CHAPTER 4: JAPANESE HISTORY: PROGRESS WITHOUT MURDER
1. Japan viewed from an archeological perspective
I have no intention of addressing the question of how and when the Japanese settled on theseislands in this book. Textbooks inform us that the Jomon period commenced approximately
16,000 years ago. The pottery of that era (Jomon ware) is markedly different from pottery
crafted by the agricultural people of the succeeding culture (the Yayoi culture). For a time thatdifference led scholars to suspect that the Jomon people were not the ancestors of the Japaneseof today. However, thanks to advancements in archaeology, we now know that the Jomon people
were the forebears of subsequent cultures and of the present-day Japanese. That being the case,
we must look to the Jomon culture for the roots of the Japanese people and of Japanese
civilization.
According to the edition of the New History Textbook1 (compiled and edited by the JapaneseSociety for Textbook Reform) currently in use, when we look at Japan from an altitude of 10,000
meters, we see that it is surrounded by water. In geopolitical terms, Japan’s location puts it in thebest possible position for resisting foreign invasions. We also notice that Japan is covered with
dense forests. The Jomon people hunted wild boars and deer. They fished, and engaged in smallscale agriculture as well. They may have formed communities or villages; if so, the villages musthave been far apart. There was nothing for them to fight over, so they did not wage wars,
probably because the communities were so scattered.
Through recent archeological advances we know that the Jomon people kept dogs, which theyused in hunting. They bonded with their dogs; they never killed them. In fact, they grieved forthe dogs when they died.
People who live in the world of ice (Siberia, for instance) use dogs to pull their sleds. When thesled dogs die, they eat them. Perhaps the Siberians’ environment tolerates such behavior, but incomparison, the Jomon people seem to have been gentle souls. They were radically different
from the Koreans and the people of Guangdong, who are so fond of dog meat.
Eventually the cultivation of rice was introduced into Japan, and agriculture began to flourish.
Such progress propelled the unification of Japan behind the Yamato court. The rice-growing
culture harvested and stored its crops. Wars were bound to break out over stockpiled food.
Pottery from the Yayoi period was decorated with images of warriors, and from them we knowthat there were wars then. But such conflicts were far smaller in scale and much less brutal thanbattles fought in China at that time. Moreover, there were no instances of great numbers ofpeople being buried alive, as in China during the Shang dynasty.2
In China a writing system had been invented, and when a ruler died, xunzang (the ritual suicideof his wives, retainers and servants so they could accompany him in the afterlife) was practiced.
The Chinese crafted and used bronze and iron vessels. All these articles were used in warfare.
But the Japanese did not yet have access to tank-like vehicles drawn by four horses, nor tocrossbows made of bronze, which were more accurate than ordinary bows.
Here I would like to cite an example from Japanese mythology: the story of the transfer of the
1 Shinpen: Atarashii rekishi kyokasho (New history textbook, revised edition) (Tokyo: Jiyusha, 2016).
2 China’s earliest dynasty (ca. 1600-1046 BC).

1

land of Izumo. Amaterasu (goddess of the sun and earth) requested the transfer of Izumo, thenruled by Okuninushi, a descendant of Susanoo. Okuninushi asked her to build a great shrine at
Izumo, which would serve as his home, and to worship him there. Amaterasu honored his
request and the transfer was consummated. Not a drop of blood was spilled. The shrine
mentioned in the myth is Izumo Taisha, and we learned only recently that the shrine describedin Japanese mythology was indeed built (see the section pertaining to Emperor Jinmu’s easternmigration in Chapter 3 of the Chronicles of Japan). There you will find no mention of themassacre or annihilation of defeated soldiers. On the contrary, Emperor Jinmu took the daughterof the head of a powerful clan who had surrendered to him as his wife. Jinmu was tireless in his
efforts to effect reconciliation with those he had defeated. Once the Yamato court wasestablished and Buddhism, with its taboo against killing, came to Japan, the Japanese were evenmore loath to take the lives of other humans.
Buddhism is a philosophy and a religion that spread throughout East Asia in ancient times. It
prohibits murder precisely because one of its tenets is that all living creatures are entitled to live
life to its fullest. With its emphasis on the contemplation of the past and the future, Buddhism
would continue to have an extremely powerful influence on the Japanese, augmenting the Shinto
culture created by farmers.

