Eurpai Szocilis

Alap

BEFEKTETS A JVBE

szerkesztette/edited by BDIS

ZOLTN

A titok
fenomenolgija
a cigny npmesben

BDIS ZOLTN

A titok fenomenolgija
a cigny npmesben

This volume is the fourth in a series of books entitled Fabula Aeterna to be

published by the Association of Applied Narratology that is hosted by the Faculty of Child
and Adult Education at the University of Debrecen. The bilingual volumes (Hungarian
and English) are first and foremost devoted to investigating, analysing and publicising the
heritage of the tale world of the Roma and other ethnic groups in the Carpathian Basin.
The studies in the current volume were first presented at a workshop organized by the
Applied Narratology Workshop and the Balzs Lippai Roma Special College. The chapters
by the authors Pter BLINT, Gbor BICZ, Zoltn HERMANN, Gabriella gnes
NAGY, Tams VALASTYN of this volume are beneficial for the reader in two ways:
on the first hand they further deepen the knowledge, textual experiences and highlight
special features and values of the Gypsy tales discussed in the previous volumes of the
Fabula Aeterna series. On the other hand they offer approaches on complex levels about
the phenomenon of the secret that allow us to see the never out-dated actuality of the
archaic tradition of tale texts.

The Phenomenology
of the Secret in Gypsy Folktales

szerkesztette/edited by

A Debreceni Egyetem Gyermeknevelsi s Felnttkpzsi Karn mkd Alkalmazott

Narratolgiai Mhely kutatcsoportja Fabula Aeterna cmmel knyvsorozatot indtott
tjra. A ktnyelv (magyar-angol) ktetek elssorban a Krpt-medencei roma s ms
npek mesevilgnak rksgt dolgozzk fel, rtelmezik s teszik hozzfrhetv az rdekld kznsg szmra. A sorozat negyedik, jelen ktetnek tanulmnyai egy az Alkalmazott Narratolgiai Mhely s a Lippai Balzs Roma Szakkollgium ltal kzsen szervezett mhelykonferencia nyomn szlettek meg. A szerzk Blint Pter, Bicz Gbor,
Hermann Zoltn, Nagy Gabriella gnes, Valastyn Tams rsai ketts haszonnal brnak az olvas szmra: egyrszt a Fabula Aeterna sorozat korbbi kiadvnyai utn tovbb
mlytik ismereteit, szvegszer tapasztalatait az egyedlll sajtossgokat s rtkeket
megjelent cigny mesemonds vilgban, msrszt a titok fenomnjnek olyan sokrt
meggondolst knljk lehetsgl, amely a meseszvegek archaikus hagyomnynak el
nem vl idszersgt engedik ltni.

The Phenomenology
of the Secret
in Gypsy Folktales

Eurpai Szocilis
Alap

BEFEKTETS A JVBE

szerkesztette/edited by BDIS

ZOLTN

A titok
fenomenolgija
a cigny npmesben

BDIS ZOLTN

A titok fenomenolgija
a cigny npmesben

This volume is the fourth in a series of books entitled Fabula Aeterna to be

published by the Association of Applied Narratology that is hosted by the Faculty of Child
and Adult Education at the University of Debrecen. The bilingual volumes (Hungarian
and English) are first and foremost devoted to investigating, analysing and publicising the
heritage of the tale world of the Roma and other ethnic groups in the Carpathian Basin.
The studies in the current volume were first presented at a workshop organized by the
Applied Narratology Workshop and the Balzs Lippai Roma Special College. The chapters
by the authors Pter BLINT, Gbor BICZ, Zoltn HERMANN, Gabriella gnes
NAGY, Tams VALASTYN of this volume are beneficial for the reader in two ways:
on the first hand they further deepen the knowledge, textual experiences and highlight
special features and values of the Gypsy tales discussed in the previous volumes of the
Fabula Aeterna series. On the other hand they offer approaches on complex levels about
the phenomenon of the secret that allow us to see the never out-dated actuality of the
archaic tradition of tale texts.

The Phenomenology
of the Secret in Gypsy Folktales

szerkesztette/edited by

A Debreceni Egyetem Gyermeknevelsi s Felnttkpzsi Karn mkd Alkalmazott

Narratolgiai Mhely kutatcsoportja Fabula Aeterna cmmel knyvsorozatot indtott
tjra. A ktnyelv (magyar-angol) ktetek elssorban a Krpt-medencei roma s ms
npek mesevilgnak rksgt dolgozzk fel, rtelmezik s teszik hozzfrhetv az rdekld kznsg szmra. A sorozat negyedik, jelen ktetnek tanulmnyai egy az Alkalmazott Narratolgiai Mhely s a Lippai Balzs Roma Szakkollgium ltal kzsen szervezett mhelykonferencia nyomn szlettek meg. A szerzk Blint Pter, Bicz Gbor,
Hermann Zoltn, Nagy Gabriella gnes, Valastyn Tams rsai ketts haszonnal brnak az olvas szmra: egyrszt a Fabula Aeterna sorozat korbbi kiadvnyai utn tovbb
mlytik ismereteit, szvegszer tapasztalatait az egyedlll sajtossgokat s rtkeket
megjelent cigny mesemonds vilgban, msrszt a titok fenomnjnek olyan sokrt
meggondolst knljk lehetsgl, amely a meseszvegek archaikus hagyomnynak el
nem vl idszersgt engedik ltni.

The Phenomenology
of the Secret
in Gypsy Folktales

A TITOK FENOMENOLGIJA
A CIGNY NPMESBEN
e
THE PHENOMENOLOGY OF THE SECRET
IN GYPSY FOLKTALES

Szerkesztette/Edited by
Bdis Zoltn

Fabula Aeterna
Sorozatszerkeszt/Series Editor:
BLINT PTER
IV.

Szerkesztette / Edited by

Bdis Zoltn

A TITOK FENOMENOLGIJA
A CIGNY NPMESBEN
e

THE PHENOMENOLOGY OF THE

SECRET IN GYPSY FOLKTALES

Debrecen, 2015

Kiad / Published by
Didakt Kft., Debrecen
Debreceni Egyetem Gyermeknevelsi s Felnttkpzsi Kar,
Alkalmazott Narratolgiai Mhely, Hajdbszrmny
(Debrecen University, GYFK, Association for Applied Narratology)

A kiadvnyt tmogatta az Emberi Erforrsok Minisztriuma

This publication is supported by The Ministry of Human Resources

A ktet kereskedelmi forgalomba nem kerl.

The volume is not for commercial sale.

Lektorlta / Proofreader KOTICS Jzsef, VGH Balzs Bla

A tanulmnyokat fordtotta/Translated by
NAGY Gabriella gnes (2., 4., 5.), RNAI Anik (3.) George SEEL (1.),
Idegen nyelvi lektor/ English language proofreader: George SEEL
Szerkesztette / Edited by: BDIS Zoltn
Trdel szerkeszt/Layout editor: DALLOS Csaba
ISBN 978-615-5212-29-1
ISSN 2064-6380
Nyomdai munkk/Printed by Kapitlis Kft., Debrecen

TARTALOM/CONTENTS
Elsz .................................................................................................................................7
Blint Pter: Atitok fenomnje a npmesben
(Jakab Istvn: Brug [AaTh, Bn 311 (406A*)~307]).............................................11
Nagy Gabriella gnes: Atitok fenomenolgija Jakab Istvn: Jnas
a zrdban cm mesjben (Abn, a lt, a szeretet s a szeret titka)........55
Bicz Gbor: Atitok-paradigma alakvltozatai a mesben:
mi Lajos letmvnek pldja............................................................................103
Valastyn Tams: Atitok atopikja Berki Jnos Fehrlfia cm mesjrl.....123
Hermann Zoltn:A titok az oroszorszgi cigny npmeskben.....................135

Foreword........................................................................................................................155
Pter Blint: The Phenomenology of the Secret in the Folk Tale
(Istvn Jakab: Brug [AaTh, Bn 311 (406A*)~307])............................................159
Gabriella gnes Nagy: The Phenomenology of the Secret
in Istvn Jakabs tale: Jnas in the Nunnery
(The Secret of Guilt, Existence, Love and the Lover)...................................... 207
Gbor Bicz: Forms of the Secret-paradigm in the Tale;
The Tales of Lajos mi...........................................................................................259
Tams Valastyn: The Atopics of the Secret On Jnos Berkis tale
Son of the White Mare...........................................................................................277
Zoltn Hermann: The Secret in the Gypsy Folk Tales of Russia ....................291
Bibliogrfia/Bibliography............................................................................................311
Szerzk/Authors...........................................................................................................319

152

ELSZ
1.
Debreceni Egyetem Gyermeknevelsi s Felnttkpzsi Karn mkd Alkalmazott Narratolgiai Mhely kutatcsoportja Fabula Aeterna cmmel knyvsorozatot indtott tjra.
Aktnyelv (magyar-angol) ktetek elssorban a Krpt-medencei roma s ms npek mesevilgnak rksgt dolgozzk
fel, rtelmezik s teszik hozzfrhetv az rdekld kznsg szmra. Kutatsi tapasztalataink alapjn szmos olyan nagyformtum mesemond-szemlyisg hagyatka ll rendelkezsre forrsanyagknt, melyek tanulmnyozsa segt
megrteni a loklis trsadalmak, a mesemond s kzssge mindennapi vilgnak alapvet viszonyait. Asorozat vllalt clja, hogy a mesemondk s trtnetmondk letmvvel foglalkoz hazai kutatk szmra publiklsi lehetsget
s egyben frumot teremtsen. Hitnk szerint a mese kortrs renesznsza, a kzvlemny s az jabb szvegkzpont valamint trsadalomtudomnyi rdeklds elgsges alapot jelent sorozatunk szmra. Akortrs mese-divat mgtt
ll okok kzl minden bizonnyal kiemelkedik a hagyomnyos mesben rendelkezsre ll rk, msknt fogalmazva idtll egyetemes tartalom, a mfaj
keretei kztt adott szellemi alkotszabadsg lehetsge, ami a mesemondt s
mindenkori hallgatsgt (olvasjt) rtelmez kzssg szervezi. Amese vszzadokon s kultrkon keresztlvelve teremt kapcsolatot s knl lehetsget prbeszdre egymssal. Remnyeink szerint sorozatunk sikeresen segtheti
a klcsns megrtst a gazdag mesekultrval (verblis s trtnetmondi kultrval) rendelkez, de trsadalmi megtlsket tekintve perifrilis kisebbsgi
roma trsadalmak, illetve a mindenkori tbbsgi trsadalom kztt.

172

2.
Jelen ktet tanulmnyai egy az Alkalmazott Narratolgiai Mhely s a Lippai
Balzs Roma Szakkollgium ltal kzsen szervezett mhelykonferencia nyomn szlettek meg, az ottani eladsok, az elmlylt vita s a felmerl krdsek alapos megbeszlse sztnzte a szerzket a titok jelensgnek vizsglatra.
Amese vilgban a titok klns helyi rtkkel br, mert a mesk java rszben
valamikppen megjelenik a titok, ugyanakkor a titok maga ritkn vlik egy mese
tematikus kzppontjv. Az ismeretlen npmese cm tanulmnyban Honti Jnos gy r:
Amesei elemek vizsglata arra a tapasztalatra vezetett egyszer, hogy vannak olyan elemek, amelyeknek a trgy szempontjbl semmi lnyeges szerepk nincs, amelyek magukban vve legtbbszr furcsk, rthetetlenek, de
amelyek mgis csodlatos szvssggal rzik helyket a mesei hagyomnyban: ezek az elemek psgben megvannak, mintha csak ezek lennnek az
illet mesetpusok hagyomnynak tartpillrei. [Ezeknek az elsrend
szerkezeti elemeknek] tbb is, meg kevesebb is a szerepk Kevesebb, mert
nem a hagyomnyt tmogatjk, hanem ezeket tmogatja a hagyomny, s
tbb, mert nem a hagyomnyozsnak tartpillrei, hanem egyfajta szerkezetnek az igazi meseszerkezetet megelz csri. Tani annak, hogy egyes
elemek egymshoz tapadhatnak nemcsak olyan mdon, hogy egy hagyomnyos esemnymenet kveteli meg az egyformasgukat, hanem ltszlag
rtelmetlenl is, sszefggsben nem kvetelten, esemnysorozatban nem
szksgszeren, hanem a meseelemek valami bels trvnyszersgnl fogva.1
Honti megfogalmazsa ugyan ltalnosabban, s nem a titok jelensgre fkuszlva llaptotta meg a fentieket, a ktet tanulmnyait sorra vve azonban az olvas szmra vilgoss vlik, hogy a titok olyan mesei fenomn, amely valban
a mesk bels rendjt hatrozza meg.
Az els kt rs a kivl cigny mesemond Jakab Istvn egy-egy mesjt
vizsglja meg. Abevezet tanulmnyban Blint Pter a fenomenolgiai herme-

1 HONTI Jnos: Az ismeretlen npmese In: U. Amese vilga, Magvet. Bp., 169174.

182

neutika mdszervel rtelmezi a Brug cm mesben megjelen titok jelensg-bokrt, olyan fenomnek hlzatnak feltrkpezse rvn, mint a tilts, a
kvncsisg, a hitetlenkeds, az ruls, a sznvalls, az rz trelem, a leleplez
trelmetlensg, a jvendls s az gret. E jelensgek mgtt mindig a titok elrejtsnek s feltrulsnak sajtos mozgsra bukkanhatunk, amely vgl ha
csak egy pillanatra is a mese hse szmra felvillantja az nmegismers lehetsgt. Nagy Gabriella gnes tanulmnya a Kermode-fle titok-fogalom nyomn az elbeszls-hagyomnyban j kontextusba trd mitikus trtnetet,
Oidipusz kirly titkokkal tsztt sorst veti ssze a mesei nyelvben felhangz
nyelvi jtkok rvn mlysget nyer mesehs, Jnas letvel. Atitok megfejtsre tr figurk ahogy a mesei nyelv figuralitsa sem oldhat fel valamilyen
vgs jelents rgztsvel elvtik a lt igazsgnak megtapasztalst, gy kapcsoldik ssze a titok s a bn.
Az Alkalmazott Narratolgiai Mhely komplex kutatsi szemllett reprezentland Bicz Gbor rsban egy filozfiai megalapozottsg titok-koncepci kidolgozsra tesz ksrletet, amelynek konkrt mesei anyagt az ltala tbb
tanulmnyban alaposan feldolgozott mi Lajos letmve adja. Jelen tanulmnya
a titok narratv burjnzsnak tapasztalata rvn jut el a vgkvetkeztetsig,
miszerint a titok a mesben egy folyton permutld, megfejtsre hv strukturlis-funkcionlis alakzat, amely mindig az egyedi meseszvegben vlik megrthetv. Valastyn Tams szvege szintn a filozfiai diskurzus fell olvassa
Berki Jnos mesit. Elemzsben a mese autopoetikus alakzataira, szvegtestnek titkaira, az abbl ered rtelmezi jtk lehetsgre utalva fejti ki, hogy a
mesl a titok elmondsa helyett mondja mesjt, amely gy vgl a szlets, az
jjszlets s az anyamh allegorikus helyv vlik, sajtos titokknt egyszerre hordozva a meseszveghez hasonlan az elrejts magnyt s a ltbe val
bebocsts lehetsgt.
Az utols tanulmnyban az orosz mesk vizsglatval Hermann Zoltn a
proppi morfologikus elemzs fell Waldenfels paradoxonig jut, amely szerint
a titok a meskben megjelen cignysg idegensgeknt vlik megragadhatv,
gy azonban, hogy az elbeszli magatarts nemcsak a kls nyelvi, kulturlis,
trsadalmi kontextust tekinti idegennek, hanem nmagt is kpes kvlrl lttatni. Kpes a sajt/idegen mitikus oppozcit a sajt-mint-idegen retorikai-elbeszli alakzatba temelni.
192

Remnyeink szerint a ktet tanulmnyai ketts haszonnal brnak az olvas szmra: egyrszt a Fabula Aeterna sorozat korbbi kiadvnyai utn tovbb
mlytik ismereteit, szvegszer tapasztalatait az egyedlll sajtossgokat s
rtkeket megjelent cigny mesemonds vilgban, msrszt a titok fenomnjnek olyan sokrt meggondolst knljk lehetsgl, amely a meseszvegek
archaikus hagyomnynak el nem vl idszersgt engedik ltni.
Debrecen, 2015 tavaszn

Bdis Zoltn

1 10 2

Blint Pter
ATITOK FENOMNJE A NPMESBEN
(Jakab Istvn: Brug [AaTh, Bn 311 (406A*)~307])

1 11 2

A titoknak azonban, meghatrozsnl

fogva, nem lehet archvuma. Atitok maga
az archvum hamuja, az a hely, ahol mg
maga a hamu, vagy magban a hamuban kifejezsek is rtelmket vesztik.1

1. Ami mg nem
titok fenomnje kapcsn feltehetnnk az ismert ontolgiai
krdst: mirt van inkbb a titok, mint a feltrultsg vagy a leplezetlensg? Atitok fenomnjt (kivltkppen is, ha a titokban
tart, vagy ha a beavat a titokba kifejezsek rtelmben vizsgljuk), egyfell a nem-lthatval, a maszkkal elfedettel, az nmagt fel nem trulval, a sttsgbe veszvel, a pokol torncn vagy blcsben
ltezvel sszefggsben kell grcs al vennnk els megkzeltsben.2 Ekkor
a titokban ltezt valahol (valaki birtokban), valamilyen rejtekhelyen, valamifle metafora ltali takarsban, l-nven (nven nem nevezetten) megbv
jelen-nem-ltknt rtelmezzk. Ms olvasatban olyan jelenvalknt, amelyrl
Starobinski azt rja: az elrejtett a jelenlt msik oldala.3 Tovbb, ha magunkv tesszk Lvinas azon kijelentst miszerint a fenomn, a teljes fnyben trtn ltszs, akkor bizton llthatjuk, hogy a titok fenomnje fnyrt kilt, akr
csak egy pislkol mcsesrt is. De vajon ki vilgtja meg, ki s milyen felttelek

1 DERRIDA, JacquesERNST, Wolfgang: Az archvum knz vgya/Archvumok morajlsa, (ford. Bereczki Pter, Lnrt Tams), Kijrat, Bp., 2008. 91.
2 Erre utal, hogy a titokban tart szsszettel esetleg sszefggsben van az etimolgiai sztrban jelezett tulajdon s tolvaj kifejezsekkel (Etimolgiai sztr,
magyar szavak s toldalkok eredete, Tinta Kiad, Bp., 2006. 849.), ilyetnkppen a
tulajdon, a jav rejtekezik, a titokban tartsval oltalmazza magt a gazdja a tle
azt elorozni, ellopni, eltulajdontani vgykkal szemben. Atitkot kifrksz maga a
leskeld, kinek a leskeldse nem ms Starobinski szerint, mint a szem birtokl vgya. STAROBINSKI, Jean: Poppea ftyla. Vlogatott irodalmi tanulmnyok,
(ford. dm Anik et al.) Kijrat, Bp., 2007. 39.
3 Uo. 33.

1 12 2

mellett kpes megvilgtani a sttben lappang fenomnt: magt a titkot? Egyfell, amiknt Merleau-Ponty lltja:
[] az nmagban-val vak sttje csakis az nmagrt-val vilgossg
szmra van, vagyis az n tudatom fnye az, ami bevilgtja.4
Ebben az esetben a tudatom fnye (a descartes-i quelque lumire) ltal megvilgtott fenomn lthatv ttele a megrtst szolglja, amit a francia filozfus ekknt rtelmez: a megrts nem ms, mint a dolgokba s a vilgba elzrt
rtelem hozzfrhet jelentsekk val tfordtsa.5 Msfell a hozzm kzelt, a vendgszeretetemre vgy, az n ltkrmbe belp, az engem behzdottsgombl feleletignyvel kibillent Msik hozza a fnyt, hogy a sttsgben
rejtez titkot egy msik n szempontjbl (az szeme fnynek sugarval) megvilgtsa, s felknlja nekem, mint trsszubjektumnak az egyttes rtelmezsre
az egyelre ki-nem-mondhatt. Atitok fenomnje a jelenttessgt (tbblet-jelentst) csakis az n tudatom fnyben s a Msik tudatnak fnyben, mintegy
a kt fnycsva egy kzs dologra fkuszlsban, a kt ltszg metszspontjban trulkozik fl, mgpedig akknt, amilyen les fnybe kerl, s amilyen
irnybl rkez fny vetl re: hogy kzsen vgezzk el az interpretatv mveletet. Lvinas a simogats fenomnjt elemezve, a mg-nincs fogalmval illeti a titokzatosat:
Amg-nincs nem abban a jvendben sorakozik, ahol mindaz, amit megvalsthatok, mr nyomul elre, szikrzik a fnyben, knlkozik az elrejelzsre s hatalomra serkent. Amg-nincs nem pusztn ms lehetsgeseknl
tvolibb lehetsges. Asimogats nem cselekszik, nem a lehetsgest ragadja

4 MERLEAUPONTY, Maurice: Althat s lthatatlan, (ford. Farkas Henrik, Szab Zsigmond), L Harmattan, Bp., 2007. 79.
5 Uo. 49. Ugyanerrl Marion ekknt r: Atrgy a maga bizonyossgt s igazoltsgt csakis az t igazol s megismer egnak ksznheti. MARION, JeanLuc: Az
erotikus fenomn. Hat meditci, (ford. Szab Zsigmond), L Harmattan, Bp., 2012.
25. Ez a Marion-fle ego, amirl korbban Buber ekknt beszl: Az ego nem rszesl semmi valsgban, s nem is nyer semmi valsgot. Elvgja magt a Msiktl, s
igyekszik birtokba venni belle annyit, amennyit csak kpes, tapasztals s hasznls ltal. BUBER, Martin: n s Te, (ford. Br Dniel), Eurpa, Bp., 1991. 79.

1 13 2

meg. Atitok, melyet kiknyszert, nem tudstja valamirl, mint a tapasztalat, hanem felbortja az nnek nmagval s a nem-nnel val viszonyt.6
Atitok, az egyelre meg-nem-nevezett -sg, mely az n s a te kztt kzvett az egyidejsgben: egy kzsen birtokolt (m de ami mg nem kimondott,
egy nyelvre le nem fordtott) vilgot konstitul mindhrom rszvev jelenvalsgban. Atitok a kzvetts, a rejtve lv -sgnek kimondsa rvn: a magbazrtsg, a benssgessg, a templom, a vr, a remetelak sttsgbl kvlre vitt
entits, ami a kvlsg vilgossgnl, a vilg vilgossgnl mutatja meg pre
magt. Atitok a megvilgtatlan, a mg meg-nem-nevezett, ekknt egy brmilyen nyelven ki-nem-mondott lt, mely a fnynl feltrulkoz ltben lthatv
vl gretvel arra sztkli a Msikat, a fnyhozt, hogy a fenomnt gy vilgtsa meg az ltala hozott fny vilgossgnl, hogy az minl tbbet ruljon el,
trjon fel -magasgrl, a titok rtelmezsi terbe betolakodrl s persze rlam, a titok jelentsnek birtokljrl, s nem utols sorban arrl a helyrl, ahol
tallkozsban vagyunk,7 ahol Buber szerint: trtnik valami az emberrel. Aheideggeri vilglsrl mondja Lvinas, a lt megvilgtott krnyezete nem egyb,
mint Isten ittjrtnak helye.8 Errl a vilglsrl tanskodik szmos mesenarratvban felbukkan s a titok lnyegt megvilgt szakllas kis emberke, aki
valjban nem ms, mint a magt msok eltt le-nem-leplezve jr, a hs sorst tetszse/beltsa szerint alakt, s az adott pillanatban eltn Isten.9 Amint
e fensbb s titokzatos Lny megvilgtotta a titkot, mint egyfajta tudst, ms-

6 LVINAS, Emmanuel: Az rosz fenomenolgija, In: U. Teljessg s Vgtelen,

(ford. Tarnay Lszl), Jelenkor, Pcs, 1999. 221.
7 Amegismers alapja az eltns, a fenomn, amely a ltezk ltben bontakozik ki
gy, hogy a dolgokat egyms mell helyezi a fnyben, s elrendezi a rendet. E vilglsban, elkerlhetetlen egyidejsgknl fogva, a dolgok mr a legtitkosabb rejtekhelykn jelenvalv vlnak, mintha a lt olyan szembektsdi lenne, amikor a szem
bektttsge nmagban nem akadlyozza a jelenlt mindenfell rkez csalogatst. LVINAS, Emmanuel: Talny s fenomn, In: Nyelv s kzelsg, (ford. Tarnay
Lszl) Jelenkor, Pcs, 1997. 9091.
8 Uo. 93.
9 Mskor a Moirkrl, vagy egy, esetleg hrom sorsmadrrl beszlnek a mesemondk.

1 14 2

knt szlva a vele val ls vagy nem-ls lehetsgt, s az tmutat-tuds hasznlatt az n-re s a te-re bzza.10 Miutn meggyzdtt rla, hogy valban
kpesek lni vele: mgpedig kzsen s klcsnsen, felelsen s pldaszeren
(Buber szerint: a titkot a szellem munkival s szolglatval szltja meg11), a
mese szellemben: az rkkvalsgig. Amese zrlatban feltn sztereotpia:
mig is lnek, ha meg nem haltak, Marion szellemben a hsg s a szerelem
rkkvalsgt hirdeti:
Aszerelem teht nem egyszeren hsget, hanem egyenesen rk hsget
kvetel. Ahsg temporalizlja a szerelem fenomnjt, megnyitva eltte az
egyetlen lehetsges jv horizontjt.12
Atitok fenomnjnek vilglsa a kizkkent s a sttsgbe tasztott, a veszlynek kitett s fenyegetett ltben visszalltja a rendet, s ennek az jrasztt
rendnek (ami nem jra-kezdett, hanem a rgi jogaiba vissza-lltott rend, a Teremts rendje13) az rkkvalsg gretvel val fennmaradst a kirlly, a
rend legfelsbb rzjv s reprezentnsv avanzslt hs biztostja. Ez a helyrellt kpessg s ellensges erkn (gonosz lelkeken) fellemelkedni, uralkodni, trvnyt tenni tuds, mint adottsg, vagy mg inkbb nyelvi adomny
(mely a szavakra lefordthat tetteken keresztl olykor meglljt!, mskor ne
ljt! parancsol az rt szndk lnynek), az titka, a sz konkrt s tvitt rtelmben: kirlyi titok.
Atitokzatos, msknt az elrejtett, az elfedett, az l-nven (nven msknt
nevezetten: pl. Nemtudomka, Kilenc, Vasjank stb.) ltez lnyegi kapcsolatban
ll a ltszatra nem-ltezvel, a magt ms valaki, vagy ms valami ftyla mg
10 Jung szerint a titok fenomnjt ugyanis csak azon mesehsknek trja fl, akik rszolgltak birtoklsra. JUNG, Carl Gustav: Aszellem jelensge a mesben, In: U.
Az archetpusok s a kollektv tudattalan, (ford. Trczi Attila), Scolar Kiad, Bp.,
2011. 201247.
11 BUBER: i. m. 124.
12 MARION: i. m. 246.
13 Ez a rend az, aminek a szne eltt lnk, az, amiben lnk, az, amibe s amitl
lnk, a titok: az maradt, ami volt. Jelenvalv lett a szmunkra, s jelenltvel hrl adta magt neknk, mint dvssg; megismertk, de nincsen ismeretnk rla,
mely elvenne titokzatossgbl titokzatossgt enyhten. BUBER: i. m. 136.

1 15 2

rejtezvel.14 Atitokzatos elfedi (elhallgatja) egyfell a titkot adomnyoz kiltt, msfell elbb-utbb megmutatja (bejelenti) az adott, az adomnyozs vgeredmnyeknt eltn jelenlt egzisztencia-karaktert: igaz vagy hamis voltt.
Aszavak s a tettek kztt olykor mrhetetlen szakadk ttonghat. Hiszen egyltaln nem biztos, hogy ami belle a fnynl lthatv vlik, az volna az eltn
jelenvallt karaktere, s nem csupn egyfajta lca, lruha, maszk, ftyol, persona, mely mgtt egy msik egzisztencia-karakter ltezik lefokozottan, nmagba zrtan, titokzatossgban: a titok szmra megtartottban.
Atitok, vagy jelzs vltozata: a titokzatos a fny ltali feltrs (megmutats)
s kibeszls (megrtett tevs) rvn rszben vagy teljes egszben megmutatja
magt (de nem az adomnyozs mltbli aktust, hanem a sttsgbl eltns
jelenbeli folyamatt mutatja meg), idszakosan vagy ppen csak egy adott pillanatban (pillanatnyi idre) prn ll elnk (ce qui se donne se montre15). Majd
ppolyan vratlanul, kiszmthatatlanul lti jfent magra maszkjt, ftylt, ms
szval vedlik vissza azz, aki a titokzatossg lcjban szmunkra lthatatlanul ltezett,16 Buberrel szlva: a titokba merl l.17 Ez a kitrulkozs s visszahzds, eltns s almerls, a mltban elklnbzds s jelenltben
sszerendezds a lt sajtos mozgsa. De ne feledjk, a csbts s a szeretet,
a tants s jvendls is!
Atitokzatos, az elrejtett: nem lthatknt, lefokozottan, alig valakivel (kizrlag csak a ltezsrl tudk, a beavatottak titkos trsasgval) rintkez ltezknt, a sttsgben jelenvalknt mutatja meg vagy takarja el magt: lneve

14 Jakab mesjben a gonosz llek hol konkrtan megneveztetik: De ht ki vt ez a

zsras bunds, mint Brug maga! [] mert ez vt az rdgknek a fnke. (NAGY
OlgaV Gabriella: Havasok mesemondja, Jakab Istvn mesi, j Magyar Npkltsi Gyjtemny. XXVI. Szerk. Nagy Ilona, Akadmiai, Bp., 2002. 240241.); hol
srkny, De ht nem kalmr vt ez, mert ez egyszer egyfej srkny vt. (Uo.
246.), mskor pedig ris alakjban tnik el. (Uo. 253.)
15 MARION, JeanLuc: tant donn, d. Quadrige/PUF, Paris, 2005. 102.
16 Agonosz llek szmos alakban ksrti meg a fiatal prt, vgl a zsid szab leleplezi lnyegt: Mert akkor [tizenkt rakor] fog pp elvonulni a gonosz llek a felesgeddel ppen a te kalibd eltt (NAGYV 256.)
17 BUBER: i. m. 85.

1 16 2

(feketebli kirlylny, elvarzsolt kirlykisasszony, Tndr Ilona18) maga is titkos jel. Az lnv, mint a nevet eltakar, helyettest jel, vagy mg inkbb metafora: a lt s a nyelv megkettzdse. Derrida a nv kimondsnak tilossga
kapcsn azt mondja:
Ha a nv tilos marad, ha ragaszkodunk ehhez, akkor az, ami tilos, egyszerre kivteles s alapvet jelleg.19
Atitokban ltez, mint nyelvben artikullatlan vagy a megkettzds rvn
ppensggel nmagn tlcsordul lt, nem kpes hrt adni magrl, termszetnek lnyege: a hr-telensg (amint a szls tartja az eltn, lthatatlan dologrl: se hre, se hamva20). Arejtzkdsnek titka, hogy csakis a titok gazdjnak
intencija rvn kpes feltrulkozni, mgpedig oly mdon, amiknt a titokgazda
rdekben ll megmutatni egyfajta lnyegt: hr-kzl s hr-viv s gretet-tev
voltt. Az intencionalits partialis jellege a titokmegoszts ketts irnyultsgban gykerezik: egyszerre nvdekezs s tapogatzs, elhallgats s kibeszls,
nmegtartztats s nyits a Msik fel. Atitok (mint -sg) hrkzl szndknak elfogadshoz s az nmagrl szl beszdbe elegyedshez elengedhetetlen mindkt fl (az n s te) akarata, vagyis mindkettjk beleegyezse
szksgeltetik. Emellett a tapasztalatokat klcsnsen megoszthat kzs nyelv
ltrehozsa (mely egy bizonyos mondshoz val hozzjuts21 tilalmn tlpst
segti) is nlklzhetetlen, vagyis az n s te diskurzusa egyben az -sg kl18 Agyerk mg a tltos l c. mesben rendkvli mdon Tndr Ilona tveszi a gonosz anya-tpus meskben a gyilkos anya szerept, s hogy htlensgt leplezze, meg
akarja lni frjt. In: PENAVIN Olga: Jugoszlviai magyar npmesk. j Magyar
Npkltsi Gyjtemny. XVI. Szerk. Ortutay Gyula. Akadmiai, Bp., 1971. 169188.
19 DERRIDA, Jacques: Amsik egynyelvsge, (ford. Boros Jnos et al.), Jelenkor, Pcs,
1997. 50.
20 ppen az ember akarta nyjtani a kezit, hogy elbcszzan a zsras bunds embertl [] sehol se volt a szekeren, mintha a fld nyelte volna el (NAGYV 239.) E
kijelents mg hromszor hangzik el a mesben); Egy egsz esztendbe telt, amg
az egsz orszgat sszenyargalta, a szrazfdet, de a lnynak hre hellyit, mg meleg nyomt se tallta. (NAGYV 244.); Estre megrkezett a kirly a vadszatrl, de mr hre-hamva se vt a felesginek. (NAGYV 246.)
21 DERRIDA: i. m. 50.

1 17 2

csns birtoklst s megrtett ttelt (rt szndknak s rontsnak legyzst) felttelezi. Ugyanis semmilyen titok, nmagban-val sem trulkozik
fel nszntbl a maga sszetettsgben. Atitok leglnyegt tekintve mg a haland titokgazda eltt is titokban, feltratlansgban marad, a nven nevezhetsgre tett nyelvi ksrlet folyamatosan kudarcra van tlve, ha s amennyiben a
Msik, a te idegenkedik az rtelmezs klcsnssgtl s a titok megtartsra tett grete, fogadalma szmonkrhetsgtl. Ezrt vrom a Msikat, vagyis
pontosan arrl van sz, amit MerleauPonty mond:
[] a semmi, aki vagyok, s a lt, amelyet ltok, gy egytt, a msik rkezse eltt mgis zrt szfrt alkottak.22
Ha magamra maradok a titokkal, titokgazdaknt is mindig rajta kvl lvnek
rzem magam. Egyfell a magam magnya Derridval szlva: a magny, a titok msik neve is titok, mely:
[] nem hagyja, hogy a msikhoz val viszony, az egyttlt, vagy a trsadalmi ktelk brmilyen formja elsodorja, vagy elfedje.23
Msfell magamba hzdva, a Msiktl, a Te-tl elfordulva, elklnlve, a
vele folytatand diskurzus, beszly hjn csupn az egyik oldalrl jv fnyben felvillan felsznt ltom a titoknak, ilyetnkppen a nyelvembe zrtsgom
ellehetetlenti a Msiknak szl gretem szavakba ntst. Atitok teljessgnek
e belthatatlansga miatt vagy elfogadom a folytonos lefordtsra vr titokzatos ltezst, vagy ktelyeimet s agglyaimat flretve tagadom ltezst: lefordthatatlansgt affirmlom.
Anem-lts vagy nem jl lts az n vagy a te rszrl egyfell a jelenval-ltk felmrsnek, mrlegre tevsnek s megismerhetv ttelnek hinyossgrl, msfell az egzisztencilis most-ban trtn nmegrtsk,
n-mondsunk nyelvi zavarrl (egymsnak lefordthatatlansgrl) tanskodik. Egyikk sem kpes fnybe llni s a Msikhoz vezet utat mint titkos svnyt megvilgtani24 s gyanakvs, idegenkeds, elzetes felttelezsek nlkl
22 MERLEAUPONTY: i. m. 74.
23 DERRIDA: Essz a nvrl, (ford. Boros Jnos et al.), Jelenkor, Pcs, 1995. 40.
24 Afny a sttsg elzsvel ri el, hogy a dolog eltnjn, kiresti a teret. LVINAS: Teljessg, i. m. 157.

1 18 2

megtenni. Az elgtelen fny okn lthatatlanok, vagy a flhomlyban rosszul lthatk egyms szmra, a fnycsvk elcsszsa azt eredmnyezi, hogy az szlelseik nem sszehasonlthatk. Ilyetnkpp termszetesen megszlthatatlanok,
mivel egymst szlongatsuk ppoly tapogatzs a Msik irnyba, felttelezett
lakozsa fel, miknt ahogy MerleauPonty rja a vak ember bizonytalan
keznek tapogatzsa a sttben.25 Ezt a tkletes zavart, tjkozatlansgot, melyet a sttsg rejtettsgben lv nem-ltszdsa, vagy nem annak ltszdsa,
mint ami, mg tovbb bonyoltja az, hogy a szemll nem kpes magt megfelelen pozcionlni s jtkba hozni a szemllni, megszltani vgyott Msikkal, az arca ftyolba burkolzik. Anem, vagy nem jl lt ezrt arrl a limbusok
kzti szdelgsrl ad hrt, melyben sem a mltbli-n (volt-vagyok) tapasztalata, sem az eljvend-lt remnysge: a vlni valamiv (devenir) szndka nem
nyjt semmifle kapaszkodt a szmra. Ennl fogva folyamatosan a szdlsnek, sztszrdsnak, zuhansnak, mlybevitelnek van kitve, adott ltszituciban tvesen mri fel a helyzett, helytelen dntseket hoz, azokat is rosszul:
flrertsre okot adva kommuniklja. Akommunikcis zavart kveten, a flre-beszlst neki felrovk berzenkedse miatt haragra gerjed, s elhamarkodottan ktsges rtk tleteket mond. E nem egszen normlis, az let megszokott
rendjvel ellenttes ltllapot egyik vltozata a Blanchot-i elragadtatsba ess:
Ha valaki elragadtatsba esik, azt mondhatjuk rla, hogy semmilyen valsgos trgyat, valsgos alakot nem rzkel, mert az, amit lt, nem a valsg vilghoz, hanem az elragadtats meghatrozatlan kzegbe tartozik.26
Az elragadtatsban nem vilgos lts, nem kell tvolsgot (folyamatos kzeltst) felvev lts, a tves vagy illzin alapul rzkelshez vezet, ami akadlyozza a szemllni vgyt abban, hogy a ltni adott ltek vagy dolgok helyes
szlelsre s felfogsra trekedjk. Hol tbbet, hol kevesebbet lt. Amikor tbbet lt, a szem, a tekintet nem lvn kpes az adottra fkuszlni, tlcsordul a ltottan, mert mindent akar ltni, a szem ltal trgyiastott dolgon/ltezn tl
metafizikai skra tereli rzkelst. Amikor kevesebbet lt, valjban nem is az
25 MERLEAUPONTY: i. m. 73. Derrida az egy kzzel rs folyamatt hasonltja a vak
ember mozdulathoz. DERRIDA: Amsik egynyelvsge, i. m. 110.
26 BLANCHOT, Maurice: Az irodalmi tr, (ford. Horvth Gyrgyi et al.), Kijrat kiad,
Bp., 2005. 18.

1 19 2

adottra koncentrl, hanem a sajt rzkelst s reflexiit helyezi eltrbe, kpzeteket kerget, megfosztva magt a szituatv ltrzkelstl s a valsgtartalmaktl. Ne feledjk a Gilbert Durand-i megllaptst, ami ltszik/fnylik,27 az
beszl nmagrl s a msiknak feltrja nmagt. Ergo: ami rosszul vagy homlyosan ltszik, az annak megfelelen helytelenl s csalka (csalrd, hazug, sznlelt) mdon beszl nmagrl s folyton-folyvst megtveszti, tvtra vezeti a
Msikat, aki elragadtatsban eltveszti a nem vilgosan s nem kell tvolsgbl ltott valsgvonatkozsait. Labirintusba keveredik, elveszti a fonalat, a kit
remnysgt, s sszezavarodottsgban nem tudja, miknt viszonyuljon a titok
fenomnjhez s persze hozzm, aki elragadtatsbl nem igyekszem kiragadni t, mert nem adom fl inkognitmat, nem knlom fl neki kzelsgemet, biztonsgot nyjt kezemet, ehelyett titokzatosknt viselkedem eltte. Taln mg
lvezem is, hogy meg kell kzdenie azrt, hogy rm talljon, megrintsen, megsimogasson, pontosan abban az rtelemben, ahogy Lvinas beszl a simogatsrl:
az rzkszervi vagy verblis rintkezsben ott szunnyad a simogats.28 Noha
feszengek: nem szegi-e kedvt a bizonytalansgban tapogatzs, a remnytelen
tkeress, a folyamatos kompenzls, ezrt olykor bizonyos jeleket kldk fel,
hogy fenntartsam benne az elhatrozottsgot. Azavart, a tjkozatlansgot, a
hozzm vezet t folyamatos el- vagy sszetvesztst egyedl csak a titkos rejtekhelyemen ltez nmagamrl hrt ads, az: mhol vagyok, gyere! meghvsa kpes felszmolni.

27 Dans les cinq premiers versets de l vangile platonicien de saint Jean, la parole est
explicitement associe la lumire qui luit dans les tenbres, mais l isomorphisme
de la parole et de la lumire est bien plus primitif et universel que le platonisme johannique. Constamment les textes upanishadiques associent la lumire, quelquefois
le feu, et la parole []. Jung montre que l tymologie indo-europenne de ce qui
luit est la mme que celle du terme signifiant parler, cette similitude se retrouverait en gyptien. In: DURAND, Gilbert: Les structures anthropologiques de l imaginaire, d. Dunod, Paris, 1992. 173.
28 LVINAS: Nyelv s kzelsg, In: U. i. m. 132.

1 20 2

De a meghvsnak srgetnek kell lennie, nem kznysnek. Soha nem kellene azt rteni alatta: szabadsgodban ll nem eljnni, s ha nem jssz, annyi baj, nem szmt.29
Amesenarratvban az eltkozott, elvarzsolt, kzssgtl eltvoltott lny rszrl rkez el- vagy meghvs sohasem kznys, mindig srget, s nem ismer
szabadkozst, feleltlensget, knnyelm grgetst, kudarcot, mivel a hvsra
rkez s szban vagy tettben feleletet gr hs elhatrozottsgra, llhatatossgra s felelssgvllalsra apelll. Mindkt flnek meg kell nyilvnulnia. Az
larc levetse s a valdi arc megmutatsa a szerelmi diskurzus felttele, ahogy
Marion rja: a szerelem kiknyszerti az arc szemlyess vlst.30
Hallgassl ide, szivem! Ne gondold te aztat, hogy galamb voltam n, nem
vtam n galamb. Hanem majd meg fogod ltni, hogy mi vtam n. (NAGY
V 45.)
Arejtekez arcom megvilgosodsban a Lvinas-i rtelemben vett kitntetettsgben a kijelentsem, srget hvsom szavahihetv vlik; az eltvolodottsgot felszmolja a kzeleds,31 a megnyls, a beszd, a klcsnssg, a
Marion-fle rtelmezsben, amikor klcsnsen megajndkozzuk egymst az
adomnyozottsg rangjval.32
Na, szivem, n harcoltam rted, te harcoltl rtem. Mtl kezdve te leszel
az n kedves felesgem. (NAGYV 246.)
Anyugat-eurpai gondolkodsban a nem-lts s helytelen tlkezs egyik
alapvet oka maga a sttsg, melyet Pltinosz az eredend rosszal azonost,
hiszen:
[] olyan kp ez, amely sisge folytn nagyban hozzjrul a metafizikai
gondolkods fny-szimbolikjnak megszilrdulshoz [].33
29 DERRIDA: Essz a nvrl, i. m. 23.
30 MARION: Az erotikus fenomn, i. m. 223.
31 Kzeledni annyi, mint megrinteni a kzelllt a megismers sorn bizonyos tvolsgbl felfogott adottsgokon tl; vagyis annyi, mint a Msik fel kzeledni. LVINAS: Nyelv s kzelsg, i. m. 132.
32 MARION: i. m. 168169.
33 TENGELYI Lszl: Abn mint sorsesemny, Atlantisz, Bp., 1992. 157.

1 21 2

Ezt igazolja az egyik bibliai passzus is, mely szerint a nem-lts vagy homlyos-lts ltllapotban ltezket igyekszik Pl figyelmeztetni az elre-elhatrozott (pre-desztinlt) titkossgra, egyedl Isten eltt s nmaga szmra
fenntartott rtelmezhetsgre: a titok titokban maradsra, a titok titokba visszazuhansra. Ez a figyelmeztets egyben utals arra, hogy a grgk kedvelt
szavval az egynaplk, a Babits Jns knyvben emltett id, a teremts
idejnek sszel flfoghatsga hinyban,34 nem kpesek kellen mrlegelni,
beltni, megrteni az r rks jelenvalltre vonatkoz dntseit. Nem kpesek kell megrtssel fogadni az idben s kvetkezmnyeiben szmukra belthatatlan istentleteket:
Nem szeretnm testvreim, ha nmagatokat blcseknek tartva nem venntek tudomsul azt a titkot, hogy a megkemnyeds Izrel csak egy rszt rte
[]. (Pl Rmabeliekhez, 11: 25)
Ebben a prftai intsben (mely helytelents s fenyegets is egyben) kt
hangslyos elem rhet tetten; az egyik: az nmagatokat blcsnek tartva kifejezs pontosan kifejezi, hogy az emberi blcsessg (belts, flfogs) nem elegend, nem elg fnyes, nem elgg bizonyos ahhoz, hogy nmagban, az isteni
segtsg, tmutats, szellem nlkl kpes volna az rkkval titkokat megretni. Amegrts csak ugrdeszka a megrtett dolog/feladat irnt vllalt ktelessgszer elktelezdshez. Ez utbbihoz szksges kialaktani azt a kpessget,
melyrl Ricur mint a valakinek bnt tulajdonthatsgrl (imputabilit) beszl.35 Vagyis az szhasznlat birtokban s az erklcsi tudat, a jogrend, az isteni
trvnyek ismeretben az embernek olyan lnny kell vlnia, aki kpes cselekedeteirt vllalni a felelssget s ennek okn szmonkrhetv, elszmoltathatv, ms szval bntethetv vlik: s ennek tudatban is van. Lvinas a hv
hangra szemt lestve s alzatosan vlaszol Mzes gesztusban lttatja a
teofnia dicssgnek megrthetetlensgt, a titokzatossal szemben az emberi sz bizonytalankodst s ktelkedst: magt a tamskodst a bizonyossg
34 BABITS Mihly: Jns knyve: s negyven nap, negyven v, vagy ezer-annyi/ az n
szjamban ugyanazt jelenti.
35 Il revient une phnomenologie de lhomme capable d isoler la capacit qui trouve son expression la plus approprie dans l imputabilit RICUR, Paul : Parcours
de la reconnaissance, Trois tudes, d. Gallimard, Paris, 2004. 171.

1 22 2

eltt. Egyetlen kivlasztott mesehs sem kpes elsre s teljes mrtkben megrteni azt a Msvalakitl (lombl, mesebettbl, versbl) kapott tmutatst/
tudst, mellyel megajndkozzk t. Ahs ppoly szemlestve, majd a titkot kutat vakmersgt kvet kudarc utn megsemmislve ll a hozz szl, az t
megfedd, szmonkr eltt, mint Mzes. Az idzett prftai intsben a msik
hangslyos elem, hogy az emberi elme kpes az akr mindenkinek, vagy akr
szemlyesen csak neki kimondott titkokat tudomsul venni, elfogadni, magv tenni, elsajttani anlkl, hogy megbotrnkozna; anlkl, hogy a kls akarattal knyszerteni kellene az elfogads s elsajtts gesztusra, a csodlatra,
mely Kierkegaard szerint nmagunk boldog elvesztse,36 amikor is a szv s llek megnylik a kinyilatkoztatsra: ez a hit aktusa. Ametafizikai hagyomnyban
a titok rzsnek helye: a szv, Assmann tovbbmegy: az rtelem szkhelynek
nevezi.37
Atitok nem csak a ltssal, de a hallssal is lnyegi sszefggsben ll.38 Bizonyos trsasgok, szervezetek a vilg szeme s fle ell rejtekezve tevkenykednek, tagjai hangtalanul, olykor csak jelekkel vagy hrvivk hozta levelek rvn
36 KIERKEGAARD, Sren: Ahallos betegsg, (ford. Rcz Pter), Gncl, Bp., 1993. 101.
37 ASSMANN, Jan: Uralom s dvssg, (ford. Hidas Zoltn), Atlantisz, Bp., 2008. 165.
Starobinski szerint Nem az ember szvben, hanem a kezei kztt torzul el minden.
STAROBINSKI: i. m. 102.
38 Jakab mesje Agondolatlan kirly [AaTh 708 (510) ~590] pldja; amikor a kirlylnyt szabadt hst meglik, hrom kutyja: Vilglt, Vilghall s Fdneheze
tallja meg a holttestt, de a feltmasztsnak a titkt egy kis madr nekli ki: Hiba srtak tk, hrom kutyk, a gazdtokr, mert aztat tbbet soha fl nem tmassztak mind addig az ideig, amg egy olyan madarat nem kaptak, nem fogtak meg,
mind amilyen n vagyak, mert a jobb flembe l-hal f, bal flembe l-hal vz
van. [] Mingyr mondjk a Fdnehezinek, hogy n, mit mond ez a madr. Elveszi
az reg a szemvegit, flteszi a szemire, s nzeget szerteszjjel, s azt mondja a madrknak: Valamilyen hangot hallok, ltni nem ltok, rteni nem rtem, de hallom,
hogy valamilyen beszdfle van itt. Ht lgy szves, ereszkedjl lejjeb, hogy nzzem
meg, hogy ki vagy s mi vagy, adjl segtsget neknk, hogy a gazdnkat meg tudjuk menteni, fl tudjuk mg egyszer tmasztani. [] Asz mondja a madr, hogy:
Odaszllnk, de ht flek, hogy te megfogsz engemet! / De a medve egyltaln nem
akarta rteni, hogy mit beszl a kicsi madr. (NAGYV 283.)

1 23 2

rintkeznek, s iparkodnak nem hagyni nyomot39 maguk utn. Anyomtalansg, mint ltszlagos hiny, persze nem r, inkbb csak valamivel elfedett lt.
Jakab egyik mesjben: Jnas a zrdban [AaTh 931 (756A1725)+ 314]40 a
minden lehetsges bnt elkvet, s igaz, akaratn kvl mg az anyjval vrfertzsbe is kerl Jnasnak, egy erszakos tette utn figyermeke szletik, miutn
bntetskppen idejekorn meghal. Fia, aki mogyorbokorban fogant ezrt a
Mogyors Jnas nevet kapta , iskolba kerl, ahol egy kakasnak, a lthatatlan
fldalatti katonasg egyik tagjnak a segtsgvel (egy csodlatos kukoricaszemet adomnyoz neki, mely elmjt lesti), rendkvli kpessget mutat a tanulsban. Az egyik jjel:
[] hallatta Jnaska minhogyha a padls all valamilyen vkony kis hangot hallott vna, hogy a kis kakaska szlalt vna meg (NAGYV 705.)
, s a bartja elvitte magval az alvilgba, ahol megtekinthette a lthatatlan s
hallhatatlan katonasgot. Ettl fogva Jnas elmaradozik a tanulsban, s amikor szmon krik rajta lustasgt, a tilalom s grete/fogadalma ellenre elrulja a tantnak bartjt, aki visszaveszi tle adomnyt.
Na, hallgass ide, te Mogyors Jnas! Mg egyszer visszaadam neked a kukorict, de jl vigyzz, ne hidd el magadat, s amit lttl, mindeflit, az nem
lam, mert valsg, s nem szabad neked aztat elmondoni. Mert az, amiket
te mindenflt lttl, az neknk huszonnyc v alatt lett oda sszeszedve,
s sszeszerkztetve. Csak n tgedet azr vittelek el, mert nagyon okos gyerek vtl, jszv, hsges, s azr mutattam meg eztet, mert eztet, a mi tit39 Az 1527-ben rott Exemplum mirabile tansga szerint a magyar nyom szra igen
vltozatos jelentseket tallunk: Mikoron jutottak volna meg az svnyre, holott
egymst talltk vala, megllnak, mert tovbb nem hagy nyomotni az vendg,
bulcst akara tle venni Kzpkori magyar rsok, (a ktetet sszelltotta: Mezey
Lszl), Magvet, Bp., 1957. 189. ; [] me nagy kszlettel s sok szmtalan magval eleibe nyomotk (megjelent) az des lelknek kvnsga [] (i. m. 193.) Mikoron azrt ttova jrna gyalog, mint olyan r, brsonyba, bborba ltztetett mint
ki azon napon nyomatott ki mennyegzi hztl, senki ismerje eleibe nem tr, nagyon kezdte rajta bosszankodni. Belnyomotvn rfii vrba, ht mind ms mdon
vagyon szabvn, hogy nem hagyta volna. (i. m. 198.)
40 NAGYV: 691731.

1 24 2

kunkat, nem akrki tudhatja, s nem akrki lthatja. Neked megmutattam,

s hogyha te mnket el fogsz rulni, h gy tudd meg, hogy tbb az letbe
nem fogunk tallkozni, me n elmondtam a mi csszrunknak, hogy te milyen megbzhat gyerek vagy, s akkor engemet lncra, vasra fognak verni,
megbilincselnek. Ha akarad tudni, ht nem vagyok n kakaska, hanem n is
egy rendes katona vagyok, mind amilyeneket te lttl ott lenn a virgoskertben, a parkban, ahol ketten jrtunk. (NAGYV 712713.)
Aztn hogy msodszor is elrulja bartjt s a titkos katonasgot, megint csak
a hallsa rvn vesz tudomst bntette: rulsa kvetkezmnyrl:
Letette Jnas a flit a padlra, ott, ahol szokott lenni a lappancs, ht olyan
szekrzrgseket hallott a padls alatt, nagy vonulsakat, jajgatsokat, meg
srsakat is, lnczrgseket, mindenfle nagy zajt hallott, hogy a flhrtyja majd kihasadt. (NAGYV 714.)
Atitok fenomnjnek teht mindkt ltalunk kijellt vizsglati kre az avatatlanok eltti nem-lts (tns, rejtezs, bvs) s a nem-halls filozfiai antropolgiai rtelmezshez, illetve egyszerre tbb rzkszervet (szem, fl, ujj/
kz, orr) mozgst percepci kritikjhoz vezet el bennnket.41 Tovbbmenve,
magra a ltezsre (a descartes-i sum-ra), a jelenval-lt ltmdjra irnytja a
figyelmnket, amiknt ezt a krdst Ricur is felveti, aki szerint a titok s a hazugsg is a lt s a ltszat dialektikjhoz vezet el bennnket.42 Kivltkppen
is egyrtelm ez, ha a titkot gy rtelmezzk, mint valakinek vagy valamely lteznek a rejtettsgben (ki nem mondottsgban) lv ltt, mely lthatatlansgban (feltratlansgban) s elmondhatatlansgban (lefordthatatlansgban)
elvrja, st egyenesen megkveteli az t elszntan szemllni vgytl, hogy a
ltszatrl, a nem-igaz megnyilvnulsrl, a valaminek/valamiknt ltszdrl

41 MerleauPonty azt rja: Testem olyan ltkszlk, a lts sokflesgnek olyan lelepedett tudsa, mely lehetv teszi a nzpontvltst s biztost arrl, hogy ugyanazt a dolgot ltom most kzelrl, melyet az imnt messzirl lttam. Testem szlelsi
lete az, amely fenntartja s biztostja az szlels kifejthetsgt, pontosthatsgt.
MERLEAUPONTY: i. m. 51.
42 RICUR, Paul: Ahrmas mimzis, U. Vlogatott irodalomelmleti tanulmnyok, (ford. Angyalosi Gergely et al.), Osiris, Bp., 1999. 297.

1 25 2

lerntsa a leplet, s a hamis referencia helyett megmutassa valdi ltt, arcnak

eredeti/lnyegi zenett. Ez pedig csakis az n s a Te kztt megteremtend
klcsnssg viszonyban llhat el: a szeretetben, a felebartsgban, a testvrisgben, a hitvestrsassgban.

2. Atitokkal szembeni viselkeds

(a valaminek valamiknt lttatsa)
Avisszahat igei alak: az elrejteni magt s a megmutatni magt nagyon pontosan utal arra, hogy mindkt tevkenysg felttelezi a szabad akarattal rendelkez szemlyt, aki egyfell reflexv viszonyban ll a vilggal, msfell az ltala
kifejtett tevkenysg (odaforduls, szolglat stb.) rvn folyamatos trsas kapcsolatot tart fenn a Msikkal s/vagy msokkal. Br az igei szemllet azt mutatja, hogy elvlik, eltvolodik, elszigeteldik egymstl a ktfle lt: a maszk mg
bv lt s az adomnyozott ltben megmutatkoz jelenvallt. m a sztvls
ellenre mgis szorosan sszerendezdik a ktfle ltmd az n s- nttelezsben (illetve a Msikkal klcsnssgben), hiszen mindkt ltmd mint valaki szmra lthat vagy lthatatlan ltknt adott, s ilyetn mdon alakul a rla
kialakul tudat s -magasgnak (ipsit) tudata is.43 Erre a rla kialakul s
az ipszeitst kpez tudatra Jakabnl adekvt lerst tallunk. Brug mesjnek kirlyfija fehr galambknt tnik fl, a neki rendeltre val rtallsa utn
elveszti rendkvli kpessgeit:
Ht nem rvnyes az mr semmit. Akkor vt rvnyes, mikor n adtam neked. Mr nincsen annak [madrtollnak] semmi hatsa, nincsen annak semmi ereje. Mert csak addig vt az er benne, amg n neked tadtam s amg
azalatt a varzsszellem alatt vtam, hogy galambb vtam vtaztatva. De
mr ennek az ereje is lejrt. (NAGYV 251.)
Ugyanakkor a gonosz llek ksrtsei all felszabadtand felesg, adott pillanatban maga is rendkvli kpessgrl, illetve a gonosz szellem ltali megrintettsge ellenre is a jsggal val kapcsolatrl tesz tanbizonysgot:

43 MARION: La traduction, In: U. tant don, i. m. 97102.

1 26 2

 Na, hallgass ide, kedves frjem! Mr kt ccaka rsget tett: most kvetkezik a harmadik ccaka. Te menjl be mma a vrasba, ide s meg ide, ebbe
a zsidzletbe. [] adak n neked egy paprt, amit odaadjl a zsidnak. s
nzd meg, krjl tlle ruhkat, nzd ott a szveteket meg, de egyikbl se vsrajj. Mond meg a zsidnak, hogy abbl a ruhbl adjan neked, amelyik a
pult al van tve. (NAGYV 255.)
A Msik szmra val lthatatlansg, mint valamifle titokzatos elrejtettsg (elvarzsoltsg), szndkos elrejtzs a hozzm kzeled szemlldse ell,
megoldsra vr rejtlyknt, kivltkppen is nyelvi akadlyknt tnik fl az
szmra. Althatatlanban, a sttsgben val tapogatzs bizonytalansga, a
rejtzkd nmasga vagy rejtjeles beszde, srget feladatknt hrul re: arct
ki kell emelni a sttsgbl, hogy a Lvinas-i rtelemben beszlni tudjon. Jakab
meseszvetben kiderl a sttsgbl szabaduls titka:
gyse fog itt hd lenni addig az ideig, amg a kirly maga hram ccaka
meg nem fogja a felesgit rizni, hogy el ne aludjk. Addig soha az letjin keresztl nem tud a tengerre tbb tszllni, s nem tud a kastlyban meg az
orszgban uralkodni. (NAGYV 253)
ABrug c. mesben erre az risok kztt a legfiatalabbik ltal kifecsegett
titokra (ez a fecsegs az elbizakodottsg, a kanti gg, a derridai nhittsg,44
rendthetetlensg fenomnjt jelenti meg), s a titokfejts egyedl lehetsges
mdjt elmond diskurzusra hivatkozva mondja el a kirlyn:
Na, kedves frjem! Vigyzzl, hogyha akarod, hogy egytt tudjunk lni,
ne prblj elaludni ezen az ccaka, mert r fogsz fizetni a btra. (NAGY
V 254.)45

44 Afiatal ris nhittsge rszben a tbbiek biztostotta er s tudsflnyben, rszben abban a hitben gykerezik, hogy azt hiszi: tud mindent, s srthetetlen mindentudsa, kikezdhetetlen s felfejthetetlen beszde.
45 Afelesg intsnek az rtelme: r fogsz fizetni a btra, szintn az nhittsg veszlyeire figyelmeztetsben rhet tetten, az ints a mltra s a jvre egyarnt utal,
ekknt a tapasztalatot s a lehetsges (mint eladdig nem tapasztalt) elgondolst is
rinti.

1 27 2

Atovbbiakban vegyk sorra a titokkal s a titokkpzssel szembeni viselkedsi formkat, melyek a lehet legszorosabb viszonyban llnak a titok fenomnjvel! Ezek kzl elsknt a tiltssal s a kvncsisggal (a titkolni szndkolt
lehetsges esemny, a lts/rzkels ell elzrni hajtott dolog elfedsre, msfell ezek felfejtsre, kimondsra, megrtsre val szndkkal) kell szmot
vetnnk. Atitok mibenltrl (aminek interpretlsa a nehz feladat megoldsnak a kulcsa s a hs/hsk ltmdvltsnak az elfelttele), elszrre fogalma sincs a mesehsnek. Sem a tuds forrstl rkez tilts (mely a re leselked
veszlyrl, a csoda megrthetetlensgrl, a feladatmegolds kzben knlkoz
eljrsok korltozsrl szl46), sem az szhasznlat mozgstsnak s fkuszlsnak mdja nem ismeretes szmra. Atuds/titokforrs rszrl elhangz
tilts kln-kln vagy egyszerre is rintheti a ltst vagy a hallst,47 pontosan azt a kt rzkszervet, melyet a legknnyebben lehet megtveszteni, szirnnekkel rszedni. Atilts htterben meghzd titok s a benne fenyeget
veszly feltrsnak tadsa, s a feladatmegolds msok elli elhallgatsa a me46 Na, hallgassl ide, te lny! B van szerezve az lelmed, hvd ssze ezeket a mestereket, s ksztsl nekijek egy-egy telt, ennivalt. De gy kszitsed azt, hogy legyen
m tve belje az, amire szksgk van nekijek, hogy tbbet ezek ne beszjjenek sokat, amg a fdnek a kereksge fennll. Mindjrt kapcsolt a lny az alkalman, megrtette, mind meg kell ezeket a mestereket tetni, meg kell mrgezni, hogy annak
idejn, mikor hazakerl Brug, ne tudjk elrulni t, hogy mit mvelt , s hova, merre lett el. (NAGYV 243.)
47 Nzz ide, des gazdm! Most mik megindulunk az tan menni elre. De jl vedd
figyelembe, akrmit fogsz ltni az tan, akrmit tallsz, te az n szmat meg ne hzd
a kantrral. Mert hogyha fogod hzni az n szmat a kantrral, azt is vedd tudamsul, hogy rossz fog lenni a vge. (Atizenkt testvr NAGYV 429.) Na, de
nem messze szaladatt a ttl, szrevettk a tndrek, hogy valaki viszi a ruhjukat,
olyan szpen krtk a legnt szp szavakkal, hzelegtek nekije, hogy csak egy pillanatra lljan meg s nzzen vissza, mert nem fogja megbnni, ha megfordul s visszanz. De a legny mg csak szaladatt, de ht ezek olyan szpen krtk s krleltk,
mr nem mertek a tndrek a tbl se kimenni, mert csak dresszbe vtak, de ahogy
lttk, hogy a legn van att, killtak mind a hrman, kimentek a tbul a t partjra,
s gy krleltk srva a legnyt, hogy csak egy pillanatra nzzen vissza a legny, hogy
br nzzk meg szembl, hogy milyen gynyr szpsges szp legny . (ATkvros) (NAGYV 325.)

1 28 2

sehst olyan tbblet-tudshoz juttatja, amelynek birtokban kpess vlik egzisztencija megvltoztatsra, a Msik alteritsnak s az -sg veszlyforrsnak
megszntetsre.
Te menj szpen, ne lss engemet! gy vedd tudamsul, hogy be fog vinni
tged a frjed egy fekete vrasban. De jl figyeld te meg, amit mondak n neked, s ne felejtkezzl meg te arrul, amit mondtam. Fog adni neked frjed.,
be fog zrni a fekete vrba egy szobbo, fog adni neked a frjed enni hrom
ksfejet, de ne prbld megenni, hanem add oda a macsknak, hadd egye
meg a macska, hogy hzzan tlle! Atbbi aztn a te gondod lesz, majd meg
fogod ltni, hogy mi trtnik. Majd annak idejn valaha mg tallkozunk,
s n foglak tged tovbb utasittani. Egyelre menjl, hogy ne gondoljan valamit a frjed. (NAGYV 241.) ,
mondja a fehr galamb a Brug ltal elrabolt lnynak, aki a gonosz ksrtse all kell felszabadtania, hogy meglhesse vele a lakodalmt.
Amikor azt mondjuk, hogy a mesehs (olykor valaki ms) egy cselekedetet
titokban vgrehajt, akkor egszen pontosan csak azt lltjuk, hogy a rajta kvl llk szmra ltezik elrejtettsgben az esemny s annak kvetkezmnye.
Arra nzvst viszont hallgatunk, hogy a titokforrs, aki a tilts48 rvn elszigetelni hajtotta a hst a titokzatostl, annak mgiscsak van apriori tudsa a titokban vgrehajtott (teht elrejtett, s azltal, hogy befejezett, egyben mltt

48 Arontsokat, mivel trvnysrtk: tiltjk s bntetik. Amesben a tuds/titok birtoklja a ronts, a ront erk ltal vgzett mgia ellen vdelmezi a hst. Atilts
formlis mdon jelzi a mgikus s a vallsi rtus antagonizmust. pp a tilts teszi
a rontst mgikuss, hiszen vannak olyan vallsi rtusok, amelyek szintn ront jellegek, mint pldul a devotio egyes esetei, a vros ellensgeinek, a srgyalzknak
vagy az eskszegknek a szidalmazsa, vgl mindazok a halotti rtusok, amelyek
szentestik a ritulis tiltsokat. Mg azt is mondhatjuk, hogy vannak rontsok, amelyek azok szmra minslnek rontsnak, akik tartanak tlk. Atilts a hatr, amely
fel a mgia egsze tart. MAUSS, MarcelHUBERT, Henri: Amgia ltalnos elmletnek vzlata, In: MAUSS, Marcel: Szociolgia s antropolgia, (ford. Vargyas
Gbor), Osiris, Bp., 2000. 62.

1 29 2

is avatott/mondott) trtnetrl. Kivl pldt tallunk erre Jakab Istvn ATkvros c. mesjben.49
Amesben50 vgs soron a hs hozza meg a hatrozatot a sorsbetltst illeten, de ezt megelzi a fenyeget veszlytl val tilts s a tiltstl elmaradhatatlan
tancs (mint a hatrozathozatal eltti mrlegelsre ints s a konfliktus megoldsra irnyul blcsessg), amely mindig msvalakitl (a tuds forrstl, a segtlnytl) rkezik, fggetlenl attl, hogy valsgosan is lthatv vlik, avagy
csak lomszer lnynek tnik.51 Atancs retorikai alakzata szinte mindig a sza49 Na, mondjad, fiam, mr shajtozol, s mr vagy gy elkeseredve? Ltt valamit, fj
valamid, beteg vagy?
Asz mondja a legny:
Nem.
De gondolkozatt, a legny, mg restelte is magt, a fogadatt apjnak hogy elmondja, hogy mit lttat. De ht az sz regember nagyon jl tudta, mert kldte abba az
irnyba, s nem azr kdte abba az irnyba, hogy a fia meg ne lssa.
H mgis, fiam, mit lttl, s mr vagy olyan szomor, vagy megijedtl valamitl
a vadszaton?
Asz mondja, hogy:
Egyltaln nem ijedtem meg semmit.
s elmondta, hogy milyen gynyr szp fehr hrom hattyt ltatt, s milyen gynyr szp hrom tndr lett a hrom fehr hattybl. Asz mondja az sz regember nekije:
Na, jl van, azakr vagy te gy elkeseredve, gy elgondolkozva?
Ht azakr vagyak n biza, regapm.
Ht igaz, fiam asz mondja , mr lttam, tudam, hogy itt vna az idd, neked is
nslni kne, de ht mg egy kicsit mg vrnad kell, mg trelem kell legyen benned, s meg kell vrd az dt. (NAGYV 324.)
50 Ellenttben a mtosszal, melynek hse folyton azt mrlegeli elzetesen, hogy mit fog
tenni s milyen hatrozatokat hoz, mieltt cselekedne. RICUR: Le fonds grec: l
agir et son agent, In: U. Parcours de la reconnaissance, d. Gallimard, Paris, 2004.
122.
51 Jakab Abtor kirlylegny : Mind csak tovbb gondolkazatt, akkor mr nem az
ton gondolkazatt, se nem az tra gondalt, hanem azan gondolkazatt, hogy vajon
tnyleg valsgban ltta az regasszanyt, s mondta nekije, vagy csakhogy el vt gondolkazva, lmba ltta. Ht mindegy az, gondolta magba, lom vagy nem, de ht

1 30 2

baduls narratvjt adja a hs el s elnk; hogy az tmutats elemei/rszletei

jobban megrthetk legyenek, az egymst kvet tagmondatok egyrtelmen
elklnlnek egymstl, mg ha ismtldik, vissza-vissza is tr bennk egy-kt
utasts, amely az emlkezsbe vsst s a felidzst segtik:
Na, hallgass ide, szivem! Megmosakodsz a forrsban, hamarbb vizet
iszal, megmosakadsz, megfordulsz a forrstl jobb fel. Megltsz ott egy
nagy ft, reg tlgyft. Az reg tlgyfnak a tvibe tallsz egy zd dit, azt a
zd dit ktfel nyitad, kapsz benne egy aranytrlkzt, a dihjba. Adihjat visszateszed az eredeti helyre, oda, ahonnan flvetted. Azutn aztn
majd tallkozunk, s tovbb fogunk beszlni. (NAGYV 245.)
mde ltnunk kell, hogy a hs a tilts s a tancs megtartsrl vagy megszegsrl gy dnt, hogy valjban nincs tudatban sem a titok mibenltnek,
sem annak, hogy megfontolatlan vagy ppen a tancsot megtart cselekedete
miknt s mily mrtkben befolysolja, vltoztatja meg a jvbeni sorst. Dntsknyszerben van, annak ellenre is, hogy a helyes dnts kpessgnek nincs
a birtokban, a Msik, a tancsad szavra, szavahihetsgre bzza magt. Ez
az letszituci az, amikor a mesben a hs a keresztthoz rkezik, oda, ahol
az eltte nyl kitaposatlan utak kzl vlasztania kell. Joggal krdezhetjk
Derridval egytt:
De a ki nem taposott t nem a dnts felttele-e egyttal, vagy az esemny, mely az t megnyitsbl ll, az thaladsbl, teht a tlhaladsbl,
az apria meghaladsbl?52
Atilts: ami egyben a titokkpzs egy jl meghatrozott nyelvi formja (volt
mr ilyen, hidd el nekem, s aki megszegte: prul jrt), rszben arra szolgl,
hogy a hs beletkzzn egy olyan rejtjelezett feladvnyba, amely arra knyszerti, hogy elzetesen megismerje sajt egzisztenciakaraktert, felmrje szemlyes
gy fog tenni, prbt tesz, hogy mit mondatt az regasszany, nzze meg, hogy tnyleg lesz-e belle vagy se. (NAGYV 291.) [] mert nem lam ez, hanem ez valsg, amit n neked elmutattam, s jl vigyzzl, tartsd figyelembe, amit n mondok
neked, ne prbld elrulni soha senkinek, ne prbld elmondani aztat, amit te itten
lttl, s amit tudsz. (NAGYV 709.)
52 DERRIDA: Essz a nvrl, i. m. 73.

1 31 2

kpessgeit, feltrja azokat a cselekvsi mdokat s ltlehetsg-feltteleket, melyek a felelssgvllalsnak s Msikhoz viszonyulsnak felismerst segtik: s
mindennek fggvnyben kpes legyen dnteni. Rszben pedig gy funkcionl a
tilts, mint a cselekmnyszvsben elrejtett csapda (az eszmletet delejez hvs
a sttsgbe), melybe a hs annak ellenre is belestl, hogy elzetesen valakitl
hrt kapott a ltezsrl; igaz a hrnk ltali tilts-narratvum olyan kdolt zenet, melynek megfejtkdjt s sajt ltre vonatkoztathatsgt is neki kellene
megtallnia: meg is tallja, de tbbnyire s ez a kdfejts termszethez tartozik ksn, nem az els nekifutsra. Atilts valjban a lehetetlenre figyelmeztets, mgis felknlja a nehz feladatra, a lehetetlen rletn thaladsra val
lehetsget a mesehsnek, aki a sors/Isten kegyeltje.
Oda menni, ahov menni lehetsges, ez nem volna elmozduls vagy dnts,
csak egy program feleltlen lefuttatsa. Az egyetlen lehetsges dnts az eldnthetetlen s a lehetetlen rletn t halad: oda menni, ahov (wo, Ort,
Wort) menni lehetetlen.53
De brmikor is tnjk fl a meseszvs sorn egy tilts, mint a hsnek cmzett megszlts s felhvs, a r vonatkoz felelet mindig a tiltst megkrdjelez kvncsisg, az ellenkezs diszkurzv formjban rhet tetten: mi volna, ha
mskpp cselekednk?, mi trtnik, ha a tanccsal szemben ppen az ellenkezjt tennm?54 Akvncsisg fenomnjt Heidegger ekknt rja le:
Aszabadd vlt kvncsisg azonban a ltsrl s nem a ltott megrtsrl gondoskodik, azaz ahelyett, hogy a ltotthoz viszonyul ltre tenne szert,
csak nz. [] nem a szemll idzs plst keresi, hanem a nyugtalans53 Uo. 79. Akeresztny teolgiban a megrts egyben megtrst jelent, a mi szempontunkbl aktualizlva a kijelentst: a tilts vgs soron (sokadik megszegs utni)
val betartsa, a helyes interpretci s ltlehetsg-vlaszts, az rletesnek tn
bevllalsa s a fizikai ern felli teljests teszi lehetv a mesehsnek a sorsbetltst.
54 Na, hallgass ide, kedves frjem! Menjl nyugodtan el, mert hazajn az uram, a srkny estre, s n meg fogom nekije mondani, kne nekem, valamilyen kszerre
volna szksgem. s akkor ugynaazakat az kszereket fogom vsrolni tlled, amelyikeket te vettl a srknytl. Hadd lssuk, hogy mit fog mondani! (NAGYV
249.)

1 32 2

got s izgalmat, amelyet a mindig j, valamint az tjba kerl vltakozsa vlt ki.55
Akvncsisg teht nem az jonnan ltott dolog/ltez trelmes, elfogulatlan
szemllsre s megrtett ttelre irnyul; a szemll a hozz val viszonyulsban nem akarja mindenron megismerni sem nmagt, sem a ltsa ltal trgyiastott dolgot vagy Msikat, nem akarja a kritikja trgyv tennie, mert nem
hajt hosszasan elidzni magval a megrtssel s a magyarzattal.56 Elgg el
nem tlhet mdon beri a felsznes ltvnnyal, a pillanatnyi idvel (a Bache
lard-i rtelmezsben: az id mint magnyos pillanat nyilvnul meg, mint a magnyossg tudata57); s nem utols sorban megelgszik a gykrtelen ltezssel: a
cltalan jvs-menssel. Heidegger ezrt is adja meg a kvncsisg fenomnjnek
hrom jellemvonst ekknt: nem-idzs, sztszrds s seholsemtartzkods. Aheideggeri kvncsisgot58 btran sszehozhatjuk a kierkegaard-i vagy
a Bachelard-i rtelemben vett pillanattal,59 ami tovbb rnyalja a temporlis
rtelemben vett nem-idzst, a trelmesen s koncentrltan tprengs elvetst (a sztszrdst), s a csak szempillantsra mltatott jelensgen mihamarabbi tllps s msutt felsznesen keresgls aktust: ami a meseszvetben a
55 HEIDEGGER, Martin: Lt s id, (ford. Vajda Mihly et al.) Gondolat, Bp., 1989. 322.
Akvncsival ksrtetiesen rokonlleknek tnik a Kosseleck-fle prophte philosophe, akit msknt rajongnak is nevez. KOSSELECK, Reinhart: Elmlt id.
Atrtneti idk szemantikja, (ford. Hidas Zoltn, Szab Mrton), Atlantisz, Bp.,
2003. 37.
56 Amagyarzat kifejezs a Ricur-i rtelemben rtend: Ricur nem pusztn az
esemnyek okainak felkutatst rti, hanem a cselekvsek indtkainak feltrst is.
TENGELYI Lszl: Trtnelmi tapasztalat s trtnelemkutats Ricur felfogsban, In: Sz s bet szerint a vilg, i. m. 210.
57 [] le temps se prsente comme linstant solitaire, comme la conscience d une solitude. BACHELARD, Gaston: L intuition de l instant, d. Gonthier, Paris, 1979. 13.
58 BDIS Zoltn: Acsald titka c. tanulmnyban vizsglja jszeren a titok s a kvncsisg, a titok s tilts, a kimonds s nv sszefggseit Heidegger alapjn. Tiszatj, 2013/10. oktber, 7483.
59 Apillanat maga a magnyossg ( L instant c est dj la solitude. ), s amely egyszerre kt semmisg (nant) kztt ltezik : az id minden bizonnyal kpes jjszletni, de elbb meg kell halnia. Ua. 13.

1 33 2

feladatmegolds elutastst vagy a helytelen interpretci miatti eltvesztst

idzi el. Atveszts, mint a helybenjrs, a seholsemtartzkods rme tnik
fl a hs szmra, hiszen csak tlpett egy hatrt, de mint kiderl, az tlps
nem elre, jval inkbb htralps volt: ilyenkor gyakorta felmszik egy fa tetejre, nmagba hzdik, amg a helyes utat ki nem tallja, vagy nem vezetik r.
Akvncsisggal egytt rdemes vizsglni egy msik, vele szorosan sszefgg viselkedsformt, mgpedig a tamskodst.60 Atamskod lny azt a Msikat, aki a bizonyossg, a titok s a pldzat jelentsteltettsgnek s rtelmnek
birtokban van, olyanknt iparkodik feltntetni nmaga s msok eltt, mintha a tansgtv nem az volna, mint akinek mutatja magt, mint akinek mondja/hirdeti magt, hanem mintha msvalaki nevben beszlne, s nem ott volna,
ahol van, ahol lennie kellene, hanem a cltalansg vagy zavaros szlels okn eltvelyedett, a jtl s a kzssgtl eltvolodott.
Atamskod elbb ktelkedik a kinyilatkoztats, a prfcia, a felmutatott jelek bizonyossgban, majd hogy a tant szavai s jelei ltal felknlt interpretcival szembeni hitetlenkedse miatti kritikt, feddst eloszlassa, kvncsisgot
mmelve fordul a ltsa szmra titokzatoshoz, s a szemt helyettest ujjval
igyekszik letapogatni, ami szmra homlyba vsz.

60 Jakab Aszegny ember meg a hall (AaTh, BN 330) c. mesjben a Krisztus Urunktl s Szent Ptertl olyan ajndkot kr a szegny ember, hogy minden lyukkal
tudjan beszlni, s adjanak egy olyan pnztrct, amelyikbl a pnz sohase nem fogy
ki, meg adjanak egy alyan tarisnyt nekije, hogy akrmit, mennyit belrak, hogy soha
meg ne tejen a tarisnyja. Na, jl van, amikor eztet megmondta, mingyr meg is
adtk neki. Aval bcsut vettek tlle, s elmentek az tasak. Naht, gazdlkadatt a
szegny ember, mr mingyr vge lett a szegnsgnek, mert pnze annyi vt, minl
tbbet kivett a pnztrcbl, annl tbb vt bennemaradva. De mingyr, ahogy elmentek, mingyr ki kezdte prblni magt, hogy tnleg, sikerl-e nekije vagy se. Elmegy ki az udvarra.
Na, mondjad, te lyuk, hnyfle egr jrt benned?
Mingyr megszlal a lyuk:
Ht, jrt nbennem mindenfle fajta egr, de ha akar, mg maga is belm bjhat Bujjan a fene asz mondja a szegny ember , nem bujak n semmit. (NAGY
V 312.)

1 34 2

Az evidencit kvetel Tamst a feltmadt Jzus arra inti, hogy Boldogok,

akik nem ltnak s hisznek. (kiemels BP) 61
E kinyilatkoztats szinte rendre elfordul azokban a meskben, amikor a hs
lmban vagy vakknt megpihenve egy erdei fa tvben, sorsmadarak diskurzust (jvendmondst, tlett) hallja, s az ltaluk elmondottat, mint hasznlati utastst foganatostja tetteiben. Ahs a hihetetlennel, a hihetetlennek
tn tanccsal szemben befogad magatartst vesz fl, mivel Derrida szerint:
Atansgttel rendje maga tanskodik a csodsrl, a hihetetlen hihetrl:
arrl, amit mindenkppen hinni kell, akr hihet, akr nem.62
Ahssel ellenttben, testvre vagy testvrei nem igyekszenek az elbk ll
regasszony vagy regember szavt meghallani, seglykrelmt felszltsknt rteni, grett el-hinni, pp ellenkezleg, gyans ellensgknt vagy bosszant hazugsgokat mond lnyknt kezelik. Ltnunk kell, hogy amit Jzus
s a mesebeli sorsmadarak is a tamskodk figyelmbe vonni akarnak, az nem
ms, minthogy: a bn az akaratban van s nem a tudsban;63 vagyis a hinni-nem-akarsban, ami korltozza, kirekeszti az sz mkdst.
Atamskods, a hitetlenkeds, a hit-visszautasts aktusn is tlmutat az ruls fenomnje; az, aki egy konkrt letszituciban a Msiknak adott szavt, fogadalmt, eskjt megszegi, aki a trvny s benne foglalt ernyfogalom ellen
tudatosan vtkezik: az rul. Tettvel nemcsak nmagt zrja ki a kzssgbl,
de egy idre lehetetlenn is teszi a jsg s ms ernyek rvnyeslst a kzssgben. Az ruls fenomnjt vizsglva rja MacIntyre, hogy:
Arra is szksg lenne azonban, hogy bizonyos cselekedeteket olyan mrtk
krokozsknt hatrozzanak meg, amelyek oly mdon romboljk le a kzssgi ktelkeket, hogy bizonyos vonatkozsban s legalbbis bizonyos ideig
lehetetlenn vlik a j megvalstsa vagy elrse. Az ilyen vtkekre jelleg-

61 FABINYI Tibor: Akeresztny hermeneutika 7. http://nyitottegyetem.phil-inst.hu/

teol/fabinyi.html, 2014. 01. 02.
62 DERRIDA: Amsik egynyelvsge, i. m. 35.
63 KIERKEGAARD: i. m. 111.

1 35 2

zetesen az rtatlan letek kioltsa, a lops, az eskszegs s az ruls lenne a plda.64

Ha s amikor Kierkegaard azt mondja, hogy a bn az tudatlansg, az ruls
kapcsn alapjaiban kell mdostanunk a kijelentsen, mivelhogy aki rt, rtani
akar a Msiknak, az pontosan tudatban van az elkvetett bne/vtke slyossgnak s a kzssgre hrul krtkonysgnak.65 Rla nem mondhat el, hogy
nem ismeri a trvnybe foglalt jt, ernyest. pp ellenkezleg, a kzssgben elfogadott ernyfogalom ismerete (tudsa, kvetse) teszi lehetv szmra, hogy
az ernnyel ellenttes magatartsnak: a szndkos rtani akarsnak, a gonosz
szolglatnak a hve legyen.66 Csak az kpes rtani, aki kpes flfogni az ernyfogalom krbe tartoz ernyek, viselkedsformk jelentsgt s kvetkezmnyeit. Az rt s rt fogalmi prhuzam pontosan rvilgt arra, hogy az ember
hasznlni kpes az tlkpessgt, kpes megrteni, sszel flfogni, hogy mely
cselekedete van msvalaki, a kzssg szmra rtalmas hatssal, ezrt eldnti,
hogy tettvel (vagy az elmulasztott tettvel) a jt vagy a gonoszt szolglja. Nem
vletlen, hogy a magyar kzmonds: vallj sznt! rendre elfordul a mesben, a
hs s ellenfele prviadal idejn a teremts kt szne: a piros s- a kklng kztt
vlasztva mutatja meg egzisztenciakaraktert.
64 MACINTYRE, Alasdair: Az erny nyomban, (ford. Brn Kaszs va), Osiris, Bp.,
1999. 206.
65 AJnas a zrdban c. mesben Jnas hisgbl, nzsgbl, nvdelembl rulja el titkt. s rulsval msoknak szenvedst okoz: Na, hallgassl ide, Jnas! Mr
mindegy, ez mr megtrtnt, lsd, n mr szenvedek rette, s gy fogsz szenvedni
te is az letedbe. Hogyha te ezt a titkat nem adtad vna t, nem rultl vna el bennnket, ht vedd tudamsul, hogy a vgin mg kirly is lehetett vna bellled. Na de
gy, amivel hogy te elrultad a titkat, ht nem tudam, hogy mi fog kerekedni, mindenfle a te viselkedsedbl fog kitelni. (NAGYV 714.) Lvinas beszl a gylletrl ekknt: Nem mindig kvnja a msik hallt []. Agyll olyan szenvedst
igyekszik okozni, amelyrl a gyllt lt tansgot tesz. Szenvedst okozni nem annyit tesz, mint a msikat a trgy rangjra reduklni, hanem, ellenkezleg, ggsen
megtartani a szubjektivitsban. LVINAS: Az arc s a kls, In: U. Teljessg s
Vgtelen, i. m. 203
66 Amagyar nyelvben az erny/arny, rtk/rtalom fogalomprok a lehet legszorosabb sszefggsben llnak egymssal az r-/r- sztbl eredeztets okn.

