’) to the revised edition of his pioneering alities. In this light, reflections on the rel- study, Martin Buber: The Life of Dialogue (fi rst evance of dialogue, as testified in the com- published in 1955), in which he shared his munication between Hammarskjöld and observation that Dag Hammarskjöld echoed Buber, are as relevant for politics today as Buber’s call for renewed ‘contact and com- they were half a century ago. munications across geographical and politi- cal boundaries’.3 The ‘age of mistrust’ has not yet come to an end. It continues, despite efforts such as this As Manuel Fröhlich summarised, ‘Buber’s to bring back into public discourse ideas that analysis of the underlying forces that domi- remain as relevant today as they were at the nate the Cold War scenario, which for him time of the correspondence between Ham- basically was an age of distrust, also influ- marskjöld and Buber. But this is no excuse enced a number of speeches by Hammar- for not reminding ourselves and others that skjöld who shared Buber’s diagnosis that tools to address most of the issues confront- many of the political and military problems ing us in our search for a better future have were in fact problems of human behaviour, already been thoroughly explored. After trust and communication.’4 all, more dialogue rather than less might not be such a bad idea in our times either. This essence of dialogue remains more rel- evant than ever in times where ‘otherness’ Henning Melber is all too often misconstrued as alien. De- spite today’s much higher degree of mobil- ity (physically as well as mentally, and in

3 http://www.religion-online.org/ showchapter.asp?title=459&C=393. 4 Manuel Fröhlich, ‘“The Unknown Assignation”: Dag Hammarskjöld in the Papers of George Ivan Smith’, in ‘Beyond Diplomacy: Perspectives on Dag Hammarskjöld’, Uppsala: Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, 2008 (Critical Currents no. 2), p. 16. The publication is accessible for download at www.dhf.uu.se.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 5

In the course of a three-week visit in 1959 to the Middle East Photo: UN Photo and Africa, UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld spent three days in Israel where he held talks with govemnent officials. He also took the opportunity to visit the famous philosopher Professor Martin Buber.

Can we save true dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? The encounter of Dag Hammarskjöld and Martin Buber

Introduction The personal encounter of Dag Hammar- Lou Marin (a pseudonym) prefers to remain skjöld and Martin Buber was as short in anonymous. Born in 1961, from 1981 to 2001 duration as it was intense in intellectual ex- he lived in Heidelberg, where he studied change. It took place during the later years Political Science. He is a regular contributor of both men’s lives, between 1958 and 1961, to the nonviolent, anarchist monthly, and consisted of a short correspondence and Graswurzelrevolution, and a member of its three personal meetings. Buber lived longer editorial collective. As part of the collective of than Hammarskjöld and gave some a memo- the same publishing house he has been an editor, rial interview in Hammarskjöld’s honour. translator and author of several of its books, inter alia on Albert Camus and anarchism (1998), This special relationship, which both men another India (2000), the new wars since 9/11 also characterised as a personal friendship, (2002), African American resistance in the 1960s takes on a special significance in that one of (2004), Simone Weil and anarchism (2006) and Hammarskjöld’s last acts before the fatal air Ashis Nandy’s The Intimate Enemy (2008). crash in Ndola, Zambia, in September 1961, was to work on a draft translation of Buber’s Since 2001 he has lived in Marseille as a book I and Thou. journalist, author, translator and publisher. He is an administrative member of CIRA (Centre This essay is not the fi rst on their encounter. International de Recherches sur l’Anarchisme). Biographers of Buber and of Hammarskjöld His work includes Albert Camus et les libertaires have already paved the way, and to a great (1948-1960) (Égrégores Editions, 2008), Le don extent this text is based on their preceding de la liberté (Les Rencontres Méditerranéennes research. I have sub-divided their encoun- Albert Camus, 2009) and Albert Camus et sa ter into two phases, each of them initiated critique libertaire de la violence (Indigène Éditions, by Hammarskjöld after reading a work of 2010). He is also the author of Camus and Gandhi: Buber’s. Whereas, hitherto, information on Essays on Political Philosophy in Hammarskjöld’s their encounter has been gathered to show Times (Critical Currents, no. 3, Dag Hammarskjöld their similarities, I have focused as much Foundation, 2008). on the differences between them, and the difficulties that were bound to arise when

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 7

Hammarskjöld tried to interpret and trans- ,…,.., …, 1 fer Buber’s concept to a sphere it had not been written for. These differences became clear in the period immediately following Hammarskjöld’s death, in the projects Bu- ber undertook at that time, and will be pre- sented in a fi nal chapter, entitled ‘Outlook’, in order to start a discussion on topics that touch on today’s problems and have to do with the legacy of both Hammarskjöld and Buber. I think the tension resulting from these different outlooks will be fruitful for further discussion.

1:-ot _,. • &R.la ~- r , The fact that it was Hammarskjöld who Jf,r~ a.:\.

read and interpreted Buber much more than the other way round, justifies, I believe, a certain imbalance in this text with respect to the two men’s works – that is, my deci- sion to examine more extensively the con- tent and intellectual background of those parts of Buber’s texts that Hammarskjöld explicitly referred to in his letters and press conferences.

A few letters from Buber’s and Hammarskjöld’s correspondence

-- 8 Critical Currents no. 8

I » The ‘Walls of Distrust’ within the ‘Age of Mistrust’ The encounter of Dag Hammarskjöld and Martin Buber, phase 1 (1958-59)

When the great Jewish philosopher Martin War? Did he have an unconscious hunch Buber (1878-1965) spoke about his encoun- that his fi nal project, resulting from his re- ter with the second Secretary-General of the lationship with Buber – namely, translating United Nations, Dag Hammarskjöld (1905- Buber’s major work on dialogue, I and Thou 1961), in a speech for the Swedish Radio in – would not be accomplished, and that his 1962, entitled ‘Memories of Hammarskjöld’ desire for a wide-ranging, long-term and (Buber 1962a: 57-59), he not only talked intensified contact with Buber, whom he about their common understanding of the admired, would be unfulfi lled? In his letter Cold War and the current incapacity of of 26 August 1961 to Buber, Hammarskjöld states’ representatives to take part in true was boldly outspoken about the kind of re- dialogue, but went on rather mysteriously: lationship he was hoping for:

But I sensed, looking at and listening to If this all works out, may I tell you how him, something else that I could not ex- much it would mean to me also by pro- plain to myself, something fateful that in viding me with a justification for a broad- some way was connected with his function ened and intensified contact with you in this world-hour (Buber 1962a: 58). personally.1

Buber continued with his account of their It is surprising to see so much wishful think- relationship instead of exploring in more ing on the part of the usually realistic Ham- depth what he meant by ‘something fate- marskjöld, who knew when he wrote this ful’. Did he think that because of Hammar- that Buber was already 83 years old. skjöld’s function his good intentions were doomed to failure? Or did he even mean 1 Kungliga Biblioteket Stockholm, Dag Hammar- that he sensed Hammarskjöld’s impending skjöld Samling (hereafter KBS DHS), Dag Ham- marskjöld, Letter to Martin Buber, 26 August 1961. death? As for Hammarskjöld, was this sense Some but not all of the letters that Dag Hammar- of destiny, this inescapable duty concerning skjöld and Martin Buber exchanged are published his office at this ‘world-hour’, something he in Nahum N. Glatzer and Paul Mendes-Flohr (eds) (1991), The letters of Martin Buber, New York: started to regret during his encounter with Schocken Books, which is an abridged version of Buber? Did he already feel that he might Martin Buber Briefwechsel aus sieben Jahrzehnten not survive this critical moment in the Cold (1972/73/75), edited by Grete Schaeder, 3 vols, Heidelberg: Lambert Schneider.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 9

The itinerary of the encounter and the letter an objective detachment as well as a capac- exchange between Dag Hammarskjöld and ity ‘to experience his difficulties subjectively’; Martin Buber has been well documented finally, that both ‘knew a realistic and active in German and English by several authors. mysticism which does not turn away from They all agree that no direct influence of the world’ (Friedman 1988: 311). Nonethe- Buber’s philosophy was discernable in Ham- less, Friedman confirmed van Dusen’s judge- marskjöld’s writings before Hammarskjöld ment when it came to exploring the funda- contacted Buber for the first time in April mental differences between them: 1958.2 One of Hammarskjöld’s biogra- phers, Henry van Dusen, points out that the There are, however, differences between Secretary-General had even visited Jerusalem Markings and Buber’s thought, one of three times before (April-May 1956; May which is that while Buber was also de- 1957; December 1957) without contacting cisively influenced by Meister Eckhart, Buber or showing any intention of visiting his Hammarskjöld seemed to remain Ki- house (van Dusen 1967: 215). Van Dusen even erkegaardian precisely in the way that invited Buber’s English translator and main Buber did not, i.e., focusing on the I- biographer, Maurice Friedman, to exam- Thou relationship with God somewhat at ine carefully Hammarskjöld’s posthumously the expense of that with man. There was, published memoirs, Markings (1965), to prove indeed, a Kierkegaardian quality of lone- that there was no evidence of influence by liness and isolation about Hammarskjöld Buber in these. After reading them, Fried- even in the midst of his intense activity, man made some remarks on similarities, for which Buber did not share. Hammar- example that for both of them ‘to live mean- skjöld, too, was concerned about the ten- ingfully meant to live in response to the sion between ‘being’ and ‘seeming’, but demand of the situation’; that both showed he saw no resolution of this tension in au- respect for the word and would not allow it thentic interhuman contact as Buber did. to be misused, as this would show contempt What is more, in Hammarskjöld’s con- for man; furthermore, that their approach to cern for God and others there was a note conflict with another person included both of denial of the self that was very foreign to Buber (Friedman 1988: 312).

2 See most notably: in German, Fröhlich (2002: It is striking that in both phases of their re- 192-211), and occasional discussions on Buber’s influence elsewhere in this book), Fröhlich (2005: lationship, it was Hammarskjöld who initi- 97-114), Friedman (1999: 489-501); and in Eng- ated the contact by writing to Buber. It was lish, Friedman (1983: 303-331), van Dusen (1967: Hammarskjöld who read and interpreted 215-219), Hodes (1972: 153-171). Manuel Fröhlich explains that there were ‘parallel ways’ in the sense Buber, not the other way round. Essentially, that Hammarskjöld’s ‘quiet diplomacy’, established Hammarskjöld felt the urge for contact with during his negotiations in China in 1955, were Buber after reading English translations of an implementation of central elements of Buber’s philosophy of dialogue without his knowing it – a his essays, so already in his fi rst letter of 16 thesis which will be discussed in the section on the April 1958, only five days after his re-elec- second phase of their encounter (Fröhlich 2002: tion for a second term as Secretary-General 253-283; Fröhlich 2005: 108-111). of the United Nations, he wrote:

10 Critical Currents no. 8

My reason for sending you these lines is Buber’s speech at the Community that I just read the newly published Amer- Church and the first encounter ican edition of your collection of essays, ‘Pointing the way’. I wish to tell you how with Hammarskjöld in strongly I have responded to what you New York, 1 May 1958 write about our age of distrust and to the background of your observations which I Buber himself was on his third trip to the fi nd in your general philosophy of unity United States, which lasted from March to created ‘out of the manifold’. Certainly, early June 1958. He and his wife Paula (née for me, this is a case of ‘parallel ways’.3 Paula Winkler) had been given a house for the duration of their stay in Princeton, New He fi nished the letter by expressing the wish Jersey. Both were elderly: Buber had just cele- to visit Buber when he – Hammarskjöld – brated his 80th birthday, and Paula was to die was next in Jerusalem. But only two days on their way back to Israel, in Venice. During later, Hammarskjöld wrote again, having his sojourn in the United States, Buber was learned that Buber was currently in the holding informal conversations with chosen United States: students of Professor Friedman at Princeton, but more important concerning his predis- Today I see from the papers that you are position towards meeting Hammarskjöld at Princeton for guest lectures. Please may was a speech he was about to give in New I most warmly invite you to visit us at York ‘at the end of April’ (Buber 1958: 364) the United Nations if and when it might on Zionism and the Israeli-Arab question. suit you. I would be happy and proud, The speech was to be given to the American indeed, to receive you here.4 Friends of Ichud (‘Association’ or ‘Union’) – a group formed by Buber and his friends in He even gave the telephone number of his Palestine, in 1942) – who were having a big office. This fact and the devoted tone of his meeting to celebrate Buber’s birthday as well letter show Hammarskjöld’s eagerness to as commemorating the 10th anniversary of meet Buber. He enclosed a copy of his fi rst the death of Judah Magnes, the former presi- letter, sent to Buber in Jerusalem. dent of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and a close friend of Buber’s in the Ichud and the League for Jewish-Arab Rapprochement and Co-operation in Israel. This celebration was to take place at the Community Church in New York, attended by several thousand people (Friedman 1988: 236). A quarrel took place between Isidor Hoffman (the Jewish chaplain at Columbia and a leading Ameri- can pacifist), Erich Fromm (who was anti- 3 KBS DHS, Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to Martin Buber, 16 April 1958. Zionist) and Friedman (then chairman of the 4 KBS DHS, Dag Hammarskjöld, US Ichud) as to whether Buber should speak Letter to Martin Buber, 18 April 1958. as the last and main orator. The conflicts in

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 11

the aftermath of the celebration led to Fried- insistent about the essence of what he had man’s resignation as chairman and to the said. In a ‘rectifying communication’ to the splitting of the Zionist Ichud mother group editor of Ha-aretz6, one of the few Israeli in Israel from her more and more anti-Zion- newspapers that didn’t criticise him for his ist daughter group in the US (Friedman 1988: speech, he confi rmed: 446). Friedman recounts that Buber’s speech I must add now that the part of the Jewish …lasted for almost an hour and was an people did not change this opinion even ambitious attempt to present an overview after Hitler’s defeat. I oppose now as I op- of the whole Zionist movement with posed then, with all my force, those who the split between those who wanted to believe in the doctrine of ‘Not by the achieve Zion by diplomatic means and spirit, but by power’ and act upon it.7 those like Buber and his friends, who believed in organic colonization and in In response to this controversy, Buber felt Jewish-Arab good-neighbourliness and obliged to write an article for the American cooperation (Friedman 1988: 236-37). Jewish press with the intention of further explaning his views. This was published in Such had been the antagonism between Congress Weekly and later included in the pa- Theodor Herzl and Martin Buber long ago perback edition of Buber’s book Israel and at the very beginning of the Zionist move- the World (Friedman 1988: 237). Here, Buber ment. In this highly sensitive celebration still maintained: speech, still unpublished as far as I know, Buber stated explicitly, according to his Within a part of the Jewish people, grue- own notes for the speech: somely affected by the victory of the sub- human over the human, the false doctrine In the days of Hitler the majority of the lasted, even as the sub-human had been Jewish people saw that millions of Jews toppled… It has been by the spirit that have been killed with impunity, and a this people survived through all times, certain part [of the Jewish people] made unbowed, challenging unfortunate des- their own doctrine that history does not tiny. With the methods of the spirit alone, go the way of the spirit but the way of the Zionist movement took her position power.5 in Palestine and has already achieved the first legal titles. Only by strictly following This passage provoked severe criticism by the guidance of the spirit could it hope to the Jewish press in the US and in Israel. In create something greater than merely one the the months that followed, Buber repeat- more state amongst the states of the world… edly regretted having said that Hitler had killed ‘with impunity’, for Hitler had lost the war as well as his life and that was his 6 Ha-aretz: Israel’s oldest daily newspaper, founded in 1918, today published in Hebrew and English. The punishment. But he remained decidedly English edition is sold together with the Internation- al Herald Tribune, affi liated to the New York Times, and appears as a weekly. 5 Martin Buber, quoted by Friedman (1983: 237). 7 Martin Buber, quoted by Friedman (1983: 237).

12 Critical Currents no. 8

We only recognised how deeply the evil Thus Buber’s political confession, reflecting had already penetrated into a part of the his mental disposition in the aftermath of his people, when this fact could no longer be speech, just before travelling from Princeton overlooked. Meanwhile, in opposition to to New York to meet Hammarskjöld. Buber the proposals [of Buber and the Ichud] for proposed the meeting with Hammarskjöld a bi-national state or a Jewish part within a in his letter of 22 April 1958: federation of the Middle East, the unfortu- nate partition of Palestine has been carried I want to thank you for your two letters. out, the abyss between the two peoples has What you tell me in your letter to Jeru- been torn wide open, battle has raged… salem is very important for me. I think But one day it happened that, contravening to go to New York April 29 for 3 days. all orderly conduct of war, a gang of armed Would it suit you if I come to see you Jews attacked an Arab village and annihi- May 1 in the afternoon? (on April 30 I lated it…8 Here it was a matter of our own, have no leisure at all).10 of my own crime, an assault of the Jew on the spirit. Even today, I cannot think of it From the dates given by Buber, it is clear – without feeling guilty. Our fighting belief although neither Friedman nor Buber him- in the spirit has been too weak to prevent self gives a precise date for the speech at the the outbreak and expansion of the demonic Community Church (Friedman [1988: 236] false doctrine.9 talks of ‘spring’ 1958 and Buber [1958: 364] of the end of April) – that Buber delivered the speech on 30 April, the day when he had ‘no 8 Buber is referring here to the incident on 9 April leisure at all’. Thus, Buber met with Ham- 1948 at Deir Yasin, an Arab village which was attacked by unified troops of Irgun (‘National marskjöld, who was essentially a diplomat, Military Organisation in the Land of Israel’ and the involved in power politics in the context of Stern-Gang/LEHY (‘Fighters for the Freedom of the Cold War at the same time that Buber Israel’). During this attack 254 Arab inhabitants – men, women and children – were reportedly killed was reflecting on his own experiences of (Buber 1958: 368-369). From 1931 to 1948 Irgun nearly 50 years of involvement with the Zi- operated as an armed group of revisionist Zion- onist movement, and was publicly denounc- ists under Jabotinsky, and after 1948 it was slowly ing ‘diplomatic means’ (Friedman 1988: 237) integrated into the Israeli Defence Forces. The Stern-Gang/LEHY was an underground armed as strongly as he had done many years before group opposed to the British Mandate of Palestine, in his very early quarrel with the purely dip- which carried out political assassinations of the lomatic approach of Theodor Herzl (Fried- British authorities and Palestinian Arabs and killed UN mediator Folke Bernadotte in September 1948; man 1982: 53-73). And yet, Buber showed no it was then banned by the new Israeli government resentment about entering one of the towers under a new anti-terrorist law, but LEHY activists of worldwide power politics and diplomacy benefited already on 14 February 1949 from a gen- eral amnesty granted by Israel. to meet Hammarskjöld, even saying that the 9 Buber (1958: 367-368), translated from the German latter’s impression when reading Pointing the by Lou Marin as no English edition of ‘Israel and Way had been ‘very important’ to him. the Command of the Spirit’ was available to the author. The only English version is in the 1963 revised paperback edition of the original text by Buber (1948, hardcover), Israel and the World. Essays 10 KBS DHS, Martin Buber, Letter to Dag Hammar- in a Time of Crisis, New York: Schocken Books. skjöld, 22 April 1958.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 13

Before their meeting in Hammarskjöld’s of- for the first time the possibility of translating fice at the UN building, which lasted about ‘Hope for this Hour’ into Swedish, together two hours, Hammarskjöld gave instructions with two or three other essays in Pointing the that they should not be interrupted under Way (Hodes 1972: 162). any circumstances (van Dusen 1967: 216). Buber speaks about this fi rst meeting in his Before examining that in more detail, we memorial address: need to draw attention here to the fact that when Buber addressed himself publicly in When we then met in the house of the terms of criticism he used the term ‘represen- organization so remarkably named the tatives of states and groups of states’, whereas United Nations, it proved to be the case when he spoke positively of his hopes and that both of us were indeed concerned perspectives for the future he always used about the same thing: he who stood in the expression ‘representatives of the peo- the most exposed position of interna- ple’. These are not necessarily the same, and tional responsibility, I who stand in the hint at a symptomatic difference in Buber’s loneliness of a spiritual tower, which is outlook, also hinting at the different spheres in reality a watchtower from which all of his experience within the Zionist move- the distances and depths of the planetary ment. Whereas, Hammarskjöld, for his part, crisis can be descried… We were both was entirely concerned with the power poli- pained in the same way by the pseudo- tics of states’ representatives. speaking of representatives of states and groups of states who, permeated by a fun- damental reciprocal mistrust, talked past Hammarskjöld: Respect for the word one another out the windows. We both It is not that Hammarskjöld was unaware hoped, we both believed that still in suffi- that there were other domains where the cient time before the catastrophe, faithful capacity for true dialogue needed to be re- representatives of the people, faithful to stored. This awareness is evident in his let- their mission, would enter into a genu- ter to the poet and translator Erik Lindegren ine dialogue, a dialogue dealing with one with whom he was working at the time on a another out of which would emerge in all translation of the poet Saint-John Perse: clarity the fact that the common inter- ests of the peoples were stronger still than I saw the other day old Martin Buber – he those which kept them in opposition to really is a great man – who said that he one another (Buber 1962a: 57-58). felt that we had come to a stage where the individual life had been completely During their meeting Hammarskjöld also gobbled up by political life and that po- mentioned that he would like to quote Buber’s litical life now represents a world without remarks on the need to combat the prevailing any exit and without any entry. He talked mistrust. Hammarskjöld was already prepar- about our de-humanised existence where ing for an address he was due to give in June language has ceased to have its normal 1958 at Cambridge University (Hodes 1972: function of communication in order to 160). Furthermore, Hammarskjöld suggested establish a living contact between human

14 Critical Currents no. 8

beings. I think he is basically right, and For the moment, we can overlook the fact I think that is one reason why the poets that Camus, too, did not write for the realm should add a new dimension to their task of diplomacy but for society, and that he was as guardians of straight human commu- known as a philosopher of revolt as well as nication where the respect for the word is dialogue. still maintained.11 The corollary of absence of word and trust Apparently, for Hammarskjöld this was a jus- is fear and mistrust. In fact, when Ham- tification for his evaluation work on literature marskjöld was seeking to make contact with within the Swedish Academy as well as his Buber, the Cold War was in full swing, and translation work, which would soon turn to more often than ever the Security Council an interest in translating Buber into Swedish. was blocked because of vetoes by one or more One of Hammarskjöld’s biographers, Manuel of its members. Each conflict ran the risk of Fröhlich (2005: 101), points here to a phrase quickly accelerating into an imminent threat Hammarskjöld wrote in his diary (later pub- of nuclear war between the superpowers. In lished as Markings) on 1 August 1955: April 1958, at the time of the first encoun- ter between Hammarskjöld and Buber, the Respect for the word is the fi rst command- Security Council quarrelled about a charge ment in the discipline by which a man by the Soviet Union that the United States can be educated to maturity – intellec- were overflying the Arctic region without tual, emotional and moral… To misuse their permission. As a reaction, the US pro- the word is to show contempt for man posed a monitored inspection zone, the pro- (Hammarskjöld 1964: 101). posal rejected in turn by the Soviet Union. Unusually, Hammarskjöld spoke out in this But Fröhlich (2005: 105-06) also highlights Security Council debate, implicitly referring the fact that Hammarskjöld wanted to re- to Buber’s critique of the current crisis by establish respect for the word fi rst and fore- stating that the basic reason most in his very own domain, international diplomacy. Another biographer, Emery is the crisis of trust from which all man- Kelen, testifies– without giving a precise kind is suffering at the present juncture date – that at a press conference Hammar- and which is reflected in an unwilling- skjöld was defending his ‘quiet diplomacy’ ness to take any moves in a positive di- with explicit reference to two philosophers rection at their face value and a tendency of dialogue: to hold back a positive response because of a fear of being misled (Hammarskjöld I do believe, to use what has become a fa- 1958: 71a). mous term, thanks to Camus and Buber and others – I do believe that development Hammarskjöld also spoke of the relation be- in human terms of what they call dialogue tween governments and individual citizens is badly needed (Kelen 1966: 132). in this statement, but in a fundamentally different way from Buber:

11 Martin Buber, Letter to Erik Lindegren, 3 May 1958, quoted by Fröhlich (2002: 202 and 2005: 101).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 15

Each government is in close contact with to appear otherwise than he is… In our the opinion of the man in the street in time something basically different has its own country. For that reason, I am been added… One no longer merely fears sure that all governments are in a posi- that the other will voluntarily dissemble, tion to confi rm my statement that the but one takes it for granted that he cannot peoples are eagerly and anxiously ex- do otherwise… The other communicates pecting leadership bringing them out of to me the perspective that he has acquired the present nightmare. The government on a certain subject, but I do not really taking a fruitful initiative will be hailed take cognizance of his communication as as a benefactor by the peoples (Hammar- knowledge. I do not take it seriously as skjöld 1958a: 71). a contribution to the information about this subject, but rather I listen for what This is an entirely different view from Bu- drives the other to say what he says, for an ber’s, the latter regarding ‘the man in the unconscious motive… Since it is the idea street’ as an atomised individual totally ori- of the other, it is for me an ‘ideology’. ented to, and obeying, the large collective My main task in my intercourse with my such as the nation or the state (via media fellow-man becomes more and more…to propaganda), not acting as a conscious par- see through and unmask him… With this ticipant in a small community and hence as changed basic attitude…the mistrust be- a true and independent personality in op- tween man and man has become existen- position to and demanding something from tial. This is so indeed in a double sense: his or her government. It is fi rst of all, no longer the upright- ness, the honesty of the other which is Hammarskjöld in Cambridge: in question, but the inner integrity of his existence itself… Nietzsche knew what ‘The Walls of Distrust’, 5 June 1958 he was doing when he praised the ‘art of The award of an honorary doctorate for mistrust’, and yet he did not know. For Hammarskjöld at Cambridge University was this game naturally only becomes com- approaching, and Hammarskjöld gave a major plete as it becomes reciprocal… Hence address there entitled ‘The Walls of Distrust’ one may foresee in the future a degree of (Hammarskjöld 1958b: 90-95) on 5 June 1958. reciprocity in existential mistrust where In this he quoted explicitly and at length from speech will turn into dumbness and sense Buber’s speech ‘Hope for this Hour’ (Buber into madness…’ Martin Buber has found 1952: 220-229), as he had already told Buber expressions which it would be in vain for was his intention when they met: me to try to improve.12

In an address in Carnegie Hall in New So Hammarskjöld, as Fröhlich (2005: 104) York, in 1952, Martin Buber had the fol- put it, made politics with Buber ‘in the best lowing to say: ‘There have always been sense of the word’. Hammarskjöld’s political countless situations in which a man be- application of Buber’s thinking, as he inter- lieves his life-interest demands that he suspect the other of making it his object 12 Martin Buber (1952), quoted by Hammarskjöld (1958b: 93).

16 Critical Currents no. 8

preted it, was immediate, concerning his ef- understanding. Then followed the passages forts to overcome the cleavage between East on the current age and the art of mistrust and West at the level of United Nations pow- which Hammarskjöld quoted. Buber con- er politics. But wasn’t that too quick? Did tinued by asserting that despite the progres- Hammarskjöld in his hasty interpretation of sive decline of dialogue and a corresponding, Buber really grasp his thinking in depth, and universal growth of mistrust, there was still in all its aspects – to begin with, his analysis a basic need for man’s existence to be con- of crisis and his proposed solution? firmed by the other. As dialogue was blocked this basic need set out on two false ways: Buber’s ‘Hope for this Hour’ …he seeks to be confi rmed either by As surprising as it is to see to what length himself or by a collective to which he Hammarskjöld quotes Buber’s ‘Hope for this belongs. Both undertakings must fail. Hour’, it is also important to look at what The self-confi rmation of him whom no he didn’t quote. Buber started his address fellow-man confi rms cannot stand. With by saying that the three principles of the ever more convulsive exertions, he must French Revolution – freedom, equality, fra- endeavour to restore it, and fi nally he ternity – had broken asunder. Fraternity had knows himself as inevitably abandoned. been deprived of its meaning, the encoun- Confi rmation through the collective, on ter of human beings, so the two remaining the other hand, is pure fiction…it cannot watchwords had been turned against each recognize anyone in his own being, and other. Buber said this had become clear to therefore independently of his usefulness him since World War I, when direct dia- for the collective (Buber 1952: 225). logue was becoming ever more difficult and rare. In another address, in 1953, ‘Genuine In this way Buber criticised the contempo- Dialogue and the Possibilities of Peace’, Bu- rary atomisation of individuals, perceiving ber depicted war as the great enemy of dia- it as a corollary of the incapacity of state of- logue, and opposed war and speech: ficials to communicate. Thus governments were not in close contact with the man on War has always had an adversary who the street, and the man on the street was not hardly ever comes forward as such but able to express his basic needs. Moreover, in does his work in the stillness. This adver- his essay ‘The Question to the Single One’, sary is speech, fulfi lled speech, the speech Buber described the ‘man in the crowd’ as of genuine conversation in which men un- being ‘pushed’, and as embodying ‘non- derstand one another and come to a mu- truth’ and ‘un-freedom’ (Buber 1936: 64). tual understanding (Buber 1953a: 236). Solutions begin, according to Buber, with the So far, Hammarskjöld could surely agree. In drawing of ‘demarcation lines’. The opponent ‘Hope for this Hour’, Buber went on to hail is not 100 per cent an ideologue; that is only philosopher Robert Hutchins for stating that one part of his wholeness and ‘manifoldness’ the essence of the Civilization of the Dia- (we might even consider to find here in part logue is communication, mutual respect and of what Hammarskjöld refers to in his first

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 17

letter of 16 April 1958 as ‘unity created “out ‘Buber was a social anarchist in the bibli- of the manifold”’). The ideological view of cal sense.’ the opponent in the age of mistrust is a re- duction of his personality. To overcome this Buber concluded his address ‘Hope for this reduction is a precondition for real dialogue Hour’ with a hint of who these men (and between the two camps. But now followed women) are that oppose power politics only the essential for Buber: with their spirit:

They who begin must have overcome in The representatives of whom I speak will themselves the basic mistrust and be capable each be acquainted with the true needs of of recognizing in their partner in dialogue his own people, and on these needs will the reality of his being. It is self-understood be willing to stake themselves. But they that these men will not speak merely in will also turn understandingly to the true their own names. Behind them will be di- needs of other peoples, and will know in vined the unorganized mass of those who both cases how to extract the true needs feel themselves represented through these from the exaggerations. Just for that rea- spokesmen. This is an entirely different son they will unrelentingly distinguish kind of representation and representative between truth and propaganda within body from the political (Buber 1952: 227). what is called the opposition of interests (Buber 1952: 228). Obviously, Buber didn’t expect solutions on the level of power politics and state repre- There is no doubt that Hammarskjöld fit- sentatives. And he went on: ted into this description and that Buber was never so strict in his rejection of power poli- These men will not be bound by the aims tics that he was unwilling to embrace such of the hour, they are gifted with the far- rare men to be found in the political sphere. sightedness of those called by the unborn; But it is equally clear that Buber was talking they will be independent persons with no mainly of ‘representatives’ outside the polit- authority save that of the spirit… (Buber ical sphere – ‘independent persons’ capable 1952: 227-28). of listening to their own and other people’s true needs – whom he was looking out for Buber wasn’t thinking of people like Ham- from his fabled ‘watchtower’, from which he marskjöld here; in fact, due to the obliga- observed the ‘planetary crisis’. tions of his function, the latter was entirely concerned with the political principle; in his years as UN Secretary-General Hammar- Buber’s conception of the ‘Crossfront’ skjöld succeeded in furnishing the position In other texts of Pointing the way, Buber was with considerable ethical authority as well as in this sense beginning to talk of a ‘cross- political power (Fröhlich 2002: 347-351 and front’ to be forged, for example at the end of 361-372). Now it becomes clear why Buber’s ‘The Validity and Limitation of the Political main biographer and friend Maurice Fried- Principle’ (1953b): man could write (1988: 333):

18 Critical Currents no. 8

There is, it seems to me, a front – only the prevailing atmosphere of distrust, pro- seldom perceived by those who compose paganda and non-communication for there it – that cuts across all the fronts of the to be any realistic hope that it would yield hour, both the external and the internal. the solution. The best those working in the There they stand, ranged side by side, the political sphere could achieve was to prevent men of real conviction who are found in the earth from being literally destroyed by all groups, all parties, all peoples, yet who nuclear warfare – sadly enough this would know little or nothing of one another really mean something: the precondition of from group to group, from party to party, all life and social reconstruction. But in the from people to people. As different as the long run, according to Buber, the toppling goals are in one place and in another, it of the Cold War system as well as the related is still one front, for they are all engaged thinking and consciousness had to be initi- in the one fight for human truth… Those ated from elsewhere. I think Buber uttered who stand on the crossfront, those who this regret in his 1962 eulogy broadcast on know nothing of one another, have to do the Swedish Radio, precisely through the with one another (Buber 1953b: 218-219). word ‘but’ – the only ‘but’ in the entire eu- logy – which I quoted near the beginning In ‘Genuine Dialogue and the Possibilities of this essay. Buber sensed in Hammarskjöld of Peace’ Buber again referred to this con- ‘something fateful that was connected with cept of a crossfront for a solution, that is the his function in this world-hour’. Hammar- re-structuring of true dialogue: skjöld was, as it were, fatefully bound up with the political sphere due to his function. To the task of initiating this conversa- tion those are inevitably called who carry Hammarskjöld’s particular interpretation of on today within each people the battle Buber’s contemporary and political texts was against the anti-human. Those who build very understandable due to the necessity of the great unknown front across mankind immediate application imposed by his func- shall make it known by speaking unre- tion. But Buber’s philosophy meant more servedly with one another, not overlook- than this. Whereas Hammarskjöld spoke of ing what divides them but determined the ‘Walls of Distrust’, referring explicitly to to bear this division in common (Buber the Cold War and the ‘Wall/Iron Curtain’ 1953a: 238). dividing Europe, Buber spoke of an more long-term ‘Age of Mistrust’, which went Hammarskjöld was, in Buber’s understand- far beyond the Cold War situation. In order ing, part of the crossfront, but the main par- to explore what Buber meant by this it is ticipants of the crossfront would stay out- necessary to discuss the basic stream of his side the political – independent, free and thinking that was related to Zionism and unbound by the aims of the political sphere. his hope for a re-structuring of the Jewish I think that therein lies a certain and very community through the Kibbutz village humbly expressed regret concerning Buber’s communes. relationship with Hammarskjöld. For Buber the political sphere was far too poisoned by

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 19

Buber’s ‘Paths in Utopia’: of group and community life was emerg- Village communities as the basis ing, whereas in the tradition of centralised socialism there was a prevailing dogmatic of his worldview uniformity, compulsion, no diversity, no It is very interesting to see which of the free will to federate ‘out of the manifold’ books by (and on) Buber were in Hammar- – that is, no constant creativity to meet the skjöld’s private library, as listed by Manuel challenges of daily life. Fröhlich (2005: 99, note 5). On the list are many of Buber’s books on Hasidic litera- Buber wrote Paths in Utopia in the midst of ture and tales, as well as Pointing the Way World War II, from about 1942 to 1945 (he and the fi rst biography of Buber by Maurice settled in Palestine after persecution in Ger- Friedman – but none of Buber’s writings on many in 1938). One of the last chapters of Zionism, Palestine and the Kibbutz com- this book is called ‘In the Midst of Crisis’. munities. There is no surprise in this, as it is Here, Buber developed from the core of his in his writing on the Kibbutz communities thinking – his analysis of the ‘Age of Mis- that Buber comes nearest to anarchism. No- trust’ – a historical vision of re-structuring tably, in the most important of these works, society and community. Buber located the Paths in Utopia (Buber 1950), he explored the outbreak of the crisis as 30 years before – history of practical community experiments that is, at the beginning of World War I. But from the fi rst utopian attempts of Robert for Buber, this crisis was simply the result of Owen up to the broad Kibbutzim move- man’s historical development. Man had piled ment in Palestine and Israel. Buber remind- up more and more technical inventions but ed his readers of the tradition of thinkers the core of human development had always such as Proudhon, Kropotkin and Gustav been the creation of a social world through Landauer (1870-1919) – the nonviolent an- mutual aid (as defi ned by Kropotkin). Ac- archist who was murdered in 1919 during cording to Buber, this human development the reactionary repression of the Bavarian had fallen far behind technical progress in Republic of Councils and who, together the historical development of man. with Franz Rosenzweig, was Buber’s closest friend – and placed them in sharp contrast At an early stage, and until the middle ages, with Hegel, Marx and Lenin. For Buber, this social creativity developed within a this represented the antagonism between a social structure of groups, associations and federalist socialism and a centralised state communities, different and diverse as they tradition of socialism. It was the contradic- were. Power centres were to be found at an tion between self-organised collectivisation early historical stage but: and community, on the one hand and Soviet forced collectivisation and state nationalisa- to the political sphere in the stricter sense, tion, on the other; the contradiction be- the State with its police-system and its tween Moscow and Jerusalem, as Buber put bureaucracy, there was always opposed it symbolically at the end of his book. In the organic, functionally organized so- the practical tradition of federalist socialism, ciety as such, a great society built up based on voluntary efforts, a natural unity of various societies, the great society in of all the different concrete implementations which men lived and worked, competed