2. The Jinshin War: Major conflict arising from imperial succession disputes
In 608, when Prince Shotoku dispatched the third mission to Sui China, there was debate overwhat language to use to convey the Japanese emperor’s title. The consensus was that theappellation used in China (huangdi) would not be appropriate. On the other hand, it would beequally inappropriate to describe the Japanese emperor as “king,” since that would make him
subordinate to the Chinese ruler. Then someone hit upon tenno, or “celestial sovereign.” In
Chinese the word (tianhuang) is used to describe the highest-ranking Daoist deities or,
specifically, the North Star, around which all stars rotate.
By using the word tenno, the Japanese were being courteous to the Sui court and to the Tangcourt, which followed it, as well. But they were also demonstrating that the Japanese ruler had
attained a status equal to that of the Chinese emperor, and that there was another realm beyond
that of the Chinese world.
Now I would like to draw readers’ attention to Prince Shotoku’s 17-Article Constitution, which
exemplifies the mindset of a nation’s ruler. Even today it represents the fundamental principles
by which the Japanese live. Article 1 contains a prime example:

Harmony should be valued and quarrels should be avoided.
Article 17, the final article, reads in part:

Decisions on important matters should not be made by one person
alone.
This is the underlying principle of the Japanese respect for discussions and consultations.
Article 2 offers the following instructions:

The three treasures, which are Buddha, the (Buddhist) Law and the2(Buddhist) Priesthood, should be given sincere reverence, for they are
the final refuge of all living things.
Prince Shotoku designated Buddhism, which has served through the ages as a solid foundation
for the Japanese spirit, as Japan’s second national religion.
Blessed with a natural barrier that enabled them to live their lives without the constant fear of
being invaded by a foreign power (China, in this case), the Japanese succeeded in creating a new,separate world. All the conditions necessary for the establishment of a nation whose citizens
could live in peace and prosper, should those governing them so desire, were satisfied.
China, on the other hand, was always at risk. Not even the most gifted ruler, not even the ideal
relationship between ruler and subjects, could protect the Chinese from invasions and possible
annihilation. They could build a glorious nation, but that nation would always be vulnerable toattack by a military force from outside.
But the Japanese did not need to worry about a foreign invasion, and could instead focus on
forging the ideal relationship between a nation and its people.
The Jinshin War erupted in 672, not long after the death of Emperor Tenji. It was triggered by adispute over Emperor Tenji’s successor between Prince Oama, his younger brother, and Prince
Otomo, his son. Since neither side would give way, victory in war seemed to be the only possible
solution. This was the first armed conflict in Japan that resulted from an imperial-succession
controversy among blood relatives. In China, such wars were often blood baths involving several
tens of thousands of combatants.
The Xuanwu Gate Incident (626) resulted in the enthronement of Li Shimin as the second
emperor (Emperor Taizong) of the Tang dynasty. Li killed his older brother (the crown prince),
his younger brother Li Yuanji, and every member of their families, for a total of tens of thousandsof victims. After his father, Emperor Gaozu, relinquished the throne, Li became the wisest ruler
in Chinese history, but until he grasped the reins of power firmly in his hands, he was fighting a
war originating from a vicious family dispute.
Japan’s Jinshin War was a large-scale conflict over imperial succession. But compared with
Chinese conflicts with similar causes, it was a minor clash, and far less brutal.
On June 24 Prince Oama fled from Yoshino, where he had been living the secluded life of a priest.
On July 23, Prince Otomo committed ritual suicide after having been defeated in battle. The war
had lasted exactly one month. According to Chronicles of Japan, Prince Oama’s warriors
numbered 23,000 (20,000 from Owari and 3,000 from Mino). However, judging from population
estimates, he probably had fewer than 10,000 men under his command. If Prince Otomo’s army
was about the same size, there were 20,000 combatants at most. Moreover, the great majority ofthem were farmers. The general commanding Prince Oama’s forces, Otomo no Fukei, issued awarning: The mission of these soldiers is not to kill farmers, but to kill evildoers. Therefore, do
not kill at random. This was an official notice prohibiting the killing of farmers. The Jinshin War
was small in scope, and it was likely that there were not many casualties. Prince Oama had
already embraced Buddhism, and therefore was averse to killing others. Even so, in previous
eras there was no precedent for brutal wars, such as the ones waged in China. Perhaps for thatreason, after the death of Prince Otomo, the victors treated the defeated mercifully. Eight people
were held accountable and executed, and an unspecified number of persons were exiled. No one
else was punished.