1 36 2

Nmileg ms az ruls megtlse abban az esetben, amikor a segtlny

el-rulja a hsnek a titkot. Tagadhatatlan tny, hogy ebben az esetben is ruls trtnik, mgpedig valamely titkos trsasg kzsen birtokolt tudsnak s
ebbl a kohzit s identitst biztost tudsbl msokat akarattal kizr szndknak a megsrtsrl beszlhetnk. Csakhogy ekkor nem a kzssg, a kzssgi ktelk, a trvnyben rgztett ernyfogalom ellen trtnik a titoksrts,
pp ellenkezleg: a hs s rajta keresztl a kzssg javra, az rdekeit szem eltt
tartva szolgl az ruls, mint a j diadalra juttatsnak, a jra vls megteremtsnek a lehetsge. Amesenarratvban elhangz elrulom neked a titkot
fordulat, egyfell rvilgt a tudsforrs egzisztenciakarakterre s szndkra,67
msfell dnt fordulatot hoz a meseszvsben, az ruls, mint kt jelenlv kztt zajl diskurzus, mint az letszitucit megrt magatartsra sztnzs, a
tvesztst, a helybenjrst kilendti holtpontjrl, segt a tancs realizlsban.
Akvncsisg fenomnje kapcsn a titokkal s titokzatossggal szembeni magatarts egy kvetkez formjt: a trelem68 s trelmetlensg pros fenomnjt
is grcs al kell vonnunk. Amagamat feltrs egytt jr egy a msiknak adott
sz betartsval, illetve a Msik megtartom gretnek fogadsval/elvrsval,69 mg akkor is, ha nem tudom (nem tudja a mesehs), hogy amit egyknnyen grek, az tudtomon kvl is hamarosan ltezv vlhat, s a rajtam ksbb
szmon krt gret sorsom alapvet megvltozshoz vezet. Amesehsnek szorult helyzetben azonnal el kell teremtenie valamit, azonnal vgre kell hajtania
egy cselekedetet, s az t megksrt lnynek habozs nlkl, a trelmes megfon67 Az elbbi nem felttlenl az ernyes kategriba tartozik, az utbbi viszont az arisztotelszi cselekvs szempontjbl megtlhet.
68 [] trelmesnek lenni annyit jelent, mint kszen llni a vrakozsra mindaddig,
amg be nem teljesl az let grete. MACINTYRE: i. m. 314.
69 ABrug c. mesben a zsras bunds ember sok ajndkot vsrol a szegny parasztnak, aki mg restellte is magt, mert tisztessges, becsletes, szegnyebb sor
gazdlkod ember vt. [] tkzben megkrdi a zsras bunds ember tlle: Na,
hallgassl ide, te j ember! Van neked egy lnyad? / Igen, van nekem./ Na, hallgass ide! n a napakba majd fel foglak keresni tgedet, hadd lssam meg a te hztjadat s ha majd akarad, megeggyeznk! Ht add nekem a lnyadat felesgl! / Jl
van asz mondja az ember. Ht neked adam n tiszta szivessen, mr ne adnm?!
Lttam, hogy nagy gazda ember vagy. (NAGYV 239.)

1 37 2

tols hjn gretet tesz, vagyis kiszolgltatja magt egy kls, erszakos s rt
lnynek, csbt beszlynek, s e tettvel, illetve tragikus kvetkezmnyvel (elveszti gyermekt, eladja az rdgnek a lnyt) csak ksbb, utlagosan szembesl. Mskor a titok feltrsa irnti trelmetlensgben egy mesehsre rtr az
elapaszthatatlan kvncsisg, amelyet csak fokoz a httrben munklkod nzsg s birtoklsvgy, azt sem bnja, hogy kvncsisga s trelmetlensge akr a
titok-tudjnak (frjnek) a vesztt is okozhatja.70

3. Avak jvendls s gret

Eljtt az id, hogy feltegyk a krdst: voltakppen kit (s mit) vd s kinek
(s minek) rt a titok lte? Atitok fenomnjben implicit mdon benne rejtezik a vdelem s az rtani akars, miknt az gret s ajndkozs fenomnje is.
Ahsnek titokbl s a titokzatosbl fakad veszllyel szembeni vdelemrl
mindig a tuds forrsa gondoskodik, mivel a ftyollal fedett, az idegenknt, illetve flelmetesknt mutatkoz titokzatos eleve rtalmas, olykor letveszlyesen
fenyeget az t felfedni, a rejtelmeibe behatolni szndkoz szmra. Az a nyelv,
az a diskurzus, amin a titokkal/titokzatossal szembeni ktelez viselkedst elrja a tud a prtfogoltja szmra, nmagban is varzseszkzknt mkdik.71
70 Lsd az llatok nyelvt rt juhsz mest, melyben megtiltjk a hsnek, hogy elrulja a titkt! (AaTh 670).
71 Na, nzzl ide, fiam, n rajzolok a prba, rok sok kocsit, sok lovat, marht, krt,
gynyr szp palott, rajzalak ide, zenszeket, szobalnyokat, szakcsnkat, mindenflt.
Asz mondja a gyerek neki:
Ht mit r aval, regapm, hogy maga rajzol?
Ht megltod, fiam, csak nzed, hogy mit csinlak n, majd annak idejn, ha szkslges lesz, te is csak gy rajzoljl s rjl a porba, hogyha valamilyen kivnsgad lesz,
vagy valamit akarsz elrni.
Jl megfigyelte a gyerek, hogy mit csinl az reg, s akkor azt mondta az reg neki:
Na, ltad-e, fiam, hogy mit csinltam n?
Igen az mondja , regapm!
Na hal lm, prbld te is, tudsz-e ilyesmiket csinlni, vagy tudsz-e gy rajzolni,
ahogy n rajzolok!

1 38 2

Ricur jegyzi meg a homroszi tragikus hsk kapcsn, hogy sohasem sznnek
meg tetteikrl beszlni, s Austinra hivatkozva lltja, hogy a beszd nem ms,
mint a dolgok ltrehozsa szavak ltal.72 m a titokzatossal (a mgtte rejtez
rt ervel) val kzdelem sorn brhnyszor is vt a hs a nyelvi jelrendszer s
a diskurzusban meghatrozott grammatikai szablyok ellen, buksra van tlve: enged a nyelv/szirnnek csbtsnak. Amesehs buksnak, egszen pontosan sajt rzelmei s vgyai ldozatul essnek kt lehetsge van MacIntyre
rtelmezsben: (1) ha kptelen rendezni rzelmeit s vgyait, (2) s a mi szempontunkbl ez a fontosabb ha nem rendelkezik azzal a kpessggel, melynek
segtsgvel ellenrzse alatt tarthatja azokat a vgyait, amelyek nem arra irnyulnak, ami az adott helyzetben a javt szolglnk.73 Viszont, amint ragaszkodik az eredetileg elrt szablyokhoz, betartja a nyelv rendjt, rtalmatlantja
mind a titok ront/rt hatst, mind a titok fenntartsban rszvev lnyek varzsszavnak rendkvli erejt: a csbt nyelv, a szirnnek hatstalann, mg
pontosabban hallhatatlann vlik.
Atitok fenomnjt a haland s bns ember rtelme ell elrejtett, Isten titkos blcsessgvel (Pl 1. Kor. 2: 7), illetve a mesehs sorst valamilyen mdon
rint jvendlssel (elreltssal, elbbre-vtellel, mrlegelssel, projekcival)
s grettel hozhatjuk lnyegi kapcsolatba. m Lvinas felhvja a figyelmnket
arra a paradoxonra, hogy:
Ajslatok ktsznsge: ppen azokban a szavakban lakozik a legnagyobb
klncsg, amelyek a blcsessg lettemnyesei.74
Ajslat, a jvendls, mint titokzatos s rvidre szabott beszd, mely a hallgatsga szmra mr csak belthatatlansga s rtelmezhetetlensge okn is klncsgknt tnik fl, a mesehstl az idegensg, a mssg, a Msik mssga, a

Neki is fogott az reg rajzolni vagy a legny rajzolni az reg eltt, mg ahol tvesen csinlta, az reg kijvtotta, s megmondta nekije, hogy miutn a rajzat elvgezte, hromszor fujjan ra, s ha valaki a kzelbe van, vigyzzan, hogy szre ne vegye,
hogy mr lehel, inkbb tegye magt, mindhogyha shajtott volna. A Tkvros
(NAGYV 329330.)
72 RICUR: Parcours de la reconnaissance, i. m. 156.
73 MACINTYRE: i. m. 203.
74 LVINAS: Talny s fenomn, In: U. Nyelv s kzelsg, i. m. 85.

1 39 2

profetikus ints, a jelens s eltns szlelse sorn az inkluzv-sz mkdst

vrja el. Emellett a kzssgi tapasztalat s blcsessg eltti alzatot, a kzssg
elvrshorizontjnak s a kzssget sszetart ernyeknek val megfelelst kveteli meg. Ezenkzben akrcsak a tilts a maga a jsls/jvendls homlyossgval szndkosan kizrni igyekszik a megrtsbl mindenki mst, aki
nem a mesehs (a kzssg) javra, hanem pp ellenkezleg: a krra, a vesztre munklkodna, mivelhogy az ilyesfajta krokozs, amely a trvnyszegshez
vezet, MacIntyre szerint a kzssg ktelkeinek lazulst eredmnyezi.75 Akizrs egyik mdja az avatatlanok eltti hallgatni tuds. (Az egyik afrikai mesekutat rja: letnk sorn megtanulunk helyesen/jl beszlni, de mindenekeltt
hallgatni is, miknt egy joruba kzmonds tartja: a szj nem mondja ki mindazt, amit a szem meglt.76) Akizrs msik mdja az, amirl Frank Kermode a
titokzatos eredetrl rott ktetben77 beszl, hogy tudniillik a jzusi kergmatikus nyelven elhangz bizonyos kijelentsek s kinyilatkoztatsok, prfcik s
parancsolatok, tiltsok s gretek szndkosan titokzatosak, ppen azrt, hogy
csak s kizrlagosan a beavatottak eltt truljon fl az rtelmk. Erre utal Ricur a maga Kermode-interpretcijban:
Frank Kermode felveti azt a gondolatot, hogy bizonyos elbeszlsek clja ppensggel nem a dolgok megvilgtsa, hanem elhomlyostsa s lczsa.78
Amesben az elre nem lthat titokzatos esemnyek, a meseszvetben vratlanul felbukkan titokzatosra utal diskurzusok (a tiltst vez jvendlsek,
a jvendlseket erst tancsok) gyakorta elfordulnak, mivel a tradicionlis/
szakrlis mesemond gondolat s- kpzeletvilgt mlysgesen thatja egyfell az si/archaikus hiedelemvilg, msfell a keresztny valls szellemisge s
75 MACINTYRE: i. m. 206.
76 On apprend bien parler, mais avant tout on apprend aussi se taire. Cest dans
ce contexte quun proverbe yoruba dit : La bouche ne dit pas tout ce que les yeux
voient . LADITAN,Affin O.: De loralit la littrature: mtamorphoses de la parole chez les Yorubas, Semen [En ligne], 18|2004, mis en ligne le 02 fvrier 2007.
77 KERMODE, Frank: The Genesis of Secrecy (on the interpretation of narrative), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England, 1979. 2425.
78 RICUR: Vlogatott irodalomelmleti tanulmnyok, i. m. 292.

1 40 2

erklcsisge. Ehhez a kzssgi szellemhez s erklcsi normarendhez tartozs

felttelezi az adott korban hatlyos s/vagy szoksos trvnyek: az ernyek s
vtkek, a j s a rossz megltt s nem utols sorban mindenki ltal val ismerett.79 Aki betartja a kzssg ltal meghatrozott trvnyeket: az abban rvnyes ernyfogalomnak megfelelen cselekszik (illetve a kizkkentsgen tllpve
visszatr e normkhoz), kirdemli a jvendlsben sejtetett gret/adomny birtoklst: kirlly, a trvny legfbb urv vlik a mesben.
Lssunk egy pldt a trvny (az adott sz) megtartsval szembeni bizonytalankodsra! Jakab Brug c. mesjben a felesg tbbszr is tved, frje tiltsa
ellenre gyrket (karika s pecstgyrt, mint az elktelezds szimbolikus
trgyait) vesz az idegen kalmrtl, majd kptelen lvn a frjt bren tartani
(vele egytt, kzs sorsukrt virrasztani), a gonosz llek fogsgba kerl jfent.
Emlkezznk Arisztotelsz napjainkig rvnyes megllaptsra:
[] az emberek jellemk szerint lesznek olyanok, amilyenek, de tetteik szerint lesznek szerencssek vagy ellenkezleg80
Ameseszvetben azt ltjuk, hogy a felesg hol tudatban van az rtatlansg melletti kitarts ernyn alapul erklcss ltnek;81 hol enged a csbts ksrtsnek (mivel magval ragadja a gonosz szellem, tovbbi erfesztsre s
ldozathozatalra knyszertve a frjt); hol pedig titokzatos mdon rintkezik
a megszabadtval: levelet r a zsid szabnak, melynek tartalma ismeretlen,
lczott, titokzatos mind a hs, mind az olvas eltt. Afelesg gonosz szellemtl megszllottsgnak s a jsgra tltsg rvn a bns-lt jvttelre
(kompenzlsra) trekvsnek szembelltsa, emellett a frj egzisztencijnak s kpessgeinek folyamatos vltoztatsa: a Kermode ltal felvetett elbeszli szndkra: az elhomlyostsra s lczsra hajaz.
79 Erre mondja MacIntyre: lettrtnetem ugyanis mindig begyazdik azoknak a kzssgeknek a trtnetbe, amelyektl identitsomat kapom. MACINTYRE: i. m.
296.
80 ARISZTOTELSZ: Potika, (ford. Sarkady Jnos), Magyar Helikon, Bp., 1974. 16.
81 Hallgass ide, szivem! Ez mg csak eljegyzs, s n csak gy jttem, hztznzbe.
Majd, mikor megesksznk, jogod lesz hozzm nylni, s lefekdni vllem egy gyba. De mindaddig az ideig nem engedem meg, hogy kzel gyere hozzm. (NAGY
V 241.)

1 41 2

Mikor megszabadtotta a felesgit a gonoszsgtl, ht mr nem kellett a kirly tovbb jrjon, tovbb menjen. gy tudta megmenteni a felesgit. (i. m.
256.)
Az gret s adomnyozs kedvezmnyezettje a mesben mindig szembetallja magt egy (vagy tbb) olyan ltezvel, aki a titokzatos kpessgvel szembeni
gyanjnak, ktkedsnek ad hangot, s az isteni adomnyozs gret/kinyilatkoztats bizonyossgt, az sszel meg-nem-rtett zenet birtokolhatatlansgt
igyekszik kikezdeni, megkrdjelezni, msknt szlva megbotrnkozik rajta, a fogalom Kierkegaard-i interpretcijban:
Mert ht mi a megbotrnkozs? Amegbotrnkozs boldogtalan csodlat.
Ezrt az irigysggel rokon, ez az irigysg azonban az ember ellen fordul, pontosabban nmaga ellen fordul []. (kiemels BP) 82
Aboldogtalan csodlat, ms megvilgtsban: valaki rendkvli kpessgnek, vagy adomnynak, adott ltnek irigysggel val szemllse, mely
mg testvrek esetben is tlcsordul a szereteten, az egy akolba tartozs tudatn,
s az irigysg az elviselhetetlensgig fajul, vgl a gyilkos sztnbe csap t: ennek tipikus esete a Bab/Borsszem Jank-tpus meskben rhet tetten.83 Amikor a kt fivr irigykedik a ksve szletett (az eltnsk utn csods krlmnyek
kztt szletett) ccskre, aki elbb jeleket mutat nekik testvr-lte igazolsra (anyatejjel ksztett lepny), majd rettenetes ereje rvn megszabadtja a
hgukat s ket is az alvilgbl, k, hogy a kudarcukat s szgyenket leplez-

82 KIERKEGAARD: i. m. 101102.
83 NAGYV: i. m. 103152, 153183. Emellett kiemelhetjk mg Jakab Asr gyermek [AaTh 650A(409B*) + 328*] c. mesevltozatot (NAGYV i. m. 590610.),
melyben Jnas nem is gondol a testvrek gonoszsgra. Elhatraztk [a kt nvr]
aztat, hogy ljk meg a kisebbik testvrt, ne tudja Jnas elvenni, hogy k kzlek vegye brmelyiket, csak a kicsikt hogy ne vegye. Igy nagy irigysget vettek a testvrekre, hogy ilyen boldog, s milyen boldogsgot nyert a kisebbik testvrek, milyen
nagy vitz embert kapott, hogy a vilgan az egsz srknyokat mr elpuszttotta.
[] Mire mr elkszlt ara a kt lny, hogy levgjk a lnynak a fejit, arra megrkezett Jnas [] Na, nem gondolt Jnas semmifle rosszra egyltaln, mert abba vt Jnas, hogy ht k testvrek, s rosszat gyse akarnak okozni egymsnak. (i. m. 608.)

1 42 2

zk: sszebeszlnek s magra hagyjk a szabadtjukat.84 Starobinski errl a

jel-adsrl s nmegmutatsrl mondja:
[] az n csak akkor ltezik a maga teljessgben, ha megmutatkozik. s
ha szntelenl tannak hvja a vilgot, azrt teszi, mert csakis akkor bred nnn ltnek tkletes tudatra, ha tan eltt jelenik, illetve mutatkozik meg.85
Bab/Borsszem Jank, mint hs, nem elrejtettsgben, nem nmagba-hzdsban, nem elklnltsgben akar ltezni (ugyanis nem ez a kldetse,
el-hivatottsga), hanem feltrtsgban, a Msikhoz (testvreihez) val reszponzv-etikn alapul viszonyban: ezrt hvja ket tanknt minden tetthez, melyek kzs sorsukat rintik.86 Amesemenet elejn feltn, hogy a kt fitestvr
leginkbb gy jellemezhet, mint sajt kpessgeik ismeretnek hjn elbizakodott s megfontolatlanul grget alak, mindkett azt hiszi: kszen ll arra, hogy
sikeresen megvvjon a srknnyal, kpes a ki- s megvltst megtenni. Velk ellenttben a kisebbik fi, Babszem pedig valban felkszlt s eltklt a feladatra
(ezt kapta adomnyknt), ezrt nem is lehet ms lefolys a bonyodalom, minthogy a jellemgyenge testvrek irigysgbl, gylletbl megszegik a ne lj! pa84 No, de szavamat ssze ne kavarjam, mikor a kt btyja visszament a nvrihez, gy
rijesztettek a nvrire, s asz mondtk a nvrinek, hogy ha meg fogja mondani otthon az desanyjnak vagy valakinek, hogy nem k ltk meg a srknt, ht akk le
fogjk vgni a nvrinek a fejit. H mindenesetre mr , a nvre is tartott a btyjait, s felfogadta a btyjainak, hogy soha el nem rulja ket. (NAGYV 117.)
85 STAROBINSKI: i. m. 72.
86 Asz mondja akkor Jank a kt btyjnak:
Na, kedves btyim, n tkteket mg egyszer letbe tettelek, csak azt fogadjtok
fl nekem, hogy amit n krek, ti is nekem meg fogjtok tenni.
Hogyne a kt legn mingy ffogadta, met azak se nem akartk, hiba tmasztatta fel Jank ket, de nem akartk elismerni tesvreknek Jankt. Akk szpen elvette Jank a msik kt kis laptyt, s odaadta a kt btyjnak, anlkl, hogy mondjan
valamit, hogy egyk meg. Mik megettk a laptyt, krdezi Jank a btyjaitl:
Na, mit reztek, mit vettetek szre?
Ht olyan vt ez a laptya, mintha az desanym tejivel lett vona kszitve.
Na ht akkor testvrek vagyunk.
s aszongyk a btyjai, hogy igen. (NAGYV 116.)

1 43 2

rancst s egyenesen gyilkoss vlnak. Az persze tovbbi vizsgldst ignyelne,

hogy Babszem Jank vajon elre ltta-e, vagy valakitl (valaki ms prfcijbl)
tudta-e meg jvend sorst, hogy tudniillik miutn megmenti testvreit az alvilgbl (a lnyt a srkny fogsgbl, a fikat egyenest a hallbl), a fik irigysgbl az letre trnek. Felttelezhetjk, hogy a mesemond Jakab szmra a
korbbi trtnet (mintegy pre-egzisztens trtnet) forrsaknt s kezdeti vltozataknt: a bibliai Jzsef-trtnet ll rendelkezsre.
Atitok, kivltkppen is az Ers Jnos-tpus s a Bab/Borsszem Jank-tpus
meskben, az adomnyozott lt: a rendkvli ervel megajndkozottsg, egyfell a hs hasznos felntt-vlst, msfell a sikeres csaldegyestst szolglja: vagyis a titok feltrsa a hst magt vdi, s hozzsegti a jvendlsben jelzett
gret realizlshoz. Az a krds, hogy kitl s honnan kapta a hs rendkvli
erejt, elszrre nem is magt a hst izgatja, hanem a krnyeztben lket, majd
amikor elrkezik a konkrt feladatmegolds ideje, s szembe kell nznie a feladattal, neki (s persze a hallgatsgnak is) el kell tprengenie azon:
[] ki vagy mi adja az adomnyt, kinek az adomnyai vagyunk, ki az,
akinek ksznheten megrthetem nmagam adomnyozottsgt s zrt
szubjektumbl adomnny, adomnyozott, megszltott s ntadv
vlhatok?87

4. Atitokkpzs, mint szvs

Amesenarratvban megnyilvnul titokkpzs egyik legkprzatosabb pldjt Jakab Brug c. mesben talljuk meg, mely a gyjtk szerint a Kkszakll
s az Eltkozott leny tpus kontamincija.88 [Brug AaTh, Bn 311 (406A*)~307]
Azt, amit Ricur a trtnetmonds kapcsn konfigurcis aktusnak nevez,
magam bjtatottszl-szvsnek mondanm Jakabrl szlvn, ami az esemnyek (a szavak s tettek) nyelvi kifejtse sorn lekpezi azt a munkafolyamatot,

87 CSEKE kos: j fenomenolgia Franciaorszgban, Magyar Filozfiai Szemle,

2011/2. 174177. Jean-Luc Marion egy egsz ktetet sznt a krdsnek lsd: tant
donn.
88 NAGYV: i. m. 238257.

1 44 2

melyet a parasztasszonyok a szvszken vgeznek.89 Az egyik meseszl (nevezetesen a vetlkfonal: a titokkpzs szla), az emlkezethlknt kifesztett
keretfonalak kztt bvpatakknt tnik fel s el a meseszvetben az elads
ritmusnak megfelelen. AJakab-fle meseszvs akknt halad elre, hogy az
esemnylncolatot folyton megszaktja egy titokgazda titokfeltrsa, mely cselekmny jabb titokzatos bonyodalmat okoz: Ricur szerint jabb cselekmnyt
implikl, elhvva a httrbl egy jabb/msik titokgazdt s annak aktulis titokfeltrst. Vagyis Jakab mr azzal is zavarba hozza a mesemondsban tbb-kevsb jratos hallgatsgot, hogy nem egyetlen/kiemelt titokgazda van
a mesben, hanem ppensggel hat, hangslyoss tve ezltal, hogy a tuds, a
mindentuds forrsa nem lehet egyetlen szemly, hanem a titkos tudsbl mindenki csak rszlegesen rszesedik, ezrt szksgkppen kiegsztik/sznestik
egymst, egymsra vannak utalva a titokrtelmezs s a szerzett tuds tadsa
sorn. Ez a szerepmegoszts, hogy tudniillik a titokgazda eredeti funkcija megsokszorozdik, mintegy sztszrdik, maga is a titokzatossgot, a homlyossgot
ersti, illetve hogy a hasonlatunknl maradjunk jellegzetesen lnk szn
szvetet hoz ltre.
Akonkrt mesenarratva hermeneutikai vizsglata s a titokrtelmezs sorn
felvetdik a krds: az egyes szereplk/hsk, akik valamilyen mrtkben birtokoljk a titkot, mirt vesztik el idvel a tudskpessgket? Agalambknt
megjelen leend frj (i. m. 241246); a hst tba irnyt regasszony (i. m.
24748); a sajt pecstgyrjrl ellensget/frjet felismer srkny (i. m. 250); a
fecseg fiatal ris (i. m. 253); a frjt bersgre int felesg (i. m. 254); a hsnek
vgs tancsot ad zsid szab (i. m. 256) a megfelel pillanatban tad a msiknak egy-egy kzeltsi mdot (interpretatv mveletet) maghoz a titokhoz.
Mesenarratvnkban a titok nem sztszrt, ellenkezleg, nagyon is sszetett fen89 Alncfonalat a keretre fggleges irnyban folyamatosan a vetlkfonal keresztmetszetnek megfelel tvolsgban szorosan felvezetik, kifesztik. gy keletkezik egy
olyan ll fonalsor, amelybe a vetlkfonalat alulrl s fellrl vltakozva be lehet
fzni. Ez a keresztirny befzs ismtldik gy, hogy az elz sor alulrl trtn
tfzse felett fell, illetve az elz sor fellrl trtn tfzse felett alul legyen az
tfzs, s vgl kialakul a szvet.
http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sz%C3%B6v%C3%A9s ( a letlts ideje: 2013.10.02.)

1 45 2

omnnek tnik: a csbtsbl megszabadts s a hsgre eszmltets egyidej,

mde pp az egymst kiolt jellegk miatt bonyolult sszefggst rejti. Atbbszri titoktads s a titokzatos beszdmd kapcsn felvetdik egy kzbls krds: voltakppen ki nylik meg ki eltt? Vgtre is kinek lehet felttlenl hinni?
Kinek a szavahihetsge helytll? Ki szvi gy a diskurzust, hogy a titok vgl
is titok maradjon, mgis rtelmezhetv vljon? Ne felejtsk, nem a nyelv rejti a
titkot, hanem a szndk, melynek rvn elfedni vagy eltakarni akarunk valamit,
miknt Merleau-Ponty llaptja meg:
Anyelv tvol ll attl, hogy a vilg titkt magba rejtse, a nyelv maga egy
vilg, maga egy lt.90
Az rdgk fnke, Brug ltal elrabolt lnynak rendelt szabadt frj
megjelensben (szp fehr galamb) s titokzatos utastsaiban elzetesen hrt
ad adomnyozott ltrl; a knyszerhzassgban l lny habozs nlkl megfogadja tancst, viszont ksbbiekben az jabb ksrtsnek (gretnek) taln pp
a kvncsisg okn kptelen ellenllni. Ahs szjbl elhangz elzetes hrads,
mint gret, egyben szemrmesen bejelentett vgy is a Msikra; m a jvbeni
hzassgrl szl titokzatos beszdnek vonzbbnak kell lennie annl, mint amilyen szeretetet, gondoskodst a rabl (az ellenfl) grt. Ezrt az gret nyelvi
formuljt lt titokzatos beszd maga is csbts, mondhatni helytelenl: fell-grs, vagy r-grs, a rlicitls kifejezs rtelmben. Tbbet grni, mint
amennyit a msik (az ellenfl) gr, egyfell a szubjektumban meglv ernyhiny, vagy nyelvi fogyatkossg elleplezse, msfell a msikkal szemben elkvetett csals, mert az gr gy okoskodik, hogy az utlagos szmonkrs idejn
egy vllrndtssal vagy szabadkozssal, mentegetzssel elintzheti az gyet,
hiszen a Msik ostoba s feledkeny.91 Atbbet grsben a jelen valdi rdeke,
a jvvel szembeni feleltlensg marad titokban; miknt az is titokban lappang,
hogy az grget valban rendelkezik-e azzal a kpessggel, amire hagyatkozva

90 MERLEAUPONTY: i. m. 113.
91 Kant a fortlyossg kapcsn jegyzi meg: Afortlyossg, agyafrtsg, ravaszsg (versutia, astutia) abbli gyessgnk, hogy msokat becsapjunk. Krds mrmost, vajon csakugyan okosabb-e a csal, mint akit knny becsapnia, s hogy az utbbi-e az
ostoba. KANT: Antropolgiai rsok, i. m. 130.

1 46 2

btran tbbet gr, s amire az gret diskurzusban vllalkozni merszkedik,

avagy minden szava cselvets s rmnykods.
Adott mesnkben a vgy mohsgra mi sem jellemzbb, minthogy a leend frj a Ne lj! parancs megszegsre kszteti a lnyt, kinek boldogsga megszerzshez meg kell lnie, meg kell mrgeznie az rdg pokolbli vrnak reit,
s mg ezutn is hezitls nlkl hven kell kvetnie a leend frj (a magt annak
mond) utastsait, melyek tovbbi titokzatos gretben nyilvnulnak meg (Azutn aztn majd tallkozunk, s tovbb fogunk beszlni). De vajon ez az elzetes
beszd, mint folyamatos vgykelts s grettevs kellen megnyugtat-e a lny
szmra jvbeni: az rkkvalsgot is magba foglal sorst illeten? Nem
merl-e fl benne, hogy jbl egy szirnnek fogsgba kerlt, s hogy a nyelv
nem magra tallst segtette, hanem bezrta a frje nyelvbe: vgzetesen vgrcsapdott a kalitka ajtaja, tssz vlt. Jakab mesteri szvtechnikjra jellemz, hogy a hzassgban megnyugvs boldog llapott (melyet a ms csbtktl
val tilts, ms frfiaktl elzrs, elklnts parancsa tarthatna fenn), pp a szeretet s kitarts temporalitst rint vektorn ideiglenesknt tnteti fl elttnk:
De hiba, mert nem sok rmek vt egyiknek a msikba, mert alig telt el egy
ht, kett, arrafel vndorolt egy gyrs kalmr gynyr szp kszerekkel.
(NAGYV 246.)
A hzassg trvnyes rendjt s a hitvestrsi ernyt: az nuralmat92 prbra tev kihvs, a szval vagy kszerrel csbts szituatv rtelmezse nem
ms, mint a megksrtett szemly folyamatos nvizsglatrl szl vallomsa, az
n-mondsrl val tansgttele. Hogy a megksrtett szemly milyen tansgot tesz a hitvestrssal val egyttlsrl, az a nyelvilleszkedsktl fgg, mivel
az jabb s jabb csbti grgetsekkel szembeni hsg vagy szszegs, kitarts vagy elklnbzds a trssal val egyet-rts vagy egyet-nem-rts nylt bevallsa. Acsbtk mindig az gret perverzijnak lehetsgvel ksrtik meg a
lnyt, tudniillik olyan gretet tesznek, mely egy betarthatatlan gret komolytalan elktelezdst93 jelenti csupn, ellenben folyton ltben s szabadsgban
92 [] az nuralom sztoikus ernyre, amelynek birtokban kpesek vagyunk uralkodni szenvedlyeinken, ha az erny ltal megkveteltek teljeststl el akarnnak trteni bennnket. MACINTYRE: i. m. 315.
93 DERRIDA: Amsik egynyelvsge, i. m. 114.

1 47 2

fenyegetik azt, akit magukhoz igyekszenek ktni: vendg s rn helyett tssz

teszik. Frje valban neki rendelt voltrl, jvendlsei s gretei (rlicitlsai), tilalmai s tancsai megbzhatsgrtl, vagyis komoly elktelezdsrl
csak akkor gyzdik meg, amikor is megtapasztalja, hogy tbbszri ldozathozatalra kpes rte, nem kmlve n-magt. Ekkor viszont a lny/felesg maga
nylik meg, trja fl azon kpessgt, hogy tud kzdeni leend kzs sorsukrt,
tud hinni a lehetetlenben: az rkkvalsgig tart szeretetben. Itt trhetnk
vissza korbbi krdsnkhz, hogy: az egyes szereplk/hsk, akik valamilyen
mrtkben birtokoljk a titkot, mirt is vesztik el idvel/idnknt a tudskpessgket? Mert az rkkvalsgot clz szeretet nem elgszik meg az apostoli intssel: viseljtek el egymst szeretetben, nem elgszik meg a meggrem
fogadalmval, mivelhogy a csbts mesnk tansga szerint brmikor tall egy kis repedst a biztonsgtudat, a megszoks, az unalom faln, s kpes kikezdeni a talpig nehz hsget. Az rkkvalsgot clz szeretet ennl jval
tbbet kvetel meg mindkt fltl: az egymsnak rendeltsg megfellebbezhetetlen tnyben val hinni tudst, vgtre is a szeretet megvlt erejnek csodjban val hinni tudst.
Asajt letnket, mind egynenknt, mind msokhoz fzd viszonyainkban, egy lehetsges kzs jvvel kapcsolatos elgondolsok fnyben ljk
meg.94
Akt fhs mellett feltn titokgazdk kzl az regasszony s a zsid szab: mindkett a ront/rt erkkel szembeni kvetkezetes elhatroldst, a nemet-mondani-tuds btorsgt, a felelssgvllalsukban s elktelezdskben
val rendthetetlen kitartst szorgalmazzk. Kitartani ez esetben egyet jelent azzal, mint trelmesen megvrni, amg eljn az grt boldogsg ideje, nem hagyni, hogy a szabad akaratot kls erk s faktumok rossz irnyba befolysoljk.
Az titokzatos tudsuk a szabad akaratrl s a teljes ltezsrl fellrja, korltozza a srkny s az risok hatalmt; ezrt beszdk pldzatszerv vlik, melynek megrtsrl a kt hs kvet magatartsa: tantvnyukk vlsa
tanskodik. Atantvnyok jmborr, azaz istenflv lesznek, a hzassguk

94 MACINTARYRE: i. m. 289.

1 48 2

ahogy Vico mondja : valamely istensg irnti flelembl kttt szemrmes testi kapcsolat.95

5. Atitokzatossg megszntetse
Atitok feltrsra s a titok titokzatossgnak megszntetsre, felszmolsra val trekvs tbb lpcss folyamat: (1) egy ltalam tudott (vagy tudni vlt) ismeret, rzs, lmny, tudatostsa nmagam szmra, amikor rajtam
kvl mg senki ms sem rszesedik az ltalam birtokolt s nmagamnak valamikppen feltrt (tudott s vgiggondoltt tett) valamirl, ami a vgiggondols utn mr nem pusztn faktum, hanem egy konkrt tudslmny. Egy
bels er, vgy, szenvedly arra ksztet, hogy az tads, megoszts rvn valaki
msnak, a Msiknak is vgiggondolhatv, megrtett s tudott tegyem azt a
tudslmnyt, melyrl azt felttelezem, hogy n s a klcsnssg egyfajta vdettsgben, az sszetartozs rkkvalsgban lesznk kpesek ltezni, ezrt
osztom meg vele fltett titkomat. Atitokmegoszts ez esetben nemcsak a jvre
irnyul gret, hanem a jelenben cselekvsre felszlts is: mkdj egytt velem, ha szeretsz!, egyttmkdsed arrl biztost engem, hogy elfogadsz s kveted utastsaimat.
Na, hallgass ide, szivem! Megmosakodsz a forrsban, hamarbb vizet
iszal, megmosakadsz, megfordulsz a forrstl jobb fel. Megltsz ott egy
nagy ft, reg tlgyft. Az reg tlgyfnak a tvibe tallsz egy zd dit, azt a
zd dit ktfel nyitad, kapsz benne egy aranytrlkzt, a dihjba. Adihjat visszateszed az eredeti helyre, oda, ahonnan flvetted. Azutn aztn
majd tallkozunk, s tovbb fogunk beszlni. (NAGYV 245.)
Ennek a bels ernek, vgynak, szenvedlynek, hogy tudniillik kibeszlem a
titkomat, a kezdeti fzisban megszlal bennem egy fogadalom (mely az n
fogadalmam lesz, s ilyetnknt magnyos fogadalom96), az esk erejvel s kvetkezetes megtartsval megfogadom magam eltt azt, hogy a titkomat (tudslmnyemet, tapasztalatomat) csak egy vagy egynehny valaki mssal osztom

95 VICO: Az j tudomny, i. m. 321.

96 MARION: i. m. 151.

1 49 2

meg, ppen azrt, hogy magamat s a Msikat (a titkot birtokl szk kzssget) megvdhessem (ahogy erre Kermode utal) a fltett titkunkba erszakosan
behatolni vgy, a tolakodssal a kzs tudslmny meghittsgt szertefoszlat erkkel szemben (pl. a szerelem titknak megvallsa; vagy a msiknak nekirendeltsg kimondsa; az tok alli felszabadts mdjnak megszerzse a
mesben).
Afogadalomttelem utn igyekszem meggyzdni arrl, hogy a Msik, akinek el akarom mondani a titkomat, s ezltal rszesv kvnom tenni a meghitt klcsnssgnek, szavahihet-e s ennek okn szmonkrhet-e vagy sem,
vagyis bizonyos elvrst fogalmazok meg vele szemben, hogy bizalmamba fogadhassam bizalmat fogad lnyt. Elvrom a Msiktl (aki mellettem vlik azz
az n-n, akiv tulajdonkppen vlnia kell az adomnyozs vagy a sors rendelse rvn a mesemenetben), hogy minden ktsget kizran biztostson engem
arrl, hogy nyugodtan, gyanakvs s habozs nlkl hagyatkozhatom a szavra.
Ekknt bizalmam az belm vetett bizalmn nyugszik,97 s visszaigazolja a fogadalmat, vagyis megersti az eredeti eskt, hogy tudniillik megtartja a titkomat s nem l vele vissza:
[] a msik fogadalma igazolhatja majd az enymet, s ilyen mdon a kt
fogadalom keresztezdhet, sszeaddhat, st legjobb esetben tkletesen
egymsba is olvadhat.98
Marion szellemben az elvrsom egyszerre ketts mozdulat. kzeleds s
kockztats, egyfell kitrs a magamba hzds bstyi kzl, a Lvinas-i eltvolodottsgom megszntetse, msfell a Msik fel forduls,99 mgpedig gy,
hogy kzeledsemmel igyekszem t biztostani a magamban tudatostott felelssgvllalsomrl, cserbe viszont elvrom tle, hogy miknt Lvinas mondja
a szemtl szembe egyenessgvel tekintsem rm, a sandasgot, flretekintst,
szemlehunyst rkre iktassa ki a hozzm fzd viszonybl. Kezdetben az elvrsom meglehetsen ingatag talajon ll, mert elszrre nem lehetek bizonyos
abban, hogy a Msik (legyen sz szerelemrl, vagy msfajta viszonyulsrl: pl.
97 MARION: i. m. 203.
98 Uo. 151.
99 Amsik olyan tekintet, amely sehonnan sem szrmazik, s amely mgis minden oldalrl krlleli nemet s teremtkpessgemet. MERLEAUPONTY: i. m. 77.

1 50 2

bartsg, ksn felismert testvrisg) a kzeledsemet, a megnylsomat, a hvsomat (a.) nem utastja-e hatrozottan vissza, mondvn nem kr belle, (b.) nem
l-e vissza (abuse) feltrulkozsommal, (c.) nem akarja-e kisajttani (nz mdon a sajtjnak tudni, a magnak mondani, vallani, feltntetni msok eltt)
azt, amit n adtam t neki azzal a kittellel/felttellel, hogy: engedlyem nlkl
nem oszthatja meg msokkal.100 Ugyanis, ha a titoktartsi fogadalmt megszegi, s gy tesz, mintha az v (eredetileg a sajt titka) volna, s maga gy tehet,
hogy elvrja a harmadiktl azt, amit n vrok el tle (vrtam volna el tle),
rszed engem, egyfell kifecsegi magt a titkot, msfell sajt hatskrbe von
olyan jogokat, melyek nem illetik meg. Ebben az tadsban rejlik a kockztats gesztusa s rtelme: ez az, ami tartzkodv, gyanakvv s rkk megerstst vrv tesz.
Ebbl a kezdeti gyanakvsbl, a bizalom felttlensgt megelz kockztats mozzanatbl,101 a kzeledsemmel egytt jr vdtelensgem, mondhatni
kitettsgem rzetbl fakad a klcsnssg elvrsa, st annl is tbb, a Msiktl val hatrozott s szigor megkvetelse:
Hiszen csak az vlasza (mhol vagyok!) kpes az n sajt mhol vagyok!-omat igazolni. Az n kezdemnyezsem, az n kzeledsem, az n vallomsom, melyet elsknt, s a viszonzs remnye nlkl hajtok vgre, egy
homlyos s meghatrozatlan indtk, egy az n egologikus szfrmon bell
marad fantazmagria lenne, ha a msik nem ersten meg, hogy ugyanezt rzi, hogy itt nem az n fixa idemrl, hanem a mi kzsen felfogott rtelmnkrl van sz.102
Amesenarratvban a titok feltrst (hogy tudniillik neked vagyok rendelve, gyere!) az tok alli felszabadts mdjnak kimondst kveten fokozottan
jelentkezik a klcsnssg elvrsa. Az egyik mesehs (leggyakrabban az eltkozott fl), aki egy msik vilgban (a hall birodalmban) a gonosz/stt erk
hatalmnak fogsgban, ront erejnek ismeretben, tssz-ttelnek lmnyben (tapasztalatban) leledzik bizonyos id ta, a neki rendelt flnek elmondja

100 Lsd a kgyvlegny-tpus mesket!

101 MARION: i. m. 150.
102 Uo. 149150.

1 51 2

azt a titkot, melynek ismeretben eldntheti: l-e a szerelem felknlta lehetsgvel, s ha igen, kellen elhatrozott-e a titok tudsval felszabadtani a Msikat. Ez a fajta vak kvetelzs, amirl Marion beszl, a titkok feltrja rszrl
srget hvs, st egyenesen kimondott parancs, amellyel szemben nincs apellta, mintha egy nlamnl nagyobb hatalom mondta volna ki:
[] a msiknak szeretnie kell engem, annl is inkbb ktelessge ez, mert n
mr szeretem t, s fleg, a szerelem megkveteli a klcsnssget.103
Ez a parancs a megszltott szmra viszont egyszerre adomny s felelssgteljes kvetelmny, ami magban rejti az adomnyozottknt lteztl az elktelezdst, az adott szhoz/fogadalomhoz val hsget, a kitartst s a Lvinas-i
jsgot, vagyis amikor a msik tbbet nyom nlam a latban. Valamennyi eltkozott kirlylny-tpus mesben (de valamennyi vitz hs ltali kirlylny
szabadt narratvban) a nehz feladat irnti elktelezds s a Msikrt vllalt felelssg mutatja meg a hs valdi egzisztenciakaraktert, amire pontosan
illik Marion meghatrozsa:
Az igazi szeret, aki azt teszi, amit mond, s azt mondja, amit tesz (Imhol
vagyok!), felttlen, szmolgats nlkli ostromrl ismerszik meg, mert kpes szeretni anlkl, hogy ezrt brmit is krne cserbe.104
Szmtalan esetben lehetnk tani annak, hogy a nincstelen mesehs (a.) otthonrl meneklse okn, (b.) nem lvn ms vlasztsi lehetsge, (c.) nem
akad ms vllalkoz sem az orszgban, sem ms kirlysgbl, szmtgats nlkl vg bele a nehz feladat vgrehajtsba, elfogadvn (vagy ppen kirdemelvn) egy ismeretlen tmutatst/segtsgt, s miutn megltja az elrabolt
kirlylny szpsgt, megszlal szvben az Imhol vagyok tansgttele, ami
egyet jelent azzal, hogy nyltan kimutatja: rted jttem, nem hagylak cserben.
Az ernyfogalom ez esetben jelentsmdosulson megy t, s tkletesen megmutatja, hogyan hasznlja a hs konkrt esetben az tlkpessgt.105 Ugyanis
mind az ismeretlen segtlny tiltsa/tancsa, mind pedig a megpillantott lny
szpsge/varzsa: titok, amely a metaforikus beszd s a szimblum felfejts103 Uo. 230.
104 Uo. 232.
105 MACINTYRE: i. m. 209210.

1 52 2

nek, az ppen megfelel szra talls kpessgnek fggvnyben lebbenti fel a

ftylat magrl, hogy egy pillanattal ksbb visszahulljon elfedettsgbe.
Gyakorta titok fedi azt is (lsd Jakab AFeketebli kirlylny c. mesjt!), hogy
az tok all felszabadtand fl csakugyan a hsnek van/lett-e rendelve, avagy
csak egyfajta prbattel el llttatik, nevezetesen, hogy klnbsget tud-e tenni az erotikus vgy s az rkkval szerelem kztt.
Avgyam azltal trja fel szmomra hogy ki vagyok, hogy megmutatja,
hogy mi izgat fel. Apillanat, amikor a vgyam nmagammal azonost, az a
pillanat, amikor tekintetemet nem tudom levenni egy bizonyos msikrl, s
azt a pillanatot tvedhetetlenl felismerem.106
AJakab-fle hs, Jnas, noha a szakllas kis emberke figyelmezteti: ne nzzen a koporsban fekv lnyra, mert nem fog brni a vrvel, megszegi a tilalmat, minek kvetkeztben a felknlt erotizlt hs perverz ajndknak107
kptelen ellenllni s az elvarzsolt lny felszabadtst kveten szexulis vgyait igyekszik kielgteni a termszete titkos lnyege szerint kirki-aspektus
kirlylnnyal.
Nzz ide, Jnas szvem, n a tied, te az enyim! Te riztl meg engemet, n
tllem tbbet nincsen, amit fjjl, mert mindenfle gonosz llek kiment belllem, s hogyha akarsz Nzz ide, kicsi szivem, mindenesetre te riztl meg
engemet hrom ccaka, amin mondtam, nincsen, amit mr fjjl tllem, n
106 MARION: i. m. 147.
107 Uo. 204.

Aszegny halsz meg a kt fia c. mesben amikor a fi megrzi a harmadik este
is a kirlylnyt s felszabadul az tok all, stlni invitlja: Te azt mondja ,
stljunk egy kicsit, ne ldgljnk olyan sok! /Akk mn ltta hogy mn megvidult az arca, s mutassa, hogy egy szp n, de mg mindig nem tiszta, mg mindig
olyan vltozs, hun fehr, hun fekete, hun rt, hun meg milyen. Mik aztn karon
fogta s kezdtek stiklni, ht a lny csak hzdozott, csak hogy ne jussanak ahh
a kis medenchez. De a gyerek addig kerte, addig kerte, utjra, amik belettte a kezit, szemkzt frccsentette a vizzel. Akk a lny nyalbta. PENAVIN: i.
m. 119. Vico szerint a vz volt az els a hzassgkts kt tnyezje kzl, csak gy
volt szabad frigyre kelni s ldozni, ha megtrtnt a szent mosakods. VICO: i. m.
334336.

1 53 2

mr tiszta llek vagyok, ugyhogy mindenfilit elkvetek, ami csak neked tetszsed szerint trtnik, vagy akaratad van bellle, de adak neked egy msik
j tancsat. Mindenesetre, n nem vtam neked rendelve, hogy felesged legyek, de hogyha tetszised van, lehetek. gyhogy a kenyeret megkezdheted, de
bevgezni nem vgezheted a kenyeret be. (NAGYV 212.)
Az erotizlt hsra vgyakozs feltrja Jnas szmra lte titkt, hogy tudniillik erfesztse (a hrom jjelen t val megrzs) ellenre sem kpes megtartani az eredeti tiltst, ami nem csak a ltvnyra (az erotizlt hs ltal kldtt
jelek, jelzsek elutastsra) irnyult, hanem a msiktl val vgleges elfordulsra is, s e tilalomszegsnek kvetkeztben kptelen az nmegtartztatsra, ami
sajt disznpsztorsga, eltkozott-lte alli felszabadulst szolgln, s visszaadn szabadsgt s vele egytt a ksbbi, Msvalakivel bekvetkez szeretetre, a klcsns felelssgre val kpessgt is.
Na, jl van, Jnas megfogadta a lnynak az oktatst, na de ht nagyon
melegen (sic!) vllatt a szerelemtl, mert nagyon szerelmes lett a lnyba.
Na, gyhogy mindenfile megtrtnt ottan, ami trtnnival vt azan ccaka, egisz hajnalig. (NAGYV 213.)
Ezrt aztn csakis szereti viszonyban megvalsul lvezet ltesl a kt mesehs kztt,108 ez a pillanatnyi, s sohasem hinytalan beteljeslst gr lvezet
utn maradt r dbbenti r Jnast, hogy szmra egyelre nincs is menekvs a
boldogtalansgbl (msfell az eredetileg disznpsztorknt adomnyozott ltformbl). Aszeretet titka tovbbra is megfejthetetlen marad szmra, st, elrhetetlen tvolsgba kerl tle, olyan ideaknt lebeg a szeme eltt, mely folyton
nyugtalantja azltal, hogy maghoz hvja t, sztlanul, de annl szvszortbban. jbl tra kell ht kelnie Jnasnak, s mindaddig, amg nem rti meg, hogy
az erotizlt arc, a gynyrben megdicsl arc nem ugyanaz, mint a jmborsgot visszatkrz arc, melyben: a kpes s ksz vagyok tged szeretni, ha hagyod nekem, hogy szeresselek grete tkrzdik vissza.

108 t magt lvezem teht. Mskppen fogalmazva, nem a sajt gynyrmet lvezem, hanem az vt. MARION: i. m. 170.

1 54 2

Nagy Gabriella gnes

ATITOK FENOMENOLGIJA JAKAB ISTVN:
JNAS A ZRDBAN CM MESJBEN
(Abn, a lt, a szeretet s a szeret titka)

1 55 2

a feltrtsg mellett s tle elvlaszthatatlanul ott ll az elleplezs s az elrejts1

Asajt lttel val foglalkozsnak is lteznek
olyan mdjai, amelyek betegebbek, mint
azok a hanyatl egzisztencia-mdok, amelyekben a sajt lt nem vlik kln krdss.2
Abeteljeslt tapasztalat nem a tuds, hanem az j tapasztalat irnti nyitottsg beteljeslse.3
akab Istvn egyik leghosszabb mesje hangslyosan kt
rszre tagoldik mind tipolgiailag, mind a trtnet elbeszlsnek szintjn. Agenercis mesnek is felfoghat szveg elszr ugyanis az apa sorst beszli el, majd finak sorsa, tettei
s jvtteli gesztusai zrjk az esemnyeket. Elsknt Jnas,
az apa csaldjnak s magnak a bnei, titokban tartsuk s kvetkezmnyeik viszik elre az els rsz cselekmnyt, a msodik rszben azutn Jnas finak
a r bzott titokhoz val viszonya ll kzppontban. Atitok a mesben gyakran
olyan elrejtett vagy visszatartott tudsra vonatkozik, aminek a megfejtse vagy
feltrsa elreviszi a cselekmnyt s a hst egy jobb sorshoz juttatja. Jakab Istvn mesjben a titok megjelenik ebben a klasszikus rtelemben is, de csak a
msodik rszben az elrult titok s az ebbl fakad felismers gymond bels
1 GADAMER, Hans-Georg: Aszp aktualitsa, (ford. BONYHAI Gbor), In: U.
ASzp aktualitsa, T-Twins Kiad, Budapest, 1994. 55.
2 HELTING, Holger: Bevezets a pszichoterpis daseinanalzis filozfiai dimenziiba, (ford. BLANDL Borbla s FAZEKAS Tams), LHarmattan, Budapest, 2007.
142. Akr Derridt is idzhetnnk: a hall, vagy a tllet vagy az emlkezet krdsnek ilyen makacs feszegetse patologikus; a gygyuls tja e krdsek elfelejtsn, mellzsn vagy erteljes httrbe szortsn t vezet. DERRIDA, Jacques: Ki
az anya?, In: U. Ki az anya? (ford. BOROS Jnos, CSORDS Gbor, ORBN Joln), Jelenkor Kiad, Pcs, 2005. 37.
3 GADAMER, idzi: HELTING, i.m. 69.

1 56 2

erhz juttatja a fit. Aszveg az els rszben azonban a ltezs titkrl mesl,
amely fenomenolgiailag rtelmezve vlik rtelmess.
Acselekmny szintjn az els rszben minden titok feltrul az olvas eltt, m
az apa bnt bnre halmoz s ez az jabb s jabb epizdokban elmondhatatlanknt, titokknt addik ssze. Amsodik rszben Jnas finak trtnete mr kt
titok kapcsn bontakozik ki: az apa (egybknt szvegszeren a msodik rszben a fi szmra utals nlkl hagyott) kilte kapcsn, illetve a gymntos kistyk4 ltal Jnasra bzott titok kapcsn. AJnas a zrdban cm mese ugyanis
egy figyermek genercis trtnett hrom genercin keresztl gy beszli el, hogy idrendben feltrja a csald trtnett anlkl, hogy ez az elbeszls szerint a figyermek (3. generci) tudtra jutna. Tipolgiailag is teht kt jl
elklnthet rszbl ll: az els rsz rvidebb, s tbb mese tvzete (AaTh 931
Oedipus, AaTh 1726APruljrt szerelmesek, s a Gyilkos haramia egyes motvumai AaTh 757), mg a msodik rsz egyetlen mese vltozata (Az aranyhaj kertszbojtr, AaTh 314). Akt rsz kt hse, apa s fia teljesen elt egymstl, mg
az egyik alapveten negatv, a msik alapveten pozitv alakknt tnik fel: a hs
s anti-hs vrsgi rokonsgban ll egymssal. Akt rszt azonban nem csak a
genercis letlehetsg tanulsga, a hsk vilgra jvetelnek sajtos s titokzatos mdja, hanem a titokhoz s bnhz val viszony is szorosan kapcsolatban
tartja, mg akkor is, ha ez a kapcsolat retorikailag s etikailag ellentteken, ellenpontozson keresztl teremtdik meg.
Atitok eredenden valami megmagyarzhatatlan, felfoghatatlan, rejtlyes,
valami, ami tlmutat az emberi tudson.5 Ezek a titkok tartoznak a misztikum,
a misztrium fogalomkrbe, s titkos tantsok trgyt kpezik. Frank Kermo4 Maga a meseszveg inkonzekvens, hol kendermagos/gymntos tyknak, hol kiskakasnak nevezi.
5 BENK Lornd (szerk.): Amagyar nyelv trtneti-etimolgiai sztra IIII., Budapest, Akadmiai Kiad, 19671976. 153. Ttfalusi Istvn Magyar etimolgiai
nagysztra szerint a titok msok eltt leplezett, elhallgatott dolog, vagy megmagyarzhatatlan, rejtlyes dolog: a termszet titkai. Szrmazkai: titkos, titkost,
titkol, titokzatos, titoknok, titkr, titkolzik. Aszcsald feltehet tit- alapszava taln si ugor rksg: vogul tujt- (elrejt, eldug), a -k deverblis fnvkpz, mint a
nyomdok, szndk szavakban. Atitoknok, titkr, titokzatos nyelvjtsi szalkotsok. Lsd mg tilt.

1 57 2

de a schleiermacher-i hermeneutikai rtelmezsen tlmutatva6 a bibliai exegzis, interpretci mveletei fell rtelmezi a fogalmat s a midrs gyakorlatbl
kiindulva olvassa a bibliai szvegeket. Aknon rgztst megelzen (az evangelistk) trtk, s adaptltk az si szvegeket, hogy elvessk, vagy elfogadhatv tegyk azt, ami rthetetlenn vlt, vagy srt lett. Ezt a gyakorlatot neveztk
midrsnak, s ez tbbek kztt narratv vltoztatsokat, vagy beszrsokat vont
maga utn, nha igencsak szabadon. 7 Amidrs mint gyakorlat a Kr.u. 412. szzadban virgzott, s a trvnyekhez tartoz zsid szvegmagyarzatok eredenden szbeli szvegeit rgztette s szerkesztette meg. AMidrash Rabbah olyan
egyni szvegek gyjtemnye teht, amelyet klnbz szerkesztk klnbz
idkben rgztettek. Amidrs sz sztvnek jelentse hberl: kikeresni, kikutatni, vgl az rtelmezs jelentst vette fel. AMidrash Rabbah ktfle szveget tartalmazott: a halakhah szvegeit, amelyek trvnyeket, viselkedsi kdokat
rtak le (ezek kulturlisan eleve vallsos tartalmak voltak), s az aggadah szvegeit, amelyek elbeszl irodalmi szvegekbl, parabolkbl, teolgiai s erklcsi megllaptsokbl lltak. AMidrash Rabbah clja a meglv/mltban hozott
trvnyek s hagyomnyok folytonossgnak biztostsa volt.8 AMidrash szvegei a szent szvegek lakonikus stlusnak ksznhet tmrsget, informci
kihagysokat Holtz Auerbach tanulmnyra hivatkozva ezeket a helyeket gy
hatrozza meg, mint a motivci, az rzelmek, gondolatok elbeszletlensgt
tltik fel magyarzatokkal. gy a Midrashban alapveten a gyakorlati szablyok s a nyilvnossg normi9 rgzltek.
http://www.szokincshalo.hu/szotar/?qbetu=t&qsearch=&qdetail=11399, (letltve
2013. szeptember 25.)
6 Samuel Beckett sem elgszik meg a ftyol csinl elgondolsaival, s azt keresi, ami
a nyelven tli egyetlen olyan (nmet nyelv) 1937-ben keletkezett levelben r errl, amely valamelyest nyelvfilozfiai llspontjnak tekinthet.
7 KERMODE, Frank: The Genesis of Secrecy. On the Interpretation of Narrative, Harvard University Press, Cambridge s London, 1979. 81.
8 HOLTZ, Barry W.: Midrash, In: U. (szerk.) Back to the Sources. Reading the Classic Jewish texts. Simon and Schuster, New York-London-Toronto-Sydney, 2006
(1984). 177179.
9 HEIDEGGER, Martin: Lt s id (ford. VAJDAMihly, ANGYALOSI Gergely, BACS Bla, KARDOS Andrs, OROSZ Istvn), Gondolat Kiad, Budapest, 1989. 483.

1 58 2

De mi az sszetart elv a ktfajta szveg, a trvnyek s szablyok, valamint az

ezeket magyarz imaginatv, elbeszl szvegek kztt? Holtz szerint a hagyomny folytonossgnak biztostsa, hiszen a trvnyek egyes korokban, bizonyos
kontextusokban szlettek, a trtneti-kulturlis kontextus azonban vltoz az
eredeti visszafejtst Holtz kreatv historiogrfinak, illetve kreatv filolginak nevezi, ezzel is jelezve minden utlagos rtelmezs alkot jellegt10. Az
ltalam trgyalt Jakab Istvn mese a szveghagyomnybl nzve egy si szveg magyarzata, tirata, egy mtosz kontextulis thelyezse. Atragikus tmk kerlse ltalban jellemzi a mesket, az Oidipusz tma azonban kivtel, s
mind a magyar mind a nemzetkzi tipolgia szmon tartja. Nagy Olga kiemeli,
hogy Jakab Istvn mesje annyiban egyedi megolds, amennyiben nem rvnyesti a meskre jellemz vilgltst. Amitikus vilgban a sors szerepe az, hogy
az embert sjtsa, viszont a mesei gondolkodsban az a feladat, hogy mindent a
hs javra fordtson.11 Nagy Olga arrl is emltst tesz, hogy megtartva az eredeti Oidipusz tmt a maga tragikus menetben, Jakab Istvn rzi, nem fejezheti be gy a mest, s a mese valdi hseknt nem az apt, hanem annak fit teszi
meg. Az Oidipusz mtosz mesei elbeszlse ezzel egytt olyan j trtneti-kulturlis kontextusba kerl, amely az si, grg jogrend s a modern keresztny jogrend kztt igyekszik belthatv tenni bizonyos univerzlis rtkrendet. Mg
az els rszben Jakab a ne lj parancsolatnak megszegst, valamint a titkok
felkutatsnak vagy a titokhoz juts kvetkezmnyeit, kockzatt beszli el, addig a msodik rszben immr tllpve a mitikus trtneten a titok meg nem tartsa kapcsn az ruls toposzt is krbejrja12.
Tlhaladva a titok fenti rtelmezsn, amely kulturlisan, a transzcendens fogalmhoz, szent szvegekhez ktheten jut megllaptsokra, a titok fenomenolgijt is rdemes kzelebbrl szemgyre venni. Ehhez kiindulpontknt a
daseinanalzis beltsait lehet segtsgl hvni, amelyek a heideggeri filozfia tovbbgondolsval nemcsak a ltezs, az itt-ltt, a jelenval lt titkt kpesek fl10 HOLTZ: i.m. 189.
11 NAGY Olga: Atltos trvnye. Npmese s eszttikum. Kriterion Knyvkiad, Bukarest, 1978. 224.
12 Errl bvebben a jelen ktetben BLINT Pter: Atitok fenomnje a npmesben
cm tanulmnynak els fejezett.

1 59 2

trni, hanem ezt a titkot az ember autentikus lte fell rtelmezik. AJakab Istvn
mesjben tematizlt keresztny etikai kdrendszer meseszvegen belli rtelmezse helyett, amely a bn s az isteni feloldozs problematikjra futna ki, a
daseinanalzis fenomenolgiai szempontjai a jelenvallt akadlyoztatottsgnak, a lelkiismeret hvsnak, a ltezs ltre val nyitottsgnak mdjait trjk
fel. Amese bnket tematizl els rszben ugyanis kt olyan alapvet minta,
vagy cselekvst meghatroz alakzat vonul vgig, a ki- s belevetettsg, illetve a
sodrds, amelyek mint alapvet ltlmny irnytjk a hs dntseit. Ahs cselekedetein keresztl pedig elvtssel, a ltlehetsgek elhibzsval, a valamitl
val megszabadulssal (a valamire val szabadd vls helyett), a felelssgvllals elhrtsval, az egszsges vilg utni vggyal vlaszol. Heidegger szerint
azonban a jelenvallt mint olyan bns; bnsnek lenni azt jelenti: alap-oka
lenni a msik jelenvalltben jelentkez valamilyen hinyossgnak, mgpedig
oly mdon, hogy ez az alap-ok-lt nmagt a maga amirt-jbl hinyosknt
hatrozza meg. Ez a hinyossg abban ll, hogy nem tettnk eleget egy kvetelmnynek, mely a msokkal val egzisztl egyttltre vonatkozik.13 Akvetelmny, a msokkal val egzisztl egyttlt egyms irnti gondban, gondozsban
bomlik ki. Hiszen minden jelenvallt lte a gond14 abban az rtelemben, ahogyan a gondozs a gond egy mdja; a gondozs az embernek a tbbi emberrel
szembeni, lnyegszer gondja15.

1. Elvtsek sorozata s sodrds

Jakab Istvn mesje rviden megfogalmazva a fldre szletett ember lehet legnagyobb fel nem fedettsgt/titkt beszli el: azt, hogy az apa gazember,
gyilkos, bnt bnre halmoz, az anya pedig az apa elveszejtje. Azsid-keresztnyi tantssal szemben, amely a teremtstrtnet szerint az ember genezist
egy gyilkossghoz kapcsolja (Kin s bel16), de kikerlve azt, az ember szmra
13 HEIDEGGER: i.m. 475.
14 HEIDEGGER: i.m. 478.
15 HELTING: i.m. 197.
16 Izgalmas tiratot tallhatunk Jos Saramago utols regnyben, amelyben hasonlkppen a Jakab ltal elmondott meshez, a gyilkos apv vlik. Az apa azonban nem

1 60 2

egy harmadik gyermeket jell meg sknt, Seth-et, Jakab mesje kiprblja,
milyen letlehetsgei addnak egy gyilkosnak, hogyan vlik cselekvsi mdd a bn, honnan ered a megbocsts, s milyen ltlehetsgei vannak annak,
aki mindebbl tovbbi letet szeretne teremteni. Amese teht a msodik rszben mindenkppen a szeretetben szlets helyett a bnbe szletst tematizlja.
Az els rszben talljuk meg a bnbe szlets eredett: a bns apa olyan csaldba szletett, ahol minden megvolt, gazdagsg, boldogsg, csak a gyermek hinyzott. Akrnyken az vt a divat, hogy az els vagyon a gyerek (691)17. Akr
npnyelvi fordulat, akr szndkos szhasznlat miatt, de a van ige Jakab ltal
hasznlt alakja a vagyon, birtoktrgy jelentst is meghvja, ezltal megosztva a jelentst: mindenekeltti a gyerek, vagy az els, legdrgbb vagyon a gyerek.
Avagyontrgyknt hasznlt gyermek, mint kvetkez tulajdontrgy mgsem
vltja be a hozzfztt remnyeket: na, ht nem sok id telt bel, nem sok rmek lehetett a gyerekben (691). Radsul az apa lma szerint a gyermek majd
ppen az gyilkosv vlik. Atrtnetbeli els vtek teht a ltezs, a jelenvallt feletti rm elhibzottsga, amennyiben sajt ltket a szlk nem kpesek az ltaluk ltrehozott let jelenvalsgban megnyitni, az j let szmra
lehetsgknt nyitott tenni, ugyanakkor vtekk, elvtss, elhibzss vlik
az lom rtelmezse is.
Az lomszimbolika tbbrtelmsgnek megengedse helyett az apa megfejti, sz szerint rti az lmot, s ennek kvetkeztben megszabadul egyetlen fitl a mese tovbbi szvegbl kvetkeztetve mintha nem is szletne ksbb
sem gyermek ebbl a hzassgbl, legalbbis a mese erre nem tesz utalst. Kermode szerint az lomszveg a megrtsben eltnik, az rtelmezsben kimertdik, felszmoldik, s elveszti affektv (rzelmekre hat) erejt. Radsul, ha
egy rejtvnyt, vagy lmot rosszul fejtenek meg a mesben, elkrhozshoz vezetkerl kapcsolatba a fival, a fia mindvgig idegen maradt szmra. Aregnyben a
bn eredete nem ms, mint elvts, elszr is az ldozat elvtse, Saramago szerint
pedig Isten elvtse is, amennyiben nem fogadja el az letldozatot. Jos SARAMAGO: Kin (ford. PL Ferenc), Eurpa, Budapest, 2011. 123.
17 JAKAB Istvn: Jnas a zrdban In: NAGY OlgaV Gabriella: Havasok mesemondja, Jakab Istvn mesi. Akadmiai, Budapest, 2002. 691731. Amese szvegre val hivatkozsokat az oldalszm jellsvel fogom a szvegben megadni.

1 61 2

het. Lehet, hogy jobban jrunk, ha a titkot/lmot (mint megfejtsre knlkoz

szveget, zenetet, jel- s utalsrendszert) anlkl rizzk meg, hogy megfejtennk s megrtennk, akrcsak Kafka re Aperben.18 Az lom msrszrl nem
ms, mint szimblumokba rejtett zenet. Az lom szimbolikja19 szerint a fi
megli az apjt, de ez a gyilkossg nem sz szerinti, inkbb archetipikus kp,
hiszen minden apa sorsa az, hogy a fia tlnjn rajta. Sajt frfiassgnak megtallsa gy nem ms, mint az apai frfier integrlsa, majd ennek sajtt nvesztse, az apain val tlnvs.
Daseinanalitikai szempontbl azonban sem az asszociciknak, sem az lettrtnetnek, sem az archetipikus, mitolgiai rtelmezseknek nem lehet szerepe,
hiszen a megfejts () nem lehet ms, mint egy tnylls20. Ameseszvegben
nem az lom kpi lersa olvashat, hanem az apa lomrtelmezse: egyszer egy
ccaka azt ltta a gyereknek az desapja lmban, hogy az a gyerek, akibe gy
gynyrkednek, s mindenfle boldogsgak benne van, az fogja az desapt elpuszttani. (691.) Az lom rtelmezst kvet cselekvssor teht egy lomrtelmezsbl indul ki, a tnyleges lomkpeket rejtve hagyja, mikzben maga az
elbeszls, titokk, hozzfrhetetlenn, rejtett vlik. Ha mozgstjuk a grg
igazsg sz (aletheia: el-nem-rejtett) rtelmt, az lomkp maga rejtettsgben
(letheia) elfedi az igazsgot (a-letheia).21 Az lomkpekbl a mese szvege eleve
lom-gondolatokat generl, azaz a kpisg mdiumbl olyan nyelvi megnyilatkozss teszi az lmot, amely rtelmezsknt immr csak vagy sz szerinti vagy
metaforikus rtelemmel brhat.22 Msfell azonban mg ebben az lomrtel18 KERMODE: i.m. 2432.
19 KAST, Verena: lmok (ford. MURNYI Beatrix), Eurpa, Budapest, 2010.
20 Condrau-t idzi Helting: i.m. 174.
21 Heidegger aletheia-fogalma az igazsgot olyan el-nem-rejtett jelensgknt rtelmezi, amelynek kiegszt prja a Verborgenheit, az elrejtettsg, amely implicite magban hordozza azt, hogy a vilg mr eleve titokknt, el-rejtettsgben tapasztalhat
meg. BDIS Zoltn: Amese s a titok In: U: Amesesz igazsga. Cifra Jnos cigny mesemond mesi, Didakt, Debrecen, 2014. 129. Ugyanebben a tanulmnyban
a magyar titok sz gykervel kapcsolatban Bdis szintn kiemeli, hogy a tit/til szgyk az elrejtssel, elfedssel ll kapcsolatban. (BDIS: i.m. 131.)
22 V. RICUR, Paul: Image and Language in Psychoanalysis, In: U. On Psychoanalysis (ford. PELLAUER, David), Polity Press, Cambridge-Malden, 2012. 94118.

1 62 2

mezsben is lthat, hogy az rtelmezs akr el is homlyosthatja az lomelbeszls fenomenlis adottsgait. Ebben az lomban ugyanis eleve az apa lmrl
van sz, az viszonyrl a fihoz, amelyet a flelem fenomnje ural. Aflelem
az ittltet magt flti, az ittlt fenyegetettsge ebben bontakozhat ki. Az lom az
apa lma, amelyben az ittlttl val flelme jelenik meg, tgabban pedig a vilgban-benne-lt szorongsa uralkodik el rajta. Az ltnek folytonossgt (tettekben s gondolatokban) biztost lteznek, a finak olyan lehetsget tulajdont,
amelyen keresztl majd sajt lte szmoldik fel. Bizonyos rtelemben, a hallhoz val elrefutsban ez gy is van, de mint apa eleve azzal a szorongsval
tallkozik, amelyben fit sajt ltt fenyeget ltezknt ismeri fel. Helting a szorongs kapcsn kibontja annak negatv s pozitv vonatkozsait is:
Avilgba mint egszbe belevetett lenni-tuds a szorongsban vlik nyilvnvalv. Az ember ilyenkor kifejezetten megtapasztalja, hogy van, hogy sszetveszthetetlenl ms, mint a vilgon belli ltez, amivel ugyan viszonyban
ll, de ami mr jelenleg nem nyjt semmifle tmaszt. Tovbb megtapasztalja: br a jvben is ltezhet, de lenni-tudsa semmikppen sem szksgszer. () Aszorongs alaphangulatnak megtapasztalsa olyan jelensg,
amelyben nyilvnvalv vlik, hogy az ember tbb, mint egyes ltezk ellltja s hasznlja, hogy az ember sajt mltsgnak tbbel tartozik annl, hogy csak a ltezvel foglalatoskodjon. () Aszorongs olyan jelensg,
amelyet teljesen pozitvan gyis rtelmezhetnk, mint ami az ittltet kimozdtja ltnek tgassgba.23
Az apa sajt ltlehetsgeinek meghatrozsa fia ltali fenyegetettsgtl nem
ms, mint egy patologikus llapot, amelyben elhibzta nmegvalstst: a vilgban-benne-lt zavart mdjrl tesz bizonysgot, gy nem az apaknt jelenval
lt hvsra vlaszol a csecsem kapcsn, hanem elvesztve a vlaszads kpessgt, pontosabban flrertve a vlaszads irnyt, elvti az irnyt, s az lomnak
tulajdontott sz szerinti jelentsre felel, vagyis az lomban megjelen szorongsra. Aszlk ezrt lemondanak a csecsemrl, mint tulajdontrgyrl, vagyonrl, eszkzrl s vzre bocstjk egy kis kosrban: ezt a gyereket te csinltad, s
nem a gyerek tgedet. Ahogyan eztet tudtad csinlni, gy mg fogsz te csinlni
23 HELTING: i.m. 8283.

1 63 2

ms gyereket is. (692.) Amesehs tjt ennek megfelelen a cselekmny sorn

lthez val viszonyt a sodrds, az elvts (az elhibzs s vtek rtelmben)
alapalakzatai, valamint az inautentikus ltmd hatrozza meg, mikzben a msik emberhez val viszony rendre birtokviszonyknt jelenik meg. Ahalllal majd
a sz szerint elszalasztott letlehetsgben tallkozik; ez az elszalaszts vlik a
mesben azz a fordulpontt, amely azonban egy msik mesehs, szletend
fia szmra lehetv teszi annak felismerst, hogy a nem magtl rtetd lehetsgeket bizonyos mdon ajndkba kapta, s egsz letben szabadon beteljestheti.24 Amese els rsznek cselekmnyben felfigyelhetnk arra, hogy
Jnas vndorlsai vgn beleszeret egy lnyba, akit elrabol, egy mogyorbokor
tvben lnyegben megerszakol, majd felesgl akar venni. Afehrnp azonban vissza szeretne jutni a csaldjhoz, oda, ahov tartozik, s ahonnan erszakkal szaktottk el, m ezt a krlmnyeknek megfelelen nem teheti mskpp,
mint hogy futsnak ered, menekl, elszalad. Jnas utna veti magt, a fehrnp
kiti a szemt, megvaktja, s Jnas nem ltvn tbb a vilgot, belebucskzik
egy gdrbe hogy ott lelje hallt. Alehetsgekre val nyitott vls helyett Jnas meg akarja szerezni, hasznlni akarja, birtokolni akarja azt, amire lthez
s ltnek folytonoss ttelhez a legnagyobb szksge lenne megismtelve a
szlei felje tanstott viszonyt, amelyben a hozzjuk tartoz, rjuk bzott csecsemt birtoktrgyknt rtelmeztk.
Jnas a fehrnppel megesett mogyorbokor-jelenetben vgleg elszalasztja
azt a ltlehetsget, amely visszavezethetn egy olyan autentikus ltmdhoz,
amelyben sajt ltben mondana igent a msik emberre, sajt nyitott ittltt
hangolt-megrt nla-ltt vltoztatn, a szereti viszonyt a msik lenni-hagysra alapozn, a tgassg s lelkesltsg tapasztalatnak adn t magt s
olyan pozitv fggsgi viszonyba bocstkozna, amelyben csak azrt lehet nmaga, mert a msik lehetv teszi ezt szmra25. Heidegger nyomn Helting rmutat arra, hogy a msokkal val beszlgets amelyet egybirnt Jnas szintn
elszalaszt, hiszen szinte meg sem prbl a fehrnppel szba elegyedni ahhoz
szksges, hogy megtalljuk a sajtot: az idegenbe val utazst mindig egy
otthonoss vlsnak kell megelznie. Amsikkal folytatott beszlgetsben
24 HELTING: i.m. 97.
25 V. HELTING: i.m. 182.

1 64 2

a keres figyelmess vlik a szrmazsi tjkhoz val sajt viszonyra.26 Jnas

a mese e pontjn mr kptelen a szrmazshoz val sajt viszonynak figyelmet
szentelni, s elszalasztja a lehetsget, hogy valamilyen mdon szabadd vlhasson valami, azaz a lt szmra, lemondjon a kznllev s kzhezll dolgok
hasznlatrl, hallgasson lelkiismeretnek hvsra s belefeledkezzen a vilgra val nyitottsgba s rutaltsgba. Azaz a mlt megterhel tapasztalata miatt
a jvt mr nem nyitott lehetsgknt tapasztalja, () a lehetsgeket mr nem
kpes lehetsgekknt tapasztalni, () nem rendez maga kr eleven, vltozatos, lakhat teret, hangoltsgban patologikuss vlik, msoknak s magnak
lland szenvedst okoz, a msikat hasznlati trggy, rucikk teszi, cselekvsmdjai beszklnek korltozva a vilghoz s a tbbi emberhez val szabad
viszonyt.27 Megvaktst nem maga vgzi el egy felismersnek ksznheten,
mint Oidipusz kirly, hanem az ltala megerszakolt fehrnp ti ki a szemt,
hiszen Jnas nem kpes sajt sorsval s dntseinek felelssgvel maga szembenzni, kvetkezskppen menekl nmaga (az nelfogads) s a lt nyitottsga ell, s bizonyos rtelemben megvaktsa, majd halla ennek a remnytelen
hanyatl folyamatnak vet vget.
Amesben teht a hall, egy jabb gyilkossg, a lehetsg elszalasztsa s egy
j let kezdete egyetlen kpbe srsdik, sz szerint vget vet a lehetsgeit elvt, sodrd hsnek. Patolgis, zavart vilgban lte nem oltja ki benne a vilgra s embertrsaira val rutaltsg ignyt, az azokra val rutaltsgt, akikrl
gondoskodhat. Arutaltsg s gondoskods ignye is elvtss, patologikuss vlik, olyannyira, hogy emiatt nem maga omlik ssze, hanem sszeomlasztjk.28
Amese msodik felben ennek az elvtsnek a gymlcseknt Mogyors Jnas,
Jnas fia lesz az, aki apjval ellenttben bekapcsoldik a vilgban val lt rmbe, s nyitott vlik sajt ltlehetsgei szmra, mintegy genercis feloldst
biztostva a rengeteg, apja ltal elkvetett vtket kiegyenltend.

26 Heideggert idzi HELTING: i.m. 206.

27 HELTING: i.m. klnsen a 3. fejezet, 120124.
28 Az ember ignyli a vilgra s embertrsaira val rutaltsgot, akikrl gondoskodhat. Ha semmi ignyre nem tart ignyt, illetve ha az ilyen igny irnt nem vlik fogkonny, akkor sszeomlik. HELTING: i.m. 119.

1 65 2

De mifle lehetsgeket is vtett el Jnas? Elszr is kosrban vzre tett csecsemknt partra veti a vz, apck, fiatal fehrnpek talljk meg, veszik gondozsba, gy volt nevelve, mind egy katolikus gyerek (693.). Igen m, de szp
szl legnny cseperedve a sok fehrnp kztt mind sorrendjbe szedte, mind
az egsz mind llapatba kerlt (693.). Megszkve a zrdbl, Jnas ltszlag lelkiismerete hvsnak engedve szeretett volna feloldozst kapni, de a pap nem
foglalkozott vele: Menj, Jnas, ahova akarsz menni, mert n tged nem tudlak
feloldani, n az ilyenekkel nem foglalkazak, az ilyen emberekkel, mind te. Mikor
a szenteket te mind rontottad (693.) Haragra gerjedt erre Jnas, s meglte a
papot. Akeresztny hitrendszer szerint, amelynek alapjt kpezik a parancsolatok, Jnas tbb bnt is elkvet, de dasienanalitikai szempontbl mindenkppen
elvti a sajt bns ltvel val szembenzst. Jnas szmra azonban a bns
lt nem a hatodik parancsolat megszegsnek kvetkezmnybl addik, hanem
Jnas azon felismersbl fakad, hogy h gondolta magba, ht j vna elmenjen , hogy meggynja a bneit, mikor mennyi rengeteg szp fiatal fehrnpet
elrontott, s csfat ztt rajtak. (693.) Azsid-keresztny etikai tiltsokon s
szablyrendszereken tl tekintve (amelyet a hallgat vagy az olvas mintegy belert a trtnet rtelmbe) nem csupn a parznlkods (bizonyos szempontbl
biolgiailag sztnvezrelt) vtke nyomja a lelkt, hanem a msokon val csfot zs: a szvegben ugyanis legalbb olyan hangslyosan jelenik meg az arra
val utals, hogy isten parancsa vagy trvnye ellen vtett volna, mint az, hogy
maga ebben a csfot zsben hatrozza meg sajt bnt.29 Az elvts ebben az
rtelemben a szablyok s normk vilghoz val igazods miatti kiegyenlts
(feloldozs) keresse, s nem abbl a dntsbl tpllkozik, hogy az ittlt minden
egyes pillanatrt vllalja a felelssget, hogy sajt ltre teljes terjedelmben
mlysgben s mltsgban igent mondjon, amit senki nem tud valaki ms
helyett meghozni. Az autenticitshoz vezet utat senki nem tudja tvenni a m-

29 Csfot zni valakibl azt jelenti, hogy eltvoltani, trgyknt tekinteni r. Az rzketlensgbl fakad nevets termszetes lgkre a kzny. Asrs, az egyttrzs
megakadlyozza a komikumot. Ahhoz hogy sznalmat bresszen bennnk valaki,
rzkenny kell vlni, rezni kell, nem tekinthetek r kzmbsen, trgyknt. V.
BERGSON, Henri: Anevets (ford. SZVAI Nndor), Gondolat, Budapest, 1994. 37.

1 66 2

siktl.30 Agyns mint kzvett ltali feloldozs ezrt is maradhat elgtelen.

Heidegger a felhvs megrtse s a bn kapcsn a kvetkezkppen fogalmaz:
Az akrki kznsges rtelme csak azt ismeri, hogy eleget tesznk vagy
nem tesznk eleget a gyakorlati szablyoknak s a nyilvnossg norminak. Ezek megszegst szmtsba veszi, s kiegyenltst keres. Legsajtabb
bns lte ell elsomfordl, hogy azutn annl hangosabban kiabljon hibkrl. Afelhvsban viszont az akrki-nmaga az nmagnak a legsajtabb bns-ltre hivatik fel. () Afelhvs megrtse azt jelenti: akarjuk,
hogy sajt lelkiismeretnk legyen.31
Jnas nyilvnvalan nem rti meg ezt a felhvst, s a kiegyenltst olyan nmagn kvlll rendben keresi, amely termszetbl, ltmdjbl addan
alkalmatlan arra, hogy nyitott tegye a msokkal val egyttlt autentikus mdjaira, s visszahozza t az anonim, inautentikus sodrdni-hagysbl a felels,
lnyegszer nbeteljestsbe32. Jnas ennek megfelelen valban elsomfordl, s
hangosan kiabl a hibkrl, ebben az esetben arrl (is), hny gyilkossgot kvetett el annak ksznheten, hogy a papok megtagadtk tle a kiegyenltst. Most
vessnk egy pillantst a bn teolgiailag meghatrozott fogalmra.

2. Abn fogalma
Ricur a bn fogalmval kapcsolatban felveti annak a krdst, mennyiben
lehet az eredend bnt az anyja mhben lv magzatra is kiterjeszteni. Szerinte az eredend bn fogalma hamis ismereten alapszik, s mint ilyen tudst szt
kell trni.33 Az eredend bn azt jelenti, hogy a rossz nem valami, nincs lte,
sem termszete, mivel tlnk szrmazik s a szabadsg kvetkezmnye. Ha a
vilg, amelybe vettetnk, eleve mr a bnben ltezik, akkor az ember is valahogyan kvlrl kerl bele, kvl van, test, vilg, dolog, amibe a llek csak mintegy
beleesik. Avilgba belevetett ltnek ez az elgondolsa oda vezet, hogy a vilg el30 HELTING: i.m. 195.
31 HEIDEGGER: i.m. 483.
32 HELTING: i.m. 193.
33 RICUR, Paul: Az eredend bn jelentsrl In: U. Vlogatott irodalomelmleti tanulmnyok, (szerk. SZEGEDY-MASZK Mihly), Osiris, Budapest, 1999. 74.

1 67 2

lendivinizlt, stni formban mutatkozik meg, a rosszat, a bnt pedig a vilg

hatalma bocstja az emberre.34 Arossz, a bn a vilgban ltezs malrje. Ha a
rossz kvlrl jn, akkor az dv is mshonnan, onnan, egy olyan tisztn mgikus megszabadts ltal, amelynek semmi kze sincs az ember felelssghez, st szemlyisghez sem.35 Apapokhoz gynsra szaladgl Jnas alakja
ppen ezt az interiorizlt sorsknt meglt bnt igyekszik feloldani kls segtsg ltal, pedig ahogy Ricur rmutat az Isten elttisg a bn mrtke s
nem az n tudatom36. Azaz isten eltt megllva, nmagra nzve kpes az ember sajt bnssgt mrtke szerint megtlni, nem pedig kls tlet ltal
gy a feloldozs sem eredhet kls forrsbl. Daseinanalitikailag ez azt jelenti,
hogy a helyette-beugr-uralkod gondozs helyett, amely megrabolja a msik
felelssgt hiszen elintznk valamit a msik helyett, ahelyett, hogy elssorban sajt lehetsgeit s kpessgeit tmogatnnk37 , az elbeugr-felszabadt gondozsnak kell eltrbe kerlnie, amellyel az ember lpsrl-lpsre
megtanulja, hogyan lehetsges nmaga vilgban val ltnek beszklt, inautentikus, kiegyenltsre vr formit a vilgra s msokra nyitott ittltt tenni.
Ezt a lehetsget azonban az ember csak nmaga kpes megragadni, ez a dnts
nem deleglhat t msra, nem trtnhet kzvettn keresztl. Ricur szerint
az interiorizlt sorsknt meglt bn a lt tvelygse, amely nlklzi az akaratot,
azaz a felelssg vllalsa helyett sorsban sodrdsnak adja t magt. Amsodik pap, egy plbnos ennek az akaratnak a hinyban, az alapvet ertlensg
miatt, az akarom s kpes vagyok kztti klnbsg38 hinyban ki is eszkzli Jnas szmra a feloldst. Ricur a penitencilis megtapasztalsknt megnevezett viszonyt a bnhz a felelssg elhrtsnak hrom mdjban jelli meg:
1. a bn realizmusa aszerint, ahogyan isten eltt van (s nem ahogyan n
meglem, vagy az n tudatomban szerepel), ez a bn mindent megelz realitsa
2. transzbiolgiai s transzhistriai szolidaritsknt (azaz ahogyan rkltem), ez a bn egyni felelssgekre lebonthatatlan kzssgi dimenzija
34 RICUR: i.m. 77.
35 RICUR: i.m. 77.
36 RICUR: i.m. 87.
37 HELTING: i.m. 198199.
38 RICUR: i.m. 88.