20 Critical Currents no. 8

with one another and helped one another; communities is weakened or even destroyed, and in each of the big and little societies individuals fi nd themselves atomised. They composing it, in each of these communes are – Buber quotes Proudhon – but ‘a heap and communities the individual human of dust animated from without by a subor- being, despite all the difficulties and con- dinating, centralist idea’ (Buber 1950: 29). fl icts, felt himself at home as once in the Without the former structure of communi- clan, felt himself approved and affirmed ties and associations, and having nowhere in his functional independence and re- where he/she feels ‘at home’, the individual sponsibility (Buber 1950: 131). becomes scared, is full of fear. Out of this fear the individual develops mistrust and Here, the individual learned what responsi- hands him/herself over to a large collective, bility is all about. This decentralised struc- a state or a nation. The individual develops ture, where some states may have been a will to obey unconditionally. existing on the margins but did not domi- nate communities, prevailed until about And the most valuable of all goods – the the middle ages, according to Buber. Then life between man and man – gets lost in came the fundamental change: the process; the autonomous relationships become meaningless, personal relation- ‘All this changed more and more as the ships wither; and the very spirit of man centralistic political principle subordi- hires itself out as a functionary (Buber nated the de-centralistic social principle’ 1950: 132). (Buber 1950: 131). The functionary, the modern bureaucrat The centralised state weakened the free as a result of centralised statist society: that communities and marginalised them. And was literally the contrary of what Hammar- the political principle infi ltrated into com- skjöld originally conceived to be the ethics munities, cooperatives and associations, into of a functionary – being answerable not to the consciousness of their members, thus one party or another, or any particular inter- over-politicising society. So society adapted est group, but only to the whole of a nation to the state – not the other way round. In- (or the planet). For Buber, by contrast, the dividuals and small communities submitted emergence of the functionary, the bureau- themselves totally to centralised power, in crat, was the outcome of the false develop- democratic as well as totalitarian ways. ment of man, where the individual had be- come just ‘a cog in the “collective” machine’ Everywhere the only thing of impor- (Buber 1950: 132). Whereas Hammarskjöld tance was the minute organization of conceived of his ethics as a functionary as power, the unquestioning observance of ‘strictly un-political’ (Fröhlich 2002: 120) slogans, the saturation of the whole of so- and as a continuation of his family tradition ciety with the real or supposed interests of Swedish officialdom (Fröhlich 2002: 214), of the State (Buber 1950: 132). the bureaucrat was for Buber the peak and the symbol of the political principle, unable Within the modern, centralised world, due to his function to act on the basis of per- where the structure of associations and small sonal relations or true ethical judgements,

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 21

with the responsibility only for carrying out conscience, and maybe also for the occupant orders from above without regard for the per- of the spiritual ‘watchtower’ as Buber de- son concerned (the Weberian ideal type). Of scribed himself in his Swedish Radio speech course, this is Buber’s general analysis, not his for Hammarskjöld (Buber 1962a: 33). For personal judgement of Hammarskjöld. Buber Buber, community was always an idea, not never formulated his theories in an absolute a fi xed principle. It had become, for practical way, in the sense that literally no one could reasons, more a question of survival than of be an exception. He regarded Hammarskjöld romance or enthusiasm. Buber was certainly as an exception in the sphere of the political thinking here of the the early Kibbutzim principle – but the norm within this sphere communities and the hardship their pioneers was definitely otherwise. (Chaluzim) had to endure. Buber longed for a resurrection of village communes (Kvuza), Thus, for Buber, the structured society of the not those of the past, but contemporary ones past has been lost because of the dominance with integrated agriculture, handicraft and of the centralised state principle. This is the industry (a concept derived from Kropotkin). crisis, the ‘Age of Mistrust’. The first task There would surely be some sort of represen- in re-structuring society should be, accord- tation there, too, but not an abstract repre- ing to Buber, defying the sovereignty of the sentation of amorphous de-structured masses political principle over society. This could of individual voters. There would be con- be achieved not through political organisa- crete representation based on common pro- tion, but only through the strong will of the duction and common experience. For Buber peoples to administer and develop the planet only such a community of communities was by working together, not against each other. a ‘Commonwealth’. In this way the question of contemporary socialism was posed for Buber. He rejected This notion of a ‘community of communi- collectivisation in the sense of state socialism. ties’ – as well as the historical concept of He also rejected the principle of being repre- a structured communal society that existed sented, because true community, cooperation until the middle ages, before the intrusion of and association required active participation the centralised state – derived from Buber’s on common matters and couldn’t survive highly influential early friend, the nonvio- without that will. A society could only re- lent anarchist Gustav Landauer (Buber 1950: structure itself through the organic co-oper- 46-57; Wolf 1994: 10; Seemann 1997: 74-91; ation of these associations and communities Wolf 1997: 210-226; Wolf 2001: 35-48). In based on active participation. They were the Pointing the Way there is one article dealing groups ‘out of the manifold’ working togeth- with this antagonism of centralisation and er. By this process, the social structure would decentralisation (‘Society and the State’, regain the power to expand the demarcation Buber 1951: 161-76) and another commem- line and to push back the political principle. orating the revolutionary and nonviolent It was not actually a question of the absolute legacy of Gustav Landauer (‘Recollection or nothing. The demarcation line had always of a Death’, Buber 1929: 115-20) though not to be tested and verified anew according to quite dealing with his historical community new historical situations – this was, accord- concept as in Paths in Utopia. ing to Buber, the task for humanity’s spiritual

22 Critical Currents no. 8

Buber’s ‘Society and the State’: But does that really fit into Hammar- What is Hammarskjöld’s unity skjöld’s description of a ‘unity “out of the manifold”’? After all, the State steps in here ‘out of the manifold’? as an outside agency to force a unity out of It is not quite clear to me whether Ham- clashes and confl icts occurring within the marskjöld’s agreement with Buber’s ‘gen- manifold. This isn’t quite a natural unity eral philosophy of unity created “out of the ‘out of the manifold’. Instead, it was from manifold”’ derived from a reading of ‘So- the viewpoint and for the sake of society ciety and the State’. There is no such literal that Buber called for a limitation of govern- formulation in that particular text. None- ment power and its reduction to mere ‘ad- theless and at fi rst sight, there are paragraphs ministration’, so that society acquired the that support the idea that Hammarskjöld space to form a unity of its own, a com- was referring to that essay: munity of communites. Buber formulated this demand in ‘Society and the State’ in the The society of a nation is composed not following way: of individuals but of societies…groups, circles, unions, co-operative bodies, and All forms of government have this in communities varying very widely in type, common: each possesses more power form, scope, and dynamics. Society (with than is required by the given conditions; a capital S) is not only their collectivity in fact, this excess in the capacity for and setting, but also their substance and making dispositions is actually what we essence… In so far as the mere proximity understand by political power. The mea- of the societies tends to change into union, sure of this excess…represents the exact in so far as all kinds of leagues and alli- difference between Administration and ances develop among them – in the social- Government. I call it the ‘political sur- federative sphere, that is to say – Society plus’ (Buber 1951: 174). achieves its object (Buber 1951: 173). That a reading of ‘Society and the State’ Here Buber leaves a task of unification to in combination with a knowledge of Bu- the State, which could have been regarded ber’s emphasis on the Kibbutzim village by Hammarskjöld as the part he was to oc- communes almost certainly led to the an- cupy within Buber’s general philosophy: archist base of Buber’s thinking, laid down by Landauer, proves a letter from a young Society cannot, however, quell the con- scholar, Hermann Meier-Cronemeyer, fl icts between the different groups; it is writing to Buber on 15 August 1963: powerless to unite the divergent and clashing groups; it can develop what they For more than a year I have been writ- have in common, but cannot force it ing a dissertation here in Jerusalem on the upon them. The State alone can do that Kibbutzim, to which I will give the title (Buber 1951: 173). ‘History, Spirit and Shape’13. Though I started this work without any preliminary

13 Hermann Meier-Cronemeyer (1969), Kibbuzim. Geschichte, Geist und Gestalt, Hannover.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 23

assumption – which surely is a disadvan- with the historical proponents of anarchist tage for a scientific work – I am more and federalism and pluralistic socialism to de- more captured by one question, that is scribe crisis and the necessary re-structuring whether the Kibbutzim cannot or at least of society. In Paths in Utopia, Buber’s phi- couldn’t be regarded as anarchism tak- losophy of a unity ‘out of the manifold’ was ing shape. Only after reading your little much more explicitly based on the history script ‘Society and the State’ was I awak- of producers’ and consumers’ co-operatives, ened to the fact that the youth movement community experiments and the Kibbutz not altogether wrongly considered itself movement. There, ‘unity’ was the federa- to be ‘un-political’ – an argument in the tion of the manifold groups, co-operatives face of which modern critics, when con- and units. And it remained clearly within fronted with it, appear completely help- the responsibility of the federated society to less, it seems to me. And they have to be create this unity. Already in his chapter on helpless, unless the difference between Proudhon, Buber wrote so beautifully: ‘social’ and ‘political’, which you empha- sise, cannot be seen. Isn’t the reduction …so long as society was richly struc- of the ‘political surplus’ quintessentially tured, so long as it was built up of mani- anarchist?14 fold communities and communal units, all strong in vitality, the State was a wall Buber answers Meier-Cronemeyer very narrowing one’s outlook and restricting briefly that the notion of ‘anarchism’ doesn’t one’s steps, but within this wall a sponta- suit him, because anarchism neous communal life could flourish and grow. But to the extent that the struc- indicates an abolition of the power relation ture grew impoverished the wall became – which is impossible as long as the consti- a prison (Buber 1950: 27). tution of the human being is as it is, rather than a respective demarcation and reduc- And further on, Buber wrote about Proud- tion of this relation as far as possible.15 hon’s federalism: ‘He refuses to equate a new ordering of society with uniformity; Compared to Paths in Utopia, ‘Society and order means, for him, the just ordering of the State’ was less radical, and did not deal multiformity’ (Buber 1950: 36).

Then Buber criticised Lenin’s centralism in 14 Hermann Meier-Cronemeyer, ‘Letter to Mar- tin Buber, 15 August 1963’, in Buber (1975: 597); a similar way: translation by Lou Marin. Unfortunately, neither this letter nor Buber’s reply is included in the In the planned, all-embracing State Co- abridged English edition by Nahum N. Glatzer and Paul Mendes-Flohr (eds) (1991), The letters of Martin operative [Lenin] sees the fulfi lment of Buber, New York: Schocken Books. the ‘dreams’ of the old Co-operatives 15 Martin Buber, ‘Letter to Hermann Meier-Crone- ‘begun with Robert Owen’. Here the meyer, 22 September 1963’, in Buber (1975: 608); translation by Lou Marin. Finally, in his letter to contradiction between idea and realiza- Meier-Cronemeyer Buber recommends for further tion reaches its apogee. What those ‘Uto- reading his article ‘The Validity and Limitation of pians’, beginning with Robert Owen, the Political Principle’ (Buber 1953b: 208-19).

24 Critical Currents no. 8

were concerned about in their thoughts is the explicit word ‘manifold’ – ‘We wish to and plans for association was the volun- perceive his manifoldness and his wholeness, tary combination of people into small his proper character…’17 – but this relates to independent units of communal life and an individual personality. Besides, the refer- work, and the voluntary combination of ence to ‘Hope for this Hour’ also fits better those into a community of communities. with Hammarskjöld’s assumption that he What Lenin describes as the fulfi lment of and Buber are thinking in ‘parallel ways’. these thoughts…is an immense, utterly For him, what he read of Buber and the way centralized complex of State production- in which he used him politically was very centres and State distribution-centres, a closely related to the idea of the political mechanism of bureaucratically run in- sphere trying to break through the ‘Walls stitutes for production and consump- of Distrust’ in the political communication tion, each locked into the other like cog- of power politics. Practically, that meant at wheels (Buber 1950: 123). the same time widening the manoeuvrabil- ity of the United Nations and the leadership Finally, describing the voluntary principle powers of the Secretary-General – which of the Kibbutz village communes, Buber was quite different from the demand for wrote: merely administrative function as described by Buber in ‘Society and the State’. Buber, …nowhere, as far as I see, in the history of on the contrary, never thought that a real the Socialist movement were men so deeply way out of the crisis, a re-structuring of true involved in the process of differentiation community and society, could come from and yet so intent on preserving the prin- the sphere of the political principle – hence ciple of integration (Buber 1950: 1945). his demand for a demarcation line with the political sphere to be pushed back as far as In fact, this is – more precisely than in ‘Soci- possible. ety and the State’ – Buber’s ‘general philoso- phy of unity created “out of the manifold”’. Lest, Hammarskjöld most likely never read The Jerusalem encounters 1958/59: that book, and apparently didn’t give ‘Soci- Buber’s ‘The Validity and Limitation ety and the State’ too much attention when of the Political Principle’ he read Pointing the Way. After all, I suppose Hammarskjöld was thinking – when formu- Although Hammarskjöld and Buber were lating this phrase ‘unity created “out of the occupied with different spheres from which manifold”’ to Buber in his fi rst letter – more rescue in the ‘Age of Mistrust’ might be of Buber’s crossfront at the end of ‘The Va- generated, they both considered themselves lidity and Limitation of the Political Prin- part of the ‘crossfront’, to use Buber’s term, ciple’, where there are formulations such as: so their encounter continued. On two occa- ‘As different as the goals are in one place and sions when Hammarskjöld visited Jerusalem in another, it is still one front…’16. And there they met at Buber’s house in the suburb of

16 See the quotation above (p.19) in this text; Buber 17 See Buber (1953b: 227). (1953b: 218).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 25

Talbiyeh: in September 1958 (early in the to translate ‘some three or four essays’, no- month, as Hammarskjöld returned to New tably in the fi nal part of the book18. Already York on 13 September) and in January 1959 summarising his impressions after both (again early on, as Hammarskjöld returned meetings in Jerusalem, Hammarskjöld also to New York on 9 January) (Hodes 1972: went on more generally: 160). There were two press conferences in New York, after Hammarskjöld’s second Je- On very many points I see eye to eye rusalem visit, in which he referred to their with him; on other points, naturally meetings. At the press conference on 16 Jan- there must be nuances. But as to the basic uary 1959 Hammarskjöld stated that meet- reaction, I think that he has made a ma- ing Buber had been jor contribution and I would like to make that more broadly known.19 one out-of-way tourism with a strong personal accent. I had the pleasure of pay- Thus, they had not been in complete agree- ing a personal call on Professor Martin ment. Unfortunately, Hammarskjöld gave Buber for whom I have a sincere admira- no hint as to where the differences and the tion (Cordier/Foote 1974: 322). ‘nuances’ lay, for example, when they dis- cussed ‘The Validity and Limitation of the An interesting point emerges from the Political Principle’. This article closes, as follow-up press conference on 5 February, we have shown above, with an outline of when a journalist, Mrs Kay Rainey Gray Buber’s concept of a crossfront, and as we from the Greenwich Times asked Hammar- suppose that Hammarskjöld could agree on skjöld to say more about the content of these that, we should mention that the fi rst part of meetings: this essay does not deal with ‘philosophy and politics from Plato down to our days’. Plato After [the second Jerusalem visit], Pro- isn’t even mentioned in this text. Moreover, fessor Buber was quoted by the press as in the fi rst part Buber discusses Jesus and his saying that your conversation concerned statement about giving unto Cæsar what is the relationship between philosophy and due to Caesar, to God what is due to God; politics from Plato down to our days, in of course, the aim in discussing this edict of particular, discussion of his essay, ‘The Jesus is to draw a demarcation line with the Meaning and Validity of the Political sphere of the political principle. Plato, on Principle’ [correct title: ‘The Validity and the other hand, is discussed at length by Bu- Limitation of the Political Principle’; L. ber, at the beginning of ‘Society and State’, M.] (Cordier/Foote 1974: 325). in a very negative way as an early historical example of someone who confuses the so- Hammarskjöld, in his reply, first rectified a cial with the political sphere. misunderstanding on Mrs Gray’s part that he supposedly intended to translate the whole of the essay collection, Pointing the Way, into Swedish, saying that he would never have time for that, but then confi rming his wish 18 Hammarskjöld, quoted by Cordier/Foote (1974: 325). 19 Hammarskjöld, quoted by Cordier/Foote (1974: 326).

26 Critical Currents no. 8

Buber’s ‘Plato and Isaiah’: was assassinated. This was a theme which The power-entangled intellectual always fascinated Buber. He returned to it again and again in conversation, and versus the powerless prophet wrote about it in his essay ‘Plato and Isa- There is one further reference that is con- iah’, which formed part of the inaugural nected with the second meeting in Jerusalem lecture he delivered at the Hebrew Uni- in January 1959. This was their last personal versity in 1938 (Hodes 1974: 160). encounter, but also the most intimate, when Hammarskjöld stayed on to dinner and spent Buber’s lecture ‘Plato and Isaiah’ opposes the whole evening at the house of the Buber two thinkers about the spirit and their rela- family. Aubrey Hodes came to know Buber tion to the political principle. The first part in 1953 as a member of a Kibbutz in the hills deals with Plato’s three visits to Sicily where of Nazareth and became a regular friend and he wanted to establish his spiritually en- visitor. He wrote about this second Jerusalem lightened just state. He was confronted with meeting in January 1959: Dionysios II, a tyrant he became acquainted with. But Plato’s view was that government Buber sometimes spoke with me about rule was in crisis and decay, so he wanted this evening – the last time he saw Ham- to convince the tyrant to govern in a new, marskjöld. And he has written that ‘in spiritual, intellectual way to bring about a the centre of our conversation stood the just state. Plato had a friend in Sicily, Dion, a problem that has ever laid claim to me in prince who had become a Platonic philoso- the course of my life: the failure of the pher himself and wanted to help him con- spiritual man in his historical undertak- vince the tyrant. On his third and last visit to ings’ (Hodes 1974: 160). Sicily, Plato was disappointed by the tyrant’s inability to understand the intellectual truth That was the Plato topic. We can deduce Plato was convinced he himself possessed. from this that they spoke more about the After Plato’s return to Athens in 360 B.C., general ‘Age of Mistrust’ than about the his friend Dion toppled the tyrant in order to short-sighted, but contemporary Cold War establish the just state by himself. Soon Dion ’Wall of Distrust’ – more about the depth of was accused of creating a new tyranny and the crisis and its solution than about short- was murdered in 354 B.C. In a letter to Sicily, term politics. Buber apparently defi ned the Plato defended his friend Dion and his power subject. Concerning Plato, Buber was not politics. 20 In his text on the subject, Buber referring to the beginning of ‘Society and presupposed the historical story and was very State’ , but most likely to another essay, ac- critical of Plato, regarding his efforts as a fail- cording to Hodes: ure. Buber quoted Kant in his critic of Plato:

[Buber] illustrated this failure [of spiri- [Kant] wrote: ‘Because the wielding of tual man in his historical undertakings] power inevitably destroys the free judge- by Plato’s abortive attempt to establish his just state in Sicily, which broke down 20 For an extended historical discussion see for when his friend and disciple, Prince Dion, example: Michael Erler (2007), Platon, Schwabe Verlag: Basel.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 27

ment of reason, it is not to be expected pounded is the opposite of the sovereign- that kings should philosophize or philos- ty of priests… That is why his criticism ophers be kings, nor even to be desired’ and demands are directed toward society, (Buber 1938a: 104). toward the life men live together… So, the criticism and demands are directed To Plato’s approach to power, Buber op- toward every individual on whom other posed an alternative approach, the biblical individuals depend, everyone who has a one of the prophet Isaiah. With this oppo- hand in shaping the destinies of others, sition, Buber insisted on his judgment that and that means they are directed toward philosophers and intellectuals such as Plato everyone of us. When Isaiah speaks of were not the owners of an everlasting truth justice, he is not thinking of institutions – while saying that according to the Jewish but of you and me, because without you prophets the spirit (philosophical truth) de- and me, the most glorious institution be- rived from God, not from any human being. comes a lie… When the mountain of the Buber concluded: Lord’s house is ‘established’ on the reality of true community life, then, and only Isaiah does not believe that spiritual man then, the nations will ‘flow’ toward it has the vocation to power. He knows (Isa. 2:2), there to learn peace in place of himself to be a man of spirit and with- war (Buber 1938a: 109-11). out power. Being a prophet means being powerless, and powerless confronting the Here we have already all the ingredients of powerful and reminding them of their the forthcoming, Landauer-inspired Paths in responsibility… To stand powerless be- Utopia that Buber was still to write. If Bu- fore the power he calls to account is part ber was talking about his favourite subject of the prophet’s destiny. He himself is not in his conversation with Hammarskjöld in out for power, and the special sociologi- January 1959 in a similar perspective like he cal significance of his office is based on has written it down in 1938, then there was that very fact (Buber 1938a: 108). no or very little room for Hammarskjöld’s functioning in the world of power politics Buber, the religious socialist, spoke with as Secretary-General of the United Nations. the prophet of an ‘invisible sovereignty’ to When Buber spoke of renewal or re-struc- which Isaiah felt responsible, the ‘sovereign- turing he always meant it to start from the ty of God’: bottom of society and face-to-face-relation- ships between ordinary citizens. Encounter, But he knew nothing and said nothing conversation, dialogue and unity ‘out of the of the inner structure of that dominion. manifold’ had to be realised through indi- He had no idea; he had only a message. viduals turning to each other rather than He had no institution to establish; he had standing in awe of the glorious institutions only to proclaim. His proclamation was that should decide for them. in the nature of criticism and demands… But this sovereignty of God which he pro-

28 Critical Currents no. 8

Hammarskjöld wanted, nevertheless, to try Dag Hammarskjöld and Martin to renew and restructure the political sphere Buber on the Arab-Israeli conflict via the United Nations. In his function he had no choice to this effort. But he had no Attitudes to David Ben-Gurion real understanding of the differences be- tween the spheres and dimensions of politics Aubrey Hodes in addition proposed a more and society. Engaging in dialogue in society psychological interpretation of that sympa- or a community was not the same as doing thy, deriving from Buber’s constant disap- so in an institution dealing with the interests pointment concerning his relations with, of superpowers. I think this was what Buber and the politics of, the Israeli prime min- meant when, in his commemorative address ister David Ben-Gurion (1948-53 and again in 1962 for the Swedish Radio, ‘Memories 1955-1963): of Hammarskjöld’, he spoke about sensing something ‘fateful that in some way was I gained the impression that [Buber’s] re- connected with his function in this world- lationship with Hammarskjöld gave him hour’ (Buber 1962a: 58). I guess, that here that contact with an active man of State we have a glimpse into the natural ‘nuances which he had despaired of having with on other points’ that Hammarskjöld referred Ben-Gurion (Hodes 1972: 161). to at the press conference in New York after the Jerusalem meetings. As a matter of fact, according to Hodes, during the two Jerusalem meetings That notwithstanding, Buber had a deep sympathy with Hammarskjöld’s efforts to the conversation touched briefly on Israe- tame the superpowers, notably in a time li-Arab relations, and more specifically of crisis and danger when the planet was on the problem of the Arab refugees, on on the brink of nuclear warfare, for Buber which Hammarskjöld was concentrat- knew that his re-structuring of society from ing at the time… On 15 june 1959 Ham- below would take time and could suffer marskjöld submitted to the U.N. General setbacks (as could be shown, for example, Assembly a comprehensive report on the today in the case of the fi nally diagnosable Palestinian refugee problem 21. This in- failure of the Kibbutzim movement). He felt corporated some of the ideas he had dis- sympathy for Hammarskjöld as a man of ac- cussed briefly with Buber during their tion in the sphere of politics who ‘suffered talks in Jerusalem (Hodes 1972: 161-162). the inner torments of an ethical mystic who had to grapple with always complex and of- This hints at a mutual influence between ten sordid political problems’ (Hodes 1972: Hammarskjöld and Buber on that prob- 161) and who was, Buber thought, doomed lem. In fact, there is much more to say on to failure in the end because his mission was Buber and Hammarskjöld concerning the impossible. 21 Dag Hammarskjöld, ‘Proposals Submitted to the General Assembly for the Continuation of United Na- tions Assistance to the Palestine Refugees, New York June 15, 1959’, in Cordier/Foote (1974: 414-436).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 29

Israeli-Arab question. Manuel Fröhlich workers and female workers who quotes a letter Hammarskjöld wrote on came on trucks home to their village 29 April 1958, only two days before their [where a curfew was imposed] were fi rst meeting at the UN building in New torn off the trucks, put up on the York, to his friend and international civil roadside and shot by machine guns. It servant of the UN, George Ivan Smith: has been reported of a large number of murdered (Buber 1956a: 350). I am happy that Buber struck a chord in your U.N. soul as it did in mine. In fact, 43 inhabitants of the village were What a truly remarkable fellow and killed, men, women and children alike. what an influence he might have As a result of the protest by Ichud, eight on his own people if they really lis- soldiers who participated were sentenced tened… If we could make him un- to between seven and 14 years’ impris- derstand our philosophy on Israel it onment, but were released in 1959 fol- might be of value beyond the human lowing an amnesty (Buber 1956a: 351). and personal sphere.22 Buber also held Ben-Gurion responsible for the disastrous consequences of the Apparently, we have to consider here Suez war, for Israel: the reversal of the the interesting fact that up to their fi rst position of the United States versus Israel meeting in May 1958 Buber did not un- resulting from the Sinai war effort, and derstand the reasons that the United Na- furthermore, that the Soviet Union had tions uniquely blamed Israel for the Suez been brought by this into closest prox- crisis. According to Buber, there had imity through their military support for likewise been a blockade by Egypt of Is- Nasser (Friedman 1988: 338). Maurice raeli shipping in the Suez Canal and the Friedman describes Buber’s position at Gulf of Aqaba. Buber, for his part, had the time: already publicly expressed opposition to Israel’s military invasion of the Sinai, When I wrote Buber about the Sinai which Ben-Gurion had commanded in invasion, he responded, in December the autumn of 1956. Notably, Buber had 1956, ‘Of course, the situation is par- protested in the name of Ichud in an open ticularly heavy for me who cannot set- letter to Ben-Gurion against the army’s tle it in my mind by “opposing” prin- massacre of the people of Kafr Kassem ciples to it. By the way, I had sharply on 29 November 1956, where opposed in Ihud (i.e. Ichud; L.M.) a more radical resolution thanking the U.N., an institution in which I cannot 22 Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to George Ivan Smith, 29 April 1958, quoted by Fröhlich (2008: put any trust.’ The U.N. had issued 16). A comprehensive and comparative study of a resolution condemning Israel, and Hammarskjöld’s and Buber’s agreements and Buber could not go along with that differences in relation to their overall percep- tion of the Israel-Palestine problem would be any more than with Ben-Gurion’s ac- very interesting, but by far exceeds the frame of tion (Friedman 1988: 338). this essay and must be left to further explora- tion.

30 Critical Currents no. 8

The most furious clash between Buber and relationship with David Ben-Gurion? In Ben-Gurion occurred at the Jerusalem Ide- her memoirs, Golda Meir, who wrote that ological Conference in August 1957, when Hammarskjöld often talked with Ben-Gu- Buber responded to a speech by Ben-Gu- rion on ‘Buddhism and other philosophical rion. Buber’s response, ‘Israel’s Mission and topics’, even asserted that Hammarskjöld Zion’23, is quoted by Friedman (1983: 341): held ‘Ben-Gurion for an angel’.25 In a letter to Ben-Gurion of 4 September 1956, Ham- Behind everything that Ben Gurion has marskjöld openly admitted that through said…there lies, it seems to me, the will their correspondence and their philosophi- to make the political factor supreme… cal discussions he gave more attention to This ‘politicization’ of life here strikes at the Israeli side of the confl ict, and he asked the very spirit itself. The spirit with all himself how long and to what extent he its thoughts and visions descends and be- could still justify this (Fröhlich 2002: 369). comes a function of politics. Hammarskjöld and Ben-Gurion even still exchanged friendly notes at the end of Sep- Buber compared Ben-Gurion with some tember 1956 on their private understanding of the kings of biblical Israel (King Ahab, and philosophical talks, when Ben-Gurion for example) who ‘employed false proph- had already drawn up plans for Israel’s mili- ets’, and he refuted Ben-Gurion’s claim that tary invasion of the Sinai, which led to the the Messianic idea was still alive within his Suez crisis (Urquhart 1984: 157-158). politics: The problem of the Palestinian refugees In how many hearts of this generation in our country does the Messianic idea live Nevertheless, Hammarskjöld’s strategy on in a form other than the narrow nation- 20 April 1958 – if there was one – to make alistic form which is restricted to the In- Buber ‘understand our philosophy’ had gathering of the Exiles? A Messianic idea seemingly, at least in part, paid off: without the yearning for the redemption of mankind and without the desire to In his report to the General Assembly of the take part in its realization, is no longer United Nations, ‘Proposals Submitted to the identical with the Messianic visions of General Assembly for the Continuation of the prophets of Israel…24 United Nations Assistance to the Palestine Refugees, New York June 15, 1959’ (Ham- Did Hammarskjöld really tell Buber during marskjöld 1958c), Hammarskjöld recom- their meetings that he had had – after some mended the continuation of the United Na- initial suspicions – an excellent and friendly tions Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) in Palestine and its work in the Palestine ref- 23 This text is not available to the author, as it is ugee camps within Arab countries. The re- published only in the revised paperback edition of port recommended not only aid for physical Martin Buber’s original (1948, hardcover), Israel and the World. Essays in a Time of Crisis, New York: Schocken Books. 24 Martin Buber, ‘Israel’s Mission and Zion’, quoted 25 Golda Meir quoted by Fröhlich (2002: 305, note by Friedman (1983: 341). 339).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 31

survival, but also argued that the refugees solutions in the area. Even before a peace needed to be integrated into the economic solution and treaty are arrived at, one life of the Near East, whether through re- should start with practical work on the patriation or resettlement (Hammarskjöld basis of real cooperation between all par- 1958c: 414-36). ties concerned: Israel, the Arab States, the refugees themselves, the U.N., the Great In response to this report – and surely in- Powers and others… [By this], ‘progress fluenced by their Jerusalem meetings only regarding the political and psychological some months before – Buber issued in the obstacles will be sought in a construc- name of Ichud a press conference-statement tive spirit and with a sense of justice and on 15 September 1959, ‘On the Hammar- realism’… We propose that Israel should skjöld Report and the Arab Refugee Prob- formally invite all nations to join in an lem’. Besides, the UNRWA had been initi- immediate and urgent action to resettle ated by the fi rst UN mediator, the Swedish the refugees in Israel and the Arab States, Count Folke Bernadotte, during the fi rst according to the U.N.-resolutions and Arab-Israeli War of 1948-49 (Persson 2008: the principles of the Hammarskjöld-re- 22). The Ichud press conference was held in port…provided they undertake ‘to live Buber’s home and the statement was edited at peace with their neighbours’. Further, by him: Israel will pay compensation to refugees settling in Arab States or elsewhere.26 ‘Ichud’ welcomes the Hammarskjöld report on the Arab Refugee problem… Unlike this positive response from one of Drawing the problem out of its usual Israel’s major opposition organisations, the emotional, philanthropic and moralistic Arab reaction to the Hammarskjöld report context and cleverly avoiding political was much more critical. Arab representatives bias and open political discussions he sur- suspected that the continuation of UNRWA veyed the economic facts which should for an unlimited time amounted to an at- make it desirable for the Arab States and tempt to postpone a solution for the refu- Israel to work for a fi nal solution of the gees and the Near East confl ict as a whole. Refugee-question. At the same time he This reaction, in turn, spurred Hammar- showed that international money spent skjöld to deliver a clarification in a ‘State- on UNRWA could be turned into a sub- ment on the Continuation of UNRWA in stantial help for the whole region’s devel- the Special Political Committee of the Gen- opment as providing training to the refu- eral Assembly, November 10 1959’ (Ham- gees which are ‘a reservoir of manpower marskjöld 1959a: 491-93). Here, Hammar- which in the desirable general develop- skjöld passionately repeated his plea for his ment will assist in the creation of higher recommendations in his former report and standards for the whole population of the area’. For quite a considerable time we 26 KBS DHS, Ichud, On the Hammarskjöld Report have demanded that in the approach to and the Arab Refugee Problem. Statement made by the Arab Refugee-Problem one should the Ichud-Association at a Press-Conference held avoid its connection with fi nal political in the home of Prof. Martin Buber, Jerusalem, on 15.9.59.