33. Taking of life anathema to Japanese culture
In 673 Prince Oama was installed as Emperor Tenmu. He proceeded to have the Great Treasuryof Sutras copied at Kawahara Temple. In 680, when his wife (later Empress Jito) became ill,
Tenmu prayed for her recovery, promising to build Yakushi Temple if his prayer was answered.
Emperor Tenmu also announced that the Omi code, which had already been enacted, would befurther refined. This became the Asuka Kiyomihara Code, which took effect during the reign ofEmpress Jito. One of the provisions of this collection of laws was the termination of the current
appellation of Japan, Wa, and its replacement with Nippon. Furthermore, work began on acompilation of Japanese history; the fruits of these labors were Japan’s first histories, Records ofAncient Matters and Chronicles of Japan.
In any case, the Jinshin War was fought to resolve a dispute over imperial succession, but it was
small in scale. Apparently Prince Oama modeled his strategy after that of the Han Emperor
Gaozu, who ruled from 256 to 195 BC. He did not, however, adopt Gaozu’s brutal methods. The
fact that once the outcome of the war was clear, there were no additional killings for the purposeof revenge, set a precedent that would be observed in the future. Previous conflicts involved noneedless brutality, but even in the Jinshin conflict, a furiously waged war, there was no cruelty
for the sake of cruelty.
Any discussion of the Japanese aversion to killing must mention the ban on eating meat issued
by Emperor Tenmu in 675. That imperial order prohibited the consumption of the flesh of cattle,
horses, dogs, monkeys, and chickens. The reason for the ban on monkeys was their close
resemblance to humans. Chickens were included because roosters’ crows tell humans what time
it is. The prohibition against eating cattle and horses (because they help farmers by working in
the fields) was limited to the growing season. In 676 Emperor Tenmu issued the Animal Release
Order, which states that birds and fish are to be released into the wild. Together with the ban on
eating meat, it adhered to Buddhist teachings, which stress kindness to animals.
Later, prohibitions against killing were issued several times, as late as the Kamakura era (11851333), when one was ordered by the Kamakura Shogunate. The Tokugawa Shogunate issued
them as well. Among them were the noteworthy Edicts on Compassion for Living Things decreed
by Tokugawa Tsunayoshi. Here I would like to emphasize the fact that even as late as the Edo
period, which falls into Japan’s modern era, the Tokugawa Shogunate issued an order banning
the killing of cattle and horses, and another prohibiting the consumption of meat. Cattle andhorses were included because they served humans. This prohibition was adhered to strictly
during the Edo period, aided by Buddhist precepts honored by the common people. Today theJapanese eat beef and other meat without any hesitation. But it was not until the Meiji period
and Westernization policies instituted then that they begin eating meat. In 1871 Emperor Meiji
set an example by eating beef, and the Japanese were advised to improve their health byemulating this Western world.
However, the multitude of orders and decrees prohibiting the consumption of meat suggest thatthese prohibitions were not observed to the letter.
The warriors who emerged in the late Heian period (794-1185) were professional combatants
who had to be prepared to kill, and resolutely so, when necessary. Therefore, refusing to eat
meat for fear of descending into a Buddhist hell would have been a mark against their honor. So
they steeled themselves and ate it.
Common people too also ate meat, using such excuses as “animals caught in traps weren’t killed
by humans, so it’s all right to eat them.” Furthermore, there were no prohibitions against4