1 68 2

3. a bn egy llapot, helyzet, amelybe az ember belemerl, de egy hatalom is,

ami fogva tartja s megktzi; ez az akarat minden aktulis vtekben megmutatkoz ertlensge. Ebben a harmadik viszonyban jelenik meg az akarat s a kpessg kztti klnbsg hinya.39
Afelelssgvllals hrom mdja ezek szerint a tudatom, hadd ne mondjuk,
lelkiismeretem szmra bnknt felfogott, az eldkre s trtnetisgre t nem
hrtott cselekvsek, s sajt akaratbl val szembesls lenne. Ezek ell Jnas
figurja kitr, s a plbnos kzbenjrsa ltal igyekszik kevs sikerrel megoldst tallni, bneitl megtisztulni. Apap teht imdkozik Jnasrt, majd azt
mondja: Na, Jnas, most mehetsz, amerre az Isten segt, vezrel, me a bneidet
gy is, gy is az Isten mr megbocsjtatta, ennyi ideig szenvedtl (695).
Jakab Istvn azonban az els feloldozs elbeszlsbe beleszvi azt a bibliai
kpet, amelyet Mrk evangliumban a magvet paraboljbl ismernk (Mrk
3.4.). Aplbnos ugyanis azt a prbt lltja Jnas el, hogy amg vissza nem
tr a feloldozsrt s megbocstsrt mondott imbl, a Jnas el asztalra tett
kenyrhez s vzhez nem rhet hozz. Aplbnos igen sokig tvol marad, hiszen Jnasnak nagy szaklla n,
a kenyr kicikzatt, j bza termett a kenyrbl, bennt az asztalan Jnas
eltt, mr az egsz asztal gy be volt gyepesedve, gy, hogy minthogyha egy
egsz bzatbla lett vna Jnas eltt az asztaln. (694.)
Ekzben a pap a kulcsot keresi, amit abban a tban tall meg, ami a hz eltt
ll, s amibe elmentben beledobta. At viszont addigra kiszradt. Afelolds
teht egy kiasztikus szerkezetben trtnik: a plbnos hosszadalmas imja Jnasrt Jnas eltt a kenyrbl, magbl bzt terem, j fldbe hullik, mikzben
kint, a kiszradt (knnyek) vz()ben elkerl a megolds/felolds kulcsa. Jakab a
bnbocsnatot a srs s knnyek elapasztsval egyidejleg az j hajts kibukkansnak kls vilgban megjelen kpvel fzi egybe. Ebben az esemnyben
Jnas hallgatsa, a hallgatsra val knyszerls megteremthetn azt a csendet,
amelyben meghallhatn lelkiismerete hvst, amely tulajdonkppeni lte megvalstsra szltja fel. m Jnas a szmra ms ltal leimdkozott kegyelmet,
az nmagra talls lehetsgt ismt elvti s mivel az ember nmagrt val
39 RICUR: i.m. 8789.

1 69 2

felelssgvel egytt adva van szmra nmaga elhibzsnak szabadsga40, az

jabb elvtsben, elhibzsban ez a szabadsg lehetv teszi az jabb vtkek fel
sodrdst.
Afeloldozst kveten Jnas tmenetileg j tra tr, a normakvets rtelmben s nem felttlenl az rtelem keressnek rtelmben. Anmet Sinn (rtelem) sz az felnmet sinnan szra nylik vissza, ami azt jelenti: ton lenni,
utazni. Az rtelem eredetileg teht olyan nylt terletre utal, amelyen van
bejrhat t, s olyan terletre, amelyen lehetsges a nvekeds, a mozgs, s a
vndorls.41 Helting daseinanalitikai rtelmezsben a vndorls, a nvekeds,
a mozgs az rtelem nylt terletvel kapcsoldik ssze. Ezrt tulajdonkppen
minden mesei vndorls, ton levs nem ms, mint ennek az rtelemnek a megkeressre irnyul cselekedet. Jnas j tra trse a mese szvege szerint ppen
ezt a mozgst teszi meg hinynak (az rtelem keresse helyett vndorlsai sorn is tbbnyire menekl), hiszen bell dolgozni egy gazdasgba, mintegy letelepszik, befejezi a vndorlst, a mozgst. Vletlenl, tudatlansgbl, tvedsbl,
jabb elvtsnek ksznheten pedig megli, meglvi a gazdt, mintegy elvti a clt a vtkek sorozata s a sorsbeteljests ezzel az esemnnyel veszi kezdett. Nincs mit tenni, a trvny szerint felesgl kell venni a gazda felesgt.
Atrvny Wolf Knierim megfogalmazsban a jvben a brskods szmra
szolgl majd alapul, a trvnyi rend a szoksjogi trvnyek helyre kerl, s az
elvileg korltlan tekintly kzssg rendjt vltja fel.42 Jakab trtnetben nem
vilgos, milyen tpus kzssgi trvnynek engedelmeskednek, csak annyit tudunk meg, hogy a trvnynek fejet kell hajtani. Jnas s az asszony a trtntek ellenre nagyon boldog, de mikor fny derl kettejk bnre (Jnas elbeszli
szrmazst, bevallja a zrdban viselt tetteit, az asszony pedig valamivel ksbb
azt, hogy Jnas az des gyermeke), Jnas bnatban tnak ered. Atrtnet sorn
msodszor igen bnsnek rzi magt az anyjval tlttt id miatt, prbl ismt
gynni, de ezttal nem kap feloldozst, hiszen ez egy hallas nagy bn. Ebben

40 HELTING: i.m. 157.

41 HELTING: i.m. 269.
42 RICUR, Paul LACOCQUE, Andr: Bibliai gondolkods (ford. Enyedi Jen) Eurpa, Budapest, 2003. 129.

1 70 2

a bns viszonyban Jnasnak sajt eredetvel, szrmazsval, kitasztottsgval,

(kulturlisan) elre megrt sorskpletvel kell szembenznie.
Az ton levs, vndorls megakasztsa paradox mdon ppen sajt szrmazsnak tjkra vezeti vissza Jnast, az ehhez a tjkhoz val viszonyhoz, amelynek terben a gyakorlati szablyok s a nyilvnossg norminak megszegst
szmtsba veszi, kiegyenltst keres. Afizikai test (phsis) nem rtelmesknt
vghezvitt cselekvse azonban Oidipusz kirly tragdijbl ismertekkel ellenttben nem a kutat rtelem (nusz), vagy az rtelem vndorl mozgsnak teljestmnye, hanem a valloms s a msikrt, az nmagrt s nmaga ltal vghez
vitt tetteirt vllalt felelssg vllalsnak a kvetkezmnye.43 Ilyen rtelemben a
43 Az eurpai kultrkr egyik legmeghatrozbb mtosza, Oidipusz kirly trtnete a pszichoanalzis sarkalatos pontjt kpezi mg akkor is, ha Freud csak 1910-ben
nevezi meg elszr, s valjban errl a mitmrl nincsen egyetlen sszefoglal
tanulmnya, rsa sem. Ez a mtosz az, amelyben megnyilvnul a pszichoanalzis elgondolsa a tudattalanrl, mint ami nem frhet hozz a tudat szmra. (Freud a
Szophoklsz drmt Monet-Sully rendezsben ltta, amely a grg sznhz kollektv eladsmdja s a krus hangslyos jelenlte helyett a sztrsznszt hangslyozta. David Wiles ennek alapjn vzolja fel a freudi tudattrkpet a korabeli sznhz
trbeli elrendezettsgre ptve. Asztrsznszre irnyul minden figyelem, a sznpad
tbbi rszn zajl esemnyek httrbe szorulnak. WILES, David: AShort History of
Western Performance Space, Cambridge University Press, 2003. 232.) Saj Sndor
egyenesen gy fogalmaz, hogy ez az, ami leglesebben szembe lltja a freudi mlyllektant a fenomenolgival: az elbbi azt vizsglja, ami megjelenik szmunkra, az
utbbi viszont azt prblja felkutatni, ami kzvetlenl nem jelenik meg, hanem csak
egy tudatos erfeszts rvn vlhat hozzfrhetv. (SAJ Sndor: Amirl tudunk
s amirl nem In: Img 2012/3, 25.)
Jnas bnei tettein, cselekedetein keresztl radnak be a vilgba. Ricur utal arra,
hogy a bn mint egyfajta jrvny, pestis terjed. Athbai pestist Oidipusz lltja meg
egy jslat megfejtsvel. Apestist eredenden ppen apja, Laiosz bne zdtotta a
vrosra, hiszen fajtalankodott, fiatal szeretje (fi) volt, ezrt Hra megtkozta, hogy
ha magnak gyermeke tall szletni, majd apja letre trjn. Oidipusznak nem
csupn sajt identitsnak felkutatsa miatt kell bnhdnie a mr elkvetett cselekedetek miatt, hanem sei sorst, tkait is magra veszi szletse pillanatban. Erika
Fischer-Lichte a kirly az tokrl val nem tuds llapotban elkvetett tetteit gy
rtelmezi (FISCHER-LICHTE, Erika: Adrma trtnete (ford. KISS Gabriella) Jelen-

1 71 2

vilgra s a msikra val nyitott ittlt lehetsgeinek tragikus elrhetetlensge, a

szrmazsi tjkra visszajuts az elvtsben, az immr a norma ltal kiknyszertett sodrdsban (trvny knyszerti a hzassgot) lesz nyilvnvalv a szr-

kor, Pcs, 2001. 4154.), mint amelyeket a pusztn fizikai test (phszisz) nem rtelmes cselekvsknt vitt vgbe, minden, ami lezajlott, a nusz (rtelem) szmra idegen,
ezrt nem is elbeszlhet, azaz nem vlhat nyelvnek rszv. Fischer-Lichte teht
nem a tudattalan s a tudatos konfliktusaknt rtelmezi a mtoszt, hanem olyan
identitstrtnetknt, amelyben a titok leleplezst a nusz, a kutat rtelem kveti
el, mikzben az istenek ltal elrendelt identitshoz csak s kizrlag a testnek van
kze. Mikzben Oidipusz igyekszik megfejteni nnn identitst, s ezt beszdaktusokban trja fel, egyre kzelebb jut testi cselekvseinek identitskpz erejhez.
Jakab mesjbl tbbek kztt ez a mozzanat hinyzik, hiszen Jnas sosem keresi
maga a titkot, sosem trekszik tudatosan megfejteni az ltala elkvetett bnk s
szrmazsa kztti kapcsolatot. Bnei ell meneklve a bnktl val szabadd vls ignyvel halad vgig lettjn, a megszabaduls vgya mozgatja. Oidipusz ellenben azt vlasztja, hogy kvetkezetesen vgigjrja az utat, s ltni, tudni akar. Atest
ltal megvalstott s hitelestett, illetve a beszdaktusokban ltrejv s ltaluk
igazolt identitst teht a nusz, a kutat rtelem hozza fokozatosan kapcsolatba.
(FISCHER-LICHTE: i.m. 47.) Alts s tuds azonban a nyelv s a beszdaktusok,
valamint a test s a fizikai tevkenysg egymssal verseng identitsalkot tnyezit
egysgbe gyrva jelennek meg: ez a kapcsolat kpezi Oidipusz szmra a felismerst.
Erre az j identitsra adott vlaszknt vaktja meg magt nkezvel testi termszett
bntetve. Avaksg llapotban elkvetett tettek immr nemcsak a nyelvbe, hanem
a testbe is berdnak. Oidipusz neve is mintegy elre utal tudsnak/rtelmnek, illetve ltsnak deficitjre: a grg o sz, nevnek eltagja egyarnt jelentheti azt,
hogy tudom s hogy lttam gy is fordthatnnk, mint sntt tuds, vagy hibs lts (FISCHER-LICHTE: i.m. 50.). Akirly teht testre alaktja nevnek jelentst ezzel jutva hozz j identitshoz. Afelismers, a testi bers aktusa utn
Oidipusz nyilvnosan is vllalni akarja nmagt ezt Kren megtiltja neki ezrt
tudatosan vllalja a bnbak szerept, elszigeteli magt, szmzetsbe vonul, majd
ott hal meg. Atragdia istenfelfogsban Oidipusznak mr szletse eltt elrendeldtt a sorsa, s mindent megtett, hogy ezeket elkerlje sikertelenl, hiszen az istenek csapdt lltottak neki, a kptelensgig fesztik s a nevetsg trgyv teszik
a nyomozst, illetve az azt biztost s az ndefinciban oly alapvet szerepet jtsz rtelmet. (FISCHER-LICHTE: i.m. 53.)

1 72 2

mazsi tjk ltal hangolt ltmd ismtlsnek aktusval, azzal szemben, amit a
vilgra nyitott ittlt valdi lehetsgei biztosthatnnak.
Heidegger szerint a beszdhez hozztartozik a megbeszltnek az amirl-je44.
Jnas tetteivel kapcsolatban feltrul az is, ahogyan maga rtelmezi az esemnyeket. Mind a gynsok, mind az anyjval-felesgvel val prbeszd rsze az
elbeszlsnek. Amirl pedig a lelkiismeret beszl legalbbis Heidegger szerint
a jelenvallt. Ajelenvallthez azonban lnyegszeren hozztartozik, hogy
vilga feltrulsval nmagnak is feltrul, mghozz gy, hogy mr eleve rti
magt () a hvs ltal nmaghoz vitetik45. Jakab Istvn mesjben a lelkiismeret nem kap szerepet abban az rtelemben, hogy Jnas elbeszln sajt bels trtnseit, vagy nmegrtst, ez valjban nem is mesei funkci, legtbbszr csak
magt a tnyt hivatkozza, cselekedeteit, vagy vtkessgt. Dntsei, lelkiismerete
elssorban az elbeszl-mesl ltal elnk trt tetteken keresztl nyilvnul meg.
Jnas magt a zrdban elkvetettek miatt felmenti, ppen a trvnyhez val
igazods hinyban: nem parancsolt senki sem nekem (697), de megkezdett
egy kicsit szlni, nem ppen az idtl, hanem a sok gondtl s a sok bjdasstl, a bnattl, hogy az lelkt milyen nagy teher nyomta. (698.) Ilyen mdon
a lelkiismereti krdseket rszben kifejtetlenl, tlet nlkl hagyja, s ezzel kapcsoldhat ahhoz a gondolathoz, miszerint a lelkiismeret egyedl s llandan
a hallgats mduszban beszl. Heidegger filozfiai megkzeltsben a lelkiismeret azltal csatlakozik brmihez, hogy hallja a hvst, ami nem ms, mint az
akrki-nmaghoz szl felhvs sajt nmagban: nmaga lenni tudsra, s
ezzel a jelenvallt elrehvsa a maga lehetsgeibe.46 Jnas sokszor kzvettkn, papokon keresztl igyekszik ennek az nmaghoz szl felhvsnak eleget
tenni, de nyilvnvalan nem ez a szmra dvzt md. Jnas trtnete azt is
elbeszli, hogy ugyan elfordulhat a kzvettn keresztli felolds, m mivel magnak a bnnek a mintzata, a vilgban val lt mdja vltozatlan, a sorskplet
maga feloldatlan marad, csak az elkvetett bnkre nyer bocsnatot; az let pedig jabb s jabb olyan helyzetekbe sodorja, mskppen fogalmazva ittltben
sodortatni engedi magt, amelyben visszardik a mintzat, s jabb bnk44 HEIDEGGER: i.m. 461.
45 HEIDEGGER: i.m. 461462.
46 HEIDEGGER: i.m. 463.

1 73 2

kel, elvtsekkel terheldik. Atitok Jnas szmra a sorskplete, amely a vrt s

kibjtlt felolds utn beteljesl, s csupn beteljeslse utn kerl napvilgra.
Atitok feltrulsa teht nem vezet jra, nem ad megnyugvst, nem menti fel
a felelssg all, csak legfeljebb utlagos magyarzatknt szolglhat. Jnas szrmazsnak s trtnetnek valsga, az ez all val feloldozs lehetetlensge (a
papok elutastsa), illetve ennek megltsa nem segti a hst lettjn.47
Heideggerrel ellenttben48 Ricur szerint a rossz nem lt, hanem tett, azaz
nem a vilg bns voltnak megegyez, annak megfelel ltmd, hanem tett,
amellyel ehhez a bnssghez kapcsoldunk, amellyel a bnt a vilgba behozzuk. Jnas valjban szembesl azzal, ahogyan egyszerre vettetett a bnk
kz a vilgba s tettei ltal is kapcsoldott a bnhz mgha ezek kztt nemcsak bn, hanem vtek, tveszts is szerepelt. Jnas tvelygse, lzadsa, elvtett
cljai, ferde s fradsgos tjai oda vezetnek, hogy bnt bnre halmoz: az sszes
tjba kerl, st minden katolikus papot megl. Akatolikus gyntat pap alakja
felfoghat gy is, mint minden emberi titok tudja, rzje, megtartja, aki szmon tarthatja a msoknak el nem mondhatt: azt, ami csakis a lelkiismeretre s
Istenre tartozik. Afelolds jogval br pap ilyen mdon a lelkiismereti prbeszdben az a dialguspartner, akivel a beszd irnyultsga csak rszben a megrts, inkbb a (vlt vagy vals) bnssg alli menteslsben jellhet ki. Jnas
47 Jnas elssorban a vilgba val vetettsg inautentikus ltmdjt valstja meg.
Ltszlag az egyetlen lehetsg szmra a (kls) feloldozs, ebben ltja a cselekvseinek kvetkezmnyeitl val eloldst, jvjnek zlogt s nem a cselekvsi lehetsgek kzli szabad vlasztsban. A vlaszts szmra felttelhez kttt: ha
valahogy megszabadul bneitl, ms tra trhet. Avlaszts, a dntsi helyzetek
magasabb etikai, a heideggeri lt harmadik szintje, a beszdben val artikulci, a
megvitats, a diszkurzv gyakorlat azonban nem jelenik meg. Heidegger pedig ennek a hrom dimenzinak a kapcsolatt hvja gondoskodsnak Jnas ezeknek a dimenziknak a metszspontjn kvl esik...
48 Abns lt nem valamilyen bn elkvetsnek a kvetkezmnye, hanem megfordtva: a bnss vls csak az eredend bns-lt alapjn vlik lehetsgess. HEIDEGGER: i.m. 477. Heidegger itt a bns cselekedeteket eleve csak a bns-ltre
val hangoltsg kvetkezmnyeknt rti. Ricur szerint pedig a bns-ltre val
hangoltsghoz a tetteken keresztl kapcsoldunk. Teht az ember nem eleve ll benne, hanem elvtett tettein keresztl kapcsolja magt az eredend bns lthez.

1 74 2

gyilkossgai dhben fogannak, de gy tnik, egyszerre clozzk a katolicizmus

ltal kzvettkn keresztl hirdetett feloldozs lehetsgnek hibavalsgt,
de legalbbis esetlegessgt goston szmra ppen ez jelenti az isteni titkot,
mivel a kivlaszts titka sosem fedhet fel, mirt ppen ez vagy az az ember lett
kivlasztva s kaphat kegyelmet illetve msrszrl az elutasts, a feloldozs
megtagadsa miatt ll bosszt.49 Asajt anyjval val vrfertz kapcsolat, a
rengeteg gyilkossg immr Jnas lelkn szrad ahogy a t vize kiszradt , t
nem ruhzhat, nem rtelmezhet transzhistriai szolidaritsknt, hiszen sajt cselekvs eredmnye. Ha a bukst az eredend bn mtoszaknt rtjk, akkor a rossz eredett egy tvoli sre vezetjk vissza, amely megvilgtja minden
ember helyzett: mivel mr megtrtnt, nem n kezdem el a rosszat, folytatom
a rossz rszeknt; a rossznak mltja van, sajt hagyomnya s eltrtnete.50
Abuks archetipikus felfogsa azonban egy olyan skpp, egyfajta tpuss formlja a bnt s a rosszat, amely ezltal a regenerci antitpusv, az jjszlets antitpusv vlik, lltja Ricur. Aregenerci, az jj ttel, az jjteremts,
az j generciv alakuls, az jjszlets kpei azok, amellyel Jakab tovbbszvi a mest m egy jabb elvtsen, jabb titkon keresztl.
Amese kt rsze kztt bizonyos rtelemben a regenerci fogalma s sz
szerinti aktusa teremt kapcsolatot az let tovbbadsnak gesztusban. Aki elrulja a Teremtt, a tipikus szkevny az, aki a megkeresztelssel vagy valamilyen ms tpus beavatssal jjszletik s bebocsttatik a Kirlysgba. Mgis
megszkik.51 Jnas trtnetben a kegyelem a plbnos imjval s a burjnz bza kpvel rkezik, hogy aztn eredend sorst beteljestve visszahulljon a bnbe, mintegy megtagadva a szks lehetsgt. Megkapja a lehetsget
az jjszletsre, de sorst nem kerlheti el. Amsodik jjszletsi rtus a szerelem lehetne, de ez mr nem Jnas jjszletshez vezet, hanem egy j lny
megszletshez ezzel egytt pedig a rgi vtkes hs hallhoz. Ebben az rtelemben a mese msodik fele az jjszlets rtust konkretizlja, a szakrlis s a
49 Jakab Istvn cigny mesemond, ezrt felmerlhet az a krds is, milyen differencit vagy ppen kapcsoldst teremt a mese a cignyok hitvilga s a katolikus hagyomnyok kztt.
50 RICUR: i.m. 89.
51 KERMODE: i.m. 63.

1 75 2

profn sszekapcsolsval: a regenerci metaforikus s sz szerinti aktusban

az jjszlets rtust a gyermeknemzs s szlets mindennapi rtusv avatja az rintkezs metonimikus alakzatban az eltolds, thelyezs (Verschiebung, displacement) alakzata egyik genercirl a msikra a fizikai rintkezs
testi gesztusban lt formt. Amikor Jnas j letet nemz, a mese nem csupn
az trtnetnek ellenpontozsaknt, tetteinek jvtteleknt folytatdhat, hanem a regenerci s trtnetmesls egyszerre metaforikus s metonimikus
alakzatban.
Amese kt rsze kztti kapcsolat feltrsa rmutathat arra, mi szksge volt
Jakab Istvnnak az egybknt jl ismert AaTh 314-es mesetpus (Az aranyhaj
kertszbojtr) ltala elmondott vltozatt sszekapcsolni egy olyan bevezet
epizddal, amelyben a hs szrmazsi tjkt jrja be. Akt rsz kztti kapcsolatot egyfell a nvazonossg, a vrrokonsg biztostja, de az ellenpontozs is.
Amese kt rsze nem csak hangulatban t el egymstl, hanem egyrszt megszaktja azt a fggsget, amelyben az apa egyoldalan valaki ms kegyelmbl,
az isteni kegyelembl akar lni52 gy, hogy kzben ppen ebbli trekvsben
leplezdik le istenhinya: az a ltszat, amely szerint az embernek istenre kellene vrnia, a legmlyebb istenhiny jele53. Helting azt is megfogalmazza, hogy
noha az egyes ember megsemmisl a hallban, tettei s gondolatai azonban tovbb lnek a tbbiekben.54 Amese msodik felben hsknt fellp Mogyors
Jnas annyiban elengedhetetlenl fontos alakja a trtnetnek, amennyiben apja
halla utn tetteit s gondolatait egyfajta jvtteli mdon lteti tovbb. Amegcsfols, a knnyelmsg, az ruls, a kitasztottsg, a msoknak okozott szenveds (pldul a kiskakas ltal megmutatott vilg lnyeinek) mind-mind tovbb
ltetik valamilyen mdon az apai rksget, azonban egyetlen risi klnbsggel, s ez a klnbsg lehet a tndrmesk vagy vitzmesk clja. Ameddig az
ember l, a lehetsgekhez viszonyulva a jelenben mindig kpes a mltbl kiindulva j jvt biztostani.55 Amese msodik rsznek rszletesebb elemzse
helyett rdemes megvizsglni, mi Mogyors Jnas titka, mi teszi lehetv sz52 V. HELTING: i.m. 181.
53 HELTING: i.m. 205.
54 HELTING: i.m. 232.
55 HELTING: i.m. 275.

1 76 2

mra a testbe s nvbe rt rksg dvtrtneti mesevgg val talaktst:

ugyanis kpes arra, hogy prbk sort killva elnyerje a kirlylny kezt s boldogan ljen, mg meg nem hal.
Jakab Istvn a mesei zrformula utn egy rvid magyarzatot is biggyeszt
a szveg vgre:
Mindenfle szenvedlye, ahogy mondta nekije a kis katona, a kis kendermagas tyk, ht vet kellett szgljan, s ht v letelte utn aztn csakis kirly lett, de mindenfle csak a jtettjirt vt, Jnasnak a j szve, hoj jt tett a
kis tykkal, a kis tyk nekije megszglta. Itt a vge, fussanak el vlle! (731.)

3. Altezs titka
Mogyors Jnas apja a papok kiirtst kveten a mese szerint fehrnpekre
vadszik, mgnem tall is magnak egyet, aki a szvt megszakasztotta. Amegkemnyedett szv, a kszv nem ms, mint az, amely az isteni hvs szmra rzketlenn vlt.56 Jnas szve egy profn esemny kapcsn, egy n ltvnyn
keresztl reped, vltozik, mozdul meg. Azonban meg sem prblkozik tisztessges mdszerekkel, azonnal cselhez folyamodik, s pontosan azt az rzkszervt hatstalantja, amely elvezette a szpsghez, a lgyul szv tapasztalathoz,
amely majd az isteni hvs meghallsra is alkalmass tenn. Ilyen rtelemben is
elszalasztja a vilgban val nyitott lt lehetsgt. Elzrja magt, vaknak tetteti
magt, hogy a lny ne figyeljen r, ne vegye szre, gy elrabolhatja, futhat vele ht
falunak hatrn tl s vgl megerszakolhatja. Megvaktsa ltal, a lts, a ltvny, amelyen keresztl megnylna szmra a kegyelemhez vezet t, vgleg meg
van tagadva. Amsik irnti gondoskods nnn lnyege alapjn nyitva ll lehetsget ez az nmegvalsts perverz mdon viszi vghez; a msikkal szembeni lnyegi nyitottsgot arra hasznlja, hogy a msikon erszakot tegyen. Ezzel az
ember elhibzza nnn lnyegt, s gy teljes egszben beteg.57 Jnos alakjban
megnyilvnul teljes elzrkzs ettl a lnyegi nyitottsgtl a vilg, az rtelem
rzkelsnek szervtl val megfosztottsgot, mint kvetkezmnyt vonja maga

56 RICUR: i.m. 87.

57 HELTING: i.m. 156.

1 77 2

utn. Vakon bolyongva meg is hal, s itt hallban Jnasnak megbocsjtatt az

Isten, vagyis megfizetett, megokolt a sok tetjirt, tladatt Jnas az letjin. (703)
Avak sors beteljestse nyilvnvalan lezrja az nll cselekedetek lehetsgt.
Msknt fogalmazva: a sors vakon val beteljestse kzben nincs md a vilgban val nyitott lt ltal felknlt lehetsgek megltsra s birtokba vtelre.
Arossz egsz titka abban ll, hogy azonos fogalommal jellnk els megkzeltsre olyannyira eltr jelensgeket, mint a bn, a szenveds s a hall. Rosszat cselekedni azonban nem mst jelent, mint szenvedst okozni a msiknak,
rtani neki s tegyk hozz, szenvedst okozni, rtani magunknak. Abnssg itt kapcsoldik a szenvedshez, hiszen a bnssg morlis s fizikai szenveds is egyben, rja Ricur.58 Mikzben a mtosz elmossa a bns s az ldozat
kztti hatrt, mivel mindkett egy nagyobb vilgegsz s rend rszeknt ltezik s cselekszik a vilgban, a retribci elve szerint viszont minden szenveds
megrdemelt szenveds (kollektv vagy egyni bnk miatt), a jogrend pedig a
bntetst s szenvedst mindenkinek a bnssg (emberi) mrtke szerint szabja ki. Amrtkarnyos eloszts azonban nem magyarzza a szenveds eloszlst:
azaz a vilgban tapasztalhat szenveds mrtke s minsge tlmutat az emberi rtelem ltal felfoghat renden. Jb trtnete azt mutatja meg, hogy brmely
oldalon is llunk, a panasz nem odaill, nincs helye Istennel szemben. Az igazi
titok a panaszrl val teljes lemondshoz vezet t: az, amelyen jrva a szenvedsben nevel s tisztt rtket fedeznk fel. Alemonds minden olyan vgyat
rint, amely igazsgossgra, ernyeink megjutalmazsra, szenvedsek elkerlsre irnyul. Ingyen szeretni Istent, nem krni semmit, nem panaszkodni semmirt, ez lehet a lekzdhetetlen szenveds titka, fejezi be Ricur a tanulmnyt.59
Jnas trtnete ezen a ponton folytatdik abban a gyermekben, aki bns mltjt nem kutatva nekiindul a ltezsnek, s beteljesti azt a panaszmentes sorsot,
amelyben lett ajndkba kapja.
Az ajndkba kapott ltezs nyomn Mogyors Jnas, a fi, jabb ajndkokhoz jut: tanulsi kpessghez, j szhez, a j szve ltal megmentett kendermagos
58 RICUR, Paul: Arossz: kihvs a filozfia s a teolgia szmra In: U. Vlogatott
irodalomelmleti tanulmnyok, (szerk. SZEGEDY-MASZK Mihly), Osiris Kiad,
Budapest, 1999. 9495.
59 RICUR: i.m. 115.

1 78 2

tykocska rvn j vilgok megismershez, segt trgyakhoz (kukoricaszem,

zsebkend), a ms nyelveken val szls kpessghez, a mltsggal vllalt furfanghoz, btorsghoz, kitartshoz s a vrakozs kpessghez. Mogyors Jnasnak egy nagy titka van: amit a kiskakas rbzott. Akiskakas ltal feltrt vilg
egyszerre egy msik, titkos vilg, amelyrl nem tudhat akrki, amelyet nem lthat akrki, s ezltal msok ltal hozz nem frhet tuds birtokba juttat, mikzben a vgyak szntert is reprezentlja, egy olyan vilgot, amelyben nem
ltezik rossz. Akiskakas titka nem csak a val/transzcendens vilg (a mesben
ez vertiklis rtelemben nem fent, hanem lent helyezkedik el, egy csapajt alatt)
titkait kpviseli; a titok megismerse ilyen rtelemben nem csak a vilgban juttat hatalomhoz, hanem a vgyak tert is jelkpezi, nem hiba kpzeli Mogyors
Jnas, hogy Tndrorszgban van (708). Akiskakas ltal feltrt titok elrulsa
teht nem csupn a titkos tuds elrulsa, de a vgyak, kzelebbrl nmaga vgyott vilgnak elrulsa is.
Mikzben apjt a szrba szkkens, a bzatblv nvs vltja meg, Mogyors Jnas szmra a kendermagos tykocska az odaajndkozott magon (kukorica) keresztl teremt kapcsolatot valami nmagn tlmutatval. Kermode szerint
a magvet a Szt veti: van, aki meghallja, de a Stn kilopja a szvbl, van, aki
rmmel meghallja, de nyoms s ldztets miatt nem tartja be, ez a sz hullik termketlen talajra, a tske azok, akik vilgi vgyakba s ambcikba fojtjk, mg azoknak, akik valban halljk, sok gymlcs terem.60 Az apa meg akar
javulni, de erszakos cselekvseivel szenvedst okoz, a bntetssel jr szenvedst pedig nem sikerl lete sorn lernia, csak halla rn. Mintha egy kegyelmi llapot utn nem jrna tbb. Afia elfogadja az rulsrt jr szenveds ht
vt, a megfosztottsg llapott61, vagyis valamilyen mdon trekszik a cselekv alany (agent) s a szenved alany (patient) kzti lnyegi rszarnytalansg felismersre, illetve kiegyenltsre. Amag viselkedse nmagban nem jelent
megoldst, csupn jelzi az esemnyek menetben bekvetkez fordulpontot
az apa kegyelmi llapott a bza jelzi, az jrakezdst egy j letben a mogyor60 KERMODE: i.m. 29.
61 V RICUR, Paul: Az n s az elbeszlt azonossg In: U. Vlogatott irodalomelmleti tanulmnyok, (szerk. SZEGEDY-MASZK Mihly), Osiris Kiad, Budapest,
1999. 380.

1 79 2

bokor alatt trtn fogantats; ezek mint elvtsbe torkoll cselekedetek vlnak
krdsess. Akegyelmi llapot vesztst a kukoricaszem elvesztse, a titok kifecsegse jelli, de Mogyors Jnas tettei apjval ellenttben sikeres jvtteli
cselekedetekben folytatdnak. Amaggal val bnsmd, a magrt vllalt felelssg az, ami meghatrozza az esemnyek kimenetelt. Az magasg krdsben Ricur kt plust klnbztet meg.
() az egyik vgponton az ugyanaz azonossgt (identit du mme) takarja, mg a msik vgponton teljesen elvlik tle. Az els plust szmunkra a
jellem jelensge kpezte (a paru symbolis), amely ltal a szemly azonosthatv s jra azonosthatv vlik. () a msodik plust az nmegrzs
(maintien de soi) a szemlynek az az igyekezete, hogy a msik szmthasson
r. Azrt, mert valaki szmt rm, szmadssal tartozom cselekedeteimrl
a msiknak. Afelelssg fogalma egyesti a kt jelentst: azt, hogy szmt
valakire egyesti azzal, hogy szmadssal tartozik valamirl.62
Ricur az magasg krdsben felvetd kt plust, a jellem ltali azonosthatsg s az nmegrzs fogalmait a felelssg fogalmval azrt kapcsolhatja
ssze, mert a szmonkrs s szmads egyfajta azonosthat ltezre irnyul,
vagy belle kiindul aktusknt lehet csak legitim, hiteles, vagy hihet performatv aktusknt ekknt rheti el azt a hatst, viheti vgbe azt a cselekvsrtk mozzanatot, ami ltal valban felelssgteljes cselekvsknt rtkelhet.
Az ugyanazonossg segtsgtl megfosztott n semmi; ez a kifosztottsg vgs
pillanata, lltja Ricur Musil kapcsn. Amese ellenben abban a posztmodern
identitsproblematikt s identitsfelfogst megelz diszkurzusrendben szletett, amely nem problematizlta a szerepl/figura/szemlyisg/jellem/identits
egysgt. Aposztmodern elbeszlsekkel szemben a mesben nem vlik szt a
cselekv s a megfigyel tudat; a karakterek a jelensg s a valsg paradigmatikus dichotmijn alapulnak a misztifikcitl a megvilgosodsig, feltrva a
karakter s identitsa/nazonossgnak igazsgt. Jakab mesjben sem lehet ez
mskpp, az nmegrzs lehetetlensgnek krdst ezrt kt alakban kell megformlja. Az egyik alak, Jnas, az apa alakja olyan jellemet kpvisel, aki jra s
jra bnt kvet el, jra s jra kegyelmet reml, a lehetsg viszont ismtelten
62 RICUR: i.m. 407.

1 80 2

megvondik tle a kitrsi pontok ellenre azonossgnak rsze az ismtld

rt cselekedet, s a feloldozs megtagadsa, mondhatni, a szeretetlensg. Jakab
mesjnek els fele teht egy nagyon konzekvensen megrajzolt alakot s cselekedeteit beszli el, amelyben cselekedeteirl szmadssal tartozik, a szmads
ignye mozgatja. Afi, Mogyors Jnas az magasg msik plust kpviseli,
amennyiben minden igyekezet arra irnyul, hogy szmtani lehessen r, teljesti
azt, amit meggrt, a kiskakassal val tallkozs kivtelvel: ktszer ugyanis elrulja a kiskakas titkt.
Jakab mesje a midrs beszdhez annyiban hasonlatos, amennyiben bizonyos
trvnyek kr szvdik a trtnetek kapcsn. Ane lj! parancsolata, a vrfertzs tilalma s a titoktarts megszegse olyan klnbz ervel br trvnyek,
amelyek eredett a mese alapveten nem problematizlja, univerzlis emberi,
szoksjogi, kzssgi, keresztny, vagy esetleg msmilyen eredetek.63 Ricur
szerint az magasg (ipsit) vlsgnak hatsra nem kellene az ntiszteletet
ngyllettel felvltanunk. Taln ez a legnagyobb teljestmnye Mogyors Jnasnak, hiszen apjval ellenttben a vlsg ami immr bizonyos rtelemben
egyfajta titkos tuds, netn nmaga elrulsnak kvetkezmnye nem torkollik ngylletbe, valamint sem nmagnak, sem msoknak nem okoz tovbbi
szenvedst.
Amennyiben a bnt vtekknt, azaz elvtsknt rtelmezzk, s a titkot nem a
valamelyik trgyi ltez, tuds vagy esemny elrejtettsgeknt gondoljuk el, hanem olyan esemnyknt, amelyben a lt addik, akkor a ltbe val belevetettsgre a lthez val viszonybl kiindulva esemnyszer ltknt tekinthetnk. E
viszony kivtel nlkl olyan felszabadt viszony, amely lehetv teszi, hogy az
ember nnn ltt megrt lnyegi mltsgba bocstkozzon, s nmagt e mltsgban megtartsa.64 Afelszabadt viszony Jakab Istvn mesjben egyben az
aptl val szabadd vlst is jelenti. Mg Jnasnak ez felems mdon sikerl,
a msiknak okozott szenveds rn, fia, Jnas kpes nnn s msok mlts63 Kivtel a Jnas sajt anyjval ktend hzassga, mieltt fny derlne arra, milyen
rokoni viszonyban llnak egymssal. Amese jelzi, hogy egyszeri, kzssgi dntsrl van sz: ha megltte az embert, a gazdjt, ht vegye el az asszanyt felesgl.
(NAGY-V: i.m. 696.)
64 HELTING: i.m. 157.

1 81 2

gt megrizve megtenni ezt a lpst. Ha a pszichoanalzis sztrt mozgstjuk,

Ricur nyomn azt mondhatni, hogy az apa, a nyelv s a kultra birtokosa ll
Oidipusz drmjnak kzppontjban, amelynek ttje ppen a vgy belpse a
kultra tartomnyba. Akultrhoz a vgy sokflekppen viszonyul, mindenesetre a kultra tilt s vigasztal. Mikzben az lom a vgy beteljests folyamatnak legelemibb formjt teszi jelenlvv, az apa meggyilkolsa olyan mly sebet
hagy, amely ignyli az apa figurjval val megbklst ennek egyik formja
lehet az utlagos engedelmessg az apa trvnynek. Avalls pszichoanalitikus
rtelmezse teht az apa utni nosztalgia a vigaszban. Avigasz azonban legalbb ktfle: egyfell a gyermeki s a blvnyoz forma keverke, msfell pedig
a llek vigasza. Ez utbbi viszont csak a valsgnak val hatrtalan, s szlssges engedelmessg ltal hozzfrhet, s csak az els fajta vigasz fltti gyszbl fakadhat.65
Apa s fia, a kt Jnas trtnetben csak gy bocstkozhat a vilgra val nyitott lt szabadsgba, ha lemond az apa utni nosztalgikus vigaszrl, s nem keresi azt a valls ltal nyjtott lehetsgekben. Ahol keresni rdemes, az a lt, a
llek maga. Anpmesknek azonban nem feladata ilyen rtelemben a llek pszichoanalitikus, teolgiai, fenomenolgiai, stb. mkdst bemutatni, sokkal inkbb hagyatkoznak az esemnyszer lt felszabadtsnak bemutatsra. Helting
ebben az esemnyszer ittltben jelli meg a titok felbukkanst:
Az ittltet, melyet elzleg a lehetsgekbe belevetett kivetlsknt gondoltuk el, immr a lehetsgekre val esemnyszer kivetlsknt gondoljuk el.
Az e kivetlsre magt bevet jelenltet esemnyszer bevetsknt gondoltuk
el. Ennlfogva az esemny az esemnyszer bevets s az esemnyszer kivetls sszetartozsaknt megy vgbe. () az ittlt felszabadtottsgnak jellege annyit jelent, hogy sajt eredete bizonyos rtelemben megvonja magt
tle, lthatatlan marad. Az esemnyben teht mindig mkdik egy olyan
alapvons is, ami nem jelenik meg, titok marad. Br az ittlt eredete titok
marad, de a lt adottsgban mint nmagt rejtve-ad (illetve adomnyoz) eredet mgis megtapasztalhat s megszlthat.66
65 RICUR, Paul: The Atheism of Freudian Psychoanalysis In: U. On Psychoanalysis (ford. PELLAUER, David), Polity Press, Cambridge-Malden, 2012. 147158.
66 HELTING: i.m. 158.

1 82 2

Alt adottsgban mint nmagt rejtve-ad eredet hordozza a lt igazsgt,

amely az esemnyben egyszerre elrejtettsgknt (letheia) s el nem rejtettsgknt (aletheia) tnik fl. Oidipusz drmja, vagy Jnas trtnete kapcsn vilgos, hogy az igazsg el nem rejtettsgnek kiknyszertse akr a sodrdsban
elvtett cselekedetekkel, akr a kutatsra fogott rtelem ltal bajt okoz. Altezs valdi titka az elrejtettsg s el-nem-rejtettsg sszetartozsnak szksgszersge, valamint az igazsgban val rejtve hagys kpessge. Aki a rejtetthez
val hozzfrsre vllalkozik, nagy kockzatot vllal, hiszen neki kell kimrnie maga szmra az arnyokat a lt igazsga ugyanis soha nem kpes teljes el nem rejtettsgben feltrulni. Afolyamatnak, az igazsgba val behatols
folyamatnak gy soha nem lehet vge. Sokkal knnyebb a ltezs igazsghoz
hozzfrni, ha minden pillanatban esemnyszeren megtrtnik a ltre val rhagyatkozs, amelyben a legnagyobb tett a lehetv tevs, illetve a lenni-hagys.
Ahhoz, hogy ezt [vilgban val lt nyitottsgt] megtapasztaljuk, le kell mondanunk az egszsges vilg utni vgyrl, s arrl is, hogy az n egyenesen
egy ilyen vilgot s dvt kpzeljen el s kvnjon magnak. () Daseinanalitikailag azt mondhatnnk, hogy ppen ez a vgy egszsgtelen, vagyis egyenesen
tjban ll annak, hogy az ember megtapasztalja lte egszsges alapvonsait.67
Altezs titka teht nem a bntelensg utni svrgsban, nem valamifle
dvtrtnet vgyban, vagy ppen az igazsg feltrsban jellhet ki, hanem
a vilgban val lt lnyegi nyitottsgnak felismersben, amely mr nem tart
ignyt az el-nem-rejtett (igazsg) teljeskr s egybirnt illuzrikus feltrsra,
hanem a titok, a fel-nem-trt mindenkori, kimerthetetlen megltnek tudjaknt aki tisztban van a titok termszetbl add vgs hozzfrhetetlensg
tnyvel ekknt az nmaga s a msok irnti felelssg s gondoskods feladatt tzi ki clul. Ember s lt sszetartozsa nem olyasvalami ltal hagyatik, amely magt mint ltezt mutatja meg, hanem az elrejtett ltal. Helting a
ltre-hagys nll fejldsnek illusztrlshoz a humanisztikus pszicholgia
kzponti kpt68 alkalmazza, a fldre bzott virgmag kpt. Amagbl kinvs
67 HELTING: i.m. 142.
68 Abraham Maslow, a humanisztikus llektan kidolgozsnak kzponti alakja, a nvekedssel kapcsolatban megnevezi a hinymotivlt nvekedst s az nmegvalstst
szolgl nvekedst, valamint azt lltja, hogy meg kell klnbztetnnk a freudi

1 83 2

folyamatban elssorban a nvekeds r-hagysban van feladat a magra bzott terlet termkenyen tartsval s nem magban a nvekedsben. Anvekedsben magban mindenekeltt a nvny mutatkozik meg, nem az, ami t
nvekedni hagyja.69
Mivel az intencionalits csak a hangoltsg alapjn lehetsges 70, a j szv is a
lehetsgre felkszlt rmknt kpzelhet el. Alt jravalsga csakis ebben az
intencionalitsban lehetsges. Alehetsgre felkszlt rmknt megjelen lt
alaptapasztalattl az ember sosem fog meneklsszeren elfordulni amelyben elsorvad az egsz rtelmhez (Sinn) val viszonya , pp ellenkezleg, sokkal
inkbb vrhat, hogy az odafordulsban igent mond az egsz rtelmre. Amennyiben a nvekeds r-hagysa, a ltre-hagys, a lenni hagys, vagy a ltre val
rutaltsg esemnyszersgt megvizsgljuk, knnyen oda juthatunk, hogy ezek
elsdleges tapasztalata kifejezetten az anyhoz, a ni archetpusok kzl a legjelentsebbhez kthet. Jakab Istvn mesjben azonban a ni archetpusok kzl
nemcsak az anya archetpusa, hanem a szeret archetpusa is rendre megjelenik,
s jelentsgt tekintve megelzi az anya archetpust.

4. Aszeret titka
Jakab Istvn egy msik mesjben, AFeketebli kirly cmben olyan meglep
fordulattal l, amely meglehetsen szokatlan a npmesei szvegvilgban. Ameseszveg szintn tbb tpus kontamincija, de olyan mrtkben, hogy szinte
mr tipologizlhatatlan, egyedi alkotss vlik71. Agonosz lelkektl megszllt
felettes nt a valdi bels lelkiismerettl s a valdi bels bntudattl. () Avaldi
bels bntudat a sajt bels termszetnk vagy nmagunk elrulsnak kvetkezmnye, amikor elhagyjuk az nmegvalstshoz vezet utat. ( az nhelytelents)
nemcsak mindenron elkerlend tnet, hanem egy bels tikalauz a valdi szemlyisg s a benne rejl lehetsgek megvalstshoz vezet nvekedsben. MASLOW, Abraham: Alt pszicholgija fel (ford. TURCZI Attila), Budapest, Ursus
Libris, 2003. 290.
69 HELTING: i.m. 180181.
70 HELTING: i.m. 79.
71 Akzlt tpuskplet csak ltalnos tjkoztatsul szolgl, nem fedi a vltozat igazi
tpussszettelt, s nem sokat rul el szerkezeti sajtossgaibl. () a jelzett tpu-

1 84 2

lny megmentsre siet hs a legborzasztbb prbkat is killva sikeresen rzi

hrom jjen t a koporsba temetett kirlylnyt, s amikor az tiszta llekknt felbred, kszen ll arra, hogy felesgl vegye. Azonban rendhagy mdon a lny
nem akar a felesge lenni, st azt tancsolja, ahelyett, hogy a szoksos mesevgre futna ki a trtnetk prbk, megments, jutalom, ami mindig a kirlylny
keze s legalbb a fele kirlysg mondjon le a hzassgrl, a kirly ltal grt jutalomrl, s krje inkbb el apjtl azt a kis tlgyfahordt, amit olyan nagy becs
ben riz. Termszetesen a tlgyfahord varzservel br, a hs valban jl jr
vele, de tmenetileg le kell mondjon a felesgrl s a vagyonrl. rdemes hosszabban idzni a megtisztult s megmentett lny szavait:
Nzz ide, Jnas szvem, n a tied, te az enyim! Te riztl meg engemet, n
tllem tbbet nincsen, amit fjjl, mert mindenfle gonosz llek kiment belllem, s hogyha akarsz Nzz ide, kicsi szivem, mindesetre te riztl meg
engemet hram ccaka, amin mondtam, nincsen, amit mr fjjl tllem, n
mr tiszta llek vagyok, ugyhogy mindenfilit elkvetek, ami csak neked tetszsed szerint trtnik, vagy akaratad van bellle, de adak neked egy msik
j tancsat. Mindesetre n nem vtam neked rendelve, hogy felesged legyek,
de hogyha tetszised van, lehetek. gyhogy a kenyeret megkezdheted, de bevgezni nem vgezheted a kenyeret be. ()
Na, jl van, Jnas megfogadta a lnynak az oktatst, na de ht nagyon
melegen vllatt a szerelemtl, mert nagyon szerelmes lett a lnyba. Na,
gyhogy mindenfle megtrtnt ottan, ami trtnnival vt azon az ccaka, egisz hajnalig. 72

sok egyni mdon fzdnek egybe, (.) igen sok egyni alkots epizd is keldik
a mesbe, () ltalban egyni redakci jellemzi mind a tartalmat, mind az sszefzst illeten. NAGYV: i.m. 853. Blint Pter legutbbi ktetnek els hrom
fejezete ezt a szerkesztsi s mesemondsi mdot bontja ki. BLINT Pter: Archaikus alakzatok a npmesben. Jakab Istvn, cigny mesemond, Didakt, Debrecen,
2014. 11101.
72 Jakab Istvn, AFeketebli kirly, In: NAGY OlgaV Gabriella: Havasok mesemondja, Jakab Istvn mesi. Akadmiai Kiad, Budapest, 2002. 212.

1 85 2

AFeketebli kirly cm mese ismt mozgstja a kenyr motvumt, mgpedig nem a megtisztuls rtelmben, sokkal inkbb a szexualitssal kapcsoldik
ssze, radsul a be nem fejezett szexualitssal, ami jelen esetben a szereti
kapcsolatnak arra az aspektusra utal, ami megmarad szereti viszonynak, s
nem teljesedik ki hzassgban vagy gyermeknemzsben.73 Anemzs (breed) s
a kenyr (bread) szavak az angol nyelvben sszecsengenek, egymsra rmelnek,
ppgy mint a llegzet (breath), amely kzs trl fakad a bread szval. Akzs
indo-eurpai gykr a bhreu vagy bhr sztre megy vissza, amelynek jelentse:
gni, melegedni.74 Azaz tallhat az indo-eurpai nyelvekben olyan nyelvileg
kihallhat sszefggs, amely egy jelentsmezbe tereli a kenyr, a szexulis
aktus s a llegzet (j let kezdete, isten lelke) szemantikjt.
Amitolgia azonban egyrtelm s szoros kapcsolatot ttelez a szerelem s a
gabona kztt, s nem csupn a grg istenek alakjain keresztl, hanem olyan
si hitrendszerekben s istenalakokban, amelyek megelzik a grg mitolgit
a grgk is az si sumr/smi kultrbl rktettk t ket. Amitolgiai gondolkodsban az orgik, a termkenysg, a hbor istene Tammuz s Isztr volt.
Frazer azt rja, hogy a Fldkzi-tenger keleti partjn fekv orszgok (Egyiptom,
Nyugat-zsia) npei Ozirisz, Tammuz, Adonisz s Attisz neve alatt jelentettk meg az let klnsen a nvnyi let venknti elmlst s jjledst. Adonisz neve a smi adon r megszlts tvtele, s Tammuz isten alakjt
rejti. Tammuz jegyese vagy szeretje, Isztr, a termszet megjt erit megtestest nagy Anya-istenn.75 Isztr termszett Frazer nmileg leszkti, s rtelmezse ezltal flrevezetv is vlik, hiszen Isztr egyszerre a termkenysg a
testi szerelem, valamint a hbor s a viszly istennje, neve a keleti smi nyel-

73 Bdi Erzsbet kutatsai nyomn a Jelkptr tesz emltst egy lengyel npszoksrl: a
lnykrs alkalmval a fi s a lny kenyeret cserlnek, ez a gesztus pedig a hzassgktst volt hivatott szentesteni. ld. Jelkptr, (szerk. HOPPL Mihly, JANKOVICS
Marcell, NAGY Andrs, SZEMADM Gyrgy), Helikon, Budapest, 2010. 153.
74 AYTO, John: Bloomsbury Dictionary of Word Origins, London, Bloomsbury Reference, 1991. 7778.
75 FRAZER, James G.: Az aranyg (ford. BODROGI Tibor s BNIS Gyrgy), Osiris-Szzadvg, Budapest, 1995. 216217.

1 86 2

vekben istennt jelentett (asztar), ezzel is utalva arra, hogy alakja az sszes istenn alakjt kpviseli.
Az uruki Istr-kultusz olyan orgiasztikus nnepsgekkel kapcsoldott ssze,
amelyeknek nknzs (esetleg nkasztrls), a szexulis szabadossg megnyilvnulsai, a kalistu papnk szzessgnek felldozsa is rszt kpezte. 76 Adonisz Theiasz, asszr kirly s lnya Szmrna gyermeke (a lny bns szerelemre
lobban apja irnt, aki nem sejti, hogy lnyval hl egytt, s e nszbl szletik
Adonisz), fnciai-szriai eredet istensg, olyan nvnyi funkcikkal felruhzva, amelyek a termszet idszakos hallval s jjszletsvel kapcsolatosak.
Adonisz az v egy rszt Perszephonnl tlti az alvilgban, a msik rszt Aph
roditval (a fnciai vltozat szerint Astartval), akinek ksrje s kedvese lesz.
Az Aphrodit-szently Bbloszban olyan helly vlt, ahol a szent prostitci nevben orgikat rendeztek: az els nap a gysz jegyben zajlott le, mg a msodik
nap rmnnep volt a feltmad Adoniszrt.77 Frazer megemlti, hogy Tammuzt vagy Adoniszt gabonaszellemknt is tiszteltk ugyan az Adonisz nnepen gyorsan nv s elvirgz nvnyeket ltettek cserpbe, maga a kultusz a
gabonhoz is szorosan kapcsoldott. Adonisz hallnak megsiratsa nem ms,
mint annak siratsa, hogy az ember erszakosan elpuszttja a gabont: levgja a
mezn, szttapossa a szrn s porr rli a malomban.78 Frazer egy felttelezssel is l, amit egy X. szzadi arab r rnk hagyott rsbl vonhatott le:
Okunk van arra a feltevsre, hogy az sidkben Adoniszt nha l ember
jelentette meg, aki az isten kpben erszakos hallt halt. Tovbb bizonytk van arra, hogy a Fldkzi-tenger keleti rsznek fldmvel npeinl
a gabonaszellemet, akrhogyan hvtk is, gyakran emberi ldozat kpviselte, akit vrl vre megltek a tarln. Ha ez gy volt, valsznnek ltszik az,
hogy a gabonaszellem kiengesztelse bizonyos mrtkben sszeolvadhatott
a holtak tiszteletvel. Azt hihettk ugyanis, hogy ezeknek az ldozatoknak a
lelke visszatr az letbe a vrkkel hizlalt gabonaszemekben, s ismt meghal a gabona learatsakor. m a meggyilkoltak szellemei rosszindulatak,
76 Mitolgiai Enciklopdia, (fszerk. TOKAREV, Sz. A.), Gondolat, Budapest, 1988.
I. 507.
77 TOKAREV: i.m. 621622.
78 FRAZER: i.m. 223.

1 87 2

hajlamosak az els adott alkalommal bosszt llni gyilkosaikon. Ezrt a lemszrolt ldozatok lelknek kiengesztelsre tett ksrletek termszetesen
sszeolvad, legalbbis a nphitben, a meglt gabonaszellem megbktsre val trekvssel. S amint a holtak visszatrtek a sarjad gabonban, gy
visszajttek a hit szerint a tavaszi virgokban is, amikor a langyos tavaszi
szell felbresztette ezeket hossz lmukbl. 79
Ezek szerint a gabonakultusz sszefggsben llt az emberldozattal s a halottak lelknek kiengesztelsvel. Amesben megjelen kertszlegny, aki felleszti a hervad virgokat Mogyors Jnasnak is ez lesz a dolga a trk kirly
udvarban , ennek az engesztel rtusnak az rkseknt is cselekszik. Istr
(Innin, Astarta) alakja eredetileg a vegetci, a gabona/bza s a nd termsnek
bsgt, venknti jjszletst szemlyestette meg. () Az Innin s Dumuzi80
psztoristen szerelmrl s nszrl szl sumr epikus ciklusok a termkenysgi kultuszok szent nnepsgeihez kapcsoldtak. Tiszteletkhz orgiasztikus
szertartsok, ill. a kirly s a papn szent nsza ktdtt.81 Mg Hrodotosz is
megemlkezik arrl a babiloni szoksrl, amelyben fent maradtak ezek az orgiasztikus szertartsok:
Minden itt szletett nnek letben egyszer le kell telepednie Aphrodit
szentlyben, s odaadnia magt egy idegen frfinak. () Az asszonyok csoportjai kztt svnyek haladnak, ezen jrklnak az idegen frfiak, hogy vlasszanak kzlk. Ha egy asszony itt egyszer lelt, addig nem mehet haza,
amg egy idegen frfi nem dob egy ezstpnzt az lbe, s kvl a szent helyen nem kzsl vele. () Az ezstpnzt, brmekkora legyen is, nem szabad
visszautastani, mert a pnzdarab meg van szentelve. Az asszony azt kveti, aki elszr dobott az lbe pnzt, s senkit nem szabad visszautastania.
Miutn odaadta magt, s ekkpp lertta az istenn irnti ktelessget, hazatr, s attl kezdve semmi pnzrt nem hajland mg egyszer megtenni.82
79 FRAZER: i.m. 223.
80 Agrg mitolgiban Adonisz s Aphrodit alakjban vettk t.
81 Szimblumtr. Jelkpek, motvumok, tmk az egyetemes s a magyar kultrbl.
(szerk. PL Jzsef s JVRI Edit) Balassi Kiad, Budapest, 2001. 227.
82 HRODOTOSZ: Agrg-perzsa hbor (ford. MURAKZY Gyula) Osiris Kiad,
Budapest, 2007. I. 97.

1 88 2

Jakab Istvn mesjben a kenyr megkezdse ilyen mdon mg csak nem is

utalhatna a hzassgra ahol az gy s az asztal kzs , a mesei mondsban
nem az j let, j kirlyfiak teremtsnek cljval trtnik, hanem puszta szerelembl. Aszerelem szexulis aktusa ebben az esetben fellrja a morlis szablyokat, a trvnyeket, a (keresztny) vallsi elrsokat is (hiba is mondja Jnas,
hogy katolikus gyerek), s a megmentett lny, tisztasgba visszahelyezett szz
jutalomknt sajt magt, sajt tisztasgt ajnlja fel; leginkbb olyan ajnlatot
tesz, amit a fent idzett babiloni Istr templomban rendezett orgik lersbl ismernk. AFeketebli kirly lnya teht olyan aktust hajt vgre, amely az
kori Istr/Aphrodit istenn ltal kpviselt jegyeket mutatja, a felajnlkozst,
az let orgiasztikus aspektust, a gabona/kenyr ltali ktdst. Azrt mondhatja, hogy Jnos megkezdheti a kenyeret, de be nem fejezheti, mert egyrszrl
nincsen szksge a szerelmi kapcsolat befejezsre (mivel ez nem odagrsen
alapul szerelmi kapcsolat, sokkal inkbb ritul, vagy kultikus cselekedet), a
kenyrrel fennll kapcsolat pedig, amit nem vgez be, folytonoss teszi a lelkek
kiengesztelsre irnyul belltdst, s gy nem szmolja fel az orgiasztikussal val kapcsolatt sem.83
AJnas a zrdban cm mesben a bzakenyrbl kicsrz bzatbla (a
kenyr kicikzatt, j bza termett a kenyrbl 694.) a meggyilkoltak, a holtak
lelke ltali kiengesztelds aktust jelzi. Aszerelmi aktus is majd egy nvny
bokra alatt zajlik, amirl Mogyors Jnas a nevt kapja. Amogyorbokor jelentsge abban ll immr nem a gabona, kenyr az, ami kiengesztelsre, vagy
orgira utal hogy Jnas fia egy olyan termsrl lesz elnevezve, amely a rejtett
blcsessg, a tudomny szimbluma. Amogyor a blcsessg, az inspirci, a
jvendls, a mgia, a khtonikus erk jelkpe. Amisztikus ismeretek fejldsre
vonatkoztatva a trelem s az llhatatossg szimbluma, mivel a mogyor lassan rik be. () Anpkltszetben a frfi genitlikra emlkeztet alakja miatt,
a dihoz s a makkhoz hasonlan, szexulis szimblumknt jelenik meg.84 Mogyors Jnas a nevben rztt szimblumon keresztl nemcsak a szexualits83 Jnas a mesben elszr olyan kirlylnynak nyeri el a kezt, aki egy msik frfit szeret. Amese rszletes elemzse a frfi-n viszony tekintetben egy kln tanulmny
trgya lehetne.
84 Szimblumtr: i.m. 344345.

1 89 2

hoz kapcsoldik vgl neki is el kell majd nyerni a kirlylnyt hanem ezt a
blcsessg, a varzslat, a tuds s a trelem tjn teszi. Akukoricaszem ezrt ad
majd neki tudst, a trk kirly nyelvt pedig ezrt sajtthatja el olyan knnyen.
Mogyors Jnas teht nem a kiengesztels, a vtkek helyrehozsnak gesztusval
li lett, hanem egy olyan terms szimblumnak vdelme alatt, ami nemcsak
biztostja az t krlvev esemnyekhez val igazods kpessgt, hanem mintegy kemny burokba zrva, elhatrolja a srlsektl, vagy a srls okozstl.
Mogyors Jnas anyja bizonyos rtelemben nem klnbzik AFeketebli kirly lnytl, hiszen mindketten valamilyen mdon ellenlls nlkl engedik t
magukat a hsnek s itt most mindegy, hogy az egyik eljul, s azrt nem kpes akarattal ellenllni, vagy akarattal odaadja magt minden ellenlls nlkl.
m az a szeret, aki mint szexulis partner az alapszksgletek evs, szexualits mellett a nyitottsgot s odaadst is felajnlja, radsul tabuk nlkl (mindenfilit elkvetek, ami neked tetszsed szerint trtnik), valjban az eurpai
keresztny kultra leginkbb tabustott, legtitkosabb ltezje, akinek a lte eleve
morlis megtls al esett. Pedig ahogyan azt mr Helting is hangslyozta, daseinanalitikai szempontbl a szereti viszony a msik lenni-hagysra alapul,
a tgassg s lelkesltsg tapasztalatnak adja t magt s olyan pozitv fggsgi
viszonyba bocstkozik, amelyben csak azrt lehet nmaga, mert a msik lehetv teszi ezt szmra85. Ilyen rtelemben a gonosz lelkektl megszllt s megmentett lny nem az erklcsi bn vagy kicsapongs romlottsgt jelenti meg,
azaz nem teszi semmiss lelke megtisztulst, hanem ebben a szereti viszonyban fordul nyitottan nmaga s a msik, megmentje fel. Teht a mesei meghatrozottsg, eleve elrendeltsg, a mesei struktra knyszert ereje is httrbe
szorul, hiszen a mesemond nem a mesei dvtrtnetre aspirl, hanem bemutatja, milyen kt ember egymsra nylsa, megtisztulsa egymsban. Aszeret
titka pedig nem ms, mint a felttel nlkli odaads, akr testben, akr llekben.
Az erotikus cselekedet tekintetben a kt mese kztt mgis hatalmas a klnbsg a kvetkezmny tekintetben. Mg a Jnas a zrdban cm mese els
rsznek zrjelenetben Jnas erszakot kvet el az ltala kiszemelt fehrnpen akibe mellesleg bele is szeret addig AFeketebli kirly hse a gonosz lelkektl megszllt lny megmentse utn mintegy ajndkba kapja a tiszta, mg
85 V. HELTING: i.m. 183.

1 90 2

egyms irnti fogadalomrl is lemond szerelmet; pusztn azt kri a hstl, induljon tovbb sajt tjn, s egy rvid idre mg segtjv is vlik az ltala a
hshz juttatott trgyakon keresztl pedig egszen a mese vgig. Aszerelem/
szeretet fenomenolgija kapcsn mindkt mesben a szexualits fenomenolgija is vizsglatra szorul, hiszen nem gyermeki, barti, vagy anyai szeretetrl
van sz, hanem kifejezetten erotikus, szexulis kapcsolatrl, amelyet a mesk
ugyan csak utalsszeren jeleznek, s mr csak azrt sem rhatnak le rszletesen, mert a szexulis aktus trbeli helyzeteinek lersa knnyen pornogrfiv
vlhat86, ez pedig termszetesen kvl esik a sorsmegold kpletet felknl mesemonds cljn. Mindazonltal a kt mese jelenetei kt test tallkozst rjk le,
de egszen msfajta kimenetellel: mindkett ajndkot terem, amennyiben Jnasnak fia szletik majd, AFeketebli kirly Jnasa pedig a tiszta, nzetlen szeretet ajndkt, illetve egy segtt kap ajndkba.87

5. Aszexualits kdjai:
a tiltson s trgyiastson tl
Aszexualits hromfle aspektust szemgyre vve a tilalom/tabu tematikja
a legszembetlbb, amelyhez j kiindulpontot szolgltat Bataille filozfiai-antropolgiai (s nmileg szrrealista) gondolatmenete. Aszexualits tabustsa
elhvja a tabuk tlpsnek vagy megszegsnek szksgszersgt is, gy soroldhat minden fajta nem a reprodukcit s gazdasgi folytonossgot szolgl
86 Ama radiklis lthatatlansg helybe egy minden zben feltrt, nyilvnos s prostitult lthatsgot lltunk. Agrfia (lers) erre utal. MARION, Jean-Luc: Az erotikus fenomn. Hat meditci (ford. SZAB Zsigmond) LHarmattan, Budapest,
(2003) 2012. 183.
87 V: Cifra Jnos egyik mesjvel, amelyben a kirlylnyt elnyert hs a mesben a hzassg eltti prbkat szinte azrt folytatja a hzassg s a fele kirlysg elnyerse utn is, mert a kirlylny szinte ldzi szerelmvel. AMr cm mesben azt
mondja a kirlylny: Felsges kirly rfi! Megmentette az letemet, elpusztttatta
a tizenngyfej srknt. Jjjen b desapmhoz, mer nincs menekvse magnak tlem. Hiszen nem eresztem el, minden kvnsgt teljestem, ha akarja, a felesge leszek. (173) Ez a felajnlkozs szmot tart az gretre, st a jutalom elli menekvs
lehetsgt is megvonn a kirlyfitl.

1 91 2

 szexualits a transzgresszv aktusok kz. Merleau-Ponty testfenomenolgijban a szexulis test rszben olyan objektumknt jelenik meg, amely ugyan
mindig szexualitssal thatott, de trsadalmi szablyozottsgnak van alvetve
s csak az egyes testtapasztalatok sorn lphet tl trgyi meghatrozottsgn.
Marion fogalma, az erotikus fenomn, a nyugat-eurpai gondolkods filozfijban azt a fordulatot gri, amely a gondolkods ltal meghatrozott, vagy a
test ltal ltestett vilghoz val viszonyt a szeretet elsbbsgnek fenomenolgijval vltja le, s a ltezs vagy testtapasztalat vgs okaknt, vagy okozjaknt jelli meg.
Georges Bataille Az erotika cm knyvben azokat a transzgresszv llapotokat veszi sorra, amelyek a nyugati civilizci szmra tabuv vltak ezek a
transzgresszv llapotok a misztikussal s a szentsggel tartanak rokonsgot:
ilyen kt transzgresszv llapot pldul a szexualits s a hall/erszak/gyilkossg. lltsa szerint alapveten a hall a ltezs kontinuitst, folytonossgt
biztostja, mg a reprodukci, a gyermek szletse a ltezs diszkontinuitsval, megszakadsval jr egytt. Az erotika azonban nem a szaporodst szolglja, hanem az a szerepe, hogy az ember legbensbb lnyhez jusson el, oda, ahol
megll a szv.88 Aszakrlis tapasztalat terben a misztikus vagy erotikus tapasztalat rendre a hall, a kontinuits terbe igyekszik. Atranszgresszv llapot
egybknt nem individulis, hanem kollektv llapot a msokkal/msikkal val
integrcira trekszik, csak abban valsulhat meg, kvetkezskppen Bataille vitatja az egyni/individulis transzgresszv lmny lehetsgt. Szmra a megszaktottsg, a reprodukci, a tabu, az let szfrja szemben ll a folyamatossg,
a transzgresszi, a hall szfrjval: a ltezk letk sorn a kontinuits tapasztalatra trekednek, azaz letk a hall fel fut. Bataille szerint a transzgresszv
tapasztalatnak hrom fajtja ltezik, a fizikai, az rzelmi s a vallsos. Akontinuits tapasztalatnak lmnyt azonban minden formban (fizikai, rzelmi,
vallsos) tabuk, tiltsok szablyozzk, ezrt a kontinuits tapasztalata minden
esetben szksgkppen egytt jr a tabuk s szablyok thgsval.
Bataille a szexualits kapcsn a genitlis impulzust a krzis okozjaknt nevezi meg, s a szexulis impulzus erszakossgrl beszl. Az (llati) szexulis
88 BATAILLE, Georges: Az erotika (ford.: DUSNOKI Katalin et al.) Nagyvilg, Budapest, 2001. 19.

1 92 2

hvnek kiszolgltatva az egyn az elszigeteltsgnek kritikus pillanatait li meg:

Ezekben a pillanatokban gyzik le a flelmet fjdalomtl s halltl.89 Atranszgresszi, az tlps nemcsak a szakrlis terben trtnhet meg, hanem egyfell
a szexulis beteljeslskor, msfell a reprodukciban, vagyis a gyermeknemzsben. Areprodukci fenomnje azonban mindig is kapcsoldott a gazdasgi rdekekhez, s mozgstja a jog, az erklcs, a valls s a gazdasgi struktra
fogalmait. Az emberi kapcsolatokknt rtett let azonban sem gazdasgi viszonyokra, sem jogi, vagy erklcsi viszonyokra nem reduklhat, de mg testfunkcikra sem, lltja Merleau-Ponty.90 Bataille kiindulpontja szerint az let s a hall
a misztikus s szexulis tapasztalatban kapcsoldik ssze. Atabustott esemnyek transzgresszija csak olyan letszfrban trtnhet meg, amely szemben ll
a rendezett, szablyokon, (erklcsi) trvnyeken alapul vilgrenddel. Amunka
vilga radsul kizrja a tabuhoz ktd erszakot. Amikor Bataille azt lltja,
hogy az let lehet kudarcra tlt, de a ltezs folytonossga nem91, akkor rthetv vlik, hogyan mesl Jakab: az elkrhozott, gyilkossgot s erszakot halmoz llek, Jnas lete nem folytatdhat, de a ltezs ltala mgis tovbb folyik.
Ilyen rtelemben a fehrnp, aki majd Mogyors Jnasnak ad letet, a ltezs
folytonossgnak biztostsval s nem az elkrhozott llek letnek folytatsval mintegy megmenti, tmenti Jnast, s nem csak a nevben. AFeketebli
kirly cm mesben egy elkrhozott lelket kell megszabadtani a megszllottsgtl, aki ebben az elkrhozott ltben szinte minden frfi hallt okozza maga
krl a kirly sszes katonja s minden egyb frfi jformn odavsz a kirlylny megrzse kzben. Amegmentst mindkt esetben egy szerelmi aktus jelzi: az els esetben egy tiszta gyermeki llek szletik, a msodikban pedig egy, a
tiszta szerelem jegyben megtrtn aktus. Arend, az erklcs vilgbl tlpve
teht a hs mindkt mesben a transzgresszi szakrlis terben tallja magt: az
egyik a reprodukci terben (ahogyan a mag, a bza jra szrba szkken), a msik a szexulis beteljesls terben (a szerelem s egyben a hall oltrn ldozva).

89 BATAILLE: i.m. 122.

90 MERLEAU-PONTY, Maurice: The Phenomenology of Perception (ford. Colin
SMITH) Routledge, London-New York, (1962) 1999. 173.
91 BATAILLE: i.m. 28.

1 93 2

Merleau-Ponty Az szlels fenomenolgija cm knyvben egy kln fejezetet szentel a test szexulis vonatkozsainak. Aszexualits eleve tjrja, thatja a lthat testet, de immr nem testi funkciknt hatrozza meg, hanem olyan
intencionalitsknt, amely a ltezs ltalnos folyst kveti, s megadja magt
a mozgsnak. Aszexualitst nem lehet meghaladni, s nem is tudattalan reprezentcikban mutatkozik meg. Mindig gy van jelen, mint egy hangulat92, de
tbbrtelm amennyiben az emberi lt minden ms alaphangulata is egyszerre
tbb jelentssel rendelkezhet. Aszexualits drmai, hiszen egsz letnket elktelezzk mellette. Mikzben Merleau-Ponty hangulatknt, az emberi ltezs
elvlaszthatatlan aspektusaknt hatrozza meg a szexualitst, amely mintegy
belengi az emberi ltezst, a fejezet vgre egy hossz lbjegyzetet illeszt, amiben a gazdasgi, jogi s morlis aspektusokrl elmlkedik. Ameztelensget, a
tekintetnek kitett meztelen testet is egyfajta objektivl tekintetknt hatrozza
meg, amely szgyent s szgyentelensget, esetleg mulatot breszt. Aszexualits s a ltezs alapvet kapcsolatban a test mint lthat dolog, trgy marad s
csak a testtapasztalatok sorn lp ki abbl az egyrtelmsgbl, amelybe trgy
knt kerlt.
Jean-Luc Marion a szexualitsra egszen ms szempontbl tekint: kitgtja a
szeretet fogalma fel s a szeretet egyik megnyilvnulsi mdjv teszi. Adescartes-i cogito ergo sum alaptzist meghaladva azt lltja, az ember csak akkor
gondolkodhat, ha ltezsben mr eleve megelzte a gondolkodst a szeretet tapasztalata s kpessge. Agondolkods nem fgg a ltezstl, az egyes lteztl bizonyosan nem, s szksgkppen eltrgyiastja a megismers trgyt, azaz
tvolsgot generl. Aszeretet azonban, amely az n. erotikus redukciban rhet tetten, felszmolja ezt a tvolsgot, s nem tvolthat el az egyntl: senki ms nem szerethet helyettem, lltja Marion. Az erotikus redukci az, amely
nem magamra bz engem, hanem kilptet magambl, ezltal biztostva a vilgban val lt fel irnyul kapcsolatot, nyitottsgot. Az erotikus redukciban az
ember eleve nem maradhat magra utalva, egyedl ez vezet ugyanis az ngyllethez hanem mindig msokra megnylva, msok fel fordulva, egyfajta dialogikus (nem felttlenl prbeszdes, hiszen a szerelmi aktus nma, vagy
legalbbis a legkevsb sincsen rutalva, st nem is tart ignyt a referencilis be92 MERLEAU-PONTY: i.m. 168.

1 94 2

szdre) viszonyban a klcsnssgen (s szerencss esetben greten) alapul ltezs tapasztalathoz jut el, amelynek alaplltsa: amo ergo sum, szeretek, teht
vagyok.93 Marion kvetkezetesen vgiggondolt s kifejtett tziseinek ismertetse meghaladja a tanulmny jelen kereteit, de nhny megltsa mindenkppen szorosan idevg.
Visszatrve a Jnas a zrdban meseszvegnek fordulpontjhoz94, amelyben a kt trtnet vltsa megy vgbe, a ltezs folytonossgt biztostva j let
teremtdik. Altezs, existere, egyben kilpst is, megjelenst is jelent, s ebben
a fordulatban a vtkes hs helyrelltani nem tudja azt a rendet, amit sszezavart, nem kpes nmaga fel fordulni, vagyis nem kpes az rzkels s gondolkods fordulatt nmagban elidzni, de legalbb biztostja sajt ltezsnek
egyfajta folytatlagossgt, hogy majd ebben az j ltben trtnjen meg a fordulat is. Maga a szexulis aktus azonban a szeretknt kivlasztott fehrnp akarati
hozzjrulsa nlkl jtszdik le. Mivel az ember ki van szolgltatva a hs automatizmusnak, Jnas ezt hasznlja fel a msik elcsbtsra. Amesben nem
egyszeren egy erszakjelenet lerst olvashatjuk, amelyben csalssal s a hs
automatizmust kiaknzva Jnas felszmolja a msik ellenllst hiszen az el93 MARION: i.m. klnsen az els meditci.
94 Agrg metanoia, fordulat eredetileg az rzkek, rzkels tfordtst jelenti. Ez a
fordulat nem ms, mint az rzkels vagy gondolkods megfordtsa. Teht az anyagi, lthat vilgban pl n hatrai kzl gy lehet kilpni, ha belpnk az isteni
nvalba egy olyan fordulattal, amely sajt rzkelsnk s gondolkodsunk megfordtsval rhet el. ABibliban a metanoia szt vezeklsnek fordtjk. Avezekls
eredetileg teht nem az a keresztny egyhz ltal felkapott gondolat, hogy szmolj
el cselekedeteiddel, osztlyozd ket aszerint, hogy jk vagy rosszak, helyesek vagy
helytelenek, aztn egyenltsd ki ket, hanem felhvs: amikor az ember bnsnek
rzkeli magt, s emiatt szorong radsul nincs is ms lehetsg, hiszen a cselekedeteink eleve vtkesknt jelennek meg , az rzkek ms irnyba val fordtsa a
megfelel vlasz. Hov? nmaga fel. Agrg tragdia azltal vlik igazsgg, hogy
nem elhallgat, hanem megmutatja a valsgot, keresztlvezeti az embert az sszes
borzalmakon s szorongsai sszes kpn. Aki viszont ksz arra, hogy belenzzen
az let mlysgeibe, az megszabadul minden szorongstl. v. DETHLEFSEN, Thorwald: Oidipusz, a talny megfejtje (ford. SARANK Mrta) Magyar Knyvklub,
1997. 6872.

1 95 2

jul a rabls folyamn, s gy a lnyrabls nem csupn mint mesei elem jelenik
meg, hanem megkettzdik a hsok kztti kapcsolatban is: az a rabls, amely a
nemi erszak formjt lti, egyben a gynyr elrablst is jelenti.95 Ez a fajta erotizci nem csak azrt kell vget rjen, mert minden erotikus esemny szksgszeren tr a vgkifejlet s lezruls fel, hanem azrt is, mert a kt hs (Jnas
s a fehrnp hsa) kztti megnyls helyett az egyik birtokba veszi a msikat.
Abirtokolhat trgyknt elgondolt test ismt azt az rksget idzi fel, amely Jnas sorsnak meghatroz esemnye volt: a vagyonknt elgondolt gyermek hangoltsgnak motvumt ismtli.
Ahogyan fentebb mr sz esett rla, Mogyors Jnas anyja bizonyos rtelemben hasonlsgot mutat AFeketebli kirly nalakjval, s nem csak abban, hogy
a ni szpsget kpviseli, vagy nem tanst ellenllst (klnbz okokbl persze), hanem abban a gesztusban is, ami sem igazsgszolgltatsra, sem erklcsi
helyreigaztsra, sem gretre nem tart ignyt. Mondhatnnk, hogy mindkett
egyszeren csak haza szeretne menni.96 Atitok szemantikjnak heterogenitsa lehetv teszi, hogy egyszerre jelenjen meg az elvlasztottsgtl (latinul secretum) a hziasig, az otthonig (nmetl Geheimnis) vezet t ez mindkt nalak
95 MARION: i.m. 219.
96 Ahogyan Bdis Zoltn utal r, a titok nmet megfelelje, Geheimnis, a Heim, otthon szt tartalmazza, s utal arra, hogy a titoknak a csaldban van a helye, illetve hogy a csald eleve titkokkal van tszve. V: BDIS: i.m. 131. Ilyen rtelemben
valban szabad hazavinni a titkot (msoknak el nem beszlhet esemnyt erszak, orgia) st, leginkbb ott van a helye. Ezrt mondhatja majd a kirlylny zsebben lapul kenyr a lny helyett az rdgszeretnek, hogy Mit sznvett t ahh
kpest, amit nekm klltt killanom! Engm vetttek, mgborontak, lvktak,
kicsptek, mgllettek, mgdagasztottak, kistttek, oszt mgis mgbocstok. Akkor t is mgbocsthacc! (Baranyai magyar nphagyomnyok IIII. Gyjttte, szerkesztette s jegyzetekkel elltta BERZE NAGY Jnos Dr., Kultra Knyvnyomdai
Mintzet, Pcs, 1940. II. 153158.) Az rdgi ksrtsnek ellenll lny helyett
az otthonrl hozott kenyr beszl, az, ami mg kapcsolatot tart az ldozathozatallal. V: BLINT Pter: Az llandsg, a folyamatossg s elzrtsg hermeneutikja (Az rdgszeret-tpus [407B] npmeskben) In: U. Meserts s rtelmezs.
Akrpt-medencei npmese hagyomny hermeneutikai vizsglata, Didakt, Debrecen, 2013. 231258.

1 96 2

esetben inkbb a szrmazsi tjk otthona s nem az ltaluk j csald szmra megteremtett otthon terepe. Mg a Jnas a zrdban cm mese hse eltt
rejtve (magyar titok, vagy a grg letheia) marad a szrmazsi tjk, s a msik
lnye hiszen a msik birtokbavtelt eleve az eltrgyiasts tette lehetv, s
megakadlyozta a valdi megismerst addig AFeketebli kirly lnya a ltet
s benne a szeretetet olyan feltrultsgban teszi hozzfrhetv a hs szmra, amely ppen ezltal juttatja el a lt fel nem trhatatlan, mindig rejtettsgben
(aletheia) marad aspektusnak megtapasztalshoz.97 Azaz az otthonmarads
szndknak kinyilvntsval egyik nalak sem knyszerti a hst olyan felelssgvllalsra, amely vagy eleve teljesthetetlen (Jnas a zrdban), vagy sorsnak tjban ll (AFeketebli kirly).
Jnas megvakttatsa egyenesen ennek a lehetetlen felelssgvllalsnak a kvetkezmnye. Aszembefordul arc az alterits prbattele el llt, ezrt nem is
lehet ltvny, hanem elssorban szembeszegezi velem a msiknak a vilgra nyl
perspektvjt (tekintett) s megszlt: Ne lj!98 Mivel a gyilkossg rkre megjell, lehet, hogy rszben magakadlyozza az arc parancst: Szeress! Marion szerint mindig csak a msiktl kaphatom meg magamat, sajt hsomat, s ennek
mindenkori elfelttele az arc parancsnak val engedelmessg ez az engedelmessg pedig eleve mr mindig abban a tapasztalatban gykerezik, hogy a szeretve levs szmra is n nyitom meg magamat. Aszeretet nem csak dialgikus
partnerviszonyt ttelez, hanem olyan egymsba rdst, a hsok keresztezdst, amelyben a rsztvevk helyettesthetetlenek, s csak egymson keresztl jut97 DERRIDA: Ki az anya? i.m. 13. Derrida az anyrl beszlve a kzvetlen rzkels
(matriarchtust meghatroz fogalmt) s az sz bizonyossgt (patriarchtus) lltja szembe. Aphszisz s tekhn ltal meghatrozott civilizci az id elrehaladtval a tekhn ismtldsre s reproduklhatsgra pl mkdst erstette fel.
Ami itt a titkot tansg s az apasg jogi koholmnyhoz kapcsolja, az az apasg
tulajdontsa, ami mindig tllpi, meghaladja az szlelst, tlhalad az rzkek tansgn; az apval val kapcsolat mindig egy olyan trsghez tartozik, ahol a titok
lehetsges s maradand, egy misztikusnak nevezhet trsghez: a misztikus rejtlyest s titkosat jelent, legalbbis a titok grg szemantikja rtelmben, amit az
elmlt vekben megklnbztettnk a latin secretum (secernere, szeparci, stb.) s
a nmet Geheimnis (heimisch, heimlich, hzis, otthon, stb.) szemantikjtl.
98 MARION: i.m. 135.

1 97 2

hatnak nmagukhoz. Jnas, aki a fizikai testet pp gy akarja birtokolni, mint

egy trgyat, olyan arccal fordulhat csak a fehrnp fel, amely mg nem kszlt
fel a Szeress! parancsnak vlaszra: csak gy trtnhet meg, hogy megvaktjk. Amsik sajt elrhetetlensgt fordtja szembe vele s lehet, hogy egymsban val keresztezdskbe beleegyezik, de szabadsgban ll az is, hogy nem.
Aszerelem abban az rtelemben vak, hogy amg nincs olyan, aki ebben az intencionalitsban el lp, s betlti a helyet, addig nem is lthatja ezrt marad vak
szemllet, elreszalad s vakon szletik meg. Aszeret csak azt ismerheti, lthatja, amit eleve szeret, s csak annyiban ismeri, amennyiben mris szereti. Jnas fehrnppel val kufrkodsa, elrablsa, birtoktrgyknt kezelse nem teszi
lehetv, hogy szeretknt nyljon meg, s a msik dntse a felszlts elutastst illeten semmi ms, mint vlasz egy olyan meghvsra, amelyben a msik
nem szeretknt lpne el, hanem gyilkosknt: a halott hs a j hs, vagyis az,
amelyik mr nem kpes ellenllni.
Amennyiben a fehrnp ellenllsa csals tjn felfggesztdik, Jnas ismt
egyfajta gyilkossgot kvet el, ismt a ne lj! parancsa ellen vt, s mert nem
ltja szerelme trgyt (sem), vaksgra knyszerl. Avaksg ebben az esetben
nem az Oidipusz trtnetbl ismert nmegvakts, mint nbntets pldja,
amelyben a kls lts bels szemlldss vlik, hanem ppen a bels szemllds elutastsnak kvetkezmnye: az a fogyatkossg, ami eddig Jnast akadlyozta, kvl, az arcn is megjelenik. Szeme vilgnak elvesztse nem vezeti
el az nvizsglathoz: a magnyos bolyongs vgn elpusztul sem jvtteli lehetsgeit nem hasznlta ki, sem a vaksg ltal lehetv tett bels vizsglatnak,
sem az rzkek tfordtsval jr fordulatnak nem adott eslyt. AJnas a zrdban cm mese fordulata rszben azrt okoz meglepetst, mert a hs nem
szokott meghalni a mese elejn, s mert a meskre jellemz jvttel, vagy kiegyenlts ltszlag nem rvnyesl. AFeketebli kirly cm mesben a kirlylny s az t megment legny nsza pedig azrt meglep, mert a hs, aki vgre
megmenti a lnyt, a kezt s a fele kirlysgot szokta jutalmul elnyerni. Ebben a
mesben azonban sokkal fontosabb, hogy a hs bejrhassa sajt tjt, killja mg
azokat a prbkat, amelyek erejhez juttatjk. Aszerelmi aktus amely egybirnt egy kriptban esik meg, hogy egyszerre vljon a szerelem, az let s a hall helysznv azonban olyan klcsns odafordulsknt megy vgbe, amely
beteljestheti az erotikus redukci radiklis formjt. Aszerelemhez az erotikus
1 98 2

redukciban megnyilvnul ismtlsre van szksg, amely az jra s jra beteljesl odafordulst, a hsok ellenlls nlkli keresztezdst ismtli. Aharmadiknak, a gyermek eljvetelnek az a funkcija, hogy biztostsa az erotikus
fenomn llandsgt, s maradand lthatsgt.
AJnas a zrdban cm mesben ez nem valsulhat meg, hiszen nem egy
marion-i rtelemben elgondolt erotikus redukcin belli szereti viszonynak vagyunk tani, hanem egy olyan alaphangoltsg hs trtnett olvassuk, akinek
megszletsekor s cselekedeteiben is sorra megszllott birtoklsi vgyrl tesz
tanbizonysgot akr a feloldozst szeretn birtokolni, akr a szerelmet, akr
a nyugodt letet. Agyerek-dologra, a sajt gyerekre irnyul megszllott birtoklsa vgy knnyen egytt jrhat a megszletett gyermek irnti kznnyel, a
rla val megfeledkezssel, a gyermek instrumentalizsval, knyelmi eszkzknt val felhasznlsval, st akr a rossz bnsmd ltali elpuszttsval, fizikai vagy pszicholgiai rtelemben.99 Rszben ezrt hal meg, s nem lehet apa
Jnasbl, rszben ezrt kell az anynak eltvoltania fit, Mogyors Jnast a szrmazsi tjkrl, az otthontl (beratja egy bentlaksos iskolba). Mivel mr
apja nincsen, gy szletett szerelemgyerekl, ht legalbb a gyerekbl legyen valami. (704.) Aszrmazsi tjkrl eltvoltott Jnas teht a titkot otthon hagyja,
hogy az tbbet ne vljon elrhetv.100 Szmra az otthon elhagysa let s hall
krdse, sz szerint rtelmet kell keresnie a vndorlsok sorn gy, hogy tbb
ne a szrmazs, a ltezs, a szexualits titkt feszegesse, hanem a tuds s a szeretet titkt. Atuds eleve a szeretetbl fakad, hiszen csak azt ismerhetjk meg,
amit mr eleve szeretnk a kiskakas-epizd is erre utal; Mogyors Jnas megszereti a kistykot s amikor azt a szakcs le akarja vgni, hogy levesbe fzze,
megmenti az lett; cserbe a kiskakastl egy csods kukoricaszemet kap, amely
minden, szmra szksges tuds birtokba juttatja.
Aszexualits a szeretet egy testisgben megnyilvnul aspektusa s annyiban tarthat fnt, amennyiben megszabadul az erotikus fenomn lland ismtldsre trekvstl. De ezt nem egy gyerekben teszi majd meg, hanem azltal,
99 MARION: i.m. 261.
100 Nem tudni tbb, ki az anya (s taln nem kell ismt hangslyoznom, hogy ez a
bizonytalansg nem pusztn fontos elmleti tt, de a legfantasztikusabb s legmegrzbb szenvedlyek hordozja is lehet). DERRIDA: i.m. 29.