32 Critical Currents no. 8

the continuation of UNWRA ‘for all the of Israel.27 But all these demands had hurt time and to all the extent necessary’ (Ham- themselves at the Ben Gurion government. marskjöld 1959a: 491). Regarding the Arab We fi nd further proof of the contrast Buber criticism – which came, ‘frankly, somewhat was made between statesmen like Ben-Gu- to my surprise’ – he clarified: rion and Hammarskjöld in a protest note he formulated in 1961, ‘To the Refugee Prob- When I have pronounced myself in fa- lem’. Buber criticised in the name of Ichud vor of the ‘indefi nite’ continuance of a speech of Ben-Gurion’s before the Knes- UNRWA, that obviously means that I set where the latter described free choice for do not – any more than anybody else, I the Arab refugees as an ‘insidious proposal’, guess – fi nd myself in a position to say urging the refugees instead to settle in Arab for how long such assistance will actually countries (Buber 1961: 370). In his very be needed. But I sincerely hope that the critical response to this, Buber wrote under time will be short. As the recommenda- points 2 and 4: tion aims at the continuance of the as- sistance until the underlying problem is The position of the Prime Minister is not resolved, it means that I try to relieve this only contrary to repeated resolutions of issue of the fundamental uncertainty that the United Nations General Assembly, has for so long enshrouded it (Hammar- but also contrary to all principles that skjöld 1959a: 492). have been adopted by the civilised world, and contrary to the Declaration of Hu- Thus, in these hostilities, Hammarskjöld man Rights, on the basis of which masses had a real and reliable ally in Buber and of refugees, among them a considerable Ichud, especially during the period after amount of Jews, have returned to their their personal encounters. Unfortunately, former residence… The solution of the a settlement on the refugee problem did Arab refugee problem is only possible not come about, as the ‘underlying prob- in full cooperation with all parties con- lem’ could not be resolved and neither side cerned: Israel, the Arab States, the refu- was willing to separate the refugee problem gees and the UNO. To begin with, there from a fi nal political solution, as Buber and should be established common technical Ichud had proposed. After Hammarskjöld’s committees. They should deliberate to- clarification and another 16 meetings, the gether the planning and the way of con- Special Political Committee of the General solidation of the refugees with ‘construc- Assembly extended the UNRWA mandate tive attitude and in the spirit of justice for three years, and after that again for three and realism’ (Hammarskjöld), whereupon years, and so on up until today (Hammar- the economic, demographic, human and skjöld 1959a: 493). especially security conditions of such an operation have to be taken into account Furthermore, Ichud – and Buber – had also (Buber 1961: 371). a long tradition of protesting against the ex- propriation of land belonging to the Arab 27 See for example Ichud (1953), ‘Ein Protest gegen die population now expelled from the territory Enteignung arabischer Böden’, in Buber (1983: 334- 37).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 33

Hammarskjöld, Buber and Psalm 73 skjöld’s intellectual abilities. Hammar- skjöld, he told me, was an outstanding So not only did Hammarskjöld use Buber interpreter of the medieval German mys- in his practical political work, Buber also tics, and in particular of Meister Eckhart. used Hammarskjöld in his criticisms of and ‘But he was not as austere as some people demands directed at the Israeli government. thought. In my talks with him I found But a considerable part of Buber’s sympathy him warm and capable of reaching a true for Hammarskjöld did not arise from these understanding,’ he said. ‘Hammarskjöld political debates. Both had been influenced told me,’ he added, ‘that there were two by Eckhart von Hochheim, known as Meis- books he kept near him and read passages ter Eckhart (1260-1328), a medieval Domin- from almost every day. One was the writ- ican theologian. Eckhart was a Christian ings of Eckhart. And the other was – can mystic who identified God with thinking, you guess? Not the New Testament. But mental activity. For him, creation was an the Psalms. He had a deep knowledge of ongoing process – like thought – without the Psalms, and when I referred to Psalm beginning and without end. According seventy-three he quoted part of it to me. to Eckhart, God could not be recognised This is, as you know, my favourite among through knowledge, but only in a mystical all the Psalms. And it was one of those moment, a spark. Eckhart inspired Ham- to which Hammarskjöld too felt closest’ marskjöld to an understanding of mysticism (Hodes 1972: 161). that turned decidedly towards the world and that demands worldly deeds in order to fol- Psalm 73 was especially dear to Martin Bu- low Christ. Hammarskjöld took from Eck- ber. He read it at Franz Rosenzweig’s fu- hart a concept of self-abandonment in the neral. Franz Rosenzweig (1886-1929), after sense of opposing personal egocentrism; an Landauer, was the second most influential understanding that God is ever anew born person and friend in Buber’s life. During the in the soul of a human being who is in- Weimar Republic they both translated the stinctively prepared and willing to sacrifice Bible from the original Hebrew into Ger- himself in order to receive the confidence of man. Furthermore, four lines from Psalm 73 God, and to lead a spiritual life in this sense were inscribed on Buber’s tombstone at his as ‘habitual will’ (Fröhlich 2002: 149-155; own request. These four lines are: Nelson 2007: 102-06). As a Hasidim, Buber was interested in the more Jewish traditions And nevertheless I am always with you, of mysticism, but he already knew Eckhart’s You have taken hold of my right hand. work very early in his life, notably from the You guide me with your counsel rediscovery by his friend Gustav Landauer of And afterward you take me into honor.28 this medieval heretic pursued by the Catho- lic inquisition, (Hinz 2000). Hodes raises Buber gave an interpretation of this Psalm this common interest of Hammarskjöld and in one of his books, Good and Evil: Two Buber in his account:

Buber had a high regard for Hammar- 28 Quoted by Friedman (1983: 410).

34 Critical Currents no. 8

Interpretations29, which has been summarised is no surprise that Hammarskjöld wrote by Friedman (1983: 410-12). The psalmist in June 1959 a four-page memorandum on says therein that if he – the psalmist – has Martin Buber for the Nobel Prize Commit- a pure heart, God is always with him. This tee in Sweden (Hodes 1972: 62-67; Nelson revelation, that God is continually with 2007: 97-102; Hammarskjöld 1959b). Ham- the psalmist is symbolised not as a word of marskjöld showed therein his admiration God but as a gesture: that God has taken for Buber, but at the end – and somehow his ‘right hand’. Buber compared this to a in contradiction to his evaluation prior to father who takes his little son by the hand in his conclusion – he proposed Buber for the the dark. God is giving a guiding ‘counsel’, Nobel Peace Prize (to be decided by a spe- but this doesn’t mean that the psalmist is re- cial committee appointed by the Norwe- lieved of the responsibility of directing his gian Parliament) rather than the Prize for own steps and making his own decisions. Literature. Hammarskjöld started his evalu- The image was then applied to Buber’s per- ation by characterising Buber’s philosophy spective on death, identifying his own suf- as ‘humanistic internationalism built on ba- fering with that of his people through the sic elements of Jewish thought’30. Hammar- Holocaust and the war in Palestine – that skjöld was aware of the outstanding position suffering (as God, the continually Present of Buber within Jewish thought, which had One) now takes man away and accompanies been unjustly marginalised because of oppo- him right up to his death. ‘Honour’, Buber sition to Buber within the Israeli establish- fi nally claimed, does not lie in a heaven af- ment. Here, Hammarskjöld even stated that ter death, nor in some glorious afterlife, but Buber was somewhat wiser in the long run in the ‘fulfi lment of existence’. The psalm- than Ben-Gurion, maybe because of Buber’s ist enters into a timeless eternity; the pure clear and outspoken intentions to achieve heart of man has vanished but so has the reconciliation with the Arab population: separation from God. So both Buber and Hammarsjköld were united in their knowl- If Ben-Gurion and his predecessors have edge of and interest in existential poetry and taken up the legacy of militant national- literature. ism which characterized historic Israel, Buber can be said to have given new life Hammarskjöld and his memorandum to essential features of the prophetic in- heritance. One might venture to predict for the Nobel Prize Committee that this time as well the voice of the Given the assumption that a considerable prophet will be shown to penetrate fur- part of their sympathy for one another came ther into the future than the voice of the from their love of poetry and literature, it military leader.31

29 Martin Buber (1953), Good and Evil. Two Interpre- tations, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. The 30 Aubrey Hodes gives the most extended account interpretation can be found in the fi rst of two es- of the memorandum, including several quotations says, ‘Right and Wrong. An Interpretation of Some (1972: 162-67); this Hammarskjöld quote is on p. Psalms’, Ch. 4, ‘The Heart Determines (Psalm 73)’, 162. pp. 31-50. 31 Dag Hammarskjöld, quoted by Hodes (1972: 163).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 35

The hailing of the prophetic inheritance is Hodes has his doubts that Hammarskjöld astonishing here given the political implica- pushed this recommendation as far as he re- tions of the prophetic tradition in Buber’s ally could, for then he would have written philosophy, as has been widely discussed himself to the special Norwegian commit- above. In his further review of Buber’s writ- tee (Hodes 1972: 165). The Swedish Com- ings Hammarskjöld paid for the first time mittee duly transferred the recommenda- special attention to I and Thou – the fi rst tion to the Norwegian Parliament, but the edition for the United States was published Peace Prize would have been given to Buber in 1958 – and Buber’s philosophy of dia- only if there had been an Arab counterpart, logue, declaring the text to be a ‘key work equally engaged in Arab-Israeli rapproche- in Buber’s philosophical writings’32. Echo- ment as Buber. The Egyptian writer Taha ing what he wrote to Erik Lindegren, Ham- Hussein was mentioned, but then dismissed marskjöld went on: because he had not advocated peace with Is- rael in a comparable way to Buber. Thus, Summing up the importance of Bu- the proposal was dropped because Buber ber the philosopher in the context that was too far ahead of his time! Already in interests us, one might say that…he has 1949, Hermann Hesse had initiated a cam- been fruitful and inspiring through his paign for Buber to be awarded the Nobel philosophical writings in spheres inti- Prize for Literature. At that time the pro- mately connected with poetry. Further, posal had been dropped because the Nobel on the basis of his philosophy, as a shaper Prize Committee did not want to award the of opinion, he has become one of those prize to an Israeli as UN mediator Count who has most eloquently defended those Folke Bernadotte had been murdered on forms of contact between people which 17 September 1948 by members of the Is- poetry wants to serve: and in so doing raeli terrorist organisation, the Stern Gang he has remained firmly rooted in spiri- (or Lohamei Herut Yisrael, ‘Fighters for the tual realities… Nevertheless, the objec- Freedom of Israel’, LEHY): tions are obvious: he is a man of eighty, with his life’s work behind him, and his It is now well established that the deci- creation falls only indirectly within the sion to kill the UN mediator was made spheres covered by the Nobel Prizes… In by the Central Committee of the LEHY, spite of the admiration for Buber which which included Yitzhak Yezernitzky- these lines reflect, I would hesitate to see Shamir. LEHY saw Count Bernadotte as him rewarded with the Nobel Prize for the main obstacle to an Israeli annexation Literature. A more natural form of recog- of Jerusalem and to Jewish control of all nition might be the Peace Prize.33 Palestine34. [Yitzhak Shamir went on to

32 Ibid: 164. The topic of dialogue will be explored 34 According to two plans of Folke Bernadotte from at length in the article on the second phase of their 27 June and 16 September 1948, Jerusalem should relationship. have remained an Arab territory (this fi rst plan was 33 Ibid: 164. To say that Buber’s work falls only indi- rejected by both Israel and the Arab States) and rectly into the sphere of literature is – to my mind then placed under UN control (this second plan – to overlook the impact of his unique poetic art of was likewise abandoned after the assassination of freely adapting the Hasidic mystic tales and stories. Bernadotte) (Persson 2008: 22-24).

36 Critical Currents no. 8

serve as Prime Minister of Israel in 1983- about this insensitivity. Apparently, here, in 84 and 1986-92; L. M]. The man who the field of personal authenticity, of poetry held the gun is believed to have been Ye- and literature, Buber lost the distance that hoshua Cohen (Persson 2008: 25). he was able to maintain very well in his political debates and human rights engage- Immediately after the assassination of Folke ments. It seems to me that in this regard he Bernadotte, Buber wrote an article criticis- was too trustful of Hammarskjöld, up to the ing the fascination with the murder and the point of becoming vulnerable – something hero worship of the assassins within the Is- which had been registered by his friends and raeli population: led to some strange behaviour:

The heads of the assassins – or the assumed Ernst Blumenthal, a friend of Buber’s assassins – are today encircled in the eyes from Jerusalem, learned about Ham- of the man in the street by the brilliance marskjöld’s memorandum in the sum- of lie, by the nimbus of abject romance. mer of 1959, during a visit to Sweden. All of those who failed in the years of He revealed some of its contents to Bu- crisis to prepare and do the right thing, ber. But he never told him about the final upraise now the real or alleged murder- paragraphs and Hammarskjöld’s reasons ers into the status of heroes and standard for not proposing him for the Literature bearers of the nation. But murder from Award and suggesting the Peace Prize in- ambush will always be only cruel and ab- stead. Buber’s friends concealed this from horrent, and every murder will only be him: and as far as we know he never dis- crime and atrocity. A murder commit- covered the truth. It is not clear whether ted in the name of a people disintegrates the Nobel episode created any breach be- the lives and the hopes of just this people. tween Buber and Hammarskjöld. What With the word ‘Thou shalt not murder!’ is certain is that there was no contact we also understand the commandment: between them for the next two years Thou shalt not murder the soul of your (Hodes 1972: 167). people (Buber 1948a: 309).35

Furthermore, as we have seen, Buber and Ichud were appealing publicly for the con- tinuation of the UNWRA refugee relief programme that Bernadotte initiated. Thus, in the cases of nomination for the Nobel Prize Buber was punished twice despite his outspoken national self-criticism and his efforts for Arab-Israeli reconciliation. Al- though he did not really want to admit it, Buber was of course disappointed and sad

35 Buber (1948: 309), translated by Lou Marin.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 37

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 29

II » Perspectives on dialogue The encounter of Dag Hammarskjöld and Martin Buber, phase 2 (1961 and after)

On 17 August 1961, after an interval of two years, Dag Hammarskjöld resumed contact with Martin Buber by writing a letter to him at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Thus, again it was Hammarskjöld who took the initiative, and again it was after his read- ing of a book of Buber’s, Between Man and Man (Buber 1955):

The last few days I have been reading some studies of yours which I had not seen before. They are the five papers which have been published in English under the collective title ‘Between Man and Man’, and I think especially of ‘Zwi- esprache’, ‘Die Frage an den Einzelnen’, and parts of ‘Was ist der Mensch’.

After having finished reading these stud- ies, I feel the need to send you again a greeting – after far too long a time of silence, understandable only in the light of the pressure of circumstances. In what Martin Buber you say about the ‘signs’, about the ‘ques- tions’ and true response and about the Single One and his responsibility, with experience – to fi nd a bridge built which reference also to the political sphere, in one move, eliminates the distance. you have formulated shared experiences This was all I wanted to tell you and I in ways which made your studies very do not believe that any further comments much what you call a ‘sign’ for me. It is would add or clarify anything.36 strange – over a gulf of time and a gulf of differences as to background and outer 36 KBS DHS, Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to Martin Buber, 17 August 1961.

38 Critical Currents no. 8

In the second part of his letter, Hammar- It is astonishing here to witness that Buber, skjöld referred to his continuing intention of who in his philosophy of dialogue gives so trying to translate Buber, although a first at- much importance to awareness of and sen- tempt to translate the first part of Buber’s ear- sibitivity towards the other, the You part ly mystical literature, published for the first of the dialogue, completely ignores the se- time in German already in 1907, Die Legende vere constraints Hammarskjöld refers to as des Baalschem (Buber 1907, 1956b), had appar- a result of his duties as Secretary-General ently not been finished.37 Hammarskjöld: of the United Nations (‘I can not envisage any more extensive work’). On the other I still keep in my mind the idea of trans- hand, Buber’s insisting on a translation of I lating you so as to bring you closer to my and Thou as his key work on dialogue shows countrymen, but it comes increasingly dif- how dear this book still was to Buber, nearly ficult to choose and of course I can not en- 40 years after its first publication in 1923. visage any more extensive work. Also, the more I sense the nuances in your German, In fact, Between Man and Man, which was the the more shy I become at the thought of original catalyst for Hammarskjöld’s resum- a translation which, at best, could render ing contact with Buber, contains, in contrast only a modest part of its overtones.38 to the German compilations of all Buber’s writings on the principle of dialogue (Bu- Martin Buber replied enthusiastically on 23 ber 1954/1962/1984), only two basic texts August 1961 from his house in the Talbiyeh – that is ‘Dialogue’ (originally written in suburb of Jerusalem : 1929) and ‘The Question to the Single One’ (originally written in 1936), referred to by I want to thank you for your letter. It is Hammarskjöld in his letter by their original for me, even more than what you said German titles. Whereas ‘What is Man?’, a in our fi rst talk, a token of true integral series of inaugural lectures of Buber during understanding, - rather a rare gift in this his fi rst year as a Professor at the Hebrew world of ours. University in Jerusalem, 1938, and published in German only in 1948 as ‘Das Problem des Were I asked, which of my books a Swede Menschen’, has not been considered an inte- should read first, I should answer: ‘The gral part of the canon of Buber’s writings on most “difficult” of them all, but the most dialogue, though it is related to the subject. apt to introduce the reader into the realm of dialogue, I mean: “I and Thou”.’ As you Notwithstanding the texts Hammarskjöld may not know the Postscript to the new mentions in his letter of 17 August 1961, edition, I am sending you a copy, together it would be appropriate here to start with with a paper on language I gave last year.39 Buber’s cardinal work on dialogue philoso- phy, that is I and Thou. At the same time, we 37 See Urquhart (1984: 40-41 and 520). should also recall that Hammarskjöld had 38 KBS DHS, Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to Martin already developed his own concept of ‘quiet Buber, 17 August 1961. diplomacy’ as a dialogue philosophy for the 39 KBS DHS, Martin Buber, Letter to Dag Hammar- skjöld, 23 August 1961. The paper on language, men- political sphere. tioned additionally by Buber, has not yet been found by the author and therefore cannot be considered more deeply here.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 39

Hammarskjöld’s intention during the negotiations at the time coincid- to refine his already existing ed with a new emerging Chinese interest in gaining more independence from the Soviet concept of ‘quiet diplomacy’ Union after Stalin’s death. This concept of ‘quiet diplomacy’ had been formed by Hammarskjöld during the US- When Hammarskjöld contacted Buber three China crisis, in relation to the imprisonment years later, the former’s concept of ‘quiet di- of US pilots at the end of the Korean War plomacy’ had undergone some changes in in 1954-55, and was one that he practised the light of experience. The tasks had be- and refined throughout his period of office come more and more difficult and at the as Secretary-General of the United Nations. time of the Congo crisis, ‘quiet diplomacy’ The political scientist Manuel Fröhlich called had come across certain limits. it, instead, ‘vertrauliche Diplomatie’ (con- fidential diplomacy, but not in the sense of Although it was Between Man and Man that secret; see Fröhlich 2002: 279) and went into made Hammarskjöld resume his correspon- the details of the negotiations during the dence with Buber, it is very likely that he had US-China crisis to deduce key elements that already read and come to know I and Thou Hammarskjöld developed there – quite some (Buber 1970) by this time – only one month time before Hammarskjöld came to know before his sudden death. As has been men- or got into contact with Buber, which led tioned at the end of the section on the first Hammarskjöld later on, in his initial letter phase of their encounter, Hammarskjöld, in to Buber of 16 April 1958, to refer to their his memorandum to the Swedish Academy, proceeding in ‘parallel ways’. For Hammar- written in June 1959, described I and Thou as skjöld, the role of the Secretary-General in a key work of Buber’s philosophy and pursuing quiet diplomacy started with a belief in personal talks – at the time of his voyage the work in which Buber best succeeded to Peking China was not even a member of in presenting a coherent and pregnant the United Nations(it joined the organisation formulation of his basic concept.40 in 1971). He was looking for an atmosphere of privacy, to some extent protected from One of the early biographers of Hammar- public debate. In diplomatic negotiations, skjöld, Henry P. van Dusen, confirmed: Hammarskjöld interpreted in a preferably objective, unemotional and detached way Hammarskjöld was already familiar with the opinions of his counterpart. He wanted I and Thou. He had included a fairly ex- to show personal integrity and honesty in his tended discussion of it in his commenda- demands as well as empathy for the other and tion of Buber for the Nobel Prize (van a desire to save the latter’s face when it came Dusen 1967: 218). to solutions (Fröhlich 2002: 253-282). Ham- marskjöld was surely lucky to find a coun- The Australian journalist, then UN Informa- terpart such as Zhou Enlai, who appreciated tion Director and close friend of Hammar- Hammarskjöld’s humble intellectualism dur- skjöld, George Ivan Smith (Fröhlich 2008), ing their Peking talks. One should not forget, wrote in a letter to Buber in October 1961, a however, that Zhou Enlai’s political margins very short time after Hammarskjöld’s death:

40 Dag Hammarskjöld quoted by Hodes (1972: 163).

40 Critical Currents no. 8

I was a personal assistant to Mr. Hammar- – approached by Buber’s son Rafael to do a skjöld during a number of his trips to the new translation – several times described the Middle East and to Asia and, as well as be- book as ‘untranslatable’ (Kaufmann 1970: 1). ing professional colleagues, we were also Many contemporary readers were appalled friends. He talked to me so often about by the style Buber employed in this work your works and on several occasions gave – his political and social writings, even his me inscribed copies of them as gifts.41 later works on dialogue are much more ac- cessible – fi nding it imprecise, pretentious, As Hammarskjöld read Between Man and Man almost romantic, and further marred by Bu- only a short time before his death, it is le- ber’s habit of inventing new German words. gitimate to suppose that I and Thou figured Kaufmann seemed to confi rm this view: prominently in these talks mentioned by George Ivan Smith. Notably, in debates with The style of Ich und Du is anything but the staff of the Secretariat on questions of sparse and unpretentious, lean or eco- awareness as a basic factor within the concept nomical. It represents a late flowering of of ‘quiet diplomacy’, Hammarskjöld even romanticism and tends to blur all contours organised sessions where they read selected in the twilight of suggestive but extremely parts of I and Thou together, as testified by unclear language. Most of Buber’s Ger- Andrew Cordier (Fröhlich 2002: 279). man readers would be quite incapable of saying what any number of passages prob- Thus, the immediate interest Hammarskjöld ably mean (Kaufmann 1970: 24). took in Buber’s philosophy of dialogue and I and Thou should be at fi rst sight interpreted Kaufmann went on to say that because of within the context of Hammarskjöld’s con- his writing style Buber had been criticised tinuing efforts to develop and refi ne the in- for being concerned only with ‘Schöngeis- struments at hand for a successful conduct of terei’ (aesthetics), an assessment that contrasts dialogue within the political sphere and in sharply with Hammarskjöld’s praise for the diplomatic negotiations. work’s poetry, as we shall see below. But the content of this book is anything but roman- The mystery and romantic anti- tic. Drawing attention to the Jewish cultural heritage of Buber, Kaufmann in his prologue romanticism of I and Thou goes to the heart of what the book is: Although Hammarskjöld admired the lan- guage of I and Thou from a poetic point of The sacred is here and now… The only view, as a philosophical work the book is possible relationship with God is to ad- very hard to read, let alone to translate. In dress him and to be addressed by him, a prologue to his new English translation of here and now – or, as Buber puts it, in I and Thou from 197042, Walter Kaufmann the present. For him the Hebrew name of God, the tetragrammation (YHVH), means HE IS PRESENT. Er ist da might 41 KBS DHS, George Ivan Smith, Letter to Martin Buber, beginning of October 1961. be translated: He is there; but in this con- 42 A fi rst English translation by Ronald Gregor Smith text it would be more nearly right to say: appeared in the UK in 1937. The fi rst American He is here (Kaufmann 1970: 25-26). edition, already revised (including some remarks made by Buberhimself ) appeared in 1958 – the year in which Hammarskjöld made contact with Buber.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 41

Buber distinguished in his book between the age’ (Buber 1970: 104), where most relations basic word pairs I-You and I-It and elaborates between persons, human beings, are not on all of their further significations (Buber true dialogue, because one person is usually 1970: 53). Only within the personal I-You re- either ignored or only experienced or used lationship is God present. Every I-It relation like an object – that is, subordinated by the deals with objects and objectification, even other. Nevertheless, for Buber, the second of human beings, and that is why He or She realm of possible dialogue, the sphere of a is a part of I-It. Buber divides the realms of dialogue between man and man, remains true dialogue into three: (1) a person can have the most important for resolving this crisis a dialogue with nature (a tree, Buber puts of our times. Kaufmann explains: forward as an example), or an animal (Bu- ber’s takes the example of a cat); (2) a person The centrality of human relationships in can have a dialogue with men – that is, with this book is so plain that critics have ac- other persons (into that relation language tually noted with surprise and protested enters); and (3) a person can have a dialogue with complete incomprehension that with spiritual entities (he/she feels addressed there should be any mention at all of a by such entities and responds with a creative tree and of a cat. The central stress falls act, not necessarily with language) (Buber on You – not Thou. God is present when 1970: 56-57). Thus, for Buber true dialogue I confront You. But if I look away from is not necessarily something that only occurs You, I ignore him. As long as I merely between human beings. In his afterword of experience or use you, I deny God. But 1957, so eagerly sent to Hammarskjöld in his when I encounter You I encounter him letter of 23 August 1961, Buber demonstrates (Kaufmann 1970: 28). this in the example of relations with pets: Thus, for Buber a real encounter happens Man once ‘tamed’ animals, and he is still within the realm of actual daily life with all capable of bringing off this strange feat. its risks. The two persons who are meeting He draws animals into his own sphere live entirely in the present and each other’s and moves them to accept him, a strang- presence. There is no precondition: er, in an elementary manner to accede to his ways. He obtains from them an of- The relation to the You is unmediated. ten astonishing active response to his ap- Nothing conceptual intervenes between proach, to his address – and on the whole I and You, no prior knowledge and no this response is the stronger and more di- imagination… No purpose intervenes rect, the more his relation amounts to a between I and You, no greed and no an- genuine You-saying (Buber 1970: 172). ticipation… Every means is an obstacle. Only where all means have disintegrated Thus, according to Buber, true dialogue encounters occur (Buber 1970: 62-63). without language or conversation between a person and an animal is possible; here the We will keep this passage in mind when it animal is part of the I-You relation; whereas comes to the discussion of whether diplo- Buber also talks about the ‘sickness of our macy, negotiations or political talks with

42 Critical Currents no. 8

their hidden or explicit interests, purposes But here Buber showed his Hebrew human- and preconditions are possible realms of true ism, because he also cites particular persons dialogue. For Buber, the ideal situation of from literary, cultural or religious history dialogue is within a loving relationship, as like Socrates, Jesus, Goethe and Buddha as he himself experienced in his marriage to representatives of true dialogue, whereas Paula Winkler (1877-1958), the latter com- Napoleon, the political conqueror, embod- ing from a Catholic background in Munich ies the negative example: and converting to the Jewish faith: – But what if a man’s mission requires Marriage can never be renewed except by him to know only his association with his that which is always the source of all true cause and no real relation to any You, no marriage: that two human beings reveal present encounter with any You, so that the You to one another (Buber 1970: 95). everything around him becomes It and subservient to his cause? How about the But God isn’t simply the beloved one in an- I-saying of Napoleon? Wasn’t that legiti- other person; he is more the invisible, un- mate?… nameable Between, dissolving itself into re- – Indeed, this master of the age evidently sponsibility for the other: did not know the dimension of the You. The matter has been put well: all being This is no metaphor but actuality: love… was for him valore43… there was nobody is between I and You. Whoever does not whom he recognized as being. He was know this, know this with his being, does the demonic You for the millions and did not know love… Love is responsibility of not respond; to ‘You’ he responded by an I for a You… Relation is reciprocity saying: It… (Buber 1970: 117). (Buber 1970: 66). Nonetheless, Buber was a rather optimistic For Buber, even an atheist who lives in a philosopher: a fi nal component of his phi- true dialogical relation with reciprocity – losophy of dialogue contains the optimistic I would rather prefer the term ‘mutuality’ possibility of Umkehr (return) for any in- – can fi nd God; naming is irrelevant here dividual, whatever sphere they live in. In (Reichert 1996). That, again, is due to the Kaufmann’s words: Jewish tradition of his philosophy, as Kauf- mann emphasises: One of the central concepts of the book is that of Umkehr. This is Buber’s Ger- The Hebrews did not visualize their God man rendering of the Hebrew t’shuvah and expressly forbade attempts to make of and means return… The Jewish doctrine him an object – a visual object, a concrete holds that a man can at any time return object, any object. Their God was not to and be accepted by God… What the He- be seen. He was to be heard and listened brew tradition stresses is not the mere to. He was not an It but an I – or a You (Kaufmann 1970: 33). 43 A note by Kaufmann – ‘Value. But the Italian word can also mean worth, courage, fitness’ – in Buber (1970: 117).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 43

state of mind, the repentance, but the act In ‘Dialogue’ (Buber 1929), Buber gives of return (Kaufmann 1970: 35-36). an extended example, from his long po- litical life, of an occasion when he felt he Now we have all the ingredients Buber had experienced the ideal of true dialogue. thought necessary for true dialogue. It con- Strangely enough, it is at the same time an tains an I-You relationship, where the other early and – as it turned out – premature at- is not regarded as a mere object. It requires tempt to establish a kind of League of Na- the sensitivity that allows oneself to be ad- tions or United Nations: dressed and to address the other in a manner characterised by awareness. It involves tak- The date is Easter 1914. Some men from ing the risk of meeting the other without different European peoples had met in an a preconception, without egoistical interest, undefi ned presentiment of the catastro- without tactical strategy or preconditions, phe, in order to make preparations for an in order to create something new in com- attempt to establish a supra-national au- mon. It requires a desire for true dialogue thority. The conversations were marked on both sides, that is reciprocity or mutu- by that unreserved, whose substance and ality. It means taking responsibility for the fruitfulness I have scarcely ever experi- other party in the encounter. If someone enced so strongly. It had such an effect on treats the other as a mere value or object, all who took part that the fictitious fell he is not dealing with dialogue, but with away and every word was an actuality. an I-It relation. Nevertheless, in principle, Then as we discussed the composition of Umkehr is possible for everyone. the larger circle from which public initia- tive should proceed (it was decided that it should meet in August of the same year) Buber’s example of the ideal dialogue: one of us, a man of passionate concen- The Forte Circle in Potsdam, 1914 tration and judicial power of love, raised Buber originally had a plan for publishing the consideration that too many Jews had several works on his dialogue philosophy been nominated, so that several countries (Kaufmann 1970: 49-50). He abandoned the would be represented in unseemly pro- plan, but his subsequent works on dialogue, portion by their Jews… Obstinate Jew after I and Thou, most of which are included that I am, I protested against the protest. in the book that Hammarskjöld read, Be- I no longer know how from that I came tween Man and Man (Buber 1955), tried to to speak of Jesus and to say that we Jews exemplify in much more accessible lan- knew him from within, in the impulses guage topics and problems that arose out of and stirrings of his Jewish being, in a way I and Thou. It is very interesting to see what that remains inaccessible to the peoples Hammarskjöld concentrated on when he submissive to him. ‘In a way that remains wrote to Buber: the ‘signs’, the ‘questions’ inaccessible to you’ – so I directly ad- and ‘true response’ as well as ‘the Single dressed the former clergyman. He stood One and his responsibility, with reference up, I too stood, we looked into the heart also to the political sphere’. of one another’s eyes. ‘It is gone’, he said, and before everyone we gave one another

44 Critical Currents no. 8

the kiss of brotherhood. The discussion Romain Rolland originally planned to join of the situation between Jews and Chris- the meeting but could not attend. The clash tians had been transformed into a bond of arguments Buber was describing above between the Christian and the Jew. In was with Florens Christian Rang. Thereby, this transformation dialogue was fulfi lled. Buber started a conversation on Jewry and Opinions were gone, in a bodily way the Christianity with Rang that lasted until the factual took place (Buber 1929: 5-6). latter’s death in 1926 (Friedman 1982: 180- 184). The joint international effort of the This example has been called ‘the original Forte Circle was a failure, but represents experience of dialogic’44 for Buber. It in- one of the now forgotten prescient evalua- volved the so-called Forte Circle and the tions of the European situation before the Easter meeting of 1914 took place in Pots- war, and one which moreover had a vision dam. The Forte Circle existed from 1910- of how to solve it. The Forte Circle dis- 15 and was an international effort, begun solved in 1915 because some of its members by European intellectuals witnessing the – Gutkind, Rang and notably Buber himself danger of the coming war, to build a supra- – had suddenly taken up propaganda for the national organisation, a forerunner of the war on behalf of their country. That infuri- League of Nations, founded in 1920. The ated Gustav Landauer, who accused Buber Easter meeting in Potsdam was an intense of having turned into a ‘Kriegsbuber’ (War- meeting that went on for three days. It was monger Buber) (Friedman 1982: 193) and attended by the Dutch initiator, Frederik told him so bluntly in May 1916, according Van Eden (a social reformer and utopian, and to Maurice Friedman: a follower of Henry David Thoreau, who also kept up a vigorous interchange with [H]e denied Buber the right to speak writers and activists like Upton Sinclair, publicly of the events of the war and ‘to Mahatma Gandhi and Rabindranath Tag- incorporate these confusions into your ore) and his fellow countryman Henri Borel beautiful and wise generalities’. ‘I confess (a writer); Martin Buber, Gustav Landauer that it makes my blood boil when you (the nonviolent anarchist and close friend of single out Germany without qualifica- Buber’s), Erich Gutkind (a German-Jewish tion as the only redeemer nation without philosopher of religion and science), Florens reference to how Germany in the last de- Christian Rang (lawyer and former protes- cades had pursued colonization through tant minister), all of them from Germany; conquest.’ ‘That is War Politics!’, Landau- and two Swedes, Poul Bjerre (psychoana- er exclaimed… ‘The community that we lyst and writer) and Theodor Gustav Nor- need is far from all that war means today’ lind (writer). The author and peace activist (Friedman 1982: 200).

But Buber and Landauer remained in close 44 The quoted formula comes from Manfred Voigts contact, their relationship of dialogue re- (2001), ‘Martin Buber – Entscheidung und Gemein- schaft’, in Richard Faber and Christine Holste (eds), mained intact and their friendship lasted Der Potsdamer Forte-Kreis. Eine utopische Intellek- until the reactionary murder of Landauer in tuellenassoziation zur europäischen Friedenssicherung, 1919. Mainly because of Landauer’s criticism, Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann, p. 107.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 45

but also for other minor reasons (such as the But where the dialogue is fulfi lled in explicit census of Jews in the German Army its being, between partners who have in 1916, which led Buber back to his origi- turned to one another in truth, who ex- nal Zionist position that the German War press themselves without reserve and are had nothing to do with the obligations of free of the desire for semblance, there is the Jewish community) he slowly gave up brought into being a memorable com- his pro-war position. That was a fundamen- mon fruitfulness which is to be found no- tal experience for Buber and the reason he where else…The interhuman opens out no longer advocated a mysticism that could what otherwise remains unopened. make one blind. Instead, Buber embraced the vision that dialogue is opposed to war This phenomenon is indeed well known and cannot go along with war propaganda. in dialogue between two persons; but I It is very likely that Hammarskjöld knew have also sometimes experienced it in a di- nothing about this background, this person- alogue in which several have taken part. al Umkehr of Buber’s. For Buber, dialogue About Easter of 1914 there met a group philosophy was a return to realism and a consisting of representatives of several dissociation from pure mysticism, whereas European nations for a three-day discus- for Hammarskjöld Buber remained a mystic sion that was intended to be preliminary even within the latter’s books on dialogue. to further talks. We wanted to discuss to- gether how the catastrophe, which we all It is interesting to read Buber’s later version believed was imminent, could be avoided. of this original and ideal dialogue experience Without our having agreed beforehand when he described it in another philosophi- on any sort of modalities for our talk, all cal work, without reference to the concrete the presuppositions of genuine dialogue historical background, which does not show were fulfi lled. From the fi rst hour imme- Buber in a very favourable light. The fact, diacy reigned between all of us, some of however, that Buber even repeated the ac- whom had just got to know one another; count of this experience in another of his everyone spoke with an unheard-of un- works on dialogue philosophy – which was reserved, and clearly not a single one of not, unfortunately, included in Between Man the participants was in bondage to sem- and Man and therefore could not have been blance. In respect of its purpose the meet- read by Hammarskjöld – shows how impor- ing must be described as a failure (though tant this historical example was for Buber. even now in my heart it is still not a cer- We find this passage in ‘Elements of the In- tainty that it had to be a failure); the irony terhuman’, first published in German in 1953 of the situation was that we arranged the (Buber 1954/1962/1984: 269-298)45, under fi nal discussion for the middle of August, the explicit chapter title, ‘Genuine Dialogue’. and in the course of events the group was Here, the passage on the particular dialogue soon broken up. Nevertheless, in the time he experienced in 1914 reads as follows: that followed, not one of the participants doubted that he shared in a triumph of 45 The fi rst English translation was by Ronald Gregor the interhuman. Smith, in Buber, Martin (1965), The Knowledge of Man, London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., pp. 72-88.