consuming fish or shellfish, as they were important sources of protein in the Edo period.
It is important to emphasize the fact that so many prohibitions against killing were issued inJapan because the Japanese had an aversion to killing humans.
4. Defining Bushido
Now I would like to examine Bushido, the moral code of Japanese warriors, or samurai, to shedsome more light on Japanese history, which progressed without killing.
Samurai came onto the scene during the Heian period, when the power of the imperial court
weakened. Privately owned parcels of land increased in number (in spite of the fact thatshouldn’t have been any private holdings). The self-proclaimed owners were forced to protect
their property. Military groups were formed, which aligned themselves with specific nobles. The
result was the formation of two large groups of warriors, the Minamoto and the Taira.
Through the 15th and 16th centuries (the Age of Warring States), and in the Edo period, when thegovernment created a social order (with samurai at the top, followed by farmers, artisans, andmerchants), the samurai headed the social order.
A detailed description can be found in Bushido: The Soul of Japan, written by Nitobe Inazo andpublished in 1899. In its preface, Nitobe tells us that the distinguished jurist Emile de Laveleye
once asked him if religious instruction was given in Japanese schools. When Nitobe responded in
the negative, de Laveleye said, “No religion! How do you impart moral education?”3 Nitobe wasat a loss for an answer right then, but after giving the question a great deal of thought, herealized that the teaching of Bushido, which took place in the home, was the Japanese form of
moral education. He then proceeded to write the aforementioned book.
Some of the virtues of Bushido, according to Nitobe, are:
1. Rectitude or justice (gi)
Refrain from dishonorable deeds.
2. Courage (yu)Retain your self-possession even in the presence of danger or death.
3. Benevolence or compassion (jin)Use your strength to help others.
4. Politeness (rei)Avoid disrespectful behavior.
5. Veracity and sincerity (makoto)3 http://www.gutenberg.org/files/12096/12096-h/12096-h.htm (retrieved 11/20/2017).

5

Abandon thoughts of personal gain
6. Honor (meiyo)
Take pride in doing what is just.
7. The duty of loyalty (chugi)
Be loyal to the bitter end when such loyalty is deserved.
These virtues resemble aspects of chivalry, which arose in Europe in the 9th century, and wasobserved through 15th century. It was developed by knights and other military men andconstituted a way of life, though not codified, for them to follow. In that chivalry stressedsacrificing the welfare of individuals for a greater good, refraining from cowardly behavior, andrespecting justice, it had much in common with Bushido.
In Korea, for a short time in the 7th century, during the Unified Silla dynasty (668-935), groups ofyoung men called Hwarang, or Flowering Knights, were active. The Hwarang did not spring up
spontaneously, but were selected by the Korean court. They do not hold up to comparison withJapanese samurai, but it was an honor to be chosen as a Hwarang. They were warriors who
despised cowardice, and took pride in their ability to demonstrate strength and compassion.
In other words, both samurai and knights had chosen an occupation that involved participatingin warfare. But both also had adopted a value system whereby they avoided meaninglessconflicts and needless killing.
Yamamoto Tsunetomo, a samurai from Saga who lived during the Edo period, wrote Hagakure(In the shadow of leaves), which was destined for great acclaim. In it he wrote, “Bushido is theway of death.” By that he meant that a samurai must obey any and all orders issued by his master,no matter how unreasonable they may seem. If his master orders him to die, he must obey rightthen and there. Such conduct smacks of stoicism, but this is a principle by which samurai lived.
When they followed the precepts of Bushido to the letter, they were able to conquer all their
lowly desires and live as ideal samurai.
Therefore, even when samurai took their own lives to take responsibility for some infringement,
they were not dispatched (for instance, decapitated) by someone else, but they retained theirhonor by committing ritual suicide (seppuku). Apparently there is a tremendous difference in thefear and pain that accompany death when one is killed by someone else or by one’s own hand.
And that represented pride and honor for samurai. The samurai of the Edo period who adhered
to the principles of Bushido did not indulge in showy luxuries. They had great compassion forthe common people in their charge, and made great efforts to insure that the common people
were safe and contented. Led by such distinguished warriors, the Edo period persisted for 260
years. It was followed by the Meiji Renovation, and with the declaration that all social classes
were equal, Japan became a modern nation. Bushido then became, at least to some extent, thenational character.
For that reason, there was no need to offer religious instruction per se in Japanese schools, justas Nitobe explained. It is because of Bushido that the Japanese are honest, brave, and kind.
Even in the Greater East Asian War (which includes World War II), the Japanese drew upon thespirit of Bushido.