1 99 2

hogy felhagy nmaga gylletvel, a msik kegyelmre s bizalmra bzza magt, vagyis megfordtja az rzkelst (metanoia). Afelismers, hogy mr elttem
is mindig szerettek anlkl, hogy ismertek volna, nemcsak a szlets eltt is ltez szlk szeretethez juttat el, hanem ahhoz az els szerethz, aki tkletesen, hiba s hinyossg nlkl, a kezdetektl egszen a vgig szeret. szeret
elszr s szeret utoljra.101 Mivel a mese nem pldzat, s nem midrs beszd, amely az isteni szeretethez val kzelebb juts lehetsgeit trja fel a nyilvnossg normin s a gyakorlati szablyok rgztsn keresztl, s nem is clja
a mltban hozott trvnyek vagy hagyomnyok folytonossgnak biztostsa,
szksgszeren lemond az isteni szeretet bemutatsrl. (Az isteni gondvisels
elbeszlsrl nem mond le, s ebbl is rzkelhet, hogy a kett nem ugyanaz:
az isteni szeretet egy ltezsmd, egy viszony, az isteni gondvisels pedig ennek
megnyilvnulsi mdja.) Azonban egy-egy mesei alakon s cselekedetein keresztl megmutathatja azokat a lehetsgeket a szeretetre, amelyek a mindenkori isten kpre teremtett (teomorf) ember szmra elrhetek. Amikor Jnas vak
szeretknt tr elre, ltstl megfosztva, s mr nem tudja, mit szerethet, kit
szerethet s hogyan, akkor tallja meg azt a msik szerett, akinek mr eleve ott
kellett lennie, aki megelzte, s vrt, s nmn hvta.102 Az isteni szeretet szmra ilyen rtelemben a tzparancsolat sem trvny, csak ajnls msklnben hogyan is bocsthatott volna meg Isten Jnasnak a sok bnrt amelynek
a betartsa jobb, autentikusabb lethez vezet. Az isteni szeretethez kzelts
emberi mdjai pedig rszben titkokban kell maradjanak annak rdekben, hogy
az emberi vilgra jellemz polarits103 ne kvnjon meg semmifle kiegyenltst,
egyenslyt, ne fedezzen fel semmilyen hinyossgot, vagy elvtst. Ha emberknt megadatik neki a tiszta szerelem, mint Jnasnak AFeketebli kirlyban, a
101 MARION: i.m. 290.
102 MARION: i.m. 281282.
103 DETHLEFSEN: i.m. klnsen Atragikus vtsg cm fejezet. 4572. Akeresztny ember megtanulhatn a tragikus vtsg tkrben jfajta mdon rtelmezni
sajt bnfelfogst, meglthatn, hogy a bn elklnlst jelent, s gy hozztartozik az emberi lthez, st megnemesti azt, mert a bn szemlyes szabadsgnak
zloga. (70.) Atitok pontosan ugyangy elklnlshez vezet, s azltal tehet szabadd, ha otthonosknt magunkv tesszk, rnykknt integrljuk s meghagyjuk annak, ami: titoknak.

1 100 2

mese szerint jobb, ha nem ebben a fldi szerelemben (ami szksgkppen tkletlen, hiszen ki van tve az id vasfognak, azaz nem vlhat idtlenn) nyeri el
jutalmt, hanem sajt erejnek felkutatsban, amire fldi ltezse miatt valdi
jogostvnyt nyert. Hiszen az ember a fldi ltben csak emberknt tud szeretni, azaz mindig is hinyosan, hibsan s tkletlenl, a mesei hs pedig ezeket
az utakat jrja be, erforrsait ezek a prbk biztostjk.

1 101 2

Bicz Gbor
ATITOK-PARADIGMA ALAKVLTOZATAI
A MESBEN: MI LAJOS
LETMVNEK PLDJA

1 103 2

Bevezets
z mi Lajos monumentlis letmvt bemutat gyjtemny 27. szm mesje, Az advrkirly, hrman maradtak egy
testvrek cmmel jegyzett trtnet drmja az utkor olvasjt
mlyen megdbbenti.1 Agyjt Erdsz Sndor kommentrja
szerint a htlen testvrrl szl minden tnyleges mesei elemet
nlklz szveg az erdbe gyermekvel kitett anya motvumnak okn sorolhat a tndrmeskhez. Aformlis tipolgia azonban az rtelmezst knnyen
flrevezeti, a szvegben adott jelentshalmozdst nem engedi kibontakozni.
Atrtnet menete szerint Advrkirly hallt kveten, legidsebb fia veszi
fel nevt s rkli a trnt, aki aztn kzps ccst trnrksnek jelli ki, mg a
legkisebb testvrt rnoknak teszi meg. Az ifjkirly sszehzasodik egy kirlylnnyal, majd testvreit is nslsre bztatja, m idvel a kirlynnak figyermeke szletik. Ekkor az esemnyek drmai fordulatot vesznek, ugyanis trtnik,
hogy egyszer a kirly legkisebb ccst a kirlyn szobjban tallja. Elvileg egy
idegen frfi szmra a tabusrts a szoksjog szerint hallbntetssel jr, de a
kirly, lvn ccsrl van sz, szmzetsre vltoztatja az elrsszer tletet.
Abntets szerint felesgt s fit kzps testvrvel a trnrkssel az erdbe viteti, hogy ott vadak tpjk szt, ellenben a trnrks, teht a kzps
testvr a kirlyn knyrgsre megkegyelmez.
Nzd, n nem engedhetlek el, kirlyn, hogy tudjam n azt megtenni? Akirly megtudja aztat, hogy a titkot elrultuk, ngemet is felakasztat, neki
hatalma van nrem is! () Na, n mg akkor is nem tudok veled mst mit
tenni, gondoltam egyet, te kirlyn, sajnllak nagyon.2
Atrnrks egy erdszcsaldnl rejti el az asszonyt s fit, rjuk bzza a titkot, amit letk rn is riznik kell. Hat nap mltval a kirly lelkiismeret furdalsa annyira ers lett, hogy elkldi kzps ccst abban a remnyben, hogy a
vadak mg nem puszttottk el csaldjt. Akzps fi termszetesen nem fedi
fel a titkot, gy az erdsznl menedket lelt kirlyn gyermekvel hazatr. Aztn

1 ERDSZ Sndor (szerk.): mi Lajos mesi I. Budapest. Akadmiai, 1968. 370376.

2 im. 372.

1 104 2

azrt, hogy szemtank ne maradjanak, a titok rkre rejtve legyen, a trnrks

legyilkolja az egsz erdszcsaldot rabltmadsnak lczva az esetet.
Idkzben a szmztt legkisebb testvr, Sndor herceg menedkre tall a trk kirlynl, s lnya kezrt elrulja btyja haditerveinek gyengjt. Abosszvgy szmztt herceg apsa hadseregvel t is tri testvrbtyja vdelmt
s foglyul ejti a kirlyt magt. mi szvege, mondhatni a szoksos naturalizmussal rszletezve beszli el a megfontolt a testvrgyilkossgot, ahogy a gyztes testvr, kivgzi btyjt.
Ki lesz az az ember, aki a kirlyt fel fogja bontani s j aprra sszevgja?
Mondta egy legny:
n civilben mszros vagyok, igen sok hst vgtam, van nekem j les baltm s j les ksem! majd n eldarabolom!
Na gyere ide, szz aranyat kapol!
Odament a legny, a kirlyt feldtk s az elvgta a nyakt, tkre huzta, j
apr darabokra szjjelvgta, az erdbe elhajiglta.3
Adrmai trtnet menete itt azonban nem r vget s zrlata tovbbi meglepetseket tartogat az olvas szmra.
Sndor herceg a felesgnek, a trk kirly jnynak azt mondta:
Nem szeretlek, mert bds a szd!
s elhagyta, elvllott tlle. Hazament s elvette a btyjnak a felesgt, akit
gyanustott r a btyja, mikor a szobjba tanlta. 4
Atrnrks (kzps testvr) szembeslvn az esemnyekkel, melyeknek
rszben okozja azzal, hogy nem hagyta a vadaknak ldozatul a kirlynt s fit,
pisztollyal ngyilkossgot kvet el. Nem brja elviselni az nvdat amiatt, hogy
btyjnak igaza volt, ccsvel szembeni gyanakvsa megalapozottnak bizonyult.
mi a trtnetet tanulsgos mondattal fejezi be.
Igy a kirlyi csalrd mindenki elpusztult, csak Sndor herceg a kirly felesgvel lakott, mert a fit a magnak rezte.5

3 im. 375.
4 im. 37576.
5 im. 376.

1 105 2

Advr kirly trtnete az olvas szmra igen csak elgondolkodtat s szmos

prhuzamosan rvnyes kvetkeztets megfogalmazsra knl alkalmat. Mr
maga a cmads is rdekes, s br nem ll rendelkezsre arra vonatkoz pontos
adat, hogy mi kitl tanulta mesjt, az Igazsg kirly trtnete multikulturlis krnyezetre, konkrtan romn hatsra utal.6 Aszzs csbt metaforikus
olvasataknt knlkozik az igazsg bukstrtneteknt val rtelmezse. Az
Advrkirly stt tnusval s remnytelen zenetvel mi egybknt gyakran
pesszimista hangvtel trtnetei kzl is kiemelkedik. Ahzassgtr asszony
s a testvrgyilkos szvetsgnek diadala okkal srti az olvas igazsgrzett,
hisz az ldozatok, a kt idsebb fivr sajt jakaratuk, pontosabban a megbocsjts ldozatai. Megfordtva, a kt krokoz, a hzassgtr kirlyn s az rmnykod cs a megrdemelt bntets knyrtelen vgrehajtsa esetn nem
okozhatnk azok bukst, akik kpesek a megbocsjtsra. Ugyanakkor s a helyzet nyilvnval paradoxonja, hogy az erklcsi jt megtestest trnrks, amikor elrejti, s ezzel megmenti a hallratlteket, valamint a kirly, amikor enged
lelkiismerete parancsnak s hazahozatja felesgt s fit, akkor ppen tetteikkel bizonytjk a morlis j kpessgt. Msknt fogalmazva, mi trtnetnek
logikjban kdolva van a buks. Az ember etikai rtelemben akkor j, ha in
praxi j, ezzel azonban vdtelenn vlik azzal (azokkal) szemben, akik ezt nem
tartjk irnymutatnak.
Atovbbi rszletektl, a mese bonyolult etikai problmitl elvonatkoztatva,
az Advrkirly mi trtneteinek, de ltalban a mese fenomnjnek egy fontos
logikai-szerkezeti alkotelemt lltja figyelmnk kzppontjba. Jelesl a cselekmny egsz menete felfoghat a titok, pontosabban a szereplk a titok, valjban titkok elleplezse s megfejtse krli ksrleteinek sorozataknt.
Atrtnetben a legslyosabb titok a hzassgtrs esemnye, melyre csak az
utols mondatban derl fny. Akirly erre vonatkoz gyanja, illetve ccse s
felesge, valamint fia elpuszttsnak terve ppen a titok megrzst szolglja,
6 mi sajt elmondsa szerint 1918 utn nem tanult tbb mest, ami azt jelenti, hogy
az 1886-ban szletett mesemond a ksdualizmus multietnikus kzssgeiben sok
trtnetet sajtthatott el. Aromn adevr (igazsg, valsg) a latin veritas (igazsg,
valsg) fnvbl ered. Amese cmad hsnek neve, Advrkirly nyilvn a romn
kifejezs magyartott vltozata.

1 106 2

ami, amennyiben kiderl, rnykot vetne szemlyre, s azon tl, hogy hisgt mlyen srti, a nyilvnossg fel megkrdjelezn uralkodi alkalmassgt.
Advrkirly tettben a loklis falusi kzssgek lett maghatroz normatv
elvrsok ksznnek vissza. Amesemond mi sajt szkebb ptrijt jelent
szamosszegi roma kzssgben is nyilvn rvnyes alapvet trsadalmi rtket,
a hsges felesg toposzt lltja kzppontba s a vlelmezett tabusrtst kveten a legszigorbb megtorls motvumt pti be a trtnetbe.
Tovbb, a titok reprezentcija a mesben a kirlyn elbjtatsnak esemnye, aminek megrzsben a trnrks msodik testvr az erdszcsald titoktartsra pt. Ahallgat (olvas) rti azt is, hogy a titok esetlegesen utlagos
felsznre kerlse milyen veszlyt hordozhat, ezrt az erdszcsald kivgzsnek
elkpeszten brutlis mdja etiktlansga megdbbent, de a trtnet logikjbl szervesen kvetkez megolds.
Vgl a trtnet menetben a titok megmutatkozsnak harmadik formlis
esete, ugyancsak kulcsszerepet jtsz motvum, a szmztt Sndor herceg titka, azaz a btyja, Advrkirly haditervnek gyengjre vonatkoz tuds, ami a
kirly buksnak, legyzsnek elfelttele. Mondhatni, leegyszerstve, a rviden bemutatott trtnet szzsje titkok egymsbl kvetkez lncolata, az ezek
elrejtsre s leleplezsre irnyul ksrletek sorozata. Az Advrkirly mi mesemondsra egybknt jellemz s a meskkel kapcsolatos kzkelet vrakozssal ellenttes megoldsa, teht a hs buksa, a gonosz diadala, pontosabban
ennek bemutatsa figyelmnket okkal irnytja a titok-paradigmatikus rtelmnek krdsre a mesben.
Akvetkezkben mi Lajos mesemvszetnek pldin keresztl ksrletet
tesznk a titok a mese strukturlis formai s koncepcionlis tartalmi alkotelemeknt trtn bemutatsra s rtelmezsre. Mieltt a konkrt pldkra kitrnnk, eljrban nhny ltalnos megllaptst kell tennnk.

1. Elmleti keretek
llspontunk szerint mi grandizus s jl dokumentlt letmve lehetsget knl arra, hogy a titok alakvltozatainak a mesben s az ezt megalapoz
mesei gondolkodsban betlttt sokoldal szerept tfog vizsglat trgyv tegyk. Aterv megvalstst mr csak az is tmogatja, hogy a titok-fenomnje s
1 107 2

a mese paradigmatikus rtelme kztt etimolgiai rtelemben bizonythatan

szoros kapcsolat ll fenn. Ugyanis, amint erre a grgbl vett enigma (rejtly, talny) kifejezs utal, a fogalom eredete szerint az ainisszomai (homlyosan mondani, sejtetni valamit) igben gykerezik, illetve az ily mdon elmondott dolog
mfaji ltalnostsra az ainosz fnevet hasznltk, melynek egyik jelentse:
mese, pldzat.7 Ezek szerint az enigma rtelmben vett titok, legalbbis etimolgiai httert tekintve a mese lnyegt illeti.
Termszetesen a krds az, hogy a titok fenomnje a mesben kimerl-e az
enigma rtelmben elgondolt rejtly kpzetben? A krds megvlaszolst,
mintegy mi pldinak rtelmezst megelz bevezetsknt, kt tematikus
szempont nagyon rvid vzlatval kezdjk. Ezek szerint felvetjk a titok ontolgiai tartalmnak s hermeneutikai szerkezetnek krdst.

Atitok-fenomn ontolgiai tartalma

Ha a mindennapi megkzeltsbl indulunk ki, mely szerint a titok msok
ell elhallgatott, leplezett tny, dolog, akkor be kell ltnunk, hogy a titok ontolgiai rtelemben kt egymst kiegszt, de intencionalitst tekintve ellenttes
aspektus egysge. Atitok fenomn egyik oldalt, jl belthat ismeretelmleti
felttelknt, a reflexv tudat sajt korltainak felismerse kpezi. Ugyanis a titok
sszezavarja a megismer rtelem munkjt, mert a megrt erfeszts a titokkal szemben annak hatrainl elveszti kompetenciit. Pontosabban fogalmazva, a szembesls a titokkal a megismer tudatot sajt kompetenciit illet
korltainak felismersre knyszerti. Ebben a megkzeltsben a titok-fenomn
a rejtly rtelemben adott kognitv entits. Az ember tallkozsa a titokkal s a
tallkozs kvetkezmnyei kt lehetsges reakcinak nyitnak teret. Egyrszt, a
titok hermetikus (teljesen elzrt, hozzfrhetetlen) rtelemtartalma hathat bntan, amennyiben szilrd keretei a megismer kvncsisg eltt nem nyitnak
kapukat: a beletrds a titok elfogadst jelenti. Msrszt s ppen ellenkezleg, a titokban adott rejtly, teht mindaz, ami itt kzvetlen evidenciaknt hozzfrhetetlen a megismerst tovbbi erfesztsre, j utak keressre, az rtelem
komplexebb mkdsre sztnzheti.
7 Gyrksy AlajosKapitnffy IstvnTegyey Imre (szerk.): grg-magyar sztr.
Budapest. Akadmiai, 1990. 35.

1 108 2

Atitok ontolgiai rtelemben vett ellenttes intencionalitssal jellemezhet

msik vetlete, nevezzk gy, a titok rnykos hogy egy vizulis hasonlattal
rzkeltessk a helyzetet oldala, az rtelem beavatottsgnak tnyre utal, s
az ezt megtestest konkrt tudsra vonatkozik.8 Ugyanis a titok-fenomn ontolgiai rtelemben nem csak az erre vonatkoz tuds hinyt, de msfell, s a
beavatottsgban a tudst is felttelezi, azt, amikor ltezik az a megrt pozci,
amely bizonyosan birtokban van annak, ami lnyegnl fogva elrejtett. Atitokra vonatkoz tuds, a beavatottsg, rtelemtartalmnl fogva ppen a megrzst
szolglja. Atitoktarts a titok conditio sine qua non-ja.

Atitok-fenomn hermeneutikai szerkezete

AJanus-arc titok-fenomn kt aspektusnak rvid krlrsa nem csak ontolgijba enged betekintst, de azt is rthetv teszi, hogy fogalommal jellt
entits mindig konkrt, mindenkor szituatv, azaz eseti trsadalmi-kulturlis
helyzethez kapcsoldik, amennyiben felttelezi azokat, akik elrejtettsgknt
szembeslnek vele s azokat, akik beavatottknt a jelentsben birtokoljk azt.
Msknt fogalmazva, a titok ltalnos rtelemtartalma csak az esetben, teht
konkrt jelentsknt mutatkozik meg. Mondhatjuk azt, hogy a titok induktv
fenomn, ami arra is utal, hogy a ttel nem megfordthat: a titok, mint ltalnos nem ltezik.
Atitok alakvltozatainak vizsglata mi Lajos mesiben rszben ppen annak
bizonytst szolglja majd, hogy megrtsk, miknt teszik az letm szvegei
lehetv a jelensg rtelemtartalmnak a klnfle konkrt esetekben trtn
megmutatkozst? Pontosabban, figyelemremlt, hogy ugyanazon szerz a titok nmagban rejtlyes sokoldalsgra tmaszkodva hnyfle varicijt kpes a jelensgnek kiaknzni.
Msfell, s itt visszatrve eredeti krdsnkhz, teht, hogy az enigma rtelmben felfogott titok kimerti-e a jelensg rtelemtartalmt, vizsglhat eg8 Abeavatottsg, a titkos tuds, avagy a titok tudsnak perszonifiklsa a nyugati
gondolkodsban tekintlyes hagyomnnyal rendelkezik, amint erre pldul Hermsz
Triszmegisztosz figurja is utal. (V. HEIDUK, Matthias: Offene Geheimnisse
Hermetische Texte und verborgenes Wissen in der mittelalterlichen Rezeption von
Augustinus bis Albertus Magnus. Wrzburg Universitt, Wrzburg, 2008. 611.)

1 109 2

szen ms megkzeltsben is. Frank Kermode a titoktarts s a titok fogalmt a

hermeneutikai rtelemben felfogott rtelmezsi tr tartozkaknt lttatja. Elemzse, ami a narratv rtelemben adott titok-paradigma rszletes kifejtst illeti,
valjban a hermeneutika kt jeles hagyomnyt vonja ssze. Egyrszt felleli az
allegorikus rtelmezsi tradcit, a Hermsz figurjhoz s funkcijhoz kthet
elrejtett jelents felfejtsre tett megrt erfesztst, ahol a megrt belltds
trgya a kzvettsben rejtlyknt add feladvny. Az allegorikus hagyomny filozfiai megalapozsa, mint ez kzismert a 18. szzadi trtneti hermeneutikai
hagyomnyban nyerte el modern rtelmt, Johann Jakob Rombachtl a romantikus filolgiai megalapozottsg hermeneutikn, Christian Wolfon t, majd az
erre kritikai rtelemben tmaszkod Schleiermacher munkssgn s a heideggeri egzisztencilis hermeneutikn keresztl Gadamerig tart ven keresztl.
Kermode azonban nem csak ezzel a b kt s fl vezredet fellel gondolati hagyomnnyal kalkull.
Anarratva szvegbe gyazott titok rtelemtartalmt mkdtet hermeneutika az arisztotelszi hagyomny tkrben a nyelv kpessgeknt, mint beszd
(glossza) rvnyesl.9 Akimondott sz funkcija a gondolat nyilvnossgnak
megteremtst szolglja, s a jelents az elrejtettsgbl trtn vilgra segtse
ebben az sszefggsben nem interpretci, hanem tiszta beszd. Msknt fogalmazva a megrts a logikai-grammatikai alakzatknt felfogott szvegben a titokkal a kimondott vagy az elhallgatott dolog retorikai dimenzijaknt szmol.
Taln ennyibl is rzkelhet, hogy a titok hermeneutikja, megkettztt feladat: a fogalom enigmatikus (allegorikus mdon elrejtett) rtelme mellett prhuzamosan faktulis (trgyszeren konkrt) tartalmra irnytja figyelmnket.

2. Atitok alakvltozatai mi mesiben

Afenti elmleti keretek elfelttelt kpezik annak, hogy mi mesiben a titok sokszn megjelenst, alkalmazst, alakvltozatait s funkciit azonostani tudjuk. Ezzel nem szeretnnk azt lltani, hogy mi Lajos a titok-fenomn
lehetsgeit mesiben tudatosan hasznlt eszkzknt dolgozta volna ki. St, ppen ellenkezleg, vakodunk minden olyan felttelezstl, ami annak a ltszatt
9 ARISZTOTELSZ: Hermeneutika. Kossuth, Budapest, 1994.

1 110 2

kelti, hogy a szamosszegi cigny mesemond mvszetben megfontolt szerkesztsi elvek mentn, vagy akr a sajt tevkenysgre vonatkoz reflexv tudatossggal jrt volna el. Inkbb arrl kell beszlnnk, hogy mi esetben is, mint
a mfaj ms nagyformtum figurinl, magban a mese-hagyomnyban megrklt strukturlis gyakorlat, szvegszervezsi s trtnetmondi kultra sztns kiaknzsval llunk szemben.
Tovbb fontos rgzteni, hogy a titok-fenomn krdst hrom opci vonatkozsban tanulmnyozhatjuk. Elszr is gyakori, hogy a titok egyltaln nem
jtszik szerepet a trtnetben, vagyis ekkor a titok-fenomn nem kpezi a mesenarratva rtelmezsnek rszt. Ugyanis, mi mesinek jelents rszben az
elbeszli pozci megvlasztsval a mesemond eleve a hallgatsg tudomsra hozza, vilgoss teszi a hs szmra a megoldand feladatot jelent rejtly
rtelmt: nincs titok (felfedett titok). Ezekben a trtnetekben a titok paradigmatikus rtelme a hs rtelmez munkjnak rszeknt, tevkenysge rtelemad elemeknt nyer jelentsget.
Minket a tovbbiakban minak vagy azok a mesi rdekelnek, melyekben
a mesemond elbeszli pozcijbl a hs s a hallgatsg azonos rtelmezi
platformon llnak, a titok-fenomn sttusza, funkcija s rtelme a szzs menetben, illetve annak feltteleknt fokozatosan nyeri el rtelmt, bontakozik ki.
Valamint azokkal a meskkel foglalkozunk, melyekben a mesemond s a hs ll
kzs rtelmezi pozciban: a mesemond a hssel mondatja ki a titkot s mutattatja fel rtelmt a hallgatsg szmra.
Amese mkdsnek kt elemi felttele, a mesei szzs s az ennek a megalapozsban felels mesei gondolkods ltalnos cljai teljes sszhangban llnak
a titok-fenomn a fentebb az elmleti keretek azonostsakor jellemzett tulajdonsgaival. Mit jelent mindez? Aszzs nem ms mint a hst a mindennapi lethelyzetbl kizkkent feladatok megoldsra tett ksrleteinek sorozata.
Tovbb, a szzs (mese) kvetest lehetv tev mesei gondolkods vagyis
a szemllet, ami a mesemond s hallgatsga szempontjbl egyltaln a hs
tjnak nyomon kvetst, megrtst rtelmezsi feladatknt felveti sszetett mdon s szmos jelentsrtegben tmaszkodik a titok-fenomnjben rejl lehetsgekre. Amese rtelmezsben a titok-fenomn ontolgiai tartalma
s hermenutikai szerkezete prhuzamosan, de eltr arnyokban s sllyal rvnyesl szempontok. mi a szvegterjedelmet tekintve is hatalmas letmve
1 111 2

ppen annak bemutatsra knl lehetsget, hogy a titok-fenomn burjnzsa,

alakvltozkonysga milyen konkrt megoldsokban lt testet. Vgs soron ksrletnk a titok funkci-varinsainak listzsval a jelensg vzlatos topolgijnak fellltsra irnyul prblkozsknt is felfoghat.

12
mi, Akeresked, aki termnyeket szllt klfdre cmmel jegyzett trtnete
az igen elterjedt szp leny s a szrny tpus (ATh 425 c) egy vltozata.10 Aszzs menete szerint egyszer egy nagyon gazdag keresked hossz utazsra indult
s hrom lnynak kedvkre val ajndkot grt. Alegidsebb karikagyrt,
a kzps dszes ruht a legkisebb bborszn virgot krt magnak ajndkba.
Miutn a keresked nem tallt bborszn virgot, ezrt egy kastly kertjbl
prblt meg lopni, de leleplezdtt. Ngy oroszln vette krl, betereltk a kastlyba, ahol fogsgban tartottk. Egy titkos hang minden kvnsgt teljestette
ugyan, de csak egy felttellel engedte szabadon.
Ember! ha azr a bborszn virgr, amit leszaktottl, hrom jnyod van
odahaza, ha hrom jnyod kzl egyet ideohozol nekem. akinek n rabszolgja legyek, mg a vilgon lek, ht akkor te mehetsz haza.11
Az ember legkisebb lnya, aki a bborszn virgot krte elment a kastlyba,
ahol a hang gazdjrl kiderl, hogy htorszg kirlya. Alny feladata, hogy
a klnbz llatok alakjban felbukkan eltkozott kirlyt megvltsa, a rmsges elefntot, a szrny farkast s a tzmteres kgyt, amely flmternyire a
szjbl a fulnkot hajiglta kifele megcskolja. Ahs sikerrel jrt s ezzel megalapozta boldogsgt.
Atrtnetben a titok-fenomn formatv aktv struktraknt rhet tetten. Ha
megvizsgljuk a szzst, belthat, hogy gyakorlatilag az egsz mese az enigma rtelmben vett titok kr, illetve ennek feltrsa rdekben tett erfeszts.
Amegvltstrtnet kt mesei menete (teht nmagban jelentssel br egysge) vilgosan elvlik egymstl. Mg a keresked nem tudja, hogy kinek a sorsra
bzza lnyt, titokban marad eltte, addig a lny btran nz szembe sorsval, az
10 ERDSZ: i.m. II. 2733.
11 i. m. 29.

1 112 2

elszr szrnyeteg kpben, majd a kirly alakjban leleplezd titokkal. Msknt fogalmazva a mesei feladat megoldsa a titok leleplezsvel, feltrulkozsval azonos eredmny. Atitok-fenomn formatv aktv struktraknt trtn
meghatrozsa azt jelenti, hogy a mese teljes mrtkben az enigma kr szervezdik, pontosabban a cselekmny minden mozzanata a titokra pl, krltte bontakozik ki, lt testet.
mi, Bihk Jnos, aki a felesgt eltkozta, hogy addig meg ne tudja szlni a
gyerekt, amg a kt karjt keresztl nem teszi cmmel kzlt trtnetben a
titok-fenomn egszen ms hasznlati mdjba tkzik az olvas. Az elveszett
frj keresse tpus (ATh 425) a tipolgiai besorolst tekintve, teht a szereplk s a motvumok strukturlis rendje szerint az elz mesvel rokonthat.
Atitok-fenomn alakzatait vizsglva megllapthatjuk, hogy Bihk Jnos mesje egszen msknt lttatja funkciit, mint az elz trtnet.
Atrtnet els mondata azzal indt, hogy a fhs megtkozza felesgt, addig ne tudja megszlni gyermekt, amg a kt karjt keresztl nem teszi, aztn
elhagyta vrands felesgt s vilgg indult.12 Aszzs, Bihk Jnos csodlatos
kalandjainak elbeszlse semmit nem vilgt meg abbl, hogy a hs mirt hagyta
el felesgt, mi a kiindul szituci. Avarzsmese klasszikus szerkezeti eleme, a
hs tnak indulsa ltalban kapcsolatban van a feladattal, ami ppen a kiindul helyzetet elidz hiny vagy krokozs megszntetsre irnyul.13 Afeladat
teljestse, a hs munkja a vilg rendjnek visszalltst clozza, amirl a mesemond tbbnyire vilgos tjkoztatst ad hallgatsga szmra.
Bihk Jnos trtnetben mi semmifle indoklssal nem l, nem tudjuk meg
a hs ksztetettsgnek okait, az a trtnet teljes egszben titok marad. Aszzs ugyanis csak azt beszli el, hogy a hs megmenti az zvegy kirlyn orszgt
a rtmad ellensgtl, csodlatos erejvel legyzi a svdeket, a knaiakat s a
12 Erdsz Sndor, mi gyjtje kommentrjban ugyan megjegyzi, hogy a mese tredkes, mert nem magyarzza meg az elzmnyeket. Ugyanakkor a mesemond dntse, illetve a hallgatsg tlete, hogy elfogadja-e teljesnek az adott vltozatot. Ha
mi nem lett volna sikeres mesjvel, az minden bizonnyal kikerlt volna a repertorbl. ERDSZ: II. 527.
13 PROPP, Vlagyimir Jakovlevics: Amese morfolgija, (ford. Soproni Andrs) Osiris,
Budapest, 2005.

1 113 2

Szovjetunit. mi a mesei hrmassg szerkesztsi gyakorlatnak szablyossgt

kvetve, s vgtelenl gazdag fantzijnak segtsgvel a fldrajzi s trtneti valsg elemeit teljesen tetszlegesen keverve mutatja be jelennek krlmnyeihez igaztva Bihk Jnosban a klasszikus varzsmese hsnek parafrzist.
Milyen nemzetek vagytok?
n a nagy Szovjetuni npje vagyok!
Menjetek el haza, sajnlnk ennyi embert, hogy elpuszttsak! Takarodjatok ki az orszgumbl, de mg a titeknek is egy negyedt hagyjtok ehhez
az orszghoz, hogy hadd njje ki magt!
Ht kacagtak egyet a katonasg rajta, mit beszl ez az ember, taln a tbolydbul jn most kifele?
Ht ha tbolyds vagy, jember, eridj csak dgodra!
Naht, ha te ngemet ennyire legyalztl fordtotta a kezt Bihk Jnos.
Mikor, a katonatiszt, akinek azt mondtk, hogy vezrezredes, pofonvgta,
az bizony a sorba az sszest leverte magval, mert az mindenki felborult. s
akkor megkezdett a tbbi katonasg szaladni.14
Visszatrve a titok-fenomn a mesben betlttt funkcijnak rtelmezsre,
a cselekmny tovbbi menetben sem derl fny arra, ami lnyegben az egsz
trtnet mkdsnek mozgatrugja. Asikeresen megvvott egyszemlyes hbort kveten, ahol a siker magyarzataknt a Bihk Jnos csodlatos erejt
mutatja fel mi, melynek forrsa egybknt szokatlan mdon, de ugyancsak titokban marad a hallgatsg eltt, mintegy a mesket felgyjt Erdsz Sndor
llspontjt erstve, mely szerint a trtnet tredkes. Ahs vgl sszehzasodik a megmentett zvegy kirlynval.
Akt mesei menetbl ll trtnet msodik szakasza azt beszli el, hogy Bihk els felesge, aki nem tudta megszlni gyermekeit, tnak indult frje megkeressre. Csellel elrte, hogy amikor a hs mellett aludt, s, amint mi fogalmaz:
14 i.m. 20. Atrtnet rgztsnek idpontjban, 1958 decemberben a magyar hsknt
titult Bihk Jnos legnagyobb ellensgeknt belltott Kna s Szovjetuni sem mi
sem hallgatsga politikval kapcsolatos elkpzelseit nem tkrzi. Ugyanakkor az
elrettent idegen hatalom s az ebben megtestesl veszly kpzeteknt rszben
mi vilghbors tapasztalataihoz kthetek, rszben a hsre vr feladat grandiozitst hivatottak hangslyozni.

1 114 2

magho szortotta Bihk Jnos az els felesgt. Azonnal a kt gyermeket

megszlte, lett egy fia s lnya.
Az zvegy kirlyn rteslt arrl, hogy frjnek els felesgtl gyermekei
szlettek, s ezen igen felhborodott.
Jaj ht esztendeje elmllott, hogy velem lakol nekem egy pulyt nem tudtl
csinlni. Ez a n hrom este hlt mg melletted, egy jnt, egy fit, ilyen gynyr gyeremekeket csinltl15
Atrtnet azzal zrul, hogy Bihk Jnos megharagudott msodik felesgre s felakasztatta, majd kirlyknt uralkodott hzassga rvn szerzett orszgban.
Elvonatkoztatva a megolds etikai vonatkozsaitl, szempontunkbl a bemutatott mesben a titok-fenomn funkcija szerint formatv passzv struktra.
Msknt fogalmazva, az egsz trtnet keretfeltteleknt, ltens, homlyban marad httereknt uralja a szzst, ugyanakkor sem utalsknt, sem az enigmra
vonatkoz tuds vagy hivatkozs formjban nem lt konkrt alakot.
Atitok-fenomn alakzatait ler topolgia egy kvetkez esett figyelhetjk
meg, a Gyertek csak testvrek, mert nem tudom, ez az ember mit akar mondani cmmel jegyzett trtnetben. Atrtnet formai osztlyozsa Erdsz szerint nehzsgeket okoz.16 Ugyanakkor elemzsnk szempontjbl mr a cm is
sokatmond, annak ellenre, hogy mi mesinek cmadsi gyakorlatt, a kezdmondat cmfunkciban trtn alkalmazst gyjtje vezette be. Mgis, a
mesekezdet itt, mint ltni fogjuk a szzs menetvel sszhangban, az enigma
bejelentst valstja meg.
Gyertek csak testvrek, mert nem tudom, ez az ember mit akar velem s
krdjtek meg tlle, mi ennek a baja, mert n nem tudom, hogy ez mirt jn
nhozzm, mit akar ntllem elrni?17
Ahangsly a meg nem rts esemnyn van, azon, hogy itt az rtelem segtsgre, a helyzet magyarzatra szorul. Anyitmondat ltalnos alanyaknt a
15 i.m. 26.
16 Erdsz a trtnetet mi egyedi mesjnek tekinti, taln az ATh 301, Fehrl fia tpussal rokonthat. (ERDSZ: i.m. I. 539.)
17 ERDSZ: I. 204.

1 115 2

mesemond ltal megszlaltatott ember szmra a msik, az orszgba rkez

idegen az, aki igyekszik egyrtelm magyarzattal szolglni. Ahallgatsg ebbl kap felvilgostst a mesei alapszitucira vonatkozan.
Hallod, nnekem semmi bajom ms veled nincsen, csak annyi, hogy tinllatok minden eges embernek a haja az g fele gy ll, mint a drt! Hanem n
jttem Bngyrorszgbul s mindenkinek a hajt meg fogom bngyrre csinlni, mert Bngyrorszgon a bngygr npnek a haja mindenkinek olyan
szpen ll, mint az enym. Nzd milyen gynyr az n fejemen a haj.18
Atitokzatos idegen vals szndkaira azonban csak jvetele oknak tovbbi magyarzatbl derl fny. Bngyrorszgban ugyanis az asszonyok csak fikat szlnek rgta, ezrt az elad sorban lv lnyokban hiny van. Aszzs
szerint ez rmre ad okot, mert, ahogy a mesl megfogalmazza:
nlunk meg hbor vt pen, kipusztultak a frfiemberek! Nk meg annyi, hogy a hajunk szllt is eszik megfele, hogy mennnek frjhe s nincsen,
akihe menjenek!19
Itt elvonatkoztatunk attl, hogy mi mesjben kzvetlenl utal a II. vilghbort kveten a magyar falusi kzssgekben elll tnyleges trsadalmi
helyzetre, a hbors embervesztesgre, illetve a mese menetnek soros esemnyben, jelesl, hogy a lnyok ezrvel lpnek hzassgra idegen orszgbeli fiatalemberekkel, kzvetve utal a vidki loklis trsadalmakban a frfihinnyal
elll szocilpszicholgiai helyzet kvetkezmnyeire. Atitok-fenomn kidolgozsnak a trtnetben megvalstott sajtos mdozatt a szzs menete trja a hallgatsg el.
Mindjrt ezrivel a jnyok kezetfogtak a fiatalemberekkel s hsget eskdtek. s ezek mindjrt kocsira ltettk kt, elvittk Bngyrorszgra.
Nadeht a szlei nem tudtk, Bngyrorszgnak a hrt sem hallotta soha
senki, mre is lehet az? Ht a jnyok oda vtak, veken keresztl, soha sem
levelet nem rtak haza, sem pedig vendgsgre nem mentek.20

18 uo.
19 i. m. 205.
20 uo.

1 116 2

Atvoli s ismeretlen orszg, az idegen hely teljes titokba burkolzik, senki nem tudja hol tallhat, vagy hol lehet megkeresni. Amese menetben ekkor
lp sznpadra a tnyleges hs, az egyik felesgnek ment lny testvre, Kis Pista,
aki vllalkozik arra, hogy elutazzon Bngyrorszgba. mi az eljuts krlmnyeit nem klnsebben rszletezi, csupn egy ids bcsi tmutatsa elegend,
hogy megtallja testvre lakhelyt. A mesenarratva azonban a hely, az idegen vilg fizikai azonostst kveten a hs szemszgbl elbeszlve nemhogy
feloldan, de mg inkbb elidegenti, bizonytalansggal s feszltsggel terheli Bngyrorszg bemutatst. mi rszben stilris eszkzkkel rszben konkrtumokkal rzkelteti, hogy Kis Pistnak fogalma sincsen arrl, hogy hol van.
Ahely ismeretlen, nem azonosthat szmra s, br a hs megrkezik valahova,
amivel tallkozik a manifeszt idegensg, amit tapasztal, maga a titok. Atrtnet hallgatja a titok krlrst szolgl, de esetlegesnek tetsz utalsokkal tallkozik a titok-fenomn lehetsges rtelmt illetleg, viszont a mesl a helyre
vonatkozan nem l vilgos magyarzattal. Abngyr np nem iszik plinkt,
csak bort, nem bzalisztbl ksztik a kenyeret, hanem rizsbl, nem bzt, kukorict s krumplit termelnek, hanem citrom, narancs s fge terem magtl,
valamint Bngyrorszgban nem Istent imdjk, hanem a legbngyrebb haj
embert, aki el tisztelete jell mindenki kteles szertartsosan letrdepelni.
mi vilgkpnek tovbbi mesibl kibontakoz jellemzibl s az ezt trgyal elemzsekbl, elssorban Erdsz rtelmezsbl sejthetjk, hogy Bngyrorszg a srknyok orszga, de ezt a mesemond nem egyrtelmsti.21 Az
rtelmezsben a titkot megtartja a maga szmra s sem hst, sem hallgatsgt nem hozza abba a helyzetbe, hogy pontosan tudjuk, hogy hol is vagyunk.

21 Ehelytt arra nincs md, hogy rszletesen vizsgljuk mi sajtos, komplex s teljes
mrtkben koherens vilgkpt. Csak utalunk arra, hogy elkpzelse szerint a vilg
hromosztat. Arelis vilg, mindennapi valsgunk szntere kzpen foglal helyet.
Az gbolt feletti fels vilg, valamint a srknyok lakhelyl szolgl als vilg olyan
helyek, melyeket csak a hsk kpesek bejrni. mi archaikus kpzeteit zsenilisan
kombinlta a modern szembeszk elemeivel, szemlyes lettapasztalatait valamint
ismereteit a vilgrl koherens rendszerbe szervezte. (V. Bicz Gbor: Mese s trsadalom. mi Lajos, egy cigny mesemond lete s mve. Debrecen, Didakt, 2014.
94101.)

1 117 2

Atitok-fenomn a trtnetben, nevezzk gy, manifeszt funkcionlis alkot.

rtelmezsnk szerint mi mesemvszetben itt a titok egy specilis alakvltozatval talljuk magunkat szemben. Ahomlyban hagyott, a mese valsgban folyamatosan jelenval titok itt olyan entits, amely ha lhetnk ezzel a
heideggeri parafrzisnak tetsz fordulattal a jelenltben megvonja magt.22
Atitok-fenomn topolgijnak egy kvetkez lehetsges varicijt azonosthatjuk a szp leny s a szrny egy tovbbi vltozatban, Ajmd parasztnak
hrom jnya vt, de soha nem vitt nekik semmit cmmel jegyzett trtnetben.23
Aszzs szinte mr ismers: a gazdag parasztember elmegy csengeri vsrba s
lnyait megkrdi, hogy mit vegyen nekik ajndkba. Az idsebb cipt, a kzps
kismacskt, mg a legkisebb szp rzst kr. Az apa csak rzst nem kap, ezrt
hazafel, mikor kinylott tulipnokat lt egy t menti kertben, elhatrozza, hogy
lop lnynak bellk. Atulajdonos azonban tetten ri, akasztfval fenyegeti,
hacsak lnyai kzl egyet nem ad felesgl hozz. Az ember, hogy mentse brt a
feltteleket elfogadja s a legkisebb lnyt, ppen azt, aki a virgot krte ajndkba, az ismeretlen fiatalemberhez adja. Aszzs az eskv esemnyvel r vget.
Bementek, a jegyz is megjelent, a pap is. Mikor elmondtk az eskt, a kt
ember alrta. Afiatalember fdhvgta egy gyufskatulyt, vllott belle
egy olyan ngylovas hint, amibe a kocsis bakrul hajtotta a hat lovat benne.
Ajny mikor a kapun mentek kifele, addig csak mosolygott, akkor pg elbditette magt. Az apja meg az anyja sval szaladtak a hint utn, de hiba szaladtak, tbb sosem lttk a jnt, maig oda van, hogyha valahun meg
nem llt a hint vele. Igy teht az ember eladta a jnyt egy szl virgrt.24

22 Termszetesen a titok-fenomn vizsglata sorn szmtalan filozfiai allzi knlkozik szinte magtl rtetden. Ugyanakkor a hiteles mesertelmezs elfelttelnek
tekintett szvegcentrikus olvass, a szinte filolgiai pontossggal elvgzett elemzmunka a mesenarratva rtelmezsekor a kifejts, a megrts megknnytse rdekben br ignybe vehet filozofmkat, de attl llspontom szerint messzemenen
vakodni kell, hogy a mesben tudatosan hasznlt, netn reflektlt filozfiai tartalmat ttelezznk!
23 ERDSZ: i.m. II. 3439.
24 i. m. 39.

1 118 2

Alnylops, lnyrabls mi mesiben, ahogy ltalban a varzsmeskben

gyakran visszatr motvum. Ugyanakkor olyan zrlatknt, amely a mesei hinyt
nem csak, hogy jrateremti, de a narratvt ebben az llapotban magyarzat
nlkl lezrja, kifejezetten atipikus. Msknt fogalmazva, a szzs szerkezetnek logikja ebben az esetben a titok a mesben betlttt szerepbl kvetkez tovbbi lnyeges tulajdonsgra utal, titok-fenomn performatv strukturlis
funkcijra. Az rtelmezs a titokra ebben a formjban a nyelvi kijelents lehetsghez kapcsold retorikai megalapozottsg alakzatknt tekint. Magyarn
s visszatrve pldnkhoz, a krds itt az, hogy mi mesjt mirt a titok a bejelentsben adott megnyitsval zrja le. Msknt fogalmazva a titok-fenomn
funkcionlisan itt azzal, hogy a mesenarratva esemnyeknt elll, egyszer s
mindenkorra el is halasztdik. Ahs (apa) s a mese hallgatja az esemnyben,
a hiny megteremtsre vonatkoz tudsban azt rti meg, hogy soha nincs s
nem lesz mdjban a titok a megrtsben trtn feloldsa. Atitok megrtse
lehetetlen. gy tnik a titok-fenomn performatv funkcija a jelensgben tetten rhet tabujellegre is utal.25
Jelen tanulmny mi mesevilgnak szvegeiben azonosthat titok-fenomn
vltozatainak utolsknt bemutatott pldjt a htlen anya tpusba (Ath 315)
besorolt, Avinasszony, akire a kirly runt cmmel jegyzett trtneten keresztl rtelmezi. A szzs az Ers Jnos mesk kevsb kzismert varinsa. Az
ids asszonyt, miutn mr nem volt hasznra az udvarnak, a munkt nem tudta elvgezni, kirlya elhatrozta, hogy elveszejti. Az erdben magra hagyott
s szarvastehn tejvel tpllkoz asszony egyszer egy szem borsot tallt, amit
megevett, majd kilencven ve ellenre, meglepetsre azt vette szre, hogy vrands lett, majd figyermeke szletett. Ahatalmas ervel rendelkez fia szletett, aki csods segttrsa, a keresztapja tmogatsnak ksznheten egy
kastlyra tett szert, ahova anyjt bekltztette. Abonyolult s tbb mesei menetbl ll trtnet szempontunkbl figyelemremlt cselekmnyszla, amikor
Ers Jnos ids anyja beleszeret a hozzjuk ember kpben vetd srknyba,

25 Itt nincs md arra, hogy John Austin s Derrida a performativits nyelvi alakzataival
kapcsolatos megvilgt rtelm fejtegetseire kitrjnk, vagy a trsadalomtudomnyi antropolgia a kultrk tabufelfogsval kapcsolatos tapasztalatait kiaknzzuk

1 119 2

majd annak rmnykodsra belegyezik egyszltt fia elveszejtsbe, amiben

tevleges szerepet is vllal.
n mr tudom, a srkny kirly mondta , tudom n, hogy hogy mennyi
ereje van neki s milyen nagy tudomnyos ember! Tudom n hogy tlers
ember! De hallod azt mondja , neked a bal p.nak a szlin van egy fejr szl szr. s mondd neki: Kedves egy fiam, n meg akarnm tudnni, hogy
mifle er van tebenned? () Tedd csak ssze a kt btyk jadat n hadd
kssem ssze. Van az n kezemben egy szl szr. Ha ezt az egy szl szrt el
tudod szakjtani, olyan nyugodtan alszok n a szobba, akrhov jssz, vagy
mensz, hogy tudom neked elibed a vilgon senki.26
Acsel sikerl, Ers Jnos tehetetlen, amikor az anyja tadja a srknynak.
Gyere te srkny, b.od az anydat, kezedbe adom a fiamnak az lett,
nem brja elszaktani a szrt.27
Ahs elrulsval s lemszrlsval a gyermekgyilkos anya trtnete azonban mg nem r vget, mert kiderl, hogy a krokoz, a srknykirly valdi clja, Ers Jnos orszgnak elfoglalsa maradktalanul csak akkor teljesl, ha tle
is megszabadul.
Azt hitted, hogy azrt vettelek el, hogy felesgemnek szeretlek? Azrt, hogy
a fiadnak az letre plyztam, hogy nnlam vitzebb a vilgon ne legyen,
de mr nrajtam ert vett vna, hogyha teveled ketten ki nem jtszottuk
vna.
Avnasszonyt elhajtotta.28
Anegatv kimenetel trtnet, a hs teljes buksa a titok-fenomn paradigmatikus rtelmnek egy tovbbi tulajdonsgra, s ezzel a jelensg jabb alakvltozatra vilgt r. Amesl a trtnet vgn a krokozra bzza a titok leleplezst,
valdi szndkainak bejelentst, ami sz szerint vgzetes. Anarratv totalitsknt felfogott titok-fenomn a mese cselekmnynek strukturlis alkotja. Lnyegben cezrt teremt, a mesenarratva menetben logikai s szerkezeti trst
26 ERDSZ: i.m. I. 350.
27 i. m. 351.
28 uo.

1 120 2

idz el, ami alapveten befolysolja az rtelmezst. Atitok tudsa fellr minden ms, minden korbbi olvasatot, zrjelezi az elzetes megrts-varinsokat
azzal, hogy rvnyessgket megvonja.
sszefoglalva, a fentiekben a titok-fenomn mi Lajos mesemvszetbl vett
pldin keresztl bemutatott t strukturlis funkcionlis alakvltozata, mondhatni a titok narratv burjnzsa a mesben a szintzisre trekv elemzst ktsgtelenl nehz helyzetbe hozza.
nr. titok alakvltozatai
1
formatv aktv struktra
2

formatv passzv
struktra

manifeszt funkcionlis
alkot
performatv strukturlis
funkci
narratv totalits

4
5

plda, mi Lajos mesje

Akeresked, aki termnyeket szllt
klfdre
Bihk Jnos, aki a felesgt eltkozta, hogy
addig meg ne tudja szlni a gyerekt, amg
a kt karjt keresztl nem teszi
Gyertek csak testvrek, mert nem tudom,
ez az ember mit akar mondani
Ajmd parasztnak hrom jnya vt, de
soha nem vitt nekik semmit
Avinasszony, akire a kirly runt

Atitok strukturlis-funkcionlis alakvltozatai a mesben

mi Lajos repertorja alapjn

Kiderl ugyanis, hogy a titok-fenomn ltalnos jelentse fogalmi rtelemben a mesben nem hatrozhat meg. mi trtneteinek elemzsbl vilgoss vlik, hogy a titok a mesenarratva vltozkony strukturlis-funkcionlis
alakzata. Msknt fogalmazva, olyan konceptulis elem, melynek mkdst a
szveg-esetek, az egyes trtnetek narratv univerzumnak szintjn, a konkrt
alkalmazs gyakorlatban lehet vizsglni, s legfeljebb az egyes szerzk, mesemondk letmvnek vonatkozsban rdemes ltalnostani.
Afentiek szerint a titok-fenomn tanulmnyozsa mdszertani rtelemben
egyrszt teht felttelezi, 1. az adott trtnetben a titok azonostst (ontolgiai tartalom); 2. a titok enigmatikus rtelmnek s faktikus (konkrt trgyszer)
tartalmnak az rtelmezsfeladatknt trtn meghatrozst (hermeneutikai
szerkezet); 3. a titok performatv funkcijnak tisztzst. Msodik mdszerta1 121 2

ni lpsknt nylik lehetsg a titok-fenomn a konkrt szveg szintjn azonosthat alakvltozatainak lersra, azonostsra s rtelmezsre.
Atitok alakvltozatainak a mese szerkezetben jtszott strukturlis-funkcionlis szerept a titok-fenomn permutcijaknt hatrozhatjuk meg. Ez prhuzamosan jelent multiplikcit, teht a titok formai soksznsgre utal, illetve
jelent permutcit, ami vilgoss teszi, hogy a mesertelmezs lnyegben mindig, gy vagy gy, de a mese-titok (ainosz-enigma) kibogozsra tett erfeszts.

1 122 2

Valastyn Tams
ATITOK ATOPIKJA

Berki Jnos Fehrlfia cm mesjrl

1 123 2

titok, titkolzs, titokzatossg kifejezsek poliszmikus mivolta visszariasztja az rtelmezt brmilyen feladattl,
amely e rejtlyes fenomnt, a titkot, engedi feltrulni. Tudniillik brmit mondannk is rla, rgtn mintha annak feltrse,
egyben beszennyezse volna, amit megnyilvnulsunk pillanatig magban rejtett. Atitokrl eszerint nem lehet megnyilvnulni, nem lehet
rla elmlkedni? Atitkot nem lehet mitizlni, etizlni, eszttizlni, politizlni?
De ht legtbbszr ppen mitikus, etikus, eszttikus, politikus kontextusai teszik izgalmass egy-egy dolog, esemny, trtns titkossgt, titokzatossgt.
Vagy ppensggel a nevezett kontextusokban lehet csak a titokkal foglalkozni, rtelmezni teht sui generis nem, mert akkor ezzel eleve megszntetnnk,
megsemmistennk rtelmezsnk trgyt? Ha nem lehetsges ezek szerint az
rtelmezi tvolsg perspektvjban ltni, lttatni e trgyat, akkor pusztn
szubjektv lenne? Felteheten vagy inkbb minden bizonnyal, nem. m ez mit
sem vltoztat azon, hogy a titok magban foglal, hogy ne mondjam, rejt valami olyasmit, ami kommuniklhatatlan. Atitok nem kommuniklhat, m mindig van, addik. Valami fenomenlis vagy noumenlis jellegzetessget trstunk
hozz, azt ppensggel, hogy feltrhatatlan, egsz egyszeren azrt, mert ha feltrul(na), mr nem lenne titok. Atitok helye teht egyfajta tagads, magnak a
hinynak az affirmlsa.
De ht hogyan affirmlhatom azt, ami nincs? Ezt a zskutca gyans, st veszlyes gondolatot taln azzal lehetne s remlem, a ksbbi fejtegetsekbl kivilglik, kell is megrizni az interpretciban, hogy ez esetben az affirmcit
nem, mondjuk gy, a trgya fell prbljuk elgondolni, hanem nmaga fell: a titok egy autoaffirmatv trsgben honol. Nem azt affirmlom teht, ami nincs,
hanem a mg-nem-lt(ez) affirmlja nmagt, s ez maga a titok. Egy nmagban pulzl potencialits igenli azt, hogy legyen, lehessen. Egy hely nlkli hely
affirmlja a teret, amelyben el-addhat. Ezt a struktrt illethetjk akr a titok
struktrjaknt is. Affirmci s hely-telensg ezek lesznek a titok fogalmnak komponensei ebben az interpretciban. Termszetesen azt nem lltom,
hogy ms komponensekrl nem beszlhetnk. St, a tovbbiakban magam is be
fogok emelni, knytelen leszek beemelni a titok fogalmba ms problematizcibl szrmaz elemeket, gymint a feltrst, feltrulkozst, leleplezst, ressget, teltdst stb.
1 124 2

llthatjuk, hogy a titok hely nlkli helye az irodalom mint a titok nlkli
titok. Az irodalom beszl a titokrl, radsul oly mdon, hogy tudatban van a
kommuniklhatatlansgnak. Akommuniklhatatlan kommunikcija ez esetben nem valamifajta kimondhatatlan atavizmus formba-rendezse, hanem valami leleplezett, feltrt jramondsa. Hiszen a titok nlkli titok olyasmi, ami
mr elvesztette titok mivoltt. Ismertt lett, rzi ugyan titok jellegt, de ppen
a legfbb jegytl fosztatott meg, a kommuniklhatatlansgtl. Persze a titoknak is van ismeret-sttusza. Atitkot mindig legalbb egyvalaki/egyvalami ismeri, akire/amire vonatkozik, aki/ami a ltbe bocsjtja, hogy immr legyen: a
titok megszletik. Ezltal helyet kap a ltben, helyesebben a lt hellyel knlja.
Az affirmci autolgiai jellege ilyenkor ktsgtelenl csorbt szenved, de mgis tovbb hat. Tovbb rezeg a megszletett titokban. Ezt nevezhetjk szingularitsnak. Az, ami egyedi, klns, ami a ltbl csakis gy s ppen nem msknt
formldhatott meg, ahogyan alakot nyert. Altez attl ltez, hogy rzi titkt. Altezben ez a titokszer a szingulris.
Nos teht ezennel kijelenthetjk: a szingulris ltez titokkal br, titokzatos.
m ha ez a titokzatos az irodalomban, valamely irodalmi mben jelenik meg,
akkor szksgkppen leleplezdik. Titoktalanodik. Hiszen az irodalom tipizl,
ppen hogy az egyedisgtl fosztja meg a ltezket, attl irodalom, hogy ltalnost. St ennl tbbet, magvasabbat, mlyebben-strukturlisabban titok-elle
neset is mondhatunk az irodalomrl, Jacques Derridt idzve:
Az irodalom modern tallmny, azokba a konvencikba s intzmnyekbe
rdik bele, amelyek, hogy csak ezt a vonst ragadjuk ki, elvben biztostjk
szmra a jogot, hogy mindent kimondjon.1
Nem maradhat titok az irodalomban, nem maradhat semmi titokban, ami
irodalomm lesz. Ami teht megjelenik titokknt az irodalomban, vagy ami
irodalomknt titokszer, az vagy titok nlkli titok, vagy hely nlkli hely. Az
irodalom a par excellence titoktalant diskurzus. Vannak ugyanakkor termszetesen az irodalomnak is olyan helyei, ahol a titokzatos szingularits vagy a
szingulris titok rizheti valdi, a kommuniklhatatlansgbl nyert kontrjait.
1 DERRIDA, Jacques: Szenvedsek. In: U. Essz a nvrl. (Fordtotta Boros Jnos,
Csords Gbor, Orbn Joln), Jelenkor, Pcs, 1995. 37.

1 125 2

De mg ezekben az esetekben sem lehet nyilvn figyelmen kvl hagyni, hogy a

titok amint megint csak Derrida rja
hallgat, nem azrt, hogy tartalkoljon vagy visszafogjon egy beszdet, hanem mert idegen a beszdtl, () a titok szenvtelenl elrhetetlen tvolsgban tartzkodik.2
Tartzkodik, ami mindenekeltt azt jelenti, hogy van, van titok, de azt is jelenti, hogy tvol tartja magt a beszdtl. m van olyan beszd, amely tiszteli e
tvolsgot, tekintettel van a titok tartzkodsra.
Azt gondolom, hogy a cigny mesemondk vilga alkalmas hely ezen szingularitsok, titokzatos egyedisgek s egyedi titokzatossgok megformlsra.
Tudniillik ezek a mesemondk nem tipizlnak, hanem sokszor a szituci knlta mdon formljk meg a hallgatsguk szmra az ppen feltrni kszlt
vilgot. Mondhatjuk, szingularitsukban lltjk a hallgatsguk el a trtnhetket. Helyet biztostanak a folyamatosan hely-telenl formldnak, a helyt
keres potencialitsnak, azaz kpesek az esemnyek egyedisgt, titokzatossgt megosztani msokkal. Merthogy a szingulris ltez ppen attl klns,
egyedi, hogy tekintettel van a msik lteztl val tvolsgra. Aszenvtelenl
elrhetetlen tvolsg e szingulris ltezk kzege. Abeszdben ez persze leginkbb nmasgknt vagy res helyknt, helytelen helyknt konfigurldik, de
mgiscsak konfigurldik. St, attl sem riadnk vissza immr, hogy kijelentsem: a cigny mesemondk mveiben a titok egyfajta konmijt tapasztalhatjuk meg, kohzis, formakonstitul erknt van jelen a titok nluk. Mi tbb,
ennl megint csak mg ersebbet is lehet lltani: a titok funkcionlis, funkcija az, hogy lehetv tegye azt a beszdet, amely t magt rintetlenl hagyja.3
Atitok res helyknt, hely nlkli helyknt trtn allegorizldsnak pldjaknt szeretnk beszlni Berki Jnos Fehrlfia cm mesjrl. Maga a szveg alakvltoztat, a Kanca Mikls cm trtnetben ismerhetnk r. Mr ebben
a mozzanatban, tudniillik a vlts mozzanatban is rbukkanhatunk egy hiny-effektusra, arra, ahogy a mesl a Fehrlfit elhagyja s vlt a Kanca Mikls2 Uo. 36., 37.
3 Derrida a kvetkezket rja ennek kapcsn: Atitok a homonmia is, nem annyira a
homonmia rejtett forrsa, mint inkbb a homonmia vagy a mimzis funkcionlis
lehetsge. DERRIDA: i.m. 36.

1 126 2

ra, s marad utna valami, amit leginkbb titokknt azonosthatunk: hiba nevezi
meg Fehrlfiaknt a sr sorstrtnst, elhagyja azt Kanca Miklsrt, j nevet tall teht, m ppen a nvre val reduklhatatlansg4 mozzanatt, ami a titkot titokk teszi, rzi tovbb a msik vltozatban.5
Az res hely mint a titok szrmazsi helye, mint a lt lehetsge, de nem a
vrs, hanem az affirmci rtelmben vett ltlehetsg hrom allegorikus momentumban brzoldik a mesben. Ebbl a hrombl egy retorikus termszet, kett motivikus. Az els, a retorikus vagy narratv jegyekkel is felruhzhat
mozzanat az, amikor a mesl megakad, s erre utal is, elfelejt tudniillik egy lnyeges fordulatot a trtnet egsznek kimenetele szempontjbl. Amsodik
szintn az esemnyek alakulsa fell vlik lnyegiv, tudniillik a lenti vilgba
vezet lyukrl van sz, a harmadik pedig az, amikor Fehrlfia, a sajt testbl
kivgva egy hsdarabot, megeteti a griffmadarat. Ez a hrom kiemelt mozzanat
annyiban mindenkppen sszefgg egymssal, hogy a fhsnket rint esemnyek krucialitshoz ktdnek: a msodik s a harmadik oly mdon, hogy a lenti vilgba a hatalmas lyukon t kerl Fehrlfia, viszont vissza mr csakis gy
juthat, ha eteti az t rept griffmadarat, s mivel minden lelem elfogy az t sorn, muszj a sajt testbl adni. Az els pedig tttelesen: a mesl ppen azt az
sszektelemet hagyja ki a trtnetbl, amely rvn a gymnt kirlylny felismerheti, ha tetszik, titoktalanthatja, vagy ppen kzs titkukat megrizve jhet
r arra, hogy Fehrlfia mg l, helyesebben immr visszatrt kzs vilgukba a
srknyok ltal uralt orszgbl.
4 DERRIDA: i.m. 36. Termszetesen nem csupn a tulajdonnevekrl van sz, hanem
minden nvrl. Atitok minden nven titok marad rja Derrida.
5 Aszveg genealgija is titokzatos, gyans, hogy honnan szrmazik. Ajegyzetr bevallja, hogy a gyjtk le akartk leplezni, gymond, Berkit: Fehrlfia mesje a szbelisgbl kerlt Berki repertorjba. Felmerlt a gyan, hogy nem ll-e a mese mgtt
valahol a tvoli mltban Arany Lszl klasszikus rtk Fehrlfia mesje, apr jelek alapjn (az ers segttrsak neve, a befejez epizd stb.) azonban ezt a gyannkat
el kellett vetnnk, s bele kellett nyugodnunk, hogy a magyar-cigny szbelisgben
is lnek a tpusnak ilyen szpen felptett vltozatai, melynek a 71 kzelebbi s az 56
tvolabbi magyar vltozat kztt is alig akad prja. In: GRG Veronika s msok
(szerk.): Berki Jnos mesl cigny s magyar nyelven. Ciganisztikai tanulmnyok 3.
MTANprajzi Kutat Csoport, Budapest,1985. 269. Atitok smja rhet itt tetten.

1 127 2

Mg mieltt konkrtan olvasnnk ezeket a helyeket, elre szeretnk bocstani egy szerintem kardinlis rtelmezsi felttelt. Tudniillik, ezek a hiny-pontok
a szvegben, ezek a hely nlkli helyek, a szingulris jellem- s trtns-srsdseket lehetv tev titokzatos ressgek, teht mg egyszer, a mesl megakadsa mint a narrci megszakadsa, a hatalmas lyuk mint egy msik vilgba
val le-, eljuts pontja, illetve a sajt test kimetszse mint a megmenekls felttele, nos ezek klns mdon nem (vagy nem csak) a halllal vannak sszefggsben, hanem (vagy sokkal inkbb) az lettel. Ahiny itt nem felttlen a hallra
utal, hanem szignifiknsan az egzisztencira. Kevsb egy j kezdet lehetsgnek rtelmben, mint inkbb e szenveds teli esemny affirmcijnak vonatkozsban. Mindegyik mozzanatban feltn az elszenved magra maradottsga.
Amesl csak magra vethet, hogy eltvesztette a trtnetet, Fehrlfia a hatalmas lyukba leereszkedvn egyedl maradva igen-igen megijed (ami ismerve erejt, btorsgt, figyelemre mlt), s el tudjuk kpzelni, hogy fjhat hsnknek,
amikor kivg sajt combjbl egy hsdarabot.
Nos, ez az egzisztencialits, a hinynak ez az letre val vonatkozsa engedi
lttatni a titok feleletlensgt, feleltlensgt, szenvtelensgt, lehetv tev, a
lehetsget esemnyekbe, terekbe terel nem-reszponzivitst, amely teht nem
hall, hanem egy nagyon tvoli idegensg, szenvtelenl elrhetetlen tvolsgban
tartzkod [van], adds, maga a titok. Megint csak Jacques Derridt idznm,
mert rja le a titoknak ezt a nem-reszponzv, lehetsget ad, helyesebben ezt
a lehetsg- s tr-addst szakadatlanul affirml jellegzetessgt:
Atitok nem hagyja, hogy a msikhoz val viszony, az egyttlt vagy a trsadalmi ktelk brmilyen formja elsodorja vagy elfedje. Mg ha lehetv is teszi ezeket, nem felel nekik, az, ami nem felel. Nincs responsiveness.
Hallnak fogjuk nevezni ezt? Az adott hallnak? Akapott hallnak? Nem
ltom semmi okt, hogy ne letnek, egzisztencinak, nyomnak nevezzk.6
Olvassuk teht az els pldt!
De jaj elfelejtettem benne valamit!... Lent az alvilgban volt neki egy t,
adott neki az regember, a szakllas, ami magtl varrt, arany crna, gymnt crna, ezst crna
6 DERRIDA: i.m. 40.

1 128 2

 Kinek adta az regember azt?

Ezt a Fehrlfinak adta. s olyan ruht lehetett varrni ebbl, olyan anyagot, diba vt az anyag ezt kifelejtettem belle na j, ez mind nla vt
ez a dolog.7
Amesl ktszer is leleplezi nmagt, azaz ktszer is utal arra, hogy elfelejtette a trtns eladsban, az esemnyek eladdsnak vilgra segtsben
ezt a nagyon fontos fordulatot. Amagtl varr t adomnya tudniillik a felismers-felismertets, feltrs-feltrulkozs esemnyt teszi lehetv. Itt fel kell
figyelnnk arra, hogy a t olyan eszkz, amely rendeltetst tekintve az eltakarst segti el, a titokban tarts egy mdja teht. Mgis majdan ennek rvn ismeri fel a gymnt lny egykori megmentjt, szerelmt, hiszen csak Fehrlfia
tud ezzel a tvel olyan ruht varrni, amely gy nz ki, mint a brnyfelh, meg
olyan, mint az gen a csillag.8 Vagyis a mesl ltal sokig elleplezett motvum segti a szereplket abban, hogy feltruljanak egyms szmra, hogy egymsra talljanak.
Akkor mirt felejti el a mesl ezt a lnyegi mozzanatot? Mintha a titok struktrjnak, vagy mg inkbb funkcijnak egyfajta megmutatkozsrl lenne itt
sz. Termszetesen nem arra szeretnk utalni, hogy a mesl a trtnetnek ezen
a pontjn direkt vagy indirekt mdon titkolzna vagy jratn velnk a bolondjt,
feszltsget keltene, ksleltetne. nfeltrsa (De jaj elfelejtettem benne valamit!; ezt kifelejtettem) szintnek hat. Br mit jelentene itt az, hogy szinte?
Mirt, a mesls sorn vgig nem volt az? Szval nem az szinte/hazug etikai
vagy eszttikai reminiszcencikat felidz binris oppozicionalitst akarom felleszteni. Nem. Nem csak azrt, mert a titok struktrjtl abszolt idegen ez
a binarits. Berki a mesjt a titok helyett mondja el. Atitok hely nlkli helyn
szletik, onnan n ki a trtnete, a titok abszolt hinybl, a trtnet a titok
helyett ll nmagrt helyt: s itt, ezen a ponton, az egyik helyen ez mintha kiderlne: legalbbis amit ltni-lttatni enged ezltal, az egy megszakads, a trtnet
felfeslse, nem tveszts, mg csak nem is felejts, inkbb zavar ez. Zavarodottsgrl tesz tanbizonysgot a mesl. Amesls ezen szakaszban az addigi jl
kerektett, mederben tartott narrci hektikuss vlik, ahogy Derrida mondan,
7 Fehrlfia. In: GRG: i.m. 248. Ezen a helyen a mesegyjt kzbekrdez.
8 Uo. 248.

1 129 2

egyfajta cltveszt irnytalansgot rzkelnk e helyt.9 Radsul a gyjt, a

krdez vagy interjvol ekkor bele is szl a meslsbe: Kinek adta az regember azt?10 Teht visszatereli a helyes irnyba Berkit. Nos, ez a cltveszt irnytalansg rtelmezsem szerint a titok nyoma a szvegben.
Amsik ilyen nyom a hatalmas lyuk:
Egy nagy hatalmas lyuk, lentre a mlybe () Belelt [mrmint Fehrlfia
a kosrba V. T.], ht bizony is megijedt, mer olyan sttsg vt abba a
nagy lyukba []. Leerisztettk. Lert egy orszgba.11
Alyuk egy hagyomnyosan elterjedt toposz egy msik, a lenti vilgba trtn tjrs rzkeltetsre. Egy msik lt lehetsgnek a kpeknt beszlhetnk
teht e lyukrl. Ahiny ez esetben is lettel, egy szingulris egzisztencival teltdik. Egy jl elklnthet, a msiktl klnbz ltezsrend krvonalazdik
elttnk. Ez a ltezsrend, a lenti orszg, mint mesli Berki, nagyon-nagyon
szp, m azt is megtudjuk, srknyok lnek lenn, akik kirlylnyokat rabolnak. Nos, neknk ezennel most pusztn az tmenettel kell foglalkoznunk. Ahatalmas, flelmetes, stt lyuk transzponatv kzegvel mint a/egy msik vilg
lehetsgnek, illetve megszletsnek helyvel. Ezt a helyet el kell hagyni, szksgkppen t kell rni rajta, hogy lehessnk, hogy egy msik vilgban tallhassuk magunkat. Ez a hely arra, azrt van, hogy elhagyjuk. Az a rendeltetse, hogy
megsznjn a szmunkra, azaz egy sajtos hinyeffektus kpezi az ontolgiai
alapjt. Mert ne feledjk, e helyt is az lettel, egy msik egzisztencival van dolgunk.
Itt most megengednk magamnak egy olyan kpzettrstst, amely elszrre
visszariaszthatja az rtelmezt, de mint ltni fogjuk, a mesl maga terel bennnket e fel a mozzanat fel. Az uterusrl mint ennek a hely nlkli helynek az
emltett lyukban, a sttsget rejt ressgben trtn allegorizldsrl lenne
sz. Az uterus ressge a teltettsget affirmlja. Az a, mondhatni, sorsszer rendeltetse, hogy teltdjn az j let lehetsgvel, illetve hogy onnan kitoldjon
s testet ltsn a natalits. Minderre az uterolgiai aspektusra egybknt maga a

9 DERRIDA: i.m. 39.

10 GRG: i.m. 248.
11 GRG: i.m. 243., 244.

1 130 2

mesl utal. Tulajdonkppen egy elszrre szmomra rthetetlen nyomatkols

vezetett el ehhez az interpretcis elemhez. Berki hangslyozza Fehrlfinak a
srknyokkal val tallkozsa eltt, mintegy kihangostva a srkny drmai felismerst, a kvetkezket:
H, az anyja istenit azt mondja [a srkny V. T.] , ez nem lehet ms,
csak a Fehrlfia. Tudtam [], mikor az anyjnak a hasban vt, hogy akkor is bajom lesz vele!12
Eszerint Fehrlfia metaforikusan jra megszletik a hatalmas lyuk sttsgbl, elhagyja azt, hogy aztn mg egyszer, immr testben fogyatkozva,
testbl hsdarabokat kimetszve, mintegy a hinybl jra rszeslve visszatrjen a sajt vilgba. De ne szaladjunk ennyire elre, mg nem rkeztnk vissza
hsnkkel a sajt vilgba!
Amit mg szeretnk kiemelni ezen motvum olvassakor, az a fhs magnya.
Csak egyedl megy le a msik vilgba e nevezett lyukon, a tbbiek, Fanyv,
Hegytol, Vasgyr fenn maradnak a lyuk eltt, s vrakoznak bartjuk visszatrtre. Ez a magny klnskppen figyelemre mlt. Az ltszik ltala nagyon
lesen, amit a szingularitsrl, az egyedi, klns ltezkrl mondtunk fentebb.
Amagny ennek a szingularitsnak az lesen, sr vonatkozs-egszben trtn elnk kerlse. Atitok msik neve a magny, ahogy jfent Derrida rja, a
magny teszi lehetv az ember szmra az autentikus ltezsi kpessgeit,13 pl.
a tansgt, s teszem azt, a prbatteleit. Fehrlfia a prbatteleit szksgkppen magnyosan hajthatja vgre.
s vgl olvassuk a harmadik mozzanatot, Fehrlfinak a sajt testt kivgsokkal felldoz gesztust, amely lehetv teszi, hogy visszajusson az elhagyott
sajt vilgba, vagy, ahogy a mesl nevezi, a napvilgra, mskpp, a flvilgra!
Fordtotta a fejit [a griffmadr V. T.], kapott egy krt, egy kenyr, egy hord bor. Na, de bizony mn majdnem a lyuk szjnl vtak, odafent, elfogyott
minden, nem vt semmi. Akkor meg idefordtotta a fejit, kellett vna hs s
nem vt, mer akkor visszaesett vna. Mit csinljon most Fehrlfia? Meg12 GRG: i.m. 245.
13 DERRIDA: i.m. 40.

1 131 2

fogta a bicskjt, kivgott a combjbl egy darab hst. Visszadobta neki a

szjba. gy fljutottak a flvilgra.14
E helytt jfent egy hagyomnyos mesei toposz, a felttelszabs lp hatkonyan mkdsbe, a griffmadr felttelekhez kti a segtsgt. Miutn Fehrlfia
ezeket teljesti, indulhatnak kzs, nagy tjukra, feljutni a flvilgra. Agriff felttelei tulajdonkppen az t teljestsre elegend er biztostshoz kapcsoldnak. Csakhogy ezek a biztostkok egyszerre elfogynak. Ekkor trtnik az meg,
amit kiemelten idztem, hogy Fehrlfia a sajt testbl kivgva egy darabot eteti meg a griffmadarat, biztost neki ert a tovbbreplshez, ami egyben azt is
jelenti, hogy feljutnak a napvilgra.
m feljutni a napvilgra bizonyos rtelemben vissza-szletst jelent. Megint
csak nem hallt, hanem egy jabb transzponldst az letbe. Fehrlfinak illeszkednie kell ahhoz a hatalmas lyukban egyszer mr megtapasztalt flelmetes
sttsghez, az ressghez, amelyen egyszer mr tjutott. Magnak is hinny
kell vlnia, az ressg helyre kell visszatoldnia. S ezt gy ri el, hogy bizonyos
rtelemben kasztrlja nmagt, kivg egy darabot a hsbl. ldoz az ressg
szmra nmagbl egy darabot. nmagt metaforikusan megsemmisti nmaga eltt. Ez persze hatalmas fjdalommal, szenvedssel jr, de pontosan ezltal
ragadja meg a sajt vilgba val visszajuts lehetsgt. Agriff szerepeltetse
e helyt ketts funkcival br: rszint hatalmas erejnl fogva klnbz szfrkat kpes ez a mesei lny ttrni, rszint mint egy fogalom metaforja, nevezetesen a megragad, megrint (ergreifen, begreifen) ige alakja segt tttelesen is a
hsnek, hogy visszarntsa a msik vilg, a sajt vilga nmagba. Nos, a szenveds s a sajt vilgba trtn visszajuts mlyen, mondhatni, strukturlisan sszefgg, s ez megint csak a titok res helyn sarjad, a titok helyett van, addik.
Ott, ahol nem marad semmi, a legfjdalmasabb a fjdalom, a legszenvedstelibb
a szenveds. Valami/valaki helyett llni, lenni, a beszdet mkdtetni, trtnetesen pp meslni utalni valakire/valamire ezzel a helyett-tel, ezzel a kicserldssel, le- vagy felvltssal, megtartani, fenntartani ezt a helyett-et, pontosabban
a helyett helyn tartzkodni, az valamikpp a szenvtelenl elrhetetlen tvol-

14 GRG: i.m. 248.

1 132 2

sgban tartzkod titok tiszteletben tartsa. Atitoktalant diskurzusban a/

egy titok polsa.
Vgezetl rdemes sszevetni a msik mesvel, az alakvltoztatott verzival
Fehrlfia trtnett. AKanca Miklsrl szl elbeszlsben nem talljuk azokat
az ressg-mozzanatokat, amelyek a Fehrlfia-szveget jellemzik. Vagy legalbbis ersen mdosultan bukkanhatunk a hiny-helyekre. Ami legelszr is szembe
tnik, az az, hogy mr a leend bartokkal val konfrontatv, st agonlis tallkozs sorn hangslyozza a mesl a klns szletettsg llapott: Tudtam
Mikls, mikor a kancalnak az anyamhibe vtl, hogy veled tallkozok.15 Ebbl
arra kvetkeztethetnk, hogy erre a szingulris, titokzatos, tudniillik llati eredet szletsre figyelnnk kell. Fehrlfia esetben, aki ugyan a nevben vgig hordozza llati eredett, klns mdon a trtnete, ltnek nyomon kvetse sorn
Berki intencija szerint mintha eltekinthettnk volna szrmazsnak ettl a vetlettl. Szval Kanca Mikls magn viseli a mi kultrkrnkben abszolt tabuizlt vrfertzs billogt, fele l vt, fele meg emberi alak vt,16 ellenttben
Fehrlfival, aki teht nevben br rzi llati eredett, ltben emberi alakknt
vndorol. Kanca Mikls figurja ppen ezrt paradox mdon kevsb titokzatos,
mint Fehrlfi, rszint mert jobban engedi ltni-lttatni eredett, rszint pedig
mert az a bizonyos Derrida ltal olyannyira kihangslyozott szenvtelenl elrhetetlen tvolsg radiklisan lecskken, ha meg nem is sznik persze.
Amsik klnbsg, amire fel szeretnm hvni a figyelmet, az a griff szerepeltetse. Fehrlfia esetben sokkal rnyaltabban brzolja e madarat Berki: Csak
gyn a nagy grifffmadr. Olyan vt, mint egy nagy felh, olyan nagy vt.17 Afeketn elgomolyg felht megidzve a mesl bravrosan rzkelteti a madr
veszlyessgt. Annl inkbb a fordulat erejvel br az a mozzanat, hogy vgl
ppen e lny menti meg a fhst. Kanca Mikls esetben ez az elbb olyan kltien brzolt jelenet gy szl: jtt haza nagy sebesen a griffmadr.18 Ezt a szr15 GRG: i.m. 252.
16 GRG: i.m. 251. Mesei fikcirl lvn sz, termszetesen a vrfertzst inkbb idzjelesen kellene rtennk, br a cigny mesk ers referencialitsa, sajtos vilg-vonatkozsa miatt akr el is hagyhatjuk az idzjeleket.
17 GRG: i.m. 247248.
18 GRG: i.m. 256.

1 133 2

klst, egyszersdst lehet magyarzni pl. azzal, hogy szbelisgrl lvn sz,
nem mindig van ugyanolyan hangulatban a mesl, amire egybknt a gyjtk
sokszor fel is hvjk a figyelmet. Ami ennl izgalmasabb, hogy Berki itt, ebben
a verziban lenyeleti a griffel Kanca Miklst. Ilyet Fehrlfinl nem tapasztalhattunk meg. Idzem:
Avval leszllt a griffmadr a fa tvihe, megltta Kanca Miklst, ott van, mer
el vt fradva, egybl lenyelte. Agriffmadarak hozzfogtak rni Ez az
rdeme neki, desanynk, megmentett ktszer minket, s mg te lenyeled?
Na nem baj avval ki is kpte.19
rtelmezsemben ez a kiss sebtben eladott jelenet nagyobb hordervel br
a trtnet egsze szempontjbl annl, mintsem hogy a gyorsan lezajl mivolta
miatt esetleg tugorjon rajta a tekintet vagy a figyelem. Agriff vgeredmnyben
megsemmisti az esemnyek addigi pontjig megismert Kanca Miklst, a vrfertztt szereplt, vagyis megmrtja sajt gyomra, begye ressgben, titokban
rszelteti, visszaadja az addig megfosztott titkt neki, helyesebben neki adomnyozza a titok tvoli idegensgt, visszaszli a titok szenvtelensge szmra.
Atitok van, magamagbl kibomlan folytonosan s szingulrisan addik. s
nem engedi magt elsodorni vagy elfedni.

19 GRG: i.m. 256.

1 134 2

Hermann Zoltn
ATITOK AZ OROSZORSZGI
CIGNY NPMESKBEN

1 135 2

gor Szmirnovnak, az orosz posztmodern apostolnak legalbbis gy nevezi t a jelenkori kritikai diskurzus , 1996-ban
megjelent, Paszternak Doktor Zsivagojrl rott monogrfija,
Atitkok regnye1 egy kimert kriptolgiai bevezetvel indul.
Az irodalmi szveg s a titok Akognitv potika problmjhoz cm els fejezetben tbbek kztt Szemion Frank orosz filozfusra, Greimas-ra s Courts-re, Derridra, Gilles Deleuze-re, Kermode-ra2 hivatkozva fejti
ki azokat az elzetes megjegyzseit, amelyek egyfajta kommentr-gyjtemnyknt a Paszternak-regny titokzatos vilga fel vezetik az olvast. Szmirnov
szinte egyetlen munkjban sem titkolja a logika irnti vonzdst, s itt is Greimasnak a logikai jelek nyelvn elmondott titok-defincijbl vezeti le konklziit:
() M incogn (m0) =
A logikairl a retorika nyelvre fordtva: titoknak azt nevezzk mondja
Szmirnov , ami sajt kontextustl tkletesen elzrva, egyfajta zrvnyknt
ltezik, amire nem mutatnak a krnyez az irodalmi szvegben ltalban fiktv vilg jelei, amelynek a megismershez nem vezet semmifle logikai mve1 , , ,
, M, 1996. 1435.
2 GREIMAS, Algirdas Julius COURTS, Joseph, The Cognitive Dimension of Narrative Discourse, New Literary History, (1976) Vol. VII. 3. 440.; DERRIDA, Jacques:
Fors In: ABRAHAM, NicolasTOROK, Maria (szerk.), Kryptonymie. Das Verbarium
des Wolfsmanns, Harnacher, Frankfurt am Main, 1979. 758.; DERRIDA, Jacques,
Wie nicht sprechen. Verneinungen (Comment ne pas parler. Denegations, 1987), ford.
Hans-Dietrich Gondek, Wien, 1989, passim.; , .
(1939), Mnchen, 1971.; DELEUZE, Gilles, Simulacre et philosophie antique, In: u. Logique du sens, Paris
1969. (ld mg: , , , (ford. ),
5, 1993, 4556.); ASSMANN, Jan, Zur sthetik des
Geheimnisses. Kryptographie als Kalligraphie im alten gypten, In: Susi Kotzinger
RIPPL, Gabriele (szerk.), Zeichen zwischen Klartext und Arabeske, Atlanta-Amsterdam, 1994. 175186.; KERMODE, Frank: Hotis Business: Why Are Narratives
Obscure? In: U. The Genesis of Secrecy. On the Interpretation of Narrative, Cambridge-Massachusetts-London, 1979. 45.