46 Critical Currents no. 8

One more point must be noted. Of course what his words will be; genuine dialogue it is not necessary for all who are joined has to be spontaneous and cannot be pre- in a genuine dialogue actually to speak; pared beforehand. those who keep silent can on occasion be especially important. But each must What did Hammarskjöld do with these el- be determined not to withdraw when ements of Buber’s philosophy of dialogue? the course of the conversation makes it How did he interpret and use them for his proper for him to say what he has to say. political sphere, the terrain of diplomacy? No one, of course, can know in advance Are diplomatic negotiations even imaginable what it is that he has to say; genuine dia- without intense preparation and the work- logue cannot be arranged beforehand. It ing-out of a tactical strategy beforehand? has indeed its basic order in itself from the beginning, but nothing can be de- termined, the course is of the spirit, and The ‘Signs’ and the Mehé experience some discover what they have to say only In his letter of 17 August 1961 Hammar- when they catch the call of the spirit (Bu- skjöld wrote that he had read Between Man ber 1953c: 79-80). and Man ‘with reference also to the politi- cal sphere’. It is quite obvious that he was Here again Buber has told this story with- instantaneously relating the philosophy of out admitting that he himself was soon to dialogue of Buber to his everyday life as be among those advocating war. But again it Secretary-General of the United Nations, must be emphasised that Buber was only tem- where he had to deal with diplomacy and porarily a proponent of war and that the in- negotiation talks with states’ representatives sight gained from his personal failure led him or confl icting partners of new emerging to oppose dialogue and war in his philosophi- states, as in the Congo crisis which was at its cal thinking. So with the help of Landauer’s peak when Hammarskjöld resumed contact severe criticism Buber came back two years with Buber. Nevertheless, Buber made only later to his cherished Jewish motto, ‘Not by small and occasional references to the politi- might but by spirit’ (Friedman 1982: 193). cal sphere in his works on dialogue, which were primarily written not for the political Now we can deduce some further elements sphere but for the social sphere. of true dialogue from the experience of the Forte Circle. The partners should turn to Thus, when Hammarskjöld approved what each other with truthfulness and should ex- Buber wrote on ‘Signs’ it is very likely that press themselves without reserve. Even very he was reading it with special reference controversial views will always be judged to his own situation within the political with respect and understanding on the basis sphere. ‘The Signs’ is the title of a section in of truth. Furthermore, it is not necessary for Buber’s text ‘Dialogue’ (Buber 1929: 10-13), every participant in true dialogue to speak, the sequel to I and Thou in the canon of his or speak much. But one should be able to writings on dialogue philosophy – and the respond in the presence of the other when fi rst text published in Between Man and Man. addressed. No participant knows in advance Here, Buber states that in contemporary

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 47

times men are not aware of the signs when trust’ within Cold-War political and diplo- they are addressed by the other for dialogue. matic discourse. The representatives of the They do not see, feel, observe these signs. superpowers wear their armour and, thus, They lack presence and attentiveness, be- cannot read the signs of a real address, of cause they live in an armour: true intention of dialogue. Buber went on already to make parallels between ‘signs’ and Each of us is encased in an armour whose ‘questions’. He explained what he meant by task is to ward off signs. Signs happen to being addressed: us without respite, living means being addressed, we would need only to pres- …it is said into my very life; it is no ex- ent ourselves and to perceive. But the perience that can be remembered in- risk is too dangerous for us, the soundless dependently of the situation, it remains thunderings seem to threaten us with an- the address of that moment and cannot nihilation, and from generation to genera- be isolated, it remains the question of a tion we perfect the defence apparatus… questioner and will have its answer46. Each of us is encased in an armour which (It remains the question. For that is the we soon, out of familiarity, no longer no- other great contrast between all the busi- tice. There are only moments which pen- ness of interpreting signs and the speech etrate it and stir the soul to sensibility (Bu- of signs which I mean here: this speech ber 1929: 10-11). never gives information or appeasement) (Buber 1929: 12).47 Signs are not something extraordinary; they address a person within the realms of daily As in I and Thou, Buber illustrated in ‘Dia- life. But men have, in their armour, turned off logue’ this major task of recognising the their receivers most of the time. Nonetheless, signs of being addressed by a particular ex- signs signal what is happening in the world: perience, but this time a negative experi- ence. This example is given in the section What occurs to me addresses me. In ‘A Conversation’, immediately following what occurs to me the world-happening the section ‘The Signs’. It concerns an expe- addresses me. Only by sterilizing it, re- rience where Buber missed to read the signs. moving the seed of address from it, can This experience I take what occurs to me as a part of the world-happening which does not refer to …was brought home to me by an every- me. The interlocking sterilized system day event, an event of judgement, judg- into which all this only needs to be dove- ing that sentence from closed lips and tailed is man’s titanic work. Mankind has an unmoved glance such as the ongoing pressed speech too into the service of this course of things loves to pronounce. work (Buber 1929: 11). 46 The English translation is not very precise here. Hammarskjöld undoubtedly rediscovered In the German original it is clear that the the here within a philosophical concept the questioner is looking for an answer, not that he will defi nitely get an answer (Buber 1954/1962/1984: common ground he had found with Buber 156). on the causes of the present ‘Wall of Dis- 47 The brackets are Buber’s.

48 Critical Currents no. 8

What happened was no more than that one position. The young man he mentioned had forenoon, after a morning of ‘religious’ en- a name, Mehé, and the encounter with him thusiasm, I had a visit from an unknown happened in July 1914. Friedman tells the young man, without being there in spirit. I story as follows: certainly did not fail to let the meeting be friendly, I did not treat him any more remiss- About this time…Buber was given to ly than all his contemporaries who were in hours of mystic ecstasy. The illegitimacy the habit of seeking me out about this time of of this division of his life into the ev- day as an oracle that is ready to listen to rea- eryday and a ‘beyond’ where illumina- son. I conversed attentively and openly with tion and rapture held without time or him – only I omitted to guess the questions sequence was brought to Buber by ‘an which he did not put. Later, not long after, I event of judgement’ in which closed lips learned from one of his friends – he himself and an unmoved glance pronounced the was no longer alive – the essential content of sentence (Friedman 1982: 187-188). these questions; I learned that he had come to me not casually, but borne by destiny, not Buber didn’t read the signs of his encounter for a chat but for a decision. He had come to with Mehé. Later, he learned from a friend me, he had come in this hour. What do we that Mehé had died; but why, under what expect when we are in despair and yet go to circumstances? Mehé came to Buber not for a man? Surely a presence by means of which a chat, but with a question. He had to de- we are told that nevertheless there is meaning cide whether or not to go to war if called (Buber 1929: 13-14). up; that is, whether or not to love life:

Again, Buber recounts the example in a very The decision was one of life or death. But mysterious manner, with no names, no fur- not in the sense that many assumed. Mehé ther information about the background or did not commit suicide, as some com- what actually happened to the young man, mentators have asserted. Rather he died at and omitting his own personal involvement. the front in the First World War, as Buber Again, it was an experience at the begin- himself wrote me, ‘out of that kind of de- ning of World War I, the period when Bu- spair that may be defined partially as “no ber made one of the biggest mistakes of his longer opposing one’s own death“.’ Even life by advocating war on behalf of German in a psychologising age such as ours, the nationalism (and by calling on Jews living difference between actual suicide and such in Germany to participate). Like many writ- despair should be evident. The ‘something ers, poets and artists of expressionism, some monstrous that was getting ready to con- existential mystics like Buber were also sud- sume history and mankind’ is the quali- denly attracted by war as a means of liberat- tatively different era that began with the ing themselves from the so-called degenera- First World War, continued with the Sec- tion of society. Buber is not very courageous ond, and outstripped imagination in the here in deleting the background. This is Nazi extermination camps, Hiroshima notwithstanding the fact that the encoun- and Nagasaki, and the ‘Gulag Archipela- ter with the young man was part of Buber’s go’. In such situations those who do not Umkehr – turning away from his warmonger fight wholeheartedly against their death

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 49

will certainly be killed, whereas those fullness but each mortal hour’s fullness of who do might remain alive… Buber ex- claim and responsibility (Buber 1929: 14). perienced this event as a judgement and responded to it with a ‘conversion’ which Thus, here we have an example of what changed his whole life. Buber’s feeling of Hammarskjöld wrote in his letter to Bu- guilt was not based on any illusion of om- ber on reading the ‘signs’ when a person is nipotence, as if he should have been able to addressed, as well as the ‘Single One and remove Mehé’s despair no matter what… his responsibility’. I think, Hammarskjöld In Mehé’s case what made Buber person- could easily transfer the necessity to be ally guilty in the exact sense in which he present and aware in encounters within di- himself later defined existential guilt was plomacy, the necessity to read the ‘signs’ in that he withheld himself, that he did not the political sphere – although for Buber the respond as a whole person to the claim of Mehé experience helped an Umkehr where the situation… This withholding himself he turned away from an isolated, individual did not arise through any conscious deci- inner mysticism, which lies at the core of sion or wilful detachment but through a Hammarskjöld’s own religious philosophy habitual way of life which removed him of mysticism as depicted in Markings. from the everyday to a ‘spiritual’ sphere which had no connection with it…he still was not ‘there’ for Mehé, who had come ‘Responsibility’ and ‘conscience’ to him in that hour. It is not that he did in Buber’s ‘The Question not say the right thing but that he failed to the Single One’ to make real, insofar as was up to him, the possibility of genuine dialogue that that It is no surprise, then, that the follow-up text hour offered (Friedman 1982: 188-189). Buber wrote on his philosophy of dialogue, ‘The Question to the Single One’ (Buber Thus, out of this negative experience, Bu- 1936), was a critique of the individualist ber learnt lessons. When he realised, some philosophies of Max Stirner (1806-1856) and years later what he had done, this reflection Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855). In this cri- contributed to his recovery from a pro-war tique, Buber challenged the modern inter- position and led to a rejection of mysticism pretation of man as an isolated individual. in an isolated, individual manner of self-de- Within this interpretation the individual al- nial, without connection to the other. Bu- ways seeks a solitary relationship with God, ber wrote thus in ‘Dialogue’: as is the case with Kierkegaard’s philosophy and biography. Thus, modern individualist Since then I have given up the ‘religious’ philosophy neglects the relational character which is nothing but the exception, ex- of the human being, symbolised in Kierkeg- traction, exaltation, ecstasy; or it has given aard’s rejection of his possible marriage with me up. I possess nothing but the everyday Regine Olsen. For Buber, who embraced a out of which I am never taken. The mys- personal, dialogic philosophy, a relation- tery is no longer disclosed, it has escaped ship with God is inseparable from the re- or it has made its dwelling here where ev- lationship with fellow human beings, thus erything happens as it happens. I know no

50 Critical Currents no. 8

God can only be found through relations the community to which a man belongs with human beings and not by isolating the does not usually express in a unified and Single One from these relations. Whether unambiguous way what it considers to be this interpretation of Kierkegaard by Buber right and what not right in a given situ- is right or wrong is not of primary inter- ation. It consists of more or less visible est here.48 We just have to consider the fact groups, which yield to a man interpreta- that Hammarskjöld obviously didn’t reject tions of destiny and of his task which are the book because of Buber’s critique of the utterly different yet all alike claim abso- mystical essentialism of Kierkegaard, which lute authenticity. Each knows what ben- seemed to be close to Hammarskjöld’s own efits the community, each claims your concept of faith hitherto. Nonetheless, what unreserved complicity for the good of the Hammarskjöld hinted at in his letter of 17 community (Buber 1936: 67). August 1961 were passages of the book not necessarily connected with the parts where Now comes into play what Hammarskjöld Buber criticised Kierkegaard. might have called ‘the reference to the po- litical sphere’: When Hammarskjöld mentioned the ‘Single One and his responsibility, with reference Political decision is generally understood also to the political sphere’, I am quite sure to-day to mean joining such a group. If that he was referring to a section in Buber’s this is done then everything is finally in ‘The Question to the Single One’, entitled order, the time of deciding is over. From ‘The Single One in Responsibility’ (Buber then on one has only to share in the group’s 1936: 65-71). Here, Buber elaborates on the movements… The group has relieved you relationship between community and per- of your political responsibility. You feel sonal responsibility. We know from the dis- yourself answered for in the group; you are cussion of the first phase of the encounter permitted to feel it (Buber 1936: 67). between Buber and Hammarskjöld how im- portant community was to Buber, whether But this is exactly what Buber rejects. For the community of the Kibbutz or the larger him it is a negation of the I. The I within community of the Jewish Nation. My view is the I-You relationship is as important as the that in the following passage he was thinking You. In other words: The You can be a per- merely of the latter. Yes, Buber was a kind of son, but can also be God speaking through Jewish nationalist, but he adopted a unique, the individual conscience. For Buber, God is pluralistic and very moderate nationalism concerned with the entirety of all relation- without letting individual responsibility be ships; life within a group cannot be separated subordinated. That is why he first describes from life without that group or even demand in this text the fact that that God is only valid without that group. That would render all dialogical I-You rela- tionships within the group irrelevant and run 48 There are scholars who think Buber’s criticism of counter to the notion of an all-embracing as Kierkegaard denies some reverse tendencies and well as all-in-between presence of God. Bu- that there are possible bridges that could be built ber called that a curtailment of God’s realm: from Kierkegaard to Buber, see for example Hent- ing (2002).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 51

The relation of faith to the one Present ophy ‘religious anarchism’49. Buber rejects Being is perverted into semblance and here the Jewish religious law in the sense self-deceit if it is not an all-embracing of a presupposed order or ethical norm to relation. ‘Religion’ may agree to be one be blindly followed in a given situation of department of life besides others which existential decision. Buber, however, is to- like it are independent and autonomous – tally concentrated on the present moment it has thereby already perverted the rela- and does not rely on norms because for him tion of faith (Buber 1936: 67-68). these norms have become mere rituals; they have been institutionalised and thus lack life Thus, the Single One is in constant dialogue and creativity: with persons from his group or community as well as with God. In a given situation where That means: the presence of the encoun- the Single One is addressed, and called upon ter breaks through or undermines the to respond, he cannot follow solely the rules rules provided by religion or social insti- of the group. That, precisely, is the individual tutions for the relations to God respec- responsibility of the Single One: tively between man and man. Indeed, they challenge the codifying institutions Certainly the relation of faith is no book themselves (Reichert 2002: 25). of rules which can be looked up to dis- cover what is to be done now, in this very However, the decision that demands an en- hour. I experience what God desires of counter, which has to be taken in the pres- me for this hour – so far as I do experi- ence of the other and not by relying on ence it – not earlier than in the hour… My prescribed norms, was not meant to be ethi- group cannot relieve me of this responsi- cally arbitrary. There is a place, according to bility, I must not let it relieve me of it; if I Buber, where decision is made, it is an inner do I pervert my relation of faith, I cut out place and it is called conscience: of God’s realm of power the sphere of my group. But it is not as though the latter did He [who is addressed in a decisive situa- not concern me in my decision – it con- tion] may even hold firm with all his force cerns me tremendously… I may before all to the ‘interest’ of the group – till in the have to do justice to it, yet not as a thing last confrontation with reality a finger, in itself, but before the Face of God; and hardly to be perceived, yet never to be no programme, no tactical resolution, no neglected, touches it. It is not the ‘finger command can tell me how I, as I decide, of God’, to be sure; we are not permitted have to do justice to my group before the to expect that, and therefore there is not Face of God (Buber 1936: 68). 49 Gershom Scholem, here quoted by Reichert (2002: The fi rst two sentences in this quotation 26). The article by Scholem that the quote comes help explain why the great social scientist of from is ‘Martin Bubers Deutung des Chassidismus’, Hasidic tradition, Gershom Scholem, called in Scholem, Gershom (1997) Judaica 1, Frankfurt- am-Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, sixth edition, pp. Buber a ‘religious anarchist’ and his philos- 165-206, especially p. 197.

52 Critical Currents no. 8

the slightest assurance that our decision is Buber concluded this chapter with a vision right in any but a personal way… The fin- of the ‘crossfront’ that we know already ger I speak is just that of the ‘conscience’… from ‘The Validity and Limitation of the I point to the unknown conscience in the Political Principle’ in Pointing the Way (Bu- ground of being… The certainty produced ber 1953b): by this conscience is of course only a per- sonal certainty; it is uncertain certainty; What I am speaking of has nothing to do but what is here called person is the very with ‘individualism’…I consider the hu- person who is addressed and who answers man person to be the irremovable central (Buber 1936: 69). place of the struggle between the world’s movement away from God and its move- Buber’s recourse to a concept of ‘conscience’ ment towards God. This struggle takes showed that even in the presence of a given place to-day to an uncannily large extent situation, the decision to be made cannot in the realm of public life, of course not be devoid of ethical behaviour. There are between group and group but within each always preliminary ethical decisions that group… Only those who are bound and shape ’conscience’. What is simply meant by free in this way can still produce what can this is that the ethical decision has to be re- truly be called community… His respon- newed in each different situation. Thomas sible decision will thus at times be opposed Reichert pointed to these ethical decisions: to, say, a tactical decision of his group. At times he will be moved to carry the fight Apparently, by uttering the basic word I- for the truth, the human, uncertain and Thou, there have nonetheless been made certain truth which is brought forward by pre-decisions about the activity to envisage, his deep conscience, into the group itself, resulting from the presence and the recog- and thereby establish or strengthen an in- nition of the other and the way of being ner front in it. This can be more important self, for example that one cannot torture for the future of our world than all fronts the other, or murder him, or disrespect him that are drawn today between groups as a human being (Reichert 2002: 31). and between associations of groups; for this front, if it is everywhere upright and Finally, Buber summarised: strong, may run as a secret unity across all groups (Buber 1936: 70). I say, therefore, that the Single One, that is, the man living in responsibility, can make even his political decisions prop- What was Hammarskjöld referring to erly only from that ground of his being at when he talked about the ‘questions’? which he is aware of the event as divine speech to him; and if he lets the awareness There is one other notion that Hammar- of this ground be strangled by his group skjöld mentioned in his letter of 17 August he is refusing to give God an actual reply 1961: ‘the “questions” and the response’. It (Buber 1936: 69-70). is not absolutely clear to me to what text in

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 53

Between Man and Man Hammarskjöld was having read ‘parts of “Was ist der Mensch”’50. referring to here. As I see it, there are two Unfortunately, there is no hint as to which possibilities. The last and very decisive sec- parts Hammarskjöld meant. Thus, in the tion of Buber’s ‘The Question to the Single following we will deal with just two chap- One’ (Buber 1936) is called ‘The Question’ ters of ‘What is man?’ that very possibly (but in the singular, not in the plural), where- chimed with Hammarskjöld’s most urgent as the last text in Buber’s Between Man and concerns. Man, ‘What is Man?’, a series of lectures he gave at the Hebrew University beginning in 1938 (the first book edition in Hebrew was Buber’s chapter on ‘The Question’ published in 1942), deals with the four an- But let us start with the fi rst possibility: the thropological ‘questions’ (plural) of Kant: last chapter of ‘The Question to the Single (1) What can I know; (2) What ought I to One’, called ‘The Question’. Here, Buber do?; (3) What may I hope?; (4) What is man? discussed the contemporary crisis of man It is possible to add the quest for ‘response’ in relation to the person as well as to truth to both of them. Hammarskjöld may have by taking up the necessity of decision in a been referring more to the last chapter of given situation with the help of a person’s ‘The Question to the Single One’, because ‘conscience’, which we discussed above in he mentioned the topic at the same time as relation to the topic of the responsibility of mentioning the topic of the ‘Single One and the Single One. But this freedom of deci- his responsibility’; moreover, the need for a sion was actually threatened, especially be- ‘responsible response’ (Buber 1936: 80) was fore and in 1936 when Buber wrote the text expressed at the beginning of this essay. On while still living in the Germany of the Na- the other hand, ‘What is Man?’ has also been zis.51 It was threatened by what Buber calls related to Buber’s writings on dialogue, al- collectivisation: though it constitutes more of an anthropo- logical journey through philosophical histo- The question by which the person and the ry, and despite the fact that this text was not truth have become questionable to-day is included in the German compilation of his the question to the Single One. The per- works on dialogue, Die Schriften über das son has become questionable through be- dialogische Prinzip (Buber 1954/1962/1984). ing collectivized (Buber 1936: 80). Buber himself said in his preface to the 1948 German edition, Das Problem des Menschen 50 Hammarsköld spoke in his letter of the German that he wanted the major works on dialogue title ‘Was ist der Mensch?’ for this text comprising to be classified historically with ‘What is lectures by Buber during the summer term of the man?’ and set aside from his contemporary Hebrew University in its fi rst year of existence, 1938. But the German publication of these lectures theories (Buber 1948b: 5). had a slightly different title, Das Problem des Men- schen (The Problem of Man), and was not published In the fi rst paragraph of his letter of 17 Au- before 1948; see Buber (1948). 51 After coming under much pressure from Nazi gust 1961, Hammarskjöld already mentions Germany Buber moved to Palestine in 1938, only a short time before the November pogrom in which his house and furniture in Heppenheim were de- stroyed.

54 Critical Currents no. 8

During the decades around the turn of the sibility for human truth. So instead of Max century, Buber continued, there had been Stirner’s saying ‘True is what is Mine’ (arbi- a fight against the Nietzschean concept of trary), the collective says today: ‘True is what an arbitrary, self-centred I, which had led to is Ours’ (politicised). Buber concluded: the recognition of being bound ‘to a peo- ple, to a family, to a society, to a vocational But in order that man may not be lost there group, to a companionship in convictions’ is need of persons who are not collectiv- (Buber 1936: 80). But now, in the 1930s, this ized, and of truth which is not politicized. had gone off in a seriously wrong direction, according to Buber: There is need of persons, not merely ‘representatives’ in some sense or oth- But it came about that a tendency of a er, chosen or appointed, who exoner- quite different origin and nature assumed ate the represented of responsibility, but power over the new insights, which ex- also ‘represented’ who on no account let aggerated and perverted the perception themselves be represented with regard to of bonds into a doctrine of serfdom. Pri- responsibility… That man may not be lost macy is ascribed here to a collectivity52. there is need of the person’s responsibility The collectivity receives the right to hold to truth in his historical situation. There the person who is bound to it bound in is need of the Single One who stands such a way that he ceases to have com- over against all being which is present to plete responsibility. The collectivity be- him – and thus also over against the body comes what really exists, the person be- politic – and guarantees all being which comes derivatory. In every realm which is present to him – and thus also the body joins him to the whole he is to be excused politic (Buber 1936: 82). a personal response (Buber 1936: 80). Hammarskjöld may well have seen a con- Buber drew the conclusion in relation to nection with his ‘political sphere’ here, but truth, in the sense that this dispense of the this might also have been a misconception, personal response corrupts truth: in great part due to an inappropriate transla- tion of the German expression ‘öffentliches The truth, on the other hand, has become Wesen’ as ‘body politic’53. But then again, questionable through being politicized Hammarsköld may have read this passage as (Buber 1936: 81). another early version of the ‘crossfront’ con- cept elaborated above in the discussion on Buber now elaborated in a few paragraphs on the fi rst part of his encounter with Buber. the ‘sociological doctrine of the age’, which was guilty of contributing to this process of dispossessing the individual from the respon- 53 As a translator of German origin, I am not quite satisfied with the use of ‘body politic’ for the Ger- man expression ‘öffentliches Wesen’ here. Buber 52 When talking of ‘collectivity’, Buber was always does not mean only the political sphere when talk- thinking of big collectives like states or nation ing of ‘öffentliches Wesen’, but is also referring to states, that is nations without an inner dialogical society and the discussions within the social sphere structure of different groups. as opposed to the political sphere.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 55

Buber’s questions in ‘What is Man?’ which qualitatively are of such a nature that men are ever anew born into them Now let us turn to the second possibility. or grow into them, who thus understand There is a high probability that we can iden- their membership not as the result of a tify more precisely the ‘parts of “Was ist der free agreement with others but as their Mensch?”’ that Hammarskjöld mentioned destiny and as a vital tradition. Such in his letter of 17 August 1961 without giv- forms are the family, union in work, the ing a concrete hint of which parts he meant. community in village and in town (Bu- As there are only two chapters where Buber ber 1938b: 157). did not go into more detail on the views of certain specific philosophers (Aristotle, Thus, Hammarskjöld found here, in short, a Kant, Hegel, Marx, Feuerbach, Nietzsche, summary of the more detailed Paths in Utopia, Kierkegaard, Husserl, Heidegger, Scheler) which he apparently never read and which in respect of the four anthropological ques- has been discussed above in section on the tions posed by Kant (of which the fourth is first phase of their encounter. Some anarchist ‘What is man?’), I propose to concentrate interpretations of Buber (for example, that of on the first part of the chapter entitled ‘The French libertarian sociologist Michael Löwy Crisis and its Expression’ and on the last [Löwy 2001: 37-38]) rightly connect these chapter of the text, ‘Prospect’. segments of ‘What is man?’ to similar, but more extended and detailed passages in Paths In the ‘The Crisis and its Expression’ we in Utopia.54 Moreover, in his analysis of ‘What fi nd an early philosophical version of the is man?’, Löwy pointed to the use of an old more concrete analysis of contemporary cri- Jewish cultural image by Buber when elabo- sis that Hammarskjöld had read two years rating on the reasons for the contemporary before in Pointing the Way (1957). The fact crisis. This image is a man-made artificial that this early version had been written as monster, the ‘Golem’, which was believed to far back as 1938 shows that Buber did not be possessed by an evil power (Löwy 2001: regard the fascist decades as an isolated crisis 37), a coldness without soul. It was a clay fig- but as a continuum that began with World ure made by a Rabbi to prevent attacks on War I and stretched far into the post-World- Jews, but ends up destroying or being de- War-II period. stroyed by the Rabbi; the Golem could only destroy or be destroyed55: According to Buber, the fi rst reason for the contemporary crisis was a sociological one: The second factor can be described as one of history of the spirit, or better, of the It is the increasing decay of the old or- soul… I should like to call this peculiarity ganic forms of the direct life of man with man. By this I mean communities which 54 Löwy also published a study of Jewish messianism quantitatively must not be too big to al- and libertarian thought; see Löwy, Michael, Erlö- sung und Utopie. Jüdischer Messianismus und libertäres low the men who are connected by them Denken, Berlin: Karin Kramer Verlag. to be brought together ever anew and set 55 This explanation comes from a note by the transla- in a direct relation with one another, and tor of Between Man and Man, Walter Kaufmann. It is note number 14 in Buber (1955: 208).

56 Critical Currents no. 8

of the modern crisis man’s lagging behind threat Hammarskjöld was confronted with his works. Man is no longer able to mas- at the beginning of the 1960s in the United ter the world which he himself brought Nations, which eventually led to the Cuban about: it is becoming stronger than he is, missile crisis after his death. it is winning free of him, it confronts him in an almost elemental independence, and The other part of ‘What is man?’ that Ham- he no longer knows the word which could marskjöld might have been referring to in subdue and render harmless the golem he his letter of 17 August 1961 is the last chap- has created (Buber 1938: 158). ter, entitled ‘Prospect’. Here, at the end of his presentation of the history of anthro- There were three realms where man was pological philosophy, Buber juxtaposed the lagging behind his works, Buber said here. traditions of individualism and collectivism Firstly he made a critique of modern ma- in the face of the actual, contemporary situ- chinery. Although Buber was not anti-mod- ation, the historical apogee of fascism and ern but advocated a future re-structuring of national socialism in the1930s: society, necessarily different from what has been before, nevertheless for Löwy Buber’s In spite of all attempts at revival the time critique was a romantic protest against mod- of individualism is over. Collectivism, on ern capitalist-industrial civilisation (Löwy the other hand, is at the height of its de- 2001: 38). So Buber wrote about technology velopment, although here and there ap- that machines, originally invented in order pear single signs of slackening. Here the to serve men in their work were now sub- only way that is left is the rebellion of the ordinating men to their service; they were person for the sake of setting free the re- no longer tools, extensions of men’s arms, lation with others (Buber 1938: 202). but men had become their extension. The second realm was the market economy, Now, after these totalitarian ideologies, a where the production and utilisation of ‘third alternative’ was about to emerge, ac- goods ‘spread out beyond man’s reach and cording to Buber; this was the time of dia- withdrew [themselves] from his command’ logue – not a revival of arbitrary individu- (Buber 1938: 158). Thirdly, Buber pointed alism but encounters between mature and to the political sphere. There, World War I present individuals who are bound to their had exposed men to unleashed powers, the community but are not willing to give up use of gas as a weapon for example, that ex- their responsibility for decision. Thus, the es- ceeded all human purposes and brought un- sence of human life is neither individualism imaginable extermination to both sides: nor collectivism, neither I nor Thou, but a third sphere, and that is the ‘Between’ (with Man faced the terrible fact that he was the reference to the title of the American edi- father of demons whose master he could tion, Between Man and Man). It had a spiritual not become (Buber 1938: 158). connection to Buber’s belief that God is pres- ent in every personal encounter, between I It is not too difficult to extend this analysis and Thou. Buber explained the ‘Between’ in to the Cold War situation and the nuclear more detail in the last pages of the book:

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 57

I call this sphere…the sphere of ‘between’. After this Buber gave an answer to Kant’s Though being realized in very different fourth question, ‘What is Man?’, which degrees, it is a primal category of hu- Hammarskjöld may have been referring to man reality. This is where the genuine in his letter of 17 August 1961 when he wrote third alternative must begin… The view of ‘the “questions” and the response’. At the which establishes the concept of ‘between’ end of the essay, Buber conceived that dia- is to be acquired by no longer localizing logue and the sphere of the ‘Between’ was the relation between human beings, as is his own response to Kant’s question: customary, either within individual souls or in a general world which embraces That essence of man which is special to him and determines them, but in actual fact can be directly known only in a living rela- between them… In a real conversation (that tion… We may come nearer the answer to is, not one whose individual parts have the question what man is when we come to been preconcerted, but one which is com- see him as the eternal meeting of the One pletely spontaneous, in which each speaks with the Other (Buber 1938: 205). directly to his partner and calls forth his unpredictable reply)…a real lesson…a real embrace…a real duel and not a mere game Was Hammarskjöld’s intending – in all these what is essential does not take to resign in September 1961? place in each of the participants or in a neutral world which includes the two and In looking more closely at the topics that all other things; but it takes place between Hammarskjöld mentioned explicitly in his them in the most precise sense, as it were letter of 17 August 1961 after reading Between in a dimension which is accessible only to Man and Man, we rediscover early versions of them both (Buber 1938: 203-204). topics that had been already discussed during their three personal meetings during the first Given this new perception of the ‘Between’, phase of their encounter within a more ob- Buber described this third sphere – which vious framework of current political matters. for him also constituted the sphere of the di- What was different was that this time, these vine – as the initial point of a philosophical topics were embedded in a more philosophi- turning point where neither the individual cal approach to dialogue. Hence we suppose nor the collective would be the focus: that, again, Hammarskjöld had been reading these texts and signalling his will to occupy In the most powerful moments of dia- himself with the tremendous task of translat- logic, where in truth ‘deep calls unto ing Ich und Du from German into Swedish, in deep’, it becomes unmistakably clear that order to draw directly on what he read – ‘with it is not the wand of the individual or of reference also to the political sphere’ (Ham- the social, but of a third which draws the marsjköld) – with the purpose of improving circle round the happening. On the far his practice of silent or quiet diplomacy. But side of the subjective, on this side of the was that really his purpose? We may experi- objective, on the narrow ridge, where I ence quite a surprise in the following. and Thou meet, there is the realm of ‘be- tween’ (Buber 1938: 204).