6

I believe that if the Japanese were pitted against any army, and the two sides had similarequipment, the Japanese would prevail. In battles waged during the Second Sino-Japanese War,the Japanese fought with all their might. They were subjected to harsh criticism to the effect thatthe rank and file were quite capable, but the higher the rank, the more ineffective the officer. It’strue that there may have been a few incompetent officers, but I am confident that Japanese
officers were generally capable and honorable.
There is a saying that goes, “The cherry among flowers, the samurai among men.” Cherry
blossoms open suddenly and fall just as quickly. Samurai of ancient times gave their lives fortheir masters. Ever since Japan opened up to the rest of the world the basic Japanese moral
principle of patriotism has been held in high respect. Though some may disagree, when soldiers
vowed to die for the Emperor, they were not spouting ideology, they were expressing a basic
Japanese moral principle. The Japanese had so few resources, and as they approached the Battleof Leyte Gulf, they realized that to strike a severe blow against the US, and perhaps gain someleverage in peace talks, their only recourse was suicide attacks. The Japanese military took thatdrastic step.
The Japanese have every reason to be proud of their patriotic martyrdom, with its basis in
Bushido; it is a respected national characteristic. For that very reason, it is of the utmost
importance that accounts of suicide squads and those Japanese who chose death before
surrender be passed on to future generations.
Now I’d like to discuss the view that Bushido would never have come into being if Japan had notbeen at peace, which may seem, at first glance, contrary to conventional wisdom. But the fact isthat while samurai kept Japan at peace, a spiral turning in a favorable direction was at work, andBushido became even stronger in a peaceful society. If the spiral had been broken from outside
and a great number of people were killed unjustly, it would soon have disappeared. One need
only look at the tragedy of the Hwarang on the Korean peninsula. There the threat of foreigninvasion was constant, the spiral was cut, and Bushido never came into being. Objective
conditions differed between Japan and Korea where Bushido was concerned.
Since warfare was the objective of the samurai, a casual glimpse makes one think that theexistence of samurai and warfare were two faces of the same coin. In that case, then one could
conclude that the mere existence of samurai was harmful to peace because they destroyed peaceand caused wars. But this was a simplistic conclusion.
While samurai needed to be strong, they were also required to be kind. Since they were able tokill, when Bushido, which restrains them from killing meaninglessly, was born, the objective of
the samurai became maintaining and preserving peace. The two Chinese characters used towrite bushi or “warrior” are 武士. The right-hand side of the first character (戈) means “halberd,”
and the left side (止) means “stop.” The word formed when we combine these two components
and then follow them with the character for “man” means “someone who stops wars.” Myaversion to Chinese characters notwithstanding, I believe these two characters express theraison d’être of the samurai quite eloquently.
But from a Chinese perspective, the characters for bushi seem quite incongruous. In Chinese thesecond character means “scholar-official.” The Japanese notion of the dual path of cultural andmartial arts is totally alien to the Chinese. A man of letters and a man of the sword areconsidered two separate beings, and since the Song dynasty, the Chinese political structure has
given precedence to men of letters.