1 136 2

let, illetve ha mgis van egyetlenegy ilyen t, azt vagyis magt az utat nem
ismerjk. Szmirnov Frank nyomn igyekszik elklnteni a titok abszoltumt,
a magban val titkot a titok ms vltozataitl: az illuzrikustl Greimas-i
kplete: () simulacr (m, m0) , a rejtlytl/rejtvnytl, amelynek megoldshoz logikai lpsekben is eljuthatunk; egszen a misztriumig, amely a titok
bels jelrendszert s a kontextulis jelek rendszert nem elemenknt, hanem
rendszer-szinten felelteti meg egymsnak, s a misztriumba val beavatst a
rendszerek kztti fordtsi mveletek elsajtt(tat)sban ltja. Ktsgkvl sok,
a regny vilgbl nem kvetkez, kontextulis vagy logikai mdon le nem vezethet momentum van a Doktor Zsivagoban, a fhs nevnek (a regny cmnek)
titokzatossga mellett ilyenek a vratlanul a klasszikus orosz rk flreismerhetetlen stlusban megrt bekezdsek (Puskin-hangzs a kis Zsivago anyjnak
temetsekor; messze nem vilgos a narratv funkcijuk ezeknek a rszeknek),
a vletlenszer, oksgilag rtelmezhetetlen kulcsregny-jellege (Majakovszkij
mint a regnybeli Komarovszkij stb), vagy vonatutazsok lersnak folytonos
szvegprhuzamai a futurista kiltvny szvegvel.
Szmirnov hermeneutikai rtelemben a Doktor Zsivagoban az rtelmezsnek ellenll, a szimbolikus helyek azonosthatsgra, de a szimbolikus tartalmak felismerhetetlensgre pt regnypotika mkdst s mkdtetst ltja. (Vegyk
szre, Szmirnov szndkosan hatroldik el az rtelmezs individulis, asszociatv teljestmnytl, nem klnsebben rdekli, hogy a befogad elzetes ismeretei
vagy kreativitsa hogyan kpes levezetseket, ok-okozati viszonyokat tallni ott,
ahol a szveg erre nem ad tmpontot. De neknk ez most nem is fontos.)
Mindenkppen hozz kell azonban tennnk, hogy a klt-doktor regnybeli alakja szndkoltan olyan figura, aki mindvgig kvl ll mind a cri, rendi
trsadalom, mind az j rend, a kommunista kasztokra, az egykori elnyomkra
s elnyomottakra osztott trsadalmi szereplehetsgek s -knyszerek keretein. Maga Zsivago mondja a regny els knyvben, a negyedik rsz tizenharmadik fejezetben:
, , .
( Ej, ez a mi tbori letnk, ez a storoscigny-let!)3
3 , , , , ,
1990. 125.; PASZTERNAK, Borisz: Zsivago doktor, (PR Judit fordtsa).Eurpa,

1 137 2

Az elmlt vszzadok oroszorszgi cignysgnak szociokulturlis helyzete

sem vletlenl rhat krl a titok fogalmaival. Acignykzssgek egsz Eurpra jellemz trsadalmon kvlisge, trsadalomba integrltsgnak hinya itt
hatvnyozottan rvnyeslt, klns mdon azonban mindenekeltt az orosz
nagyvrosok kzelben hosszabb-rvidebb idre megteleped cignysg esetben trsadalmi megtlsk nagyon sok pozitv elemet is tartalmazott. Aligha
vletlenl a romantika kora (Gyerzsavin, Puskin, Lermontov, Leszkov, Turgenyev, Tolsztoj, Kuprin, a drmar Osztrovszkij) s a premodern (Alekszandr
Blok) a klti s az egyni szabadsg szinonmjaknt tekint az oroszorszgi cigny etnikumra, a kultrk klnbzsbl add rtelmezi tjrhatatlansgot pedig a titokzatossg fogalmaival ruhzza fl. Atrsadalom perifrijn is
tl, mgis az arisztokrcia s a mvelt elit szrakoztatsbl l cigny kzssg pedig nyilvn felismeri, s igyekszik a maga javra fordtani a rla kialakult,
irodalmias titokzatossg-imzst.
(Sajt, anekdotikus trtnetem is van ezzel kapcsolatban: a kilencvenes vek
elejn Szentptervr krnykre utaztunk ki elektricskval ez az orosz vroskrnyki vast , s egy nyugdjas tanrnvel szba elegyedve, amikor megtudta, hogy magyarok vagyunk elszr Klmn Imrre, aztn a cignyzenre
tereldtt a sz, mikor vgl a kedves hlgy megkrdezte: Maguknl is lnek
cignyok? Jaj, maguknak olyan j!)
Az oroszorszgi cigny etnikumok kutatsa lnyegben csak az 197080-as
vekben indult meg, a szintn cigny szrmazs, r-etnogrfus Jefim Adolfovics Druc s Alekszej Nyikolajevics Gesszler leletment munkjval.4 Druc s
Gesszler mr a modern antropolgiai mdszerek segtsgvel gyjtttk, de a
folklrmfajok tradicionlis felosztsa szerint rendeztk el az oroszorszgi cigny etnikumok kulturlis hagyomnyait, a szoksok s a vltozatos szvegfolklr felhalmozott gyjtemnyt. Munkjuk igen npszerv vlt, oroszra fordtott
gyjtemnyes ktetekben is publikltk: a ksbbiekben n is ebbl az orosz
nyelv gyjtemnybl idznk.
Budapest., 1988. 139.
4 , , , , .
, , , 1985. (Atovbbiakban a meskre a DG jelzssel s a mesk sorszmval hivatkozom.)

1 138 2

Az alaposabb kutatsokra azonban csak a 2000-es vek elejtl, mindenekeltt

az etnogrfus, r, festmvsz Nyikolaj Vlagyiszlavovics Besszonov feltr jelleg monogrfii-tanulmnyai nyomn kerlt sor.5 Besszonov s kveti nztek elszr szembe a cignykultra titok-jellegnek antropolgiai problmjval,
azzal, hogy a gyjtsmdszertan direkt rkrdezses techniki egy az identitst zrvnykzssgknt rz etnikum esetben ktes, ers kritikval feldolgozhat eredmnyeket hozhatnak csak. Besszonov tanulmnyaibl sok rdekes
dolog kerlt felsznre, a nagyvrosi cignysg s a nomd cignysg konfliktusait illeten, a litvniai s fehroroszorszgi cigny kzssg etnikai rtelemben
nagyon ers elszlvosodsa, ahol a cignysg sem etnikai, sem kulturlis kzssget nem kpez, hanem egyszeren a trsadalmi perifrik gyjtkzssge.
Besszonovk figyelnek tudatosan az adatkzlk (rs)tudatlansgbl kvetkez
hibs, vagy szndkosan hamis informciinak kiszrsre.
Besszonov az 194144 kztti, a nmetek ltal megszllt ukrn s orosz terleteken zajl cigny-etnikai tisztogatsokra val visszaemlkezseket kzread
s rtelmez tanulmnyban figyel fel arra, hogy a szbeli emlkezet formi s
a cigny titok-identits ntudatlanul is az emlkezsekbl kinyerhet, az ldozatok szmra, a tmegsrok topogrfiai paramtereire vonatkoz adatok megbzhatatlanok, ugyanakkor az emlkez narratvk szimbolikus rtegeiben mgis
vannak tmpontok, amelyek alapjt kpezhetik a hbors s a hbor utni adminisztrcis adatokkal val sszevetsnek. ltalnos kvetkeztetsknt Besszonov meg is jegyzi, hogy gy tnik, az oroszorszgi cigny etnikum szoksaira,
traumira a szvegfolklr sokkal tbb megbzhat adattal szolgl, mint a kzvetlen interj.
Minden bizonnyal az oroszorszgi cigny folklr tradicionlis mfajai, a cigny dalok (pontosabban a cigny szbelisg keretei kztt keletkez, eredetileg orosz np- vagy mdalok varinsai) , a hiedelemelbeszlsek (amelyek
kevsb tekinthetk a cigny hiedelmek lersnak, sokkal inkbb kls, nem
5 , , . ,
, 2010.; , , ,
, . , , , 2000. Druc s Gesszler gyjtemnye elejn egy alapos kutatstrtneti sszefoglal olvashat a 80-as
vekrl. Ajelenkori oroszorszgi kutatsokrl tjkoztat a http://gypsy-life.net/ portl.

1 139 2

cigny szempontbl megfogalmazott, fantasztikus, titok-elbeszlseknek, amelyek a cigny etnikum titokzatossg-jellegt emelik ki), egszen a cigny meskig, amelyeknek meglepen gyakori motvuma titok s a titkolzs, vagy a titok
alakzatait ismtl cselekvsek, az elrejtzs vagy a leleplezds.
Besszonov termszetesen felhvja a figyelmet az oroszorszgi cignyfolklr
gyjtsnek hinyossgaira, a sajtos beszdhelyzetek, tabuk al es, pldul
a tenyr- s krtyajslsokat ksr szvegek, szvegformulk folklorisztikus
jellegre. Ezekben, az orosz vrosi kultrban egykor a cignysgnak komoly
meglhetst biztost folkrmfajokban akrcsak a mesemond a mesben
, a js mindig valamilyen titok egyedli ismerjeknt s felfedjeknt van jelen. Bizonyos tekintetben a rendkvl npszer orosz cignydalok, cignyromncok keser, elgikus hangja is egyfajta jslatknt mkdik, a negatv jvkpek
emocionlis reprezentcijaknt lesz rsze a populris kultrnak. (Nem idzem
fel, csak utalok a tragikus Puskin-anekdotra, amelyben a nagy klt, eskvje
elestjn egy Tnya Gyemjanova nev cigny nekesn dalt hallgatja, a dalban pedig benne van Puskin boldogtalan hzassga, s tragikus halla, amirt
a kztudat mig a felesget okolja. Druck mesegyjtemnyben kt trtnet is
szl a crral konfliktusba kerl Puskinrl, akit a cignyok rejtegetnek egy ideig a titkosrendrsg ell.)6
Nyilvnval teht, hogy a Druc-Gesszler-gyjtemny titok-motvumaiban
sem csak egyszer morfolgiai vonatkozsokat kell ltnunk. Aproppi funkcikszletnek vannak olyan elemei, amelyekben a titok mint topika s tma, narratv alakzat s cselekvs van jelen: ltalnosan vve a varzsmesei knonban
a VIII (a) s IX (B) hiny-funkciinak szerept betltheti egy megfejtend titok,
a XII (), a XIII () s a XIV (Z), a varzseszkz megszerzsnek funkciiban is
megjelenhet a titok-tematika, a megszerzs mdja lehet egy rejtvny-szer krdsre adott helyes vlasz, de maga a varzseszkz is lehet valamifle absztrakt,
megszerzett tuds, megismert titok, pl. Szerencsnek szerencsje / Az rdg hrom arany hajszla (ATU 461) tpus meskben. Ugyangy a varzsmese zr
szakaszban, a XXV () s a XXVI (), a talls krdsknt, elrejtzsknt meg-

6 Ld. DG 120.

1 140 2

jelen nehz feladat s a feladat megoldsa mesei funkciiban is elfordulnak

titok-motvumok.7
Ezek a morfolgiai helyek nem csak az eurpai paraszt- s vrosi meskben,
hanem a perifrikus kzssgek trtneteiben is elfordulnak, jllehet a mesehagyomny mgtti ritulis mintzatok a letelepedettek szoksaiban s a zrvny-szer, idegensg-kultrkban eltrk lehetnek. Ennek ellenre pldul az
oroszorszgi cignymesk a proppi rtelemben alapveten nem klnbznek a morfolgia-elmlet alapszvegeinek tekintett Afanaszjev-gyjtemny mesitl. Az alapvet klnbsg azonban nem a kzs szablyossgokban, hanem
a morfolgiai, mindenekelt szerepli funkcikat rint szablytalansgokban
van. Az eurpai cignymesknek az a sajtossga, amely nyilvnvalan a csald fogalmnak mssga miatt a csaldtagok egymshoz val viszonynak
mesebeli klnssgt hangslyozza, elg gyakran nem ms, mint hogy a csaldtagokrl, a mesehs szleirl, leggyakrabban a hs anyjrl, az n. tnak indtrl kiderl, hogy maga a mesehs segttrsa, olykor pedig az hs ellenfele.
Atitok-kultra besszonovi lerst kvetve azonban vatosnak kell lennnk
a Druc-Gesszler-mesk topikjt illeten, hiszen nem egyszeren arrl van sz,
hogy a gyjtemny szvegei orosz fordtsok (fkppen Druc fordtsai), nemcsak a nyelvi elklnls okozhat problmkat: jmagam pldul nem tudom,
hogy az orosz nyelvi jeleken keresztl megragadhat topika klnbzik-e az
oroszorszgi roma dialektusokban gyjttt anyag topikjtl. Korntsem biztos,
hogy a rejtzkds s titok orosz nyelvi szkszlete (, ,
s a tovbbkpzett szalakok stb.) szemantikai rtelemben fedi a cigny nyelv
eredeti szkszletet: persze bznunk kell Jefim Druc nyelvismeretben s fordti kvetkezetessgben. Ms, s egyltaln nem elhanyagolhat krds hamr
lpten-nyomon hivatkozunk az antropolgiai gyjtmdszerek kvetkezetessgre, ezzel a krdssel az eurpai s magyarorszgi cignyfolklr-gyjtknek is
szembe kell nznik , hogy tudniilik a tisztn cigny kzssgben elmondott
mese topikja, retorikja, morfolgija nem klnbzik-e legalbb rnyalataiban a cigny mesemondk ltal a nemcigny kznsgnek, vagy a gyjtnek
elmondott mesk jellemzitl. Nem tudjuk pontosan, de ha pldul a jslat7 Aproppi funkcikrl ld. PROPP, Vlagyimir Jakovlevics: Amese morfolgija, Osiris, Budapest, 1999. 3365.

1 141 2

szvegek pldjra gondolunk ahol egyszer mikrokonmiai kplet, hogy a

cigny krtyavetn a falusi parasztot, a vrosi polgrt vagy a nemesembert tekinti jvedelemforrsnak, s nem a sajtjait , vagy gondolunk az nekesek sajtos eladsmdjhoz igaztott mdalok pldjra, egyrtelmv vlik, hogy a
rendelkezsnkre ll folklrszvegek, klnsen az oroszorszgi cignysg szveghagyomnya inkbb reprezentlja a cignysgnak a regulris trsadalom fel
mutatand arckpt, s ezzel egytt rzi titokzatossg-imzst, mintsem hogy a
cigny kzssgek hiteles lersa lenne.
Vilgos teht, hogy az oroszorszgi cigny npmesk olvassakor sem kzvetlenl a terletileg radsul nagyon sztszrt cigny kzssgek letmdjrl, hiedelmeirl kapunk pontos, vagy esetleg a tovbbi elemzsek, a nemzetkzi
sszehasonlt vizsglatok szmra forrsrtk adatokat, de az oroszorszgi
cigny kzssgek s a regulris trsadalom viszonyrl ahogy Besszonov is
megllaptja , nagyon pontos lershoz jutunk. Ennek a szociokulturlis dialgusnak taln a legfontosabb eleme, hogy fenntartsa a tbbsgi trsadalomban a
kultikus s pozitv cignysg-kpet, s ezt azrt teszi sikerrel, mert az orosz trsadalom, a XIXXX. szzadi elit- s populris kultra is csak a titok klnbzi
alakzataiban kpes az oroszorszgi romk kultrjt befogadni.
Nzznk nhny jellegzetes pldt a Druc-Gesszler-gyjtemny mesinek titok-motvumaibl, s igyekszem ezeknek a Szmirnov-monogrfia mdszertani
bevezetjben jelzett logikai, retorikai s tematikus titok-fogalmaknak a mkdst rtelmezni. (Apldkat ez pedig mr tnyleg a nyelvi tttelek tttele
a sajt nyers fordtsomban idzem.)
Az orosz cignymeskben felettbb gyakori a hivatkozs a titokra, a hsk
rendszerint elrejtznek egyms ell, eltitkolnak egyms ell valamit. Acigny
szoksok szerint ez valsznleg a kzssgi normk megsrtst jelenti, ezrt
ldzend. Az elrejtz, egyes dolgokat eltitkolk megbnhdnek:
Agyjtemny 83-as szm / Hogyan tkozta el a cignylny a fivreit cm mesje gy szl:8 Acignylny egytt kborol a
btyjaival. Hozzjuk csapdik egy szegny cignyfi, de fivrei folyton elzavarjk. Afi nem jn tbbet. Kis idvel ksbb, egy jszaka megint megjelenik a
8 ADruc-Gesszler-gyjtemny 83-as szm mesje. Amest Tomszkban gyjtttk,
meslte Z. Je. Buziljeva (szletett: 1925.), 19801982-ben.

1 142 2

kr, gazdag ember lett belle, a fivrek rmmel adjk neki most a lnyt. Afrj
s a lny kln vlnak. Hajnalig ldgltek a tz mellett, szerelmesen nztek
egyms szembe. Amikor pedig a fk fltt vilgosodni kezdett, felkelt a frj s
bcszul ezeket mondta: // Szeretett felesgem, meg kell osszam veled a titkom. Csak jszaka tallkozhatunk. Nappal nem lehetek veled. Ne is keress engem, hiba!9 Alny rjn, hogy btyjai megltk az egykori krt, temetetlenl
hagytk, s a halott jtt el most rte. Atrtnet a lnynak a gyilkos btyjaira kimondott tkval zrul.
A /Agonosz tok cm mesben10 cignyok jttek a faluba,
jsolni meg kregetni. Minden hzba bekopogtatnak. Az egyik cignyasszonynak szerencsje volt. Ajslatrt a falusi asszonyok mindig kenyrrel, szalonnval,
lelmiszerrel fizettek meg pnzt kapott. Nagyon sok pnzt! Felcsillant a szeme a cignyasszonynak s elhatrozta, hogy eltitkolja a szerzemnyt a tbbiek
ell. De az egyik cignyasszony szrvetette: // Kedvesem, csak nem pnzt adtak neked? Jaj, dehogy, a gyermekeim letre eskszm, mifle pnzt? Nzd mi
van a ktnyemben, csak ennyit kaptam, semmi mst. // Ht a ktnyben tnyleg csak valami lelmiszer-fle volt. gy vagy gy, a cignyasszonyok nem hittek
neki.11 Amese a gyerekek hallval zrul.
A / Avarzslatos fegyver12 cm szatirikus mesben a
valakik ellopjk a vajda szrad ruhi kzl a derksljt. Korcsa, a vajda megfenyegeti ket, hogy olyan fegyvere van, amelyet ha elst, a goly csak a tettest
9 , ,
, : // ,
, . .
! ! (DG 83. 261263.)
10 Szuszanyino, Leningrdi jrs, L. Ny. Iljinszkaja (szletett 1902k.), 19801982.
11 . .
. , ,
, ! ! ,
. : // ,
?! // , , ?
, , , . //
. , . (DG 109. 301302.)
12 Szemrino, Leningrdi jrs, I. M. Fjodorov (szletett 1922k), 19801982.

1 143 2

tallja el s li meg: Krdezgette Korcsa: Hov lett a derkslam? Na, gyermekeim, adjtok el szp szra! // Nem mi vettk el kiabltk a cignygyerekek. // Acignylnyok is csak fogadkoztak-tkozdtak, hogy k sem. // Afrfiak
is tagadtk. // Te hav me dadeszkiro masz! // Figyelmezzetek rm gyermekeim mondta mg egyszer a cigynyai szembe nzve a vajda , bnni fogjtok,
hogy nem vallotttok be. Rosszul gondolja a tolvaj, hogy el tudja titkolni a bnt
ellem. gyis megtallom azt az vet, de a tolvaj azt nem li tl!13 Vgl kiderl, hogy a paraszt tehene megette a slat.
Ahzassggal, a szexualitssal kapcsolatos tabuk, tilalmak megsrtsrl, a
kzssg ell val elrejtzs, a titokban folytatott viszony bntetsrl szl a
gyjtemny egyik leghorrorisztikusabb mesje. Az orosz cigny szoksjogban
nyilvn ezek a legslyosabb bnk. A / Acignylny s kgy
cm mesben14 ltszlag a tbori letmdhoz ktd mgia, a kgyk elleni rolvass etiolgiai elbeszlst olvashatjuk. Acignyprnak egyetlen lnyuk szletik, feln s frjhez akar menni. Megszeret egy fit a tborbl, minden nap keresi
a percet, amikor egytt lehet vele.15 Beszlni akar a firl az apjnak, az meg sem
hallgatja, csak azt mondja neki. , ,
. (Nem a te prod, jobb ha megfeledkezel rla.)
. (Titokban kezdenek tallkozgatni a fi
s a lny.) Az erdben tallkozgatnak, de egyszer egy kgy mszik be az alv
13 : // ? -, ,
-. // , -, ,
. // ,
. // , : // ! //
, , ,
, . ,
, . .
. (DG 116. 315319.)
14 Mihajlovka, Leningrdi jrs, A. M. Lobanova (szletett 1907k.), 19801982
15 . ,
.
,
, . ,
, : (DG 106. 292295.)

1 144 2

lny szjba, s a lny megbetegszik. Az apa a fit vdolja, s meggri, hogy, ha

meggygytja a lnyt, hozzadja felesgl. Afi frdt kszttet s a frdben
forr tejjel kizi a lnybl a kgyt. Megfogjk s megfzik a tejben. Az eskvn
a fi megvdolja az apt, hogyha rajta mlt volna, a lnynak egsz letben egy
boldog nepja nem lett volna. Alakodalom vgn mindketten esznek a tejben ftt
kgybl, s holtan terlnek el.
A cigny kzssgen belli titkolzs igen negatv megtlse magyarzza, hogy a meskben egybknt gyakran olvashatunk olyan szvegformulkat,
tbbnyire a mesk zrlatnl fordulnak el amikor a hsk sajt kalandjaikat mondjk el a szleiknek, testvreiknek stb. amelyek didaktikusan utalnak
a kzssgen belli viselkeds pozitv normjra, pl.: ,
, . Azaz: mindent elmondott, semmit sem titkolt el elttk.
Atitkolzsnak vannak praktikus-racionlis okai is. Amesemotvumok kztt megjelenik az orosz-szovjet katona- s rendrllami hatalomnak a nomd
letmd visszaszortst clz intzkedsei ell val menekls.
Ilyen a / Acigny s a szrny16 mesje: Ez rgen trtnt.
ltek valamikor a fldn a banotori-cignyok. ltek, ahogy tudtak: voltak kztk
szegnyek, voltak gazdagok. Egy tnt ki kzlk, a vajda. Amerre mondta, a cignyok arra vettk az tjukat. Volt egy tboruk, tucatnyi csalddal, nem tbben.
Pnzk nem volt, tlevelk nem volt, a sorozs ell elrejtztek a sr erdkbe.17
A91-es szm, / Hogyan csapta be a cigny az
erdei mant18 cm mesben ezt olvassuk: Acigny egyszer lovat lopott, messze valahol a tbortl. Mindenki tudja, hogy ha ilyesformn igyekszel hazafe-

16 Bolsoj Biser, Novgorodi jrs, A. Je. Mihajlov (szletett: 1899), 19801982.

17 . -. - :
, , .
, . ,
, . , ,
, . (DG 11. 119122.)
18 Mihajlovkban (Leningrdi terlet) gyjtve, I. I. Ivanova, 70 v krli cignyaszonytl (19801982).

1 145 2

l, jobb, ha nappal elrejtzl az erdben, s csak jjel, ha mindenki nyugorvra

trt, akkor lsz fel a lra.19
Ezek e trtnetek viselkedsformkat rgztenek, mindenekeltt az idegenekkel szembeni titkolzs viselkedsmintit erstik a kzssgekben. Ezeket a trtnetek egybknt nem is felttlenl kellene mesknek tartanunk. Az eddigiek
tbbnyire morlis tltettel is rendelkez hiedelemelbeszlsek, a szoksok eredett magyarz pldzatok.
Avoltakppeni varzsmesk esetben mindig szrevehet, hogy a titok mint
toposz a hall motvumai kr szvdik. Ahall, a tlvilg birodalma maga a titok, trtnete annak van, aki lknt tr vissza onnan.
AVajda s Ruzsa cm mesben20 egy Ruzsa nev cignylny a templomba
indul. Egyszer, valami nnepnapon nekiindult Ruzsa, hogy elmegy a templomba. Megy-megy s megltja, hogy az tflen, a proban egy aranylncocska hever.
Kzelebb megy, piszklgatni kezdi a lbval, az meg, mintha lne, egyszercsak
rtekeredik Ruzsa bokjra s le akarja hzni a lnyt a fld al. Megnmult Ruzsa a flelemtl, ht egy szt sem szlva, egy szt sem kiltva sllyedt-sllyedt a
fld al. Ahol a fld maga al temette (elrejtette), egy gynyr, tereblyes nyrfa
ntt. Ha csak rnzel rgtn le akardzik szaktani egy gacskt, emlkbe.21
Afa motvuma mutatja a leny szerencss visszatrst, Vajda fogja kiszabadtani. Az / Az elvarzsolt rvalnyban22 az rvalny
19 - .
, ,
, , , . (DG 91. 274275.)
20 Bolsoj Biser, Novgorodi jrs, A. Je. Mihajlov (szletett: 1899), 19801982.
21 - , - , .
: . ,
, , ,
- . ,
, , .
, , -.
. (DG 2.
6973.)
22 Mihajlovka, Leningrdi jrs, Je. V. Harponyina (szletett 1905k.), 19801982. (DG
10. 115119.)

1 146 2

egy varzslnnl lakik, s titokban eltanulja tle a varzstudomnyt, s elrejti egy kristlytojban. Egyszer az erdben rtall a lnyra egy fejedelem, megszereti hazaviszi, felesgl veszi, gyerekk szletik. Aboszorkny rontst kld
a lnyra, az megbetegszik s meghal. Akirly s a fia gyszoljk, idrl idre megltogatjk az erdben, ahol egy ratoronyban fekszik a halott fiatalasszony, vrl vre nem regszik semmit. Amint egyszer a fia a kristlytojssal
az anyja arct simogatja, a halott ledezni kezd. Avarzs megtrik.
, , .
. Afi elmondja az asszonynak mi hogyan trtnt,
semmit el nem titkolt. Attl kezdve gazdagon s boldogan ltek.
Agyjtemny mesiben (hiedelemtrtneteiben?) azonban az is gyakori, hogy
a halottak jnnek t az lk vilgba, pontosabban, valami megakadlyozza ket
a tlvilgra jutsban.
A / Aholtak tbora cm mesben23 egy fiatal lcsiszr egy
cignykaravnhoz csatlakozik, este a cignyok a tbortznl lnek, s gynyren nekelnek. Afi udvarolni kezd a szplnynak, megkri a lny kezt, a cignyok meg is ktik vele az egyezsget. Mindenki nyugovra tr, a fi azonban
jjel a lny strt keresve megltja, hogy az alv cignyok nmelyiknek a karja,
nmelyiknek a lba, sokuknak meg a feje hinyzik. Rdbben, hogy a tborlakk
mind halottak. lt egyszer egy fiatal cigny. Gazdag nemzetsgbl szrmazott,
lkeresked volt. Egyszer vsrozni ment, s dolga vgeztvel, tisztes haszonnal,
megelgedetten indult hazafel. Vrostl vrosig igen hossz volt az tja. Utazs
kzben lepte meg az jszaka is. Aludni kszldtt, de egyszer csak, valahonnan
a kzelbl cignyok neklst hallja mint egy tbortz melll jnnnek a hangok. Elindult az neksz irnyba, s csakhamar rlelt a cignytborra. Egy nagy
mezn, a foly partjn tboroztak a cignyok. Krbe, mindenfel tbortzek gtek, a tzek mellett cignyok ltek s nekelgettek. Olyan gynyren nekeltek,
hogy mg hallgatni is csoda volt. Megkttte a cigny a lovait, de nem merszkedett kzel a tzhz. Idegen tbor cignyai, ki tudja, kiflk, miflk. Valahogy
mgis egyre kzelebb s kzelebb kerlt az idegenekhez. Meglt egyszer csak
a tz mellett egy gynyr cignylnyt: olyan szpen nekelt s tncolt a lny,
hogy a lkeresked beleszeretett, a szve megtzesedett. Legnyember volt mg
23 Petrozavodszk, Ny. A. Novikov (szletett: 1919), 19801982.

1 147 2

a keresked elhatrozta, lesz, ahogy lesz, megismerkedik a lnnyal, aki annyira

lenygzte. Elhatrozta, hogy felesgl kri. s ha mr egyszer elhatrozta, gy
is lesz! // Acignyok meg csak tncoltak s nekeltek, a lkeresked a tboron
kvlrl figyelte ket. Amikor hajnalodni kezdett, a cignyok visszahzdtak a
straikba. Akeresked kifigyelte, hogy a leny melyik storba ment be, s utnalopakodott. Odart a storhoz, flrehajtja a ponyvt, de a rettenettl megtntorodott. Szrny kp trult el: a padln cignyok fekdtek, az egyiknek a keze, a
msiknak a lba, nmelyiknek meg a feje hinyzott. Alkereskednek a haja is
gnek meredt. Megrtette, mifle cignytborra akadt: a holtak tborra. Hirtelen elprolgott a flelme s a lnyt kezdte keresni. Ltja: a fldn fekszik, nem llegzik. Elszomorodott a cigny, de aztn gy hatrozott: ha enym a halott lny,
az l is az enym lesz! Elviszem magammal, brmi is trtnjk! Ha csak jjelenknt lesz az enym, nekem az is elg. // Feltette a lny testt a kocsijra s elhajtott. Egsz nap hajtott, hogy minl messzebbre kerljenek a tbortl, s ahogy
eljtt az jfl, a cignylny felbredt: // Hova viszel? Elment az eszed? Mindjrt
utolrnek a btyim s meglnek. Ht nem tudod, hogy a holtak ell nem lehet
elrejtzni? Fordtsd vissza a lovaidat, egy percet se vesztegess!24
24 . ,
. - ,
. .
. ,

.
. .
, . ,
. , ,
. .
- : , , , -?
.
, , ,
. ,
, .
. ,
! // , ,

1 148 2

Atestvrek mgis utolrik, flholtra verik s visszaviszik a lnyt a tborba. De

a fi utnuk ered, s megtudja, a tbor trtnett. Egyszer a cignyok kicsaptk a
lovaikat egy falu mellett a legelre, a lovak meg mint felfaltk a frissen kaszlt sznt, a falusiak erre villt, kaszt, baltt ragadtak, rrontottak a tborral s mindenkit megltek, el sem temettk ket. Akkor szabadul meg tlk a fi, s akkor veheti
felesgl a lnyt, ha tisztessggel eltemeti s megsiratja a lny rokonait.
Nem rt, ha itt esznkbe jut a Zsivagonak az a jelenete, amikor a doktort elraboljk a vrs partiznok Varikinbl, a csald pedig vekig halottnak hiszi a
fhst. Aregulris kzssgek fell nzve a cignymeskben meglev titok/hall-szimbolika itt megfordul. APaszternak-regnynek ez az epizdja is arra utal,
hogy a tbbsgi, orosz falusi s vrosi kultra szmra a cignyok a regnyben az erdben l partiznok vilga jelenik meg a hall metaforiban, a hall vilgaknt. (s persze ez is remek plda a regny kriptotextulis potikjra.)
Atitok teht lnyegben a tlvilg. Akulturlis s ritulis mintk megrtshez akkor jrunk a legkzelebb, ha a sajt/idegen mitikus oppozcit azonostjuk a tudott/titkolt dolgok oppozcijval. Ebben a tekintetben a cigny mesk
ltal reprezentlt idegen vilg, az orosz falvak, vrosok vilga azonosthat a tlvilggal kapcsolatos hiedelmekkel, a sajt vilgukbl pedig tabu al esik a titkolzs. Az idegennel, az orosz emberrel szemben ppen azrt szabad titkolzni,
, ,
- , .
, .
, .
. : ,
, . . ,
. ,
- . : .
, : !
, ! , . //
.
, , , : //
? !
. , ?
, . (DG 19. 145148.)

1 149 2

azrt szabad ket becsapni, mert a halottakkal, a tlvilg kpviselivel is gy kell

viselkedni. Ez az agresszi csak egyfajta nvdelem.
A / Aboszorkny cm mese25 gy kezddik: lt egy faluban egy reg
cignyasszony. Szkcskn ldeglt, vagy szz ve ldeglt bkben, a fival. Gonosz termszet asszony volt, az rdggel cimborlt. Nem szerette, ha vendgek grkeztek hozzjuk. Ilyenkor, ha leszllt az este, mindig kiment az udvarra,
nekiltott, varzsigket mormolt, majd megfordult maga krl s anyakocv
vltozott. s mindenkinek, aki a hzuk kzelbe merszkedett odadrglztt
a lbhoz, addig lkdste-tasziglta, amg a vendg el nem botlott, s meg nem
hemperedett a srban. gy lassan mindenkit elldztt a hztl. // Az asszony fia
pedig igazn jkp legny volt. Nem is tudott az anyja varzstudomnyrl, az
meg soha nem is beszlt rla a finak. Felntt a fi s megismerkedett egy rendes cignylnnyal26 Amikor aztn a fi megkri a lnyt a testvreitl, k vilgostjk fel, hogy az anyja boszorkny, s addig nem is adjk hozz a fihoz a
lnyt, amg a boszorknyt el nem puszttjk. Elmennek a testvrek a cignyasszonyhoz a kovcstl szerzett vassprkkel, nekiront a koca, k meg alaposan
helybenhagyjk. Megjelenik a fi az regasszony hznl:27 az regasszony a ke25 1925-ben jegyeztk fel Tomszkban, Z. Je. Bukljeva meslte.
26 -. .
. .
, - ,
, . , ,
. , ,
. .
. // .
, .
(DG 69. 241242.)
27 , , ,
. // , ?
. // -, , .
, . // -, , ,
, , ?
, : //
! // , ?

1 150 2

mencn fekszik, alig l, a fia meg lerngatja az ingnl fogva a kemencrl s akkor megltja a vassprk tpte sebeket az anyjn, a fegyverhez kap: Igaz ht,
amit az emberek mondanak? Te vagy a boszorkny! kiltotta, aztn meghzta a ravaszt. Ahogy a fst eloszlik, ltja, hogy az anyja csak ll ott, mintha semmi sem trtnt volna, s fejt ingatja: Jaj, fiacskm, sokig titkoltam elled az
n titkomat, de most mr nem tehetek semmit. Ltom, hogy nem leszel boldog,
amg n lek. Ide hallgass, ezen a helyen nem lhetsz meg engem, hanem vigyl
el az erdnkbe az eltkozott szzves tlgyfhoz. Ott elhagy a varzserm. Vigyl oda s ott lj meg! // Kis is vitte a cigny az anyjt a tlgyhz, rltt s ahogy
a fst elszllt, ltja, hogy az vnasszony halott.28
Aboszorkny lett elvenni csak a hall metaforjnak tekinthet szzves
tlgy tvben lehetsges, ott lehet t visszakldeni a tlvilgra.
Az orosz cignymesk titok-kultrjrl mg egy fontos dolgot kell megjegyeznnk. Az imnt emltett pldkban egy-kt kivteltl eltekintve a titok krl
kipl etiolgiai s taburendszer konfliktusai frfi-ni konfliktusok. Az oroszorszgi cignykultrban a cignykzssgek s a kls vilg kztti kapcsolatokban, kulturlis dialgusban, szemben pldul a kzp-eurpai mintkkal, a
nk szerepe legalbb olyan aktv, mint a frfiak. Amagyarorszgi cigny npmesk esetben csak ritkn van plda arra, hogy a folkloristk ni mesemondktl
gyjtttek volna. Az elbb felsorolt pldim kzl, a tz idzett mesbl htnek
ni mesemondja volt, Druck 1980 s 1982 kztt gyjtttk ezeket a mesket.
-? // , , .
// , ,
. ,
. , . (DG 69. 242.)
28 . // , ?!
, ! . ,
, :
, , ,
. , , . :
, ,
. .
! // , , ,
, . (DG 69. 242.)

1 151 2

(Nem idztem tle mest, de a gyjtemny adatkzli kztt volt Szvetlana Toma
is, cigny szrmazs sznszn, az 1975-ben, Gorkij Makar Csudra cm elbeszlsbl forgatott filmnek, Acignytbor az gbe megynek volt a fszereplje.)
Hogy mirt ilyen ltvnyos a ni mesemondk jelenlte az oroszorszgi cigny
tradcikban? Vagy a magyarorszgi cignymesemondk frfi-dominancija jelenthet egyfajta eltrst az etnikai hagyomnyoktl?
Atitok feltrulsa tbb vltozatt is lttuk a pldkban a flvrosi orosz
cigny identits egyik gyakori narratvja. Anyelvi, kulturlis, trsadalmi idegensg azonban nagyon klns formkat lt az orosz cigny mesei tradcikban. A titok-narratva ugyanis trjnk vissza oda, ahogyan Igor Szmirnov
nyomn a titok fogalmt definiltuk sem ms, mint a sajt kontextustl tkletesen elzrt vilg lersa, a vilg amelynek a megismershez nem vezet
semmifle logikai mvelet, vagy nem ismerjk ezeket a logikai-retorikai, nyelvrl nyelvre trtn fordtsi mveleteket. Az orosz cigny mesk titok-narratvja a kulturlis idegensg waldenfels-i paradoxonhoz hasonlt.29 Abban az
rtelemben mindenkppen, hogy nem egyszeren a kulturlis nmeghatrozssal, nem pusztn az etnikai identits rgztsvel klnben bonyolult kplet
trulna fel emgtt az identitsnarratva mgtt is, mert nemcsak a tbbsgi orosz, de XX. szzadi, jonnan betelepl cigny-csoportokkal szemben is
les, elhatrol gesztusok fedezhetk fel ebben a primr identitsban azonos
ez a narratva. Valami mssal is, hiszen ez az elbeszli magatarts nemcsak a
kls nyelvi, kulturlis, trsadalmi kontextust tekinti idegennek, hanem a narratva keretein bell lsd Aholtak tbora cm mese/hiedelemelbeszls titok-feloldst, a parasztok ltal legyikolt s temetetlenl hagyott cignytborrl
szl magyarzatot nmagt is kpes kvlrl lttatni. Kpes a sajt/idegen
mitikus oppozcit a sajt-mint-idegen retorikai-elbeszli alakzatba temelni.

29 WALDENFELS, Bernhard: Az idegensg etnogrfiai brzolsnak paradoxonjai,

In: BICZ Gbor (szerk.), Az Idegen, Csokonai, Debrecen, 2004. 91116.

1 152 2

THE PHENOMENOLOGY OF THE

SECRET IN GYPSY FOLKTALES
e

1 153 2

FOREWORD
1.
his volume is the fourth in a series of books entitled Fabula
Aeterna to be published by the Association of Applied
Narratology that is hosted by the Faculty of Child and Adult
Education at the University of Debrecen. The bilingual volumes
(Hungarian and English) are first and foremost devoted to
investigating, analysing and publicising the heritage of the tale world of the Roma
and other ethnic groups in the Carpathian Basin. As a result of our research
there is a wealth of source material handed down to us by many great tale-telling
individuals, the study of which helps us to understand local societies and the
fundamental relationships between the tale teller and the everyday world of the
community. The declared aim of the volume is to offer Hungarian researchers
involved in the life works of tale- and story tellers both a forum and the chance
to publish their work.
We are convinced that the current renaissance of the tale, as well as public
opinion and the new text-centered interest expressed by the social sciences,
provide a sufficient justification for our series. Behind the contemporary fashion
for the tale lies what we may describewith some careas the eternal, timeresisting universal nature of the contents of the traditional tale and the possibility
which exists in the framework of the genre for individual creativity, both of
which create the receptive community of the tale teller and the contemporary
audience (readers). The traditional contents and formal elements of the tale
genre in narrative practice function as a bridge spanning the centuries between
our past and present. Furthermore, and of exceptional importance from our
perspective, is the fact that it creates an opportunity for dialogue between
cultures which are alien to each other when they first meet. We hope that our

1 155 2

series will help mutual understanding between the Roma communitywhich

has a great tale culture (both verbal and story-telling)but is considered to be a
peripheral minority culture, and the majority culture of contemporary society.

2.
The studies in the current volume were first presented at a workshop
organized by the Association for Applied Narratology and the Balzs Lippai
Roma Special College; the talks and the following debate at the workshop, the
thorough discussion of the questions motivated the writers to closely analyze
the phenomenon of the secret. In the world of the tale the secret has a special
place since in most of them secrets do appear somehow; at the same time the
secret itself rarely becomes the thematic center of the tale. In his article entitled
The Unknown Folktale Jnos Honti writes the following:
An observation of the talelike elements once led me to the conclusion that
there are elements which, as far as the subject is concerned have no definite
function, and are strangely incomprehensible, yet nevertheless, adhere with
great tenacity to the talelike tradition these elements emerge fully intact as
if they were the supporting pillars of the traditions of the given type of tale
[The role of these primary structural elements] is either greater or smaller.
Smaller because they are not supporting tradition but are themselves
supported by the latter, and greater because they are the supporting pillars
of one type of structure, the basis of the real talelike structure, and not of
tradition. They furnish evidence that certain elements can adhere together
not as a result of the uniformity of a traditional course of events, but in a
seemingly meaningless way, not following necessity in a course of events but
some sort of internal law within talelike elements.1
Hontis words stated the above observations in general and not specifically
in reference to the phenomenon of the secret, however looking at the studies of

1 HONTI Jnos: The Unknowe Folktale, In: HONTI: Studies in Oral Epic Tradition,
(Transl. Rna Eva) Akadmiai, Budapest, 1975.126128.

1 156 2

the present volume, it becomes clear for the reader that the secret is a kind of
phenomenon that truly defines the inner order of the tales.
The first two studies examine tales by the excellent Gypsy storyteller, Istvn
Jakab. In the introductory study using the methodology of phenomenological
hermeneutics Pter Blint interprets the cluster of phenomena of the secret
appearing in the tale entitled Brug by mapping out the phenomena-network
such as curiosity, disbelief, betrayal, confession, guarding patience, unveiling
impatience, foretelling and promise. Behind these phenomena we may repeatedly
find the peculiar movement of the concealment and unveiling of the secret that
finallyeven if for only a momentoffers the possibility for self-knowledge for
the hero of the tale. By using the concept of the secret presented by Kermode
the study authored by Gabriella gnes Nagy compares the mythic story, the
destiny of King Oidipusinterwoven by secretsbeing rewritten into a new
context in the narrative tradition, through the life of the tale hero, Jnaswhile
the language games uttered in the tale text providing greater depths. Those
characters who are striving to unveil the secretjust at the figurativity of the
tale language cannot be resolved by fixating some final meaning eithermiss
experiencing the truth of existence, therefore secret and sin become related.
To represent the complex research attitude of the Applied Narratology
Workshop in his study Gbor Bicz elaborates on a philosophically based
concept of the secret whose particular examples are drawn from the oeuvre of
Lajos mi, his tales had already been subject to previous studies and an entire
monograph in this same series by the same author. The present study reaches
its conclusion through the experience of the narrative proliferation of the
secret according to which the secret in the tale constantly becomes subject
to permutation, it is a structural-functional figure calling for its resolution
always becoming comprehensible in the given unique tale text. The text written
by Tams Valastyn interprets the tales of Jnos Berki based on philosophical
discourse as well. By referring to the autopoetic figures, the secret of the body
of the text, to the possibilities of interpretative games deriving from them, he
explains that the storyteller tells his tale instead of telling the secret that finally
becomes the allegoric space for birth, rebirth and the maternal womb, being
pregnant both withsimilarly to the tale textthe solitude of hiding and the
possibility of entering existence as a peculiar secret.
1 157 2

In the last study Zoltn Hermann analyzes Russian tales and from the
Proppian morphologic analyses he travels to the Waldenfels paradox according
to which the Gypsies appearing in these tales become graspable as foreignness,
alterity but in such a way that narrative attitude not only considers external
linguistic, cultural, social context as foreign but it is capable of making itself
seen externally as well. These tales are capable of repositioning the opposition
of the own/foreign into the rhetoric-narrative figure of the own-as-foreign.
Our hope is that the studies in this volume are beneficial for the reader in two
ways: on the first hand they further deepen the knowledge, textual experiences
and special features and values of the Gypsy tales previously discussed in the
volumes of the Fabula Aeterna series. On the other hand they offer a kind of
understanding taking place on complex levels about the phenomenon of the
secret that allow us to see the never out-dated actuality of the archaic tradition
of tale texts.
2015 Spring, Debrecen,

Zoltn Bdis

1 158 2

Pter Blint
THE PHENOMENOLOGY
OF THE SECRET IN THE FOLK TALE
(Istvn Jakab: Brug [AaTh, Bn 311 (406A*)~307])

1 159 2

But of the secret itself, there can be no

archive, by definition. The secret is the
very ash of the archive, the place where
it no longer makes sense to say the very
ash (la cendre mme) or right on the ash
( mme la cendre).1

1. What is Not Yet ...

oncerning the phenomenology of the secret we can put
the familiar ontological question: why is there a secret and not
discovery or uncoverability? In our first approach towards an
understanding of the phenomenon of the secret (and especially
when we analyse it in the sense of held in secret or initiated
into a secret) we must consider what is not visible, what is covered by a mask,
what does not reveal itself, what is veiled in darkness, what exists in limbo or in
the cradle.2 In this case we are understanding what exists somewhere in secret
(in someones possession), in a hidden place, covered by a metaphor, or hiding
under another name (not named by its name) as something hiding in a state of
present-not-being. In another reading it is something which is present, of which
Starobinski writes: the hidden is the other side of a presence.3 Furthermore, if
1 DERRIDA, Jacques: Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression. Diacritics, Vol. 25. No. 2.
(Summer 1995) p. 62
2 This refers to the idea that the combination of words in the expression kept in
secret is perhaps related to the expressions property and thief in the Hungarian
etymological dictionary (Etimolgiai sztr, magyar szavak s toldalkok eredete,
Tinta Kiad, Bp., 2006. p. 849) in that in the word tulajdon (property) the form
jav is hidden; in keeping the secret the owner covers himself against the desire to
remove, steal or acquire the thing desired. The one attempting to see into the secret
is the one lying in wait, whose act of lying in wait is, according to Starobinski,
the desire to possess solely through sight In: STAROBINSKI, Jean: The Living
Eye. (Translated by Arthur Goldhammer), Harvard University Press, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, London, England, 1989. p. 8
3 Ibid., p. 1

1 160 2

we accept Levinas claim that the phenomenon is the vision of something in a full
light, then we can safely state that the phenomenon of the secret stands out in
the light, even if it is only a dim rushlight. But who illuminates, who and under
what conditions is able to illuminate the phenomenon hiding in the darkness,
the secret itself? On the one hand, as Merleau-Ponty states:
[] that the obscurity of the In Itself is for the clarity of the For Itself in
general, if not for that of my consciousness.4
In this case it is understanding which serves to make visible the phenomenon
illuminated by the light of awareness (Descartes quelque lumire), as the
French philosopher explains: [] to understand is to translate into disposable
significations a meaning first held captive in the thing and in the world itself.5
On the other hand, the Other, who approaches me, who desires my hospitality,
who comes into my field of vision and who demands a response from my
introverted state, brings the light, so that the secret which lies in the darkness
can be illuminated from the perspective of another I (in the rays of the light
of his/her eyes) and can offer mea fellow objectthe comprehension of the
mutual understanding of what cannot yet be said. The coming into meaning (the
surplus meaning) of the phenomenon of the secret can only be revealed in the
light of my awareness and the light of the Others knowledge, as the focussing
of two beams of light on one common point, the intersection of two fields of
4 MERLEAUPONTY, Maurice: The Visible and the Invisible. (Edited by Claude
Lefort, translated by Alphonso Lingis), Northwestern University Press, Evanston,
1968. p. 64
5 Idem., p. 36Marion writes this about the same theme: The object owes its
certaintyits certificateto the ego that certifies it. MARION, JeanLuc: The
Erotic Phenomenon. (Translated by Stephen E. Lewis), The University of Chicago
Press, Chicago and London, 2008. p. 12 This is Marions conceptualisation of the
ego, which Buber had earlier spoken of: Individuality neither shares in nor obtains
any reality. It differentiates itself from the other, and seeks through experiencing and
using to appropriate as much of it as it can. BUBER, Martin: I and Thou, (Translated
by Ronald Gregor Smith), Scribner, New York, 1958. p. 64. http://www.tjdonovanart.
com/Martin%20Buber%20-20I%20And%20Thou%20(c1923%20127P).pdf. (17.01.
2015)

1 161 2

vision, as something that comes sharply into the light and which is illuminated
by light approaching from that direction: in this way the act of interpretation can
be tackled as a common endeavour. Lvinas, when analysing the phenomenon
of stroking, refers to secrecy as the concept of the not yet:
The not-yet-being is not to be ranked in the same future in which everything
I can realize already crowds, scintillating in the light, offering itself to my
anticipations and soliciting my powers. The not-yet-being is precisely not a
possible that would only be more remote than other possibles. The caress
does not act, does not grasp possibles. The secret it forces does not inform it
as an experience; it overwhelms the relation of the I with itself and with the
non-I.6
The secret, the as-yet unnamed it-self, which mediates between the I and
the you within the state of synchrony, constitutes a commonly-owned world
(but one which is not yet spoken, not translated into a language) in the real
presence of all three participants. Through the mediation, the utterance of the
it-ness hidden within, the entity which is projected from the closing off within
oneselfthe internality, the church, the castle, the hermitshows itself in its
nakedness in the clarity of the externality, the clarity of the world. The secret is
an unilluminated being, something unspoken in any language, which with the
promise of being made visible in its existence in the light of revelation encourages
the Other, the bringer of light, to ensure that the phenomenon be illuminated
once more by the light the Other brings, so that it reveals and uncovers as much
as possible about itself, and about the intruder that has brought the secret into
the sphere of comprehension, and of course about myself as the possessor of
the meaning of the secret, and not least of all about the place where we are
meeting,7 the place where, according to Buber, something happens to people.
6 LVINAS, Emmanuel: Phenomenology of Eros, In: Totality and Infinity. (Translated
by Alphonso Lingis), Duquesne University Press, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 2000. p.
259
7 Cognition rests on apparition, on phenomena, which the being of beings unfolds,
putting all things together by light, ordering order. Taken in the light, inevitably
contemporaneous, things are present even in their most secret hiding places, as
though being were a game of blind-mans bluff where a blindfold over your eyes does

1 162 2

Levinas speaks of a Heidiggerian illuminated place, the illuminated site of

being is but the passage of God.8 Numerous bearded little men, who suddenly
appear and reveal a secret in tale narratives, bear witness to this illuminated
place; men who are no other than God himself, who reveals and does not reveal
himself to others, who shapes the destiny of the hero according to his desire or
vision, and who disappears at a given moment.9 The higher and secret Being
illuminates the secret, as a form of knowledge, or in other words, an opportunity
to exist or not exist with the secret, and as a use of guiding knowledge, trusting
to I and you.10 And then he is convinced that we really are able to take the
opportunity together and mutually, with responsibility and in an exemplary
fashion (according to Buber, [we address] the mystery with work and service for
the spirit11), in the spirit of the tale, for ever after. The stereotypical tale ending:
they lived happily ever after, in the sense employed by Marion, announces the
loyalty and love of eternity:
And so, loving demands not only faithfulness, but faithfulness for eternity.
Faithfulness thus temporalizes the phenomenon of love, by assuring it its
only possible future.12
The illumination of the secret re-establishes order for the being disturbed
and forced into the dark, exposed to danger and threatened; and the promise of
the eternal survival of this newly re-woven order (which is not a new beginning,
not prevent presence from calling to you from all sides. LVINAS, Emmanuel:
Phenomenon and Enigma In: Collected Philosophical Papers, (Translated by
Alphonso Lingis), Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, 1987. p. 71
8 Ibid., p.73
9 On other occasions tale-tellers speak of the Moirai, or of one, or sometimes three,
of the Birds of Fate
10 According to Jung, the phenomenon of the secret can only be discovered in those
tale heroes who are forced to possess it. JUNG, Carl Gustav: Phenomenology of the
Spirit in Fairytales, In: The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. (Translated
by R. F. C. Hull), Princeton University Press and Routledge and Kegan Paul, Ltd.
1990. pp. 207254
11 BUBER: op. cit. p. 102
12 MARION: op. cit. p. 185

1 163 2

but the world restored to its old laws, the order of Creation13) is guaranteed by
the king, the supreme maintainer of order and its most prominent representative
hero figure. This capacity to re-order and to overcome the opposing forces
(embodied in the evil spirits), and the knowledge to rule and to create laws,
as an ability, or more precisely as a linguistic gift (through which deeds can be
turned into words sometimes commanding the harmful being with a Stop!
and sometimes with a Do not kill!), is his secret; in the concrete and active
sense it is the kings secret.
The secretive, in other words the being which is hidden, covered, and which
goes under a false name (a name named as something else, such as I-dont-know,
Nine or Iron John etc.) has an existential relationship with what appears not to
exist, someone who exists behind someone else, or behind a veil.14 The secretive
covers (silences) the being who gifts the secret, and at the same time sooner or
later shows (announces) what has been given, the existential character of the
being which appears as the final result of the gift: the true or false face. Between
the words and the deeds there is an immeasurable gap, since it is in no way
clear that what becomes visible in the light from within will be the character
of the being as it appears, and not merely a kind of mask, a disguise, a veil, a
persona behind which another existential character exists in a reduced form,
closed within itself in secrecy, keeping the secret to itself.

13 This sense of this order is that: That before which, in which, out of which, and into
which we live, even the mystery, has remained what it was. It has become present
to us and in its presentness has proclaimed itself to us as salvation ; we have
known it, but we acquire no knowledge from it which might lessen or moderate its
mysteriousness. BUBER: op. cit. p. 111
14 In Jakabs story, it is sometimes the evil spirit, where it is concretely named: But
who was that fatty bundle, but Brug himself! [...] because [he] was the chief of the
devils. NAGY OlgaV Gabriella: Tale Teller of the Transylvanian Mountains
Tales of Istvn Jakab. j Magyar Npkltsi Gyjtemny. XXVI. Szerk. Nagy Ilona,
Akadmiai, Bp., 2002. pp. 240241.); sometimes, it is the dragon, But it wasnt a
merchant, because it was a simple one-headed dragon. (idem., p. 246), at other times
in appears in the shape of a huge giant. (idem., p. 253) (All subsequent tale extracts
are also translated by G.S.)

1 164 2

The secret, or in its indexical version, the secretive, through the discovery
caused by light (demonstration) and utterance (being made comprehensible)
shows itself in part or in whole (but showing not the past act of the donation, but
the present process of the appearance from the dark), and appears before us in
its nakedness for a period, or even just for a specific moment (ce qui se donne
se montre15). Then, just as suddenly and unpredictably, it takes on another
mask or veil, in other words it throws its skin back on, which is for us the
invisible being of the secretive in its disguise;16 in Bubers words it: it sinks back
in mystery.17 This uncovering and drawing back, appearance and submergence,
the differentiation from the past and the restoration of the present is the specific
motion of the being. But let us not forget that it also is the attraction and love
and the teaching and prediction of the being as well!
The being which is secretive, hidden, not visible, reduced, and who hardly
touches anyone (I only know of his/her existence, the secret society of the
initiated), the being existing in darkness, shows or hides him- or herself: the
cover name (the King of Black, the Enchanted Princess, Fairy Ilona18) is itself a
secret sign. The cover name, as the coverer of the name, is a substituting sign, or
more precisely a metaphor, the duplicity of the name and being. Derrida notes,
in relation to the prohibition on uttering the name:
The interdictif the name interdict is to remain, if we are keen on retaining
itwas of a kind at once exceptional and fundamental. 19
15 MARION, JeanLuc: tant donn, d. Quadrige/PUF, Paris, 2005. p. 102
16 The evil spirit accompanies the young couple in many forms, until the Jewish tailor
finally exposes its nature: Because at that time [at twelve oclock] the evil spirit will
pass by with your wife right in front of your shack (NAGYV p. 256)
17 BUBER: op. cit. p. 69
18 In the tale entitled The Child and the Enchanter Horse in an extraordinary way
Fairy Ilona takes on the role of the murdering mother in the evil mother type tales,
and wants to kill her husband in order to reveal his infidelity. In: PENAVIN Olga:
Jugoszlviai magyar npmesk. (Yugoslavian Hungarian Folk Tales) j Magyar
Npkltsi Gyjtemny. Szerk.: Ortutay Gyula. XVI. Akadmiai, Bp., 1971. pp. 169
188 (Trans. G.S.)
19 DERRIDA, Jacques: Monolingualism of the Other or The Prosthesis of Origin. (Trans
lated by Patrick Mensah), Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, 1998. p. 32

1 165 2

What exists in secret, as a being that cannot be articulated in language,

or which perhaps, through its own doubling, overflows itself, is not able to
announce itself and the essence of its nature: it is un-announcable (as the
expression suggests, it is a being which disappears and is invisible, of which
there is no trace20). The secret of hiding away is that only with the deliberate
intention of the owner of the secret is it able to uncover itself, and then in such
a way that it shows a kind of essence that serves the interest of the owner of the
secret; an aspect that communicates and brings news and makes a promise.
The characteristic of intentional partiality is rooted in the dual direction of
the sharing of the secret: at once self-protection and sounding out, silence and
speaking out, reserve and an opening towards the Other. For the acceptance
of the intention of the secret (as it-self), in order to bring news and to strike
up a conversation which speaks of the self, the desire of both parties (the I
and the you) is essential, i.e. both sides must give their agreement. To achieve
this, the creation of a mutually understandable language of experience is also
necessary (which is helped by going beyond the prohibition of access to speech
[au dire], that is all, a certain kind of speech21); in other words, a precondition
of the discourse between the I and the you is the possession of a common
it-self and comprehension (overcoming any intention to harm or spoil). At the
same time, no secret ever reveals itself willingly of its own nature in its own
complexity. In terms of the essence of the secret, even to the willing possessor
of a secret it remains a secret and undiscoverable, and the attempt to name it
through language is doomed to continual failure if, and as long as, the Other
the youis averse to fulfilling the promise of the mutuality of comprehension

20 And the person wanted to offer their hand to say goodbye to the fatty bundle []
but it was nowhere to be seen, as if the earth had swallowed it up (NAGYV p.
239). This statement is made three times during the course of the tale; A year passed
and they scoured the whole country, every square inch of dry land, but there was
no news, no living trace of the girl. (NAGYV p. 244); In the evening the King
returned from the hunt, but already there was not the slightest trace of his wife.
(NAGYV p. 246)
21 DERRIDA: Monolingualism , op. cit. p. 32

1 166 2

and the capacity to become accountable for keeping the secret. That is why I wait
for the Other, or precisely as MerleauPonty says:
[] but the nothing I am and the being I see all the same formed a closed
sphere.22
If I stay on my own with my secret, I always feel a being outside of myself as
the possessor of the secret. My own loneliness is also a secret, as Derrida says
loneliness, the secrets other name:
The secret never allows itself to be captured or covered over by the relation
to the other, by being-with or by any form of social bond.23
On the other hand, if I withdraw into myself and turn away from the Other,
from You, and become a stranger, and if there is no discourse, then I only see
the secret in the light which illuminates the surfaces when it arrives from one
side; in this sense my closing myself in my language makes it impossible to
express my promise to the Other in words. Because of the completeness and
the unpredictability of the secret, I either accept the existence of the secretive
being which is continuously waiting to be translated, or, setting aside my doubts
and worries, I deny its existence and affirm its untranslatability.
Not-seeing, or not seeing clearly from the perspective of I or you, is, on
the one hand, the lack of any recognition of the existence of the beings present,
the absence of any way of measuring them or getting to know them, and on
the other hand, the product of a disturbance to the language which speaks of
myself, of understanding in the here and now (the impossibility of translating
one to the other). Neither is able to stand up in the light and illuminate the light
which leads to the Otherleads along a secret path24; and to do this without
suspicion, reluctance or laying down pre-conditions. The state of being unable
to see each other because there is insufficient light, or seeing each other only
vaguely in the dimness, accompanied by the slipping away of the beams of light,
22 MERLEAUPONTY: op. cit. p. 59
23 DERRIDA, Jacques: On the Name. (Tanslated by David Wood, John P. Leavey, JR.,
and Ian McLoad), Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, 1995. p. 30
24 The light makes the thing appear by driving out the shadows; it empties space.
LVINAS: Exteriority and the Face, In: Totality, op. cit p. 189

1 167 2

means they cannot compare their perceptions of each other. Of course, they can
call out to each other, since this is a kind of reaching out to the Other, to the
presumed location of existence, in the same way that the blindas MerleauPonty writesfeel around in the dark.25 The face is covered by a veil caused by
the totally disturbed confusion, by the invisibilityor the inability to see that
objectwhich lies in the darkness, or, to take it further, by the fact that the
viewer is not able to appropriately position and bring into play what should
be seenthe Other that he/she desires to address. The one who cannot see,
or who cannot see clearly, announces the falsity which lies in limbo, which is
neither the experience of the past I (the I was-I am), nor the hope of the future
to come; the intention to become something (devenir) offers nothing to hold on
to. This means that one is continually exposed to dizziness, confusion, falling
and being carried away into the depths, and falsely evaluates the given situation,
makes wrong decisions, and makes them badly; any message one gives leads
to misunderstanding. Following this disturbed communication, the irritation
caused by the misunderstandings gives way to anger, and rash, doubtful
judgements. This not completely normal state of being, which is opposed to the
customary order of life, is what Blanchot describes as falling into ecstasy:
If someone becomes fascinated, we can say of him that they perceive no real
object and no real form, because what he sees does not belong to the real
world, but to the indefinable field of fascination.26
The confused sight that is characteristic of enchantment, which does not
see things from the appropriate distance (through a steady approach), leads to
an awareness of things based on falsity or illusion, which prevents the wish
to observe, in the sense that the sensation or conceptualisation of the thing
or being available to sight is broken. Sometimes we see more, sometimes less.
When we see more, the eye, the gaze, is not able to focus on the object, what is
25 MERLEAUPONTY: op. cit. p. 58Derrida compares the movement of a blind man
to the process of writing with one hand. DERRIDA: Monolingualism op. cit. p. 64
26 Quiconque est fascin, on peut dire de lui quil naperoit aucun objet rel, aucune
figure relle, car ce quil voit nappartient pas au monde de la ralit, mais au milieu
indtermin de la fascination BLANCHOT, Maurice: L espace littraire. d.
Gallimard, 1955. p. 26 (Trans. G.S.)

1 168 2

seen overflows, because the eye wants to see everything, and it becomes aware
of the metaphysical field which exists beyond the thing or being it observes.
When it sees less, it does not really concentrate on the object, but on its own
feeling and reflection, it chases its own imaginings and deprives itself of the
sense of being specific to the situation and its truth content. Let us not forget
what Gilbert Durand noted, that what shines and is seen27 speaks of itself and
uncovers itself to the other. Consequently, what appears weakly or dimly speaks
of itself in a correspondingly inappropriate and deceptive way (it cheats, lies
and pretends) and continually misleads the Other and leads him/her on a false
path, drawing the relationship with realityseen unclearly and from the wrong
distanceinto an enchantment. The Other is led into a labyrinth, and loses
the thread, the hope of escape, and in his/her confusion does not know how
to react to the phenomenon of the secret and, naturally, to myself, because I
make no attempt to tear myself away from the enchantment, because I will not
give up my own anonymity, and because I will not offer the Other any closeness
or any helping hand; instead, I will behave secretively in his or her presence.
Perhaps I even enjoy the fact that the Other must struggle to find me, to touch
me, to stroke me, in precisely the sense that Levinas spoke of stroking: the

27 Dans les cinq premiers versets de lvangile platonicien de saint Jean, la parole est
explicitement associe la lumire qui luit dans les tenbres, mais lisomorphisme
de la parole et de la lumire est bien plus primitif et universel que le platonisme
johannique. Constamment les textes upanishadiques associent la lumire,
quelquefois le feu, et la parole []. Jung montre que ltymologie indo-europenne
de ce qui luit est la mme que celle du terme signifiant parler, cette similitude se
retrouverait en gyptien.
(In the first five verses of the Platonic Gospel of Saint John, the word is explicitly
associated with the light which lights in the darkness, but the isomorphism of the
word and the light is much more primitive and universal than Johannine Platonism.
The Upanishads constantly associate light, and sometimes fire, with the word [].
Jung shows that Indo-european etymology of that which is light is the same as the
term which means speak, and that this similarity is found in Egyptian.) DURAND,
Gilbert: Les structures anthropologiques de l imaginaire, (The Anthropological
Structures of the Imaginary) d. Dunod, Paris, 1992. p. 173 (Trans. G. S.).

1 169 2

caress is dormant in sensorial or verbal contact.28 Sometimes he/she becomes

restless: does the uncertain fumbling around, the helpless search for a path, the
continuous compensation not causes a loss of all enthusiasm? And so at that
point I send a certain sign, in order to maintain his/her commitment. It is only
the announcement of my own existence in the secret hiding placethe Come
over here, here I am!, which can overcome the disturbance, the sense of loss, the
continuous absence and confusion about the path that leads to me.
But the invitation must be pressing, not indifferent. It should never imply: you
are free not to come and if you dont come, never mind, it doesnt matter.29
In the tale narrative, the invitation or call which arrives to the being who is
cursed, enchanted and distant from his/her community, is never indifferent, it is
always urgent and recognises no room for manoeuvre, no irresponsibility or easy
promises, nor failure, since it appeals to the commitment, the resolution and the
sense of responsibility of the hero who receives the challenge and is required to
make the commitment in word and deed. Both sides must reveal themselves.
The removal of the mask and the revealing of the true face is a pre-condition
of the discourse of love, as Marion writes: love requires the personalization of
the face.30
Listen to me, my heart! Dont think that I was a dove, I wasnt a dove. But
soon youll see what I really was. (NAGYV p. 45)
In the illumination of the hiding facewhat Lvinas understands as the
making apparentthe words of my announcement, my urgent call, become
credible; the closeness31, the openness, the speech, the mutuality, destroys the
remoteness, in the sense described by Marion, when we have only to give

28 LVINAS: Language and Proximity In: Collected Papers, op. cit. p. 125
29 DERRIDA: On the Name, op. cit. p. 14
30 MARION: op. cit. p. 167
31 To approach is to touch the neighbor, beyond the data apprehended at a distance in
cognition, that is, to approach the other. LVINAS: Language and Proximity, In:
Collected Papers, op. cit. p. 125

1 170 2

ourselves up, each to the other, and give ourselves reciprocally the status of
gifted32.
Well, my heart, I fought for you, you fought for me. From now on you will
be my darling wife. (NAGYV p. 246)
In western European thought one of the basic causes of not-seeing and false
judgement is darkness itself, which Plotinus identifies with the orginating evil,
since:
[] it is a picture which since the most ancient of times has largely contributed
to the establishment of light symbolism in metaphysical thought [].33
This is demonstrated by a passage from the Bible, where Paul attempts to
warn those living in a basic existential state of not-seeing, or not seeing clearly,
of the secret of predestination, their capacity to be understood alone before
God and to themselves: the secret staying in secret, the secret falling back into
the secret. This warning is at the same time a reference to the fact that those
who lack an understanding of what Babits terms in the Book of Jonah the time
of creation34 those whom the Greeks loved to call the one-day liverswill
not be able to judge appropriately, nor to see or understand the decisions of the
Lord to make himself eternally present. They will not be able to accept with
full understanding the judgements of God, whose time and consequences are
beyond their understanding:
For I dont desire you to be ignorant, brothers, of this mystery, so that you
wont be wise in your own conceits, that a partial hardening has happened
to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in [].35
In this prophetic warning (which is both a reflection and a threat) two elements
are emphasised and explicated: the expression wise in your own conceits
32 MARION: op. cit. p. 126
33 TENGELYI Lszl: A bn mint sorsesemny, (Sin as an Event of Fate), Atlantisz, Bp.,
1992. p. 157 (Trans. G.S.)
34 BABITS Mihly: Jns knyve (The Book of Jonah): s negyven nap, negyven v, vagy
ezer-annyi/ az n szjamban ugyanazt jelenti. (and forty days, forty years, or a
thousand of them / in my mouth mean the same.) (Trans. G.S.)
35 Pauls Letter to the Romans, 11: 25 (http://ebible.org/web/Romans.htm)

1 171 2

expresses the idea that human wisdom (insight, conception) is not sufficient,
is not illuminating enough, not sure enough that it can of itself unravel the
eternal secret without divine help and the guidance of the spirit. Understanding
is just a stepping stone to the commitment undertaken towards the obligatory
task as it is understood. This commitment requires the development of an
ability which Ricur refers to as someones capacity to be characterised by sin
(imputabilit).36 In other words, possessing the use of rationality and morality,
and understanding the rule of law and the laws of God, a human must become the
kind of being that is able to undertake acts with responsibility and is answerable
for them, accountable for them and, in other words, can be punished, and be
aware of all of this. Levinas sees Moses act of lowering his eyes and showing
humility in response to the voice which calls out, as the incomprehensibility of
the theophany of glory, the human reaction of uncertainty and doubt when
faced with the secretthe doubting of Thomas in the face of certainty. There
is no tale hero who is able, from the beginning, and in full, to understand the
direction or knowledge received from the Other (in a dream, a tale within a tale,
or in a poem) which is offered to him. Destroyed by the failure which follows the
foolhardy search for the secret, the herolike Mosesstands with lowered
eyes before the testing figure who addresses him, reprimands him and demands
explanation. The other element emphasised in the prophetic warning quoted is
that humans mustcollectively or individuallybe able to become conscious
of and accept the secret which is given to them, and to make it theirs, to acquire it
without being scandalized, without needing to compel the gesture of acceptance
and adoption with some external force; this is the miracle which, according
to Kierkegaard, is happy self-surrender37, when the heart and the spirit open
36 It is up to a phenomenology of the capable human being to isolate the capacity
that finds its most appropriate expression in imputability. In: RICUR, Paul: The
Course of Recognition, (Translated by David Pellauer), Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, 2007. p. 105 ( Il revient une phnomenologie
de lhomme capable d isoler la capacit qui trouve son expression la plus approprie
dans limputabilit. RICUR, Paul: Parcours de la reconnaissance. Trois tudes,
d. Gallimard, Paris, 2004. p. 171)
37 KIERKEGAARD, Soren: The Sickness Unto Death, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, New Jersey 1941. p. 97

1 172 2

towards the manifestationthe act of faith. In the metaphysical tradition the

heart is where the secret is guarded; Assmann goes further when he describes it
as the central location of understanding.38
The secret is essentially linked not just to sight but also to hearing.39 Certain
societies and organisations act beyond the eyes and ears of the world; their
members are soundless, and at times they only communicate through signs or
through messages mediated through intermediaries, and they strive to ensure
they do not leave traces behind them40. The tracelessness, as a clearly visible
http://www.naturalthinker.net/trl/texts/Kierkegaard,Soren/TheSicknessUntoDeath.
pdf (19. 01. 2015)
38 ASSMANN, Jan: Uralom s dvssg, [Herrschaft und Heil] (Hung. trans. Hidas
Zoltn), Atlantisz, Bp., 2008. 165.According to Starobinski It is not in an
individuals heart but between the hands that everything becomes distorted.
STAROBINSKI: op. cit. p. 102
39 Jakabs tale The Thoughtless King [AaTh 708 (510) ~590] is an example; when
the rescuing hero of the princess is killed, his three dogs, World-seer, World-listener
and Heavy-earth find his corpse, but the secret of his resurrection is sung by a little
bird: Its a waste of time those three stupid dogs crying, because hes never going
to come back to life until they catch a bird like me, because in my right ear theres a
mortal blade of grass, in my left ear theres mortal water. [] In a minute theyll tell
Heavy-earth and his friends just what that little bird says. The old man takes out
his spectacles, puts them on and looks all around, and then says to the bird:I can
hear something; I cant see anything, I dont understand what it is, but I can hear that
theres some kind of talking going on. Please come down a bit lower, so that I can see
who and what you are, and help me so that I can help our master, that he can come
back to life again. [] The bird says:Ill come over, but Im frightened that youll
catch me! / But the bear really didnt want to understand what the bird was saying.
(NAGYV p. 283)
40 According to what is written in the Exemplum mirabile which dates back to 1527,
the Hungarian word nyom has many different meanings: Mikoron jutottak volna
meg az svnyre, holott egymst talltk vala, megllnak, mert tovbb nem hagy
nyomotni az vendg, bulcst akara tle venni (When they had come to the path,
where they had met each other, they stopped, because the guest didnt want to
press any more, he wanted to take his leave.) Kzpkori magyar rsok, (Medieval
Hungarian Writing) (ed. Mezey Lszl), Magvet, Bp., 1957. p. 189 ; [] me nagy

1 173 2

lack, is, of course, not empty space, but some veiled being. In one of Jacobs stories,
Jnas a zrdban (John in the Priory) [AaTh 931 (756A 1725)+ 314]41, John,
who is capable of committing any and all kinds of crime, and is able, although
admittedly against his will, to involve his mother in a blood bath, becomes father
to a child after an act of violence, and, as a punishment, dies before his time.
The son, who is found in a hazelnut bushand who thus is named Hazelnut
Johnny , gets to school where, with the help of a cockerel who is a member of
an invisible underground army (and who makes him a gift of a wonderful ear of
maize which sharpens his brains), he is able to display extraordinary abilities in
his studies. One night:
[] Johnny heard a reedy little voice from under the floor, as if the little
cockerel was calling to him (NAGYV p. 705),
and his friend took him off to the underworld, where he saw the invisible
soundless army. From that day on Johnny neglects his studies and when he
is asked to explain his laziness, despite the prohibition and the promise he has
made, he betrays his friend to the teacher, whereupon his friend takes back the
gift he had given him.
Well listen here, little Johnny Hazelnut! Ill give you back the maize once
more, but pay attention, you may not believe your own eyeseverything you
see, everything, thats real, not a dream, and you mustnt tell anyone about
it. Because all you can see took us twenty eight years to bring here and put
kszlettel s sok szmtalan magval eleibe nyomotk (megjelent) az des lelknek
kvnsga [] (op. cit. p. 193) ([] and behold, there were many things prepared
and countless people appeared, curious about his sweet spirit.) ; Mikoron azrt
ttova jrna gyalog, mint olyan r,brsonyba, bborba ltztetettmint ki azon
napon nyomatott ki mennyegzi hztl, senki ismerje eleibe nem tr, nagyon
kezdte rajta bosszankodni. Belnyomotvn rfii vrba, ht mind ms mdon
vagyon szabvn, hogy nem hagyta volna. (op. cit. p. 198.) (When he walks hesitantly,
like a lorddressed in velvet and purplejust like he emerged from his heavenly
house that day, none of his acquaintances come forward, they began to be angry with
him. Appearing at the castle of the prince, all in different clothes, that he wouldnt
have allowed.) (Trans. G.S.)
41 NAGYV: op. cit. pp. 691731

1 174 2

together. I only brought you down here because you are a very clever child,
good-hearted and loyal, and Im only showing it to you because this, our
secret, is not for the likes of any old person; its not for everyones eyes. Ive
shown it to you and I hope you wont betray us when you know that if you
do, well never meet again in your life, because Ive told our emperor what a
trustworthy child you are and so theyll chain me up and put me in irons.
If you want to know, Im not a cockerel, but a normal soldier, just like the
ones youve seen down there in the flower garden, in the park, where we were
walking. (NAGYV pp. 712713)
When he has betrayed his friend and the secret army for a second time,
again it is through what he hears that he becomes aware of his crime, of the
consequences of his betrayal:
Johnny put his ear to the floor, where the trapdoor used to be, and he heard
such a scraping of chairs under the floor, such pulling, wailing and crying
too, and rustling of chains, all kinds of noises, that his eardrum almost burst.
(NAGYV p. 714)
So the phenomenology of the secret leads us to both of the spheres of
examination we have indicated; the non-seeing (disappearing, hiding away,
lurking) of the pre-initiated state, and the comprehension of the philosophical
anthropology of non-hearing, and at the same time to a critique of the perception
which sets other sense organs (eye, ear, finger/hand, nose) in motion.42 To go
further, it directs attention out to existence itself (Descartes sum), to the form
of existence of the present being, a question which was also raised by Ricur,
according to whom secrets and lies also bring back the dialectic of being and
appearance.43 This is especially true if we understand the secret as someone
42 MerleauPonty writes: but this is because the functioning of my body as a possibility
for changing point of view, a seeing apparatus, or a sedimented science of the
point of view, assures me that I am approaching the same thing I saw a moment
ago from further off. It is the perceptual life of my body that here sustains and
guarantees the perceptual explicitation. MERLEAUPONTY: op. cit. p. 37
43 RICUR, Paul: Time and Narrative: Threefold Mimesis In: Time and Narrative,
Volume 1. (Translated by Kathleen McLaughlin and David Pellauer), The University
of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1990. p. 79

1 175 2

hiding their being from someone else (in an unsaid state), which waits in a state
of invisibility (undiscoverability) and unspeakability (unrevealability), indeed
directly demands that the one who observes with the desire to see pulls away
the veil from the appearance, from the manifestation of untruth, and the state
of looking like or appearing as something, and in the place of the false reference
shows the true being, the message carried by the original/essential aspect of
their face. This, however, can only be created through the mutual relationship
brought to life between I and You; in love, in the friendship of a companion, in
brotherhood and the company of a fellow believer.

2. The Behaviour Accompanying the Secret

(Looking Like or Appearing as Something)
The forms of the reflexive verbs, to hide oneself and show oneself, very precisely
refer to the fact that both actions require an individual possessed of free will,
who not only has a reflexive relationship with the world but who, through his/her
own actions (turning towards someone, serving them), maintains a continuous
relationship with the Other or with others. However, the perspective of the verb
shows that the two beings areor have becomeseparate and isolated from
each other: the being hiding behind the mask and the present being showing
him/herself in the existence he/she is given. However, despite the separation,
the two kinds of being are still closely related to each other in the I and the
casted self (as well as in the mutuality with the Other), since both modes of
being are beings which are visible or invisible to someone, and it is in this way
that knowledge of them and knowledge of their own selfness (ipsit) is formed.44
We can find an appropriate description of the knowledge that forms of him and
of the ipsit in Jakab as well. In the tale Brug, the prince appears as a white
dove, and after the discovery of this fact loses his exceptional abilities:
Well, its not worth anything now. It was worth something when I gave
it to you. Now they [the birds feathers] dont have any effect, they have no
strength. Because they only had any strength while I gave them too you and I

44 MARION: La traduction, In: idem., tant don, op. cit. pp. 97102

1 176 2

was under the magic spell, and I was turned magically into a dove. But now
their strength has waned. (NAGYV p. 251)
At the same time, the wife freed from the evil spirits temptation herself
has exceptional abilities and, despite the contact with the evil spirit, she bears
witness to the relationship with the good:
Well, listen here my good husband! Youve already stood guard for two
nights; now comes the third. You go off to the town, here and there, off to that
Jewish shop. [] Ill give you a paper, which you should give to the Jew. And
look here, you ask him for some clothes, look at the material, but dont buy
any of them. Tell the Jew that he should give me some of the material that is
kept under the counter. (NAGYV p. 255)
Invisibility to the Other, as a kind of hidden secrecy (enchantment), intentional
hiding away from the one who comes towards me to see me, as a mystery waiting
for a solution, appears above all to him/her as a linguistic obstacle. In invisibility,
in the uncertainty of fumbling around in the dark, in the presence of a silent
concealment or mysterious speech, an urgent task confronts him/her: a face
must be lifted from the dark, so thatin the sense of Levinashe/she can speak.
From the texture of Jakabs tales the secret of emergence from the darkness
appears:
There will be no bridge here until the king guards his wife for three nights
and does not fall asleep. Until then he will never again in his life be able to
cross over the sea, and he wont be able to rule over the castle or the country
(NAGYV p. 253)
In the tale entitled Brug, the queen responds to the need to talk out the
secret from among the youngest of the giants (this talking out or blathering, this
vainglory, the Kantian pride, Derridas conceit,45 represents the phenomenon
of imperturbability), and uses a form of discourse which is the only way to solve
the secret:
45 The conceit of the young giant is partly rooted in the strength that convinces the
others and the surplus knowledge, and partly in the belief that he believes he knows
everything, and he is invulnerably all-knowing, cannot be defeated and his speech
is unforgettable.

1 177 2

 Well, my dear husband! Careful what you wish for, so that we can live
together; dont go to sleep this night, because the stick will make you pay.
(NAGYV p. 254)46
In what follows we will examine the forms of behaviour that occur when
dealing with the secret and secretive abilitythe forms which have the
closest relationship to the phenomenon of the secret itself. First among these
is prohibition and curiosity (the possible event of intending to prohibit, the
covering of the object which we wish to close off from sight/feeling, and, on
the other hand the desire to unlock, announce and understand them). Initially
the hero has no idea of the existence of the secret (the key to interpreting this
is the solution of the difficult task and the precondition is a life change on the
part of the hero). He has no knowledge of the prohibition which arrives from
the source of knowledge (which speaks of the danger which lies within it, of the
incomprehensibility of the miracle, and the restriction of the process offered
as the key to solving the task47), nor of how to set his intelligence to work and
focus it. The prohibition arising from the source of the knowledge/secret can
affect the hearing and sight either separately or together,48 precisely those two
46 The meaning of the queens warning is you will pay for this stick, since it makes the
warning about the danger of conceit understandable, and the warning refers both to
the present and the future, to both the experienced, and possiblei.e. what has not
yet been experiencedthought.
47 Well, listen here, girl! Get your food ready, call those tradesmen together and make
some food and drink for each of them. But make sure you make it so that you put in
everything they need, so that they dont speak a lot any more, as long as the world
is round. Soon the girl saw her opportunity, and understood what she had to give to
these tradesmen, that she had to poison them, so that when Brug came home, they
wouldnt be able to betray him, and tell what he had done and where he had been.
(NAGYV p. 243)
48 Look here, my sweet master! Now were leaving and you go on after. But be careful,
whatever you see on the road, whatever you find, dont pull my mouth with the reins.
Because if you pull my mouth with the reins, you should know that things will come
to a bad end. (The Twelve Brothers NAGYV p. 429)Well, they hadnt gone
far from the lake when the fairies realised that someone had taken their clothes;
they asked the young man so sweetly, with such sweet words, flattering him and

1 178 2

sensory organs which can be most easily tricked and fall victim to the sirens.
The gift of the discovery of the secret which lies behind the prohibition and the
threat which lies within it and the silence in the presence of others regarding the
solution to the task all bring the tale hero the kind of surplus knowledge in the
possession of which he becomes capable of changing his existence, and ending
the alterity of the Other and the danger to himself.
Of you go, dont leave me! Just be aware that hell take your husband to a
black castle. But pay attention to what Im saying to you, and dont forget
what I tell you. Hell give your husband... hell lock him in the black castle,
hell give him three goats heads to eat, but dont try to eat them, give them
to the cat, let the cat eat them so that he gets fat! After that, the rest will be
your problem, youll see what happens. And in time well meet again and
Ill give you some more instructions. For the time being, be gone, in case your
husband gets any ideas. (NAGYV p. 241) ,
says the white dove to the girl kidnapped by Brug, who must be freed from
the evil that accompanies her so that she can marry him.
When we say that a tale hero (and sometimes someone else) carries out an
act in secret, then we are saying that the act and its consequences occur outside
the knowledge of other beings. By the same token, however, we hear that the
source of the secret, who through prohibition49 desires to isolate the hero from
telling him to stop just for a moment and look back, because he wouldnt regret it if
he turned and looked back. But the young man just ran on, but they asked him so
kindly and pleaded with him and the fairies didnt dare come out of the lake, because
they only had their light dresses on, but when they saw that there was a young man
there they all three stepped out, came out of the lake, went to the lake shore, and so
made such a heart-felt request to the young man that he should look back just for a
moment, so that they could see with their own eyes what a beautiful fine young man
he was. A Tkvros (Squash City) (NAGYV p. 325)
49 Those who utter curses, since they break the law, are prohibited and punished. In the
tale the knowledge/possession of the secret protects the hero against the magic of
the curser and the forces of the curse. This prohibition marks the formal distinction
between magical and religious rites. It is the fact of prohibition itself which gives the
spell its magical character. There are religious rites which are equally maleficent, such

1 179 2

the secret act, has prior knowledge of the event carried out in secret (i.e. it is
hidden and, consequently, once finished becomes a past initiated/uttered event).
An excellent example of this can be found in Jakabs A Tkvros (Squash City)
tale.50
At the end of the tale 51 it is the hero who takes the decision to fulfil his
destiny, but prior to this comes the essential advice (as the warning which
acts an as evaluation and the wisdom which directs towards a solution to the
conflict) concerning both the danger that threatens and the prohibition; this
always arrives from someone else (from the source of knowledge, from the
helping friend), independently of whether this person is really visible, or appears

as certain cases of devotio, the imprecations made against a communal enemy, against
persons violating tombs and breaking oaths, and all those death rites sanctioned
by ritual taboos. We might go so far as to say that there are evil spells which are
evil only in so far as people fear them. The fact of their being prohibited provides
a delimitation for the whole sphere of magical action.MAUSS, MarcelHUBERT,
Henri: A Definition of Magic, In: MAUSS: A General Theory of Magic. (Transl. by
Robert Brain), Routledge, London and New York, 2001. p. 27
50 Well, tell me, son, why are you sighing, and why are you so bitter? Have you seen
something, are you in pain, are you ill? The young man says:No. But he was
thinking, the young man, wondering whether he should tell his foster father what
he had seen. But the old man knew very well why he was sent in that direction, and
he wasnt sent there so that the boy wouldnt see.Well, my son, what is it you saw,
and why are you so sad, or did you see something that frightened you on the hunt?
He said: Nothing at all frightened me. And he said that he seen three beautiful
white swans, and that the three white swans had become three beautiful fairies.
The ancient old man said to him:Well, thats it, thats why youre so bitter, so lost
in thought?Yes, thats the reason, thats right, my old father.Well, yes, my son
he says , Ive already seen that this would be the time for you to marry, but youll
have to wait a little, have a bit more patience, and wait for the right time. (NAGY
V p. 324)
51 Unlike the myth, whose hero continually evaluates prior to acting, judging what to do
and what decision to take. RICUR: Recognizing Oneself. The Greek Background:
Action and Its Agent, op. cit. p. 70 (Le fonds grec: lagir et son agent, In: Parcours
de la reconnaissance, p. 122).