58 Critical Currents no. 8

When Dag Hammarskjöld resumed contact vious one. His intention was to bring with Buber, the Congo crisis with which he Prime Minister Adoula57 and Tschombe was concerned was not only far advanced together in an act of national reconcili- but was also going in a dangerous direc- ation. I believe that he then intended to tion. Hammarskjöld’s skills were, of course, resign from his post as Secretary-General still badly needed, and diplomatic negotia- (Urquhart 1991: 174). tions with the Katanga secessionists under Tschombé were still possible. But the danger Hammarskjöld repeated this intention in of real entanglement by UN peacekeeping early September 1961 to Mongi Slim, a pos- troops in warlike engagements with seces- sible successor as Secretary-General, as well sionist Katanga was getting more and more as to Adnan Pachachi, the Iraqi ambassador imminent. That is why Hammarskjöld flew to the UN. To the former, Hammarskjöld to Ndola at great personal risk on 17 Septem- said he would resign only if his mission to ber 1961, a journey from which he did not solve the Congo crisis failed; to the lat- arrive alive.56 But had Hammarskjöld already ter he said in a more general way that he realised that the intervention of UN peace- would resign anyway after the Congo crisis keeping troops in the Congo was doomed (Urquhart 1984: 565). to disaster? What did Hammarskjöld mean by hinting, during the last weeks of his life, at a possible resignation from his function Translation problems and as Secretary-General after the Congo cri- Hammarskjöld’s new view of sis? Brian Urquhart, then a staff member of I and Thou the United Nations Secretariat, a close and confidential friend of Hammarskjöld’s and We should keep this intention in mind when one of those entrusted with administering reading the continuation of the correspon- the deployment of peacekeeping forces to dence between Hammarskjöld and Buber. the Congo, wrote of Hammarskjöld’s pen- Just before leaving on this penultimate voy- ultimate voyage to the Congo, just after his age to the Congo, Hammarskjöld answered renewal of contact with Buber: Buber’s letter of 23 August 1961, in which the latter had sent Ich und Du and made his In early September, Hammarskjöld de- proposal that Hammarskjöld should trans- cided to make another visit to the Con- late his most difficult work. Hammarskjöld go. He did this in the belief that he must responded on 26 August: personally try to resolve the Katanga secession problem, which would other- Yesterday I got your kind letter and also wise poison the forthcoming session of the last German edition of ‘Ich und Du’ the General Assembly as it had the pre-

57 In midsummer 1961 Hammarskjöld managed to 56 For a full overview of the Congo crisis of 1960-62, install a new prime minister after the murder of Lu- involving the United Nations peacekeeping troops mumba and the Mobutu’s fi rst putsch in the Congo. in direct warlike battles during the history of their The Congolese parliament was not yet completely existence, see especially the impressively detailed out-manoeuvred and elected as president the mod- memoires of Brian Urquhart (1984: 389-520 and erate and sensible Cyrille Adoula, as someone who 545-589; and 1991: 145-188). appeared prepared and willing to take up negotia- tions with Katanga (Urquhart 1991: 174).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 59

with the postscript. I am certain that I it to Slim and the others – Hammarsjköld am reading you correctly if I see reflected would probably have completed the transla- in your reply a silent ‘Aufruf ’ that I try a tion of Ich und Du within his scheduled time translation of this keywork, as decisive in of two months (!) for finishing a fi rst ver- its message as supremely beautiful in its sion (Urquhart 1984: 41). It is amazing to see form. This decides the issue and, if I have how Hammarskjöld could fi nish the most your permission, I shall do it even if it complicated translations alongside the tre- may take some time.58 mendous amount of work he was engaged in as Secretary-General. In 1960, he had This was the fi rst surprise, because appar- already completed the translation of Djuna ently Hammarskjöld instantly took up Bu- Barnes’ The Antiphon60 and in summer of the ber’s proposal, notwithstanding the con- same year he translated the poem Chronique straints of his office which he had referred by Saint-John Perse61, about whom Ham- to in his letter of 17 August. Had he already marskjöld himself, according to Urquhart, made up his mind to resign after the Congo admitted that ‘[his] French was so complex crisis? It is not quite clear how decided he as to make translation practically hopeless’ was about this perspective at that time, but (Urquhart 1984: 39). things had been deteriorating very fast in the Congo for quite some time already, and We have already learnt that the second Eng- they had become so bad that even one of lish translator of Ich und Du, Walter Kauf- his other closest friends, Albert Schweitzer mann, thought, at fi rst view, that Buber’s (1875-1965), had written frankly to Ham- main philosophical book would be untrans- marskjöld in a letter on 7 March: latable. Apparently, Hammarskjöld, even in the midst of the Congo crisis, saw this tre- As an old African, I hold the opinion mendous task rather as a personal challenge that there will be a minor death toll, if than a burden which he should refraining one lets the Africans fight their vendettas from taking on. Thus, Hammarskjöld con- against each other by their own, without tinued in his letter of 26 August to Buber: outer interference.59 I am, in fact, today getting in touch with This letter led to a considerable cooling the main Swedish publishing firm asking of the friendship between Hammarskjöld them whether they would accept my of- and Schweitzer. However, even if Ham- marskjöld’s intention of soon resigning as 60 Djuna Barnes (1892-1982) was an US-American Secretary-General was not really serious – novelist and playwright. Her last play was The but then it would have made no sense to tell Antiphon (1958), dealing with an incestuous relation between child and mother. 61 Saint-John Perse, a pseudonym for Alexis Saint- Léger Léger (1887-1975), was a French diplomat and 58 KBS DHS, Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to Martin poet and had been awarded the Nobel Prize for Lit- Buber, 26 August 1961. erature in 1960. There was an extended correspon- 59 Letter from Albert Schweitzer to Dag Hammar- dence between Dag Hammarskjöld and the poet skjöld, 7 March 1961, quoted by Fröhlich (2002: throughout the six years before Hammarskjöld’s 184). For more information on the relationship of death. See for more information Marie-Noëlle Hammarskjöld and Schweitzer see Fröhlich (2002: Little (ed.), (2001), The Poet and the Diplomat. The 170-192). Correspondence of Dag Hammarskjöld and Alexis Leger, Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

60 Critical Currents no. 8

fer. When I have their reply, I shall write view both of form and content, not only to you again in order to have your final a key work in modern philosophy, but reaction and so that you might ask your moreover one of the few great poems agents to get in touch with the publisher of this age. To such a ‘call’ I feel that I for the necessary formal arrangements.62 should respond, and for some time ahead I shall therefore, in odd hours, instead of At the end of the letter, Hammarskjöld ex- reading, try to make this translation.63 pressed his hope of resuming thereby ‘a broad- ened and intensified contact’ with Buber. What is really striking here is the fact that Hammarskjöld did not think of the valid- The main Swedish publishing fi rm belonged ity of such a translation for true dialogue in – and remains today – to the Bonnier fami- terms of improving the approach to diplo- ly. Hammarskjöld conferred at various times matic negotiation. Instead, he stressed the with different members of the family on beauty of the form, the literary style of Bu- matters to do with his translations and pub- ber – in contrast to many readers of the time, lishing projects: Albert, Jytte, and Gerhard as attested by his English translator Walter Bonnier as well as Georg Svensson, another Kaufmann. Hammarskjöld even went on to director of the publishing house. In fact, on underline his admiration for the style: the same day that he replied to Buber, Ham- marskjöld wrote a letter to Jytte Bonnier. A book like that one is the very opposite And here we have another big surprise, with to ‘box office’, and I guess most publish- special regard to the fact that Ich und Du has ers would look at it with considerable always been regarded all over the world as scepticism, especially as I would not like a philosophical work that explains and il- it published as a philosophical or theo- luminates all aspects of an encounter and a logical work but as a work of pure lit- dialogical situation: erature. However, Buber is Buber, and while Mann and Hesse are well known You may know that for quite some time in Sweden, Buber, as the third in some I have played with the idea to translate sense the greatest one in Germany of that some of the key parts of Martin Buber’s generation, has been left aside. That may work. It is at least as exacting from the justify the publishing venture, and per- point of view of form as Perse or Barnes, haps the name of the translator might add and in a sense German is worse than a few copies to the sale.64 English or French. However, it has been a most challenging thought. Now Buber Hammarskjöld even ended the letter by ex- himself has, so to say, pushed me over the pressing the additional intention of trans- brink, as I have just received a letter from lating the Danish poet Paul La Cour65 into him which I may regard as a ‘call’ to me to translate ‘Ich und Du’ which of course 63 KBS DHS, Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to Jytte is the culminating crystallisation of his Bonnier, 26 August 1961. 64 Ibid. mystical thought and, from the point of 65 Paul La Cour (1902-1956) was a Danish poet whose poetry changed with the mood of the times. After living in Paris in the 1920s, he brought modern 62 KBS DHS, Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to Martin influences into Danish literature. His reflections on Buber, 26 August 1961. art after World War II influenced other writers.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 61

English and said, furthermore, that he envis- ful, intensely personal, but also intensely aged translating Hermann Hesse’s ‘Morgen- Old-Testament-German prosody. landfahrt’, describing this as ‘another temp- tation of mine’66. Apparently, he envisaged I may end by saying that this is really he would have enough time for these en- something I am very happy to do – also deavours in the near future – after resigning for the publicly unavowable reason that from his office? this translation in a certain sense is a per- sonal declaration.67 We note here fi rst and foremost Hammar- skjöld’s characterisation of Buber’s I and Thus, at this stage, Hammarskjöld defi nitely Thou as ‘pure literature’. What did that showed more interest in the mysticism and mean? Was Hammarskjöld thinking of his literary aspects of Buber’s philosophy of di- aborted translation of Buber’s early literary alogue than in its political implementation work, The legend of Baal-Schem (Buber 1907, – which had still been his central interest 1956b)? Or was he unconsciously regretting when resuming contact with Buber after his memorandum to the Swedish Academy reading Between Man and Man – making his in which he had proposed Buber for the translation effort henceforth more than ever Nobel Prize Peace Prize rather than for the a ‘personal declaration’. Did this amount to Nobel Prize for Literature? And why did he a kind of testimony that he would resign not mention the importance of Buber’s key from his office as true dialogue no longer work on the philosophy of dialogue for his seemed possible to him within the diplo- work of diplomacy and negotiation in the matic framework of the United Nations? ongoing Congo crisis and after, that is for the ‘political sphere’, as he had always done Hammarskjöld’s recommendation before? Did he not believe in that any lon- of John Steinbeck to Buber ger? Did he seriously want to resign? Before we try to answer this decisive ques- A further letter, written a fortnight later, 12 tion, we turn to the fact that there was an September 1961, to Georg Svensson of Bon- interlude in the letter exchange between nier’s, confi rms this impression that the ‘po- Hammarskjöld and Buber concerning the litical sphere’ was no longer of central inter- US-American writer and novelist John est to Dag Hammarskjöld: Steinbeck (1902-1968), a friend and neigh- bour of Hammarskjöld’s in New York68, and Buber’s prose is exceedingly difficult and also a regular visitor to Sweden and a per- I shall have to make a first version which makes the sense crystal clear and a sec- ond version representing a maximum approximation to his intensely beauti- 67 Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to Georg Svensson, 12 September 1961, quoted here in Fröhlich (2002: 66 KBS DHS, Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to Jytte 206, note 437). Bonnier, 26 August 1961, Post-Scriptum. ‘Morgen- 68 The addresses of their private apartments in New landfahrt’ can be translated as ‘Oriental Voyage’. In York were 125 East 73rd Street for Hammarskjöld this Post-Scriptum, Hammarskjöld also enquires and 206 East 72nd Street for Steinbeck. Thus, they about what works of Buber had already been trans- were living only one street apart. lated into Swedish.

62 Critical Currents no. 8

sonal friend of the painter Bo Beskow69 in also know that he would be very happy if Hagestad, who was painting portraits at that you could – and so would I.70 time of both Steinbeck and Hammarskjöld. Bo Beskow had known Steinbeck person- Hammarskjöld had also sent letters of intro- ally since the winter of 1936-37. Beskow also duction concerning Steinbeck’s forthcom- introduced Steinbeck to Hammarskjöld in ing trip to the Middle East to Abdel Nasser 1953 (Hovde 1997: 98-99). Steinbeck was and David Ben-Gurion. Steinbeck had been awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in in search of politicians in a position of au- 1962. The extensive correspondence be- thority, who brought ‘temperament and tween Hammarskjöld and Steinbeck shows character’ to their offices, which were very their close relationship (Hovde 1997: 103- rarely seen in Steinbeck’s view. Steinbeck 129), which was deepened by occasional wanted to fi nd thereby natural leaders, ‘the dinner invitations when the Steinbeck fam- truly moral man’ who could be trusted as ily spent evenings with Hammarskjöld in not being opportunistic or corrupt (Hovde his own apartment and by Hammarskjöld’s 1997: 99). On the same day that he wrote visits to the Steinbecks’ more distant and to Buber in Jerusalem (5 September), Ham- isolated property at Sag Harbor, Long Is- marskjöld sent a letter to Steinbeck enclos- land. Eventually, Hammarskjöld even went ing Between Man and Man and explicitly rec- so far as to send Buber a letter of recom- ommending the reading of ‘the fi rst paper mendation about Steinbeck when the latter “Dialogue” and the last “What is Man?”’, was planning a trip to Israel. This letter of which showed, by the way, a shift in Ham- Hammarskjöld’s to Buber was written on 5 marskjöld’s focus of interest compared with September 1961 and was entirely dedicated his fi rst letter to Buber referring to the book to introducing Steinbeck to Buber: on 17 August 1961 – a shift towards the more historical dimension of the anthropological As my friend, John Steinbeck, is going question, as well as to the community-ori- to visit your country, I wish to send with ented parts and the ‘Between’ -philosophy him my warm personal greetings. Of in ‘What is Man?’. However, neither the course, he is in no need of an introduc- vast three-volume biography of Buber by tion. Such an introduction is provided Maurice Friedman nor the 1100-page vol- by ‘The Grapes of Wrath’, ‘Of Mice and ume by Steinbeck’s biographer Jackson J. Men’, and most recently by ‘The Win- Benson (Benson 1984) makes any mention ter of our Discontent’, not to mention his of Steinbeck visiting Buber in Israel in late other works. He is, as you will know, one 1961. Apparently, they never met. of those observers of life in our genera- tion, who feel that its survival will depend Hammarsköld at work on on our ability to know ourselves and to I and Thou on his last flight stick to basic human values with the will to pay what it may cost. I know that you The last letter Hammarskjöld sent to Buber may have no time to receive him, but I was written on 12 September 1961, the day that Hammarskjöld left New York for his 69 Bo Beskow (1906-1989) studied art in Stockholm, Rome, Paris and Portugal. He was a painter and 70 KBS DHS, Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to Martin writer. His paintings used Christian motifs. Buber, 5 September 1961. See also Hovde (1997: 129).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 63

last and fatal journey to the Congo. Ham- skjöld was talking to his colleagues about marskjöld informed Buber of the positive Buber right to the very end, but no longer response he had received from the Bonnier about implementing parts of Buber’s dia- publishers, this time from Albert Bonnier: logue philosophy into his strategy for politi- cal encounter, diplomacy and negotiation: I have now received a letter from the Swed- ish publisher (Albert Bonnier, Sveavägen By a series of chance I was not with him 56, Stockholm C) whom I approached re- on his last trip to Africa. Dr. Linner 73 told garding the translation of ‘Ich und Du’. He me that before Dag boarded the aircraft, tells me that they will be happy to publish almost the last conversation he had with such a translation and wish to get in touch Linner concerned your work. He was with you regarding such practical matters translating some of it into Swedish while as would have to be settled. He adds that he was at Leopoldville and almost cer- he would be grateful if I would arrange for tainly in the aircraft on the way to Ndola. this contact. Linner said that the last words he remem- bered him saying before the aircraft took I believe that the most practical way to off referred to your work and to medieval proceed, provided that you confirm your mystics. ‘For them’, Dag said, ‘love meant agreement to the translation and its pub- a surplus of energy and an overflowing lication in Swedish, would be for me to of strength which fi lled them when they ask them to address you directly; this un- lived in true selflessness’… less you could indicate to me the agent with which they should deal…71 Forgive my intrusion but I did feel that Dag would have wanted me to share with Buber received this more formal letter of you this knowledge of how closely you Hammarskjöld’s, on the procedure for the and your work were with him at the very envisaged Swedish translation of Ich und Du, end of his life.74 in Jerusalem only on 18 September 1961, In this last quotation from Linner, Ham- an hour after he had heard over the ra- marskjöld’s language was more that of his dio about the latter’s death in the plane own mysticism in Markings (Hammarskjöld crash in the Congo. Thus the dialogue 1964) than Buber’s dialogical approach. between the two men was a present real- Whereas Hammarskjöld still used ‘selfless- ity from both sides even after Hammar- ness’ in the sense of a renunciation of the skjöld’s death (Friedman 1988: 318). self, for Buber it was a mature personality – the ‘Single One’, with an upright opinion In his letter of October 1961, quoted above72, and ‘conscience’ – that could serve best for a George Ivan Smith indicated that Hammar- 73 Dr. Sture Linner, Sweden, was the ‘Chief in Office’ 71 KBS DHS, Dag Hammarskjöld, Letter to Martin of the United Nations Operations in the Congo Buber, 12 September 1961. (ONUC) from 1960-61. 72 KBS DHS, George Ivan Smith, Letter to Martin 74 KBS DHS, George Ivan Smith, Letter to Martin Buber, beginning of October, 1961. Buber, beginning of October, 1961.

64 Critical Currents no. 8

personal encounter with the other in a dia- Hammarskjöld’s briefcase, which sur- logical situation. In the Congo, Hammar- vived the crash intact, gives the only skjöld even discussed with Linner details of known detail of what went on in the his translation and requested Linner to go aircraft during the fl ight. Hammarskjöld through the typewritten draft pages he had continued his translation of Ich und Du, already fi nished (Fröhlich 2002: 205-206). his flowing script fi lling the pages of the yellow legal-size pad. The writing was At almost the same time as receiving Smith’s fi rm and neat, and there were very few letter Buber received another letter – on 5 corrections (Urquhart 1984: 588). October 1961 from Dag’s nephew Knut Ham- marskjöld, also about the draft translation: Martin Buber responded very emotionally on 10 October 1961 to George Ivan Smith’s Now that I have brought the body of letter: my uncle Dag Hammarskjöld back from Africa, I regard it as my duty to report to I want to thank you for what you tell me you that among the few personal effects in your letter and particularly for the in- he had with him on his last flight were formation about Hammarsköld’s translat- two texts (in German and English) as well ing some of my book even at Leopold- as twelve typewritten pages of your I and ville and it seems, even after it. This is a Thou. The latter was the beginning of the fact most dear to my heart. I had a letter first draft of his translation of your work from Bonnier’s about his wish to bring into Swedish that he had completed shortly the book into Swedish by fi nding another before his departure from New York.75 translator. In my answer to him I sug- gested to put at the head of the book the Knut is confusing many things here. Ham- words: ‘At the wish of Martin Buber this marskjöld carried a German and English translation is dedicated to the memory book version of I and Thou with him on of Dag Hammarskjöld, who planned to his trip to the Congo, as well as a 12-page do it himself and began to work at it few typewritten draft in Swedish, which he left days before his death.’76 in Leopoldville, and a further, seven-page handwritten draft, also in Swedish, very The Bonnier publishers kept their promise. likely the continuation, which he took with The new translators were Margit and Curt him on his fl ight to Ndola and which was Norell, and the dedication Buber requested found in scattered pages at the site of the appears on the fi rst page of the publication, plane crash. Thus, it is clear from various and has done ever since the fi rst edition of sources that Hammarskjöld was working on the book in Swedish in 1962.77 the translation during his last fl ight (Fröhlich 2002: 206). Urquhart wrote: 76 KBS DHS, Martin Buber, Letter to George Ivan Smith, beginning of October, 1961. 75 Knut Hammarskjöld: ‘Knut Hammarskjöld to 77 See for example the current Swedish publication of Martin Buber; Geneva, October 5, 1961’, in Glatzer Martin Buber (1990), Jag och du, reprint of the 1962 and Mendes Flohr (1991: 641-642). Bonnier edition, Ludvika: Dualis Förlag.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 65

At the end of September 1961, an article in On 22 October 1961, a front page story in the the Stockholm newspaper Dagens Nyheter New York Herald Tribune predicted that the had confi rmed the plan to publish the trans- Nobel Prize for Literature would be award- lation of I and Thou by another translator as ed to Buber, in response to a ‘fi nal recom- an act in honour of Hammarskjöld (Fried- mendation’ by Hammarskjöld as expressed man 1988: 318). Only a few days later, on 1 to the Bonnier family in his letters on the October 1961, the New York Times published translation plan (Friedman 1988: 319). But a similar article. It read: again, and for the third time, Buber did not receive the award. The 1961 Prize for Lit- When he died Sept. 18, Secretary-Gener- erature was given to the Bosnian writer Ivo al Dag Hammarskjöld left an unfi nished Andric. And the Peace Prize was awarded literary project that had occupied his – posthumously, for the first and only time mind even as he prepared to depart for – to Dag Hammarskjöld. the Congo. The project was a translation he had planned of a work by the contem- In 1962 Buber gave the speech on the Swed- porary Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, ish Radio, ‘Memories of Hammarskjöld’ ‘Ich und Du’ (‘I and Thou’). The day (Buber 1962a), already quoted at the very before he took off for Africa, Mr. Ham- beginning of this text on phase I of their marskjöld wrote to Dr. Georg Svensson encounter. Again, in 1963, Buber tried to of Stockholm’s leading publishing house, give a Dag Hammarskjöld Memorial Lec- Bonnier’s, that he planned to work on ture at the Hebrew University in Jerusa- the translation in the months ahead and lem, entitled ‘Serving Spirit in the Realm would have it completed by January. He of Power’. This lecture had been planned wrote that he anticipated that the project as part of a public series of about 30 distin- would not be easy because it would be guished lectures dedicated to the memory necessary to have Buber’s meanings clear of Hammarskjöld on five continents. Each and to fi nd just the right linguistic form lecturer could choose a university in his for what he termed ‘Buber’s intensely country as his platform. Unfortunately, Bu- beautiful, intensely personal and Old Tes- ber’s health did not permit him to give the tament German prose’. The letter to Dr. lecture (Friedman 1988: 319). Svensson reflected Mr. Hammarskjöld’s admiration for the Vienna-born Jewish philosopher, whose essays have a marked mystical element. The Secretary-General said that he wanted to do the translation because it would mean something of a personal declaration for him. He indi- cated that he had found that Buber’s ideas often corresponded to his own…78

78 KBS DHS, ‘Translation of Work by Buber was planned by Hammarskjöld’, copy of the article with no signature or hint of authorship, in New York Times, 1 October 1961.

66 Critical Currents no. 8

III » Outlook: Can we save true dialogue in an ‘Age of Mistrust’? Discussion of Hammarskjöld’s and Buber’s alternatives if dialogue fails

Hammarskjöld had his own interpretation Experience and Landauer’s severe criticism of Buber and, furthermore, this interpreta- of Buber’s political position on World War tion varied according to his intentions in the I and its causes. Die Legende des Baalschem changing situations of the last years of his life. which Hammarskjöld had already tried but The reduction of Buber’s philosophy of dia- not succeeded in translating was originally logue to ‘mysticism’ and ‘pure literature’, as published in 1907, before Buber’s turning revealed in Hammarskjöld’s last letters to the away from mysticism (Buber 1907). Bonnier family, was already present in some parts of the memorandum Hammarskjöld Buber’s perception of Hammarskjöld wrote on Buber to the Swedish Academy in June 1959. Then, Hammarskjöld wrote: as an exception in the political sphere As far as Buber’s interpretation of Hammar- 79 The mysticism of personal spiritual life – skjöld is concerned, we can deduce from the terminology is warranted however less his public appraisals after Hammarskjöld’s than adequate – which Buber developed death that Buber was fi nally able to have during the influence of Hasidism as well as trust in the United Nations because of his from Christian medieval mysticism, sepa- personal encounter with him. During the rates itself in a decided way from the ratio- Suez crisis he still distrusted the United nal materialism…as from the formalistic Nations, but for some years after Hammar- orthodoxy and religious intolerance…80 skjöld’s death he even quoted statements of Hammarskjöld’s on the Arab-Israeli refugee By resuming and amplifying this interpre- problem. But his trust remained very much tation in his letters to the Bonniers, Ham- connected with the unique personality of marskjöld neglects the biographical fact that Hammarskjöld. When Buber entitled the Buber’s I and Thou as well as his other dia- speech he planned to give in 1963 ‘Serving logical writings are in great part due to Bu- Spirit in the Realm of Power’ he may have ber’s explicit turning away from mysticism, substantiated his argument with quotations due to his Umkehr, triggered by the Mehé from his own I and Thou his view that a statesman or a businessman who serves the 79 The term ‘mysticism of personal spiritual life’ (in spirit is a possibility (Buber 1970: 98). Like- Swedish, ‘personlighetsmystik’ was taken by Ham- wise, he could again answer the question he marskjöld from the protestant theologian Nathan had already answered in the last section of Söderblom (1866-1931). 80 Hammarskjöld (1959), quoted by Nelson (2007: 99). ‘Dialogue’:

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 67

You ask with a laugh, can the leader of a crisis (Urquhart 1984: 545-589). Therefore, I great technical undertaking practise the would like to draw attention here to Buber’s responsibility of dialogue? He can (Buber more general perception of Hammarskjöld’s 1929: 38). having been abandoned in the sense that recalls Buber’s words in his Swedish Radio But this he can do only as a Single One, as speech of 1962, about ‘something fateful’ be- an exception to the rule. It was in this sense, ing connected with Hammarskjöld’s ‘func- I believe, that Buber perceived his friend- tion in this world-hour’, as quoted at the ship with Dag Hammarskjöld: as a ‘covenant very beginning of this text. I hold that Buber of peace’, as Buber’s biographer Maurice thought that maybe some few and excep- Friedman called it (Friedman 1988: 303). As tional personalities could keep to ‘the spirit’ Hammarskjöld died, the covenant too died. within the realm of power, but that the realm And Buber felt, according to Friedman, that of power politics in general had still not be- Hammarskjöld had been abandoned within come a sphere where he, Buber, wanted to the United Nations: act in the future and above all, a sphere from which he expected a re-structuring of society In Hammarskjöld, Buber saw a man of and an Umkehr to true peace to emerge. The good will who tried to do something events of subsequent years, the further devel- but who had been abandoned. ‘Doing opments in the Congo, the Cuba crisis and his utmost,’ Buber said to Meyer Levin81, the nuclear threat, confirmed the impression ‘Hammarskjöld still lacked the technical that for Buber diplomatic means, negotiation means to carry out his peace mission, and and dialogue in the political sphere had come so he was martyred in his death’ (Fried- to the end of their possibilities. That is why man 1988: 318). Buber was obliged to reflect on what to do, when dialogue – at least within the realm of I don’t know what Buber meant by ‘tech- power – failed. And he definitely had some nical means’ here, whether he agreed with answers: amongst these were education and the military engagement of the UN in the civil disobedience. Congo or whether he was referring to moral, political or financial support from some states (France, Great Britain and the United States Buber’s first alternative: Education threatened to withdraw their financial con- In Between Man and Man Buber included two tributions to the UN during the Congo cri- texts on education: ‘Education’ (Buber 1955: sis a few days before Hammarskjöld’s death 83-103), written already in 1926, and ‘The and had already started to do so). I imagine Education of Character’ (Buber 1955: 104- that Buber knew little about the complicated 117), written in 1939. Education had always matters on the ground during the last week of been an important part of Buber’s life and ac- Hammarskjöld’s life in relation to the Congo tivities, notably in his profession as an assistant professor and honorary professor of the ‘Freies Jüdisches Lehrhaus’ (Free Jewish Teaching 81 Meyer Levin (1905-1981) was a US-American journalist and novelist, one of the fi rst writers of Institute) in Frankfurt-am-Main between the ‘documentary novels’. He became aware of Anne two World Wars, from 1924 to 1933. Buber Frank’s diary and was one of the fi rst to recognise reopened the ‘Frankfurter Lehrhaus’ in 1933 the literary and dramatic potential in it.

68 Critical Currents no. 8

after the seizure of power of the Nazis and the United States. Martin Luther King was taught Jewish culture to his students as well directly influenced by Buber as well as by as the basics of Zionism in order to prepare Albert Camus. Buber’s biographer Maurice them for their exile in Palestine (Friedman Friedman wrote in relation to the imprison- 1999: 280). Then again, he taught in Palestine ment of Martin Luther King during the civ- from 1938 to 1951 at the Hebrew University il rights campaigns in Montgomery in 1956 of Jerusalem. At the end of his text ‘Society and Birmingham in 1963: The two books and the State’, Buber already proposed educa- that King took with him to prison were Ca- tion as an alternative in a time of crisis and mus’ The Rebel and Buber’s Between Man and distortion of the political sphere: Man (Friedman 1988: 450).

But there is a way for Society – meaning Friedman was, among many other things, at the moment the men who appreciate a creative interpreter of Buber’s philosophy the incomparable value of the social prin- and wrote two books, Problematic Rebel and ciple – to prepare the ground for improv- The Hidden Human Image (Friedman 1963 ing the relations between itself and the and 1974), in which he elaborated on his political principle. That way is Educa- theory of an opposition between the ‘Mod- tion, the education of a generation with a ern Promethean’ type of rebel who advo- truly social outlook and a truly social will cated an ‘all-or-nothing rebellion’, like the (Buber 1951: 175-76). Black Power Movement, marked by despair, and the ‘Modern Job’ type of rebel who ad- Apparently, for Hammarskjöld education vocated a ‘trust-and-contending rebellion’, was not a sphere where he wanted to be or like King, Thoreau, Gandhi and Camus where he could have been active if dialogue (Friedman 1974: 348). Friedman wrote in failed. Thus, he didn’t mention the two his biography on Buber: texts on education in Between Man and Man in his letters to Buber. In 1961, I sent Buber a copy of the bac- calaureate address that I gave at the Uni- Buber’s second alternative: versity of Vermont in which I pointed for the first time to that common attitude of Civil disobedience Buber and Camus that in Problematic Rebel Buber advocated a second alternative in (1963) I was to identify as that of the ‘Mod- case true dialogue failed: civil disobedi- ern Job’ – the attitude in which dialogue ence. Within a situation of nonviolent re- and rebellion, trust and contending are sistance or civil disobedience there certainly inseparably coupled… In 1958 in a panel is a kind of coercion of the opponent, but which we shared on Buber and Literature the word is still respected, dialogue is not at a University of Michigan intercollegiate abandoned or rejected and can be resumed conference, the distinguished American at any time. During the last years of Ham- literary critic R. W. B. Lewis told me that marskjöld’s life, the world witnessed the rise at the Salzburg Festival in Austria, Camus of Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968) and had said to him that he did not mind be- his civil rights movement for the emancipa- ing called religious in Buber’s sense of the tion of African Americans in the south of term (Friedman 1988: 153-154).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 69

Here we have a more contemporary under- Willing like Job to stand alone even standing of Camus as a philosopher of re- against his friends, King repeatedly stat- volt as well as of dialogue. As far as Martin ed: ‘If every Negro in the United States Luther King is concerned, on several occa- turns to violence, I will choose to be sions, in his writings and speeches, the in- that lone voice preaching that this is the fluence of Buber’s philosophy is explicit, as wrong way’ (Friedman 1974: 350). Friedman shows: It must be mentioned here that this stand Nonviolence ‘does not seek to defeat or of Martin Luther King’s was supported by humiliate the opponent, but to win his Abraham Joshua Heschel (1907-1972), a life- friendship and understanding.’ Its goal long friend of Buber’s who had worked with is the ‘creation of the beloved commu- him in Jewish education at the ‘Freies Jüdis- nity.’… Nonviolent resistance, to King, is ches Lehrhaus’ in Frankfurt. Heschel had fled the narrow bridge between acquiescence from the Nazis to the United States and later and violence… ‘We who engage in non- participated as a Rabbi, in solidarity with violent direct action are not the creators the civil rights cause, on the marches led of tension,’ King points out. ‘We merely by Martin Luther King. There is a famous bring to the surface the hidden tension photograph showing Heschel next to Mar- that is already alive’… But again like the tin Luther King, Jr., in the front row of the Modern Job, the rebellion is not for the famous Selma-to-Montgomery-marches in sake of any one person or group but for 1965. Heschel’s participation in the campaign the sake of the brotherhood of all men. showed the high level of cooperation be- ‘Segregation, to use the terminology of tween US-American Jews and the Black civil the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, rights movement (Heschel 2000: 20-38). substitutes an ‘I-it’ relationship for an ‘I- thou’ relationship and ends up relegating These liaisons show how close Martin Lu- persons to the status of things’.82 ther King, Jr., Gandhi and Buber were, al- though Buber did not want to be regarded When writing his essay on Gandhi, Buber as a pacifist by principle. Moreover, he dis- was already impressed by Gandhi’s decision liked the vision of mass movements of civil not to give up nonviolence even in the midst disobedience, because he feared that the of the independence movement’s increasing crowd at a mass demonstration cannot be tendency to use violent means (Buber 1930). a true community and instead was an ac- Friedman says the same of Martin Luther cidental mingling of atomised individuals, King when the latter was challenged by a a meaningless sample of molecules. Thus in ‘nihilistic philosophy born out of the con- 1962, Buber wrote in a short address for the viction that the Negro can’t win’83: centenary of the death of the inventor of this concept, the US-American anarchist Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862), that

82 The special quotations are from various writings of Thoreau did not formulate a general prin- Martin Luther King, Jr., the quote as a whole from Friedman (1974: 346-48). ciple as such; he set forth and grounded 83 Martin Luther King, Jr., quoted by Friedman (1974: 349).

70 Critical Currents no. 8

his attitude in a particular historical-bio- who are these if not those who hear the graphical situation (Buber 1962b: 191). voice that addresses them from the situ- ation – the situation of the human crisis In this sense, the strong influence of ‘con- – and obey it? (Buber 1963: 193) science’ on a true decision made in a dialog- ical situation of responsibility by the Single We should think of the big international One was the core of Buber’s understanding peace movements of the 1980s as well as the of civil disobedience. No surprise then, that Eastern European dissident movements, and ‘conscientious objection’ has often coin- their working together within cross-bloc cided with campaigns of civil disobedience campaigns such as the Campaign for Eu- and led, for example, Martin Luther King ropean Disarmament initiated by Edward to his critique of the Vietnam War. Despite P. Thompson, as examples of Buber’s plan- his hesitations concerning crowds and mass etary front and ‘crossfront’ and as the real movements, Buber advocated more openly saviours of dialogue and the real prohibitors this kind of civil disobedience shortly after of nuclear war within Europe. Only due to Hammarskjöld’s death, in face of the grow- these movements and their relentless pres- ing threat of a nuclear war at a time when sure did politicians fi nally decide to listen to his trust in exceptional personalities within each other, which led to the removal of the the political sphere had vanished. Thus, in a Iron Curtain and the fall of the Berlin Wall, second text on civil disobedience, in 1963, that is the end of the Cold War. Buber wrote:

It is the possibility that in the course of Hammarskjöld: Dialogue and the mutually outstripping bellicose sur- the spiralling-down dynamics of prises on the side of both partners, so to extended political leadership speak – with the seeming continuation of human institutions – the most dangerous As for Hammarskjöld, he also based his un- of our powers will autonomously con- derstanding of dialogue on the legacy of tinue the game until it succeeds in trans- Buber and Camus84 (6). In a response to a forming the human cosmos into a chaos question in a press conference on 19 May beyond which we can no longer think. 1960 Hammarskjöld alluded to these two thinkers and then elaborated on his concept Can the rulers of the hour command a of dialogue in the political sphere, that is halt to the machinery which they only seemingly master?… But if, as I think, 84 Camus wrote a series of articles in the aftermath the rulers of the hour cannot do this, who of the Second World War, Neither Victims nor Executioners. The French original had been quickly shall come to the rescue here while there translated into English by Dwight Macdonald, an is still time if not the ‘disobedient’, those American. Therein, Camus opposed the word to who personally set their faces against the war and characterised the current time as an age of fear, but he did not really write on the philosophy power that has gone astray as such? Must of dialogue; all in all Camus should be regarded, not a planetary front of such civil dis- rather, as a philosopher of revolt/rebellion, see for obedients stand ready, not for battle like example Lou Marin (ed.) (2008), Albert Camus et les Libertaires (1948-1960), Marseille: Egrégores Editions. other fronts, but for saving dialogue? But

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 71

his concept of so-called private, or silent or Furthermore, Hammarskjöld’s biographer quiet diplomacy: Manuel Fröhlich pointed to principles like confidentiality, or in Hammarskjöld words …dialogue requires quite a few things: ‘discretion, tact and prudence’, concluding objectivity, a willingness to listen, and that this ‘is a rule everywhere in political considerable restraint. Those are all hu- and diplomatic negotiations’89. Hammar- man qualities. No one of them is very re- skjöld invented the ‘Peking Formula’, which markable, but they are all called for, and meant that he could step aside from the im- if they lead to a ‘dialogue’ I think it is mediate execution of a General Assembly very reasonable to let that dialogue de- resolution although he had an official man- velop within the more or less traditional datory responsibility for this resolution, framework, that is to say, a little bit out of claiming that he was equally responsible to the glare of publicity, which robs you of a the written and approved UN Charter as few headlines but helps us all.85 the basis of his negotiations. That gave him the possibility of taking a seemingly objec- Another preoccupation for Hammarskjöld tive or neutral position during his personal in respect of diplomatic dialogue was Bu- talks with Zhou Enlai and the Chinese side. ber’s demand for awareness. In a letter to If one wants to, it is possible to see this ne- Eyvind Johnson86 on 31 January, Hammar- gotiation strategy as an interpretation of the skjöld wrote that any participant of political Buberian concept that the Single One was dialogue not only responsible to the norms of the community he had to represent, but also to must push his awareness to the utmost his ‘conscience’. limit without losing his inner quiet, he must be able to see the eyes of the oth- Nevertheless, the Peking Formula had been ers from within their personality without the starting point for a controversy about the losing his own.87 personal sphere of independence and leader- ship power of the Secretary-General of the Andrew Cordier attested for the staff at the United Nations that led to the phrase habitu- Secretariat that it was at exactly this point Bu- ally used in relation to United Nations crisis ber that had been discussed by all of them: resolution matters, ‘Leave it to Dag’, which points to an ever-extending power sphere for We read together and discussed selected the Secretary-General. At the end of Ham- portions of I and Thou, relating to this marskjöld’s term of office, this independent basic factor in effective negotiation.88 interpretation of his acts more due to the written Charter and its legal obligations than his role as a direct executioner of resolutions 85 Hammarskjöld, quoted by Cordier/Foote (1974: of the General Assembly or the Security- 606). Council had developed into a source of se- 86 Eyvind Johnson (1900-1976) was a Swedish writer and translator of Camus and Sartre into Swedish; he vere criticism. Brian Urquhart remembered was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1976. 87 Hammarskjöld, quoted by Fröhlich (2002: 278). 88 Andrew Cordier, quoted by Fröhlich (2002: 279). 89 Hammarskjöld, quoted by Fröhlich (2002: 260).

