Reading Mori Ogai's 'Takasebune'

This work deals with the theme of so-called "euthanasia." In this day and age, where advances in medical technology have made it possible to extend a patient's life to the absolute limit, sometimes allowing them to survive in a vegetative state, this is a major and difficult issue that anyone could potentially face.

However, I do not think that "euthanasia" was widely recognized as a social issue during the era in which this work was written, and it must have been quite a sensational piece. Or perhaps, it may not have resonated with many people at the time.

A typical example of "euthanasia" would be someone who, unable to bear the sight of a loved one writhing in agony from an incurable disease, reluctantly ends their life in response to their plea. In our country's courts, there has never been a case of "euthanasia" that was ruled not guilty. A recent judicial precedent (Yokohama District Court, 1995) sets out four requirements for when euthanasia is permissible.

First, the patient must be suffering from unbearable physical pain; second, the patient's death must be inevitable and imminent; third, all possible means to eliminate or alleviate the patient's physical pain must have been exhausted with no other options available; and fourth, there must be an explicit expression of intent from the patient consenting to the shortening of their life. If any one of these requirements is missing, it cannot be recognized as euthanasia.

However, it is rare for a person to remain calm when witnessing their own loved one writhing in intense pain. Rather, they are more likely to experience even greater agony than the patient and become distraught. In such a situation, it is impossible to stop and consider whether each of the four requirements is being met before performing euthanasia.

Perhaps out of consideration for such things, the court in question left a comment stating, "These requirements are a consideration at the current stage for when euthanasia is permissible," and that "it is difficult to present requirements for the permissibility of euthanasia as a universal standard established with a view to future circumstances." This is likely the reason for the difficulty in simply categorizing human hearts and actions.

By the way, what process was followed in determining the plea and sentencing for Kisuke, the sinner who killed his younger brother? Although it is not written in detail, from the description that "the majority of sinners on the Takasebune were people who had committed unexpected crimes due to what was called a misunderstanding. To give a common example, it was the type of man who attempted a double suicide, then called a 'relative death' at the time, killed the woman, and survived alone," there is a sense that Kisuke's sentence was reduced by one degree.

When reading through the actions taken by Kisuke and the state of his younger brother, who was gasping for breath after attempting suicide, it perfectly clears the four requirements presented by the aforementioned court. The author then has Shobei, the constable who accompanied him on the Takasebune, say, "I have no choice but to follow authority," and raises a highly sophisticated issue. In that era, not long after the Edo period had passed. It is truly astonishing.