1 180 2

as a dreamlike being.52 The structure of the rhetoric of the advice nearly always
takes the form of a narrative of liberation offered to the hero and to us; in order
to make the elements/details of the guidance more understandable, the phrases
that follow one another are clearly separated from each other, and even if they
are repeated, they give us again and again a couple of pieces of advice to help us
weave them into our memory and to quote them again:
Well, listen to me, my heart! Youll wash in the spring and soon youll drink
water; youll wash and then youll turn to the right away from the spring.
Then youll see a big tree, an old oak tree. By the roots of that old oak tree
youll find a green walnut; open that green walnut in half and youll see a
golden towel in the kernel. Put the kernel back where it was, where you took
it from. Then, then we will meet and speak again. (NAGYV p. 245)
However, we will have to realise that the hero makes the decision about
keeping or breaking the prohibition and the advice he is given without really
having any knowledge about the existence of the secret, noreither by acting
heedlessly or acting in accordance with the advicehow, and to what extent,
he can influence and change his future destiny. He is forced to decide, despite
the fact that he has no ability to decide correctly and he trusts to the credibility
and advice of the Other. This is the life situation in which the hero arrives at the
crossroads, the place where he must choose between the untrodden paths.
With Derrida, we can justly ask:
But isnt the uncleared way also the condition of decision or event, which
consists in opening the way, in (sur)passing, thus in going beyond? In (sur)
passing the aporia? 53
52 Jakabs A btor kirlylegny (The Brave Prince): And he went on thinking, he wasnt
thinking on the road, he wasnt thinking of the road, but was thinking whether he
had really seen the old woman and told her, or whether he had just thought it, or seen
it in a dream. Well, anyway, he thought, dream or not, he would dohe would try
what the old woman had told him, and see whether anything would really come of
it or not. (NAGYV p. 291)[] because what I showed you is not a dream but
reality, and be very careful, make sure that what I tell you, you dont reveal to anyone;
dont try to tell what youve seen here and what you know (NAGYV p. 709)
53 DERRIDA: On the Name, op. cit. p. 54

1 181 2

The prohibition, which is also the well-tried linguistic formula of the creation
of the secret (they have been those, believe me, whove broken [the prohibition],
and they turned to dust), serves to ensure the hero encounters the kind of
mystically signed problem which forces him to recognise his own existential
character from the beginning, to evaluate his own abilities, discover those
ways of acting and conditions of being which help him to recognise his sense of
responsibility and his relationship with the Other: and it is as a function of all
this that he is able to decide. In part, however, the prohibition functions as a trap
hidden in the tissue of activity (the rationality-deluding call into the darkness),
which the hero walks into, despite having received news from someone of the
existence of the being; this, it is true is the kind of coded message contained
in the tale narrative of the agent, the code which he must crack and whose
relationship to his own existence he must find himself; and indeed he does find
it, and what is moreand this is part of the nature of cracking codesat a later
stage, and not at the first attempt. The prohibition is really a warning of the
impossible, but still offers the difficult task, the possibility of an impossible
mad progress offered to the hero, whom destiny/God has spared.
Going where it is possible to go would not be a displacement or a decision, it
would be the irresponsible unfolding of a program. The role decision possible
passes through the madness of the undecidable and the impossible: to go where
(wo, Ort, Wort) it is impossible to go.54
But whenever a prohibition appears in the tissue of a tale, as a call and challenge
addressed to the hero, the response to it is always the questioning curiosity about
the prohibition, which is made clear in the oppositional discourse: what would
happen, if I did it another way?, what would happen if I did exactly the opposite

54 Ibid., p. 59In Christian theology understanding is at the same time conversion;

from our perspective, the actualisation of the statement: keeping to the prohibition
to the end (after many breaches), making a correct interpretation and choosing a
possibility of being, accepting that which appears mad and performing physically
in a way which is beyond strength, all make it possible for the hero to fulfil his
destiny.

1 182 2

of what I was advised?55 Heidegger has this to say about the phenomenon of
curiosity:
When curiosity has become free, it takes care to see not in order to understand
what it sees, that is, to come to a being toward it, but only in order to see. []
it also does not seek the leisure of reflexive staying, but rather restlessness
and excitement from continual novelty and changing encounters.56
Thus curiosity is not directed towards a patient, unbiased observation and
attempt to understand the newly seen object/being; the seer, in his relationship
to the object, does not wish to recognise at any price either himself, or the
objectified thing, or the Other which he has seen; he does not wish to make it
the object of critical examination, because he does not desire to dwell for long on
understanding and explaining himself.57 It is enough to settle for the superficial
appearance in a non-judgmental way, in a momentary sense (in the sense
understood by Bachelard, time is manifest as a lonely moment, as the awareness
of loneliness58); and not least of all, he is satisfied with a rootless existence
with an aimless coming and going. Heidegger describes the three characteristics
55 Well, listen here, my husband! You can go now, because the master of the house is
coming, the dragonin the evening- and Ill tell him, Ill have to tell him that I
need some jewels. And Ill buy those very jewels from you, the ones you took from
the dragon. Lets see what hell say! (NAGYV p. 249)
56 HEIDEGGER, Martin: Being and Time. (Translated by Joan Stambaugh), State
University of New York Press, Albany, 1996. p. 161.Curiosity seems to be
temptingly related in a spiritual sense to Kosselecks prophte philosophe, who is
also called an admirer. KOSSELECK, Reinhart: Futures Past. On the Semantics of
Historical Time. (Translated by Keith Tribe), Columbia University Press, New York,
2004. p. 22.
57 The word explanation should be understood in Ricurs sense: Ricur does not only
intend the search for the mere reasons for the events, but also the motivation for the
actions as well. TENGELYI Lszl: Trtnelmi tapasztalat s trtnelemkutats
Ricur felfogsban, (Ricurs conception of historical experience and historical
research) In: Sz s bet szerint a vilg, (The World in Word and Letter) op. cit. p.
210. (Trans. G.S.)
58 [] le temps se prsente comme linstant solitaire, comme la conscience dune
solitude. ([] time presents itself as a solitary instant, as the conscience of a

1 183 2

of the phenomenon of curiosity as follows: non-dwelling, scattering and

belonging nowhere. We can confidently link the heideggerian curiosity59
with Bachelard or Kierkegaards moment60, which further shades the nondwelling in a temporal sense; the loss of patient and concentrated meditation
on a thing (the scattering), and the act of stepping beyond the object dignified
with observation just for a moment and the superficial search for the object
somewhere else; what in the tale narrative is a loss brought on by a rejection
of the solution or an incorrect interpretation. Getting lost, as a movement in
space, appears to the hero as the nightmare of belonging nowhere, since he has
crossed a frontier, although as it turns out, the step taken was not forwards, but
much more backwards: at this point he usually climbs up a tree and withdraws
into himself until he finds the right path, or until he is led to it.
Along with curiosity it is worth examining another closely related form of
behaviour, doubting.61 The doubting being attempts to make himself appear
solitude.) BACHELARD, Gaston: Lintuition de linstant, d. Gonthier, Paris, 1979.
p. 13 (Trans. G.S.)
59 In his study entitled A csald titka, (The secret of the family), BDIS Zoltn
following Heidiggerre-examines the relationship between the secret and curiosity,
the secret and prohibition, and the utterance and the name. Tiszatj, 2013/10.
October, pp. 7483
60 The moment is already solitude ( Linstant cest dj la solitude. ), and it exists
between two nothings (nant) at the same time: time is always certainly capable of
rebirth, but first it must die. BACHELARD idem., p. 13 (Trans. G. S.)
61 In Jakabs tale A szegny ember meg a hall (The Poor Man and Death) (AaTh, BN
330), the poor man asks for a gift from Our Lord Jesus and St. Peter so that he would
be able to talk with every hole, and be given a purse which would never run out of
money, and a satchel which however much you put in it would never overflow. Well,
anyway, when hed said that, they gave him those things right away. And with that
they said goodbye and went on their way. Well, the poor man would get rich, and
soon his poverty would be over, because he had so much money, the more he took
out of the satchel, the more there was left inside it. But soon, after theyd gone, he
started to test himself, to see whether it really would work or not. He went out into
the yard.
Well, tell me, hole, how many mice have been in you? And soon the hole said,

1 184 2

to the Otherwho is in possession of certainty, of the secret and the fullness

of the meaning and value of the moraland to himself and others, as if he
as a witness were not someone who shows himself, who announces himself,
but as if he were speaking in someone elses name, and as if he were not
there, where he is, where he should be, but because of his aimlessness and
disturbed thinking, he has become lost and separated from the good and the
community.
The doubter first doubts the announcement, the prophecy the certainty of
the signs offered, and then, as his criticism and resentment at the interpretation
offered by the words and signs of the teaching begin to melt away, he turns and
mimes a curiosity to what remains secret to his sight, and with his fingers, which
substitutes for his eyes, he tries to fumble around for what to him is shrouded
in murk.
Jesus, indicates to Thomas, seeking for evidence, that those who do not see
and yet believe are happy. (my italics PB) 62
This level of manifestation occurs in those tales when the hero in a dream or
blindly resting by the roots of a tree in the forest, hears a discussion between
the birds of fate (a prediction of the future, a judgement), and puts into effect
what they have said, using it as a guide for his actions. The hero adopts an
accepting attitude to the unbelievable or unbelievable-seeming advice, as
Derrida notes:
The order of attestation itself testifies to the miraculous, to the unbelievable
believable: to what must be believed all the same, whether believable or
not.63
Unlike the hero, his brother or brothers do not attempt to listen to the words
of the old man or woman who appears before them, or interpret his/her call for
help as an imperative, to believe his/her promise; quite the contrary, they treat
Well, all kinds of mice have been inside me, but if you want you can come in too.
Get in!!said the old manIm not getting in at all. (NAGYV p. 312)
62 FABINYI Tibor: A keresztny hermeneutika 7. (Christian Hermeneutics), http://
nyitottegyetem.phil-inst.hu/teol/fabinyi.html, (01.02.2014.)
63 DERRIDA: Monolingualism, op. cit. p. 20

1 185 2

him/her as a suspicious opponent or as a vengeful, lying being. We must observe

that what Jesus and the mythical birds of fate wish to warn the doubters of, is
nothing other than the idea that sin lies in the will, not in the intellect;64 i.e. in
the unwillingness to believe, which restricts and disturbs the operation of the
reasoning mind.
The act of doubting, the lack of belief or the rejection of belief, clearly show the
phenomenon of betrayal; anyone who, in a given life situation, breaks the word,
promise or oath he/she has given to the Other, who behaves against the law and
against the concept of virtue it embodies, is a betrayer. His/her acts do not only
exclude him/her from the community, but also for a time make the achievement
of goodness and other virtues impossible in that community. Examining the
phenomenon of betrayal, Macintyre writes:
They would also need, however, to identify certain types of action as the
doing or the production of harm of such an order that they destroy the bonds
of community in such a way as to render the doing or achieving of good
impossible in some respect, at least for some time. Examples of such offences
would characteristically be the taking of innocent life, theft and perjury and
betrayal.65
If and when Kierkegaard says that sin is ignorance, in relation to betrayal we
must modify this statement, since whoever wishes to hurt or injure the Other
knows very well the seriousness of the sin/crime that will be committed and
the damage it will do to the community.66 It cannot be said of him that he is not
64 KIERKEGAARD: op. cit. p. 109
65 MACINTYRE, Alasdair: After Virtue. A Study in Moral Theory. University of Notre
Dame Press, Notre Dame, Indiana, 1984. p. 151
66 In the tale entitled Jnas a zrdban (Jnas in the Priory) Jnas reveals the secret
out of vanity, conceit and self-protection, and causes suffering to others through
this betrayal. Well, listen here, Jnas! Its all the same, now. Whats done is done,
Im suffering for it and youll suffer in your life. If you hadnt given away the secret,
hadnt betrayed us, well, you should know, in the end you would have become king.
Well, anyway, since youve given away the secret, well I dont know how things will
turn out, all manner of things can happen because of you. (NAGYV p. 714).
Lvinas has this to say about hatred: Hatred does not always desire the death of

1 186 2

aware of the good, of the virtue which the law expresses. On the contrary, the
concept of virtue accepted by the community (knowing what it is, and abiding
by it) makes it possible for him to adopt a form of behaviour that is opposed to
virtue: the deliberate desire to hurt, to be a follower and servant of evil.67 Only
if a person is capable of conceiving of the virtues understood as part of the
concept of virtue in general, of the significance of this kind of behaviour and its
consequences, is he capable of causing hurt. The paired concept of understanding
and hurting precisely illuminate the fact that the individual is capable of using
his judgement, is able to understand, to conceive rationally which actions are
harmful to another and have a harmful effect on the community, and so can
decide whether his actions (or the actions he neglects to perform) serve good
or evil. It is no accident that the Hungarian saying vallj sznt (show your true
colours, out with the truth) regularly appears in tales; when the hero and
his opponent are duelling the two colours of creation: a choice must be made
between the red and blue flames, to show their existential character.
The judgement we make of betrayal is somewhat different when the helping
being betrays the secret to the hero. It is an undeniable fact that in this case
a betrayal does occur; we can speak of an infringement of the desire to exclude
others from the knowledge commonly held by a kind of secret society and
from the cohesion and identity that this knowledge brings. It is just that here
it is not an infringement against the community, or communal bonds, or the
concept of virtue laid down in the law, but, on the contrary, the betrayal serves
the interests of the hero and through him, those of the community, as a reward
for the triumph of good, the possibility of a separation for the sake of the good.
The words heard in the tale: Ill give away the secret to you, both illuminate

the Other [] The one who hates seeks to be the cause of a suffering to which the
despised being must be witness. To inflict suffering is not to reduce the Other to the
rank of object, but on the contrary is to maintain him superbly in his subjectivity.
LVINAS: Exteriority and the Face, In: Totality, op. cit. p. 239
67 In Hungarian, the word pairs erny/arny (virtue/gold), rtk/rtalom (value/harm)
are joined in the closest way as a result of the original syllables r-/r.

1 187 2

the existential character and intention of the source of knowledge,68 and also
bring a decisive turn in the structure of the tale; betrayal, as a discourse which
takes place between two present beings, as the instinct to behave in a way that
will allow us to understand a life situation as well as an error, as the dead point
from which the correct course sets off, helps to carry out the advice that has
been given.
In relation to the phenomenon of curiosity, we must consider one other form
of behaviour in the face of the secret and secrecy: the paired phenomenon of
patience69 and impatience. My discovery of self is accompanied by keeping my
word to another, and the fact that I accept/expect the promise of I will keep it
which I made to the Other70, even if I do not know (the hero does not know) that
what I promise so easily will soon become possible without my being aware of
it, and that the promise for which I am accountable will later lead to a radical
change in my life. Something must be created immediately in the situation into
which the tale hero has been forced, some action must be taken immediately,
and to the being which accompanies him he makes a promise without hesitation,
and one made without patient consideration; in other words, he becomes the
servant of an external, forceful and harmful being, of a seductive speech, and
he will only face the deed and its tragic consequences (losing his child, selling
his daughter to the devil) at a later stage. At other times, the impatience in the
face of the discovery of the secret will break the insatiable curiosity of the tale
hero, only exacerbated by the selfishness and urge to conflict present in the
68 The former does not necessarily belong to the category of virtue, the latter, however,
can be judged according to the Aristotelian perspective on action.
69 [] to be patient is to be prepared to wait until the promise of a lifetime is fulfilled.
MACINTYRE: op. cit. p. 234
70 In the tale Brug, the man in the oily sheepskin coat buys many gifts for the poor
peasant, who was disturbed, because he was an upstanding, honest, poor farming
man, [] While they were travelling, the man in the oily sheepskin coat asked him:
Well, listen here, my good man! Do you have a daughter? / Yes, I do. /Well, listen
here! One of these days Im going to come and find you, let me see your house and
if you want, well make an agreement! Well, give me your daughter as my wife! /
Very wellsays the man.Ill give you her with a pure heart. Why shouldnt I give
her to her?! I can see youre a big, rich man. (NAGYV p. 239)

1 188 2

background; she does not care if her curiosity and impatience can lead to harm
or even death for the one who knows the secret (her husband).71

3. The Blind Prediction and Promise

We must now ask the question of who (and what) is that is protected and who
(and what) is harmed by the existence of the secret? In the phenomenon of the
secret protection and the desire to hurt lie hidden in an implicit way, as do the
phenomena of the promise and the gift.
The source of knowledge always takes care of the protection of the hero
against the danger he faces when confronted with the secret and secrecy,
because the veiled, alien, and at times, fear-provoking appearance of secrecy, is
essentially harmful, and sometimes presents a life-threatening danger to anyone
who intends to uncover it or discover its mystery. The language, the discourse,
which is required of the supporter from the knower as an essential behaviour
in the face of the secret/secrecy, itself operates as a tool of enchantment.72
Ricur notes, in relation to the tragic Homeric heroes, that they never cease to
speak of their deeds, and, quoting Austin, claims that speech is nothing other
71 See the tale about the shepherd who understood the language of animals in which
the hero is prohibited from revealing the secret (AaTh 670).
72 Well, look here, my son, Im going to draw in the dust, Im going to draw a lot of
carriages, many horses, cattle, oxen, a beautiful palace, Im going to draw for you
musicians, chambermaids, cooks, all kinds of people. The child said:Well, whats
the point of drawing, my old man?Well, youll see, just see what Im going to do,
when its needed, you just draw and write in the dust, whatever you wish to, or
whatever you want to achieve. The child paid close attention to what the old man
was doing, and then the old man said to him:Well, you see, son, what Ive done?
Yeshe said , my old man!Well, listen here, you try too, you can do this kind of
thing, you can draw like this, just like I do! And the old man drew and the young man
drew in front of the old man, and where he made a mistake the old man corrected
him and told him that when he had finished the drawing, he should blow on it three
times, and if anybody was standing nearby, he should be careful that they werent
aware of what was happening and why he was blowing, but should take a breath and
tell them that he had sighed. A Tkvros (Squash City) (NAGYV p. 329330)

1 189 2

than doing things with words73. However, during the struggle with secrecy
(with the harmful force that lies behind it) the hero can at any time infringe the
rules governing the linguistic system and the grammar defined by the discourse,
and be condemned to failure: falling into the trap of language/the siren. The
downfall of the hero, to be precise, his falling victim to his own desires and
emotions, arises in two situations, according to MacIntyres analysis: (1) if he
is unable to order his emotions and desires, and (2)and from our point of
view this is the most importantif he does not have the ability which will help
him to keep under control those desires which do not direct him, do not help
him achieve good in that given situation.74 However, as long as he keeps to the
rules laid down, and respects the laws of language, he will render harmless the
ruining/damaging influence of the secret as well as the exceptional strength of
the words of enchantment of the being who is involved in keeping the secret:
the tempting language, the siren, will lose its power, and will become inaudible.
The phenomenon of the secret is hidden to the reason of the mortal and
sinning individual, with secret wisdom (Paul 1. Cor. 2:7), although we can find
an essential relationship with the prediction (foreseeing, prejudging, evaluation,
projection) and promise which in some way affects the heros destiny. However,
Levinas draws our attention to the paradox:
Such is the duplicity of oracles: extravagances are lodged in words that
guarantee wisdom.75
The prediction, the foretelling, as a secret and abbreviated speech, which,
because it cannot be seen through, nor analysed, appears as a peculiarity to
the audience, and demands of the tale hero the operation of inclusive reasoning
when dealing mentally with the process of the strangeness, the otherness, the
otherness of the Other, the prophetic warning, the sign and the manifestation.
In addition it requires humility before the experience and wisdom of the
community, and to respond appropriately to the horizon of expectations of the
community and to the virtues which keep them together. In thisjust as in

73 RICUR: The Course, op. cit. p. 94

74 MACINTYRE: op. cit. p. 149
75 LVINAS: Phenomenon and Enigma, op. cit. p. 66

1 190 2

prohibition itselfprediction/foretelling with its dimming effect intentionally

wishes to exclude from comprehension everybody else who does not act for the
good of the hero (the community), but on the contrary, wishes to harm him and
works for his defeat, since this kind of hurt, which leads to the infringement of
the law, results, according to MacIntyre, in the loosening of the bonds which
bind the community.76 One way of exclusion is being able to keep silent in the
presence of the uninitiated. (One African tale researcher writes: during our life
we learn to speak correctly/well, but first of all to listen, too, since as a Yoruba
saying has it: the mouth does not say everything the eye sees.77) The other method
of exclusion, as Frank Kermode writes in his volume about the origin of secrecy78,
is the deliberate secrecy of certain announcements, declarations, prophecies
and commands in the kerygmatic language of Jesus, which are made precisely
in order that only and exclusively the initiated will be able to uncover their
meaning. Ricur refers to this in his interpretation of Kermode:
In The Genesis of Secrecy, Frank Kermode introduces the idea that certain
narratives may aim not at illumination but at obscurity and dissimulation.79
In tales, previously unforeseen secret events and discussions (predications
which warn of prohibitions, advice which reinforces predictions) relating
to unexpected secrets occurring in the structure of the tale narrative occur
frequently, since traditional/sacred thought and the imaginary world of the tale
are deeply influenced by the ancient/archaic world of belief, and also by the
76 MACINTYRE: op. cit. p. 151
77 On apprend bien parler, mais avant tout on apprend aussi se taire. Cest dans
ce contexte quun proverbe yoruba dit : La bouche ne dit pas tout ce que les yeux
voient . (One learns to speak, but above all one also learns to be silent. It is in
this context that a Yoruba proverb says The mouth does not say all that the eyes
see.) LADITAN, Affin O.: De loralit la littrature: mtamorphoses de la
parole chez les Yorubas, Semen [En ligne], 18|2004, published on the internet
2nd February 2007
78 KERMODE, Frank: The Genesis of Secrecy (on the interpretation of narrative),
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England, 1979. pp.
2425
79 RICUR: Time and Narrative, Vol. 1 op. cit. p. 75

1 191 2

spirituality and morality of the Christian religion. Membership of the community

spirit and its ethical norms requires laws which are operative and/or accepted
at that given time: virtues and sins, the existence of good and evil, and last but
not least, that these are recognised by everyone.80 Those who obey the laws laid
down by the community, who behave in accordance with the valid concepts of
virtue (and those who, after transgressing them, return to the norms) deserve to
become the possessors of the promise/gift which is felt to lie in the prediction;
to become a king, the highest-ranking lord in the world of the tale.
Let us consider an example of the uncertainty which arises when keeping
the law (the word that has been given). In Jakabs tale entitled Brug, the wife
frequently makes a mistake and despite her husbands prohibition takes rings
(finger rings as well as seal rings as the symbolic objects of commitment) from
the unknown peddler, and then, unable to keep her husband awake (to wake
themselves together from their common fate) falls back into the clutches of the
evil spirit. We should remember Aristotles point, which is still valid today.
Now character determines mens qualities, but it is by their actions that they
are happy or the reverse.81
In the structure of the tale we can see that the wife is sometimes aware of the
moral being that is founded on the persevering attempt to remain innocent82,
and sometimes allows herself to be tempted (since in attracting to herself the
evil spirit, she forces her husband to undertake further effort and sacrifices);
sometimes, however, she makes secret contact with the liberator; she writes a
letter to the Jewish tailor, the contents of which are unknownare masked
both to the hero and to the reader. Through the evil spirits taking possession
80 MacIntyre has this to say: For the story of my life is always embedded in the story
of those communities from which I derive my identity. MACINTYRE: op. cit. p. 221
81 The Poetics of ARISTOTLE. (Translated by S. H. Butcher) London, MacMillan and
Co., Limited, New York: The MacMillan Company, 1902. p. 27 https://www.stmarysca.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/files/Poetics.pdf (18.01. 2015)
82 Listen here, my heart! This is just an engagement, and I only came here to see the
family hearth. When we get married, youll have a right to touch me, and lie together
with me in the bed. But until that time I wont allow you to come close to me.
(NAGYV p. 241)

1 192 2

of her and her being judged for the good, the wife attempts to achieve
compensation for the sinning being, and in addition to this, to continually
change the existence and capabilities of the husband; the intention to speak, as
understood by Kermode, is the vague intuition of a clouding over and masking.
When he had freed his wife from evil, the king had nothing left to do, nowhere
left to go. And so this was how he managed to save her. (op. cit. p. 256)
The being favoured with a promise or a gift must always come face to face with
one (or more) beings who give rise to doubts or suspicions of possessing secret
abilities, and so he attempts to begin to confront and question the certainty of
the promise/declaration of the divine gift, and the supposed unpossessability
of the message which cannot be understood by reason. In other words he is
outraged by it, in Kierkegaards interpretation of the concept.
For what is offense? Offense is unhappy admiration. It is therefore akin to
envy, but it is an envy which is turned against oneself, or, more exactly, envy
which is worst of all against oneself. (my italics PB) 83
Another way of looking at unhappy wonder is to see it as the envious gaze
towards someone who has exceptional abilities or gifts, or is in some way
a given being; envy is a feeling which goes beyond love, even in the case of
siblings, and is a conscious penning in of the object, and can reach a level where
it is unbearably painful, and end in an instinct to kill: a typical case of this is
found in the Little Johnny Bean type story.84 The two brothers become envious of
83 KIERKEGAARD: op. cit. p. 96
84 NAGYV: op. cit. pp. 103152, 153183. We can also emphasise Jakabs tale
entitled A sr gyermek (The Crying Child) [AaTh 650A (409B*) + 328*] (NAGY
V pp. 590610), in which Jnas does not even think that his siblings might be
evil. They [the two sisters] decided that they would kill the smaller sister, because
Jnas could take either of them, just not the little one. And so the sisters became very
jealous, because she was so happy, and because of the happiness the little sister had
found, what a fine hero shed got, whod exterminated all the dragons in the world.
[] And when the two girls were ready to do it, to cut of the girls head, Jnas arrived
[] And, well, Jnas didnt suspect anything bad, because Jnas was thinking that
they were all sisters and they wouldnt want to cause each other any harm. (op. cit.
p. 608)

1 193 2

the late-born brother (born in miraculous circumstances after a disappearance),

who first shows them signs that prove he is their brother (a pancake prepared
with mothers milk), and then frees both them and their sister with his terrifying
strength. In order to cover up their failure and shame they talk together and
their liberator is left to his own devices.85 Starobinski notes, in relation to this
giving of signs and self-manifestation:
[] the I only exists in its completeness if it shows itself. And if it ceaselessly
calls the world as a witness, it does so because only then does it become fully
aware of its own being, if it appears before witnesses and shows itself.86
Little Johnny Bean, as the hero, does not wish to be hidden, nor withdrawn
into himself, nor to exist in differentiation (and this is not his mission, not his
challenge), but in openness, in a relationship with the Other (his brothers) based
on responsive ethics; that is why he calls them as witnesses to all the deeds
that effect their common fate.87 At the beginning of the tale it is noticeable
that the two brothers are best characterised as vainglorious men who make
thoughtless promises without being aware of their own abilities. Both of
them believe that they are ready to successfully defeat the dragon, are able to
transform themselves and achieve redemption. Little Johnny Bean, on the other
hand, really is prepared for and committed to the task (which he has received as
85 Well, dont let me mix my words, when the two brothers went back to the sister,
they so frightened the sister and said to her that if she said anything to their mother
back home about the fact that it wasnt them that had killed the dragon, then they
would cut her head off. And the sister, in any case, kept with her brothers and swore
to the brothers that she would never betray them. (NAGYV p. 117)
86 STAROBINSKI: op. cit. p. 72
87 And so Jank said to his two brothers: Well, my dear brothers, Ive already kept
you alive once in your life, so just swear to me that what I ask youll do for me.Of
coursethe two young men soon swore, because they didnt want Jank, never mind
if hed pulled them up, they wouldnt have him as their brother. So Jank took the
two other little pancakes and gave them to the brothers, without asking them to eat
them. When theyd eaten the pancakes, Jank asked them: Well, what do you feel,
havent you realised something?Well, those pancakes tasted like they were made
with my mothers milk.Well, so were brothers, and brothers from our mother.
(NAGYV p. 116)

1 194 2

a gift) which is why there is no other way out than for the weak-willed brothers
to break the commandment Thou shalt not kill, out of envy and hatred, and to
become killers. It is, of course, worth further examination to discover whether
Little Johnny Bean has foreseen his fate or has heard (from a prophecy made by
someone else), that in fact when he rescues his brothers from the underworld
(the girl from the clutches of the dragon, the boys directly from death), the
brothers will seek to kill him. We can assume that for the tale teller Jakab, the
earlier story (as a story of pre-existence) operated as a source and early version:
he knew the Biblical story of Joseph.
The secret, especially in the John the Strong and Little Johnny Bean type stories
is the donated being: the gift of being exceptionally strong, serving both the
heros becoming a useful adult, and the successful unification of the family;
i.e. the discovery of the secret protects the hero himself, and helps to realise the
promise indicated in the prediction. The question of from whom and from where
the hero received the exceptional strength is not initially of any concern to
the hero, but rather to those around him; when the time comes for him to solve
the practical task itself, and to do the deed, then he (and of course the audience)
must meditate on it:
[] who or what is it that makes the gift? Whose gift are we? Who must I
thank for being able myself to understand the concept of being gifted, of
becoming, from a closed subject, a gift, or someone given, or someone called
or someone who is himself handed on? 88

4. Secrecy as Weaving
One of the most eye-catching examples of the secrecy which appears in tale
narratives can be found in the tale entitled Brug, which, according to collectors,
is a contamination of Bluebeard and the Cursed Girl type.89 [Brug AaTh, Bn 311
(406A*)~307]
88 CSEKE kos: j fenomenolgia Franciaorszgban, (New Phenomenology in France)
Magyar Filozfiai Szemle, 2011/2. pp. 174177 (Trans. G.S.) JeanLuc Marion
devoted a whole volume to the question: tant donn.
89 NAGYV: op. cit. pp. 238257

1 195 2

What Ricur refers to as the act of configuration in relation to tale telling, I

would refer to as the weaving of hidden threads in relation to Jakab; the working
process in which the language of the actions (words and deeds) is uncovered by
the events, like the process which the peasant women complete on their weaving
stools.90 One of the threads of the tale (namely the weft lines, the thread of
the secret), appears as a stream bubbling in and out of the crossed threads of
the tensed memory network, following the rhythm dictated by the telling. The
tale-weaving of Jakab presses forward as the discovery of a secret possessed by
its owner continually breaks the chain of events, an action which causes a new
secret complexity: according to Ricur, it implies a new action, calls from the
background a new/other possessor of a secret and its current discovery. Jakab
also confuses his more-or-less experienced audiencein terms of taleswith
the idea that there is no one/emphasised possessor of a secret in the tale, but
in actual fact six, in this way emphasizing that the knowledge itself, the source
of knowledge, is not embodied by one individual alone, but that everyone is
only partially in possession of the secret knowledge, and that they necessarily
supplement/add detail to each other, and are referred to each other during the
process of understanding and transferring the secret. This division of roles, the
fact that the original function of the owner of the secret is scattered, in fact
multiplied sixfold, itself acts to reinforce the secrecy and confusion, andto stay
with the metaphorcreates a characteristically brightly coloured cloth.
While examining the concrete hermeneutics of the tale narrative and the
comprehension of secrets, the question emerges: why do the individual actors/
heroes, who all to some degree possess the secret, waste their time with their
capacity for knowledge? The would-be husband who appears as a dove (pp.
241246); the old women who directs the hero on his way (pp. 24748); the
90 The weft threads are continuously passed horizontally across the weaving frame
and at an appropriate distance are threaded up and tightened. In this way a line is
created in which the threads can be threaded from above and below into the surface.
This criss-crossing continues so that the weaving from under the first line comes
a bove, and the weaving from above the first line goes under, and so eventually the
cloth is created. (trans. from http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sz%C3%B6v%C3%A9s)
(downloaded: 02. 10. 2013.)

1 196 2

dragon who recognises the enemy/husband from his own signet ring (p. 250);
the young giant chatterbox (p. 253); the wife who warns her husband to be sober
(p. 254); the Jewish tailor who gives the hero a final piece of advice (p. 256),
all, at the appropriate moment, give to the other a way of approaching the secret
(an interpretative operation). In our tale narratives the secret is not a scattered
phenomenon; on the contrary, it seems to be extremely compact. It is at one
and the same time a liberation from temptation and the rational understanding
of loyalty, which, however, hides complicated and intricate connections due to
the differing characters it occupies. In relation to the repeated transference of
the secret and the way in which the secret is spoken about, a central question
emerges: who is opening up to whom? In the end, who can we really believe
in? Who can justifiably enjoy our trust? Who weaves the discourse, so that the
secret remains a secret, but becomes comprehensible? We should not forget that
it is not language that hides the secret, but the intention with which we want to
veil something over or cover it up, as MerleauPonty notes:
Far from harboring the secret of the being of the world, language is itself a
world, itself a being.91
The chief of the devils first announces the gifted beings existence in the
appearance of the liberating husband (the beautiful white dove) sent for the
girl kidnapped by Brug and in the secret instructions given; the girl, forced
into marriage, accepts the advice she is given without hesitation, but later, when
confronted with new temptations (promises) she is, perhaps due to her curiosity,
unable to resist temptation. The initial announcement from the mouth of the
hero is at the same time a direct declaration of desire for the Other; however, the
secret discussion of the future marriage must be more attractive than the love
that the kidnapper (the enemy) has promised as care. Consequently, the secret
conversation which takes linguistic form is itself a temptation, and we might
say, somewhat mistakenly, a promise over, or to, something, in the sense of a bid
made at an auction. It is an act of promising more than the other (the enemy)
promises, partly because of the subjects absence of virtue, or the uncovering of
his linguistic handicap, but also as a trick carried out in the presence of the other,
91 MERLEAUPONTY: op. cit. p. 96

1 197 2

because the promiser has calculated that when he is finally called to account
he can dismiss the whole affair with a shrug of the shoulders or with a brief
word of apology and an excuse me, since the Other is stupid and forgetful.92
In promising more, the real interests of the present and the irresponsibility of
the future remain secrets; just as it also remains a secret whether the promiser
really does possess the capabilities which he relies on to boldly promise more,
and on the basis of which he dares to make undertakings in the promise-making
discourse; in other words, every word is trickery and intrigue.
In the tales we are considering there is nothing more indicative of the
greediness of desire than that the husband-to-be forces the girl to break the
commandment Thou shalt not kill!; she has to kill in order to achieve happiness,
she must poison the guards at the devils castle in Hell, and then mustwithout
hesitationfollow her husband-to-bes instructions (as he expresses them),
which appear in further secret promises (Then we will meet, and well talk about
it again). But will this preliminary discourse, as a continual awakening of desire
and making of promises, be reassuring enough for the girl with regard to her
future: her destiny which stretches out into eternity? Does it not occur to her
that once again she has fallen into the clutches of a siren, and that language has
not helped her to find herself, but to close her up in her husbands language: the
door of the cage has been closed for ever, and she has become a hostage. It is
characteristic of Jakabs masterful weaving technique that the calming happiness
of marriage (which maintains the order to keep away from other temptations
and be closed away from other men, in separation) appears before us precisely in
the time-bound vector of love and dedication as something temporary:

92 In relation to cunning, Kant notes: Craftiness, cunning, slyness (versutia, astutia)

is skill in cheating others. The question now is: whether the cheater most be more
clever than the one who is easily cheated, and whether it is the latter who is the stupid
one? KANT, Immanuel: Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view, (Translated
by Robert B. Louden) Cambridge University Press, New York, 2006. pp. 99100.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/120948338/Immanuel-Kant-Anthropology-from-apragmatic-point-of-view (17.01.2015)

1 198 2

But it was in vain, because they didnt bring each other much happiness,
because hardly a week or two had passed when a peddler selling rings came
wandering that way with beautiful jewellery. (NAGYV p. 246)
The challenge to the normal order of marriage and the virtue of the partner, to
self-control93, the temptation with words or jewellery, is nothing other than the
continuous call to the challenged individual to examine themselves and to bear
witness with a personal confession. Exactly what kind of witness statement the
partner makes about their life together depends on what is revealed by the use
of language, since the declarations of faithfulness or the breaking of promises,
the perseverance or indifference in the face of the continual seductive promises
is the open declaration of whether or not there is agreement between the couple.
The tempters always try to tempt the girl with a perversion of the promise, in
fact they make a promise which only represents the frivolous commitment
to an unkeepable promise 94, and they, on the contrary, are continually trying
to threaten the freedom and the existence of the one they are trying to bind
to them; instead of a guest and a lady she becomes a hostage. She only really
becomes convinced of the given face of her husband, of the trustworthiness
of the predictions and promises he has made (in the bidding process) and the
prohibitions and advicein other words of the seriousness of his commitment
when she also realizes he is capable of making several sacrifices for her, without
sparing himself. At this point the girl/wife opens up and reveals the capability
she has to fight for their common destiny and to believe in the impossiblethe
love that will endure forever. Here we can return to our earlier question, namely
why do the actors/heroes who possess the secret to some degree, waste time
on their secrecy? Why is the love that endures for eternity not satisfied with the
apostolic command to take each other in love, not satisfied with the oath that
declares I promise, since temptationaccording to our talescan at any time
find a little crack in the wall constituted by the knowledge of security, of custom,
of boredom and is able to make a pass at the mile high task of loyalty. The
love which intends to last forever demands more than this from both parties: the
93 [] the Stoic virtue of self-command which enables us to control our passions when
they distract us from what virtue requires. MACINTYRE: op. cit. p. 235
94 DERRIDA: Monolingualism , op. cit. p. 93

1 199 2

knowledge of a belief in the unappealable commitment to each other, and in the

end, a knowledge of a belief in the miracle of the virtue of redemption.
We live out our lives, both individually and in our relationships with each
other, in the light of certain conceptions of a possible shared future [...].95
Beside the two main heroes, the noticeable owners of the secret are the old
woman and the Jewish tailor, both of whom serve to systematically ward off the
harmful/malicious forces, to reinforce the strength to say no, and to provide the
unshakeable perseverance to accept responsibility and undertake commitment.
Persevering in this case is synonymous with patiently waiting until the promised
time of happiness arrives, and not allowing external forces and events to lead
things in the wrong direction. Their secret knowledge overrules freewill and
the whole of their being, restricts the power of the dragon and the giants, and
consequently we can describe it as exemplary, the comprehension of which is
demonstrated by the behaviour of the two heroes as they follow the example
they have been set. The pupils show their piety; in other words they become
god-fearing, and their marriage isas Vico says[...] a chaste carnal union
consummated under the fear of some divinity.96

5. The Disappearance of Secrecy

The attempt to ensure the discovery of the secret and its disappearance and
the bringing to account of the secret is a multi-stage process: (1) informing
myself of an awareness, feeling, or experience that I know about (or think I
know about), when no-one except for me is part of that something which I
possess and which is kept in some way for myself (as a conscious and thoughtthrough act); and when I have finally thought through it, it becomes not merely
a fact but a concrete known experience. An inner strength, desire or passion
motivates me to make the experience of knowledge understood and known, by
transferring it, sharing it and making the Other able to think it over, by which I
95 MACINTYRE: op. cit. p. 215
96 VICO, Giambattista: Poetic Wisdom In: The New Science, (Translated by Thomas
Goddard Bergin and Max Harold Fisch), Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York,
1948. p. 153

1 200 2

presume that I and the community will be able to exist in some kind of eternal
protection and solidarity, and so this is why I share with them what I jealously
guard as my secret. In this case the sharing of the secret is not just a promise for
the future, but a call to action in the present as well: Work together with me,
if you love me!; I guarantee I will co-operate with you if you accept and follow
my instructions.
Well, listen to me, my heart! Wash in the spring, then quickly drink water,
wash and then turn to your right, away from the spring. Youll see a tree, an
old oak tree. At the root of the old oak tree youll see a green walnut; open
that walnut in two halves, and youll find a golden towel inside, in the kernel
of the nut. Put the nut kernel back in its original place, right back where you
found it. After that, well meet soon and talk some more. (NAGYV p.
245)
In the initial phase these inner strengths, desires and passions which enable
me to express my secret call on me to make an oath (of which we can note
that my oath will remain mine, thus solitary97), and with the strength of the
oath and the consequent keeping to the oath I swear to myself that my secret
(my experience of knowledge, my experience) will only be shared with a few
others, precisely because I can thus protect myself and the Other (the restricted
community of those who share the secret, as Kermode notes) from those
who attempt to break into the jealously guarded secret by force, and in their
irruption, use all the force which breaks the intimacy of the common experience
of knowledge (for example, the acknowledgement of the secret of love, or the
declaration of being pledged to the other; the acquisition in the tale of the
means to free oneself from the curse).
After making the oath I try to convince myself that the Other to whom I wish
to tell my secret, and in this way to create the mutual intimacy, is credible and
can be held to account; in other words I express a kind of expectation to him/her
to ensure that I can trust the being who accepts my trust. I expect of the Other
(who becomes the I beside me whom I must accept by way of a gift or through
the rulings of fate during the course of the tale), that he/she will, without any
97 MARION: op. cit. p. 112

1 201 2

doubt, guarantee that I can speak to him/her calmly, and without any suspicion
or hesitation. In this sense my trust rests on the trust that he/she has placed in
me,98 and certifies the oath, or rather reinforces the original vow that he/she
will keep my secret and not exploit it:
[] doubtless anothers oath could validate my own; certainly these oaths
will cross, will add to one another and, at best, will coincide99 [].
In the spirit of Marion my expectations are at once a double movement. They
are an approach and a risk; on the one hand a breaking into the fortifications
with which I have surrounded myself, the end of my distancing from others,
in the sense of Lvinas, and on the other hand a turn to the Other,100 in that I
attempt to convince him/her of the declaration I have made that I will undertake
responsibility, and in exchange, however, I expect that he/she willas Lvinas
sayslook me straight in the eye and forever banish from our relationship any
kind of squinting, and downward or sideways glances. Initially my expectations
stand on quite uncertain ground, because I cannot begin to be sure that in
response to my approach, my opening, my challenge (whether we are referring
to love, or some other kind of relationship, such as friendship, or a sibling bond
discovered late) the Other will not simply (a), reject it out of hand, because it
is something she does not want, (b) abuse my uncovering of myself, (c) will not
want to appropriate that which I have given (to make it her own in a selfish way,
and speak of it and announce it to others as her own), with the excuse/condition
that it cannot be shared with others without express permission.101 At the same
time, the oath to maintain secrecy might be broken, and she might behave as if it
were her own (as her own original secret), and as if she can expect the same from
the third person as I expect from her (what I would have expected), and mock
me and give away the secret itself, and also assign to her own field of authority
rights which do not belong to her (all references to her in the two sentences
98 Ibid., p. 153
99 Ibid., p. 112
100 He encompasses it, he is a look come from nowhere and which therefore envelops
me, me and my power for ontogenesis, from all sides. MERLEAUPONTY: op. cit.
p. 61
101 See the Snake Bridegroom type tales

1 202 2

above could equally well apply to him [translators note]). It is in this transfer
that the risky gesture, and its meaning, lies: this is what makes someone hold
back, suspect and wait endlessly for reinforcement.
It is from this initial suspicion, the the taking of a risk102 which precedes the
absolute nature of trust, the defencelessness which accompanies my approach,
and my feeling of exposure, that the mutual expectation is born, as well as, in
truth, the decided and strict expectations of the Other:
In effect, only her response, Here I am! validates my own Here I am!; for
my advance to utter it first and without assurance would remain a vague,
undecided impulse mired in my own sphere, if the other did not ratify it as
her signification, too, and thus as our common signification.103
In the tale narrative, following the uncovering of the secret (that in fact I am
destined for you, come here!), the announcement of the way in which liberation
from the curse is to be achieved, there arrives the mutual expectations. One
of the tale heroes (generally the one under a curse), who is held in captivity in
another world (the empire of death) by the forces of evil/darkness, aware of the
harmful forces around him, in the experience of being a hostage (inexperience),
announces to the partner who has been assigned to him the secret, the
knowledge of which can prove decisive: will he take advantage of the possibility
of love which is offered to him, and if so, armed with the knowledge of the
secret, will he be sufficiently decisive to liberate the Other? This type of blind
demand of which Marion speaks is an urgent call from the uncoverer of the
secret, indeed, a direct order, against which there is no appeal, as if a greater
power than I had announced it:
[] that the other should love me, that she must do it all the more because
I love her already and, above all, because love requires reciprocity; [...].104
This command is, to the one who receives it, at one and the same time a gift
and a requirement to show responsibility, which hides within itself the command
to commitment from the being given as a gift, to the loyalty to the given word/
102 MARION: op. cit. pp. 111
103 Ibid., pp. 110111
104 Ibid., p. 173

1 203 2

oath, to perseverance, and to what Lvinas calls the good, i.e. when the other
strives more than I do. In all the cursed princess type tales (in all narratives
where the princess is freed by the strong hero) the commitment to the difficult
task and the responsibility to the Other shows the true existential character of
the hero, as precisely defined by Marion.
[] the true lover, who does what he or she says and says only what he or she
does (Here I am!), is characterized by his or her unconditional advance,
because he or she loves without asking for anything []. 105
In numberless cases we can witness how the poverty stricken tale hero (a)
by reason of his escape from home, (b) his lack of any other alternative, (c) the
absence of anyone else in the country, or in any other kingdom, who can take
on the task, rushes thoughtlessly into the difficult task, accepting (or perhaps
deserving) an unknown guide or assistance, and when he sees the beauty of
the kidnapped princess, the witness of the Im here is heard in his heart, i.e.
he openly declares I have come for you, I will not abandon you. The concept of
virtue in this case undergoes a change of meaning, and perfectly demonstrates
how the hero handles his capacity for judgement in a real-life situation.106 At the
same time, both the prohibition/advice of the unknown serving girl, and the
beauty/enchantment of the observed being are secret, and hover behind the veil
as a function of the metaphorical discourse and the uncovering of symbols, and
of the capacity to guess just the right word, so that a moment later the veil can
be withdrawn to reveal.
Often (see Jakabs The Princess of Black tale) the secret includes the fact that
the half that is to be liberated from the curse is/was destined for the hero, i.e.
there is only one kind of trial that must be passed, namely, whether he can
distinguish between erotic and eternal love.
My desire speaks me to myself by showing me what arouses me. This moment,
in which desire fixes me in myself by settling my gaze upon that particular
other, is recognized without fault107
105 Ibid., p. 174
106 MACINTYRE: op. cit. p. 154
107 MARION: op. cit. p. 108

1 204 2

Jnas, Jakabs hero type, although he is warned by the bearded little man not
to look at the girl lying in the coffin, because his blood will not be able to bear
it, breaks the command, and as a result is unable to resist the temptation of the
perverse gift108 of the eroticised flesh, and when the girl has been liberated he
tries to satisfy his sexual desires with the secret essence of nature in the form of
the Circian-aspected princess.
Look here, Jnas my heart, Im yours, and you are mine! You guarded me,
and now I have nothing to fear from you, because every kind of evil spirit has
left me, and if you want . Look here, my little heart, you protected me for
three full nights, and as I said, there is nothing for me to fear any more, Im
now a pure spirit, I did everything just as you wanted it to happen, just as
you desired; but Ill give you another good piece of advice. In any case, I was
not destined for you, to be your wife, but if you want me to be, then I can.
Because you can start the bread, but you cant finish it. (NAGYV p. 212)
The desire for the eroticised flesh uncovers the secret of being for Jans, in
the sense that he is not really capable, despite his efforts (standing guard for
three nights), to observe the original prohibition, which refers not just to the girl
(the rejection of the signs and symbols sent by the eroticised flesh), but also to
any final turning away from the other, and as a consequence of the breaking of
this prohibition he is incapable of the self-restraint which would enable him

108 Ibid., p. 153 In the tale entitled The Poor Fisherman and the Two Sons, when the
boy guards the princess for the third night and frees her from the curse, he invites
her to go for a walk: You he sayslets go for a walk, lets not sit around her so
much! /And then he saw that her face brightened and he saw she was a beautiful
woman, but she was still not clean, she was still always so changeable, sometimes
pure white, sometimes black, sometimes red, and whatever. When he took her arm
and they began to walk together, the girl pulled back, so that they wouldnt reach
the little pool. But the boy asked her and asked her, and finally her hands were full
and the water splashed up into her face. And then the girl lapped it up. (PENAVIN:
op. cit. p. 119)According to Vico, water was the first of two factors in marriage
and it was only permitted to take communion and give sacrifice if there had been
a sacred washing. VICO: op. cit. pp. 163165

1 205 2

to rise above his own cursed pigherd-ness, and give him back his freedom and
with it the later love for the Other, and the capacity for mutual responsibility.
Well, very well, Jnas accepted the girls advice, but he got really hot (sic!)
with love, because hed really fallen for the girl. Well, every kind of thing
happened after that, everything that could happen in a night, right through
till morning. (NAGYV p. 213)
And so after that, enjoyment was experienced by the two tale heroes in the
form of a relationship between lovers,109 and in the space left behind after this
momentary, and never completely fulfilled, promise of enjoyment, Jnas realises
that for him there is no escape from unhappiness (nor from the original pigherd
form of existence which he had been given). The secret of love remains unresolved
for him, indeed, it is at an unreachable distance, hanging in front of him in the
air as an idea which continually disturbs him by calling to him, wordlessly, but
more painfully for his heart. Jans must set out on his travels again, and carry
on until he realises that the eroticised face, the face resplendent in beauty, is
not the same as the face which reflects back piety, in which the promise that
Iam able and ready to love you if you let me love you is reflected back to him.
(Translated by George Seel)

109 Thus I enjoy her. Put another way, I do not enjoy my pleasure, but hers. MARION:
op. cit. p. 128

1 206 2

Gabriella gnes Nagy

THE PHENOMENOLOGY OF THE SECRET
IN ISTVN JAKABS TALE:
JNAS IN THE NUNNERY
(The Secret of Guilt, Existence, Love and the Lover)

1 207 2

Alongside and inseparable from this

unconcealing there also stands the
shrouding and concealing that belongs to
our human finitude1
Questioning our own existence has modes,
too, that are more pathological than those
declining existential modes in which our
own existence does not become a problem
of its own.2
Fulfilled experience is not yet knowledge,
but the fulfillment of openness towards
new experiences.3
ne of the longest tales by Istvn Jakab is clearly divided
into two parts, both in a typological sense and on the level
of the story narrated. The text, which may be considered as a
generational tale, first narrates the life of the father; the events
are then closed by the narration of his sons destiny, acts and
gestures of retrieval. Sins committed by the fathers family and the hero himself,
keeping these sins in secret and its consequences move the plot forward in the
1 GADAMER, Hans-Georg: The Relevance of the Beautiful In: GADAMER: The
Relevance of the Beautiful and Other Essays. (trans. Nicholas WALKER), Cambrideg
University Press, 1987. p. 34
2 HELTING, Holger: Bevezets a pszichoterpis daseinanalzis filozfiai dimenziiba
[Introduction to the Philosophical Dimensions of Psychotherapeutic Daseinanalysis] (trans. BLANDL Borbla s FAZEKAS Tams), LHarmattan, Budapest,
2007. p. 142. We may quote Derrida as well: this persistent questioning of death or
afterlife or the problem of memory is pathological, the path to healing leads through
the act of forgetting or ignoring these questions, or their being forcefully pushed to
the background. DERRIDA, Jacques: Ki az anya? In: DERRIDA: Ki az anya? [Who
is the Mother?] (trans. BOROS, JnosCSORDS, GborORBN, Joln), Jelenkor
Kiad, Pcs, 2005. p. 37
3 GADAMER, cited by: HELTING, op.cit. p. 69

1 208 2

first part, while in the second the story centers around the relationship of Jnass
son to the secrets entrusted to him. The secret in tales often refers to hidden or
withheld knowledge whose resolving or unveiling moves the plot forward and
bestows a better fate on the hero. In Istvn Jakabs tale the secret appears in this
classic sense as well, but only in the second partthe secret revealed or betrayed
and the realization resulting from it, let us say, provides strength for the boy.
However, the text in its first part narrates the secret of existence: it becomes
understandable by applying a phenomenological interpretation.
On the level of the plot, in the first part all secrets are revealed for the reader;
however, the father commits sin after sin and in the episodes that follow this
is accumulated as something impossible to tell, a secret. In the second part the
story of Jnass son is presented in relation to two secrets: on the one hand
regarding the father (whose identity is left unveiled for the son) and the secret
which the diamond chicken4 entrusted to Jnas. The tale entitled Jnas in the
Nunnery tells the generational storythrough three generationsof a young
boy in such a way that on the temporal plane it reveals the family history but,
according to the tale, without letting it be known to the boy (3rd generation).
Therefore, typologically the tale consists of two clearly separable parts: the first
part is shorter and is the combination and contamination of three different tale
types (certain motifs of the tale type AaTh 931 Oedipus, AaTh 1726A Failed
Lovers, and AaTh 757 The Murderer Scamp), while the second part is the version
of one single tale (The Golden-haired Gardener, AaTh 314). The heroes of the
two parts, father and son, are completely different from each other; while one is
basically a negative, the other is a positive figure as presented by the tale: the hero
and the anti-hero are blood relatives. The two parts, however, are also linked to
each other not only by the moral lesson of the generational existential possibility,
the peculiar and secret nature of the heros birth, but by the relationship to the
secret and to guilt, even if this relationship is created by oppositions, contrasts
and contra-punctuation, both ethically and rhetorically.
4 The text of the tale itself is inconsistent, sometimes referring to a diamond chicken,
or to a small/young rooster. The expression kendermagos tykocska is untranslatable
to English; it refers to a kind of color, kendermagos: light or even white spots on black
or dark feathers. Literally it means hemp-seed feathered chicken.

1 209 2

Originally, the secret is something inexplicable, inconceivable, enigmatic,

something that points beyond human knowledge.5 These types of secret belong
to the realm of the mystic and of mystery and constitute the material for
secret teachings. Pointing beyond the hermeneutic interpretation provided by
Schleiermacher6, Frank Kermode interprets the concept of the secret from the
perspective of Biblical exegesis and reads the Biblical texts proceeding from
the practice of the Midrash. It is quite widely agreed that the evangelists used
methods continuous with those by which, before the establishment of the
canon, ancient texts were revised and adapted to eliminate or make acceptable
what had come to be unintelligible or to give offense. This practice is known as
Midrash, among other things it entailed narrative alterations or interpolations,
sometimes very free.7 Midrash as a practice flourished in the 412th century
to fix and edit the originally oral texts of Jewish explications of texts about
their laws. Therefore the Midrash Rabbah is a collection of individual texts that
had been fixed by various authors in various periods. The stem of the word
Midrash in Hebrew means to search, to explore and finally it began to mean
5 BENK Lornd (ed.) A magyar nyelv trtneti-etimolgiai sztra IIII. [HistoricalEtymological Dictionary of Hungarian] Budapest, Akadmiai Kiad, 19671976.
p. 153. According to Istvn Ttfalusis Hungarian Etymological Dictionary, the
secret is a thing unveiled and kept in silence for others, or an unexplainable,
enigmatic thing: its derivations are secret (titkos), cryptic (titkost), enigmatic
(titokzatos), a person responsible for the secret affairs of others (titoknok), secretary
(titkr), keeping something in secret (titkol, titkolzik). Probably the base word,
the stem of this group of words, is of Finno-ugric heritage: the vogul tujt- (to
hide, to conceal), and the deverbal derivational suffix of k is added as in other
Hungarian words. The words titoknok, titkr, titokzatos are words created during
the age of language reform. See also: tilt (to prohibit). http://www.szokincshalo.hu/
szotar/?qbetu=t&qsearch=&qdetail=11399 , (Downloaded Sept, 25. 2013.)
6 Nor was Samuel Beckett content with the solutions offered by the veil maker, and
so he searched for what is behind languagehe writes about this in his German
letter of 1937 which may be regarded the only evidence of his only standpoint on
the philosophy of language.
7 KERMODE, Frank: The Genesis of Secrecy. On the Interpretation of Narrative,
Harvard University Press, Cambridge and London, 1979. p. 81

1 210 2

interpretation. Midrash Rabbah contained two types of texts: the texts of the
halakhah describing laws and behavior codes (these originally had a religious
content anyway) and the texts of the aggadah which consisted of narrative
literary texts, parables, and theological and ethical teachings. The aim of the
Midrash Rabbah was to ensure the continuity of traditions and already existing
laws, or laws registered in the past.8 Due to the laconic style of sacred texts,
the texts of the Midrash fill in this compactness and these informational gaps
referring to Auerbachs study Holtz defines these gaps or places as un-narrated
motivations, feelings and thoughtswith explanations. Therefore, in essence
manipulable rules and public norms9 were fixed in the Midrash.
But what is the connecting principle between the two types of texts, between
the rules and norms and the imaginative, narrative texts explaining them?
According to Holtz it is the guarantee to preserve the continuity of tradition,
since laws were born in different periods and in different contexts; however,
the historical-cultural context is not constantHoltz calls the solution or
explanation of the original a creative historiography, or creative philology
in order to point out the constitutive character of all posteriori interpretation10.
The tale by Istvn Jakab that I will analyze from the perspective of textual
tradition is nothing but a rewriting, an explanation of an ancient text, and
a contextual displacement of a myth. Tales are generally characterized by
the avoidance of the tragic; the subject of the Oedipus myth is, however, an
exception, and both the Hungarian and international typology lists it among its
types. Olga Nagy underlines the point that Istvn Jakabs tale is a unique version
in as much as it does not enforce the world view so characteristic of tales. In
the mythic world the role of destiny is to visit and penalize man, however, in the

8 HOLTZ, Barry W.: Midrash, In: HOLTZ (ed.) Back to the Sources. Reading the
Classic Jewish texts. Simon and Schuster, New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, 2006
(1984), pp. 177179
9 HEIDEGGER, Martin: Being and Time (trans. MACQUIRRIE, John and ROBINSON,
Edward), Blackwell Publishers, Oxford and Cambridge, 1962. p. 334
10 HOLTZ: op.cit. p. 189

1 211 2

world of tales the task is to change everything for the benefit of the hero.11 She
also mentions that while keeping the original subject of the Oedipus story on
its tragic course, Istvn Jakab feels that he cannot finish the tale like this and
so it is not the father who he makes the hero of the tale but the fathers son. By
this turn the narration of the Oedipus myth in the tale is embedded in a new
historical-cultural context that makes the universal system of values visible,
by implying the differences between the ancient Greek law and order and the
Christian law and order. While in the first part Jakab tells of the violation of
the command Thou shall not kill, and the consequences and risks involved
in searching out and obtaining the secret, in the second partalready stepping
beyond the mythic storyhe considers the topos of betrayal in relation to the
act of betraying the secret.12
Going further, beyond the interpretation given above, whose concluding
statements are linked to the concept of culture and the transcendentrelated
to sacred textsit is worth taking a closer look at the phenomenology of the
secret. As a starting point we may use the insights provided by Dasein-analysis
which, by expanding and developing the thinking of Heidegerrian philosophy,
is capable of not only unveiling the secret of Dasein, existence, the beingpresent, but also interpreting these secrets from the perspective of the concept
of authentic existence. Instead of the interpretation of the thematically present
Christian system of ethical codes that would end in the explanation of guilt and
divine absolution, in the tale by Istvn Jakab the phenomenological aspects of
Dasein-analysis reveal the modes of incapacitation of the being-present, the call
of the conscience, the being prevented from being-present, and the openness of
being to existence. In the first part of the tale, which focuses on guilt and sins
committed, there are two basic patterns defining the series of actions: being
cast out and being thrown in, which along with drifting are those phenomena
that, as a basic existential experience, guide the heros decisions. Through his
actions the hero then responds by missing or misfiring, by missing existential
11 NAGY Olga: A tltos trvnye. Npmese s eszttikum. [The Law of the Taltos. Folk
Tale and Aesthetics] Kriterion Knyvkiad, Bukarest, 1978. p. 224
12 See the present volume: BLINT, Pter: The Phenomenology of the Secret in the
Folk Tale, especially the first part of the study.

1 212 2

possibilities, by becoming free of something (instead of becoming free for

something), by declining responsibility, by the longing for a healthy world.
However, according to Heidegger the being-in-the-world as such is guilty, and
to be guilty means: Being-the-basis for the lack of something in the Dasein of
an Other and in such a manner that this very Being-the-basis determines itself
as lacking in some way in terms of that for which it acts as the basis. This kind
of lack is a failure to satisfy some requirement which applies to ones existent
Being with Others.13 This requirement, ones existent Being with the Other is
unfolded in the care for others, since the existence of all Being-in-the-world is
care (Daseins being is care14) in the sense that taking care is one aspect of
care, taking care is mans essential care for the others15.

1. The Series of Failure and Drifting

To summarize it briefly, Istvn Jakabs tale narrates the greatest possible
concealment/secret of man born to earth: that the father is a villain, a murderer,
commits sin after sin, and the mother is indirectly the fathers murderer.
As opposed to the Judeo-Christian teaching in which the genesis of man is
linked to a murder (Cain and Abel16), and in order to get around it, appoints a
common ancestor for man, a third child, SethJakabs tale tests what kinds
of existential possibilities are given for a murderer, how guilt becomes a mode
of action, where forgiveness really does come from and what kinds of existential
possibilities are available to an individual who would like to create another
life on this earth. Therefore, in the second part of the tale Jakab, instead of
13 HEIDEGGER, Martin: op.cit, p. 328
14 HEIDEGGER: op.cit. p. 329
15 HELTING: op.cit. p. 197
16 We find a very exciting version in the last novel of Jos Saramago in which, similarly
to Jakabs tale, the murderer becomes a father. In Saramagos novel the father does
not come into contact with his sonhe remains foreign to him all along. In the
novel, the origin of sin is nothing but a mistake, first a mistake by sacrifice, then,
according to Saramago, a mistake by God, a divine mistake in as much as God does
not accept the sacrifice of life. SARAMAGO, Jos: Kin (trans. PL Ferenc, Eurpa
Kiad), Budapest, 2011. p. 123.

1 213 2

the being born in love, thematises the act of being born in sin. We find the
origins of this being born in sin in the first part: the guilty father was born into a
family where everything was provided; prosperity, happiness, only the child was
missing. In the neighbourhood it became the fashion that the child was the first
(property)(p. 691)17. Either due to a special usage of language in folk discourse
or a purposeful word usage by Jakab, the use of the verb be in the form Jakab
uses it invites another meaning as well, the meaning of property, and therefore
it divides meaning: either the child is a first thing or the first, most expensive
property is the child. However, the child used as the next property would not
be capable of fulfilling the hopes that the parents project onto him: well, not
much time passed, they did not have much joy in that child. (p. 691) Moreover,
the father has a dream in which the child becomes the fathers murderer. The
first transgression, or sin, is the mistaken or missed joy over existence, over the
being-in-the-world in as much as the parents are unable to open up their own
existence for this new life, as a possibility for this new life, a Dasein of the life
they had created; at the same time the interpretation of the dream also becomes
a failure, it misfires, it becomes a mistake.
Instead of permitting the ambiguity and the polysemantic nature of the
dream imagery and symbols, the father resolves the dream, he understands
it literally, consequently he sets himself free of his only sonreading the tale
text closely it seems as if there would be no other child born in the family
later. According to Kermode, the dream text disappears in interpretation, it is
exhausted, annihilated, and loses its affective power. Moreover if a riddle or a
dream is solved incorrectly in the tale it may lead to perdition. Perhaps we may
come out of this situation best when we preserve or protect the secret or the
dream (as a text, a message, a system of signs or references) which offers itself
17 JAKAB Istvn: Jnas a zrdban [Jnas in the Nunnery] In: NAGY OlgaV
Gabriella: Havasok mesemondja, Jakab Istvn mesi. [The Tent Gypsy of the
Transylvanian Mountains. Tales by Istvn Jakab] Akadmiai Kiad, Budapest,
2002. pp. 691731. I will refer to page numbers in the tale text by adding them in
parenthesis. az vt a divat, hogy az els vagyon a gyerek: in Hungarian, the word
vagyon has two meanings: one is a derivative of the verb be, an old form. The other
meaning, as a noun, is property, possession, wealth

1 214 2

to be deciphered without unveiling or understanding itjust as the doorkeeper

does in Kafkas Trial.18 On the other hand, the dream is nothing but a message
hidden in symbols. According to the symbols of the dream19 the son kills the
father; however, this murderous act is not literal, it is rather an image of an
archetype, since the destiny of every father is to let the son grow beyond/over
him. To find ones masculinity is then nothing else but the integration of paternal
power/strength, then letting it grow to become his, i.e. it is, the integration and
overcoming of the paternal.
From the Dasein-analytic standpoint neither associations, nor life stories, nor,
archetypes, nor mythological interpretations can have a role since the solution
() may not be anything else but a statement of facts20. In the tale text we do
not find the description of the dream images themselves, but the interpretation
provided by the father: once, at night, the father of the child saw in his dream
that the child they had found so much joy in and who meant all happiness for
them, well, he will be the one to kill him. (p. 691) The series of actions following
the dream is actually triggered by a dream interpretation, it leaves the actual
dream imagery concealed while the narration itself becomes a secret, something
unavailable and hidden. When we reflect on the concept of the Greek word of
truth (aletheia: unhidden), the dream image in its concealed character (letheia)
hides truth (a-letheia).21 The tale text already generates dream thoughts from
the dream imagery, that is, from the medium of the visual it makes the dream
a kind of linguistic utterance that, by becoming an interpretation, may only

18 KERMODE: op.cit. pp. 2432

19 KAST, Verana: lmok [Dreams] (trans. Beatrix MURNYI) Budapest, Eurpa
Kiad, 2010.
20 Condrau cited by Helting, op.cit. p. 174.
21 Heidegger with his concept of aletheia understands truth as a non-hidden
phenomenon, whose complementary pair is Verborgenheit, the hidden, which
implicitly brings with it the idea that the world is already a secret principle and is
experienced as hiddenness. In: BDIS Zoltn: The Truth of the Tale-Word. Tales
of Jnos Cifra, Gypsy Tale Teller, Didakt Kft., Debrecen, 2014. p. 331. In the same
chapter, in relation to the root of the Hungarian word titok, Bdis highlights that
the word stem til/tit is related to concealment, hiding. BDIS op.cit. p. 333)

1 215 2

have a literal or metaphoric meaning.22 On the other hand, however, it is clear

even in this act of dream interpretation that interpretation itself may blur the
phenomenological capacity of the dream narrative. In this dream the narration
gives an account of the fathers dream, of his relationship to his son which is
dominated by fear. Fear fears Dasein itself, the threatened nature of the Dasein
may only be unfolded here. The dream is the fathers dream in which the fathers
fear from this Dasein appears or surfaces, more generally speaking the anxiety
of being-in-the-world overcomes him. A possibility is attributed to his own
son, to the being who guarantees the continuity (both in acts and in thoughts)
of his (the fathers) existence, by which his own existence will come to an end.
In a certain sense, however, in his advancement towards death it is true that
as a father he meets his already existing anxiety by which he recognizes his son
as a being already threatening his own existence. In relation to anxiety, Helting
explains both its positive and negative aspects:
It is in anxiety where the capability of being-in-the-world as thrown into a
wholeness becomes apparent. At this moment man definitely experiences
that he is, that he is unmistakably different from any other beings in the
world, with which he has connections, which however, no longer provide
any support. Furthermore he experiences that although he may exist in the
future, his capability to exist is by no means necessary. () Experiencing the
basic atmosphere of anxiety is a kind of phenomenon in which it becomes
obvious that man is more than the producer and user of individual existents,
that man owes more to his own dignity than to make himself busy only with
the existent. () Anxiety is a phenomenon that we may interpret absolutely
positively as something that dislocates the Dasein into the spaciousness of
its own existence.23
The definition of the existential possibilities of the father through being
threatened by his own son is nothing other than a pathological state in which
he fails to realize his self-fulfillment: he testifies to the troublesome mode of
22 See RICUR, Paul: Image and Language in Psychoanalysis, In: RICUR: On
Psychoanalysis (trans. PELLAUER, David), Polity Press, Cambridge and Malden,
2012. pp. 94118.
23 HELTING: op.cit. pp. 8283

1 216 2

his being-in-the-world and consequently, in the case of the baby, he does not
respond to the appeal of existence being present as a father but, losing the
capability of responding to, more precisely misunderstanding, the direction/aim
of response, he misfires, fails and he answers the literal meaning appropriated to
the dream, i.e., his own anxiety surfacing in the dream. Therefore, the parents
give the baby up as one would give up a piece of property, an object of wealth, a
tool; they set him off down the river in a small basket: you have made this child
and it was not the child that made you. As you could make him, so you will be
able to make other children as well. (p. 692) Accordingly, the path of the hero
during the course of events in the tale will be defined by the basic figures of
drifting, by failure (in the sense of making a mistake, of sin) and the inauthentic
mode of existence, while his relationship towards Others will be presented as a
possessive relationship.
He will then meet death in the existential possibility as he literally misses or
lets the existential possibility run away; this letting it run becomes the turning
point in the tale which makes it possible for another herohis sonto be born,
to recognize that he received the possibilities that are not obvious at all, as a
gift and he may fulfill them freely during his entire life24. In the plot of the first
part of the tale we may notice that at the end of his wanderings Jnas falls in
love with a girl, whom he kidnaps, rapes at the bottom of a nut bush and finally
wants to marry her. However, the girl wants to get back to her family, to the place
where she belongs and from where she has been removed by force; however, she
is unable to do it any other way than to start running, escaping, so she runs away.
Jnas chases her, she hits him in the eyes, making him blind and, no longer able
to see the world, Jnas falls into a pit and dies there. Instead of becoming open
to possibilities Jnas wants to acquire, possess and use what he would need most
for his existence, to make his existence continuoushe repeats the relationship
of his parents towards him when they understood the baby entrusted to them
as an object to be possessed.
In the nut bush scene Jnas definitively lets his existential possibility run
away, so to speak misses it, the possibility which would lead him back to a kind
of authentic mode of existence in which he would say yes to others in their
24 HELTING: op.cit.p. 97

1 217 2

own existence, in which he would turn his own open Dasein into an attunedunderstanding being-by-itself, in which he would base the relationship to the
lover on the principle of letting the other be, in which he would give himself
over to the experience of spaciousness and exhilaration and in which he would
allow himself to be part of a positive dependent relationship where he may only
be himself because the other makes it possible for him 25. Following Heidegger,
Helting points out that talking to others, i.e. dialoguewhich Jnas misses again
since he does not even try to speak with the girlis necessary to be able to
find our own-being: the travel to the unknown and foreign must always be
preceded by a state of feeling at home. In the conversation with others the one
who seeks becomes attentive to his own relationship to his homeland area. 26 At
this point in the tale Jnas is not able to pay attention to his own relationship to
his own homeland and he misses the possibility to become free in some way or
another for existence and to give up the usage of things ... at hand or fitting the
hand, to listen to the call of conscience and to give himself over to openness
and dependency on existence. Meaning that, due to the burdensome experience
of the past he does not experience the future as an open possibility () he is not
capable of recognizing possibilities as such, () he does not arrange a lively, wellhabitable space around himself, he becomes pathological in his environment, he
causes constant suffering to others and to himself, he makes the Other a tool for
use, a piece of merchandise, his acts become narrowed down limiting the free
relations towards the world and the Others27. Unlike Oedipus he does not blind
himself as a result of his recognition of something; it is the raped girl who hits
him in the eye, since Jnas is unable to face and confront his own destiny and
decisions; consequently, he runs away from himself (from self-acceptance) and
from the openness of existencein a certain sense his blindness and his death
put an end to this declining process.
Therefore in the tale, death, another (indirect) murder, the missing of
possibilities and the beginning of a new life is condensed into one single image,
which literally puts an end to the drifting hero failing in his possibilities. His
25 See HELTING: op.cit. p. 182
26 Heidegger quoted by HELTING: op.cit. p. 206
27 HELTING, especially the third chapter, op.cit., pp. 120124

1 218 2

pathological and confused being-in-the-world does not extinguish his longing

for the world, for the need to be dependent on his human fellows, the need to be
dependent on those who he can care for. The need to take care and be dependent
again becomes a failure, a pathological failure, so much so that he does not
himself collapse, but is made to collapse.28 In the second part of the tale, as a fruit
of this failure, Nutbush Jnas (Jnas Mogyors), the son of Jnas will be the one
who, unlike his father, will join the pleasure of being-in-the-world and become
open to his own existential possibilities as if to ensure a generational absolution
and to compensate for the immense number of sins committed by his father.
But what kind of existential possibilities were missed by Jnas? First of all, as a
baby in his basket he is found on the shore by nuns, young girls, who begin to
take care of him, he was raised as a Catholic child (p. 693). Well, so far it goes
well; however, when he grows up and becomes a fine lad among all these girls
he takes all of them in hand, all of them became pregnant (p. 693). Escaping
from the nunnery, Jnas seems to listen to the call of his conscience and would
like to receive absolution; however, the priest does not want to deal with him:
Go, Jnas, wherever you want to because I cannot absolve you from your sins,
I will not deal with such a man as you, when you have defiled all the saints. (p.
693.) Jnas becomes infuriated and kills the priest. According to the Christian
system of belief, whose basis is the Ten Commandments, Jnas obviously
commits several sins; however, from the point of view of Dasein-analysis he
absolutely misses the confrontation with his own guilt. For Jnas this guilt is
not only rooted in the consequences of violating the sixth commandment, but
also from the recognition that well, he thought to himself, it would be good
to go and confess his sins when he had spoiled so many beautiful young girls
and ridiculed them (p. 693). Beyond the Judeo-Christian ethical prohibitions,
taboos and regulations (which are understood by the listener or the reader as
part of the meaning of the story) it is not only the (in a certain sense biologically
instinctively driven) sin of adultery and fornication that troubles his soul, but
the sin of mocking and ridiculing others: according to the text the reference
28 Man needs the dependency on the world and on his human fellows of whom he can
take care. If he does not have any need, or if he does not become sensitive to this
need, he collapses. HELTING: op.cit. p. 119

1 219 2

to violating the divine laws is emphasized just as much as the fact that he
himself defines his sin as ridiculing others.29 Making a mistake in this respect
is a search for the compensation (absolution) resulting from a need to orientate
oneself according to regulations and rules in the world of norms, and is not
rooted in the decision to take responsibility for each and every moment of the
Dasein, to say yes, affirm his own existence in its entire spectrum, depth and
dignity that nobody else would be able to do except for the Other. The path
to be walked leading to authenticity cannot be taken over from the Other. 30
This is the reason why the confession as an absolution procured by a mediator
will be insufficient. In relation to understanding the summons and to sin/guilt,
Heidegger formulates the following thought:
The common sense of the they knows the satisfying of manipulable rules
and public norms and the failure to satisfy them. It reckons up infractions
of them and tries to balance them off. It has slunk away from its ownmost
Being-guilty so as to be able to talk more loudly about making mistakes. But
in the appeal, the they-self gets called to (angerufen) the ownmost Beingguilty of the self. () Understanding the appeal means wanting to have a
conscience.31
Obviously, Jnas does not understand this appeal and he seeks compensation
in an order outside of himself which, due to its nature, and existential modes
is incapable of making him become open to the authentic existential mode
of being together with Others, and to bring him back from the inauthentic

29 To mock someone means to create a distance, to look at somebody as one would

look at an object. It is laughter triggered by the absence of feelings: Indifference is
its natural environment, for laughter has no greater foe than emotion. Crying or
empathy disturbs and arrests the comic. In order for us to feel compassion we have
to become sensitive, we have to feel, we may not look at somebody indifferently
or as an object. See BERGSON, Henri: Laughter. An Essay on the Meaning of
the Comic (trans. BRERETON, Cloudesley and ROTHWELL, Fred), Arc Manor,
Boston, 2008. p. 3
30 HELTING: op.cit. p. 195
31 HEIDEGGER: op.cit. p. 334

1 220 2

state of letting-oneself-be-drifted to responsible, essential self-fulfillment. 32

Accordingly, Jnas literally slinks away and begins to talk about mistakes all
the more vociferously, in this case about how many murders he has committed
because priests declined his request for absolution. And now, let us take a closer
look at the theologically defined concept of sin.

2. The Concept of Sin

In connection to the concept of sin Ricur contemplates over how much
original sin is the original guilt of little children in the wombs of their mothers
and whether original sin might be expanded to this original guilt. According
to him the concept of original sin is false knowledge, and it must be broken as
knowledge33. Original sin means that evil is not something that exists, it has
no being, no nature, since it comes from us, because it is the work of freedom.34
If the world into which we have been thrown already exists as sinful then man
has fallen into it somehow from the outside, he is outside, a body, a world, a
thing, into which the soul simply falls. Conceptualizing the soul as something
falling into the world leads us to the thought that the world is counter-divinized,
it presents itself in its satanic form, sin and evil proceeds from the powers of
the world toward man.35 Evil and sin is the unfortunate mistake of being in
the world. If evil comes from the outside, then salvation comes to man from
elsewhere, from out there, by a pure magic of deliverance, without any connection
to human responsibility or even personality36. Jnas, who keeps running after
priests for salvation, attempts to solve this sin lived as an interiorized destiny
he attempts to do so by using outside help, although as Ricur pointed out
being before God is the extent of the sin and the extent of my consciousness37.
32 HELTING: op.cit. p. 193
33 RICUR , Paul: Original Sin: A Study On Meaning In: Paul RICOUER: The Conflict
of Interpretations, Essays in Hermeneutics, trans Peter McCormick, Northwestern
University Press, Evanston, 1974, p. 270
34 RICUR: op. cit. p. 272
35 RICUR: op.cit. p. 273
36 RICUR: op.cit. p. 273
37 RICUR: op.cit. p. 282

1 221 2

This means that man is only able to judge the extent of his own guilt by standing
before God, by looking at himself and not by the use of some outside help
therefore salvation may not arrive from out there. In the language of Daseinanalysis this means that instead of the the care that substitutes, leaps forward,
or rules robbing the Other of his responsibilitysince we arrange something
on behalf of the Other instead of primarily supporting his own options and
capabilities38the leaping in front of or liberating care should come to the
fore by the help of which one may learn step by step how it is possible to make
the forms waiting for the compensation of his own limited, inauthentic beingin-the-world a Dasein that is opened up to the world and to others. However,
this possibility may only be grasped by man himself; this decision cannot be
delegated to somebody else, it cannot occur through mediators. According to
Ricur, this sin lived as an interiorized destiny is the erring of existence that
lacks will, meaning that instead of taking responsibility it gives itself over to
drifting in its destiny. The second priest, a parson, in the absence of this will
caused by a basic incapacity, and in the absence of the distance between the
I want and I can39 could procure salvation for Jnas. The relationship to sin
referred to as a penitential experience by Ricur has three modes of refusing
responsibility:
1. the realism of sin as it exists before God (and not as I experience it or as it
is cast in my consciousness); this is the reality of sin which precedes everything
else;
2. as a transhistorical and transbiological solidarity (as I have inherited it);
this is the communal dimension of sin which is impossible to disassemble into
individual responsibility;
3. sin is a state, a situation into which man sinks or dives but also a power that
captivates him and ties him down; this is the incapacity of will presenting itself
in each concrete mistake. The lack of the distance between the I want and I
can appears here.40

38 HELTING: op.cit. p. 198199

39 RICUR: op.cit. p. 282
40 RICUR: op.cit. pp. 282284

1 222 2

Accordingly, the three modes of taking responsibility are a confrontation

through the will, through acts which have not been transferred to ancestors, nor
to historicity that my consciousness, or let us say, my conscience, apprehends
as sin. Jnass character avoids these and he trieswith little luckto find a
solution by asking the parson to intervene and procure one for him; he wants to
be purged of his sins. Therefore the priest prays for Jnas and then says: Well,
Jnas, now you may go wherever God helps you to go because your sins have
been already forgiven by God in one way or another, you have suffered for so
long. (p. 695)
However, Istvn Jakab weaves an image in the tale text that is familiar from
the Bible, from the parable of the Sower in the Gospel of Mark (Mark, 3.4). The
parson tests Jnas by requesting thatuntil he returns from the prayer said for
his salvation and absolutionhe should not touch the bread and water placed
on the table in front of him. The parson leaves for a long period, since in the
meantime Jnas grows a very long beard.
The bread was renewed, new wheat grew from the brea;, inside, on the table
in front of Jnas, the entire table was covered with green as if a whole field
of wheat was in front of him on the table.(p. 694.)
Meanwhile the priest is looking for the key, which he finds in the lake in front
of the house, the lake into which he had thrown the key before his departure.
However, the lake has since dried up. Absolution takes place in a chiastic
structure: the parsons long prayer for Jnas produces wheat from the bread
and grain placed in front of Jnas, they fall onto good ground, while outside,
from the waters of dried up tears, the key to resolution or absolution is found.
Simultaneously to the drying up of the tears and the cessation of crying, Jakab
weaves an image of absolution with the image of new shoots appearing in the
world outside. In this event, Jnass silencehis obligation to keep silentwould
be able to create that type of silence in which he would be able to hear the call
of his conscience which would call him to realize his own existence. However,
Jnas again misses the possibility of finding himself, of finding the absolution
that somebody else has prayed for instead of him, and since together with mans

1 223 2

responsibility for himself the freedom to miss oneself is also given41, in his
repeated mistakes this freedom makes it possible for him to drift off once more
towards other sins.
Following the act of absolution, Jnas temporarily begins a new life, in the
sense of following the norm and not necessarily in the sense of seeking out reason
or significance. The German word Sinn (significance) goes back to the Old High
German word sinnan which means to be on the move, travel. Significance
originally referred to an open territory in which there is a path to be followed
and to a territory in which growth, movement and wandering is possible.42
In the Dasein-analytic interpretation provided by Helting, wandering, growth,
and movement are linked to the open territory of significance. Therefore in all
wanderings in tales, being on the path or road is nothing other than an act
directed towards the search for this significance. Jnass decision to turn over a
new leaf, at least according to the tale text, makes this move an absence (instead
of searching out significance he is mainly escaping during his wanderings) since
he begins to work on a farm, as if to settle down; he finishes his journey, his
travelling. By chance, or through lack of knowledge, or by mistake, (another
mistake) he shoots the farmer, killing him, as if he has missed his aimthe
series of mistakes and the fulfillment of destiny begins here with this event.
There is nothing to do but to marry the farmers wife, according to the law. In
relation to law, as Knierim pointed out, to consent to law is the future basis for
the courts; it replaces the community based on customary ajudication and it
will introduce a legally prescribed order where the community no has longer
absolute authority.43 In Jakabs story it is not very clear what kind of community
law they have to obey, we only learn that they must bow before the law. Despite
the tragic events, Jnas and the woman are very happy; however, when their sin is
brought to light (Jnas tells of his origins, and admits all the sins he committed
in the nunnery and a little later the woman tells him that she is his mother) Jnas
41 HELTING: op.cit. p. 157
42 HELTING: op.cit. p. 269
43 RICUR, Paul and LACOCQUE, Andr: Thinking Biblically: Exegetical and
Hermeneutic Studies, (trans. by PELLAUER, David) The University of Chicago
Press, Chicago and London, 1998. p. 71

1 224 2

sets out to his journey again. For the second time in the story he feels very guilty
because of the time he spent with his mother; he tries to confess again but this
time he is not absolved since this is now fatal sin. In this sinful relationship
Jnas has to confront his own origins, his background, his exclusion, and his
(culturally) prescribed form of destiny.
The end of his wanderings, paradoxically lead him back to the homeland of
his origins, to his relationship with this homeland where he takes practical rules
and public standards into consideration, and searches for compensation. The
unreasonable acts carried out by the physical body (physis) however, unlike the
familiar issues known from the tragedy of King Oedipus, is not the achievement
of the mind (nous) searching or wandering, but the consequence of his confession
and his taking responsibility for the other and for the deeds he has himself
committed.44 It is in this sense, in the tragic unattainability of the possibilities
44 One of the most definitive myths in European culture is the myth of King Oedipus
and it constitutes the key text of psychoanalysis even though Freud only refers
to it in 1910 and there is no synthetic summary or study written on the topic. In
relation to this myth the ideas of psychoanalysis on the unconscious are developed
as something unattainable for the consciousness. (Freud saw the play directed by
Monet-Sully which, instead of the collective view of the Greek theatre and the
emphatic presence of the choir, placed the lead actor in the centre of interest. Based
on this performance, David Wiles sketches Freuds map of consciousnessbased
on the spatial arrangements in contemporary theatre. All attention is focused on
the lead actor, the rest of the action takes place at the back of the stage. WILES,
David: A Short History of Western Performance Space, Cambridge University Press,
2003. p. 232) Sndor SAJ clearly formulates that this is what most sharply opposes
phenomenology with Freuds psychoanalysis. The former studies what appears in
front of us, the later, however, attempts to search out those that do not directly appear
what is only available by making conscious efforts. SAJ, Sndor: Amirl tudunk s
amirl nem [What We are Aware of and What We Are Not] In: Img 2012/3, p. 25
Jnas sins flow into the world through his acts and deeds. Ricur refers to sin as
something that infects man from the outside and spreads like the plague. The plague
in Thebes is stopped by King Oedipus when he solves the riddle. The plague was
originally triggered by Oedipus fathers, Laoss sin, since he committed fornication;
he had a young male lover and so Hera cursed him that when he himself would
become a father, the child should turn against his fathers life. King Oedipus not

1 225 2

for Dasein to be open to others and to the world, that the return to his homeland
only has to pay to search for his own identity because of his previous deeds, but
also takes upon the destiny and curse of his forefathers at the moment of his birth.
Erika Fischer-Lichte interprets the deeds committed by the king in his state of notknowing the curse as something that the physical body (physis) carried out as nonmeaningful acts; everything that has happened is foreign and unknown to the
mind (nous): therefore it is not possible to narrate, and may not become part of
his language. (FISCHER-LICHTE, Erika: A drma trtnete [History of European
Drama] (trans. KISS Gabriella) Jelenkor Kiad, Pcs, 2001. pp. 4154. FischerLichte does not interpret the myth as the conflict between the conscious and the
unconscious, but as a kind of identity story in which the act of revealing the secret
is committed by the nous, the searching mind, while the identity pre-ordained by
the gods is only known by his body. While King Oedipus tries to resolve his own
identity, unveiling it in speech acts, he gets closer and closer to the identity forming
power of his bodily acts. This momentum is missing from Jakabs tale, since Jnas
never himself searches for the secret consciously, he never wants to resolve or unveil
the secret himself, to reveal the connection between the sins committed and his
origins. Running away from his sins he walks through life with the need to become
free of sins and guilt, he is motivated by the desire to become free. As opposed to
Jnas, King Oedipus chooses to walk consistently along this path and he wants to
see and know. The identity realized and authenticated by the body, and the identity
created in speech acts that validate it are therefore gradually linked to each other
by the searching mind (FISCHER-LICHTE: op.cit. p. 47). Vision and knowledge
however appear as something that molds the identity forming factors into a unity
these factors, language and speech acts, body and physical acts are rivals in the
process: for King Oedipus this connection makes the revelation and recognition
possible. The answer given to this new identity is the blinding scene, in which he
blinds himself with his own hands to punish his own nature. The deeds committed
in the state of blindness are inscribed not only into language but into the body as
well. The name of Oedipus in a sense pre-supposes, refers forward to the deficit of
his knowledge/mind and his vision: the Greek word oi, the first segment of his
name may both mean that I know and also that I have seenwe may translate
it as a limping knowledge or inaccurate vision (FISCHER-LICHTE: op.cit. p. 50).
So the king tailors the meaning of his name to his body, and therefore gains his new
identity. Following the act of revelation, the bodily inscription, Oedipus wants to
recognize himself publicly as wellCreon prohibits this (we may remember that

1 226 2

in error, enforced by the norm (the law enforces the marriage) makes the drifting
apparent by the act of repeating the existential mode attuned to the homeland,
as opposed to what the true possibilities of the being-in-the-world, the Dasein
open to the world, would offer.
According to Heidegger, to any discourse there belongs that which is
talked about in it.45 In relation to Jnass deeds it is revealed how he himself
understands these events. Both the confessions and the conversation with his
mother-wife are part of this narration. And what conscience talks aboutat
least according to Heideggeris the Dasein. But it is essential to Dasein that
along with its disclosedness of its world it has been disclosed to itself, so that
it always understands itself. (...) The Self () gets brought to itself by the call.46
In the tale by Istvn Jakab, conscience does not have a role in the sense that
Jnas would narrate his innermost processes or his self-understanding, these
are not even functions in the tale in general; most of the time he only refers to
facts, to his deeds or his guilt. His decisions, his conscience are presented to
us mostly through the deeds narrated by the narrator-taleteller. In connection
to the acts performed in the nunnery, Jnas absolves himself simply because of
his not being orientated by the law: nobody was there to command me (697).
However his hair began to turn grey, not because of the time past but because
of the tremendous amount of trouble and wanderings, the sorrow that his soul
was troubled by so much weight (p. 698). In this way he leaves the issues of
conscience unelucidated, passing no judgment on them, and so he might connect
himself to the idea that conscience discourses solely and constantly in the mode
of keeping silent.47 In the philosophy of Heidegger conscience is connected to or
the Hungarian word titok, secret has a common root with tilt prohibit)so he
consciously accepts the role of the scapegoat, he isolates himself, goes into exile and
dies there. According to the concept of the divine, in the tragedy Oedipuss destiny
had already been arranged before his birth and he himself did everything to avoid it
unsuccessfully, since the Gods prepared a trap for him, they strain the investigation
and search to the extreme and make it ridiculous, and the mind ensures it, the mind
that plays such a basic role in self-definition. (FISCHER-LICHTE: op.cit. p. 53)
45 HEIDEGGER: op.cit. p. 317
46 HEIDEGGER: Idem. p. 317
47 HEIDEGGER: op.cit. p. 318

1 227 2

joins anything by hearing this call or appeal which is nothing else but an appeal
to the they-self in itself; as such an appeal it summons the self to its potentialityfor-Being-itself, and thus calls Dasein forth to its possibilities.48 Often Jnas
attempts to meet the expectations of this appeal to its potentiality-for-Beingitself through mediators, through priests; however, apparently this is not the
right and blessed road for him. The story of Jnas also tells of the idea that
salvation and absolution may take place through a mediator but since the pattern
of the sin itselfthe mode of existence in the worldis unvaried, unchanged,
and the destiny-formula stays unresolved, he is only forgiven for the sins he had
already committed; life will drift him into situations again and again, in other
words he allows himself to be drifted along in Dasein, in which the pattern is
re-inscribed and becomes charged with subsequent sins and mistakes. For
Jnas the secret is his destiny-formula which is fulfilled after the expected and
fasted for absolution and which comes to light only after its fulfillment. The
secret revealed thus has no good outcomes; it does not provide peace, it does not
excuse him from his responsibility, it can only serve as a posteriori explanation.
The reality of Jnass origin and story, the impossibility of being absolved from
it (the refusal by the priests) and the ability to see all this does not help the hero
on his way.49
As opposed to Heidegger50, Ricur argues that evil is not being but doing,
so the world is not a mode of existence identical with or corresponding to its
48 HEIDEGGER: op.cit. p. 319
49 Jnas primarily realizes the inauthentic mode of existence of Being-thrown into
the world. Seemingly the only option for him is (external) absolution; this is what
he sees as the disentanglement from the consequences of his deeds, the guarantee
for his future and not in the free choice of possible acts. For him choice is linked
to a precondition: if he somehow frees himself from his sins he may take another
road. The choice is the higher level of decisive situations; this is the third level of
Heideggerian existence, although articulation on speech, discussion and discursive
practice do not play a role. Heidegger calls the connection among these three
dimensions careJnas falls outside of their juncture point.
50 Being-guilty does not first result from an indebtedness (Verschuldung), ..., on the
contrary, indebtedness becomes possible only on the basis of a primordial Beingguilty. (HEIDEGGER: op.cit. p. 329) Heidegger understands guilty, sinful acts as

1 228 2

guilty nature, but a doing with which we attach ourselves to this guilt, with
which we bring guilt into the world. In reality, Jnas faces the fact that he has
been thrown into a world of sin and at the same time he himself has been
linked to it by his deedseven these include not only sins but mistakes and
goals not achieved. The meanderings of Jnas, his wanderings, his rebellion, his
unachieved goals, his wry and tiresome journeys lead him to accumulate sin
after sin: he kills all priests that come his way, he even kills all Catholic priests.
The figure of the Catholic priest listening to confessions is the knower and
keeper of all human secrets, who takes into account everything which cannot
be told to others: those that only concern conscience and God. In the dialogue
of conscience the priest with the right to absolve is the dialogue partner whose
function in relation to speech is partly understanding, but more importantly
he is there for the absolution from (presupposed or true) guilt. The murders
committed by Jnas are motivated by his anger and are aimed at the vanity of
the possibility of absolution through mediators in the Catholic faith/order, or at
least their incidentalityFor Saint Augustine this is the divine secret itself, since
the secret of being chosen, i.e. why this or that person was chosen and received
mercy, may never be revealed,on the other hand Jnas takes revenge because
he is refused, because he is refused absolution51. The incestuous relationship
with his mother and the tremendous number of murders weighs on Jnass soul/
conscience; it is impossible to alienate it or transfer it to somebody else, it cannot
be understood as a transhistorical solidarity, since it is the result of his own
doings. If we understand failure as the myth of original sin then we are tracing
back the origin of evil to a distant ancestor, a myth that uncovers the situation
of every man. Evil has already taken place. I do not begin evil; I continue it.

a consequences of being attuned to this Being-guilty. According to Ricur, we

are attached to this being attuned to Being-guilty through acts. Therefore man
does not already stand in Being-guilty but he attaches himself to it through his
mistaken acts.
51 Istvn JAKAB is a Gypsy tale teller, therefore it might be worth considering how
the tale connects or differentiates between the Gypsy world of belief and Catholic
tradition.