7

To elaborate a little more, suppose a man knows that he will eventually be going into battle andthat he may be killed. He would, normally, be terrified. For a warrior the first hurdle to overcomeis the conquest of that fear. In other words, a warrior must begin by acquiring the self-control toovercome the fear that his survival instinct gives rise to. He must accomplish that by controlling
his will to live, which is the most important aspect of the human spirit. If he manages to succeed,
he deserves to be proud of himself.
He must be kind to the weak, and never torment them. He must not kill recklessly, and he mustalso be prepared to die when a great cause is presented to him. He is able, ultimately, to become
an ideal human being, an ideal member of society, when he is able to conquer his fear of death.
Therefore, as Nitobe Inazo wrote, samurai do not need to undergo moral education by means ofreligious instruction, because Bushido provides the moral path to tread.
Compared with Westerners, or with Muslims or East Indians, East Asians are less religious.
Views on life and death differ by ethnicity. Bushido, like religions, tells you to contemplate deathand to always be aware of death, but besides that, samurai also seek aesthetics as a “practice”
that transcends religion; Bushido is superior to religion, and even to the standards of good andevil.
Earlier I mentioned how warriors and peace form a spiral, and I would like to mention it again.
Warriors are prepared to engage in battles of all sorts at any time. But for such warriors to
emerge in society, that society must be largely free of war. If not warriors will not emerge. If
warriors must conquer their fear of death, and take pride in doing that, then society must
admire and value them.
In societies where unjust deaths are a matter of course, there is no latitude that will permit theluxury of admiring the proud warrior. When the will to live is denied and humans are casually
killed, humans cannot be faulted for doing whatever is necessary to survive. Even if in their
midst there are kind people who do not kill and who are kind to the weak, society does not havethe leisure to appreciate such behavior.
In China where the people are sacrificial lambs, caught up in someone else’s battles and casually
killed, samurai warriors will definitely not appear. The good spiral between warriors and peace
will never form.
In a battle arena of a Japanese war, warriors fulfill the leading roles. Farmers, artisans, andmerchants are something like spectators, as at a sporting event. The civil wars fought in China
during the modern age, where every member of the population was forced to participate, wereentirely different. That is why, in Japanese wars, warriors or soldiers play the leading roles;
Japanese wars are sporting and fair play prevails.
The fact that warriors and knights appeared in Japan and the Western world is proof that at
those times society was orderly, and that unjust killings were not common practice. The fact thatwarriors appeared in Japan means that the Japanese had built a peaceful society.
The presence of warriors created peace, and peace encouraged the appearance of more warriors.
In other words, the spiral of justice functions. If a foreign people were to invade Japan and war
broke out, with cruel deaths being the rule rather than the exception, Bushido would disappear.
But since Japan is surrounded by water and was provided with a natural barrier, there were no
foreign invasions, and Bushido advanced by leaps and bounds. Japan became a peaceful nation
with few wars.

