It is a difficult question to answer as each case would be different. In general one has no right to end someone’s life simply because one cannot see suffering of others. It is a kind of assisted suicide originating from an ignorant pity that neither understands the deeper reasons for suffering nor its true cure.
But there could be instances where the soul has withdrawn and only the body with a certain amount of life force is left like an empty shell. In such a case euthanasia is understandable.
However in many cases of coma it is not the person who is suffering but the relatives who are feeling emotionally and financially drained. It is akin to killing a member of your family because he is no more useful and has rather become a drain upon oneself. Here Mercy killing is killing someone out of Mercy for oneself!
The simplest would be to tell the doctors clearly not to put on artificial life support systems if the patient has crossed a certain age and is unlikely to get back to normal functioning. The decision should be taken by the patient himself. Now many relatives and doctors treat overenthusiastically playing God and then land up in such dilemmas.
Still there is scope for passive euthanasia, that is to say a withdrawal of artificial support systems where one is simply dragging on with life and a recovery is either not possible or else likely to greatly diminish the quality of life. But as i said it is a tricky decision unfortunately dilemmas created by modern medicine in its urge to avoid or delay the inevitable and promoted actively by hospitals to capitalise on the dying.
Affectionately,
Alok Da
Follow up question:
In the case of Aruna Shanbaug what should have been done?
If ever there was a right case for passive euthanasia, it was her case.
The Divine is all merciful then why didn’t he interrupt in the case of Aruna and took away her painful life which she suffered for 42 years as passive euthanasia was not allowed in her case.
How do we know that it is not merciful to let us go through the ordeal of a purifying suffering? If we take progress rather than happiness as the goal to be first pursued then we can often see that suffering does a greater good than pleasure and outer happiness. So the thing that we value as human beings may not be the same that the Divine values as you must be aware in the story of the caterpillar and the butterfly.
Having said that, how do we even know that a person in coma for several years was suffering. By its very definition, a person in coma is impervious to pleasure and pain. Perhaps she was silently growing within in some inner world while the ignorant eye of man saw a physically helpless woman who was tortured into a long deep sleep. Perhaps her soul had left long back and a shell void of pleasure and pain remained while the ignorant heart of passerbys felt pity. Whatever it be God does not give knee-jerk reactions to events and circumstances because He sees and knows much more and His eyes are fixed on the deeper eternal good than on immediate passing appearances. Here are few lines from Savitri revealing this deeper truth to us.
‘Acquiescing in the wisdom that made hell
And the harsh utility of death and tears,
Acquiescing in the gradual steps of Time,
Careless they seem of the grief that stings the world’s heart,
Careless of the pain that rends its body and life;
Above joy and sorrow is that grandeur’s walk:
They have no portion in the good that dies,
Mute, pure, they share not in the evil done;
Else might their strength be marred and could not save.
Alive to the truth that dwells in God’s extremes,
Awake to a motion of all-seeing Force,
The slow outcome of the long ambiguous years
And the unexpected good from woeful deeds,
The immortal sees not as we vainly see.
He looks on hidden aspects and screened powers,
He knows the law and natural line of things.
Undriven by a brief life’s will to act,
Unharassed by the spur of pity and fear,
He makes no haste to untie the cosmic knot
Or the world’s torn jarring heart to reconcile.
In Time he waits for the Eternal’s hour.’
You said,”Perhaps her soul had left long back and a shell void of pleasure and pain remained…”.If her soul had left long back then how would her soul silently grow within in some inner world?
If the soul has left then obviously there is no question of growth. The body becomes then a field of vital forces. The growth aspect was the other perhaps. It was either or, perhaps her soul was growing within or perhaps it had left.
Can a body live even after her soul has withdrawn?I thought that soul withdraws only when one dies.
To live needs life, the energy and force of life, not soul. There are number of people who continue to live like an animal or demon. The soul in them has either not established proper contact with the body or else has not yet entered. Animals, especially lower animals, do not have a soul though they are living. Soul is required for the continuity of inner evolution through successive lives. Its main purpose is to give a Godward orientation to the being, a turn towards the Right and the Light, a seeking for Beauty, Truth and Good.
Affectionately,
Alok Da