1 229 2

I am implicated in evil. Evil has a past; it is its past, it is its own tradition.52
The archetypical concept of the Fall however, molds sin and evil into a kind of
archetype, a kind of type that, in this way, becomes the anti-type of regeneration,
or rebirth, according to Ricur. Regeneration, making something new, creating
something new, becoming a new generation, and images of rebirth are what
help Jakab to weave his text onwardsachieving this, however, through another
mistake, another secret.
In a certain sense it is the concept and the literal act of regeneration that
creates a connection between the two parts of the tale. The one who betrays
the Creator, the typical deserter, is one who by baptism or some other rite
of initiation has been reborn and received into the Kingdom. Nevertheless he
flees.53 In Jnass story mercy arrives together with the parsons prayer and with
the image of the growing and proliferating wheat to fulfill his original destiny
and fall back into guilt as if to deny the possibility of fleeing. He is offered the
possibility for rebirth but he is unable to avoid his destiny. The second rite of
rebirth could be the act of love; however, it will not lead to the rebirth of Jnas
but to the birth a new being and with that to the death of the old guilty hero. In
this sense the second part of the tale concretizes the rite of rebirth by linking
the sacred and the profane: in the metaphoric and literal act of regeneration it
confers the rite of rebirth to the everyday rite of child breeding and birth, in the
metonymical figure of connectionfrom one generation to the next the figure of
displacement (Verschiebung) is embodied in the gestures of the physical, bodily
connection. When Jnas breeds a new life, the tale might continue not only as
the counterpoint to his own story, as a restoration or compensation of his deeds,
but in the simultaneously metaphoric and metonymic figure of story telling.
Revealing the connection between the two parts of the tale may indicate why
it was necessary for Istvn Jakab to connect the version of the otherwise wellknown tale type AaTh 314 (The Golden-Haired Gardener) that he had told with
a kind of introductory episode in which he travels around the homeland
of the hero. The connection between the two parts is guaranteed first by the
identical names (both the father and the son are called Jnas), and the blood
52 RICUR: op.cit. pp. 279280
53 KERMODE: op.cit. p. 63

1 230 2

relation between the two heroes, but also by the counterpoint as well. The two
parts of the tale are different from each other, not only in their atmosphere but
by interrupting the dependency of the father, i.e. his desire to live relying on
somebody elses mercy, on Gods mercy54, in such a way that his utter absence
of a God is unconcealed in this exact striving: the illusion that man should be
waiting for God is the sign of the deepest absence of God.55 However, Helting
continues that even though individual humans are annihilated in death, their
deeds and thoughts will live on in others.56 In the second half of the tale the
hero, called Nutbush Jnas, is an inevitable part of the story in as much as he
makes his fathers deeds and thoughts survive in a beneficial, compensatory
way. Mockery, recklessness, betrayal, being cast out, the suffering caused to
others (for instance, the suffering Jnas caused to the beings of the world the
little rooster has introduced him to) all enable the paternal heritage to survive;
however, there is one enormous difference and this difference might indeed
be the aim of fairy tales or hero tales. As long as man lives by relating to his
possibilities, he is always capable of ensuring a new future based on the past.57
Instead of a thorough analysis of the second half of the tale it might be more
interesting to see why Nutbush Jnass secret is what makes it possible for him
to convert his embodied and inscribed heritage (i.e. inscribed as a name) to a
story of salvation by the end of the tale: he is able to pass the tests and win the
princess and to live happily ever after.
After the closing formulas of the tale Istvn Jakab adds a short explanation at
the end of the text: All his passion, as the little soldier told him before, was the
little rooster; he had to serve for seven years and after the seven years passed he
did become a king, but everything was due to his good deeds, Jnass good heart,
that he did good to the rooster, and the rooster served him in return. This is the
end, you may go now! (731.)

54 HELTING: op.cit. p. 181

55 HELTING: op.cit. p. 205
56 HELTING: op.cit. p. 232
57 HELTING: op.cit. p. 275

1 231 2

3. The Secret of Existence

Following the elimination of priesthood, the father of Nutbush Jnas begins
to hunt for women, until he finds himself someone who stops his heart.
The hardened heart, the heart of stone, is nothing else but the heart become
insensitive to the divine call.58 Jnass heart is broken, changed, moved by
a profane event, by the sight of a woman. However, he does not even try to
apply regular, respectful methods, he immediately turns to cunning and he
inactivates just the same sensory organ that leads him to beauty, to meet the
experience of the softening heart that would make him capable of hearing the
divine call. In this sense he also lets the possibility of being-in-the-world openly
run away. He closes himself off, pretends that he is blind so that the woman
would not take notice of him, so he may kidnap her, he may run with her through
seven villages and finally he may rape her. By being blinded in the end, the vision
and sight through which the road to mercy would open up for him is irrevocably
denied. Taking care of the other, by using the possibility as it exists in its very
essence, is a self-realization performed in a perverse way; it uses the essential
openness towards the other to violate the other. By this act man misses his own
essence and so he is sick/pathological in his entire being. 59 The utter exclusion
of the essential openness manifested in Jnass character has a consequence:
he becomes deprived of the organ capable of sensing the world and the mind
(sensibility). Wandering blindly he dies and in his death Jnas is forgiven by
God, which means, he has paid for his deed, Jnas gave his life over. (p. 703.) To
fulfill a blind fate or destiny apparently concludes the possibility of independent,
autonomous acts. In other words: while blindly fulfilling ones destiny there is
no chance to see and take the possibilities offered by this openly being-in-theworld into possession.
The whole enigma of the evil may be said to lie in the fact that we indicate with
the same terms such different phenomena as sin, suffering and death. However,
to commit evil means nothing else than to cause suffering for the other, to cause
damageand we should add, to cause suffering and damage to ourselves as well.
58 RICUR: op.cit.p. 278
59 HELTING: op.cit. p. 156.

1 232 2

And here being-guilty is linked to suffering, since being-guilty is both psychical

and physical suffering, writes Ricur.60 While myth blurs the boundary between
the sinner and the victim, since both of them exist and act as part of a greater
whole and order in the world, according to the principle of retribution all
suffering is suffering deserved (due to collective or individual sins), and lawful
order then inflicts punishment for everyone according to the (human) degree
of their guilt. Distribution based on proportion, however, does not explain the
distribution of suffering: the extent and quality of suffering experienced in the
world points beyond the order concievable by the human mind. The story of Job
shows that whichever side we take, complaint is not appropriate, it has no place
when facing God, that he came to love God for nought. The real secret is the road
that leads to the complete renunciation of complaint: on which we walk and find
an educating, cleansing value. Renunciation concerns all desire that is aimed at
justice, the reward for our virtues, the avoidance of suffering. Ricur concludes
his train of thought by arguing that to love God freely, not to ask for anything,
not to complain about anything, this might be the secret of invincible suffering,61
The story of Jnas at this point continues in the child who does not search for
his guilty past but begins to live his own existence and fulfills the complaintfree destiny in which he received his existence as a gift.
Existence is received as a gift for Nutbush Jnas, the son, offers other gifts
as well: his ability to learn, to have a smart mind, to be taught by the little
rooster whom he saved with his good heart. He learns about other worlds, about
cunning which can be transformed by dignity and brings braveness, as well
as about persistence and the ability to wait. Nutbush Jnas has a great secret:
that which he was entrusted by the little rooster. The world unveiled by the
little rooster is at the same time another, secret world of which nobody may
know, which no-one may seetherefore this world offers a kind of knowledge
not accessible for others, while it represents the scene of desire, a kind of world
in which evil does not exist. The secret of the rooster does not only represent
the secrets of the true/transcendent world (on the vertical plane, in the tale, it is
60 RICUR, Paul: Evil: A Challenge to Philosophy and Theology, (trans. By David
PELLAUER) Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 1985, Vol. 53. n. 4. p. 636.
61 RICUR: op.cit. p. 115

1 233 2

located downstairs, below a little swing-door); learning about the secret, in this
sense, does not only provide power in the world, but also represents the scene
of desires; it is not by coincidence that Nutbush Jnas thinks he is in Fairyland
(708.). Betraying the secret unveiled by the little rooster therefore is not only the
betrayal of the secret knowledge itself, but the betrayal of desires, more precisely,
the betrayal of the world he himself desires.
While his father is absolved by the growing and proliferating wheat, Nutbush
Jnas creates a connection to something much greater than himself through the
seed (a piece of corn, a kernel) that the little rooster gave him as a gift. According
to Kermode what the Sower sows is the word: People by the wayside hear it,
but Satan (the birds) comes and takes it from their hearts. The stony ground
signifies those who receive the Word with gladness, but are unable to retain it
under stress and persecution; the thorns stand for those who hear it but allow
it to be choked by worldly lust and ambition. And the last group are those who
hear and receive the Word and bear much fruit.62 The father wants to improve
and change for the better, but with his violent deeds he causes suffering, and he
is still unable to discharge the suffering that accompanies punishment in his life,
he can only do that in his death. As if there were no more to come following a
state of mercy. His son accepts the seven year suffering for the act of betrayal,
accepts the state of deprivation63, meaning that in some way or another he strives
for the recognition and compensation of the essentially disproportionate link
between the acting agent and the suffering agent (patient). The behavior of the
seed in itself does not lead to any solution, it only gives a sign about the turning
point in the course of eventsthe fathers merciful state is illustrated by the
growing wheat, the renewal is shown by the conception of a new life taking place
under a nut bush; they all become problematic in the acts leading to mistakes.
62 KERMODE: op.cit. p. 29. Kermode adds that this interpretation by Mark is probably
mistaken, a misunderstanding, or even mistranslation. The real sense of the parable
is that the Twelve dont need parables, but the crowd does. KERMODE: op.cit. p.
30. The secret meaning of things is not hidden from somewho have ears and eyes
etc.but for the rest it is.
63 RICUR, Paul: The Self and Narrative Identity In: RICUR: Oneself as Another,
(trans. BLAMEY, Kathleen) University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1995. p. 165

1 234 2

Losing the merciful state is referred to by the loss of the corn kernel, by the
blabbing out of the secret; however, unlike his father, the deeds committed by
Nutbush Jnas all continue with successful, beneficial acts. Handling the seed,
taking responsibility for himself is what defines the course of events. Ricur
differentiates two poles in connection to selfhood-identity:
() we admitted that selfhood-identity covered a spectrum of meanings,
from the pole where it overlapped with identity as sameness to the opposite
pole, where it is entirely distinct from the later. The first pole appeared to
us to be symbolized by the phenomenon of character, by which the person
can be identified and reidentified. As for the second pole, it appeared to us
to be represented by the essentially ethical notion of self-consistency. Selfconsistency for each person is that manner of conducting himself or herself so
that others can count on that person. Because someone is counting on me, I
am accountable for my actions before another. The term responsibility unites
both meanings: counting on and being accountable for.64
Discussing the problem of selfhood-identity, Ricur may connect the
concepts of being identifiable by character and self-consistency with the term
responsibility because giving account of something may become legitimate,
authentic or credible as an act which proceeds from this being accountable for
and counting on and aiming at a kind of existentas a performative act it may
only have an effect or perform that movement of performative value by which
it truly becomes appreciated as a responsible act. The self-deprived of its selfconsistency is nothing; these are the moments of extreme destitution, writes
Ricur in connection to Musil. The tale, on the contrary, was born in that order
of discourse that precedes the postmodern problem and the concept of identity
that has not yet created a problem of the unity of the character/figure/personality/
identity. As opposed to postmodern narratives, in tales, the acting and observing
conscience is not distinct; characters are based on the paradigmatic dichotomy
of phenomenon and reality from mystification to enlightment, unrevealing the
truth of the self-identity/ identity of the character. This is true for Istvn Jakabs
tale as well; the problem of the impossibility of self-consistency has to be molded
64 RICUR: ibid. p. 166

1 235 2

into two different characters. One character, the father figure, represents a kind
of character who commits sin after sin, hopes for mercy again and again, and in
spite of the existing breaking points, the possibility of redemption is denied
part of his self-identity is repeated harmful acts, the denial of absolution, we
may say existing without love. The first part of Jakabs tale therefore narrates
the story of a very consistently presented character and his deeds, in which he
needs to be accountable for his deeds and is motivated by this need. The son,
Nutbush Jnas represents the other pole of selfhood-identity in as much as all
of his struggles are aimed at becoming somebody who can be counted on; he
fulfills what he had promised except when meeting the little roosterhe twice
betrays the roosters secret.
The tale by Istvn Jakab is similar to Midrash in the sense that in relation to
the plot it is woven around certain laws. The law of Do not kill!, the prohibition
of incest and the disobedience to the roosters request not to betray the secret
are laws possessing various degrees of force, whose origins the tale does not
seek out or question; they might be universal human laws, customs, community
laws, Christian laws or perhaps laws of another origin.65 According to Ricur,
the crisis of selfhood-identity should not have an effect and replace self-respect
with self-hatred. Perhaps this might be the greatest achievement by Nutbush
Jnas, since unlike his father, the crisiswhich is in a certain sense a kind of
secret knowledge, perhaps the consequence of betraying himselfdoes not lead
to self-hatred, and he does not cause further suffering to others, nor to himself.
If we understand sin as a mistake, as a missed objective, and we do not think
of the secret as a concealment of an object, knowledge or an event, but as a kind
of event in which existence is given, then being thrown into existence may be
regarded, proceeding from the relationship to existence, as an eventful existence.
Without exceptions, this relationship is a kind of liberating relationship that
makes it possible for man to arrive into an essential dignity, understanding his

65 There is an exception: Jnass marriage with his mother before their true relationship
comes to light. The tale refers to the fact that it was a single decision by the
community. If the man has shot his master, well, then let him marry the wife.
(NAGYV: op.cit. p. 696)

1 236 2

own existence and to keep himself in this dignity.66 The liberating relationship
in Istvn Jakabs tale means, at the same time, becoming free of the father. While
Jnas succeeds only partially and doubtfully and by causing suffering to others,
his son, Jnas is capable of taking this step by preserving his own and others
dignity. If we mobilize the terminology of psychoanalysis, following Ricur,
we might say that the center of the Oedipus story is the father, language, and
the owner of culture and what is at stake here is precisely the desire to enter
the world of culture. Desire is related to culture in many ways, but in any case,
culture prohibits and consoles. While dreams make the most elemental form of
the process of wish fulfillment, the murder of the father leaves a huge wound
behind that calls for reconciliation with the father-figureone form of this might
be the posteriori obedience to paternal law. So the psychoanalytic interpretation
of religion is the nostalgia for the father inherent in consolation. Consolation,
however, is at least twofold: it comes through the infantile and idolatrous form,
while on the other hand it is the consolation based on the spirit. This latter is
accessible only through an extreme and unlimited obedience to reality and may
come through the mourning of the loss of the first consolation.67
In the story of the two Jnas, father and son can only enter the freedom of
the openness in being-in-the-world if they give up the nostalgic consolation
provided by the father and they do not search for it in the options offered by
religion. Where it is worth looking for is existence, the spirit itself. However, in
this sense, tales are not entitled to introduce or represent the psychoanalytic,
theological, phenomenological, etc. functions of the spirit, they rather fall back
on introducing the liberation of event-like existence. Helting finds the emergence
of the secret exactly in this event-like Dasein:
Dasein that we have previously conceived as a projection thrown into
possibilities, now we understand as event-like projections onto possibilities.
We understood this Dasein throwing itself onto this projection as an eventlike throwing-in. Therefore the event takes place as something that belongs
66 HELTING: op.cit. p. 157
67 RICUR, Paul: The Atheism of Freudian Psychoanalysis In: RICOUER: On
Psychoanalysis (trans. David PELLAUER), Polity Press, Cambridge and Malden,
2012. pp. 147158

1 237 2

together in the event-like throwing in and in the event-like projection. ()

the liberated character of the Dasein means that its own origin deprives
itself of it, it stays invisible. So in the event, a kind of basic feature is at work
which never appears, which remains a secret. Although the origin of Dasein
remains a secret, as giving (or donating) itself as hidden, in the givenness of
existence the origin may be experienced and addressed.68
Existence as an entity which originally both presents itself and offers itself as
a hidden entity, carries the truth of existence inside and in this event it appears
both as something concealed (letheia) and something unveiled (aletheia).
In relation to the tragedy of Oedipus and the story of Jnas, it is clear that
forcing the unveiling of the secreteither by mistaken deeds committed in the
process of drifting, or by the mind bound to the process of searchingcauses
trouble. The true secret of existence is the necessary belonging of the concealed
and the unconcealed together and the ability to leave things in their truth
unconcealed. Whoever volunteers to access the concealed, the hidden, takes an
enormous risk, since he himself will have to measure out the proportionsthe
truth of existence is never able to reveal itself entirely, only to a certain extent.
Therefore, the process of penetrating truth may never come to an end. It is much
easier to access the truth of existence if the event-like assent to existence takes
place in every moment in which the greatest deed is to let something happen,
to make things possible. In order to experience this (the openness of the beingin-the-world) we have to give up our desire for a healthy world and have to give
up the idea that the self would straightforwardly imagine and wish for a kind
of world and salvation for itself. () From a Dasein-analytical point of view we
may even say that this desire is unhealthy, it directly stands in the way of man
capable of experiencing the healthy features of his existence.69
The secret of existence may not be assigned to the yearning for guiltlessness,
nor the desire for salvation, or the uncovering of truth, but to the recognition
of an essentially open being-in-the-world which no longer vindicates the entire
and otherwise illusionary revealing of the unhidden (truth) but as a being who
knows the secret, the unconcealed being always present, and inexhaustible
68 HELTING: op.cit. p. 158
69 HELTING: op.cit. p. 142

1 238 2

the one who is aware of the fact of being ultimately inaccessible which derives
from the nature of the secretand who therefore sets the goal to accomplish the
task of being responsible and taking care for others. The belonging of man and
existence is not permitted by something that shows itself as an existent but by
the one who is hidden. To illustrate the individual development of being-leftto-existence Helting applies the central image used by humanistic psychology,
the seed entrusted to the ground70. In the process of growing out from the
ground the main task is to allow this growth, to let something growto keep the
soil for the seed fertileand not in the growth itself. In the process of growth
it is primarily the plant that shows itself and not that which allows it to grow. 71
Since intentionality is only possible by the atmosphere72, the good heart may
only be conceived as joy prepared for possibility. The goodness of existence can
only be possible in this intentionality. Man will never flee or turn away from the
primal experience of existence which appears as preparation for the possibility
of joyin which his relationship to the meaning (Sinn) of the whole withers
away , on the contrary, it is more likely that in this turning towards he affirms
the meaning of the whole. If we examine the event-like character of allowing
to grow, allowing to exist, allowing to be or being dependent on existence, we
may easily arrive at the conclusion that the primal experience of these should
be connected to the mother, to the most significant of the female archetypes.
However, in Istvn Jakabs tale it is not only the archetype of the mother but the
archetype of the lover that repeatedly appears, and in terms of its significance,
it precedes that of the mother.

70 Abraham Maslow, the central developer of ideas in humanistic psychology

distinguishes two forms of motivation towards growth: deficiency motivation and
self-actualization and says that we must differentiate the Freudian type of superego
from intrinsic conscience and intrinsic guilt. () Intrinsic guilt is the consequence of
betrayal of ones own inner nature or self, a turning off the path to self-actualization.
( self-disapproval) is not just a symptom to be avoided at any cost but is rather an
inner guide for growth toward actualization of the real self and of its potentialities.
MASLOW, Abraham: Toward a Psychology of Being, Sublime Books, 2014. p. 161
71 HELTING: op.cit. p. 180181
72 HELTING: op.cit. p. 79

1 239 2

4. The Enigma of the Lover

In another tale by Jakab, The King of Blackness, he uses a surprising turn
quite unusual in the world of folk tales. This tale text is again a contamination
of various types, but to such an extent that it is impossible to typologize; it
becomes a work of art in its own right.73 The hero rushing to save the girl who is
possessed by evil spirits passes the most horrendous tests while on guard beside
the princess buried in a coffinand when she awakens as a cleansed spirit, he is
ready to marry her. However, in a quite irregular way the princess does not want
to become a wife, she even suggests that the hero, instead of letting the tale reach
its usual end of and they lived happily afteri.e. the conclusion of a series of
tests, saving the girl, the reward that is always the princess and at least half the
kingdomshould renounce his intention to marry her and the reward offered by
the king, and should ask instead for the little oak barrel from her father that he
values so much. Naturally, the oak barrel has magic powers, the hero has struck
a good bargain but temporarily he has to give up both wife and the wealth. It is
worth quoting in length what the cleansed and saved girl says:
Look here, my sweetheart Jnas, I am yours and you are mine! You have kept
me, there is nothing for you to be afraid of in me because all kinds of evil
spirits have left me and if you wish Look, my little sweetheart, in any case
you were the one to keep guard over me for three nights, and as I said, there
is nothing to fear from me, I am a clean spirit now, so I will do anything that
pleases you or you wish to take part in, but I will give you another piece of
advice as well. In any case I was not destined to be yours, to be your wife,

73 The type formula I suggest is only for general information and it does not cover
the real type formula of the tale, since it does not give us much information about
the structural features. () The types are woven together uniquely, () there are
indeed many episodes inserted in the tale that are individual creations, () generally
an individual redaction characterizes both the content and the links between the
types. NAGYV: op.cit. p. 853. In the first three chapters of his latest volume,
Pter Blint discusses the structural features and the characteristics of tale telling
BLINT Pter, Archaic Images in Folk Tales. Istvn Jakab, Gypsy Tale Teller, Didakt
Kft., Debrecen, 2014. pp. 11101

1 240 2

but if it pleases you, I might be. So you may begin the bread but you cannot
finish the bread. ()
Well, Jnas took the advice and words of the girl seriously, however he was
hot with love because he was very much in love with this girl. So, everything
took place there that had to take place on that night, until dawn.74
The King of Blackness repeatedly activates the motif of the bread and not in
the sense of salvation; it is much rather connected to sexuality, with sexuality
unfinished, in this case referring to that aspect of the relationship of lovers
that remains a love affair and does not culminate or become fulfilled in marriage
or child bearing.75 In English the words breed and bread rhyme just as the word
breath that has the same root with bread. The common Indo-European root goes
back to bhreue or bhr which means: to burn, heat.76 There is a linguistically
observable connection in Indo-European languages that unites the semantics of
bread, the sexual act and breath (the beginning of a new life, the divine spirit)
into one semantic field.
Mythology, however creates an unambiguous and close connection between
love and wheat and not only through the figures of ancient Greek gods but through
an ancient system of belief that precedes Greek mythologybeliefs which the
Greeks inherited from the ancient Sumerian or Semitic culture. In mythological
thinking the gods of orgies, fertility and war were Tammuz and Ishtar. Frazer
writes that people of the lands bordering the Eastern Mediterranean (Egypt,

74 Jakab Istvn: A Feketebli kirly [The King of Blackness], In: NAGY Olga
V Gabriella: Havasok mesemondja, Jakab Istvn mesi. [The Tent Gypsy of
Transylvanian Mountains. Tales by Istvn Jakab] Akadmiai Kiad, Budapest, 2002.
p. 212
75 Research conducted by Erzsbet Bdi offers a good example taken from Polish
customs: at the proposal the girl and the boy exchange a loaf of breadthis
gesture was to sanctify the forthcoming marriage. Jelkptr, (ed. HOPPL Mihly
JANKOVICS MarcellNAGY AndrsSZEMADM Gyrgy), Helikon Kiad,
Budapest, 2010. p. 153
76 AYTO, John: Bloomsbury Dictionary of Word Origins, London, Bloomsbury
Reference, 1991. p. 7778 See also the Online Etymological Dictionary:
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?l=b&p=40&allowed_in_frame=0

1 241 2

Western-Asia) presented and represented the annual decline and renewal of

lifeespecially plant lifeunder the names of Osiris, Tammuz, Adonis and
Attis. The name of Adonis is a borrowed name and goes back to the Semitic
adon, lord, a title of honour and it hides the figure of the god Tammuz. The
fiance or lover of Tammuz was Ishtar, the Great Mother goddess embodying
the renewing forces of nature.77 The nature of Ishtar is somewhat restricted
or narrowed by Frazer, therefore his interpretation becomes misleading since
Ishtar is the goddess of fertility, physical love, war and conflict, and her name in
the Eastern Semitic language meant goddess (astar), referring to the fact that
her figure represented the figure of all goddesses.
The Ishtar cult from Uruk was connected to orgiastic celebrations in which
self-torture (perhaps self-castration), sexual liberty, and sacrificing the virginity
of kalishtu priestesses was also a part.78 Adonis was the child of Theias, an
Assyrian king and his daughter Smyrna (the daughter fell in incestuous love
with her father who had no idea that he had slept with his own daughter, and
from this unification Adonis is born), a god of Phoenician origin having plant
functions that are related to the temporary death and renewal of nature. Adonis
spends part of the year with Persephone in the underworld, the other half with
Aphrodite (according to the Phoenician version, with Ashtarta) whom he
accompanies and whose lover he becomes. The Aphrodite sanctuary in Byblos
became a place where in the name of sacred prostitution orgies were held: the
first day was for mourning, then the second day was a celebration of joy for the
resurrecting Adonis.79 Frazer mentions that Tammuz or Adonis was respected
as a wheat god as welleven though they planted fast growing, fast blooming
and withering plants into pots, the cult itself was closely related to wheat, too.
Mourning the death of Adonis is nothing else but mourning over man violently
destroying the wheat crop: he cuts it down in the field, stamps it to pieces on the
77 FRAZER, James G.: The Golden Bough, Digital Edition, NuVision Publications,
LLC, 2006. p. 175 (https://books.google.hu/books?id=SmSqmPSFzw8C&printsec=
frontcover&hl=hu#v=onepage&q&f=false)
78 Mitolgiai Enciklopdia, Vol. I., [Mythological Encyclopedia] (ed. TOKAREV, S. A.),
Gondolat, Budapest, 1988. p. 507
79 TOKAREV: op.cit. p. 621622

1 242 2

threshing-floor, tramps and grinds it to powder in the mill.80 Frazer also makes
a presupposition based on a description by a 10th century Arabic writer.
There is some reason to think that in early times Adonis was sometimes
personated by a living man who died a violent death in the character of the
god. Further, there is evidence which goes to show that among the agricultural
peoples of the Eastern Mediterranean, the corn-spirit, by whatever name he
was known, was often represented, year by year, by human victims slain on
the harvest-field. If this was so, it seems likely that the propitiation of the
corn-spirit would tend to fuse to some extent with the worship of the dead.
For the spirits of these victims might be thought to return to life in the ears
which they had fattened with their blood, and to die a second death at the
reaping of the corn. Now the ghosts of those who have perished by violence
are surly and apt to wreak their vengeance on their slayers whenever an
opportunity offers. Hence the attempt to appease the souls of the slaughtered
victims would naturally blend, at least in the popular conception, with the
attempt to pacify the slain corn-spirit. And as the dead came back in the
sprouting corn, so they might be thought to return in the spring flowers,
waked from their long sleep by the soft vernal airs.81
Accordingly, the cult of the wheat/corn/crop has been related to human
sacrifice and the pacification of the spirits of the dead. The gardener who appears
in tales and who revives plants and flowersthis will be one of the tasks of
Nutbush Jnas at the court of the Turkish kingacts as a successor to this
pacifying rite. The figure of Ishtar (Innin, Ashtarta) originally personalized the
abundance of wheat and reed, the annual rebirth of vegetation. The Sumeric
epic cycles about the love and unification of Innin and Dumuzi82, the shepherd
gods, were related to the sacred celebrations of fertility cult. They were connected
to orgiastic rituals and the sacred unification of the king and the priestess. 83
80 FRAZER: op.cit. p. 182
81 FRAZER: op.cit. p. 182183
82 In Greek mythology they were called Adonis and Aphrodite.
83 Szimblumtr. Jelkpek, motvumok, tmk az egyetemes s a magyar kultrbl.
[Encyclopedia of Symbols. Symbols, Motifs and Subjects in Universal and Hungarian
Culture] (ed. PL Jzsef and JVRI Edit) Balassi Kiad, Budapest, 2001. p. 227

1 243 2

Even Herodotus mentions the custom in Babylon in which the traces of these
orgiastic rituals survived:
The Babylonians have one most shameful custom. Every woman born in
the country must once in her life go and sit down in the precinct of Venus,
and there consort with a stranger. () lines of cord mark out paths in all
directions; the women, and the strangers pass along them to make their
choice. A woman who has once taken her seat is not allowed to return home
till one of the strangers throws a silver coin into her lap, and takes her with
him beyond the holy ground. () The silver coin may be of any size; it cannot
be refused, for that is forbidden by the law, since once thrown it is sacred.
The woman goes with the first man who throws her money, and rejects no
one. When she has gone with him, and so satisfied the goddess, she returns
home, and from that time forth no gift, however great, will prevail with her.84
In Istvn Jakabs tale beginning the bread would not even refer to marriage
in this waya marriage where table and bed are sharedin the tale telling act
it does not take place claiming the beginning of a new life with a new princess/
partner but with the ideal of achieving pure love. The sexual act of love in this case
overwrites moral rules and regulations, and religious (Christian) instructions
(Jnas tells her in vain that he is a Catholic lad) and the rescued girl, the cleansed
virgin, offers herself, her own chastity, as a reward; a kind of offer we might be
familiar with from the above quoted description of orgies taking place in the
temple of Ishtar. The princess in The King of Blackness therefore performs an
act that presents the signs represented by the ancient goddesses of Ishtar and
Aphrodite, the orgiastic aspect of life, the attachment by wheat/corn. She can
say that Jnas may begin the bread but may not finish it, because on the one
hand she does not need to put an end to the love affair (since it is not a love affair
based on promises, but rather a ritual, a cult performance), while on the other
hand the relationship to the bread, which he may not finish, makes the attitude

84 HERODOTUS: Persian Wars, I. p. 199 (http://www.parstimes.com/history/

herodotus/persian_wars/clio.html (Downloaded: 18. 11. 2014)

1 244 2

to pacify and console the spirits continuous and it by no means annihilates its
connection to the orgiastic.85
In Jnas in the Nunnery the wheat field which grows from the wheat bread
(in the sense that the bread has been renewed, and new wheat has grown from
the bread 694) points to the act of propitiation by the murdered one, by the dead
spirits. Similarly, the act of love will take place under a bush, a plant, from which
Nutbush Jnas will receive his name. The significance of the nut bushand it
is no longer the wheat or bread which refers to propitiation or orgyis that the
son of Jnas is named after a plant which is the symbol of hidden wisdom, and
knowledge. The nut is the symbol of wisdom, inspiration, prophecy, magic,
khtonic forces. Related to the development of mystic knowledge it is the symbol
of patience and persistency since the nut ripens ripe slowly. () In folk poetry,
due to its shape which reminds us of male genitalia, just like the walnut and
the acorn, it appears as a sexual symbol.86 Through the symbol preserved in
his name, Nutbush Jnas is not only linked to sexualityfinally he also has to
obtain the princessbut does so walking the path of patience, wisdom, magic
and knowledge. This is why the corn kernel will provide him with knowledge
and he will be able to learn the language of the Turkish king so easily. Therefore
Nutbush Jnas lives his life not acting out the gestures of propitiation, or
compensation for sins but under the protection of a symbol of a kind of plant
that not only ensures his ability to adjust to the events around him but also in a
sense closes him into a hard shell, separating him from injuries or the possibility
to cause damage.
In a certain sense, the mother of Nutbush Jnas is no different from the
princess of The King of Blackness since both of them give themselves over, and
without resistance, to the heroand now it does not matter whether she faints
and for this reason is unable to resist by her own will or instead, gives herself
willingly and without any resistance. However, the lover, who as a sexual partner
offers openness and devotion besides the basic needseating, sleeping, sexuality
85 Jnas in the tale first obtains the princess who is in love with another man. The
thorough analysis of the male-female relationship in the tale might require further
study.
86 Szimblumtr: op.cit. 344345

1 245 2

, will also do so without any taboos (I will do anything that pleases you or you
wish to take part in) which is the greatest taboo, the most secret existent of
European Christian culture, whose existence always already falls under moral
judgment. Although, just as Helting highlighted, from a Dasein-analytic point
of view the relationship with a lover is based on letting the other exist, it
offers itself for the experience of spaciousness and enthusiasm and enters a
positive relationship of dependency in which he may be himself only because
the other makes it possible for him87. In this sense the girl possessed by evil
spirits and finally saved from them does not present the corruption of moral
sin or profligacy, she does not annihiliate the cleansed state of her spirit, but in
this love affair she openly turns towards herself and towards the one who saved
her. In this sense the events determined by the tale, the destinies pre-ordained,
the forceful power of the tale structure withdraws into the background, since
the tale teller does not aspire to a story of salvation in the tale but presents how
two people may open up to each other, how they can be cleansed in each other.
The secret of the lover is nothing else but this giving oneself over without any
precondition, either physically or spiritually.
As for the erotic act there is still an enormous difference between the two
tales in relation to the consequences. While in the closing scene of the first
part in the tale Jnas in the Nunnery, Jnas rapes a woman he had set his eyes
onwith whom he incidentally falls in lovethe hero in The King of Blackness,
after saving the girl from the evil spirits, receives as if by a gift the pure love
that is even capable of giving up the promise made to each other. She only
asks the hero to follow his own path and for a short time she even becomes his
helperthrough the objects that she helps the hero to obtainright up to the
end of the tale. In connection to the phenomenology of love in both tales the
phenomenology of sexuality needs to be studied since these tales do not speak
of some infantile, brotherly or maternal love, but explicitly about erotic, sexual
love which the tales only refer to and do not ever describe in detail; the spatial
movements of the sexual act would easily turn into pornography88 and this is by
87 HELTING: op.cit. p. 183
88 One substitutes for its radical visibility a visibility in full exposition, public and
prostituted. Graphy in the word refers to this move. MARION, Jean-Luc: The Erotic

1 246 2

no means a goal in tales offering the listener or reader formulas to solve their
fates or lives. Nonetheless, the scenes in the two tales describe the encounter of
two bodies but with an entirely different outcome: both yield a gift in as much as
Jnas will have a son, the Jnas in The King of Blackness, who will receive pure,
selfless love and a helper.89

5. Codes of Sexuality:
Beyond Prohibition and Objectification
Taking a closer look at the threefold aspect of sexuality, the concepts
of prohibition/taboo are the most striking, for which the philosophicalanthropological (and somewhat Surrealistic) writing by Bataille provides a good
starting point. Making sexuality a taboo invites the necessary transgression and
violation of taboos; therefore all kinds of sexual actswhich do not serve the
end of reproduction or economic continuitymay be listed as transgressive.
In Merleau-Pontys study on the phenomenology of the body the sexual body
partly appears as a kind of object which is always sexual and co-existent with
life90 but is subjected to social regulations and may only step beyond being
Phenomenon (trans. By LEWIS, Stephen E.) University of Chicago Press, Chicago
and London, 2007. p. 138
89 Compare: in one of his tales, Jnos Cifra, the hero who wins the princess would
continue to pass tests even after the wedding and receives half the kingdom for
himself almost solely because the princess chases after him with her love. In the tale
entitled Mr the princess says: My majesty, my dear young king! You have saved
my life, you have killed the fourteen-headed dragon. Please come into my fathers
house because you cannot escape from me now. For I will not let you go, I will fulfill
all your wishes, if you want, I will be your wife. Mr (trans. by Gabriella Agnes
NAGY), In: BDIS Zoltn: The Truth of the Tale-word. Tales of Jnos Cifra, Gypsy
Tale Teller, Didakt Kft. Debrecen, 2014. p. 379. Her offer depends on the promise,
she would even revoke the possibility of an escape from the reward.
90 MERLEAU-PONTY, Maurice: The Phenomenology of Perception (trans. SMITH,
Colin) Routledge, London and New York, (1962) 1999. p. 168. Sexuality is neither
transcendent in human life nor shown at its center by unconscious representations.
It is at all times present there, like an atmosphere.

1 247 2

defined as an object in its own experiences as a body. Marions concept, the

erotic phenomenon, promises the turn in Western-European philosophy that
replaces the relationship defined by thought and mind or the relationship with
the world established by the body with the phenomenology of the primacy of
love and appoints it as the final cause or agent of existence or bodily experience.
In his book, Erotism, George Bataille examines those transgressive states that
became taboos in Western civilization. These transgressive states are related to
the mystic and the sacred: such a transgressive state is for instance sexuality
and death/violence/murder. According to Bataille, death basically ensures the
continuity of existence, while reproduction, the birth of a child, involves the
discontinuity of existence. Eroticism however does not serve reproduction,
the whole business of eroticism is to strike to the inmost core of the living
being, so that the heart stands still91. Within the space of the experience of the
sacral the mystic or erotic experience repeatedly returns to the space of death,
to continuity. Transgressive states are not individual but collective states. They
strive for the integration with the other/others; they can only be realized this
way, and so consequently, Bataille argues against the possibility of individual
transgressive experience. For him discontinuity, reproduction, taboo, the sphere
of life stands opposed to the sphere of continuity, death and transgression:
during the course of their lives those who exist strive for the experience of
continuity, meaning that their lives are running towards death. According to
Bataille, transgressive experience has three kinds, the physical, the emotional
and the religious. The experience of continuity however is regulated in every
form (physical, emotional, religious) by taboos and prohibitions. Therefore in
each case the experience of continuity always takes place together with the
violation of taboos and regulations.
In connection to sexuality, Bataille refers to the genital impulse as the cause
of the crisis and he speaks of the violence of the sexual impulse. Defenseless
against (animal) sexual fever the individual experiences the critical moments
of his isolation: The fear of death and pain is transcended 92. Transgression,
91 BATAILLE, Georges: Erotism. Death and Sensuality (trans: DALWOOD, Mary) City
Lights Books, San Fransisco, 1986. p. 17
92 BATAILLE: op.cit. p. 98

1 248 2

stepping beyond something, may not only take place in the space of the sacred
but on the one hand at the fulfillment of sexual desire and on the other hand in
reproduction, in breeding a child. The phenomenon of reproduction, however,
has always been linked to economic interests, and it brings in the concepts used
in law, morality, religion and economic structures. Life understood as based
on human relationships, however, may not ever be reduced to these economic
relations, or to legal or moral relations, nor even to bodily functions, states
Merleau-Ponty.93 According to the starting point for Bataille, death and life are
connected in the mystic and sexual experience. Transgressing tabooed events
may only happen in a sphere which opposes the regulated world order based on
(moral) rules and norms. (Taboo is there in order to be violated; transgression
does not deny the taboo but transcends it and completes it.) The world of work
excludes violence linked to taboo. When Bataille states that life may be doomed
but the continuity of existence is not 94, then it becomes clear how Jakab tells
his tales: the life of the doomed, murderous and violent spirit may not continue;
however, existence as such still runs on through the birth of his son. In this
sense the woman who will give birth to Nutbush Jnas, by ensuring the (dis)
continuity of existenceand the continuity of a life of a doomed spiritas if
saved, brings Jnas into the world, and not only by and in his name. In The King
of Balckness the doomed spirit has to be saved from being possessed, a spirit who
in this state of possession has caused the death of almost all men around herall
the kings soldiers and all other men were lost in the act of trying to stand guard
by the girl for three nights. The event of being saved is, in both cases, marked
by an act of love: in the first case there is a child born with his pure spirit, in the
other case an act taking place in the name of pure love. Stepping across from
the world of order and morals, the hero in both tales finds himself in the sacred
space of transgression: one of them in the space of reproduction (just as the
wheat grows), the other in the space of sexual fulfillment (presenting a sacrifice
on the altar of both love and death).
In his book, The Phenomenology of Perception, Merleau-Ponty dedicates an
entire chapter to the body in its sexual being. Sexuality is co-existent with life,
93 Maurice MERLEAU-PONTY: op.cit. p. 173
94 BATAILLE: op.cit. p. 23

1 249 2

it pervades the visible body; however, it is no longer regarded simply as a bodily

function but as a sort of intentionality that follows the general flow of existence
it yields to its movements. Sexuality may not be transgressed and it does not even
reveal itself in unconscious representations. It is always present as an atmosphere
but it is an ambiguous atmosphere since everything we live or think has always
several meanings95. Sexuality is dramatic, for we have consecrated our whole
life to it. While Merleau-Ponty defines sexuality as an atmosphere which in
a sense pervades existence, an aspect inseparable from human existence, he
attaches a long footnote at the end of the chapter in which he elaborates on its
economic, legal and moral aspects. Nakedness, the naked body exposed to the
gaze, is defined by him as an object that activates a kind of objectifying gaze
generating shame or shamelessness, or perhaps seeking to fascinate. In the basic
relationship between sexuality and existence the body remains as a visible thing,
an object, and it may only step out of this unambiguous existence, into which it
has been thrown as an object, through bodily experiences.
Jean-Luc Marion looks at sexuality from an entirely different point of view: he
extends it towards the concept of love and makes it one of the manifestational
modes of love. Going beyond the basic thesis established by Descartes cogito
ergo sum he writes that man may only think or perform cognitive acts in his
existence under the condition of being always already preceded by the experience
and ability to love. Cognition does not depend on existence, nor on the individual
being, and necessarily objectifies the object of cognition, i.e. it creates a distance.
However, love, tackled in erotic reduction, would demolish this distance and
it is impossible to distance it from the individual: nobody else can be there to
love instead of me, states Marion. Erotic reduction is something that does not
trust me with myself, but makes me step out of myself, therefore ensuring my
connections and openness towards my being-in-the-world. In erotic reduction
man cannot be left alone, solitarilythis might lead to self-hatredbut is always
open towards others, turning towards others he arrives at the sort of dialogic
(not necessarily in proper dialogues, since the sexual act is voiceless, or is not
at all dependent on, or does not even need referential speech) an experience
of existence based on mutuality (and in the luckier cases based on a promise),
95 MERLEAU-PONTY: op.cit. p. 169

1 250 2

whose basic statement is amo ergo sum, I love therefore I am.96 To summarize
or discuss this thesis consistently elaborated by Marion is beyond the scope of
this study; however, a few of its statements are undisputably relevant.
Returning to the turning point97 in Jnas in the Nunnery, two stories are
continued and to ensure this continuity (by death) a new life is created. Existence,
existere, also means to step out, to appear; in this turn the hero is incapable of
restoring the order he had disturbed and confused, he is unable to turn towards
himself, meaning that he is unable to trigger the turn of emotions and cognition
in himself, but at least he ensures a kind of continuity of his existence: in this
new life the turn will take place. The sexual act itself happens without the
womans willful consent. Since man is at the mercy of the automatism of the
flesh, Jnas uses it to seduce the other. We cannot simply read a description of
rape in the tale, in which Jnas eliminates the resistance of the other by using
his cunning and the automatism of the fleshthe woman faints during her
abduction and the elopement does not only appear as an element of the tale but
is doubled in the relationship between the two fleshes: this abduction, which
appears in the form of sexual rape, at the same time robs her of her climax, her
96 MARION: op.cit. especially the First meditation.
97 The Greek word, metanoia, turn originally means the turn of senses and sensibility.
This turn is nothing else but the reversal of perception or cognition. So to exit the
boundaries of the self-establishing itself within the framework of the material,
visible world is possible by entering the divine self by a turn that may be achieved
by the reversal of our sensitivity and cognition. In the Bible metanoia is translated
as atonement. Therefore atonement originally did not refer to the thought, so
fashionable in Christian thinking, that you have to account for your deeds, classify
them according to whether they are good or bad, correct or incorrect, and then
atone for them, but to an appeal: when man feels guilty and starts to feel anxiety
because of thisbesides this there is no other possibility, since our deeds always
appear as already sinfulthe proper answer is to turn our senses to a different
direction. Where? To the self. Greek tragedy becomes truth not by silencing but
by presenting reality, it leads man through all of the terrors and the images of his
own anxiety. But whoever is ready to look into the depth of life will be freed from
all anxiety. DETHLEFSEN, Thorwald: Oedipusz, a talny megfejtje [Oedipus the
Riddle-Solver] (trans. SARANK Mrta) Magyar Knyvklub, 1997.

1 251 2

sexual pleasure.98 This type of eroticization has to end not only because every
erotic event necessarily strives towards its dnouement and closing scene, but
because instead of the opening up of the two fleshes (the flesh of Jnas and of the
woman) one takes possession of the other. The body conceived as something to
be possessed evokes the definitive event of Jnass heritage: it repeats the motif
of being tuned to existence as a child possessed.
As I have mentioned above, in a certain sense the mother of Nutbush Jnas
shows similarities with the female character in The King of Blackness and not
only in representing female beauty or in not displaying resistance (of course
for many different reasons) but in the gesture of not demanding justification,
moral compensation or any kind of promise. We might say that both of them
would simply like to go home.99 The heterogeneity of the semantics of the secret
makes it possible for the path to simultaneously appear as one leading from
being separated (in Latin: secretum) to the domestic, to the home (in German:
Geheimnis)for both female characters it means the homeland of their origins

98 MARION: op.cit. 164

99 As Zoltn Bdis writes, the German equivalent of the word secret is Geheimnis,
which contains the stem Heim home and it refers to the fact that secret has its
place in the family, or in other words: the family is saturated with secrets. See
BDIS: op.cit. p. 131. In this sense it is permitted to take the secret home (the event
impossible to recount to othersviolence, orgy, etc.), it even has its ideal location
there. This is why the piece of bread hiding in the princess pocket may say instead
of her to the devil lover that: What have you been suffering compared to what I have
been through? I was sown, harrowed, cut off, beaten out, killed, kneaded and I can
still forgive. So you are able to forgive, too. (Baranyai magyar nphagyomnyok I
III. Collected, edited and notes by BERZE NAGY Jnos Dr.: Kultra Knyvnyomdai
Mintzet, Pcs, 1940. Vol. II. p. 153158) Instead of the girl resisting devilish
temptation it is the bread taken from home that speaks, the bread that has still
some connection with sacrifice. BLINT Pter: Az llandsg, a folyamatossg
s elzrtsg hermeneutikja (Az rdgszeret-tpus [407B] npmeskben)
In: BLINT: Meserts s rtelmezs. A krpt-medencei npmese hagyomny
hermeneutikai vizsglata [Understanding and Interpreting Tales. Hermeneutic
Analysis of the Folktale Tradition of the Carpathian Basin], Didakt Kft., Debrecen,
2013. p. 231258

1 252 2

and by no means the territory of the home they have set up for their new lives.
However, although the homeland of origins and the other being remain hidden
(in Hungarian titok, or in Greek letheia) for the hero in Jnas in the Nunnery
since taking possession of the other was already made possible by objectification
and it hindered true knowledgethe girl in The King of Blackness makes
existence and in it, love, accessible to the hero in its openness such that by this
very act he arrives at that aspect of experiencing existence which is impossible to
reveal and always remains hidden (aletheia).100 So by declaring their intention to
stay at home, neither female character forces the hero to take responsibility for
something that is already, and as if preordained, impossible to execute (Jnas in
the Nunnery) nor something which stands in the way of the heros destiny (The
King of Blackness).
The act of blinding Jnas is a straightforward consequence of this impossible
responsibility. The face facing us makes us confront the test of alterity, and
therefore it cannot be a thing seen; it primarily confronts me with the perspective
(gaze) of the other opening up to the world and it addresses me: Do not kill!101
Since murder marks me forever, perhaps it partly hinders the command of the
face: Love me! According to Marion, I can only receive myself from the other and
the pre-requisite for this is the obedience to the faces commandthis obedience
is always already rooted in the experience that in order to be loved it is me who
opens herself up. Love does not only suppose a dialogic relationship but a kind of
100 DERRIDA, Jacques: Who Is the Mother? op.cit. 13. When talking about the
mother, Derrida opposes immediate sensing (defining the concept of matriarchy)
with the certitude of the mind (patriarchy). As time passed, civilizationdefined
by physis and tekhnreinforced and increased the workings of tekhn based on
repetition and reproducibility. What connects secret here to witnessing and the
legal forgery/invention of the father is the attribution of fatherhood, which always
oversteps, exceeds sensing, exceeds the witnessing of the senses; the relationship to
the father always belongs to a territory where the secret is possible and endurable,
to a territory we may call mystic: the mystic means enigmatic and clandestine, at
least in the Greek semantics of the word which we have just been differentiating
from the semantics of the Latin secretum (secernere, separation, etc) and the
German Geheimnis (heimisch, heimlich, homely, home, etc.).
101 MARION: op.cit. p. 99

1 253 2

intersection, the crossing of the flesh in which the participants are irreplaceable
and may only reach themselves through each other. Jnas, who wants to possess
the physical body like an object, may only turn towards the woman with his face
unprepared to answer the command Love me!: this is how he is blinded. The
other turns her own inaccessibility towards him and perhaps she would agree to
take part in this intersection, or perhaps, as her freedom allows her to do, she
might not agree at all. Love is blind in the sense that as long as there is nobody
who would step in front of him in this intentionality and would fill up this space,
he cannot even see herthis is why it remains a blind attitude, it runs forward
and is born blind. The lover may only know or see what he or she already loves and
he or she knows it in as much as s/he loves it. Haggling, abducting the woman,
treating her as an object possessed does not make it possible for her to open
herself up to becoming a lover, and the others decision regarding the refusal of
the call is nothing else but a response to an invitation in which the other would
not step on stage as a lover but as a murderer: dead flesh is good flesh, i.e. flesh no
longer capable of resistance.
As long as the womans resistance is suspended by deception and tricks, Jnas
again commits a kind of murder, again he infringes the law of Do not kill! and
because he does not (even) see the subject of his love, he is doomed to be blinded.
Blindness in this case is not the self-blinding act we know from the tragedy
of King Oedipus as an example of self-punishment in which external vision
turns into internal introspection or contemplation, but is the consequence of
the refusal of this inner contemplation: the defect that has hindered Jnas so
far will appear on his face as well. Losing his sight does not lead him to selfanalysis or introspection: at the end of his solitary wanderings he dieshe
has not used his possibilities for compensation, nor did he use the possibility
for introspection offered by blindness, nor did he give any chance to the turn
accomplishable by a reversal of senses. The turning point in Jnas in the Nunnery
is surprising partly because the hero does not usually die in tales, and because
the compensatory nature of tales is not achieved. In The King of Blackness the
nuptials of the princess and the lad who saves her is surprising because the hero
who finally succeeds in saving the princess usually receives the princess and half
the kingdom as a reward. However, in this tale it is much more important for
the hero to be able to follow his own path, and pass the tests that allow him to
1 254 2

acquire his own strength. The act of lovewhich takes place in a crypt in order to
simultaneously become the location of love, life and deathhowever, occurs as a
result of a mutual turning which may fulfill the radical form of erotic reduction.
In erotic reduction, love needs repetition, which again and again repeats the
fulfilled turning towards, the intersection of fleshes without any resistance. The
function of the arrival of the third one, the child, is to ensure the permanence of
the erotic phenomenon, its constant visibility.
In Jnas in the Nunnery this may not be realized since we are not witness
to a love relationship understood as an erotic reduction in the sense offered
by Marion, but we are reading the story of a hero who is basically tuned by his
birth and by his later deeds to an obsessive wish to possesshe wants to possess
salvation, love and a quiet life.
Moreover, the obsession with possessing the thing, which one calls my child,
can easily go hand in hand with its being forgotten as a result of indifference,
its instrumentalization by convenience, or even destruction by mistreatment
(physical or psychological).102 This is partly why he dies, and cannot become
a father, this is partly why the mother has to distance her own son, Nutbush
Jnas from the homeland, from his homeshe enrolls him in a boarding school.
Since he has no father, he was born as a child of love, well, let the child become
somebody. (704). Jnas being distanced from his homeland means that he leaves
the secret behind at home, so that it would never be accessible for him.103 For
him, leaving the home is a question of life and death, he literally has to search
for meaning during his wanderings in such a way that he stops searching for
and questioning his origins, his existence, or sexuality, but starts to seek out the
secret of knowledge and love. Knowledge derives from love, since we may only
become familiar with what we already lovethe episode of the little rooster
refers to this phenomenon; Nutbush Jnas starts to like the little rooster and
when the cook wants to slaughter it to cook it in a soup, he saves its life; in return

102 MARION: op.cit. p. 198

103 We no longer know who the mother is (and perhaps I do not need to emphasize again
that this uncertainty is not merely a theoretical point but it may be the carrier of the
most fantastic, most moving emotions as well.) DERRIDA: op.cit. p. 29

1 255 2

he receives a magical corn kernel from the rooster that makes him access all the
knowledge he needs.
Sexuality is one aspect manifested in carnal experiences and it can be
preserved in as much as it sets itself free from the erotic phenomenons
aspiration to be repeated. However, it will not perform this in the reproduction
of a child but by putting an end to self-hatred, relying on the mercy and trust of
the other, i.e. by reversing his senses (metanoia). The recognition that they have
always already loved before me, too, without even knowing me, does not only
introduce the thought of the love between parents which already exists before
any birth, but also refers to that first lover who loves to perfection, without a
fault, without an error, from beginning to end. () He loves first, and last.104
Since tales are neither parables nor Midrash texts that by fixing public norms
and practical rules would reveal the possibilities to come closer to divine love
and their aim is not to guarantee the laws of the past and the continuity of
traditions, they necessarily give up the introduction of divine love. (However,
they do not renounce the narration of divine care and in this it is clear that the
two are different: divine love is an existential state, a relationship; divine care is
an aspect of it manifesting itself). However, through a few tale characters and
their deeds the tale may display those possibilities for love that are accessible for
man created in a God-like shape (man as teomorph). When Jnas pushes forward
as a blind lover, deprived of his sight and no longer knowing whom to love and
how, he finds another lover senior to him, watching him, looking after his steps,
and loving him already, without his knowledge, in spite of himit was necessary
for another lover to have gone there before him, a lover who, from there, calls
him in silence.105 In this sense, for divine love the ten commandments are not
laws but recommendationshow else would God have been able to forgive Jnas
all his evil deeds and sins , and to keep them leads us to a better, more
authentic life. The human ways of approaching divine love have to remain at
least partly secret, in order to avoid the demand for polaritiesso characteristic

104 MARION: op.cit. p. 222

105 MARION: op.cit. p. 215

1 256 2

of human existence and the world106for compensation, balance, to avoid the

revealing of absence or fault. If, as a human being, pure love is gifted, it was
gifted just as it was to Jnas in The King of Blacknessaccording to the tale, it is
better when he does not gain his reward in an earthly love (which is necessarily
imperfect, being subject to temporality, never capable of becoming timeless) but
in searching out his own strength to which he has access by a real license due
to his earthly existence. Because man in his earthly existence may only love as
a human, always with deficiency, with mistakes, with faults and imperfectly, the
tale hero then walks along these paths, and his source of strength is provided
by these tests.
(Translated by Gabriella gnes Nagy)

106 DETHLEFSEN: op.cit. Especially the chapter On Tragic Mistake p. 4572.

Christian man should learn, from the perspective of tragic mistake, to interpret
his own sense of guilt in a new way, he should see that guilt means separation
and therefore it belongs to human existence, it even enables it because guilt is the
pledge of his own personal freedom. (p. 70) In the same way, the secret leads to
separation and it may make us free if we make it our own as something homely, we
integrate it as our shadow and we leave it for what it is: a secret.

1 257 2

Gbor Bicz
FORMS OF THE SECRET-PARADIGM
IN THE TALE; THE TALES OF LAJOS MI

1 259 2

Introduction
he historical drama entitled Az advrkirly, hrman
maradtak egy testvrek (King Advar; Only Three Brothers are
Left) is a highly disturbing piece of Lajos mis monumental
collection of tales.1 According to Sndor Erdsz, collector of the
tale, the story about the unfaithful brotheralthough it lacks
all concrete tale motifsbelongs to the category of fairy tales through the motif
of the mother and child being banished into the forest. Formal typology, however,
tends to mislead the interpretation of cumulative meanings in the text.
According to the story, King Advars oldest son becomes king after his fathers
death. The new King Advar appoints his older brother crown prince and his
younger brother clerk. The young king marries a princess and urges his brothers to
marry as well. Soon the king has a son. However, the story takes a tragic turn when
one day the king finds his younger brother in his wifes bedroom. Traditionally, this
breach of taboo is punished with death; but since the person having committed
the sin is his brother, the king decides to punish him by banishing him from the
country. At the same time he orders his older brother to take the queen and her
son to the forest where wild animals would tear them to pieces. The queen begs
the older brother to spare their lives. Finally the prince takes pity:
Listen, I cannot let you go, how can I do that? If the king finds out, that we
have told the secret he will hang me; he has power over me as well. () Still,
I pity you. I have thought of a way out.2
The prince takes the queen and her son to the hunters house and tells the
hunters family to guard the secret with their own life. In six days time, however,
the kings mind is filled with remorse and he sends his brother to the forest to
see whether he could still find his family alive. The prince brings the queen and
the baby home without telling the king about the hunters family. But he needs
to keep the secret forever. He decides to get rid of the witnesses: he murders the
hunter and his family, camouflaging his act as a robbers attack.
1 Tale No. 27 In: ERDSZ, Sndor (Ed.): mi Lajos Mesi I. (Tales of Lajos mi I.)
Akadmiai Kiad, Budapest, 1968. pp. 370376
2 Ibid. p. 372

1 260 2

In the meanwhile the youngest brother, Sndor, finds shelter at the Turkish
kings court. To win the hand of the kings daughter he discloses weaknesses of
his brothers war plans. He takes revenge by conquering his brothers army and
taking the king as his prisoner. mi relates the fratricide in his usual naturalistic
manner.
Who will dismember the king and cut him into little pieces?
A young man said, I am a butcher by profession, I am skilled in cutting up
meat and have sharp knives and an axe. I can do it.
Come here then, you will be paid a hundred crowns for your work.
The king was untied and the young man cut his throat. He put the body on
a block and cut it into small pieces. When he was finished he scattered the
pieces in the forest.3
But the tragic story doesnt end here and the reader is in for further surprises.
Prince Sndor said to his wife the Turkish Kings daughter, I love you no
longer because your mouth smells, so he divorced her. He returned home
and married his brothers wife, the one he was blamed to have had a love
affair with, when found together in the same room.4
The crown prince (the second brother)seeing the way things have turned
realizes that he is partly to be blamed for all that had happened; he was the one
who had spared the life of the queen and his son. He takes a gun and shoots
himself. He cannot live with the thought of his brother having been right about
blaming their younger brother with adultery. mi ends the story with the
following conclusion:
Thus the whole royal family is destroyed, except for Prince Sndor who lived
on with the Queen and the son; who he treated as his own.5
The story of King Advr presents to the reader a number of parallel conclusions
worth discussing. The title itself is interesting, and although there is no evidence
as to where mi had learned the tale, the story of King Truth implies a
3 Ibid. p. 375
4 Ibid. p. 37576
5 Ibid. p. 376

1 261 2

multicultural environment and a direct Rumanian influence.6 The subject

prompts us to translate the story as a metaphoric interpretation of the failure
of Truth. mis tales have a tendency towards pessimism, but the dark mood
and hopelessness of King Advrs story exceeds even his normal glumness. The
victory of the adulterous wife and the fratricide hurts the readers sense of justice,
since the two older brothers are victims of their goodwill, or more precisely, their
ability to forgive. On the other hand, the wrong doersthe adulterous queen
and the intriguing brotherwould not have been able to cause the destruction of
those capable of forgiveness, had their punishment been ruthlessly carried out.
The evident paradox of the situation at the same time is that the crown prince
representing moralshides and thus saves those condemned to die; the king
driven by his consciencebrings back his wife and son. They both prove with
their actions the existence of moral good. In other words, failure is coded in
the logic of mis story. Man is good when he is in praxi good; but he becomes
vulnerable to those who think otherwise.
If we disregard other detailse.g. complicated ethical problems represented
by the storyKing Advr presents us an important logical-structural element
of mis stories and the tale phenomenon in general: we may regard the plot as
the actors continuous attempts to conceal and reveal the secret.
The greatest secret in the story is the act of adultery, and it is revealed only in
the last sentence of the story. The kings suspicion and his plans to have his wife
and brother killed serve the aim of keeping this secret. If it is revealed, it will
overshadow his personality, hurt his pride and will furthermore disqualify him
as king. King Advrs actions present us normative expectations determining the
life of village communities. The story revolves around the basic social value of
the faithful wife; a value obviously valid in mis homethe Szamosszeg Gypsy
6 mi declared not to have learned any more tales after 1918. Thus the storyteller
born in 1886must have acquired the majority of his tales within a multiethnic
community of the age of late Dualism. The Rumanian term adevr (reality, truth)
comes from the Latin veritas (reality, truth). The heros name, King Advr, is
a Hungarised form of the Rumanian term. There is one more telling term in the
quotation: the Hungarian term for family is csald. However, mi substitutes it with
the word csalrd, meaning unfaithful.

1 262 2

communitythe same way as in all traditional societies. As we can see in the

story, the breach of taboos receives the harshest of punishments. The theme
of secret is also represented in the act of hiding the queen; the crown prince
counts on the honesty of the hunters family to keep the secret. The danger of
the secret being revealed in later time is clear to the listener (reader); thus the
familys brutal massacre is unethical, revolting but at the same time a solution
necessitated by the storys logic.
Finally a third formal representation of secret in the story is another key
motif: the secret of Prince Sndor, the banished brother. He has information of
his brothers war plans: a precondition for the kings failure and destruction. I
would say, the storys plot is simply a series of secrets and a series of attempts to
conceal and reveal them. King Advrs story is a solution contrary to common
expectations: a method so characteristic of mis storytelling. Thus the heros
failure, the victory of evilmore precisely, the narrative of all thisdirects our
attention to questions of paradigmatic meanings of secret.
In the following section we will attempt to present and interpret secret as
both a formal and conceptual structural component of tales through examples
of mi Lajos tales. Before dealing with specific examples we need to make some
general assumptions.

1. Theoretical Framework
According to our view mis monumental and well documented collection
of tales may serve as a perfect basis for an overall analysis of the manifold
role of secret forms in tales, as well as in tale thinking. The realization of the
plan is supported by the close etymological relationship between the secret
phenomenon and the pragmatic meaning of tales. According to the origin of
the themeas referred to by the Greek term enigma (mystery, riddle)the term
is rooted in the verb insomnia (to give a blurred meaning, to insinuate); the
noun winosmeaning tale, parableis used as a general terminology for the
genre. According to this, the term of secretwith the meaning of enigmais
the essence of the tale in the etymological sense. Naturally, the question is: is the
phenomenon of secret in the tale fully exploited by the theme of mystery in the
sense of enigma? We will begin answering the question with a short overview of
1 263 2

two thematic views, and then deal with the question of the secrets ontological
content and hermeneutic structure.

The Secret-Phenomenons Ontological Content

If we start out from an every-day approach, according to which secret is a fact
or thing concealed from others, we will have to admit that secret is the unity of
two intentionally contradicting aspects that amend each other at the same time.
One side of the secret phenomenon is made up of the realization of the limits of
the reflexive consciousness; a well observable theoretical condition. The secret
confuses the work of the cognitive mind, for understanding efforts lose their
competences at its boundaries. More precisely: facing the secret forces the
cognitive mind to realize the boundaries of its own competences. According
to this approach the secret-phenomenon is a cognitive entity in its mystery
meaning. Mans meeting with the secret, and the consequences of this meeting
will open space for two possible reactions. First the hermetic (completely closed,
unattainable) meaning of the secret may be paralyzing, since its strict framework
offers no entry to cognitive curiosity: resignation is followed by the acceptance
of the secret. However, on the contrary, the mystery embedded in the secret
all that is evidently unattainableurges cognition onward to further its efforts
in the hope of finding new ways of understanding; to the minds more complex
operation.
A further side of the secret, characterized by a contradictory internationalization
in the ontological senselet us use a spectacular metaphor and call it the dark
siderefers to the mind being confided in, and to the specific knowledge it
gained from it.7 The secret-phenomenon refers not only to the lack of knowledge
in the ontological sense, but also to the knowledge gained by being confided in:
an understanding position of being in the possession of something that is in
essence concealed. Knowledge of the secretbeing confided inin effect serves
7 Being confided in: the secret knowledge or the personification of knowing the secret,
has a long tradition in Western thinking. See for example the figure of Hermes
Trismegistos. (See also HEIDUK, Matthias: Offene GeheimnisseHermetische
Texte und verborgenes Wissen in der mittelalterlichen Rezeption von Augustinus bis
Albertus Magnus, Wrzburg Universitt, Wrzburg, 2008. p. 611)

1 264 2

as the means of keeping the secret. Keeping the secret is the secrets condition
sine qua non.

The Secret-Phenomenons Hermeneutic Construction

The short description of the two aspects of the Janus-faced secret-phenomenon
does not only let us into its ontology, but at the same time makes us understand
that the entity described by the term is always concrete, situativethat is, it is
always connected to the given social-cultural situationas it comprises those
that confront him in concealment, and those who are in possession of the
knowledge.
In other words the general meaning of the secret is only shown in a specific
case, as a specific meaning. We may also say that the secret is an inductive
phenomenon, meaning that the theory may not be reversed: secret as a general
term is something nonexistent.
The study of the forms of secret in the tales of Lajos mi will partly serve as
an example to how texts of his stories present the meaning of a phenomenon
in different specific cases. More precisely, it is peculiar, how the same author
exploits different variations of the phenomenon supported by the many sidedness
of the term of secret.
There may, however, be another approach to our study; and this is where we return
to our original question: does secretmeaning enigmafully exploit the terms
meaning? Frank Modeler sees the meaning of keeping a secretand secret itself
as a component of the interpreting space in the hermeneutic sense. His analysis
deals with a detailed description of the secret-paradigm in the narrative sense;
and by doing this he synchronizes two well-known traditions in hermeneutics.
First, he deals with the tradition of the allegoric definition; an effort to disclose
the hidden meaning connected to the figure and function of Hermes; where the
subject of understanding is mystery in the process of transmission: the riddle. As
we well know, the philosophical base for the allegoric tradition received a modern
meaning in the historical hermeneutic tradition of the 18th Century: starting with
Johann Jacob Rorschach and later the Romantic philological hermeneutics with
Christian Wolf; continuing with Schoolteacher, who bases his works on Wolf,
in the critical sense; and ending with Heideggers existential hermeneutics and

1 265 2

Gamer. Modeler, however, goes further than this tradition of thinking comprising
over two and a half thousand years.
In view of Aristotles tradition, hermeneutics embedded in the text of the
narrativethat operates the meaning of secretappears as an element of
language, speech (gloss). The spoken words function serves the creation of the
thoughts publicity; the appearance of the meaning out of seclusion in this context
is not interpretation but clear speech. In other words understanding deals with
secret in the texta logical-grammatical formas a rhetorical dimension of
the outspoken or the withheld. We may sense from the above that the secrets
hermeneutics is a double task: it directs our attention to the terms enigmatic
(allegorically hidden) meaning as well as to the factual (subjective) content.

2. Different Forms of Secret in mis Tales

The above theoretical framework serves as a precondition for discerning the
manifold appearances, uses, forms and functions of the secret in mis tales.
Of course we do not want to say that the author used possibilities provided by
the secret-phenomenon consciously. On the contrary: we would like to refrain
from all suppositions that would give the appearance of the Szamosszeg Gypsy
storyteller operating alongside conscious design theories, let alone insinuating
any reflective consciousness in his actions. We would rather say that in the case
of mias in the case of other great storytellerswe are facing an intuitive
operation with structural practices and storytelling culture originating in taletradition.
It is also important to note that the question of the secret-phenomenon may
be observed from three sides. First, very often the secret plays no actual role in
the story: the secret-phenomenon isnt part of the tale narrative. In a majority
of mis stories the storytellertaking up the narrators positionlets the
audience know the essence of the riddle to be disclosed by the hero: thus there is
no secret (disclosed secret). The paradigmatic meaning of secret in these stories
is revealed through the interpreting work of the hero; thus providing meaning
to his actions.
The present study will deal with mis tales where the narrative position and
the audience are on the same side and the status of the secret phenomenon, its
1 266 2

function and meaning are only revealed as the story progresses; serving as a
precondition for the plot. We will also be discussing tales where the narrator
and the hero are in the same interpreting position; the narrator makes the hero
say the secret and reveal its essence to the audience.
Two basic preconditions for the tales operation: the tale plot and general
aims of tale thinking responsible for its construction are in complete consensus
with characteristics of the secret phenomenon described when dealing with
theoretical frameworks in the above. What does this mean? The plot is no other
than a series of attempts by the hero to complete tasks upending him from
the proper course of his life. Furthermore, tale thinking enabling us to follow
the plot (tale)the approach poses to the audience the task of interpreting and
understanding the heros actionsis supported by possibilities embedded in the
secret-phenomenon in different levels of understanding and in a complex way.
The ontological content and hermeneutic structure of the secret phenomenon
are aspects parallel to each other, but with different proportion and caliber
within the process of tale interpretation. mis enormous collection of stories
(enormous both in the number of tales, and the length of each individual
story) makes it possible for us to present specific examples to different forms
and changing variations of the secret-phenomenon. Our experiment of listing
function-variations of the secret may in essence be considered as an attempt at
constructing an outline of the phenomenons typology.

e
mis story entitled A keresked, aki termnyeket szllt klfdre (The Merchant
Who Transported Goods Abroad) is a variation of the popular Beauty and the
Beast story (ATh 425 C).8 A rich merchant goes on a long trip and promises his
three daughters to bring back whatever they wanted. The oldest daughter asks
for a ring; the middle one for a richly ornamented dress; and the youngest one
for a scarlet-colored flower. Since the merchant finds no scarlet-colored flower
for sale he tries stealing it from a castles orchard. He is caught by four lions

8 ERDSZ: Ibid., II. p. 3733

1 267 2

and kept prisoner in the castle. A miraculous voice lets him have everything he
wishes for but tells him, he can be set free on one condition only:
Man. You have three daughters at home. If you bring one of them here in
return to the scarlet-colored flower, so that I could be her slave, I will let you
go.9
The youngest daughterthe one having asked for the scarlet-colored flower
goes to the castle where the voice turns out to be that of the king of seven
countries. The girls task is to kiss the king and by doing this free him from a
course that turns him into a hideous elephant, a horrific wolf and later a tenmeter-long snake the tongue of which kept lashing out half a meter long. The
hero is successful and finds happiness in the end.
The secret-phenomenon may be found in a story in the form of a formative
active structure. If we look at the plot we will find that the whole of the story
revolves around the secret in the sense of enigma; it presents the heros efforts
to solve the secret. The two lines (that is, the two separate units, each bearing
its own meaning) in the story are clearly separated. While the merchant has no
idea about where he is bringing his daughter, the girl accepts her faith bravely:
facing the secret appearing first in the form of a monster and later as a king. In
other words the solution of the tale task is equal to the secrets disclosure. The
definition of the secret-phenomenon as a formative active structure means that
the tale is structured around the enigma: more precisely, all instants of the plot
are built on the secret; they unfold and materialize from it.
mis story entitled Bihk Jnos, aki a felesgt eltkozta, hogy addig meg ne
tudja szlni a gyerekt, amg a kt karjt keresztl nem teszi (Bihk Jnos, who
Put a Curse on his Wife; Not to be Able to Give Birth to her Child Until he puts his
Arms Around Her) presents a completely different use of the secret-phenomenon.
According to typological classificationthe structural order of the players and
motifsthe tale belonging to the type Search for the Lost Husband (ATh 425) is
related to our previous story.
When studying forms of the secret phenomenon we will see that the tale of
Bibk Jnos presents its functions quite differently from the previous story.
9 Ibid. p. 29

1 268 2

The tale begins by the hero cursing his wife not to be able to give birth to her
baby until he puts his arms around her. He leaves his wife heavy with child
and goes wandering around the World.10 The narrative of Bihks wonderful
adventures gives us no clues as to why he decided to leave his wife; what is
the original situation? The classical structural element of the fairy talethe
heros starting out on a tripis usually in connection with the task: in most
cases it is aimed at eliminating the lack of something or some kind of damage
described at the very beginning.11 Completing the task; the heros actions, are
aimed at restoring order in the World: something the narrator states clearly to
his audience.
mi gives no explanation in Bihk Jnos story; we do not find out about
reasons for the heros actions. They remain to be a secret all through the course
of the story. The plot tells us about the hero saving the widowed queens country
from the attacking enemy; he wins over the Swedish, the Chinese and the Soviet
Union with the help of his wonderful strength. mi follows structural practices
of the tale trinity, mingles elements of Geographical and Historical reality with
the help of his rich imagination and adjusts the story to his own present.
What nation are you?
We are from the great Soviet Union.
Go home; I would not want to kill so many people. Get out of our country,
but give us one quarter of yours so that we would grow bigger. The soldiers
started laughing at his words thinking he was coming from the madhouse.
If you are from the madhouse, my good fellow, go on your way.

10 Although Erdsz mentions that the story is fragmented, since it doesnt say why
Bihk had made his decision to travel, it is the narrators and the audiences decision
to accept the story as a whole. Had mi been unsuccessful with his story, he would
most probably have left it out of his repertoire. Tales of mi Lajos II. p. 527
11 Propp, V. Jakovlevics: Morphology of the Folk Tale. Indiana University Press,
Bloomington, 1968. p. 1622

1 269 2

You vilify me, shouted Bihk at the officer, a general-colonel, turning his
hand towards him and hitting him so hard that he fell and took with him all
the rest of the soldiers in the line. The others started running.12
Coming back to the interpretation of the secret-phenomenons function in
the tale, the rest gives us no clues as to the essential motivation of the whole
story. Bihk fights a victorious battle all by himself, the means of success being
his exceptional strength only. The origin of this wonderful strength remains to
be a secret for the audience; that is, again, something, very unusual. Following
his victory the hero marries the widowed queen he had saved. The above might
prove Sndor Erdszs point in saying that the story may be fragmented.
The second part of the story tells us about Bihks first wife, whounable to
give birth to her child goes searching for her husband. He tricks her husband
into sleeping with her when Bihk put his arms around his first wife. The
woman immediately gave birth to a girl and a boy. When the queen learns about
it she becomes very angry.
You have been living with me seven years and were unable to give me even
a turkey. Now this woman here sleeps with you three nights and you already
gave her such beautiful children, a boy and a girl.13
The story ends with Bihk becoming angry with his second wife: he has her
hanged and lives on as king in the country he had acquired through marriage.
Abstracting ourselves from ethical aspects, we could say that the function of
the secret-phenomenon is a formative passive structure. In other words it rules
latently over the whole of the story, staying in the background; it will not take
form either as an allusion or as concrete knowledge concerning the enigma.
Another form of the typology describing secret phenomenon types may be
discerned in the tale entitled Gyertek csak testvrek, mert nem tudom, ez az
12 Ibid., p. 20. China and the Soviet Union, Jnos Bihks largest enemies, provide proof
of the political views of neither mi, nor his audience in December, 1958; in the time
the story was recorded. They may however be connected to mis war experiences
as representatives of a threatening foreign power, and have also served as a means
of accelerating the heros task.
13 Ibid., p. 15

1 270 2

ember mit akar mondani (Come Brothers, I do not Know What this Man Wants
to Say). According to Erdsz, the structural classification of the tale poses a
problem.14 From the view of our study, however, the title tells us a lot, despite
the fact that the practice of using the first sentence of each tale to be the title was
introduced by the Sndor Erdsz. We will see that the storys first lines introduce
the enigma serving as the essence of the plot.
Come, brothers, I dont know what this man wants from me. Ask him what
his problem is, for I have no idea; why he came to me, what he wants.15
The stress is on the act of not understanding: the mind seeks help, the situation
needs explanation. For the general subject of opening sentencethe person
speaking in the narrationthe otherthe stranger from another countryis the
one presenting the explanation. This is how the audience acquires information
about the tales basic situation:
Listen, I have no other problem with you than the fact that everyone in your
country has his hair sticking up to the sky like wire. I come from Curly Land
and I will make everyones hair curly. In Curly Land everyones hair stands
beautifully, like mine. Look, how beautiful my hair is.16
True intentions of the mysterious stranger are revealed through further
explanation. As it turns out, mothers in Curly Land have given birth to boys
only, for some time. Thus they lack girls who the young man could marry. The
news brings happiness, for there was war in this country. Men were killed and
there are lots of young women who would eat their hearts out but could not find
men to marry.17
We will not deal with mi indirect allusion to the specific social situation in
Hungarian village societies, following the Second World War. As in the story,
thousands of young girls married men from other countries; results of the social

14 Erdsz considers this tale to be unique. It may be a variant of The Three Kidnapped
Princesses (Ath 301). ERDSZ: Ibid., p. 539
15 Ibid., II. 204
16 Idem.,
17 Ibid., 205

1 271 2

psychological situation of lack of men in rural societies. The secret phenomenon

is detailed in a unique way in the plot.
Soon thousands of young girls made their eternal vows at the altar to young
men. Then they got on carriages and were taken to Curly Land. Parents knew
nothing of this distant land, no one had heard of it before. The girls had been
away for years and never came to visit or write a letter.18
The faraway country, the strange country is a complete secret; no one knows
where it is, how to find it. This is the stage of the plot when the actual hero
appears: Kiss Pista, brother to one of the married girls, who decides to find Curly
Land. mi gives no details of the trip; advice from an old man is enough to find
the place. However, finding the strange land provides no relief: on the contrary,
the description of Curly Land is full of insecurity and tension. We realize through
stylistic tools used by mi as well as specific information that Kiss Pista has no
idea where he is. It is a strange, unidentifiable place, and although the hero had
arrived somewhere, what he finds there is a manifest strangeness and secret. The
audience faces allusions to the nature of the secret-phenomenon and there is no
clear description of the place either. The Curly people drink no palinka19, only
wine. They make bread not with flour but with rice. Instead of wheat, corn and
potatoes they grow lemons, oranges and figs. They worship not God, but the man
with the curliest hair; whom they honor by kneeling in front of him.
We may conjecture from characteristics of mis view of the Worldas seen
in his other tales, and mainly from Erdszs explanationthat Curly Land is the
land of dragons; but the narrator gives no specific information of this fact.20 He
18 Idem.,
19 Plinka is a traditional fruit brandy in Hungary.
20 We cannot go into details with description of mis unique, complex and completely
coherent view of the World. We would just refer to the fact that in his view the World
has three levels. Our everyday world is in the middle. There is an upper layer the skies
and a land below: the land of the dragons; these latter two can only be visited by the
chosen heroes. mi combined his archaic ideas with elements of the modern world
and organized them into a coherent system together with his everyday experiences.
(See also BICZ Gbor: Tales and Society; The Life and Work of Gypsy Storyteller
Lajos mi. Didakt, Debrecen, 2014. pp. 307314)

1 272 2

keeps the secret to himself: neither his hero, nor the audience are in the position
of knowing where the story takes place.
We can say that secret-phenomenon in the story is a manifest functional
component. Secret in this case takes on a special form. It is present although the
story as an entity, the presence of whichlet us use Heideggers explanation
is a manifestation of the fact of the hidden.21
A further variant of the secret-phenomenons topology is detected in the story
entitled A jmd parasztnak hrom jnya vt, de soha nem vitt nekik semmit
(The Rich Peasant had Three Daughters; he Never Brought them Anything from
his Trips); a tale belonging to the type Beauty and the Beast.22 The plot is well
known: the rich peasant goes to the fair in town and asks his daughters what he
could bring them back. The oldest asks for a pair of shoes; the middle one for a
kitten; the youngest one for a rose. The father finds no rose at the fair so passing
an orchard full of tulips decides to pick one for his daughter. The owner catches
him and threatens him with hanging unless he brings back one daughter for him
to marry. The man, to save his skin, agrees; he lets the strange young man have
his youngest daughter, the one who had asked for the rose. The story ends with
the description of the wedding.
They entered the room together with the notary and the priest. They said
their oaths and signed the register. Then the young man threw a match box
on the floor that immediately turned into a carriage drawn by six horses.
The girl was smiling until they reached the gates, but then she started crying.
His mother and father started running after the carriage with a spade but
the girl was never seen again. Thus the man sold his daughter for a piece of
flower.23
21 Naturally, a number of Philosophical allusions would present themselves during
the study of the secret-phenomenon. At the same time, however, the texts critical
readinga precondition for authentic tale interpretation, analysis with philological
accuracymay make use of philosophemes to facilitate understanding but would
highly recommend refraining from any assumptions of conscientious or even reflected
philosophical content.
22 ERDSZ: Ibid., p. 3439
23 Ibid., p. 39

1 273 2

Kidnapping the daughter is a popular motif in mis tales, as in fairy tales

in general. However, the ending that creates a lack in the story again, leaving
the end of the narrative without an explanation, is rather atypical. In other
words the logic of the plots structure in this case present us further important
characteristics of the secret: the performative structural function of the secretphenomenon. The secret in this is perceived as a rhetoric form. In other words,
the question is: why does mi end his story by introducing a secret? The secret
phenomenon appears in the narrative of the story but at the same time it is
postponed to eternity. The hero (the father) and the audience understand that
they will never be able to shed light on the secret; it is impossible to understand
it. It seems that the performative function of the secret-phenomenon refers to
the secrets taboo character.24
A final form of the secret-phenomenon discernible in mis tales is
characterized by the tale entitled A vinasszony, akire a kirly runt (The
Old Woman the King Got Tired of). The story belonging to the tale type The
Treacherous Sister (Ath 315) is a little known variation of the Ers Jnos (Strong
John) tales. The old woman is of no use at court anymore; she is unable to do her
work, so the king decides to get rid of her. She is left alone in the forest feeding
on the milk of deer. She finds a piece of pepper that she eats. Soon she sees that
despite her old age she is pregnant and gives birth to a baby boy. The boy has
great strength. He takes good care of his mother and takes her to a castle he
acquires with the help of his godfather. The complicated story has a number of
lines; the one important for our study is the one where the old woman falls in
love with the dragon appearing in the form of a man. She agrees to help him
kill her son.
I know, says the dragon king, I know how strong he is and how smart. I know
he is so very strong. But listen, you have a white strand of hair on your cunt.
Tell him, my son, put your two fists together. Let me tie them together with

24 We cannot go into details of the language forms of performativity analyzed by John

Austin and Derrida. Neither can we deal with taboo concepts in social anthropology
in the present study.

