Oldal 75 [75]
“adventuring” Hungarians did.” (I always liked this euphemism:
“adventure.” It is as if they were just going on a picnic, with cold
cuts softened under the saddle, trading, traveling, carrying kalach
and kumis in the baskets they wove. They did not rape, they did
not plunder, and they did not set fire to villages, towns, churches,
they only “adventured.” And rambled a little. Perhaps this is where
the seemingly unstoppable process of our historical self-delusion
originated from.)
And either there or in the slightly later “Cro-Magnon” there
appears killing for enjoyment, which we can call a new element,
© killing for pleasure
After a while, a law had to be made because of this killing as an
end in itself, for mere pleasure. This is even carved in stone as the
“thou shalt not kill” command of the Ten Commandments of
Moses. Of course, this is a bit wrong. Correctly translated, this is
“thou shalt not murder,” that is, do not kill—out of self-interest.
The Hebrew term (Tircach) means murder. Killing is different, since
it is not always for selfish reasons. In fact, it may be legitimate,
for example, for food. I can kill a mammoth if I am hungry (and
not a vegan), but I cannot kill a mammoth out of passion. Even
the law recognizes the legitimacy of killing in certain situations
(e.g. self-defense), but not killing for self-interest. It is a matter of
premeditation. From now on, we will consider these questions on
the basis of natural law, in the rational world. This is also why it is
unfair (I could stylishly say “unreasonable”) to compare animals
to humans (more precisely: to compare humans to animals): the
animal does not kill for pleasure, the human does. The goal of
the animal is to obtain food or to protect itself. (This is despite
an ethologist of our time concluding that self-serving aggression
and killing are also present in animals. This may be, but it is not
33 “Adventuring” (“kalandozés”) is the Hungarian euphemism for the Hun¬
garian invasions and raids into Europe c. 9-10" centuries.