8

Of course, even in Japan there was an Age of Warring States (1467-1603) during which there
was continuous warfare, beginning with the Onin War in 1467, similar to the Spring and Autumn
period in China (771-476 BC).
But warfare in Japan differed from that in China in that it did not involve the common people orfarmers. Historians indicate that when warrior leaders went into a battle, they believed that thegods would not favor them if they behaved unjustly. They did not kill needlessly. Unlike theChinese, they did not mow people down for no reason.
Battle methodology during the Age of Warring States closely resembled that employed during
the Spring and Autumn period. But even so, in Japan warriors were the leaders, and civilians did
not get caught up in the fighting. It was different from China, where the entire state was in utter
chaos. Though battles were fought during the Age of Warring States, it was not truly an era of
warfare.
When battles were fought in Japan, farmers became spectators; they knew that they would not
be harmed. At the Battle of Sekigahara in 1600, toward the end of the Age of Warring States,
farmers reportedly took their boxed lunches up to spots high in the mountains from which they
could safely enjoy the proceedings. In Japan, once the outcome of a battle was determined, andthe leaders of the losing side had committed seppuku or otherwise acknowledged their defeat,there was no massacre of the men who had served under them or of farmers living in the losing
domain. One exception was Oda Nobunaga. He reacted to Akechi Mitsuhide’s revolt (just before
Nobunaga had achieved control of all Japan) by disemboweling himself. Nobunaga had also
burned temples on Mt. Hiei in 1571 and killed priests on Mt. Koya. He refused to allow
opponents to surrender, and massacred them. But his methods made him an exception in Japan.
He must have adopted Chinese methods of warfare. Perhaps he thought he needed to emulate
the Chinese since he was a commander during the Age of Warring States. He seems to have been
dispassionate about his actions.
In 1572 after Nobunaga defeated Odani Castle, he drank sake from the defeated Azai Nagamasa’sskull. This act also had a Chinese precedent. Furthermore, in the Battle of Nagashino in 1575,
Oda lined riflemen who were to shoot at Takeda Katsuyori’s men in three rows, and orderedeach row to shoot and then reload, in succession. This way there was someone shooting at all
times as long as the barrage lasted. I believe that this particular story was invented after the fact.
But if true, it too has a Chinese precedent. The first Qin emperor lined soldiers armed with bowsthat took a long time to load and had them shoot in succession.
Additionally, Nobunaga’s economic warfare should be taken into account. Textbooks mention hisemphasis on economics, particularly commercial activity such as free markets and open guilds.
He may have been inspired by conflicts that took place during the Yuan dynasty, which also
waged commercial warfare.
If the cruel methods of waging war that Nobunaga employed had become common practice, agreat number of people would have been killed unjustly. It would have become impossible topredict death, and Bushido would not have developed. However, Nobunaga disappeared from thescene before that could happen.
5. No tradition of cannibalism in JapanMy intent for this chapter was to elucidate on Japan’s history and how its annals contain very9

few accounts of killing. Now I would like to address cannibalism.
A scrupulous examination of any nation’s history will reveal instances of cannibalism. But Chinais the only nation where wars gave rise to cannibalism, which became ingrained — part of theculture. In other nations cannibalism had one cause: famine.
The Marxist economist Kawakami Hajime (1879-1946) produced a book entitled Agricultural
Administration. In it he refers to a travel journal kept by a physician named Tachibana Nankei,
who was travelling in western Japan toward the end of the Edo period, during the Great Tenmei
Famine. Tachibana recounted a story told him by a pilgrim he encountered on the road. The
pilgrim stopped at a certain house where he discovered an old man and his daughter who werestarving, just barely alive. His heart went out to them, and he offered them his own food, but theywouldn’t accept it. The old man told him that even if he ate it he would still have no food on thefollowing day. Accepting the pilgrim’s kind offer would only prolong their agony.
In Tachibana’s journal kept during his travels in east Japan, he mentions someone in Tsugaru
who resorted to cannibalism, eating even his own child.
Therefore, there have been instances of cannibalism in Japan. Kawakami’s book relays an
account of someone in 14th-century England who killed and ate his own child to fend off deathfrom starvation. And I have heard that during the Greater East Asian War, Japanese soldiers lostin the jungles of the Pacific islands and Southeast Asia ate the flesh of dead soldiers. Such tales
cannot be completely dismissed. But all of them differ greatly from the Chinese tradition ofcannibalism becoming so entrenched that it became part of the culture; its practice could betriggered by even the slightest sign of famine.
As I wrote in Chapter 2. I doubt that Confucius, who taught the precepts of Confucianism, everate human flesh, but I think that people he knew were certainly part of the cannibalism culture.
Even today, illegal organ transplants are being done without a second thought.
My conclusion: Japan’s history tells the story of a culture that flourished without killing.

10