1 274 2

this strand of hair. If you can tear it apart I will sleep without fear of you
being hurt wherever you go in the World.25
Thus Jnos becomes powerless and his mother hands him over to the dragon.
Here you are Dragon, my sons life is in your hands. He is unable to tear the
hair apart.26
However, the story of the child murderer doesnt end with the betrayal and
murder of the hero; as it turns out the dragon kings real aim is to occupy Jnos
country, so he needs to get rid of the mother as well.
Did you think I married you because I loved you? I only needed to have
your sons life. I wanted to be the strongest in the World but he would have
defeated me if I had not tricked you into helping me. With these words he
threw the old woman out.27
The storys negative ending; the heros complete failure presents us a new form
of the secret-phenomenons paradigmatic meaning. The narrator has the wrongdoer solve the secret by having him disclose his real intentions that are literally
fatal. The secret-phenomenon in the form of narrative totality is a structural
component of the plot. It creates an interval: a logical and structural breach
in the narrative that influences the interpretation of the story. Disclosing the
secret overwrites all earlier interpretations, all earlier understanding variants,
revoking their validity at the same time.
To sum all up, we may say that the five structural functional forms of the secret
phenomenon described through examples of mi Lajos talesthe abundance
of secret variations in his narrative make analysis none the less easier.
We realize that the general meaning of the secret-phenomenon cannot be
found in the tale itself. When analyzing mis tales it becomes clear that the
secret is the tale narratives structural-functional form that changes all the time.
In other words, it is a conceptual element the operation of which may be studied
in its specific usage, on the level of each storys narrative universe; we may only
generalize in view of the collection of tales by each specific narrator.
25 ERDSZ: Ibid., I. p. 350
26 Ibid., p. 351
27 Idem.

1 275 2

No.
1

Forms of Secret
formative active structure

formative passive structure

manifest functional
component

performative structural
function

narrative totality

Title of mis Tale as an Example

A keresked, aki termnyeket szllt klfdre
(The Merchant Who Transported Goods
Abroad)
Bihk Jnos, aki a felesgt eltkozta, hogy
addig meg ne tudja szlni a gyerekt, amg
a kt karjt keresztl nem teszi (Bihk Jnos,
who Put a Curse on his Wife; Not to be Able to
Give Birth to her Child Until he Puts his Arms
Around Her)
Gyertek csak testvrek, mert nem tudom, ez az
ember mit akar mondani (Come Brothers, I do
not Know What this Man Wants to Say)
A jmd parasztnak hrom jnya vt, de
soha nem vitt nekik semmit (The Rich Peasant
had Three Daughters; he Never Brought them
Anything from his Trips)
A vinasszony, akire a kirly runt (The Old
Woman the King Got Tired of)

Structural Functional Forms of Secret

in Tales Based on mi Lajos Stories
Thus we may say that the methodological study of the secret-phenomenon
supposes 1. The identification of the secret in the given story (ontological content);
2. The definition of the secrets enigmatic meaning and factual (specific, objective)
content (hermeneutic structure); 3. The definition of the secrets performative
function. A second methodological step may be the description, identification
and interpretation of the secret-phenomenons various forms in the text.
The structural-functional role of the secrets different variations may be defined
as the permutation of the secret-phenomenon. This may mean multiplication:
referring to its manifold forms. But it may at the same time mean permutation:
showing that the interpretation of the tale is always an effort to unfold the talesecret (ainos-enigma) in one way or the other.
(Translated by Anik Rnai)

1 276 2

Tams Valastyn
THE ATOPICS OF THE SECRET
On Jnos Berkis tale Son of the White Mare

1 277 2

he polysemic nature of the expressions secret, secrecy, and

enigmatic frighten away any interpreter from any task that
would allow this enigmatic phenomenon, the secret, to be
revealed. Because anything we said about it would immediately
break and at the same time soil the very thing it was hiding in
itself until the moment of our utterance. Therefore, is it not possible to utter
anything about the secret, is it not possible to think about it, to contemplate it
at all? Can we not make the secret mythic, ethic, aesthetic or political? However,
most of the time it is exactly its mythic, ethic, aesthetic and political context
that makes secrecy and the enigmatic nature of a thing, an event, or happening,
exciting. Or is this a case where one can only deal with the secret in the contexts
listed above, since to interpret it sui generis is not possible because by doing so
we would already annihilate and abolish the object of our inquiry? If it were not
possible to see or make this object seen from the perspective of the distance
of interpretation, then would it be merely subjective? Supposedly, or rather by
all means, no. However, this does not make any difference in relation to what
the secret includes, or I might say, it hides something that is impossible to
communicate. The secret may not be communicated, but it always exists, it is
given. We appropriate it with some phenomenal or noumenal character, namely
that it is impossible to open it up simply because if it opens up it would not be
a secret any more. The location of the secret is therefore a kind of negation, the
affirmation of absence itself.
But how may I affirm what is not? This suspicious and even dangerous concept
of a dead end, perhaps needsand I hope it will be clear from my following
argument that it is in fact necessaryto be preserved during interpretation; in
this case we no longer attempt to approach this affirmation from the perspective
of its object, but rather from the perspective of itself: the secret lies in an autoaffirmative space. I do not affirm what is not, but the not-yet-existing affirms
itself and this is the secret. A potentiality pulsing in itself affirms its existence,
its permission to exist. The room without a location affirms the space in which
it offers itself up. We may also call this structure the structure of the secret.
Affirmation and non-locationthese will be the components of the concept
of the secret in my interpretation. Naturally, I am not saying that we cannot
speak of other components. I myself will even include in the concept of the
1 278 2

secretsince I will be forced to include themelements originating from other

problematics, elements such as the concepts of revealing, opening up, unveiling,
emptiness, impregnation, etc.
We may state that the location of the non-location of the secret is literature
conceptualised as the secret without secrets. Literature speaks of the secret,
moreover it does so in such a way that it is aware of its non-communicable
character. The communication of this non-communicational character in this
case is not the arrangement of some kind of an ineffable atavism into forms,
but the retelling of some unveiled, unmasked thing. This is because the secret
without a secret is something that has already lost its secrecy. It has become
known, it still preserves its secret character but it has been deprived of its main
feature, of its non-communicable character. Naturally the secret has a cognitive
status as well. The secret is always known at least by one person or thing to whom
or to which it refers; somebody or something that sends it off to exist in order
for it to be: the secret is born. Therefore it receives its location in existence; more
precisely, existence offers it a place. The autological character of affirmation in
these instances undoubtedly falls short of something; however, it still exercises
further influences. It resonates further in the secret which has been born. This
is what we may call a singularity; one that is singular and peculiar, that has been
formed from existence in this way and not in another when it gained its form.
The one existing exists because it keeps its secret. In the existing being this
secrecy is singular.
Therefore we can state: the singular existence possesses a secret, it is enigmatic.
However, when this enigmatic entity appears in literature, in a literary work,
it necessarily becomes unveiled. It is deprived of its secret, because literature
typifies and deprives what exists of its singularity, it is literature because it
generalizes. We can even say something more, deeper, more essential, something
more structurally anti-secret about literature, when quoting Jacques Derrida:
Literature is a modern invention, inscribed in conventions and institutions
which, to hold on to just this trait, secure in principle its right to say
everything.1
1 DERRIDA, Jacques: Passions: An Oblique Offering In: DERRIDA: On the Name.
(Edited by DUTUIT, Thomas. Translated by WOOD, DavidLEAVEY JR., John P.,

1 279 2

In literature no secret may remain, nothing which becomes literature may

remain in secret. Therefore in literature what appears as secret or what is secretlike as literature is either a secret without a secret or a location of non-location.
Literature is par excellence a discourse that takes the secret away, its nature is
de-secreting. There are naturally such locations in literature where the secret
singularity or a singular secret may preserve the true contours it has gained by
its non-communicability. However, even in these cases it is impossible to ignore
that the secret, again referring to Derrida:
() remains silent, not to keep a word in reserve or withdrawn [en retrait],
but because it remains foreign to speech [La parole], () the secret remains
there impassively, at a distance, out of reach.2
It remains, which first of all means that it is, that there is a secret, but it also
means that it keeps away, at a distance, from speech. However, there is a kind
of speech that respects this distance and pays regard to the withdrawn nature
of the secret.
I think that the world of the Gypsy tale tellers is a suitable place to form these
singularities, this secret distinctiveness and singular secrecy, since these tale
tellers do not draw typical figures but oftentimes form the soon-to-be unveiled
world for the audience in the mode offered by the situation. We may say that they
present the events in their singularity. They ensure a place for the continually
non-locational creation of form, for the potentiality looking for its place; that is,
they are capable of sharing the singularity and secrecy of the events with others,
because the singular existence is peculiar and singular in the way it pays regard
to the distance from the other that exists. The impassivity, the distance, being
out of reach is the medium of these singular existents. In speech, of course,
it is configured as numbness or empty location, unsuitable space, but it is still
configured. I would go so far as to say that in the works of the Gypsy tale tellers
we may experience a kind of economy of the secret, the secret is present in their
works as a cohesive, form-constituting power. We may even go further and say:

and Mcleod, Ian), Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1995. p. 28

2 DERRIDA: Passions. op.cit. p. 27

1 280 2

the secret is functional, its function is to make speech possible, speech which
leaves it (e.g. the secret) intact.3
I would like to continue with Jnos Berkis tale entitled The Son of the White
Mare as an example of the secret being an empty location, a location allegorized
as a location without a space. The text itself is a variation, and we may recognize
it in the tale entitled Mikls Kanca (Mike the Mare). Already in this moment, that
is, at the moment of this variation or switch, we can find an effect of absence: he
names the dense flow of events as The Son of the White Mare, and then leaves it
behind for, and turns to, Mikls Kanca; therefore he finds a new name. However,
in the second version he further preserves the instance of being irreducible to
a name4 which makes the secret a secret.5
The empty location as the derivational point of the secret is described in
three allegorical instances in the tale as the possibility of existence, not as an
act of waiting, but in the sense of affirmation. Among these three, one is of a
3 Derrida writes the following: The secret would also be a homonymy, not so much
a hidden resource of homonymy, but the functional possibility of homonymy or of
mimesis. DERRIDA: op. cit. p. 26
4 DERRIDA: op. cit. p. 36. The secret is what one here calls secret, putting it for once
in relation to all the secrets which bear the same name but cannot be reduced to it.
Naturally it is not only about proper names but about all names. The secret remains
a secret in all nameswrites Derrida.
5 The genealogy of the text is secret, enigmatic, it creates suspicions as to to where it
originates from. The writer of the notes admits that the collectors wanted to unmask
Berki: The Son of the White Mare wandered into Berkis repertory from orality.
There was a suspicion that it was Lszl Aranys classic tale, entitled The Son of
the White Mare, which lay behind the tale somewhere deep in the past. But based
on some small traits and differences (the name of the strong helpers, the closing
episode, etc.) we must abandon our suspicions and make peace with the fact that in
the Hungarian-Gypsy orality there are versions of this type which are built up so
wellthere are hardly any tales matching it from among the 71 closer and 56 more
distant versions of the same tale. In: GRG-KARDY Veronika et al. (ed.): Berki
Jnos mesl cigny s magyar nyelven. Ciganisztikai tanulmnyok 3. (Jnos Berki
Tells Tales in the Gypsy and the Hungarian Languages. Romani Studies 3. Budapest,
MTA Nprajzi Kutat Csoport, 1985. p. 269. The scheme of the secret may be seen
here.

1 281 2

rhetorical nature, the two others are motivic. The first one, the instance that can
be bestowed with rhetoric or narrative features occurs when the tale teller comes
to a halt; he even refers to it himself, since he forgets an essential turn from the
point of view of the entire story. The second instance becomes essential from
the point of view of the flow of events, since it is about the hole leading down to
the underworld, while the third appears when the Son of the White Mare feeds
the griffin bird with his own flesh which he has carved out of his thigh. These
three highlighted instances are interrelated with each other in the sense that
they are all connected to the crucial nature of the events regarding the hero
the second and the third in such a way that the Son of the White Mare arrives
down in the underworld through the gigantic hole; however, he can only return
if he feeds the griffin flying him back and since they run out of food he needs
to give it some of his own flesh. The first one operates indirectly: the tale teller
omits precisely those connective elements from the tale by means of which the
diamond princess would recognize him; if you like, she would deprive the tale
of its secrecy, or by keeping their own mutual secret she might realize that the
Son of the White Mare is still alive, more correctly, that he has returned to their
common world from the land ruled by the dragons.
Before reading these concrete textual locations I would like to introduce
what is, to my belief, a cardinal interpretative condition. Namely, these points of
absence in the text, these locations of non-location, the enigmatic voids making
the singular character and event condensations possible, again, the coming to a
halt by the tale teller as a break in the narration, the gigantic hole as the point
through which one can get down to the other world or the carving out of the
flesh as the precondition for escape, all of these are not (or not only) related in
a peculiar way to death but (much rather) to life. Here the absenceor lack
does not necessarily refer to death but, significantly, to existence, and much less
in the sense of being a possibility for a new life, much rather in relation to the
affirmation of the event full of suffering. In each instance the fact that the sufferer
is left alone is a striking feature. The tale teller can only blame himself that he
has missed the story; the Son of the White Mare, after descending into the
gigantic hole remains alone and becomes quite frightened (which is noteworthy,
considering his strength and bravery) and we can imagine how must it have hurt
the hero when he had to carve a piece of flesh out of his own body.
1 282 2

So, this existentiality, the absences reference to life, creates the secrets nonresponsiveness, its irresponsibility, its impassivity, the non-responsiveness that
makes possible, that guides the possibility into events and spacessomething
which is not death but a very distant foreignness, a being remaining in an
impassively unreachable distance, the secret itself. I would like to quote Jacques
Derrida again, since it is he who describes the secrets non-responsive, possibility
providing nature, or more precisely this incessantly affirming feature of the
possibility and the space which is being given:
The secret never allows itself to be captured or covered over by the relation
to the other, by being with or by any form of social-bond. Even if it makes
them possible, it does not answer to them, it is what does not answer. No
responsiveness. Shall we call this death? Death dealt? Death dealing? I see
no reason not call that life, existence, trace.6
Let us read the first example!
But oh my I have forgotten something in there! Down there in the
underworld he had a needle, the old manthe bearded mangave him
one, one that was able to sew by itself, and golden thread, diamond thread,
silver thread
Who did the old man give it to?
He gave it to the Son of the White Mare. And you could sew clothes with it,
such a texture, it was in a nutI forgot to mention thatalright, all these
things were with him.7
The tale teller debunks himself twice, i.e. he twice refers to the fact that he had
forgotten this very important turn in the performance of the story while bringing
the events into this world. The gift of the self-sewing needle makes the event
of recognitionmaking something recognized, of the unveiling-unfolding
possible. We need to pay attention here to the fact that the needle is a kind of
tool that by its function helps the hiding, the masking, and therefore it is a means
to keep something secret. However, later on the diamond girl recognizes her
6 DERRIDA: op. cit. pp. 3031
7 Fehrlfia (The Son of the White Mare) In: GRG-KARDY: op. cit. p. 248. At
this point the tale collector asks those around him.

1 283 2

savior, her love, by means of the needle, since only the Son of the White Mare is
capable of sewing clothes with this needle, which looks like a mackerel sky and
is like the stars in the sky.8 So the motif that has been hidden away by the tale
teller for quite a while helps the characters to reveal themselves to each other
and to find each other again.
So why, then, does the tale teller forget this essential move? It is as if we are
dealing with a kind of manifestation of the secrets structure or rather of its
function. Naturally, I would not like to suppose that at this point in the story
the tale teller would keep something secret directly or indirectly, or that he
would make fools of us, create tension or delay the story. His self-revealing
act (But oh my I have forgotten something in there!; I have forgotten to
say it) seems to be honest. And what would honest mean here? Why, was the
tale telling not honest all along? So I would not like to reactivate the binary
opposition which evokes the ethical or aesthetic reminiscences of the concepts
of honest and liar. No. Not only because this binary concept is totally alien from
the structure of the secret. Berki tells his tale instead of the secret. His story is
born at the non-locational space of the secret, it grows out of there, from the
absolute absence of the secret; the secret stands by itself for itself and instead
of the secret. And here, at this point, at this place it becomes clear: at least
what it makes visible is a break, it unravels the story, it is not a mistake, it is not
even a loss of memory, it is rather a kind of disturbance. The tale teller bears
witness to his disturbance. At this point in the tale the so far well-rounded, wellstructured narration becomes hectic andas Derrida would saywe may feel
a kind of destinerrant indirection9. Moreover, the collector, or interrogator
or interviewer even interrupts the flow of tale telling: Who did the old man
give it to?10 and in doing so she leads Berki back to the right path. Well, this
destinerrant indirection, at least according to my understanding, is the trace of
the secret in the text.
Another such trace is the gigantic hole:

8 GRG-KARDY: op. cit. p. 248

9 DERRIDA: op. cit. p. 30
10 GRG-KARDY: op. cit. p. 248

1 284 2

A big, gigantic hole, into the deep () He sat in it [the Son of the White
Mare in the basketT.V.] and he himself became frightened because it was
so dark in the hole [] he descended. He reached land.11
The hole is a traditionally prevalent topos used to envisage the passage to
another, downward-leading world. We may therefore speak of the hole as an
image of the possibility of another existence. In this case, any absence or lack is
filled by life, by a singular existence. A well-separable, differing existential order
is outlined before us. This existential order, the underworld, as Berki describes
it, is very, very beautiful, but we also learn that it is inhabited by dragons who
kidnap princesses. Let us now deal simply with the transition to this other world,
this gigantic, frightening, dark hole with its transponative medium, with its
place offering the possibility of an/the other world, of its birth. This place has to
be left behind, and one necessarily has to go through it to be able to exist, to find
oneself in another world. Its function is to disappear in front of us, to cease to
exist, i.e. its ontological basis is formed from a peculiar effect of absence, since
we should not forget that we are dealing with life, with another existence at this
place as well.
Here I would like to offer an association of ideas that might, at first sight,
deter the interpreter but, as we will see, the tale teller himself guides us towards
this instance. It is about the uterus as the allegorization of this location of nonlocation in the hole mentioned above, the emptiness or void hiding the darkness.
The emptiness of the uterus affirms its fulfilled nature. We may say, its function
as a fate is to be filled with the possibility of a new life and also to have natality be
pushed out if it and be embodied. The tale teller himself refers to this uterological
aspect. I myself was lead to this interpretative element by this incomprehensible
emphasisat least incomprehensible to me. Before the Son of the White Mare
meets the dragons Berki emphasizes the following, as if making the realization
of the dragon audible:

11 Ibid., pp. 243244.

1 285 2

Good God, Ill be damned says the [dragon T.V.] , this can be nobody
else but the Son of the White Mare. I knew [] when he was in his mothers
belly that I would have some trouble with him!12
According to the tale, the Son of the White Mare is symbolically reborn from
the darkness of the gigantic hole. He leaves it behind in order to return to his
world again, now less in a bodily sense, having carved pieces of flesh out of it,
as if to participate once again in this absence or lack. But let us not go this far,
we have not yet arrived with our hero in his own world!
When reading this motif what we wish to emphasize is the solitude of the
hero. Only he descends to the underworld through this hole; the others, Wood
Lifter, Mountain Pusher, and Iron Wrestler stay up there in front of the hole
waiting for the return of their friend. This solitude is especially noteworthy.
We can see very clearly what we have just said above about the singularity, the
singular, the peculiar existents. Solitude is the sharp and dense presentation of
itself for us as the reference compound of this singularity. The other name of the
secret is solitude, just as Derrida writes; solitude makes possible the creation of
the authentic being13, it constitutes, for instance, mans testimony and, I would
argue, his test. The tests of the Son of the White Mare are necessarily carried
out in this solitude.
And finally, let us read the third instance, the gesture of the Son of the White
Mare whereby he carves his own flesh out and sacrifices it, which makes it
possible for him to return to his own world which he had left behind, the world
the tale teller refers to as the world of broad daylight; in other words to the
above world!
[The griffinT.V.] turned its headhe received an ox, one loaf of bread, and
one barrel of wine. Well, but they were almost at the mouth of the hole, up
above, when they ran out of everything, there was nothing left. Then it turned
its head, meat was needed and there was none because then it would have
fallen back. What should the Son of the White Mare do now? He took his

12 Ibid., p. 245
13 Derrida: op. cit. p. 40

1 286 2

pocket-knife, he carved a piece of flesh out of his thigh. He threw it back into
its mouth. So they arrived back in the world above.14
At this place, again a traditional tale topos, the specification of conditions,
is effectively activated: the griffin will help under only certain conditions. Only
after the Son of the White Mare fulfills them can they begin their journey to get
back to the world above. The conditions laid down by the griffin are connected
to the need to guarantee a sufficient amount of strength to be able to continue
with the journey. However, these conditions cannot be met, and this is the point
where, just as I have quoted above, the Son of the White Mare carves a piece out
of his own body to feed the griffin, providing him with the strength for his flight,
which at the same time means that they will make it to the world of daylight.
But arriving back in the world of daylight means, in a certain sense, a rebirth. Again, not death, but a new kind of transposition to life. In that gigantic
hole the Son of the White Mare has to adapt again to that frightening darkness
he had experienced once before, to the emptiness which he has already traveled
through. He himself has to turn into an absence, he has to be re-shuffled into
the void. And he acquires this state by, in a certain sense, castrating himself; he
carves a piece out of his own body. He sacrifices a piece of himself for this empty
void. Metaphorically, he annihilates himself in front of himself. Naturally, this is
accompanied by extreme pain and suffering, but it is precisely through this that
he is able to grasp the opportunity to arrive back in his own world. Bringing the
griffin into the story has two functions: partly because this fairy tale character is
capable of breaking through various spheres due to his enormous strength, and
partly as a metaphor for a concept, namely its reference to the verb forms of grasp,
and touch (the German ergreifen, begreifen) which helps the hero indirectly to
pull himself back into another world, into his own world. Well, suffering and
the arrival back to his own world are deeply, we might say structurally, related
and this again germinates at the empty place of the secret; in fact it stands in
the place of the secretit is given. There, where nothing is left, pain is the most
painful, suffering causes the most suffering. To stand for, to be in the place of
something/somebody, to have a duty to speak, in this case, to tell talesto refer

14 GRG-KARDY: op. cit. pp. 248

1 287 2

to somebody/something by this in place of, by this exchange, by this replacement

and relay, to maintain and retain this in place of, more precisely to be at the place
of this in place of, is somehow to show respect for the secret which is impassive,
at a distance, out of reach. This is what it means to take care of a/the secret in
this de-secreting discourse.
Finally it is worth comparing this tale of the Son of the White Mare with the
other tale, with the different version. In the story about Mikls Kanca (Mike
the Mare) we cannot find these instances of the void or absence or lack which
are characteristic of the text of The Son of the White Mare. Or rather, we can
only find these places of absence with significant variations. What first strikes
the eye is that the tale teller emphasizes the special birth already at the scenes
of the confrontational, or even agonal meeting of the future friends: I knew,
Mikls, when you were in the uterus of the mare, that I would meet you.15
We may conclude that we have to pay attention to this singular, enigmatic, i.e.
animal birth. In the case of the Son of the White Mare, he carries his animal
features in his name all through the tale, following Berkis intention in a peculiar
way as we are following his story and existence, as if we might be tempted to
ignore this aspect of his background. So, in our culture, Mikls Kanca bears
the absolute taboo of incest, he was a half horse and a half man16; unlike the
Son of the White Mare, who preserves his animal ancestry in his name, he still
wanders around in a human form. The figure of Mikls Kanca therefore, in a
paradoxical way, is less enigmatic than the figure of the Son of the White Mare,
partly because he allows us to see his origin, partly because that impassively
unreachable distance emphasized by Derrida radically decreases, even though
it does not disappear.
The other difference that I would like to draw attention to is the insertion of
the figure of the griffin in the story. In the case of the Son of the White Mare,
Berki describes this bird in a more detailed and sophisticated way: The great
15 Kanca Mikls (Mike the Mare) In: GRG-KARDY: op. cit. p. 252
16 GRG-KARDY: op. cit. p. 251. Since we are dealing with tale fiction, incest
should naturally be understood carefully and indirectly, although due to the strong
referentiality and special world aspects of the Gypsy tales, we can even leave the
quotation marks out.

1 288 2

griffin was on its way, coming closer. It was like a big cloud, it was so big.17
Evoking the cloud coming closer as a big black tumult, the tale teller makes the
dangerousness of the bird felt. This momentumthat finally it is this creature
that saves the herogains significance as a turn. In the case of Mikls Kanca
this poetically described scene reads as follows: the griffin was on its way at a
great pace.18 We can explain the narrative becoming greyer and more simple,
by the fact that here we are dealing with an oral text, and the tale teller is not
in the same mood each time he tells his taleeven the collectors themselves
often remind us of this fact. What is more exciting than this is that here, in this
version, Berki makes the griffin swallow Mikls Kanca. There is no such scene
in The Son of the White Mare. Let me quote:
So the griffin landed at the bottom of the tree; it set its eyes on Mikls Kanca,
he was there, because he was very tired, and it swallowed him immediately.
The griffins began to cry: Is this his fate, mother of ours? He saved us twice
and then you swallow him up Well, then, dont worry. And then she spat
him back out.19
In my interpretation this little scene carries such a significance from the point
of view of the entire story that we would be wise not to jump over it when
reading or listening because it is so short. After all, the griffin annihilates Mikls
Kanca, the character born of incest, whom we have known up to this point in
the tale; that is, it dips him in the emptiness of its own stomach, it makes him
become part of a secret, it returns to him the secret he was deprived of before;
more precisely it donates the distant foreignness of the secret, and gives birth to
him again in the impassivity of the secret.
The secret is continually and singularly given up by unfolding itself from itself.
And it does not allow itself to be carried away or to be veiled.
(Translated by Gabriella gnes NAGY)

17 GRG-KARDY: op. cit. pp. 247248

18 GRG-KARDY: op. cit. p. 256
19 GRG-KARDY: op. cit. p. 256

1 289 2

Zoltn Hermann
THE SECRET IN THE GYPSY
FOLK TALES OF RUSSIA

1 291 2

n his monograph on Pasternaks Doctor Zhivago, The Novel

of Secrets1, published in 1966, Igor Smirnov, the apostle of
Russian postmodernor at least this is how the present
critical discourse labels himbegins his introduction with an
exhaustive cryptology. In the first chapter, The Literary Text
and the SecretOn the Problems of Cognitive Poetics, he refers to Semion Frank,
a Russian philosopher, to Greimas and Courts, to Derrida, Gilles Deleuze, and
to Kermode2, in order to elaborate on his preliminary remarks whichacting
as a collection of commentarieswill lead the reader towards the secret world
of the Pasternak novel. In almost none of his works does Smirnov conceal his
affiliation with logic, and here as well, he reaches his conclusion by quoting a
definition of the secret provided by Greimas in a language of logical signs:
() M incogn (m0) =
Translating the language of logic back to the language of rhetoric, Smirnov
claims that what we call secrets are those phenomena that exist in complete
separation from their own contexts; a kind of inclusion to which the signs of the
surrounding world a world which in literary texts is usually fictivedoes not
1 , :
,
, M, 1996. p. 1435
2 GREIMAS, Algirdas JuliusCOURTS, Joseph, The Cognitive Dimension of
Narrative Discourse, New Literary History, (1976) Vol. VII. 3. p. 440; DERRIDA,
Jacques Fors = ABRAHAM, NicolasTOROK, Maria (ed.), Kryptonymie. Das
Verbarium des Wolfsmanns, Harnacher, Frankfurt am Main, 1979. p. 758;
DERRIDA, Jacques: Wie nicht sprechen. Verneinungen (Comment ne pas parler.
Denegations, 1987), (trans. GONDEK, Hans-Dietrich) Wien, 1989, passim.; ,
: .
(1939), Mnchen, 1971.; DELEUZE, Gilles: Simulacre et philosophie antique = G.
D., Logique du sens, Paris 1969. (See: , : , ford.
, : 5, 1993. pp. 4556);
ASSMANN, Jan: Zur sthetik des Geheimnisses. Kryptographie als Kalligraphie
im alten gypten = KOTZINGER, SusiRIPPL, Gabriele: (ed.), Zeichen zwischen
Klartext und Arabeske, Atlanta, Amsterdam, 1994. pp. 175186; KERMODE, Frank:
Hotis Business: Why Are Narratives Obscure? = F. K., The Genesis of Secrecy. On the
Interpretation of Narrative, Cambridge-Massachusetts-London, 1979. p. 45

1 292 2

point, to whose recognition no logical operation would lead us, or if, indeed, there
is a path of this kind we do not know where it lies. Following Frank, Smirnov
attempts to separate the absolute of the secret, the inherent secret from
other versions of the secret: all the way from the illusoryGreimass formula:
() simulacr (m, m0)taking in the riddle/enigma, whose solution
we may acquire by taking logical steps, right up to mysteries which make the
inner sign system of the secret and the system of contextual signs correspond
not by elements but on the level of systemsand he sees the initiation into
mysteries as an appropriation or learning of the translational operations which
exist between systems. Without doubt, there are many contextual moments
moments that cannot be derived by logical stepsin Doctor Zhivago. Apart
from the secrecy of the heros name (and the title of the novel), we unexpectedly
find paragraphs written in the unmistakable style of classic Russian writers (for
example, Pushkin-tones at the funeral of little Zhivagos mother; sections whose
narrative function is far from clear), the occasional, the causally uninterpretable
characteristic of being a key novel (Mayakovsky as Komarovsky in the novel, etc.)
or the descriptions of travels on trains which establish constant textual parallels
with the text of the Futurist Manifesto.
In a hermeneutic sense, in Doctor Zhivago Smirnov recognizes the
workings of a poetics that is built on the identification of symbolic places
that resist interpretation and which are at the same time characterized by the
unrecognizability of the symbolic content. (We should notice that Smirnov
distances himself consciously from the individual, associative achievement
in interpretation, he is not specifically interested in how the readers previous
knowledge of creativity is capable of finding cause and effect relations where the
text does not render such connections apparent. But this is a marginal question
from our point of view.)
However, we must add that the character of the poet-doctor in the novel is
intentionally a kind of character who all along stands outside of the framework
of the role possibilities and constraints of the tsarist, orderly society, or of
the new order, separated into communist castes, the previous oppressors and
oppressed. In the first book, 4th part, 13th chapter, it is Zhivago himself who says:

1 293 2

 , , . (Hey, this is our camp life,

this tent gypsy life!)3
It is no coincidence that the socio-cultural situation of the gypsies of Russia
in the past centuries may be described by using the concepts of the secret. Being
the outcasts of society, a lack of integration into society characterized gypsy
communities all over Europe and in Russia this was even more so; however,
surprisinglyand above of all in the case of gypsies settling around Russian
cities for shorter or longer periods of timein many senses they were also judged
positively in a social context. Perhaps this is why the Romantic (Gerzhavin,
Pushkin, Lermontov, Leskov, Turgenev, Tolstoy, Kuprin, the playwright
Ostrovsky) and the Premodern ages (Aleksandr Blok) regarded Russian gypsy
ethnic groups as a synonym of poetic and other types of freedom, while they
bestowed on their interpretive impermeabilitywhich arose from cultural
differencevarious concepts of secrecy. The gypsy community, existing beyond
the periphery of society, still earned its living by entertaining the aristocracy and
the learned elite, who recognized and profited from the literary secrecy image
formed around gypsies.
(I also have my own anecdotal story related to this statement. In the beginning
of the 1990s we traveled to Saint Petersburg with the electrickathis is name of
the train which travels around citiesand we became involved in a conversation
with a retired teacher. When she heard that we were Hungarians, our talk
continued, firstly about Imre Klmn and then turning to gypsy music, at which
point this pleasant lady asked us: Are there gypsies living in your country, too?
Wow, thats wonderful for you!)
Real research on gypsy ethnic groups in Russia only began in the 1970-80s
with the text-saving work of the writer-ethnographer, Yefim Adolphovitsch
Drutz and Aleksey Nikolayevitsch Gessler, both of whom were of gypsy origin
themselves4. Already familiar with the methods of modern anthropology,
3 , : , , ,
1990. p. 125; PASZTERNAK, Borisz: Zsivago doktor, Eurpa, Bp., 1988. p. 139 (Hung.
trans by Judit Pr)
4 , , , , .
, , , 1985. (Later on in the text I will refer to
tales by using DG and the tale numbers.)

1 294 2

Drutz and Gessler collected cultural traditions, the accumulated collection

of the varied text folklore and customs of the Russian gypsy ethnic groups,
although they arranged them in accordance with the traditional categories of
the folklore genre. Their work became very popular and they have published
them in volumes translated into Russian: later on I would like to quote from
these Russian language collections.
However, more thorough research only began at the beginning of the 21st
century, primarily through the ethnographer, writer and painter Nikolay
Vladislavovitsch Bessonovs characteristically revealing work published in
monograph-studies.5 It was Bessonov and his followers who first faced the
anthropological problem of the secret nature of gypsy culture, namely by
confronting the fact that with an ethnic group which preserves its identity
as a separate community the direct interrogation method of the collectionmethodology would only bring doubtful results which would receive a critical
reception. Bessonovs studies brought to the surface many interesting points
regarding the conflicts between city gypsies and nomadic gypsies, the strong
tendency of Lithuanian and Belorussian gypsy communities to become Slavic,
where gypsies neither form an ethnic, nor a cultural community but are simply
a collecting pool for those living on the social periphery. Bessonov and his
colleagues were the first to consciously filter out information which was false,
and consequently incorrect, either due to the illiteracy or negligence of the
informant or because it was intentionally provided as false.
In his study which published and interpreted memories of the gypsy ethnic
cleansing in 19411944 on Ukranian and Russian territories occupied by the
Germans, Bessonov realizes that the forms of oral memories and the gypsy
secret-identity are unreliable in the case of the data gained unconsciously
from memories, data related to the number of victims, and to the topographic
5 , : . ,
, 2010.; , ,
, : . , , , 2000.
At the beginning of the Drutz-Gessler collection there is a thorough summary of
research history up to the 1980s. The following portal informs us about the state of
present day research in Russia: http://gypsy-life.net/.

1 295 2

parameters of mass graves; at the same time, in the symbolic layers of memory
narratives there are still certain guidelines that may serve as a basis for the
comparison of wartime and postwar administrative data. As a general conclusion,
Bessonov remarks that in connection to the customs and traumas of the Russian
gypsy ethnic groups it seems as if textual folklore would provide much more
reliable data than direct interviews.
Certainly, in the traditional genres of Russian gypsy folklorein gypsy songs
(more precisely the variations of originally Russian folk songs or composed
songs created within the framework of gypsy orality), in their stories of belief
(and although they might not be regarded as descriptions of gypsy beliefs, but
as fantastic secret narratives formulated from an external, non-gypsy point of
view, these narratives highlight the secret-character of the gypsy ethnicity), as
well as in gypsy tales featuring attempts to keep something secret or actions
which repeat the images of the secret, such as hiding or revealingsecrecy is a
surprisingly frequent motif.
Naturally, Bessonov draws our attention to the shortcomings of the collections
of Gypsy folklore in Russia, to the folkloristic character of peculiar speech
situations, texts and textual formulas accompanying palm reading and card
readingas taboo situations. In these folklore genres, which formerly ensured
a substantial living for gypsies in Russian city culturejust as with the tale
teller in folk talesthe reader or fortune teller is always present as the only one
who knows the secret, or the one who reveals it. In a certain respect, the bitter,
elegiac tone of the remarkably popular Russian gypsy songs and gypsy romances
function as a kind of prophecy, they will become part of the popular culture as
emotional representations of negative images of the future (I will not recall, but
only briefly refer to the tragic Pushkin anecdote in which on the night before his
wedding the great poet listens to the song of Tanya Gemyanova, a gypsy singer;
in the song Pushkins unhappy marriage is featured, as well as his tragic death,
for which the public blames his wife even today. Drutzs tale collection contains
two stories about Pushkin getting into a conflict with the tsar, while hidden by
the gypsies for a time from the secret police.)6

6 See: DG 120

1 296 2

It is obvious that the secret images of the Drutz-Gessler collection cannot

simply be seen as merely morphological references. The Proppian function stock
has elements in which the secret is present as a topic and a subject, a narrative
image and an action: in the fairy tale canon in general, the role of the absentation
function of VIII (a) and IX (B) may be fulfilled by a secret to be solved; in the
function of the receipt of a magical agent, XII (), XIII () and XIV (Z) may also
include the topic of the secret, the method of receipt may be a correct answer
given to the riddle-like question but the magical agent itself may also be a kind
of abstract, acquired knowledge, a recognized secret, for instance in the Luck of
Luck / The Devils Three Pieces of Golden Hair (ATU 461) tale types. Similarly,
in the closing part of the fairy tales XXV () and XXVI (), the difficult task and
the resolution of the task appearing as a riddle or an ambush may include secretmotifs.7
These morphological locations appear not only in the European peasant and
city tales but in the stories of communities living on the periphery, albeit the
ritual patterns behind the tale tradition may be different in the customs of those
who settled and in the separated and isolated cultures of alterity. Despite this
fact, Russian Gypsy talesin the Proppian sensedo not differ in any basic
way from the tales of the Afanasyev collection, regarded as base texts by the
morphology theory. The fundamental difference lies not in common regularities
but in those irregularities that concern morphological, and most of all character,
functions. The specificity of the European Gypsy tales whichobviously due to
the differing concept of familyemphasizes the peculiarity of the relationships
among family members is often nothing other than a truth revealed about
family members, the heros parents, most frequently the heros mother, the one
who sets the hero on his journey, being the tale heros helper, or sometimes the
villain, to the hero.
However, when following the Bessonovian description of the secret-culture,
we must be cautious when dealing with the topics of the Drutz-Gessler tales,
since the texts in their collection are translations into Russian (especially
Drutzs translations), and it is not only the language difference which may cause
7 For details of Propps functions, see PROPP, Vlagyimir Jakovlevics: A mese
morfolgija, Osiris, Budapest, 1999. p. 3365

1 297 2

problems: I myself do not know if the topics graspable through Russian linguistic
signs differ from the topics of the material collected in the Roma dialects of
Russia. It is not clear whether the Russian word stock on hiding and the secret
(, , and other conjugated and derivated word forms, etc.)
would cover or coincide with, in the semantic sense, the original Roma word
stock: of course we have to trust Yefim Drutzs knowledge of the language and
his consistency in translation. Another question which cannot be neglected
if we referring constantly to the consistency of the anthropological collection
methods, and this question also has to be faced by European and Hungarian
collectors of gypsy folklore as wellis the following: whether the topic, rhetoric,
and morphology of a tale told in a pure gypsy community differs at least in
nuances from the characteristics of the tales told by gypsy tale tellers to a nongypsy community, or to the collector. We do not exactly know, but when we
think of the example of the prophecy/fortune teller textswhere it is a simple
microeconomic formula for the card reader to regard the village peasant, the
city dweller, or the nobleman, and not her own type, as a source of income,
or we may also think of the examples of the composed songs tailored to the
performance style of the particular singer,it becomes obvious that folklore
texts, especially the textual tradition of the Russian gypsies, tend to represent
the image of gypsies presented to regular society and therefore preserve their
secrecy-image, rather than being an authentic description of gypsy communities.
It is therefore clear that when reading Russian gypsy folk tales we do not
receive directly an exact picture of the life style and beliefs of gypsy communities
which are, furthermore, scattered over large areas; neither do we acquire source
data for further analysis, for international comparative research, although
we may have a very accurate picture of the relationship between the Russian
gypsy communities and regular societyjust as Bessonov notes. Perhaps the
most important element of this socio-cultural dialogue is to maintain the cultic
and positive gypsy image in the society of the majority and this is successfully
achieved, since in Russian society of the 19th and 20th centuries, high and popular
culture can only accommodate the culture of gypsies in Russia in the various
configurations of the secret.
Now let us consider a few characteristic examples of the secret motifs of the
tales in the Drutz-Gessler collection. I will attempt to interpret the functions
1 298 2

of these logical, rhetorical, and thematic secret-motifs referred to in the

methodological introduction of the Smirnov monograph. (The examplesand
this is truly the transfer of a language transferwill be cited in my own rough
translations.)
There are frequent references to the secret in Russian gypsy tales; the heroes
repeatedly hide from each other, or keep something in secret from each other.
According to gypsy practices this is probably a violation of community norms
and therefore these people should be persecuted. Those in hiding and who keep
something in secret will be punished in some way.
Tale number 83 in the collection is entitled /
How the Gypsy Girl Cursed Her Brothers8 in which a gypsy girl goes wandering
off together with her brothers. A poor gypsy boy accompanies them, but her
brothers keep sending him away. The boy does not return. After a little while,
at night, the suitor appears again. He has become a rich man and the brothers
hand the girl over to him with pleasure. The husband and the girl part: They
have been sitting around the fire till dawn, they were looking into each others
eyes with love. And when the sky began to clear above the trees, the husband
got up and said these words on his departure: My beloved wife, I have to share
this secret of mine with you. We may only meet at night. I cannot be with you
during the day. Do not ever look for me, it would be in vain!9 The girl realizes
that her brothers have killed the suitor, and have left him unburied and his
dead soul has come back to see her. The story ends with the girls curse on her
murdering brothers.
In the tale entitled /The Wicked Curse10 gypsies arrive in
the village to tell fortunes and to beg. They are knocking at each and every door.

8 Tale number 83 in the DRUTZ-GESSLER collection. The tale was collected in

Tomsk, it was told by Z. Ye Buzilyeva (born in 1925) in 19801982.
9 , ,
, : //,
, . .
! ! (DG 83. pp. 261
263)
10 Susanino, Leningrad County, L. Ny. Ilyinskaya (born cca. 1902), 19801982.

1 299 2

One gypsy woman is lucky. The village women always paid for her prophecies
with bread, bacon and foodand she got money. A great deal of money. The
gypsy womans eyes kindled and she decided to keep her earnings secret from
the others. But one of the gypsy women noticed it: // My darling, have you got
some money from them? Oh no! I swear on the life of my children, what money?
Look what I have in my apron, I got this much, nothing else. // Well, in her apron
there really was only some kind of food. But anyhow, the gypsy women did not
believe her.11 The story ends with the death of her children.
In the satirical tale entitled / The MiraculousWeapon12
somebody steals the waist shawl of the voyvoda from the drying clothes. Korcsa,
the voyvoda, threatens them, saying that he has a weapon which can be loaded
and its bullet would only find the perpetrator and would kill him: Korcsa kept on
asking: Where has my waist shawl gone? Well, my children, please give it back to
me while I am being nice to you! // It was not us who took it shouted the gypsy
children.// The gypsy girls also vowed and swore that they were not to blame,
either. // The men also denied it. // Te hav me dadeszkiro masz! // Listen to me
my children! said the voyvoda to his gypsies againm while he looked into their
eyes, You will be sorry for not admitting this. The thiefs thinking is faulty if he
believes that he can keep his sin in secret. I will find the belt-shawl anyway, but the
thief will not survive!Finally, it turns out that the peasants cow ate the shawl.13
11 . .
. , ,
, ! ! ,
. : //,
?! // , , ?
, , , . //
. , . (DG 109. pp. 301302)
12 Semrino, Leningrad County, I. M. Fyodorov (born cca. 1922), 19801982.
13 : // ? -, ,
-. // , -, ,
. // ,
. // , : // ! //
, , ,
, . ,

1 300 2

One of the most terrifying tales of the collection is about the violation of
taboos, prohibitions related to marriage and sexuality, about hiding from the
community, and about the punishment for a secret liaison. According to the
unwritten laws of Russian gypsy communities these are apparently the most
severe sins. In the tale entitled / The Gypsy Girl and the Snake14
we may read what appears to be an etiological story about magic in connection
to the camp life-style, about runes for snakes. The gypsy couple has only one
daughter, who grows up and wants to get married. She falls in love with a boy in
the camp, and waits for those moments every day when she can be with him.15
She wants to speak about the boy to her father, but he does not even listen, just
telling her: , , . (He is not
for you; hes not your partner, it is better if you forget about him.)
. (The boy and the girl begin to
meet each other secretly). They keep meeting each other in the woods but then a
snake crawls into the mouth of the sleeping girl and she becomes ill. The father
blames the boy but he promises that if he cures his daughter he will be allowed
to marry her. The boy has a bath prepared and in the bath he exorcises the snake
with milk. They catch it and cook it in the milk. At the wedding the boy accuses
the father, saying that if he had had his way his daughter would never have a
happy day in her whole life. At the end of the wedding they both eat from the
snake cooked in milk and drop dead.
The rather negative judgment on secrecy within the Gypsy communities
explains that when we read certain text-formulas in tales, which can mostly be
found in the closing part of the talewhen the heroes tell their own adventures
to their parents, to their brothers, etc.they didactically refer to the positive
, . .
. (DG 116. pp. 315319)
14 Mihaylovka, Leningrad County, A. M. Lobanova (born cca. 1907.), 19801982
15 . ,
.
,
, .
, , : (DG 106.
pp. 292295)

1 301 2

norms of behavior within the community. For instance: ,

, . Meaning: He reported everything, he has
not kept anything secret.
Secrecy has practical-rational motives as well. Among the tale motifs we find
the escape from the regulations that were aimed at suppressing the nomadic life
styleregulations administered by the Russian-Soviet military and police state
power.
The tale entitled / The Gypsy and the Monster16 is a tale of
this sort. This happened a long time ago. Once upon a time the Banotori gypsies
lived on Earth. They lived as they could: there were poor people among them,
there were rich. One was outstanding among them, the voyvoda. Wherever he
told them to go, the Gypsies went that way. They had a camp with a dozen of
families, not more. They had no money, they had no passports, they were hiding
in the depths of the forest to avoid recruitment.17
In tale number 91, entitled / How the Gypsy
Played a Trick on the Forest Elf we read: Once the gypsy stole a horse, far away
from his camp. Every one knows that when you are on your way home in this
way, it is better to hide in the woods during daytime and only at night, when
everybody has gone to sleep, only then you get back on your horse.18
These stories confirm and fix certain behavioral forms within the community;
primarily they reconfirm the behavioral patterns of secrecy in relation to
foreigners. We may not even necessarily think of these stories as tales. The ones
I have quoted above are mostly stories about the moral aspect(s) of belief, and
parables explaining the origins of customs.

16 Bolshoy Biser, Novgorod County, A. Ye. Mihaylov (born in 1899), 19801982.

17 . -. - :
, , .
, . ,
, . , ,
, . (DG 11. pp. 119122)
18 Collected in Mihaylovka (Leningrad area), I. I. Ivanova, a Gypsy woman of about 70
(19801982).

1 302 2

In the case of the so called true fairy tales it is always noticeable that the
secret as a topos is woven around the motifs of death. The realm of death and
the otherworld is the secret itself; people who return from there as living beings
have stories to tell.
In the tale entitled The Voyvoda and the Ruzha19, a gypsy girl named Ruzha
goes to church. Once, on some kind of a feast day, Ruzha sets out to go to
church. She keeps on going and then all of a sudden she sees that by the side
of the road, in the dust, there is a small golden chain lying. She goes closer,
she begins to poke it with her foot, and then, as if it was alive, all of a sudden
it crawls around her ankle and tries to pull her down under the ground. Ruzha
was numbed by fear, so without saying a word, without shouting a word, she
kept on sinking down under the ground. Where the ground buried her (hid
her) a beautiful huge birch tree grew. And just by looking at it you immediately
want to break a small branch off it as a relic.20 The motif of the tree presents the
successful return of the girl; the Voyvoda will come to rescue her.
In the tale entitled / The Enchanted Orphan Girl21,
the orphan girl lives at the sorcerers house and in secret she learns all her magic
from her and hides it in a crystal egg. Once a prince finds the girl in the forest,
he falls in love with her, takes her home, marries her and they have a child.
The witch puts a curse on the girl, who falls sick and dies. The king and his son
mourn her, they visit her from time to time in the forest, where the dead woman
lies in a clock tower and does not age at all with the passing years. When his son
19 - .
, ,
, , , . (DG 91. pp. 274275)
20 Bolsoy Biser, Novgorod County, A. Ye. Mihaylov (born in 1899), 19801982.
21 - , - , .
: . ,
, , ,
- . ,
, , .
, , -.
. (DG 2.
pp. 6973)

1 303 2

caresses his mothers face with the crystal egg, the dead body begins to come
alive. The spell is broken: , ,
. . The boy tells
the woman what has happened and how, he did not keep anything secret.
From then on they lived in prosperity and happiness.
In the tales (folk belief stories) of this collection it is a recurring event that the
dead come over to the world of the living; more precisely something prevents
them from reaching the otherworld.
In the tale entitled / The Camp of the Dead22, a young
horse tradesman joins a gypsy caravan. In the evening the gypsies sit around
the fire and sing beautifully. The boy begins to court the pleasant young lady; he
proposes to her and the gypsies agree. Everyone goes to sleep, but at night, while
looking for her tent the boy sees that some of the sleeping gypsies have an arm,
a leg, and many of them their head, missing. He realizes that all the campers are
dead. Once there lived a young gypsy. He was from a rich generation, he was a
horse trader. Once he went to a fair and when he finished his job, he began to go
home with a substantial profit and very content. His way from city to city was
quite long. Night fell during his journey. He was about to settle down to sleep
but then, he heard the gypsies singing nearbyas if the voices were coming from
beside a camp fire. He began to walk towards the singing and soon he found the
gypsies camp. The gypsies were camping on a large field, by the riverside. All
around all kinds of camp fires were burning, and gypsies were sitting around
the fire and singing. They were singing so beautifully that it was miraculous to
listen to. The gypsy tied up his horses, but he was not brave enough to approach
the fire. They were Gypsies from a foreign camp, who knows who they were,
what they were. Somehow he got closer and closer to the gypsies. Then he caught
sight of a beautiful gypsy girl next to the fire: she was singing and dancing so
beautifully that the horse trader fell in love with her and her heart was burning
with love, too. The horse trader was a single man, and he decided, come what
may, that he would get to know the girl who enchanted him so much. He decided
to propose to her. And once he had decided, so be it! // The gypsies then just kept
22 Mihaylovka, Leningrad County, Ye. V. Harponina (born cca. 1905), 19801982. (DG
10. pp. 115119)

1 304 2

on singing and dancing, the horse trader was watching them from afar, from
outside the camp. When dawn approached, the gypsies withdrew to their tents.
The tradesman watched which tent the girl went into and he sneaked in after her.
He arrived in the tent, he pulled the canvas apart but he lurched backwards at
a hideous sight. A terrible sight unfolded in front of his eyes: there were gypsies
lying on the floor, one of them had an arm, the other a leg, and another his head,
missing. His hair stood on end. He understood what kind of a gypsy camp he
had found: the camp of the dead. Suddenly his fear disappeared and he began
to search for the girl. The he saw: she was lying on the ground, she was not
breathing. The gypsy became sad, but then decided: If the dead girl is mine, the
living one will be mine, too. I will take her with me, whatever happens! If she is
mine only at night, I will be pleased with that, too. He lifted the girl from the
floor and put her on his carriage and drove away. He drove the entire day to be
as far away from the camp as possible and when midnight came the gypsy girl
woke up: Where are you taking me? Have you gone mad? My brothers will soon
reach you and kill you. Didnt you know that its impossible to hide from the
dead? Turn your horses back, do not hesitate a minute!23
The brothers reach them anyway; they beat him up and take the girl back to
the camp. But the boy goes after them and learns about the camps history. Once,
the gypsies sent their horses out into a field by a village and the horses ate all
the freshly cut grass. The villagers then took their pitchforks, their scythes, and
axes and attacked the camp and killed everybody, and did not even bury them.
The boy could be free of them and marry the girl if he buried them with respect
and mourned the girls relatives.
We might remember the scene in Doctor Zhivago when the doctor is
kidnapped by the Red Partisans from Varikino and the family thinks for years
that he is dead. Looking at it from the perspective of a regular community,
the secret/death symbolic in gypsy tales is reversed here. This episode of the
Pasternak novel refers to the fact that for the culture of the majority (the Russian
village and city culture), the gypsy worldin the novel they are the partisans
living in the forestappears in the death metaphors as a world of the dead. The
secret is essentially the otherworld. We may come closest to understanding these
23 Petrozavodszk, Ny. A. Novikov (born: 1919), 19801982.

1 305 2

cultural and ritual patterns if we identify the mythic opposition of the foreign/
own with the opposition of the known/concealed. In this respect, the foreign
world, the world of Russian villages and cities represented by gypsy tales may be
identified with beliefs in connection with the otherworld, and secrecy then falls
under a taboo in their own world. They may keep secrets from foreigners, from
the Russians; it is permitted to cheat them because they need to act similarly
with the dead, with the representatives of the otherworld as well. This type of
aggression is only a kind of self-defense.
The tale entitled / The Witch24 begins as follows: Once there lived
an old gypsy woman in the village. She was short of many things, but she lived
24 . ,
. - ,
. .
. ,

.
. .
, . ,
. , ,
. .
- : , , , -?
.
, , ,
. ,
, .
. ,
! // , ,
, ,
- , .
, .
, .
. : ,
, . . ,
. ,
- . : .

1 306 2

together with her son and had been living in peace for a hundred years. She was
a woman with a wicked nature; she was friends with the devil. She did not like
it when guests announced their arrival at her home. At those times, when night
fell, she always went out to the yard, and began to murmur magic words and then
she turned around herself and became a she-pig. And she nuzzled against the
feet of anyone who was brave enough to get close to her house and she tossed
them, and poked them until the visitor tripped over and rolled around in the
mud. So slowly she chased everyone away from her house. // The womans son
was a truly handsome boy. He did not even know about his mothers sorcery,
and she never spoke about it to him. The boy grew up and got to know a proper,
nice gypsy girl.25 When the boy proposed to the girl her brothers informed him
about his mother being a witch and they did not let them marry unless they
destroyed the witch. The brothers went to the gypsy woman with iron brooms
they had received from the smith, the she-pig attacked them and they beat her
up well. The boy turned up at the old womans house26: the old woman was lying
on the stove, barely alive; then her son then dragged her off the stove, holding
her by her shirt, and he saw the marks of the iron broom, and then reached out
, : !
, ! , . //
.
, , , : //
? !
. , ?
, . (DG 19. pp. 145148)
25 Noted down in 1925 in Tomsk, told by Z. Ye. Bukljeva.
26 -. .
. .
, - ,
, . , ,
. , ,
. .
. // .
, .
(DG 69. pp. 241242)

1 307 2

for his weapon: Is this true then, what people keep saying? You are the witch!
he shouted, and then pulled the trigger. When the smoke had cleared away he
saw that his mother was just standing there as if nothing had happened and she
was nodding her head: Oh, my boy, I have been keeping this in secret from you,
but now I cannot do anything any more. I can see that you will not be happy as
long as I am alive. Listen to me! You cannot kill me here, on this spot, but take
me to our forest, to the cursed hundred year old oak tree. My strength will leave
me there. Take me there and kill me there! // The gypsy took his mother to the
oak tree; he shot her and when the smoke had cleared he saw that the old woman
was dead.27
It is only possible to take the life of the witch at the bottom of the hundred
year old oak tree, which is a metaphor for death; it is only possible to send her
back to the otherworld at that very place.
We must note one more thing about the secret culture of Russian gypsy
tales. As in the example quoted above, the conflicts of the etiological and taboo
system built around secrets arewith a few exceptionsfemale-male conflicts.
In Russian gypsy culture, in the relationships between gypsy communities and
the external world, in the cultural dialogue, unlike in the Central-European
examples, the role of the female is at least as active as that of the male. In the
case of gypsy folk tales from Hungary there are only a few examples of folklorists
collecting tales from female tale tellers. Among the examples I have listed above,
out of ten tales, seven had been told by a female tale teller. Dutz and al. were
collecting them between 1980 and 1982. (I have not cited a tale by her, but among
27 , , ,
. // , ?
. // -, , . ,
. //-, , , ,
, ?
, : //
! // , ? ? // , , . //
, ,
. , . ,
. (DG 69. p. 242)

1 308 2

the data providers of the collection is Svetlana Toma, an actress of gypsy origin
who was the lead actress in the movie entitled Queen of the Gypsies, a 1975 film
based on a short story, Makar Chudra, by Maxim Gorky.)
Why is the presence of female story tellers in the Russian gypsy tradition so
apparent? Or perhaps the male dominance of Gypsy tale tellers of Hungary may
represent a kind of deviation from the ethnic tradition?
Revealing the secretwe have seen several variations in our examplesis one
of the frequent narratives of the partly urban Russian gypsy identity. However,
linguistic, cultural and social alterity may find very special forms of expression
in the Russian gypsy tale tradition. The secret-narrativelet us return to our
definition of the concept of the secret based on Igor Smirnovis nothing other
than the description of a perfectly hermeneutically closed world, a world closed
from its own context. A described world for which no kind of logical formula
exists that would enable us to recognise it; or rather, the reality is that we do
not know these logical-rhetorical formulas, the formulas of translation from one
language to the other.
The secret-narrative of the Russian Gypsy tales resembles the Waldenfels
paradox of the culturally foreign.28 In the sense that this narrative is identical
not simply to a cultural self-identification, or does not simply fix the ethnic
identityotherwise a complex picture would also be revealed behind this
identity narrative, since in this prime identity sharp, separating gestures may
be identified which mark it out against not only the major Russian, but also
against the newly settled Gypsy groups of the 20th century. It is identical to
something else as well, since this narrative behavior/attitude regards not only
the external linguistic, cultural, social context as foreign but, within the frames
28 . //, ?!
, ! . ,
, :
, , ,
. , , . :
, ,
. .
! // , , ,
, . (DG 69. p. 242)

1 309 2

of the narrativesee the scene of the revealed secret in the tale or belief story
entitled The Camp of the Dead, and its explanation of the gypsy camp where the
murdered gypsies were left unburied by the peasantsit is capable of providing
an external point of view. It is capable of transferring the own/foreign opposition
to a rhetorical-narrative figure of the own-as-foreign.

1 310 2

BIBLIOGRFIA/BIBLIOGRAPHY
ARISTOTLE: The Poetics (Translated by S. H. Butcher) London, MacMillan and
Co., Limited, The MacMillan Company, New York, 1902.
ARISZTOTELSZ: Hermeneutika. (ford. Rnafalvi dn) Kossuth, Budapest, 1994.
ARISZTOTELSZ: Potika, (ford. Sarkady Jnos), Magyar Helikon, Bp., 1974.
ASSMANN, Jan: Zur sthetik des Geheimnisses. Kryptographie als Kalligraphie
im alten gypten, In: KOTZINGER, SusiRIPPL, Gabriele (hrsg.): Zeichen
zwischen Klartext und Arabeske, Atlanta-Amsterdam, 1994.
ASSMANN, Jan: Uralom s dvssg, (ford. Hidas Zoltn), Atlantisz, Bp., 2008.
AYTO, John: Bloomsbury Dictionary of Word Origins, London, Bloomsbury
Reference, 1991.
BACHELARD, Gaston: Lintuition de linstant, d. Gonthier, Paris, 1979.
BLINT Pter: Archaikus alakzatok a npmesben. Jakab Istvn, cigny
mesemond / Archaic Images in Folk Tales. Istvn Jakab, Gypsy Tale Teller,
Didakt, Debrecen, 2014.
BLINT Pter: Meserts s rtelmezs. A krpt-medencei npmese hagyomny
hermeneutikai vizsglata / Understanding and Interpreting Tales. Hermeneutic
Analysis of the Folktale Tradition of the Carpathian Basin, Didakt, Debrecen,
2013.
BATAILLE, Georges: Az erotika (ford.: DUSNOKI Katalin et al.) Nagyvilg,
Budapest, 2001.
BATAILLE, Georges: Erotism. Death and Sensuality (trans: DALWOOD, Mary)
City Lights Books, San Fransisco, 1986.
BENK Lornd (ed.) A magyar nyelv trtneti-etimolgiai sztra IIII., /
Historical-Etymological Dictionary of Hungarian, Akadmiai Kiad, Budapest,
19671976.
BERGSON, Henri: A nevets (ford. SZVAI Nndor), Gondolat, Budapest, 1994.
BERGSON, Henri: Laughter. An Essay on the Meaning of the Comic (trans.
BRERETON, Cloudesley and ROTHWELL, Fred), Arc Manor, Boston, 2008.

1 311 2

BERZE NAGY Jnos (ed.): Baranyai magyar nphagyomnyok IIII., Kultra

Knyvnyomdai Mintzet, Pcs, 1940.
BICZ Gbor: Mese s trsadalom. mi Lajos, egy cigny mesemond lete s
mve/Tales and Society; The Life and Work of Gypsy Storyteller Lajos mi.
Didakt, Debrecen, 2014.
BLANCHOT, Maurice: Az irodalmi tr, (ford. Horvth Gyrgyi et al.), Kijrat
kiad, Bp., 2005.
BLANCHOT, Maurice: L espace littraire. d. Gallimard, 1955.
BDIS Zoltn: A mesesz igazsga. Cifra Jnos cigny mesemond mesi/
The Truth of the Tale-Word. Tales of Jnos Cifra, Gypsy Tale Teller, Didakt,
Debrecen, 2014.
BUBER, Martin: n s Te, (ford. Br Dniel), Eurpa, Bp., 1991.
BUBER, Martin: I and Thou, (Translated by Ronald Gregor Smith), Scribner,
New York, 1958.
CSEKE kos: j fenomenolgia Franciaorszgban, Magyar Filozfiai Szemle,
2011/2. 174177.
DELEUZE, Gilles: Logique du sens, MINUIT, Paris, 1969.
DERRIDA, Jacques ERNST, Wolfgang: Az archvum knz vgya/Archvumok
morajlsa. (ford. Bereczki Pter, Lnrt Tams), Kijrat, Bp., 2008.
DERRIDA, Jacques Fors = ABRAHAM, NicolasTOROK, Maria (ed.),
Kryptonymie. Das Verbarium des Wolfsmanns, Harnacher, Frankfurt am
Main, 1979.
DERRIDA, Jacques, Wie nicht sprechen. Verneinungen, ford. Hans-Dietrich
Gondek, Wien, 1989.
DERRIDA, Jacques: Ki az anya? (ford. BOROS Jnos, CSORDS Gbor, ORBN
Joln), Jelenkor Kiad, Pcs, 2005.
DERRIDA, Jacques: A msik egynyelvsge, (ford. Boros Jnos et al.), Jelenkor,
Pcs, 1997.
DERRIDA, Jacques: Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression. Diacritics, Vol. 25.
No. 2. (Summer 1995)

1 312 2

DERRIDA, Jacques: Monolingualism of the Other or The Prosthesis of Origin.

(Translated by Patrick Mensah), Stanford University Press, Stanford,
California, 1998.
DERRIDA, Jacques: On the Name. (Tanslated by David Wood, John P. Leavey,
JR., and Ian McLoad), Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, 1995.
DERRIDA, Jacques: Essz a nvrl, (ford. Boros Jnos et al.), Jelenkor, Pcs, 1995.
DETHLEFSEN, Thorwald: Oedipusz, a talny megfejtje (trans. SARANK
Mrta) Magyar Knyvklub, 1997.
DURAND, Gilbert: Les structures anthropologiques de l imaginaire, d. Dunod,
Paris, 1992.
ERDSZ, Sndor (Ed.): mi Lajos Mesi I. Akadmiai Kiad, Budapest, 1968.
Etimolgiai sztr, magyar szavak s toldalkok eredete, Tinta Kiad, Bp., 2006.
FABINYI Tibor: A keresztny hermeneutika 7., http://nyitottegyetem.phil-inst.
hu/teol/fabinyi.html, (01.02.2014.)
FISCHER-LICHTE, Erika: A drma trtnete (trans. KISS Gabriella) Jelenkor
Kiad, Pcs, 2001.
FRAZER, James G.: Az aranyg (ford. BODROGI Tibor s BNIS Gyrgy),
Osiris-Szzadvg, Budapest, 1995.
FRAZER, James G.: The Golden Bough, Digital Edition, NuVision Publications,
LLC, 2006.
GADAMER, Hans-Georg: A Szp aktualitsa, T-Twins Kiad, Budapest, 1994.
GADAMER, Hans-Georg: The Relevance of the Beautiful and Other Essays.
(trans. Nicholas WALKER), Cambridge University Press, 1987.
GREIMAS, Algirdas JuliusCOURTS Joseph, The Cognitive Dimension of
Narrative Discourse, New Literary History, (1976) Vol. VII. 3. p. 440.;
Gyrksy AlajosKapitnffy IstvnTegyey Imre (szerk.): grg-magyar sztr.
Akadmiai, Budapest, 1990.
HEIDEGGER, Martin: Being and Time (trans. John MACQUIRRIE and
EDWARD ROBINSON), Blackwell Publishers, Oxford and Cambridge, 1962.
HEIDEGGER, Martin: Being and Time. (Translated by Joan Stambaugh), State
University of New York Press, Albany, 1996.
1 313 2

HEIDEGGER, Martin: Lt s id (ford. VAJDA Mihly, ANGYALOSI Gergely,

BACS Bla, KARDOS Andrs, OROSZ Istvn), Gondolat Kiad, Budapest,
1989.
HEIDUK, Matthias: Offene GeheimnisseHermetische Texte und verborgenes
Wissen in der mittelalterlichen Rezeption von Augustinus bis Albertus
Magnus. Wrzburg Universitt, Wrzburg, 2008.
HELTING, Holger: Bevezets a pszichoterpis daseinanalzis filozfiai
dimenziiba (trans. BLANDL Borbla s FAZEKAS Tams), LHarmattan,
Budapest, 2007.
HRODOTOSZ: A grg-perzsa hbor (ford. MURAKZY Gyula) Osiris
Kiad, Budapest, 2007. I. 97.
HERODOTUS: Persian Wars, I.
HOLTZ, Barry W.(ed.): Back to the Sources. Reading the Classic Jewish texts.
Simon and Schuster, New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, 2006 (1984).
HONTI: Studies in Oral Epic Tradition, (Transl. Rna Eva) Akadmiai, Budapest,
1975.
HOPPL MihlyJANKOVICS MarcellNAGY AndrsSZEMADM Gyrgy
(ed.): Jelkptr, Helikon Kiad, Budapest, 2010.
http://gypsy-life.net/.
http://www.szokincshalo.hu/szotar/?qbetu=t&qsearch=&qdetail=11399,
GRG Veronika s msok (szerk.): Berki Jnos mesl cigny s magyar nyelven.
Ciganisztikai tanulmnyok 3. MTA Nprajzi Kutat Csoport, Budapest,1985.
NAGY OlgaV Gabriella: Havasok mesemondja, Jakab Istvn mesi.
Akadmiai, Budapest, 2002.
JUNG, Carl Gustav: Az archetpusok s a kollektv tudattalan, (ford. Trczi
Attila), Scolar Kiad, Bp., 2011.
JUNG, Carl Gustav: The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. (Translated
by R. F. C. Hull), Princeton University Press and Routledge and Kegan Paul,
Ltd. 1990.
KANT, Immanuel: Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view, (Translated by
Robert B. Louden) Cambridge University Press, New York, 2006.

1 314 2

KAST, Verana: lmok (trans. Beatrix MURNYI) Eurpa Kiad, Budapest,

2010.
KERMODE, Frank: The Genesis of Secrecy. On the Interpretation of Narrative,
Cambridge-Massachusetts-London, 1979.
KIERKEGAARD, Sren: A hallos betegsg, (ford. Rcz Pter), Gncl, Bp., 1993.
KIERKEGAARD, Soren: The Sickness Unto Death, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, New Jersey 1941.
KOSSELECK, Reinhart: Elmlt id. A trtneti idk szemantikja, (ford. Hidas
Zoltn, Szab Mrton), Atlantisz, Bp., 2003.
KOSSELECK, Reinhart: Futures Past. On the Semantics of Historical Time.
(Translated by Keith Tribe), Columbia University Press, New York, 2004.
Kzpkori magyar rsok, (ed. Mezey Lszl), Magvet, Bp., 1957.
LADITAN, Affin O.: De loralit la littrature: mtamorphoses de la parole
chez les Yorubas, Semen [En ligne], 18|2004, published on the internet 2nd
February 2007
LVINAS, Emmanuel: Nyelv s kzelsg, (ford. Tarnay Lszl) Jelenkor, Pcs,
1997.
LVINAS, Emmanuel: Collected Philosophical Papers, (Translated by Alphonso
Lingis), Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, 1987.
LVINAS, Emmanuel: Teljessg s Vgtelen, (ford. Tarnay Lszl), Jelenkor, Pcs,
1999.
LVINAS, Emmanuel: Totality and Infinity. (Translated by Alphonso Lingis),
Duquesne University Press, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 2000.
MACINTYRE, Alasdair: After Virtue. A Study in Moral Theory. University of
Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, Indiana, 1984.
MACINTYRE, Alasdair: Az erny nyomban, (ford. Brn Kaszs va), Osiris,
Bp., 1999.
MARION, Jean-Luc: Az erotikus fenomn. Hat meditci (ford. SZAB
Zsigmond) LHarmattan, Budapest, (2003) 2012.
MARION, Jean-Luc: The Erotic Phenomenon (trans. By LEWIS, Stephen E.)
University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 2007.

1 315 2

MARION, Jean-Luc: tant donn, d. Quadrige/PUF, Paris, 2005.

MASLOW, Abraham: A lt pszicholgija fel (ford. TURCZI Attila), Ursus
Libris, Budapest, 2003. 290.
MASLOW, Abraham: Toward a Psychology of Being, Sublime Books, 2014.
MAUSS, Marcel: Szociolgia s antropolgia, (ford. Vargyas Gbor), Osiris, Bp.,
2000.
MAUSS, Marcel: A General Theory of Magic. (Transl. by Robert Brain), Routledge,
London and New York, 2001.
MERLEAUPONTY, Maurice: A lthat s lthatatlan, (ford. Farkas Henrik,
Szab Zsigmond), L Harmattan, Bp., 2007.
MERLEAU-PONTY, Maurice: The Phenomenology of Perception (trans. SMITH,
Colin) Routledge, London and New York, (1962) 1999.
MERLEAUPONTY, Maurice: The Visible and the Invisible. (Edited by Claude
Lefort, translated by Alphonso Lingis), Northwestern University Press,
Evanston, 1968.
NAGY Olga: A tltos trvnye. Npmese s eszttikum. Kriterion Knyvkiad,
Bukarest, 1978.
NAGY OlgaV Gabriella: Havasok mesemondja, Jakab Istvn mesi, j
Magyar Npkltsi Gyjtemny. XXVI. Szerk. Nagy Ilona, Akadmiai, Bp., 2002.
PL JzsefJVRI Edit (ed.): Szimblumtr. Jelkpek, motvumok, tmk az
egyetemes s a magyar kultrbl. Balassi Kiad, Budapest, 2001.
PASZTERNAK, Borisz: Zsivago doktor, Eurpa, Bp., 1988.
PENAVIN Olga: Jugoszlviai magyar npmesk. j Magyar Npkltsi
Gyjtemny. Szerk.: Ortutay Gyula. XVI. Akadmiai, Bp., 1971.
PROPP, V. Jakovlevics: Morphology of the Folk Tale. Indiana University Press,
Bloomington, 1968.
PROPP, Vlagyimir Jakovlevics: A mese morfolgija, (ford. Soproni Andrs)
Osiris, Budapest, 2005.
RICUR , Paul: The Conflict of Interpretations, Essays in Hermeneutics, (trans.
Peter McCormick), Northwestern University Press, Evanston, 1974.

1 316 2

RICUR, Paul : Parcours de la reconnaissance, Trois tudes, d. Gallimard,

Paris, 2004.
RICUR, Paul and LACOCQUE, Andr: Thinking Biblically: Exegetical and
Hermeneutic Studies, (trans. by PELLAUER, David) The University of Chicago
Press, Chicago and London, 1998.
RICUR, PaulLACOCQUE, Andr: Bibliai gondolkods (ford. Enyedi Jen)
Eurpa, Budapest, 2003.
RICUR, Paul: Vlogatott irodalomelmleti tanulmnyok, (ford. Angyalosi
Gergely et al.), Osiris, Bp., 1999.
RICUR, Paul: Evil: A Challenge to Philosophy and Theology, (trans. By David
PELLAUER) Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 1985, Vol. 53. n. 4.
RICUR, Paul: On Psychoanalysis (trans. David PELLAUER), Polity Press,
Cambridge and Malden, 2012.
RICUR, Paul: Oneself as Another, (trans. BLAMEY, Kathleen) University of
Chicago Press, Chicago, 1995.
RICUR, Paul: Parcours de la reconnaissance. Trois tudes, d. Gallimard,
Paris, 2004.
RICUR, Paul: The Course of Recognition, (Translated by David Pellauer),
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, 2007.
RICUR, Paul: Time and Narrative, Volume 1. (Translated by Kathleen
McLaughlin and David Pellauer), The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
and London, 1990.
SAJ, Sndor: Amirl tudunk s amirl nem In: Img 2012/3,
SARAMAGO, Jos: Kin (trans. PL Ferenc, Eurpa Kiad), Budapest, 2011.
STAROBINSKI, Jean: Poppea ftyla. Vlogatott irodalmi tanulmnyok, (ford.
dm Anik et al.) Kijrat, Bp., 2007.
STAROBINSKI, Jean: The Living Eye. (Translated by Arthur Goldhammer),
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England, 1989.
TENGELYI Lszl: A bn mint sorsesemny, Atlantisz, Bp., 1992.
TOKAREV, S. A. (ed.): Mitolgiai Enciklopdia, Vol. I., Gondolat, Budapest,
1988.

1 317 2

VICO, Giambattista: The New Science, (Translated by Thomas Goddard Bergin

and Max Harold Fisch), Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1948.
WALDENFELS, Bernhard: Az idegensg etnogrfiai brzolsnak paradoxonjai
= BICZ Gbor (ed.), Az Idegen, Csokonai, Debrecen, 2004. 91116.
WILES, David: A Short History of Western Performance Space, Cambridge
University Press, 2003.
, , , :
. , , , 2000.
, , . ,
, 2010.
, : , (transl. , ),
5, 1993.
, : , , .
, , , 1985.
, : , , ,
1990.
, : ,
, M, 1996.
, : .
(1939), Mnchen, 1971.

1 318 2

SZERZK/AUTHORS
Dr. habil. BLINT Pter (PhD) (1958) fiskolai tanr, a Debreceni Egyetem
Gyermeknevelsi s Felnttkpzsi Kara Irodalom, Kommunikci s Kulturlis
Antropolgia (IKKA) Tanszknek vezetje, r, esszista (8 regny s 8 irodalomelmleti tanulmnyktet szerzje) s mesekutat. A 12 ve mkd Alkalmazott Narratolgiai Mhely alaptja s vezetje. Dikjaival rendszeresen vesz
rszt a Krpt-medence terletn, klnsen Erdlyben multietnikus kzssgekben vgzett terepmunkn. F kutatsi terlete a Krpt-medence npeinek,
a magyar, svb, romn, szerb, szlovk, ukrn, cigny kzssgek hagyomnyos
mesekincsnek interdiszciplinris megkzeltse. Kutatsainak jdonsgt az
adja, hogy az archaikus kzssgekben megrztt eredeti meseszvegek vizsglata sorn az irodalmi s a fenomenolgiai hermeneutika szemlletmdjt
kveti. Az ltala vezetett mesekutat csoport tagjai kulturlis antropolgusok,
filozfusok, irodalomkutatk, nyelvszek. Szmos magyar s angol nyelven publiklt mesetanulmny szerzje.
Legutbb a Fabula Aeterna sorozatban megjelent knyve Jakab Istvn cigny
mesemond letmvt mutatja be.
Dr. habil. Pter BLINT (PhD) (1958), head of Faculty of Child and
Adult Education, Department of Literature, Communication and Cultural
Anthropology at the University of Debrecen. He is a prose writer (8 novels),
essayist (8 volumes of literary critics) and researcher of folk tales. He has been
the founder and head of the Association of Applied Narratology twelve years ago.
With his students he regularly conducts fieldwork at local areas, in multi-ethnic
communities in the Carpathian Basin, especially in Transylvania. He analyzes
the traditional tale treasure of the people (Hungarian, Swabian, Romanian, Serb,
Slovak, Ukrainian, and mostly Gypsy) in the Carpathian Basin (Central-Eastern
Europe) using an interdisciplinary approach. The novelty of his analysis consists
in examining the original tale texts preserved in rural communities from literary
aspects and phenomenological hermeneutics. He leads a tale-research team,
the members of which are cultural anthropologists, philosophers and literary
scholars. He published several volumes on tale research in Hungarian and in

1 319 2

English. His latest book is about Istvn Jakab, a Gypsy tale-teller in the series
Fabula Aeterna.
Contact: balintp@ped.unideb.hu | http://www.scribd.com/appliednarratology)
e
Dr. NAGY Gabriella gnes (PhD) (1973), a Hagyomnyok Hza Folklr
Osztlynak npmese szakeladja s az Alkalmazott Narratolgiai Mhely
kls munkatrsa. Magyar-angol-szt szakon vgzett az ELTE Blcsszettudomnyi Karn. Kutatsi terlete: sznhztudomny s performativits 20. szzadi eladsokban. Szmos npmesetanulmny s knyv fordtsa utn nll
npmese-kutatsba kezdett. Nhny publikcija: A dramatikus szveg metamorfzisai: Vltozatok, tekintet s mdia Samuel Beckett alkotsaiban (Filolgia Kzlny 2009/1-2), Rebirthing Beckett: the Veil Set in Motion (TransRevue
de literature gnrale et compar, 10:2010), A szlets reprezentcii a kortrs
sznhzban (Ltkrdsek a szlets krl, LHarmattan, 2015)
Dr. Gabriella gnes NAGY (PhD) (1973), currently working at the
Hungarian Heritage House as a folk tale expert and she is also a fellow researcher
and translator at the Association of Applied Narratology. She received her
degree in English, Hungarian and Estonian studies at the University of ELTE,
Budapest. Her research includes theatre studies and performativity in 20th
century performances. After translating several folk tale studies and a book she
began to conduct her own research in the field. Some of her recent publications:
Metamorphoses of the Dramatic Text: Variants, Gaze and Media in Samuel
Beckett (Filolgia Kzlny 2009/1-2), Rebirthing Beckett: the Veil Set in Motion
(TransRevue de literature gnrale et compar, 10:2010), Representations
of Birth in Contemporary Theatre (Problems around Birth, ed. Barbara Kisdi,
LHarmattan, 2015).
Contact: gabriella.a.nagydr@gmail.com
e
Dr. habil. BICZ Gbor (PhD) (1968) egyetemi docens, Miskolci Egyetem
Kulturlis s Vizulis Antropolgiai Intzet. Kutatsai a filozfiai antropolgia,
a 19. szzadi nmet filozfia (klns tekintettel Nietzsche blcselete s a
filozfiai hermeneutika), a kulturlis s szocilantropolgia tudomnytrtnete,
1 320 2

valamint az asszimilcis folyamatok, az etnikus egyttlsi modellek (cignymagyar, romn-magyar) s az alkalmazott narratolgia (antropolgiai portr
s mesekutats) tmaterleteihez kapcsoldnak. Kutatsait rszben az Egyeslt
llamokban s Nmetorszgban (Humboldt-Universitt zu Berlin, Yale
University, State University New York [Stony Brook], Universitt Konstanz),
rszben multikulturlis loklis kzssgekben (Magyarorszgon s Romniban)
vgezte. Utols ktete 2014-ben Mese s trsadalom, mi Lajos, egy cigny
mesemond lete s mve.
Dr. habil. Gbor, BICZ (PhD) (1968) is an associate professor of Miskolc
University, Institute of Cultural and Visual Anthropology. His interest in
philosophical anthropology includes 19th century German philosophers
(Friedrich Nietzsche and philosophical hermeneutics), research in the theory
of assimilation, the models of interethnic cohabitation (Gypsy-Hungarian,
Romanian-Hungarian) and applied narratology (anthropological portrait and
tale-research). His research was implemented partly in the United States and
in Germany(Humboldt-Universitt zu Berlin, Yale University, State University
New York [Stony Brook], Universitt Konstanz) and partly in multicultural local
communities of Hungary and Romania. He is the publisher of several books and
producers of several documentaries. His latest monograph is entitled Tale and
Society. The Life and Work of Gypsy Storyteller Lajos mi (2014).
Contact: gavrilbenedictus@gmail.com
e
Dr. HERMANN Zoltn (1967), irodalomtrtnsz, a Kroli Gspr
Reformtus Egyetem Rgi s Klasszikus Magyar Irodalom Tanszknek docense.
Sajt al rendezte Vlagyimir Propp A varzsmese trtneti gykerei cm
munkjt (LHarmattan, 2006) s az Afanaszjev-gyjtemny vlogatott
mesinek magyar kiadst (Tzmadr, Magvet, 2006.). Trsszerkesztje volt a
Magyar Npkltszet Tra cskszentdomokosi npmesket kzread ktetnek
(Estefia, jflfia, Hajnalfia,Balassi, 2013.). A mesk trtnetisgvel foglalkoz
knyveVarzs/szer/trcmen jelent meg 2012-ben, a LHarmattan kiadnl.
Dr. Zoltn HERMANN (1967) literary historian, associate professor at the
Department of Ancient and Classical Hungarian Literature, Kroli Gspr

1 321 2

University of the Reformed Church, Budapest. He edited Vladimir Propps

book entitled The Historical Roots of Tales of Magic (LHarmattan, 2006) and
the Hungarian edition of the Afanasyev collection (Firebird, Magvet, 2006).
He was coeditor to the volume in the series of Hungarian Folk Collection on the
folk tales from Cskszentdomonkos (Nights Son, Midnights Son, Dawns Son,
Balassi, 2013) His book on the historicity of tales was published under the title
Magic/Book in 2012, LHarmattan.
Contact: hermann.zoltan@hungarnet.hu
e
Dr. VALASTYN Tams (1969) a Debreceni Egyetem Filozfiai Intzetnek
docense, f kutatsi terlete a nmet koraromantika eszttikai gondolkodsa a
nmet romantika eszttika, de tgabb kontextusban, a modernits kzegben is
vizsgldik: f krdse az eszttikum kontextualizlsra, vagy kontextrjnak
lehetsgfeltteleire irnyul. Ezen tlmenen a kortrs irodalmi jelensgekkel,
valamint a kritikai reflexi elmleteivel foglalkozik. Eddig kt nll knyve,
hrom szerkesztett ktete, s szmos publikcija jelent meg. A Magyar
Filozfiai Szemle trsszerkesztje. Ktetei: Tnni s jraeredni (versrl
przrlkritikrl). Kalligram, Pozsony, 2007. A keress ritmusa (A trekv
szellem koraromantikus diskurzusai). Gond-Cura (Gutenberg tr), Bp., 2007.
Dr. Tams VALASTYN (1969) associate professor at the Institute of
Philosophy, University Debrecen; his main research interests are aesthetical
theories in German Romanticism but in a wider context he is interested in
modernity as well. His main question is about the contextualization of the
aesthetic and the existential possibilities of contexture. Furthermore he is
interested in contemporary literary phenomena and the theories of critical
reflection. So far he has published two volumes as an author and three volumes
as an editor and several other publications. He is the co-editor of the Hungarian
Philosophical Review. His books: To Disappear and to Re-originate (on poets,
prose and criticism). Kalligram, Bratislava, 2007, The Rhythm of Search (The PreRomantic Discourse of the Striving Spirit), Gond-Cura, Budapest, 2007.
Contact: valastyan@gmail.com

1 322 2

FABULA AETERNA
Sorozatszerkeszt / Series Editor: BLINT Pter
e
A sorozat eddig megjelent ktetei
Blint Pter: Archaikus alakzatok a npmesben. Jakab Istvn cigny mesemond
(a ksleltet halmozs mestere). Debrecen, 2014
Bicz Gbor: Mese s trsadalom. mi Lajos, egy cigny mesemond lete s
mve. Debrecen, 2014
Bdis Zoltn: A mesesz igazsga. Cifra Jnos cigny mesemond mesi.
Debrecen, 2014
e
Recent titles in the same series
Pter Blint: Archaic Images in Folk Tales. The Tales of Istvn Jakab, Gypsy Tale
Teller (the master of delayed accumulation). Debrecen, 2014
Gbor Bicz: Tale and Society. The Life and Work of Gypsy Storyteller Lajos mi.
Debrecen, 2014
Zoltn Bdis: The Truth of the Tale-Word. Tales of Jnos Cifra Gypsy Tale Teller.
Debrecen, 2014

1 323 2