72 Critical Currents no. 8

the opposition Hammarskjöld encountered Moreover, an excess of power for the Secre- as a result of his conception of an enhanced tary-General of the United Nations stood in power role for the Secretary-General: contradiction to Buber’s concept of reduc- ing the power politics of the political sphere Today, everybody thinks Hammarskjöld to mere administration. Furthermore, the was a huge success story. In reality, he other conditions Buber held necessary for had been completely paralysed. The Rus- genuine dialogue, such as taking the risk of sians and the French didn’t talk to him meeting the other without preconceptions, any longer, and a bunch of other people without egoistical interest, without tactical did no longer want to have anything to strategy or preconditions, in order to create do with him. At the end of his mandate something new in common – these are so- he was done.90 cial aspects that are almost impossible to re- alise within the power- and interest-driven Alan James, a researcher on the role of the political field and could be matched, if ever, Secretary-General, even described this mood only in some distant approximation. among politicians after the Hammarskjöld term: Last argument: World War II had shown all the problems of what then was called ‘secret Why, to put it harshly, was he allowed to diplomacy’, which ended up in the secret get away with so much for so long?91 amendments of the Hitler-Stalin Pact. A new beginning for democracy after World Thus, an increase in power for the Secre- War II was therefore demanding open diplo- tary-General didn’t improve conditions for macy, open and visible dialogue, controlled dialogue in the political sphere in the long by public institutions and the people, in the run. With more power for the Secretary- political sphere as elewhere. That is why the General, at times even states’ representatives first Secretary-General of the United Na- turned away from true dialogue with Ham- tions, Trygwe Lie, preferred the concept of marskjöld. But, according to Buber, a key ‘public diplomacy’ or ‘parliamentary diplo- precondition for true dialogue is reciprocity macy’, with no secret protocols or reticence or mutuality in the will for dialogue. After in front of journalists and the press as was the the initial success story during the US-Chi- case with Hammarskjöld since the success- na crisis, quiet diplomacy no longer worked ful negotiations with Zhou Enlai during the as the one and only means of confl ict reso- US-China crisis, although Hammarskjöld lution. And the tactics of Moïse Tschombé, did not want to equate his ‘quiet diplomacy’ the then President of the secessionist Repub- with ‘secret diplomacy’. It is true that the lic of Katanga, deliberately agreeing to and press or sensationalist journalists can distort then again withdrawing from negotiation, the achievements of face-to-face dialogue fi nally led to the death of Hammarskjöld. within politics, but this question is also a task for society, and has to do with an appropri- ate press code and an ethics of journalism as 90 Urquhart, quoted by Fröhlich (2002: 357-358); well as an ethics of public debate. That is why translation by Lou Marin some of Hammarskjöld’s successors as Secre- 91 Alan James, quoted by Fröhlich (2002: 358).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 73

tary-General did not always want to pursue Hammarskjöld’s alternative: the Hammarskjöld legacy in this respect, re- The peacekeeping forces – fraining from an extended role for the office- bearer. Rather, they interpreted their role in and their consequences a more reluctant manner (Fröhlich 2002: 378- In case all his sophisticated tactics of dialogue 409 and Urquhart 1991: 189-369). Additional as quiet diplomacy failed, Hammarskjöld, factors like an occasional overestimation of at a very early stage of his period of office, his own capacities of decision-making and invented something else as an alternative to a lack of willingness to delegate tasks, or an dialogue: the military instrument of a pres- unfortunate tendency to recruit the wrong ence of the United Nations through troops people for difficult tasks (like choosing the with a blue helmet, that is the peacekeeping Irish military officer O’Brien for the com- forces which have nowadays developed into mand of the UN troops in Katanga) led to a peace-enforcing-forces as witnessed in the sort of Buberian reversal of the spiral of trust bombings of former Yugoslavia or the occu- to Hammarskjöld’s disadvantage at the end of pation of Afghanistan since 2001. In contrast his term. According to Buber, true dialogue to Buber’s alternatives, discussed above, the and reciprocity of dialogue partners can lead problem with peacekeeping forces as military at best to mutual confidence and positive units is that the United Nations has thereby dynamics, a ‘spiral of trust’. In contrast, uni- been introduced to a military option that lateral decisions by political leaders with an runs the danger of cutting across or even ever-extending sphere of their claimed lead- abandoning a process of dialogue within the ership tend to damage mutual confidence political sphere, as the word – as proclaimed and lead to negative dynamics, a reversal of by Buber and Camus and occasionally also by the ‘spiral of trust’ (Fröhlich 2002: 361-372). Hammarskjöld – is opposed to war.

Thus, I come to the provisional conclusion The fi rst great initial success of the peace- that while Buber agreed that an interpreta- keeping forces, as it has been heralded in tion and implementation of his philosophy almost every historical account, was the of dialogue as conceived by Hammarskjöld deployment of the fi rst-ever UN troops in as a part of quiet diplomacy, with as many an attempt to solve the Suez crisis, that is as possible face-to-face-encounters with to contain the war between the occupation adversary politicians, was desirable in prin- forces in the Suez Canal (Israel, France and ciple, Buber thought at the same time that Great Britain) and Egypt in 1956. Already it was very difficult to implement this thor- here, very few observers have examined oughly and that the initial successes of quiet the fact that in reality these United Nations diplomacy were due to Hammarskjöld’s ex- troops only led to a temporary cessation traordinary personality. Originally, Buber of tensions, not to a real solution. Thus, in did not conceive his philosophy of dialogue 1967, in the fi rst real crisis after the deploy- for the political sphere, but for groups and ment of UN troops, these troops were ex- communities forming integral parts of so- pelled by Egypt, which rapidly led to the ciety and defending themselves against a disastrous 1967 war with Israel (Urquhart politicisation of their realm. 1991: 131-140 and 209-216).

74 Critical Currents no. 8

Already the death of Hammarskjöld has Two such ‘civil disobedients’, Anthony been connected with the military engage- Brooke, an exile from Sarawak and the ment of UN troops in Elizabethville (today British Commonwealth, and Michael Lubumbashi) against Tschombé’s Katangan Scott, an exile from South Africa, at- militias (Belgian and French mercenaries). tempted to form a World Peace Brigade Since then, in the course of time, the im- made up of unarmed volunteers sent to plementation conditions of UN peacekeep- areas of confl ict to help the refugees and ing, and then peace-enforcement, forces has wounded and endeavour to bring the been continuously enhanced. The use of this combatants together through passive re- alternative when dialogue as quiet diplo- sistance and persuasion. They decided macy fails has invaded strategic conscious- to hold the founding conference of the ness, fi nally even prompting humanitarian brigade in the resort town of Burmana and human rights-organisations to think in in Lebanon at the end of December 1961 military-strategic ways and to demand ever and asked Buber if he would be able to more military protection or even military attend. Charles Malik92, the former Leba- invasion, as each failure of such a mission nese ambassador to the United Nations, has been attributed to insufficient military had taught a course in Buber’s philosophy equipment or numbers of UN troops (Foley at the American University in Beirut for 2008). None of this really fosters the pos- many years. (In fact, Malik and Hayim sibilities for dialogue within the political Greenberg of Israel once met at the Unit- sphere of our times. Besides, out-of-the- ed Nations to discuss I and Thou.) But no box speeches, misunderstandings, inability Israeli citizen had ever openly been al- to engage in dialogue, as well as a mood lowed to enter by an Arab state. If Buber of mutual distrust, all prevail or are even had gone, he would have become the fi rst growing, and not only in the Middle East Israeli citizen to be invited to an interna- and Far East. tional conference in an Arab country. In his reply, Buber made it clear to Brooke and Scott that the fi rst meeting should Buber’s third alternative: From be held only in a country which would World Peace Brigades to Peace admit every single one of the sponsors, Brigades International without discrimination, and he was ready to demand that the conference be trans- Buber, in addition to his alternatives for sav- ferred somewhere else if Lebanon did not ing true dialogue in the sphere of society admit him (Friedman 1988: 329). through education and civil disobedience, was participating at the time of Hammar- skjöld’s death in another alternative that 92 Charles Malik (1906-1987) was a Lebanese phi- might be regarded as a sort of counter- losopher and diplomat and supported the Reinhold concept to that of military peacekeeping Niebuhr and Maurice Friedman initiative of 1962 to propose Martin Buber for the Nobel Prize for units. He was involved in the founding of Literature. Malik wrote on this occasion: ‘Buber is the World Peace Brigade in 1961, according greater than even the fi ne eulogy you compiled for to Friedman: him in your draft letter’ (Malik quoted by Fried- man 1988: 331).

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 75

But Buber then fell ill, and an exhausting form small Brigades to be sent to the scene journey anywhere was out of question. Au- of international confl icts, as decided jointly. brey Hodes remembered the determination The WPB established a training centre in of an 83-year-old Buber to go there and as- Dar es Salaam, Tangayika, in 1962 and co- sist with any effort that could contribute to ordinated an international Freedom March a new Israeli-Arab dialogue. Eventually, into Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia) to the founding congress of the World Peace support nonviolent calls for independence Brigade took place as planned in Lebanon, from British rule and a local campaign of without Buber, but some of the participants civil disobedience. The march was finally went afterwards to his house in Jerusalem to abandoned because of a change of events that visit Buber and to talk with him (Friedman turned in favour of the independence move- 1988: 330). ment. A second campaign was mobilised to the Indo-Chinese border in 1963, where The World Peace Brigade, which existed there had been a border war in 1962. The from 1961 to 1964, had some forerunners plan was to march from Delhi to Peking, such as the Peace Army (1932-1939) initiated but it received very hostile reactions from by Maude Royden, an Anglican minister. both governments. Finally a multi-national Royden was inspired by Gandhi’s idea of a group walked across India before being pre- ‘Living Wall’, which the latter had proposed vented from crossing the border into China. against external aggression in an indepen- A last, officially undertaken WPB campaign dent India. It was proposed to the League of took activists with a sailing boat to Lenin- Nations that the Peace Army be institution- grad and the Arctic Ocean to protest against alised, but the League declined to support Soviet nuclear testing (the boat eventually it. It should have intervened in the fight- had to be rescued by the Soviet navy, but ing between Japanese and Chinese forces the voyage was successfully completed). in Shanghai in the 1930s, but failed to raise After the dissolution of the WBP in 1964, enough recruits and money. some activists kept their vision alive and were involved in the subsequent founding of Another forerunner was the ‘Volunteers for the follow-up Peace Brigades International International Development/Peacework- (PBI) in 1981, which exists until today. It ers’, a students’ and veterans’ initiative after has grown into an international organisation World War II to build a ‘UN Peaceforce’, but with 15 country sections. The main task of they too were denied institutional backing. their activists is to accompany social work- The World Peace Brigade of 1961 (WPB) ers, trade unionists or other persons within had been proposed originally at the Confer- regions where there is heavy governmental ence of War Resisters’ International in India violence or civil war and to monitor viola- in 1960, to internationalise the Shanti Sena tions of their rights. Among the many proj- (Peace Army) of Gandhian origin working ects have been the international monitoring with some success at the same time within in Nicaragua in 1981, Guatemala in 1983, El India. The World Peace Brigade, fi nally Salvador (1987-1992) and Sri Lanka (1989- created in Lebanon in 1961, was divided 2009), the escorting of Native Americans in into three sections (Asia/India; Europe/ the United States in 1992, and projects in Britain; America/US) with each section to

76 Critical Currents no. 8

Haiti in 1993, Colombia in 1994 and Chad third Aliya93 of the fi rst decades of the 20th in 1994. One of their projects concerned Is- century (from about 1903, at the time of the rael/Palestine in 1989 at the outbreak of the Russian Kishinev pogrom, to about 1923), fi rst Intifada (Moser-Puangsuwan 2009). So, then mainly inspired by poor and working- fi nally, PBI contributed to a revival of joint class settlers coming from the Jewish milieu Israeli-Arab activism at the grassroots level, of Eastern Europe where Jewish Hasidism which was growing independently with in- was still alive (Friedman 1982: 272). ternational support, notably since the build- ing of a Wall of Separation, a new ‘Wall of Thus, a very brief summary of the respec- Distrust’ in the West Bank in 2003. The tive alternatives of Dag Hammarskjöld and new emerging nonviolent and grassroots Martin Buber to failed dialogue would be resistance is the only area nowadays where that Hammarskjöld created the concept of Palestinan and Israeli citizens as well as ac- peacekeeping forces by the United Nations, tivists can meet in face-to-face-encounters with the ever-prevailing danger of replacing in order to reduce their prejudices and start the word by war, whereas Buber concen- true dialogue in a way that Buber would un- trated on three alternative activities, starting doubtedly have supported (Kalicha 2008). with education, and creating a planet-wide civil disobedience movement and a World During his time, Buber’s hope for this capac- Peace Brigade to intervene unarmed in civil ity for dialogue was placed in the Kibbutz war confl icts. movement, which finally was not entirely justified. The majority of the Kibbutz com- munities did not really want to enter into serious relationships with the neighbouring 93 Aliya literally means ‘ascent’ in Hebrew and refers Palestinian villages and today most of the to ascending to the temple of Jerusalem, in the sense Kibbutz communities have adjusted their of a pilgrimage. Since the Holocaust it has been the name given to several waves of immigration into way of living to the capitalist norm of Israel Palestine in the history of the Zionist movement. society. They have been absorbed in a nega- In the fi rst Aliya (Bilu, 1882-1903, involving up to tive way by the violent values of the nor- 30,000 people) Arab workers were hired for the early Kibbutzim, who worked like slaves for the Jewish mative society – devoid of Buber’s original settlers; the second Aliya (1903-1914, up to 40,000 socialist aspirations for the second and the settlers) had Kibbutzim entirely composed of Jewish workers; the third (1919-1923, up to 35,000 settlers) which brought Jews from Russia and Rumania, as well as the youth movement of Hashomer Hat- zair (Young Guards), also founded Kibbutzim, from which in 1946 a party sprang up, which in 1948, together with another organisation, Ahdut Ha’Avoda, formed the Mapam (Workers Party); the fourth (1924-1931, up to 80,000 people), is known as the Aliya of the middle classes; the fi fth (1932-1938, up to 200,000 people) consisted of refugees, notably from Germany and Central Europe as a result of the seizure of power by the Nazis, and European Fascism; and then the Aliya Bet (second ascent in the sense of illegal immigration, until 1948) included the survivors of the Holocaust.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 77

Literature Benson, Jackson J. (1984), The True Adventures of Buber, Martin (1954/1962/1984), Das dialogische John Steinbeck, writer. A Biography, New York: The Prinzip, Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus; Viking Press. originally published in 1954 as Die Schriften über das dialogische Prinzip; the new edition of 1962 Buber, Martin (1907), Die Legende des Baalschem, includes the ‘Nachwort’ (‘Afterword’) from ‘Ich revised 1955, Zürich: Manesse Verlag. und Du’. Buber, Martin (1929), ‘Dialogue’, in Buber (1955), Buber, Martin (1955), Between Man and Man, Bos- pp. 1-39. ton: Beacon Press. Buber, Martin (1930), ‘Gandhi, Politics, and Us’, Buber, Martin (1956a), ‘Der “Ichud” und die in Buber (1957), pp. 126-138. Vorfälle in den arabischen Dörfern während des Buber, Martin (1936), ‘The Question to the Single Sinai-Feldzugs. Ein Brief an den Ministerpräsi- One’, in Buber (1955), pp. 40-82. denten’, in Buber (1983), pp. 349-51.

Buber, Martin (1938a), ‘Plato and Isaiah’, in Bu- Buber, Martin (1956b), The legend of the Baal- ber, Martin (1948), Israel and the World. Essays in a Schem, London: East and West Library, copy. Time of Crisis, New York: Schocken Books. Buber, Martin (1957), Pointing the Way: Collected Buber, Martin (1938b), ‘What is Man?’, in Buber Essays, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (1955), pp. 118-205. Buber, Martin (1958), ‘Israel und das Gebot des Buber, Martin (1948a), ‘Nach Bernadottes Ermor- Geistes’, in Buber (1983), pp. 363-69. dung’, in Buber (1983), pp. 307-309. Buber, Martin (1961), ‘Zum Flüchtlingsproblem. Buber, Martin (1948b), Das Problem des Menschen, Offener Brief des “Ichud” an David Ben Gurion’, Heidelberg: Lambert Schneider. in Buber (1983), pp. 370-72.

Buber, Martin (1950), Paths in Utopia (paperback Buber, Martin (1962a), ‘Memories of Hammar- edition 1958), Boston: Beacon Press. skjöld’, in Buber (1967), pp. 57-59.

Buber, Martin (1950), Pfade in Utopia, Heidelberg: Buber, Martin (1962b), ‘On “Civil Disobedi- Lambert Schneider. ence”’, in Buber (1967), p. 191.

Buber, Martin (1951), ‘Society and the State’, in Buber, Martin (1963), ‘More on “Civil Disobedi- Buber (1957), pp. 161-76. ence”’, in Buber (1967), pp. 192-93.

Buber, Martin (1952), ‘Hope for this Hour’, in Bu- Buber, Martin (1967), A Believing Humanism. My ber (1957), pp. 220-29. Testament 1902-1965), New Jersey/London: Hu- manities Press International. Buber, Martin (1953a), ‘Genuine Dialogue and the Possibilities of Peace’, in Buber (1957), pp. 232-39. Buber, Martin (1970), I and Thou, new translation by Walter Kaufmann, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark; Buber, Martin (1953b), ‘The Validity and Limita- fi rst published in German in 1923, fi rst English tion of the Political Principle’, in Buber (1957), pp. edition 1937. 208-19. Buber, Martin (1975), Briefwechsel aus sieben Jah- Buber, Martin (1953c), ‘Elements of the Interhu- rzehnten, III: 1938-1965, edited by Grete Schaeder, man’, in Buber, Martin (1992), On Intersubjectivity Heidelberg: Lambert Schneider. and Cultural Creativity, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Buber, Martin (1983), Ein Land und zwei Völker, Frankfurt-am-Main: Insel.

78 Critical Currents no. 8

Cordier, Andrew W. and Foote, Wilder (1974), Hammarskjöld, Dag (1958b), ‘“The Walls of Dis- Public Papers of the Secretaries-General of the United trust”. Address at Cambridge University, June 5, Nations, Vol. IV: Dag Hammarskjöld 1958-1960, Co- 1958’, in Cordier and Foote (1974), pp. 90-95. lumbia University Press: New York and London. Hammarskjöld, Dag (1958c), ‘Proposals Submitted Friedman, Maurice (1963), Problematic Rebel to the General Assembly for the Continuation of (second edition 1970), Chicago and London: The United Nations Assistance to the Palestine Refu- University of Chicago Press. gees, New York June 15, 1959’, in Cordier and Foote (1974), pp. 414-36. Friedman, Maurice (1974), The Hidden Human Im- age, New York: Delta Books. Hammarskjöld, Dag (1959a), ‘Statement on the Continuation of UNWRA in the Special Political Friedman, Maurice (1982), Martin Buber’s Life and Committee of the General Assembly, New York Work. Vol. 1: The Early Years, 1878-1923, London November 10, 1959’, in Cordier and Foote (1974), and Tunbridge Wells: Search Press. pp. 491-93. Friedman, Maurice (1983), Martin Buber’s Life and Hammarskjöld, Dag (1959b), ‘Memorandum on Work. Vol. 3: The Later Years, 1945-1965, Detroit: Martin Buber to Nobel Committee’; n Swedish Wayne State University Press. printed in Judisk tidskrift, 1966. Friedman, Maurice (1999), Begegnung auf dem Hammarskjöld, Dag (1964), Markings, London: schmalen Grat. Martin Buber – ein Leben, Münster: Faber and Faber. agenda. Henting, Holger (2002), ‘Ist ein Dialog zwischen Fröhlich, Manuel (2002), Dag Hammaröskjöld personal-dialogischem Denken und dem existen- und die Vereinten Nationen. Die politische Ethik des tialistischen Denken Kierkegaards sinnvoll? Zur UNO-Generalsekretärs, Paderborn, Munich, Vi- Ich-Du-Beziehung bei Martin Buber und dem enna and Zurich: Schöningh. existentialistischen “Selbst” bei Søren Kierkeg- Fröhlich, Manuel (2005), ‘Vom Vorposten inter- aard’, in Im Gespräch. Hefte der Martin-Buber-Ge- nationaler Verantwortung und der Einsamkeit des sellschaft, no. 4, spring 2002, Potsdam: Verlag für Geistesturmes: Dag Hammarskjöld und Martin Berlin-Brandenburg, Potsdam, pp. 30-40. Buber’, in Friedenthal-Haase, Martha and Koer- Heschel, Susannah (2000), ‘Abraham Joshua renz Ralf (eds), Martin Buber: Bildung, Menschenbild Heschel und Martin Luther King jr. – theologis- und Hebräischer Humanismus, Paderborn, Munich, che und politische Berührungspunkte’, originally Vienna, Zurich: Schöningh, pp. 97-114. published in English; German translation in Im Fröhlich, Manuel (2008), ‘”The Unknown As- Gespräch. Hefte der Martin-Buber-Gesellschaft, no. 9, signation”: Dag Hammarskjöld in the Papers of spring 2004, Potsdam: Verlag für Berlin-Branden- George Ivan Smith’, in Critical Currents, No. 2: burg, Potsdam, pp. 20-38. Beyond Diplomacy. Perspectives on Dag Hammar- Heuer, Renate and Wuthenow, Ralph-Rainer skjöld, Uppsala: Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, (eds), Antisemitismus, Zionismus, Antizionismus 1850- pp. 9-35. 1940, Frankfurt-am-Main and New York: 1997. Glatzer, Nahum N. and Mendes-Flohr, Paul (eds) Hinz, Thorsten (2000), Mystik und Anarchie. Meis- (1991), The letters of Martin Buber. A Life of Dia- ter Eckhart und seine Bedeutung im Denken Gustav logue, New York: Schocken Books. Landauers, Berlin: Karin Kramer Verlag. Hammarskjöld, Dag (1958a), ‘Statement on Disar- Hodes, Aubrey (1972), Encounter with Martin Buber, mament in the Security Council, April 29, 1958’, London: Allen Lane/The Penguin Press. in Cordier and Foote (1974), pp. 69-71.

Can We Save True Dialogue in an Age of Mistrust? 79

Hovde, Carl F. (1997), ‘The Dag Hammarskjöld – Urquhart, Brian (1984), Hammarskjöld, paperback John Steinbeck Correspondence. Introduction by edition, New York et al: Harper & Row; origi- Carl F. Hovde’, in Development Dialogue 1997, Nos nally published 1972. 1-2, Uppsala: Dag HammarskjöldFoundation, pp. Urquhart, Brian (1991), A Life in Peace and War, 97-129. paperback edition, New York/London: W.W. Kalicha, Sebastian (ed.) (2008), Barrieren durch- Norton & Company; originally published in 1987. brechen. Israel/Palästina: Gewaltfreiheit, Kriegsdien- van Dusen, Henry P. (1967), Dag Hammarskjöld. stverweigerung, Anarchismus, Nettersheim: Verlag The Statesman and His Faith, New York, Evanston Graswurzelrevolution. and London: Harper & Row. Kaufmann, Walter (1970), ‘I and You: A Pro- Seemann, Birgit (1997), ‘“…denn wo kein Geist logue’, in Buber (1970) . ist, ist Tod.” Gustav Landauers Judentum und Kelen, Emery (1966), Hammarskjöld, New York: seine Freundschaft mit Martin Buber’, in Heuer G. P. Putnam and Sons. and Wuthenow , pp. 74-91. Moser-Puangsuwan, Yeshua (2009): ‘A short his- Wolf, Siegbert (1994), ‘“Wir wollen nicht Revolu- tory of grassroots initiatives in unarmed peace- tion…” Zur Freundschaft Buber-Landauer’, in keeping’, in Peace News. For nonviolent revolution, Graswurzelrevolution – journal for a society without website: http://www.peacenews.info/issues/2391/ violence and domination, no. 188, May 1994, Heidel- pn239112.htm berg, p. 10. Nelson, Paul R. (2007), Courage of Faith. Dag Wolf, Siegbert (1997), ‘“Sich der entstehen- Hammarskjöld’s Way in Quest of Negotiated Peace, den Menschheit schenken!” Gustav Landauers Reconciliation and Meaning, Frankfurt-am-Main: Wirkung auf den deutschsprachigen Zionismus’, Peter Lang. in Heuer and Wuthenow, pp. 210-226. Persson, Sune (1998), Folke Bernadotte. In honor of Wolf, Siegbert (2001), ‘“Der wahre Ort der Ver- the 60th anniversary of the death of Folke Bernadotte, wirklichung ist die Gemeinschaft.” Der “Bund” Stockholm: The Swedish Institute. zwischen Gustav Landauer und Martin Buber’, in Im Gespräch. Hefte der Martin-Buber-Gesellschaft, Reichert, Thomas (ed.) (1996), Buber für Atheisten, no. 2, spring 2001, Potsdam: Verlag für Berlin- Gerlingen: Lambert Schneider. Brandenburg, Potsdam, pp. 33-48 Reichert, Thomas (2002), ‘Die Strenge von Martin Bubers Anarchismus’, in Im Gespräch. Hefte der Martin-Buber-Gesellschaft, no. 5, spring 2002, Potsdam: Verlag für Berlin-Brandenburg, Potsdam, pp. 25-35.

80 Critical Currents no. 8

Dag Hammarskjöld

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT IN LAW AND IN FACT A Lecture delivered to Congregation at Oxford on 30 May 1961

<~ Dag Hammarsk’ol Foundation J d

‘The International Civil Servant in Law and in Fact: A Lecture delivered to Congregation on 30 May 1961’, by Dag Hammarskjöld (1961), pp. 1–28. By permission of Oxford University Press.

This edition published in 2021.

Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation Övre Slottsgatan 2 SE-753 10 Uppsala Sweden

Email: secretariat@daghammarskjold.se Web: www.daghammarskjold.se

The inside covers feature facsimiles of pages from Hammarskjöld’s typed reading copy of the lecture he delivered at the University of Oxford on 30 May 1961. Reproduced courtesy of the Dag Hammarskjöld Collection at the Royal Library of Sweden, Stockholm and with the permission of the Hammarskjöld family.

1 INTRODUCTION

5 THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT IN LAW AND IN FACT

32 A NOTE ON THE TEXT

35 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

36 ABOUT DAG HAMMARSKJÖLD

Above: Dag Hammarskjöld (left) and A. N. Bryan-Brown, Fellow of Worcester College and the University of Oxford’s public orator, walking towards the Sheldonian Theatre on 30 May 1961. Photo credit: Keystone Pictures/TT.

INTRODUCTION Henrik Hammargren Executive Director, Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation

On 30 May 1961, the second Secretary-General of the United Nations, Dag Hammarskjöld, delivered a notable lecture at the University of Oxford. In the lecture, Hammarskjöld detailed the legal principles for the international civil service and underscored the importance of its international character and independence. He warned that if these principles were compromised, internationalism would in effect be abandoned, and concluded that ‘the price to be paid may well be peace’.1 The lecture, Hammarskjöld’s last major public speech, was the culmination of years of reflection on the topic of the international civil service. Throughout his time as Secretary-General, in his many official and public speeches, Hammarskjöld made important references to the work of the international civil service and how it relates to the principles of integrity and ethics. In 1953, in his first statement to the General Assembly after taking the Oath of Office, Hammarskjöld emphasised that the Secretariat’s work:

. . . must be based on respect for the laws by which human civi- lization has been built. It likewise requires a strict observance of the rules and principles laid down in the Charter of this Organi- zation. My work shall be guided by this knowledge.2

1 Dag Hammarskjöld, ‘The International Civil Servant in Law and in Fact’ (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961), p. 28. 2 Dag Hammarskjöld, ‘Statement in the General Assembly after taking the Oath of Office, April 10 1953’, in Andrew W. Cordier and Wilder Foote (eds), Public Papers of the Secretaries- General of the United Nations, Volume II: Dag Hammarskjöld, 1953–1956 (New York and London: Columbia University Press, 1972), p. 31.

INTRODUCTION

Two years into his first term, on 14 June 1955 in a speech at Johns Hopkins University, he clarified his position:

International service . . . will expose us to conflicts . . . Intellectually and morally, international service therefore requires courage . . . courage to defend what is your conviction even when you are facing the threats of powerful opponents.3

During a meeting of the UN Security Council on 31 October 1956, at the height of the Suez crisis, he stated:

The principles of the Charter are, by far, greater than the Organization, in which they are embodied, and the aims which they are to safeguard are holier than the policies of any single nation or people . . . The discretion and impartiality required of the Secretary-General may not degenerate into a policy of expediency. He must also be a servant of the principles of the Charter, and its aims must ultimately determine what for him is right and wrong. For that he must stand.4

For Hammarskjöld, taking a stand involved a refusal to compromise the principles set out in the Charter. In his introduction to the UN’s Annual Report for 1959–60, he stated:

It is my firm conviction that any result bought at the price of a compromise with the principles and ideals of the Organization, either by yielding to force, by disregard of justice, by neglect of common interests or by contempt for human rights, is bought at too high a price. That is so because a compromise with its principles and purposes weakens the Organization in a way representing a definite loss for the future that cannot be balanced by any immediate advantage achieved.5

3 Dag Hammarskjöld, ‘International Service’, address at the Johns Hopkins University Commencement Exercises, Baltimore, MA, 14 June 1955, in Cordier and Foote (note 1), p. 503. 4 Security Council Official Records, Eleventh Year, 751st Meeting, 31 October 1956, in Andrew W. Cordier and Wilder Foote (eds), Public Papers of the Secretaries-General of the United Nations, Volume III: Dag Hammarskjöld 1956–1957 (New York and London: Columbia University Press 1973), p. 309. 5 United Nations General Assembly, ‘Introduction to the annual report of the Secretary- General on the work of the Organization, 16 June 1959–15 June 1960’, A/4390/Add.l,

INTRODUCTION

The Oxford lecture was widely commented on at the time for its defence of international thought and action. But according to Oscar Schachter, Hammarskjöld’s former legal advisor who worked closely with him in the preparation of the lecture, it was also a personal defence. It was delivered during a period when the UN and Hammarskjöld were under attack by the Soviet Union for an alleged lack of neutrality in the handling of the Congo crisis. Schachter noted:

Hammarskjöld who saw himself as exclusively guided by the ide- als and principles of the United Nations and who had been almost universally lauded for his dedication and brilliance in pursuing those ends was then under vehement attack for bias and person- al ambition. There was no doubt that he was deeply affected, and that he perceived the criticisms as an attack on his personal integrity . . . The Oxford lecture . . . in its defence of personal integrity against the claims of power . . . carries a powerful appeal even today.6

Indeed, in the lecture Hammarskjöld charts a principled path for the international civil service that is as relevant now as it was 60 years ago. He emphasises the need for leadership by a Secretary-General with exclusively international responsibilities, but also speaks with great insight about the important distinction between international civil servants maintaining ‘personal neutrality’ and demonstrating neutral action. In a press conference held two weeks after the Oxford lecture, Hammarskjöld explained further:

It may be true that in a very deep, human sense there is no neutral individual, because, as I said at Oxford, everyone, if he is worth anything, has to have these ideas and ideals—things which are dear to him, and so on. But what I do claim is that even a man

31 August 1960, p. 7, <https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/714842>. 6 Oscar Schachter, ‘The International Civil Servant: Neutrality and Responsibility’, in Robert S. Jordan (ed.), Dag Hammarskjöld Revisited: The UN Secretary-General as a force in world politics (Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 1983).

INTRODUCTION

who is in that sense not neutral can very well undertake and carry through neutral actions, because that is an act of integrity. That is to say, I would say there is no neutral man, but there is, if you have integrity, neutral action by the right kind of man.7

Shortly before his violent death, in his introduction to the UN’s Annual Report for 1960–61, he reiterated:

The exclusively international character of the Secretariat is not tied to its composition, but to the spirit in which it works and to its insulation from outside influences as stated in Article 100. While it may be said that no man is neutral in the sense that he is without opinions or ideals, it is just as true that, in spite of this, a neutral Secretariat is possible. Anyone of integrity, not subjected to undue pressures, can, regardless of his own views, readily act in an ‘exclusively international’ spirit and can be guided in his actions on behalf of the Organization solely by its interests and principles, and by the instructions of its organs.8

The 60th anniversary of the lecture provides an opportunity to reflect on the essential values and principles underscored by Hammarskjöld during the UN’s early and defining moments. We are therefore reissuing the text of the lecture in full to ensure that it reaches the international civil servants of today, and in the hope that Hammarskjöld’s precise and meaningful words will inspire a new generation committed to the cause of peace.

7 Dag Hammarskjöld, ‘Press conference comments arising from lecture at Oxford’, 12 June 1961 in Wilder Foote (ed.), Servant of Peace: A Selection of the Speeches and Statements of Dag Hammarskjöld (New York: Harper and Row, 1962), p. 351. 8 United Nations General Assembly, ‘Introduction to the annual report of the Secretary- General on the work of the Organization, 16 June 1960–15 June 1961’, A/4800/Add.1, 17 August 1961, p. 6, <https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/543627>.

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT IN LAW AND IN FACT Dag Hammarskjöld

I In a recent article Mr. Walter Lippmann tells about an interview in Moscow with Mr. Khrushchev. According to the article, Chairman Khrushchev stated that ‘while there are neutral countries, there are no neutral men’, and the author draws the conclusion that it is now the view of the Soviet Government ‘that there can be no such thing as an impartial civil servant in this deeply divided world, and that the kind of political celibacy which the British theory of the civil servant calls for, is in international affairs a fiction’.1 Whether this accurately sums up the views held by the Soviet Government, as reflected in the interview, or not, one thing is certain: the attitude which the article reflects is one which we find nowadays in many political quarters, communist and non- communist alike, and it raises a problem which cannot be treated lightly. In fact, it challenges basic tenets in the philosophy of both the League of Nations and the United Nations, as one of the essential points on which these experiments in international co- operation represent an advance beyond traditional ‘conference diplomacy’ is the introduction on the international arena of joint permanent organs, employing a neutral civil service, and the use of such organs for executive purposes on behalf of all the members of the organizations. Were it to be considered that the experience shows that this radical innovation in international life rests on a false assumption, because ‘no man can be neutral’, then we would be thrown back to 1919, and a searching reappraisal would become necessary. 1 New York Herald Tribune, 17 Apr. 1961, pp. 1, 2.

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

II The international civil service had its genesis in the League of Nations but it did not spring full-blown in the Treaty of Versailles and the Covenant. The Covenant was in fact silent on the international character of the Secretariat. It contained no provisions comparable to those of Article 100 of the Charter, and simply stated:

The permanent Secretariat shall be established at the Seat of the League. The Secretariat shall comprise a Secretary-General and such secretaries and staff as may be required.2

In the earliest proposals for the Secretariat of the League, it was apparently taken for granted that there could not be a truly international secretariat but that there would have to be nine national Secretaries, each assisted by a national staff and performing, in turn, the duties of Secretary to the Council, under the supervision of the Secretary-General. This plan, which had been drawn up by Sir Maurice Hankey, who had been offered the post of Secretary- General of the League by the Allied Powers, was in keeping with the precedents set by the various international Bureaux established before the war which were staffed by officials seconded by Member countries on a temporary basis. It was Sir Eric Drummond, first Secretary-General of the League, who is generally regarded as mainly responsible for building upon the vague language of the Covenant a truly international secretariat. The classic statement of the principles he first espoused is found in the report submitted to the Council of the League by its British member, Arthur Balfour:

By the terms of the Treaty, the duty of selecting the staff falls upon the Secretary-General, just as the duty of approving it falls upon the Council. In making his appointments, he had

2 Article 6 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

IN LAW AND IN FACT

primarily to secure the best available men and women for the particular duties which had to be performed; but in doing so, it was necessary to have regard to the great importance of selecting the officials from various nations. Evidently, no one nation or group of nations ought to have a monopoly in providing the material for this international institution. I emphasize the word ‘International’, because the members of the Secretariat once appointed are no longer the servants of the country of which they are citizens, but become for the time being the servants only of the League of Nations. Their duties are not national but international.3

Thus, in this statement, we have two of the essential principles of an international civil service: (1) its international composition, and (2) its international responsibilities. The latter principle found its legal expression in the Regulations subsequently adopted which enjoined all officials ‘to discharge their functions and to regulate their conduct with the interests of the League alone in view’ and prohibited them from seeking or receiving ‘instructions from any Government or other authority external to the Secretariat of the League of Nations’.4 Along with the conception of an independent, internationally responsible staff, another major idea was to be found: the international Secretariat was to be solely an administrative organ, eschewing political judgements and actions. It is not at all surprising that this third principle should have originated with a British Secretary-General. In the United Kingdom, as in certain other European countries, a system of patronage, political or personal, had been gradually replaced in the course of the nineteenth century by the principle of a permanent civil service based on efficiency and competence and owing allegiance only to the State which it served. It followed that a civil service so organized and dedicated would be non-political. The civil servant could not be expected to serve

3 League of Nations Official Journal, vol. i, June 1920, p. 137. 4 Article 1 of the Staff Regulations of the Secretariat of the League of Nations, 1945 edition.

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

two masters and consequently he could not, in his official duties, display any political allegiance to a political party or ideology. Those decisions which involved a political choice were left to the Government and to Parliament; the civil servant was the non-partisan administrator of those decisions. His discretion was a limited one, bound by the framework of national law and authority and by rules and instructions issued by his political superiors. True, there were choices for him, since neither legal rules nor policy decisions can wholly eliminate the discretion of the administrative official, but the choices to be made were confined to relatively narrow limits by legislative enactment, Government decisions and the great body of precedent and tradition. The necessary condition was that there should exist at all times a higher political authority with the capacity to take the political decisions. With that condition it seemed almost axiomatic that the civil service had to be ‘politically celibate’ (though not perhaps politically virgin). It could not take sides in any political controversy and, accordingly, it could not be given tasks which required it to do so. This was reflected in the basic statements laying down the policy to govern the international Secretariat. I may quote two of them:

We recommend with special urgency that, in the interests of the League, as well as in its own interests, the Secretariat should not extend the sphere of its activities, that in the preparation of the work and the decisions of the various organisations of the League, it should regard it as its first duty to collate the relevant documents, and to prepare the ground for these decisions without suggesting what these decisions should be; finally, that once these decisions had been taken by the bodies solely responsible for them, it should confine itself to executing them in the letter and in the spirit.5

Une fois les décisions prises, le rôle du Secrétariat est de les appliquer. Ici encore, il y a lieu de faire une distinction entre

5 Report of Committee No. 4 (‘Noblemaire Report’), League of Nations, Records of the Second Assembly, Plenary Meetings, p. 596.

IN LAW AND IN FACT

application et interprétation, non pas, à coup sûr, que je demande au Sécretariat de ne jamais interpréter; c’est son métier! Mais je lui demande, et vous lui demanderez certainement tous, d’interpréter le moins loin possible, le plus fidèlement possible, et surtout de ne jamais substituer son interprétation à la vôtre.6

Historians of the League have noted the self-restraining role played by the Secretary-General.7 He never addressed the Assembly of the League and in the Council ‘he tended to speak . . . as a Secretary of a committee and not more than that’.8 For him to have entered into political tasks which involved in any substantial degree the taking of a position was regarded as compromising the very basis of the impartiality essential for the Secretariat. True, this does not mean that political matters as such were entirely excluded from the area of the Secretariat’s interests. It had been reported by Sir Eric Drummond and others that he played a role behind the scenes, acting as a confidential channel of communication to Governments engaged in controversy or dispute, but this behind-the-scenes role was never extended to taking action in a politically controversial case that was deemed objectionable by one of the sides concerned.

III The legacy of the international secretariat of the League is marked in the Charter of the United Nations. Article 100 follows almost verbatim the League regulations on independence and international

6 Statement by M. Noblemaire at the 26th plenary meeting of the League Assembly, 1 Oct. 1921, League of Nations, Records of the Second Assembly, Plenary Meetings, p. 577. 7 F. P. Walters, A History of the League of Nations, pp. 559 ff.; Egon F. Ranshofen- Wertheimer, The International Secretariat, pp. 48–49; Stephen M. Schwebel, The Secretary-General of the United Nations, pp. 6 ff. 8 Proceedings of the Conference on Experience in International Administration, Washington, Carnegie Endowment, 1943, p. II.

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

responsibility barring the seeking or receiving of instructions from States or other external authority. This was originally proposed at San Francisco by the four sponsoring powers—China, the USSR, the United Kingdom, and the United States—and unanimously accepted.9 The League experience had shown that an international civil service, responsible only to the Organization, was workable and efficient. It had also revealed, as manifested in the behaviour of German and Italian Fascists, that there was a danger of national pressures corroding the concept of international loyalty. That experience underlined the desirability of including in the Charter itself an explicit obligation on officials and Governments alike to respect fully the independence and the exclusively international character of the responsibilities of the Secretariat. It was also recognized that an international civil service of this kind could not be made up of persons indirectly responsible to their national governments. The weight attached to this by the majority of members was demonstrated in the Preparatory Commission London, when it was proposed that appointments of officials should be subject to the consent of the government of the Member State of which the candidate was a national.10 Even in making this proposal, its sponsor explained that it was only intended to build up a staff adequately representative of the governments and acceptable to them. He maintained that prior approval of officials was necessary, in order to obtain the confidence of their governments which was essential to the Secretariat, but once the officials were appointed, the exclusively international character of their responsibilities would be respected. However, the great majority of Member States rejected this proposal, for they believed that it would be extremely undesirable to write into the regulations anything that would give national governments particular rights in respect of appointments and thus 9 Documents of the UN Conference on International Organization (UNCIO), vol. 7, p. 394. See also summary record of 18th meeting, Committee I/2 (2 June 1945) in UNCIO, vol. 7, pp. 169–70. 10 U.N. Preparatory Commission (1946), doc. PC/AD.54.

IN LAW AND IN FACT

indirectly permit political pressures on the Secretary-General.11 Similarly, in line with Article 100, the Preparatory Commission laid emphasis on the fact that the Secretary-General ‘alone is responsible to the other principal organs for the Secretariat’s work’, and that all officials in the Organization must recognize the exclusive authority of the Secretary-General and submit themselves to rules of discipline laid down by him.12 The principle of the independence of the Secretariat from national pressures was also reinforced in the Charter by Article 105, which provides for granting officials of the Organization ‘such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connexion with the Organization’. It was in fact foreseen at San Francisco that in exceptional circumstances there might be a clash between the independent position of a member of the Secretariat and the position of his country, and consequently that an immunity in respect of official acts would be necessary for the protection of the officials from pressure by individual governments and to permit them to carry out their international responsibilities without interference.13 In all of these legal provisions, the Charter built essentially on the experience of the League and affirmed the principles already accepted there. However, when it came to the functions and authority of the Secretary-General, the Charter broke new ground. In Article 97 the Secretary-General is described as the ‘chief administrative officer of the Organization’, a phrase not found in the Covenant, though probably implicit in the position of the Secretary- General of the League. Its explicit inclusion in the Charter made it a constitutional requirement—not simply a matter left to the discretion of the organs—that the administration of the Organization shall be

11 U.N. Preparatory Commission, Committee 6, 22nd and 23rd meetings, Assembly records, pp. 50–51. 12 Report of the Preparatory Commission (1946), p. 85, para. 5, and p. 86, para. 9. 13 UNCIO, vol. 7, p. 394, Report of Rapporteur of Committee I/2.

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

left to the Secretary-General. The Preparatory Commission observed that the administrative responsibility under Article 97 involves the essential tasks of preparing the ground for the decisions of the organs and of ‘executing’ them in co-operation with the Members.14 Article 97 is of fundamental importance for the status of the international Secretariat of the United Nations, and thus for the international civil servant employed by the Organization, as, together with Articles 100 and 101, it creates for the Secretariat a position, administratively, of full political independence. However, it does not, or at least it need not, represent an element in the picture which raises the question of the ‘neutrality’ of the international civil servant. This is so because the decisions and actions of the Secretary- General as chief administrative officer naturally can be envisaged as limited to administrative problems outside the sphere of political conflicts of interest or ideology, and thus as maintaining the concept of the international civil servant as first developed in the League of Nations. However, Article 97 is followed by Article 98, and Article 98 is followed by Article 99. And these two Articles together open the door to the problem of neutrality in a sense unknown in the history of the League of Nations. In Article 98 it is, thus, provided not only that the Secretary General ‘shall act in that capacity’ in meetings of the organs, but that he ‘shall perform such other functions as are entrusted to him by these organs’. This latter provision was not in the Covenant of the League. It has substantial significance in the Charter, for it entitles the General Assembly and the Security Council to entrust the Secretary- General with tasks involving the execution of political decisions, even when this would bring him—and with him the Secretariat and its members—into the arena of possible political conflict. The organs are, of course, not required to delegate such tasks to the Secretary- General but it is clear that they may do so. Moreover, it may be said 14 Report of U.N. Preparatory Commission, p. 86, para. 12.

IN LAW AND IN FACT

that in doing so the General Assembly and the Security Council are in no way in conflict with the spirit of the Charter—even if some might like to give the word ‘chief administrative officer’ in Article 97 a normative and limitative significance—since the Charter itself gives to the Secretary-General an explicit political role. It is Article 99 more than any other which was considered by the drafters of the Charter to have transformed the Secretary- General of the United Nations from a purely administrative official to one with an explicit political responsibility. Considering its importance, it is perhaps surprising that Article 99 was hardly debated; most delegates appeared to share Smuts’s opinion that the position of the Secretary- General ‘should be of the highest importance and for this reason a large measure of initiative was expressly conferred’.15 Legal scholars have observed that Article 99 not only confers upon the Secretary- General a right to bring matters to the attention of the Security Council but that this right carries with it, by necessary implication, a broad discretion to conduct inquiries and to engage in informal diplomatic activity in regard to matters which ‘may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security’.16 It is not without some significance that this new conception of a Secretary-General originated principally with the United States rather than the United Kingdom. It has been reported that at an early stage in the preparation of the papers that later became the Dumbarton Oaks proposals, the United States gave serious consideration to the idea that the Organization should have a President as well as a Secretary- General.17 Subsequently, it was decided to propose only a single officer,

15 Letter from Field-Marshal Jan Christian Smuts to Mr. H. W. A. Cooper, 15 Dec. 1949, quoted in Schwebel, The Secretary-General of the United Nations (1952), p. 18. 16 Ibid. at p. 25. See summary record of 48th meeting of Committee of Experts of the Security Council, UN doc. S/Procedure 103, particularly statement of the representative of Poland. Also Virally, ‘Le Rôle politique du Secrétaire général des Nations Unies’, Annuaire Français de Droit International, vol. iv (1958), p. 363 and footnote 2; Simmonds, ‘Good Offices and the Secretary-General’, Nordisk Tidsskrift for International Ret (1959), vol. xxix, fasc. 4, pp. 332, 340, and 341. 17 Schwebel, op. cit. at p. 17.

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

but one in whom there would be combined both the political and executive functions of a President with the internal administrative functions that were previously accorded to a Secretary-General. Obviously, this is a reflection, in some measure, of the American political system, which places authority in a chief executive officer who is not simply subordinated to the legislative organs but who is constitutionally responsible alone for the execution of legislation and in some respects for carrying out the authority derived from the constitutional instrument directly. The fact that the Secretary-General is an official with political power as well as administrative functions had direct implications for the method of his selection. Proposals at San Francisco to eliminate the participation of the Security Council in the election process were rejected precisely because it was recognized that the role of the Secretary-General in the field of political and security matters properly involved the Security Council and made it logical that the unanimity rule of the permanent Members should apply.18 At the same time, it was recognized that the necessity of such unanimous agreement would have to be limited only to the selection of the Secretary-General and that it was equally essential that he be protected against the pressure of a Member during his term in office.19 Thus a proposal for a three-year term was rejected on the ground that so short a term might impair his independent role. The concern with the independence of the Secretary-General from national pressures was also reflected at San Francisco in the decision of the Conference to reject proposals for Deputies to the Secretary- General appointed in the same manner as the Secretary-General. The opponents of this provision maintained that a proposal of this kind would result in a group of high officials who would not be responsible to the Secretary-General but to the bodies which elected

18 UNCIO vol. 2, pp. 691–3. 19 Ibid., vol. 7, pp. 343–7, 387–9. Report of the Rapporteur of Committee I/2.

IN LAW AND IN FACT

them.20 This would inevitably mean a dilution of the responsibility of the Secretary-General for the conduct of the Organization and would be conducive neither to the efficient functioning of the Secretariat nor to its independent position.21 In this action and other related decisions, the drafters of the Charter laid emphasis on the personal responsibility of the Secretary-General; it is he who is solely responsible for performing the functions entrusted to him for the appointment of all Members of the Secretariat and for assuring the organ that the Secretariat will carry out their tasks under his exclusive authority. The idea of a ‘Cabinet system’ in which responsibility for administration and political functions would be distributed among several individuals was squarely rejected. It is also relevant in this connexion that the provision for ‘due regard to geographical representation’ in the recruitment of the Secretariat was never treated as calling for political or ideological representation. It was rather an affirmation of the idea accepted since the beginning of the League Secretariat that the staff of the Organization was to have an international composition and that its basis would be as ‘geographically’ broad as possible.22 Moreover, as clearly indicated in the language of Article 101, the ‘paramount consideration in the employment of the staff’ should be the necessity of securing the highest standards of efficiency, competence, and integrity. This terminology is evidence of the intention of the drafters to accord priority to considerations of efficiency and competence over those of geographical representation, important though the latter be. To sum up, the Charter laid down these essential legal principles for an international civil service: It was to be an international body, recruited primarily for efficiency, competence, and integrity, but on as wide a geog raphical basis as possible;

20 Ibid., p. 386. 21 Ibid. See also summary record of the 12th meeting of Committee I/2, ibid., p. 106. 22 Ibid., pp. 505, 510–ff.

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

It was to be headed by a Secretary-General who carried constitutionally the responsibility to the other principal organs for the Secretariat’s work; And finally, Article 98 entitled the General Assembly and the Security Council to entrust the Secretary-General with tasks going beyond the verba formalia of Article 97—with its emphasis on the administrative function—thus opening the door to a measure of political responsibility which is distinct from the authority explicitly accorded to the Secretary-General under Article 99 but in keeping with the spirit of that Article. This last-mentioned development concerning the Secretary General, with its obvious consequences for the Secretariat as such, takes us beyond the concept of a non-political civil service into an area where the official, in the exercise of his functions, may be forced to take stands of a politically controversial nature. It does this, however, on an international basis and, thus, without departing from the basic concept of ‘neutrality’; in fact, Article 98, as well as Article 99, would be unthinkable without the complement of Article 100 strictly observed both in letter and spirit. Reverting for a moment to our initial question, I have to emphasize the distinction just made. If a demand for neutrality is made, by present critics of the international civil service, with the intent that the international civil servant should not be permitted to take a stand on political issues, in response to requests of the General Assembly or the Security Council, then the demand is in conflict with the Charter itself. If, however, ‘neutrality’ means that the international civil servant, also in executive tasks with political implications, must remain wholly uninfluenced by national or group interests or ideologies, then the obligation to observe such neutrality is just as basic to the Charter concept of the international civil service as it was to the concept once found in the Covenant of the League. Due to the circumstances then prevailing the distinction to which I have just drawn attention probably never was clearly made in the League,

IN LAW AND IN FACT

but it has become fundamental for the interpretation of the actions of the Secretariat as established by the Charter. The criticism to which I referred at the beginning of this lecture can be directed against the very Charter concept of the Secretariat and imply a demand for a reduction of the functions of the Secretariat to the role assigned to it in the League and explicitly mentioned in Article 97 of the Charter; this would be a retrograde development in sharp conflict with the way in which the functions of the international Secretariat over the years have been extended by the main organs of the United Nations, in response to arising needs. Another possibility would be that the actual developments under Articles 98 and 99 are accepted but that a lack of confidence in the possibility of personal ‘neutrality’ is considered to render necessary administrative arrangements putting the persons in question under special constitutional controls, either built into the structure of the Secretariat or established through organs outside the Secretariat.

IV The conception of an independent international civil service, although reasonably clear in the Charter provisions, was almost continuously subjected to stress in the history of the Organization. International tensions, changes in governments, concern with national security, all had their inevitable repercussions on the still fragile institution dedicated to the international community. Governments not only strove for the acceptance of their views in the organs of the Organization, but they concerned themselves in varying degrees with the attitude of their nationals in the Secretariat. Some governments sought in one way or another to revive the substance of the proposal defeated at London for the clearance of their nationals prior to employment in the Secretariat; other governments on occasion demanded the dismissal of staff members who were said to

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

be inappropriately representative of the country of their nationality for political, racial, or even cultural reasons. In consequence, the Charter Articles underwent a continual process of interpretation and clarification in the face of pressures brought to bear on the Secretary-General. On the whole the results tended to affirm and strengthen the independence of the international civil service. These developments involved two complementary aspects: first, the relation between the Organization and the Member States in regard to the selection and employment of nationals of those States, and second, the relation between the international official, his own State, and the international responsibilities of the Organization. It is apparent that these relationships involved a complex set of obligations and rights applying to the several interested parties. One of the most difficult of the problems was presented as a result of the interest of several national governments in passing upon the recruitment of their nationals by the Secretariat. It was of course a matter of fundamental principle that the selection of staff should be made by the Secretary- General on his own responsibility and not on the responsibility of the national governments.23 The interest of the governments in placing certain nationals and in barring the employment of others had to be subordinated, as a matter of principle and law, to the independent determination of the Organization. Otherwise there would have been an abandonment of the position adopted at San Francisco and affirmed by the Preparatory Commission in London. On the other hand, there were practical considerations which required the Organization to utilize the services of governments for the purpose of obtaining applicants for positions and, as a corollary of this, for information as to the competence, integrity, and general suitability of such nationals for employment. The United Nations could not have an investigating agency comparable to those available to national governments, and the Organization had therefore to accept

23 Report of the Preparatory Commission, p. 86, para. 15; GA resolution 13 (I), 13 Feb. 1946.

IN LAW AND IN FACT

assistance from governments in obtaining information and records concerning possible applicants. However, the Secretary-General consistently reserved the right to make the final determination on the basis of all the facts and his own independent appreciation of these facts.24 It may be recalled that this problem assumed critical proportions in 1952 and 1953 when various authorities of the United States Government, host to the United Nations Headquarters, conducted a series of highly publicized investigations of the loyalty of its nationals in the Secretariat.25 Charges were made which, although relating to a small number of individuals and largely founded upon inference rather than on direct evidence or admissions, led to proposals which implicitly challenged the international character of the responsibilities of the Secretary-General and his staff.26 In certain other countries similar proposals were made and in some cases adopted in legislation or by administrative action. In response, the Secretary-General and the Organization as a whole affirmed the necessity of independent action by the United Nations in regard to selection and recruitment of staff. The Organization was only prepared to accept information from governments concerning suitability for employment, including information that might be relevant to political considerations such as activity which would be regarded as inconsistent with the obligation of international civil servants.27 It was recognized that there should be a relationship of mutual confidence and trust between international officials and the governments of Member States. At the same time, the Secretary General took a strong position that the dismissal of a staff member on the basis of the mere suspicion of a Government of a Member

24 Report of the Secretary-General on Personnel Policy (30 Jan. 1953), UN doc. A/2364, para. 7 and Annex I. 25 See Hearings of the Sub-committee of the Committee on the Judiciary of the U.S. Senate on ‘Activities of U.S. Citizens employed by the United Nations’ (1952). 26 Ibid. at pp. 407–11. See also Bill S. 3, 83rd Congress, First Session. 27 Report of the Secretary-General on Personnel Policy, UN doc. A/2533, paras. 69–70.

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

State or a bare conclusion arrived at by that Government on evidence which is denied the Secretary-General would amount to receiving instructions in violation of his obligation under Article 100, paragraph 1 of the Charter ‘not to receive in the performance of his duties instructions from any Government’.28 It should be said that, as a result of the stand taken by the Organization, this principle was recognized by the United States Government in the procedures it established for hearings and submission of information to the Secretary-General regarding U.S. citizens.29 A risk of national pressure on the international official may also be introduced, in a somewhat more subtle way, by the terms and duration of his appointment. A national official, seconded by his government for a year or two with an international organization, is evidently in a different position psychologically—and one might say, politically—from the permanent international civil servant who does not contemplate a subsequent career with his national government. This was recognized by the Preparatory Commission in London in 1945 when it concluded that members of the Secretariat staff could not be expected ‘fully to subordinate the special interests of their countries to the international interest if they are merely detached temporarily from national administrations and dependent upon them for their future’.30 Recently, however, assertions have been made that it is necessary to switch from the present system, which makes permanent appointments and career service the rule, to a predominant system of fixed-term appointments to be granted mainly to officials seconded by their governments. This line is prompted by governments which show little enthusiasm for making officials available on a long-term basis, and, moreover, seem to regard—as a matter of principle or, at least, of ‘realistic’

28 UN doc. A/2364, para. 94. 29 UN doc. A/2364, pp. 35–36, containing Executive Order No. 10422; as amended by Executive Order No. 10459, UN doc. A/2533, appendix to Annex I. 30 Report of the Preparatory Commission, p. 92, para. 59.

IN LAW AND IN FACT

psychology—the international civil servant primarily as a national official representing his country and its ideology. On this view, the international civil service should be recognized and developed as being an ‘intergovernmental’ secretariat composed principally of national officials assigned by their governments, rather than as an ‘international’ secretariat as conceived from the days of the League of Nations and until now. In the light of what I have already said regarding the provisions of the Charter, I need not demonstrate that this conception runs squarely against the principles of Articles 100 and 101. This is not to say that there is not room for a reasonable number of ‘seconded’ officials in the Secretariat. It has in fact been accepted that it is highly desirable to have a number of officials available from governments for short periods, especially to perform particular tasks calling for diplomatic or technical backgrounds. Experience has shown that such seconded officials, true to their obligations under the Charter, perform valuable service but as a matter of good policy it should, of course, be avoided as much as possible to put them on assignments in which their status and nationality might be embarrassing to themselves or the parties concerned. However, this is quite different from having a large portion of the Secretariat—say, in excess of one-third—composed of short-term officials. To have so large a proportion of the Secretariat staff in the seconded category would be likely to impose serious strains on its ability to function as a body dedicated exclusively to inter national responsibilities. Especially if there were any doubts as to the principles ruling their work in the minds of the governments on which their future might depend, this might result in a radical departure from the basic concepts of the Charter and the destruction of the international civil service as it has been developed in the League and up to now in the United Nations. It can fairly be said that the United Nations has increasingly succeeded in affirming the original idea of a dedicated professional

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

service responsible only to the Organization in the performance of its duties and protected so far as possible from the inevitable pressures of national governments. And this has been done in spite of strong pressures which are easily explained in terms of historic tradition and national interests. Obviously, however, the problem is ultimately one of the spirit of service shown by the international civil servant and respected by Member Governments. The International Secretariat is not what it is meant to be until the day when it can be recruited on a wide geographical basis without the risk that then some will be under—or consider themselves to be under—two masters in respect of their official functions.

V The independence and international character of the Secretariat required not only resistance to national pressures in matters of personnel, but also—and this was more complex—the independent implementation of controversial political decisions in a manner fully consistent with the exclusively international responsibility of the Secretary-General. True, in some cases implementation was largely administrative; the political organs stated their objectives and the measures to be taken in reasonably specific terms, leaving only a narrow area for executive discretion. But in other cases—and these generally involved the most controversial situations—the Secretary- General was confronted with mandates of a highly general character, expressing the bare minimum of agreement attainable in the organs. That the execution of these tasks involved the exercise of political judgement by the Secretary-General was, of course, evident to the Member States themselves. It could perhaps be surmised that virtually no one at San Francisco envisaged the extent to which the Members of the Organization would assign to the Secretary-General functions which necessarily

IN LAW AND IN FACT

required him to take positions in highly controversial political matters. A few examples of these mandates in recent years will demonstrate how wide has been the scope of authority delegated to the Secretary-General by the Security Council and the General Assembly in matters of peace and security. One might begin in 1956 with the Palestine armistice problem, when the Security Council instructed the Secretary-General ‘to arrange with the parties for adoption of any measures’ which he should consider ‘would reduce existing tensions along the armistice demarcation lines’.31 A few months later, after the outbreak of hostilities in Egypt, the General Assembly authorized the Secretary- General immediately to ‘obtain compliance of the withdrawal of foreign forces’.32 At the same session he was requested to submit a plan for a United Nations Force to ‘secure and supervise the cessation of hostilities’, and subsequently he was instructed ‘to take all . . . necessary administrative and executive action to organise this Force and dispatch it to Egypt’.33 In 1958 the Secretary-General was requested ‘to despatch urgently an Observation Group . . . to Lebanon so as to ensure that there is no illegal infiltration of personnel or supply of arms or other matériel across the Lebanese borders’.34 Two months later he was asked to make forthwith ‘such practical arrangements as would adequately help in upholding the purposes and principles of the Charter in relation to Lebanon and Jordan’.35 Most recently, in July 1960, the Secretary-General was requested to provide military assistance to the Central Government of the Republic of the Congo. The basic mandate is contained in a single

31 Security Council resolution S/3575 of 4 Apr. 1956. 32 General Assembly resolution 999 (ES-I) of 4 Nov. 1956. 33 General Assembly resolutions 998 (ES-I) of 4 Nov. 1956 and 1001 (ES-I) of 7 Nov. 1956. 34 Security Council resolution S/4023 of 11 June 1958. 35 General Assembly resolution 1237 (ES-III) of 21 Aug. 1958.

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

paragraph of a resolution adopted by the Security Council on 13 July 1960 which reads as follows:36

“The Security Council

2. Decides to authorize the Secretary-General to take the necessary steps, in consultation with the Government of the Republic of the Congo, to provide the Government with such military assistance, as may be necessary, until, through the efforts of the Congolese Government with the technical assistance of the United Nations, the national security forces may be able, in the opinion of the Government, to meet fully their tasks.”

The only additional guidance was provided by a set of principles concerning the use of United Nations Forces which had been evolved during the experience of the United Nations Emergency Force.37 I had informed the Security Council38 before the adoption of the resolution that I would base any action that I might be required to take on these principles, drawing attention specifically to some of the most significant of the rules applied in the UNEF operation. At the request of the Security Council I later submitted an elaboration of the same principles to the extent they appeared to me to be applicable to the Congo operation.39 A report on the matter was explicitly approved by the Council,40 but naturally it proved to leave wide gaps; unforeseen and unforeseeable problems, which we quickly came to face, made it necessary for me repeatedly to invite the Council to express themselves on the interpretation given by the Secretary-General to the mandate. The needs for

36 Security Council resolution S/4387 of 13 July 1960. 37 See ‘Summary Study of the experience derived from the establishment and operation of the Force: report of the Secretary-General’, U.N. doc. A/3943, General Assembly, Official Records, 13th session, annexes, agenda item 65. 38 See Security Council, Official Records, 15th year, 873rd meeting, para. 28. 39 First report by the Secretary-General dated 18 July 1960 on the implementation of the Security Council resolution of 13 July 1960, U.N. doc. S/4389, p. 4. 40 See para. 3 of Security Council resolution S/4405 of 22 July 1960.

IN LAW AND IN FACT

added interpretation referred especially to the politically extremely charged situation which arose because of the secession of Katanga and because of the disintegration of the central government which, according to the basic resolution of the Security Council, were to be the party in consultation with which the United Nations activities had to be developed.41 These recent examples demonstrate the extent to which the Member States have entrusted the Secretary-General with tasks that have required him to take action which unavoidably may have to run counter to the views of at least some of these Member States. The agreement reached in the general terms of a resolution, as we have seen, no longer need to obtain when more specific issues are presented. Even when the original resolution is fairly precise, subsequent developments, previously unforeseen, may render highly controversial the action called for under the resolution. Thus, for example, the unanimous resolution authorizing assistance to the Central Government of the Congo offered little guidance to the Secretary-General when that Government split into competing centres of authority, each claiming to be the Central Government and each supported by different groups of Member States within and outside the Security Council. A simple solution for the dilemmas thus posed for the Secretary- General might seem to be for him to refer the problem to the political organ for it to resolve the question. Under a national parliamentary regime, this would often be the obvious course of action for the executive to take. Indeed, this is what the Secretary-General must also do whenever it is feasible. But the serious problems arise precisely because it is so often not possible for the organs themselves to resolve the controversial issue faced by the Secretary-General. When brought down to specific cases involving a clash of interests

41 See Memorandum on implementation of Security Council resolution of 9 Aug. 1960, U.N. doc. S/4417 and addenda; Security Council, Official Records, 15th year, 884th and following meetings.

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

and positions, the required majority in the Security Council or General Assembly may not be available for any particular solution. This will frequently be evident in advance of a meeting and the Member States will conclude that it would be futile for the organs to attempt to reach a decision and consequently that the problem has to be left to the Secretary-General to solve on one basis or another, at his own risk but with as faithful an interpretation of the instructions, rights, and obligations of the Organization as possible in view of international law and the decisions already taken. It might be said that in this situation the Secretary-General should refuse to implement the resolution, since implementation would offend one or another group of Member States and open him to the charge that he has abandoned the political neutrality and impartiality essential to his office. The only way to avoid such criticism, it is said, is for the Secretary-General to refrain from execution of the original resolution until the organs have decided the issue by the required majority (and, in the case of the Security Council, with the unanimous concurrence of the permanent members) or he, maybe, has found another way to pass responsibility over on to Governments. For the Secretary-General this course of action—or more precisely, non-action—may be tempting; it enables him to avoid criticism by refusing to act until other political organs resolve the dilemma. An easy refuge may thus appear to be available. But would such refuge be compatible with the responsibility placed upon the Secretary-General by the Charter? Is he entitled to refuse to carry out the decision properly reached by the organs, on the ground that the specific implementation would be opposed to positions some Member States might wish to take, as indicated, perhaps, by an earlier minority vote? Of course the political organs may always instruct him to discontinue the implementation of a resolution, but when they do not so instruct him and the resolution remains in effect, is the Secretary-General legally and morally free to take no action, particularly in a matter considered to affect international

IN LAW AND IN FACT

peace and security? Should he, for example, have abandoned the operation in the Congo because almost any decision he made as to the composition of the Force or its role would have been contrary to the attitudes of some Members as reflected in debates, and maybe even in votes, although not in decisions. The answers seem clear enough in law; the responsibilities of the Secretary-General under the Charter cannot be laid aside merely because the execution of decisions by him is likely to be politically controversial. The Secretary-General remains under the obligation to carry out the policies as adopted by the organs; the essential requirement is that he does this on the basis of his exclusively international responsibility and not in the interest of any particular State or groups of States. This presents us with the crucial issue: is it possible for the Secretary-General to resolve controversial questions on a truly international basis without obtaining the formal decision of the organs? In my opinion and on the basis of my experience, the answer is in the affirmative; it is possible for the SecretaryGeneral to carry out his tasks in controversial political situations with full regard to his exclusively international obligation under the Charter and without subservience to a particular national or ideological attitude. This is not to say that the Secretary-General is a kind of delphic oracle who alone speaks for the international community. He has available for his task varied means and resources. Of primary importance in this respect are the principles and purposes of the Charter which are the fundamental law accepted by and binding on all States. Necessarily general and comprehensive, these principles and purposes still are specific enough to have practical significance in concrete cases.42

42 See, for example, references to the Charter in relation to the establishment and operation of UNEF: U.N. doc. A/3302, General Assembly, Official Records, first emergency special session, annexes, agenda item 5, pp. 19–23; U.N. doc. A/3512, General Assembly, Official Records, eleventh session, annexes, agenda item 66, pp. 47-50. See also references to the Charter in relation to the question of the Congo: U.N. doc. Sf PV.887, p. 17; U.N. doc. Sf PV.920, p. 47;

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

The principles of the Charter are, moreover, supplemented by the body of legal doctrine and precepts that have been accepted by States generally, and particularly as manifested in the resolutions of UN organs. In this body of law there are rules and precedents that appropriately furnish guidance to the Secretary-General when he is faced with the duty of applying a general mandate in circumstances that had not been envisaged by the resolution. Considerations of principle and law, important as they are, do not of course suffice to settle all the questions posed by the political tasks entrusted to the Secretary-General. Problems of political judgement still remain. In regard to these problems, the Secretary-General must find constitutional means and techniques to assist him, so far as possible, in reducing the element of purely personal judgement. In my experience I have found several arrangements of value to enable the Secretary-General to obtain what might be regarded as the representative opinion of the Organization in respect of the political issues faced by him. One such arrangement might be described as the institution of the permanent missions to the United Nations, through which the Member States have enabled the Secretary-General to carry on frequent consultations safeguarded by diplomatic privacy.43 Another arrangement, which represents a further development of the first, has been the advisory committee of the Secretary-General, such as those on UNEF and the Congo, composed of representatives of Governments most directly concerned with the activity involved, and also representing diverse political positions and interests.44 These advisory committees have furnished a large measure of the guidance

U.N. doc. Sf PV.942, pp. 137–40; U.N. doc. S/4637 A. 43 See Introduction to the Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization, 16 June 1958–15 June 1959, p. 2, U.N. doc. A/4132 add. 1, General Assembly, Official Records, fourteenth session, Supplement No. I A. 44 UNEF Advisory Committee, established by General Assembly resolution 1001 (ES-I). The Advisory Committee on the Congo was established by the Secretary-General and recognized by the General Assembly and in the Security Council’s various resolutions.

IN LAW AND IN FACT

required by the Secretary-General in carrying out his mandates relating to UNEF and the Congo operations. They have provided an essential link between the judgement of the executive and the consensus of the political bodies.

VI Experience has thus indicated that the international civil servant may take steps to reduce the sphere within which he has to take stands on politically controversial issues. In summary, it may be said that he will carefully seek guidance in the decisions of the main organs, in statements relevant for the interpretation of those decisions, in the Charter and in generally recognized principles of law, remembering that by his actions he may set important precedents. Further, he will submit as complete reporting to the main organs as circumstances permit, seeking their guidance whenever such guidance seems to be possible to obtain. Even if all of these steps are taken, it will still remain, as has been amply demonstrated in practice, that the reduced area of discretion will be large enough to expose the international Secretariat to heated political controversy and to accusations of a lack of neutrality. I have already drawn attention to the ambiguity of the word ‘neutrality’ in such a context. It is obvious from what I have said that the international civil servant cannot be accused of lack of neutrality simply for taking a stand on a controversial issue when this is his duty and cannot be avoided. But there remains a serious intellectual and moral problem as we move within an area inside which personal judgement must come into play. Finally, we have to deal here with a question of integrity or with, if you please, a question of conscience. The international civil servant must keep himself under the strictest observation. He is not requested to be a neuter in the sense that he has to have no sympathies or antipathies, that there are to be no interests

THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVANT

which are close to him in his personal capacity, or that he is to have no ideas or ideals that matter for him. However, he is requested to be fully aware of those human reactions and meticulously check himself so that they are not permitted to influence his actions. This is nothing unique. Is not every judge professionally under the same obligation? If the international civil servant knows himself to be free from such personal influences in his actions and guided solely by the common aims and rules laid down for, and by the Organization he serves and by recognized legal principles, then he has done his duty, and then he can face the criticism which, even so, will be unavoidable. As I said, at the final test, this is a question of integrity, and if integrity in the sense of respect for law and respect for truth were to drive him into positions of conflict with this or that interest, then that conflict is a sign of his neutrality—and not of his failure to observe neutrality—then it is in line, not in conflict with his duties as an international civil servant. Recently it has been said, this time in Western circles, that as the International Secretariat goes forward on the road of international thought and action, while Member States depart from it, a gap develops between them and they grow into mutually hostile elements; and this is said to increase the tension in the world which it was the purpose of the United Nations to diminish. From this view the conclusion has been drawn that we may have to switch from an international Secretariat, ruled by the principles described in this lecture, to an intergovernmental Secretariat, the members of which obviously would not be supposed to work in the direction of an internationalism considered unpalatable to their governments. Such a passive acceptance of a nationalism rendering it necessary to abandon present efforts in the direction of internationalism symbolized by the international civil service—somewhat surprisingly regarded as a cause of tension—might, if accepted by the Member Nations, well prove to be the Munich of international co-operation

IN LAW AND IN FACT

as conceived after the First World War and further developed under the impression of the tragedy of the Second World War. To abandon or to compromise with principles on which such co-operation is built may be no less dangerous than to compromise with principles regarding the rights of a nation. In both cases the price to be paid may be peace.

A NOTE ON THE TEXT At least three versions of ‘The International Civil Servant in Law and in Fact’ have been in circulation since its delivery on 30 May 1961. The first is, of course, the text spoken by Hammarskjöld on the day. While no recorded version of the lecture exists, the Royal Library of Sweden in Stockholm holds a typed copy, and it is this version which we must presume Hammarskjöld read aloud.1 The second version, a press release issued at UN Headquarters in New York on 29 May 1961, is the one that has become most known and read.2 Marked ‘For use of information media – not an official record’, the text of the press release was embargoed until 17:00 GMT on 30 May. Reprints of the UN version began appearing in news media outlets from 31 May onwards and, later, in anthologies of Hammarskjöld’s public statements as Secretary-General.3 Oxford University Press (OUP) issued a third version in July 1961.4 The OUP archives show that Sir Humphrey Waldock – who had arranged for Hammarskjöld to deliver the lecture – approached OUP on 31 May 1961 suggesting the text be published by the Press. The Delegates – that board of Oxford academics which regulates OUP’s publications – were happy to agree. There was, however, some back and forth between Waldock, his secretary, OUP and the UN Information Centre in London as to the format in which the 1 Dag Hammarskjöld, ‘The International Civil Servant in Law and in Fact’, typescript copy (undated), Kungliga Biblioteket [Royal Library of Sweden], Dag Hammarskjöld Collection, ‘Serie 47: Speeches and statements by D. Hammarskjöld - drafts, reading copies etc (1961)’, <https://arken.kb.se/SE-S-HS-L179-47>. 2 United Nations, Office of Public Information, ‘Address by UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld at Oxford University, 30 May 1961’, Press Release SG/1035, 29 May 1961. 3 See eg ‘Avoiding a Munich for the UN: The International Civil Servant to-day’, The Scotsman, 31 May 1961; Dag Hammarskjöld, ‘The International Civil Servant’, Current Notes on International Affairs, 32/6 ( June 1961), pp. 41–53, <https://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-1220070773/ view?partId=nla.obj-1220189072#page/n40/mode/1up>; and Wilder Foote (ed.), Servant of Peace: A Selection of the Speeches and Statements of Dag Hammarskjöld (New York: Harper and Row, 1962). 4 Dag Hammarskjöld, ‘The International Civil Servant in Law and in Fact’ (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961).

text should appear. On 2 June Waldock’s secretary relayed a message from R. M. P. Hawkin of the UN Information Centre in London stating:

“I would like to confirm that the Secretary-General agrees with the suggestion to reprint his Oxford speech but he feels that the footnotes for his speech are an essential part of it and, although not used in the Sheldonian, should appear in any printed version of it. I am, therefore, attaching the original copy used by him with the footnotes, so that they may be included in the Oxford University Press edition. Perhaps you will see to it that the footnotes are of course placed on each page according to the regular system employed by publishers.”5

OUP issued the lecture in July 1961 as a demy octavo- format, 28-page booklet. It sold at two shillings and sixpence, or 12.5 pence in today’s currency. A further note from the Secretary – or chief executive – of OUP, Colin Roberts (8 June 1961), specified that Hammarskjöld would receive 50 free copies, and that the UN could buy further copies at a 25 per cent discount (or 33.3 per cent if it ordered 1,000 copies). The title went out of print on 28 January 1966 and has not been republished in its original format since then. Apart from the 44 footnotes inserted at Hammarskjöld’s request, the UN and OUP versions also differ in style: the former follows US conventions; the latter implements the OUP house style. The current edition follows the OUP version, with one small difference. In the OUP version, the footnote count restarts with each new page. We have chosen, instead, to number footnotes consecutively for the entire text. We have also made a minor correction to a footnote in the OUP version which listed 13 July 1961 as the date for Security Council Resolution S/4387; in fact, it was 13 July 1960.

5 Letter from Mrs S. Prior (Secretary to Sir Humphrey Waldock) to C. H. Roberts (Clarendon Press, Oxford), 2 June 1961, quoted by permission of the secretary to the Delegates of Oxford University Press [emphasis added]. The copy of the lecture with Hammarskjöld’s original footnotes is not on file in the OUP archives.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In preparing this edition, we have relied on the generosity of many institutions and individuals. The Foundation wishes to thank the Hammarskjöld family for permission to reproduce materials in the Royal Library of Sweden’s Dag Hammarskjöld Collection. Thanks also to the staff at the Royal Library of Sweden, the Dag Hammarskjöld Library at UN Headquarters, the UN Library at Geneva, the UN Department of Global Communications, the Oxford University Press archives, the University of Oxford Academic Permissions team, the Rare Book & Manuscript Library at Columbia University and the BBC Enquiries team. Special thanks to Mailin Bala and Charlotte Mason for advice on copyright issues, and to Peder Hammarskiold, Erik Hammarskjöld and Elinor Hammarskjöld for guidance on issues related to Dag Hammarskjöld’s estate.

ABOUT DAG HAMMARSKJÖLD Dag Hammarskjöld was born on 29 July 1905 in Jönköping, Sweden, but spent most of his childhood in the university town of Uppsala. After studying linguistics, economics and law, he rose rapidly through the ranks of the Swedish civil service. In 1951 he was appointed Deputy Foreign Minister and in the following year headed the Swedish delegation to the UN General Assembly. Hammarskjöld was appointed UN Secretary-General in March 1953 at the age of 47. A compromise candidate, he served with the utmost courage and integrity from 1953 until his death in 1961. During his tenure he defied expectations and became known as an intrepid and dedicated international civil servant, creating standards against which his successors continue to be measured. On the night of 17–18 September 1961, during a UN mission to negotiate peace in the Congo, Dag Hammarskjöld’s plane crashed near Ndola in Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia). All 16 passengers and crew perished. The 1962 UN report on the cause of the crash was inconclusive and UN resolutions since have called for further inquiries into the crash conditions and circumstances. What remains unquestioned is Hammarskjöld’s lasting legacy, one that will forever be an example for those who follow in his footsteps. His most notable achievements while serving as the world’s top international civil servant include restructuring the UN to make it more effective, creating the basis for UN peacekeeping operations, and successfully implementing his ‘preventive diplomacy’ in crises from the Middle East to China. When meeting these international challenges, Hammarskjöld combined great moral force with subtlety and insisted on the independence of his office. In 1962 Dag Hammarskjöld was posthumously awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace.

Above: Dag Hammarskjöld after receiving his honorary doctorate of Civil Law from the University of Oxford on 30 May 1961. Photo credit:TT.

On the 60th anniversary of the lecture, the Dag Hammarskjold Foundation reissued the text in full to ensure that it reaches the international civil servants of today, and in the hope that Hammarskjöld’s precise and meaningful words will inspire a new generation committed to the cause of peace.

www.daghammarskjold.se https://bit.ly/daginoxford

Research Gate

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312592943

Dag Hammarskjöld: Apostle of Mediation

Article · December 2016

CITATIONS READS 0 517

Manish Thapa University for Peace 33 PUBLICATIONS 79 CITATIONS

All content following this page was uploaded by Manish Thapa on 05 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

revistademediacion.com Revista de Mediación, 2016, 9, 2, e5 (7 pages) 1

Dag Hammarskjöld: Apostle of Mediation Dag Hammarskjöld: Apóstol de la mediación Manish Thapa University for Peace (UPEACE), Organization of the United Nations

Received: 13/11/2016 Accepted: 08/12/2016

Abstract: Dag Hammarskjöld is considered as one of the ‘best, most dynamic and influential Secretary General of the Uni- ted Nations. He is one of the most pro-active diplomats whose lasting legacy was the focus on the quiet diplomacy, peace keeping and development aid. These three key features of the United Nations of today were the result of Hammarskjöld’s ideas. His legacy in United Nations is considered as a beacon and legend for men who are seeking the road to international peace and security and a moral compass for international civil service. This article tries to capture some of his contribution of his signature ‘quiet diplomacy’ (informal private mediation) to resolve some of the world’s worst crisis. Resumen: Dag Hammarskjöld es considerado uno de los mejores Secretarios Generales de las Naciones Unidas, entre los más dinámicos e influyentes. Es uno de los diplomáticos más proactivos cuyo legado duradero se centra en la diplomacia tranquila, el mantenimiento de la paz y la ayuda al desarrollo. Estas tres características fundamentales de las Naciones Unidas de hoy en día son el resultado de las ideas de Hammarskjöld. Su legado en las Naciones Unidas se considera un faro y una leyenda para aquellos que busquen el camino hacia la paz y la seguridad internacional, y una brújula moral para los funcionarios internacionales. Este artículo intenta captar parte de la contribución a su conocida «diplomacia tranquila» (mediación privada informal) para resolver algunas de las peores crisis que ha visto el mundo.

Key Words: Dag Hammarskjöld, United Nations, Secretary General, Quiet Diplomacy, Mediation. Palabras claves: Dag Hammarskjöld, Naciones Unidas, Secretario General, diplomacia tranquila, mediación.

Manish Thapa Is Resident Professor of International Peace Studies at United Nations mandated University for Peace (UPEACE). He is one of the founding members of the Department of Conflict, Peace & Development Studies at Tribhuvan University - Nepal (2007-2015). He is also Visiting Professor at the Institute of International Relations, University of Warsaw, Poland and Senior Research Fellow at Center for Europe – University of Warsaw- Poland. He has served as Research Fellow in several universities and institutes in Europe and North America such as the University of Warsaw; Department of Peace & Conflict Research - Uppsala University; Watson Institute - Brown University; McGill-Echenberg Human Rights Fellow & Jeanne Sau- vé Scholar - McGill University and Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies Visiting Fellow - University of Notre Dame. His publications include 6 books and numerous journal articles and book chapters including «Internal Conflicts & Peace- building Challenges» (Editor), New Delhi: K W Publishers, 2016 and «India in the Contemporary World: Polity, Economy & International Relations», (Co-Editor), London: Routledge, 2014. E-mails about this article should be sent to the author’s address: mthapa@upeace.org

ISSN: 2340-9754

2 Manish Thapa revistademediacion.com

Dag Hjalmar Agne Carl Hammarskjöld was a Swedish civil devoted thirty-one years in Swedish government in various ca- servant, diplomat, economist, and author who was born as pacities as public civil servant and diplomat. the youngest of four sons of Agnes (Almquist) Hammarsk- One of his major appointments was Adviser to the Cabi- jöld and Hjalmar Hammarskjöld, prime minister of Sweden, net on financial and economic problems. His responsibilities member of The Hague Tribunal, Governor of Uppland, Chair- included organizing and coordinating governmental planning man of the Board of the Nobel Foundation (United Nations, for the various economic problems that arose as a result of 2012). He served as second secretary-general of the United the war. During these years, he played an important role in Nations, from April 1953 until his death in a plane crash in shaping Sweden’s financial policy. In fact, he has been cred- September 1961. He is considered as one of the ‘best, most ited with having coined the term «planned economy». Along dynamic and influential Secretary-General the United Na- with his eldest brother, Bo, who was then undersecretary in tions has seen (Annan, 2007; Thakur, 2015) and President the Ministry of Social Welfare, he drafted the legislation that John F. Kennedy referred him as one of ‘the greatest states- opened the way to the creation of the present so-called ‘wel- man of our century’ (Linnér, 2007).He is among the only four fare state’ (Van Dusen, 1967). people who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1961 In the latter part of his career with the Swedish Govern- posthumously but having been nominated before his death ment, he drew attention as an international financial negotiator and the only Secretary General of the United Nations who for his part in the discussions with Great Britain on the post- died while in office. war economic reconstruction of Europe, in his reshaping of On his legacy, Secretary General Kofi Anan expressed, the twelve-year-old United States-Sweden trade agreement, «His life and his death, his words and his actions, have done in his participation in the talks which organized the Marshall more to shape public expectations of the office, and indeed Plan, and in his leadership on the Executive Committee of the of the Organization, than those of any other man or woman Organization for European Economic Cooperation. He led a in its history. His wisdom and his modesty, his unimpeach- series of trade and financial negotiations with other countries, able integrity and single-minded devotion to duty, have set among which were the United States and the United Kingdom. a standard for all servants of the international community – This experience really horned his skills as a very experienced and especially, of course, for his successors – which is sim- mediator who negotiated with Britain and the United States ply impossible to live up to. There can be no better rule of for the post-war swift execution of the Marshall Plan in Europe. thumb for a Secretary-General, as he approaches each new On foreign affairs, he continued a policy of international challenge or crisis, than to ask himself, ‘how would Hammar- economic cooperation (Ahlström, & Carlson, 2006). One of skjöld have handled this?’… What is clear is that his core ideas the challenging diplomatic negotiations he successfully led remain highly relevant in this new international context. The during this period was the avoiding Swedish allegiance to the challenge for us is to see how they can be adapted to take cooperative military set up of the North Atlantic Treaty Or- account of it» (Annan, 2001).This statement is the perfect re- ganization (NATO) while collaborating on the political level flection of his legacy, of his contribution to the foundation of in the Council of Europe and on the economic level in the the United Nations as a multilateral institution with an impar- Organization of European Economic Cooperation. tial undertaking of existing global challenges. Dag Hammarskjöld in the United Nations Dag Hammarskjöld’s Early Career Dag Hammarskjöld’s represented Sweden as a member of In a brief piece written for a radio program in 1953, Dag Ham- the Swedish delegation to the Sixth Regular Session of the marskjöld spoke of the influence of his parents: «From gener- United Nations in 1949 which left his mark at the United Na- ations of soldiers and government officials on my father’s side tions. Later, he joined as Vice-Chairman of the Swedish Del- I inherited a belief that no life was more satisfactory than one egation to the Sixth Regular Session of the United Nations of selfless service to your country – or humanity. This service General Assembly in Paris 1951-1952, and Acting Chairman of required a sacrifice of all personal interests, but likewise the his country’s delegation to the Seventh General Assembly in courage to stand up unflinchingly for your convictions. From New York in 1952-1953 (United Nations, 2012, p.2). scholars and clergymen on my mother’s side, I inherited a be- To his surprise he was unanimously appointed as the sec- lief that, in the very radical sense of the Gospels, all men were ond Secretary-General of the United Nations by the Gener- equals as children of God, and should be met and treated by us al Assembly on 7 April 1953 on the recommendation of the as our masters in God» (Hammarskjöld, 1962). One of the most Security Council after the resignation of the first Secretary interesting aspects of his career is that he never joined any po- General of the United Nations Trygve Lie. One of the basis litical party, always regarded himself as an independent, which of his selection as Secretary General of the United Nations shows his true character of impartiality in his responsibility. He was that he was respected as a person of utmost integrity,

Revista de Mediación, 2016, 9, 2. ISSN: 2340-9754

Dag Hammarskjöld: Apostle of Mediation 3

who acted on the basis of moral and ethical values and al- had encountered to have any illusions on that score. Fully ways been apolitical and impartial throughout his life, the aware of the magnitude and complexity of his task, he devot- character which rewarded him with the most difficult job in ed himself to it completely, exerting all his determination and the world – Secretary General of the United Nations at the strength in carrying it out. In a private letter written in 1953 he heights of the Cold War era. On 10 April 1953, he took the says: «To know that the goal is so significant that everything oath of office as Secretary-General of the United Nations for else must be set aside gives a great sense of liberation and a term of five years. He was re-appointed unanimously for makes one indifferent to anything that may happen to one- another five-year term in September 1957 – more than six self» (Kuehl, 1975). months before the end of his first term. Since he assumed the post of Secretary General, he want- Brian Urquhart, Hammarskjöld’s key advisers and his main ed to act a very pro-active role unlike his predecessor. From biographer, described how the ‘Big Powers’ then went search- the beginning, back in 1953, when he outlined the role and ing a «yes» man and, «by pure accident, picked up someone activities of the Secretariat and the Secretary-General, he laid who was exactly the opposite of what everyone wanted. down that, while it is clearly the duty of the Secretariat and They thought they had got a safe, bureaucratic civil servant, of the Secretary-General to obtain complete and objective non-political, and they got Hammarskjöld. It will never happen information on the aims and problems of the various member again. Nobody is going to make that same mistake twice» (Ur- nations, the Secretary-General must personally form an opin- quhart, 1994).What the Big Powers soon discovered was that ion; he must base it on the rules of the UN Charter and must they had elected a man who stood up to them, in particular never for a moment betray those rules, even if this means the permanent members of the Security Council, whenever his being at variance with members of the UN (Jahn, 1961).His conscience or the UN Charter required it. His cardinal values first year as Secretary-General was indeed devoted to admin- and hallmarks were independence, impartiality, integrity and istrative responsibilities – to taking hold of the Organization moral courage. This enraged some of the world’s leaders, but and to restoring the morale of the Secretariat and dignity of at the same time they respected him for it (Gilmour, 2013). Secretary General. He reiterated that the Secretary-General As a legacy to the United Nations, Dag Hammarskjöld should be «active as an instrument, a catalyst, perhaps as an emphasized that a major task of the UN is to assert the inter- inspirer – he serves (UNDP, 2012, p. 8).» ests of small countries in relation to the major powers. He also From the very first time within the United Nations, was among the architects for the UN’s peacekeeping forc- he placed great importance on the resolution of disputes es and above all he used his good offices as a mediator in a through informal mediation (use of the medium of private range of situations to prevent war and tensions among mem- discussion between representatives of the individual coun- ber states. As Secretary-General he succeeded Mr. Trygve Lie, tries), pursuing what has come to be known as the «method who had not only built up the United Nations administration of quiet diplomacy». Importance is given to such informal and participated in planning its new building, but had also mediation, as informal meetings of this kind have always given the post of secretary-general a more important and been and will always be an important part of the work nec- independent position within the United Nations than had essary to achieve agreement between conflicting views. In probably been originally envisaged. In other words, he took every situation with which he was faced he had one goal in over an office which had already been given form and an ad- mind: to serve the ideas sponsored by the United Nations. ministrative apparatus which had acquired a certain amount He called himself an international civil servant, with the of tradition (Jahn, 1961).During his eight years (1953-1961) as emphasis on the word international (Hammarskjöld, 1961). Secretary General, he invented and introduced the concepts As such, he had only one master, and that was the United of «preventive diplomacy» (negotiations to prevent conflict), Nations. «shuttle diplomacy» (negotiations to end a conflict), classical There can be little doubt that Dag Hammarskjöld achieved «peace-keeping» (troops to monitor a cease-fire and imple- a great deal through the informal mediation he facilitated, ment peace agreements) and a UN «political presence» in and that in these he demonstrated strong personal initiative conflict areas (to try to stop conflict from re-erupting), which (Jahn, 1961). There are numerous occasions where he left his is still is the major task of the United Nations (Gilmour, 2013). mark as a successful mediator using his ‘quiet diplomacy’ to resolve tensions amongst the member states. One of the Dag Hammarskjöld’s Legacy of (Quiet) most remarkable successes of his signature ‘quiet diplomacy’ Diplomacy occurred in 1955 where he mediated with People’s Repub- There is no doubt that in accepting this high office Dag Ham- lic of China to secure release of15 detained American fliers marskjöld fully realized that the years ahead would not prove who had served under the United Nations Command in Korea easy. He was all too familiar with the difficulties Trygve Lie (UNDP, 2012, p. 2).

4 Manish Thapa revistademediacion.com

The first and most challenging disputes which fell to his was finally authorized to be deployed in Egypt with its sol- lot to settle arose in the Middle East. The first of these was diers wearing for the first time the blue helmet. This shows the conflict between Israel and the Arab States in 1955. As the the genius of Dag Hammarskjöld in executing his diplomacy representative of the UN, he succeeded in easing the tension in solving the problem despite the heights of cold war ten- by negotiating an agreement between each of the parties sion between the powerful adversaries. involved and the UN, setting up demarcation lines and es- He also made a major contribution to the solution of a tablishing UN observation posts. But the tension heightened crisis between Lebanon, Jordan, and the Arab States in 1958 between the Great Britain, France and Egypt after Egypt had with the institution and administration of the United Nations nationalized the Suez Canal. He tried to find a solution to this Observation Group in Lebanon (UNOGIL) and the establish- dispute through private negotiations which did not bear any ment of an office of the special representative of the Sec- fruits. So he used his diplomatic pressure and hinted to resign retary-General in Jordan in 1958 (UNDP, 2012, p. 2). During unless all member states honored their pledge to abide by all these crises, all his qualities were given full scope, particularly clauses of the UN Charter. his ability to negotiate and to act swiftly and firmly; and to On 1 November 1955, the General Assembly adopted, on Dag Hammarskjöld must go the principal credit for the fact the proposal of the United States, resolution 997 (ES-I), call- that all these crises were resolved in the spirit of the United ing for an immediate ceasefire, the withdrawal of all forces Nations. A state of peace was established in this area (Mill- behind the armistice lines and the reopening of the Canal. er, 1961). This was a triumph for the ideal of peace of which The Secretary-General was requested to observe and report the UN is an expression, and in addition undoubtedly greatly promptly on compliance to the Security Council and to the strengthened the position of the Secretary-General (Jahn, General Assembly, for such further action as those bodies 1961). might deem appropriate in accordance with the United Na- For Dag Hammarskjöld, the UN Charter has always remai- tions Charter. In reality for the first time in the history of the ned a guiding principle in tackling any problems. His test of United Nations, the Secretary-General was thus vested with leadership was again challenged during the liberation of the far-reaching powers. This wielding power gave upper hand Congo on June 30, 1960 which was one of the largest and the to Hammarskjöld to mediate a solution between the stake- richest in resources of the European colonies in Africa to gain holders such that France and Great Britain were willing to independence. The post-colonial government with Joseph suspend hostilities, provided that Israel and Egypt were pre- Kasavubu as President and Patrice Lumumba as Prime Mi- pared to accept the establishment of a UN force to ensure nister, faced multitude challenges: the administration, which and supervise the suspension of hostilities and subsequently had been in Belgian hands, had broken down; the army had to prevent the violation of the Egyptian-Israeli border. The mutinied; a large proportion of the white population had fled; result was that the war was brought to an end, a demarcation Belgian troops had intervened – in part to protect the white line was fixed, and a UN force was established to guard it inhabitants; and the province of Katanga declared itself an in- (Jahn, 1961). dependent state (Gibbs, 1993). All these factors – the collap- This was the first armed United Nations Peacekeeping se of the administration, the mutiny of the armed forces, and force known as United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF). finally Katanga’s secession from the rest of the Congo form The setting up of this first peacekeeping mission was a pure the background for the request made to the UN by President improvisation. First it was designed to replace collective Kasavubu and Prime Minister Lumumba to the Secretary- security as envisaged in the Charter of the United Nations General asking «urgent dispatch» of United Nations military (Chapter VII). Cold war’s tensions between the Soviet Union assistance to respond to the Belgian action. and the United States blocked the Security Council prevent- The Security Council adopted Resolution 143 (1960) by ing the use of the UN to solve international crisis. To address which it called upon the Government of Belgium to withdraw the Suez crisis, Dag Hammarskjöld, acting on a proposal from its troops from the territory of the Congo. This meeting is the Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lester B. Pearson, had highly important, for it marks a turning point in the history of recourse to the General Assembly to launch the new oper- the UN. It was the first time that the UN used armed force to ation. Facing the threat of a British and French veto, Ham- intervene actively in the solution of a problem involving the marskjöld had to adopt another strategy to deploy the first termination of colonial rule (Jahn, 1961). The resolution au- UN contingent. He did it through the use of the «Uniting for thorized the Secretary-General to take the necessary steps, Peace» resolution that was dating from the war in Korea. This in consultation with the Congolese Government, to provide highly controversial method allows the UN to authorize the that Government with the necessary military assistance until deployment of troops without the approval of the Security it felt that, through its efforts with the technical assistance of Council. After difficult negotiations at the Secretariat, UNEF the United Nations, the national security forces were able to

Revista de Mediación, 2016, 9, 2. ISSN: 2340-9754

Dag Hammarskjöld: Apostle of Mediation 5

meet their tasks fully. Following Security Council actions, the The following table highlights the number of conflicts/ United Nations Force in the Congo (ONUC) was established. crisis to which Dag Hammarskjöld contributed his expertise In order to carry out these tasks, the Secretary-General set as a mediator and United Nations as an impartial/neutral up a United Nations Force which at its peak strength num- third party to mediate in the conflicting situations. One of the bered nearly 20,000. The UN intervention had not brought significant similarity and quality as interpreted by Peter Wal- about the result President Lumumba had anticipated. The lensteen is Hammarskjöld’s ‘ability to interpret mandates and Belgian troops remained in their bases in Katanga, and fresh find ingenious solutions, principles for action and practical Belgian troops were dispatched to the Congo. As a conse- course of action (Wallensteen, 2011). quence, President Lumumba made some highly unexpected Peter Wallensteen, who holds the Dag Hammarskjöld moves announcing the possibility of asking for Russian aid if chair of Peace and Conflict Research at Uppsala University the Western powers continued their aggression against the (1985-2012), stresses 9 special characteristics of Dag Ham- Congo. This led the Congo crisis became a factor in the East- marskjöld’s quiet diplomacy (mediation) which led him to West conflict, rendering the position of Hammarskjöld and success of his efforts in these crises during the heights of the the UN in the Congo immensely difficult. cold war. These characteristics as outlined by Wallensteen Dag Hammarskjöld, in the Security Council and in the are (1) Travel diplomacy (going to the area of the conflict as meetings of the General Assembly, fought in defense of his oppose to sending special representatives); (2) Build on mu- policy. He insisted throughout that all aid to the Congo civ- tual & personal trust (one to one confidence building); (3) il as well as military – must be made available through the Creating diplomatic leverage (using United Nations Charter medium of the UN. No vested interests representing any of to create his leverage for mediation); (4) Act early when pos- the power blocs must be allowed to exert their influence. sible (preventing conflict/crisis from escalation or preventive He became a subject of immense criticism from both east diplomacy); (5) Coalition Building (building critical mass who and the west. In the calm and dignified answer which Dag supports his actions and proposals); (6) Protect the integrity Hammarskjöld made to the power brokers within the United of the office of the Secretary-General (follows the UN Char- Nations, he said that he would remain at his post as long as ter as guiding principles for all his actions and decisions); (7) this was necessary to defend and strengthen the authority of Multi-arena diplomacy (work in multi-dimensional aspect of the United Nations (Jahn, 1961). And he added: It is not Soviet the crisis both international as well as domestic especially his Russia or any of the great powers that need the vigilance and role in Congo crisis where he worked both with international protection of the UN; it is all the others (Jahn, 1961). He did as well as domestic actors simultaneously); (8) Risk taking not live enough to defend and pursue his ideals and policy to (being proactive rather than staying dormant and observing its conclusion. the crisis) and (9) Stamina & simplicity (Giving priority to In an unfortunate accident, he perished on his way to a mandates and be humble and down to earth) (Wallensteen, meeting which he hoped would bring an end to the fighting 2011). in the Congo between Katanga troops and UN forces, which Among his mediation efforts, the Congo Crisis interven- had just broken out during the attempt to implement the UN tion was considered as one of the most controversial, and the Security Council resolution 161 (1961) of February 21, 1961. This UN’s role in the Congo was criticized by almost all sides— resolution called on UN military forces to take immediate both for its design and its execution. Hammarskjöld acidly steps to prevent a civil war in the Congo, and to use force pointed out to those who accused the UN of failure that deal- only as a last resort. The UN was furthermore enjoined to en- ing with a territory five times the size of France with fewer sure that all Belgian and other foreign military, political, and peace-keepers than there were policemen in Manhattan was other advisers not under UN command should be withdrawn unlikely to make the UN more efficient than the NYPD «in the immediately. prevention of murder, rape and similar time-honored ways Dag Hammarskjöld was exposed to criticism and violent, for man to realize himself» (Gilmour, 2013). His words at that unrestrained attacks, but he never departed from the path time were a bit bitter but later it was realized by the World he had chosen from the very first: the path that was to result Leaders. Six months after the fatal plane crash, Hammarsk- in the UN’s developing into an effective and constructive in- jöld’s closest Swedish associate was summoned to the Oval ternational organization, capable of giving life to the princi- Office. President Kennedy explained that he had belatedly ples and aims expressed in the UN Charter, administered by come to realize that he had been wrong to oppose the UN a strong Secretariat served by men who both felt and acted Congo policy on anti-Communist grounds, and regretted that internationally. The goal he always strove to attain was to it was too late to apologize to Hammarskjöld in person. «I make the UN Charter the one by which all countries regulat- realize now that in comparison to him, I am a small man. He ed themselves. was the greatest statesman of our century» (Gilmour, 2013).

6 Manish Thapa revistademediacion.com

Table 1: Twenty Conflict/Crisis: Mediation Efforts of Dag Hammarskjöld, 1953-1961

Conflict/Crisis Outcome of the Conflict/Crisis Outcome of Hammarskjöld’s Diplomacy

1. Guatemala 1954 Government Overthrown by CIA (USA) Failure

2. US pilots in China 1954-55 Pilots Freed Success

3. Middle East 1956 I Ceasefire Restored Success

4. Middle East 1956 II (Canal No Agreement Failure Crisis, Oct.)

5. Middle East 1956 III (Canal Ceasefire withdrawal, Peacekeeping Success Crisis, 29 Oct. -7 Nov.) Operation deployment agreement

6. Middle East 1956 IV (UNEF Deployment of Peacekeeping Operation Success in Egypt))

7. Hungary 1956 Invasion (Soviet military intervention in Failure Hungary)

8. Middle East 1957 (Israel Withdrawal, Peacekeeping Success leaving Sinai, Gaza)

9. Lebanon 1958 (infiltration Observer Group, Withdrawal Success & western intervention)

10. Cambodia - Thailand Relations restored Success

11. UK-Saudi Arabia (Bureimi) Eventually resolved Success (After Hammarskjöld’s death)

12. Laos 1959 I UN Subcommittee Failure

13. Laos 1959 II (UN Pres- UN Presence, set up by Secretary Gen- Success ence) eral

14. Congo 1960 I Action by Secretary General Success

15. Congo 1960 II (Katanga) Removal of Belgian Troops Success

16. Congo 1960 III Congo aid through UN Success

17. Congo 1960 IV (Soviet Soviet critique, General Assembly Sup- Success attack on Hammarskjöld) port

18. Congo 1960-61 (Constitu- Assassination of Lumumba Failure tional Crisis)

19. Bizerte 1961 (French-Tuni- Agreement Not achieved Failure sian conflict)

20. Congo 1961 (Katanga) Katanga secession Hammarskjöld killed on fatal air crash

Source: (Urquhart, 1994) and (Wallensteen, 2011).

Revista de Mediación, 2016, 9, 2. ISSN: 2340-9754

Dag Hammarskjöld: Apostle of Mediation 7

Room of Quiet: United Nations Meditation clearly summarizes his endeavor of diplomacy as an ‘apostle Room of mediation’ which is reflected on how he handled all the One of his lasting legacies in UN is the United Nations Med- challenges he faced during his role as Secretary General: with itation Room that first opened on October 14, 1952. The ex- perseverance and patience, a firm grip on realities, careful but istence of this room was a hard won battle by a group that imaginative planning, a clear awareness of the dangers. also saw to it that there would be a moment of silence at the beginning and closing of each General Assembly—a tra- References dition continued to this day. This is a place within the Unit- –– Ahlström, G., & Carlson, B. (2006).Sweden and Bretton Woods, ed Nations headquarters, where people could withdraw into 1943-1951. Lund Papers in Economic History, 100. themselves, regardless of their faith, creed or religion, but –– Annan K. (2001). Dag Hammarskjöld and the 21st Century, ac- Dag Hammarskjöld wanted something more dignified. In his ceded on 2 Oct 2016 at http://bit.ly/2hjO5K6 efforts he was supported by a group, composed of Christians, –– Annan, K. (2007). Foreword. In S. Chesterman (Ed.) Secretary Jews, and Muslims, the «Friends of the UN Meditation Room», or General? The UN Secretary-General in World Politics. New who combined their efforts to transform the Mediation Room York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. into the «A Room of Quiet», a masterpiece which was per- –– Gibbs, D.N. (1993). Dag Hammarskjöld, the United Nations, and sonally supervised by Dag Hammarskjöld himself. It has been the Congo Crisis of 1960–1: A Reinterpretation. The Journal of the aim of Dag Hammarskjöld to create in this small room a Modern African Studies, 31(01), 163-174. place where the doors may be open to the infinite lands of –– Gilmour, A. (September, 2013). Dag Hammarskjöld: Statesman thought and prayer. of the Century. The Nation Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2hJMpL7 In the statement during the inauguration of room of qui- –– Hammarskjöld, D. (1961). The international civil servant in law et he stressed’ this house, dedicated to work and debate in and in fact: a lecture delivered to Congregation on 30 May 1961 the service of peace, should have one room dedicated to si- (Vol. 1, No. 18). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press. lence in the outward sense and stillness in the inner sense. It –– Hammarskjöld, D. (1962). Old creeds in a new world. In W. has been the aim to create in this small room a place where Foote (Ed.), The Servant of Peace: A Selection of Speeches the doors may be open to the infinite lands of thought and and Statements of Dag Hammarskjöld, Secretary-General of prayer. People of many faiths will meet here, and for that rea- the United Nations 1953-61. Stockholm, Sweden: Harper & Row. son none of the symbols to which we are accustomed in our –– Hammarskjöld, D. (1971). A Room of Quiet – The United Na- meditation could be used’ (Hammarskjöld, 1961). tions Meditation Room. Servant of Peace, a Selection of the Speeches and Statements of Dag Hammarskjöld. New York, Conclusion USA: Harper & Row. It is always difficult to summarize the legacy of a man who –– Jahn, G. (1961). The Nobel Peace Prize 1961 - Presentation has achieved so much in course of a very short life he lived. Speech».Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB 2014.Retriebed from In Dag Hammarskjöld life there was never a dull moment as http://bit.ly/2i2MVXm his extraordinary life with multiple responsibility as a civ- –– Kuehl, W. F. (1975). Public Papers of the Secretaries-General of il servant, economist and finally as a world diplomat, has the United Nations. Vol. IV: Dag Hammarskjöld, 1938–1960. Ed. gone through the best and worst experience one can ever by Andrew W. Cordier and Wilder Foote (New York: Columbia imagine. On his arrival to Idlewild Airport in New York to University Press, 1974. xiv+ 659 pp. Notes and index). The Jour- take responsibility as new Secretary General, he reflected his nal of American History, 62(2), 475-476. experience as a mountaineer which can relate to his experi- –– Linnér S (2007). Dag Hammarskjöld and the Congo crisis, ence as international mediator. He stressed, ‘I am interested 1960–61», accessed on 1 Oct 2016 at http://bit.ly/2izaIPE in mountaineering, but my experience is limited to Scandi- –– Miller, R. I. (1961). Dag Hammarskjöld and crisis diplomacy. New navia, where mountaineering calls more for endurance than York, NY, USA: Oceana Publications. for equilibristic, and where mountains are harmonious rather –– Thakur, R. (February, 2015). Next U.N. Secretary General. The than dramatic, matter of fact (if you permit such a term in this Japan Times. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2inmA42 context) rather than eloquent. However, that much I know of –– United Nations (2012).Dag Hammarskjold: Instrument, catalyst, this sport that the qualities it requires are just those which I inspirer. New York, USA: Author. feel we all need today: perseverance and patience, a firm grip –– Urquhart B. (1994). Hammarskjöld. New York, USA: Norton. on realities, careful but imaginative planning, a clear aware- –– Van Dusen, H. P. (1967). Dag Hammarskjöld: a biographical in- ness of the dangers but also of the fact that fate is what we terpretation of’ Markings. London, UK: Faber& Faber. make it and that the safest climber is he who never questions –– Wallensteen, P. (2011). Peace Research: Theory and Practice. his ability to overcome all difficulties» (UNDP, 2012, p. 9). This London, UK: Routledge.

View publication stats