 I myself am somewhat ambivalent regarding this complex issue. While I certainly agree with the wish to avoid overgeneralizations and politically charged polarizations, and while I think the writings of the Kyoto School do need to be read critically in this regard, I am equally wary of a “globalization of thought” that amounts to a colonization of “non-Western” traditions by “Western” methods and categories of thinking. I also continue to believe that the threads of the Greco-Roman-Judeo-Christian-Euro-American traditions and cultures are woven tightly enough together to warrant provisionally and in certain contexts speaking of “the West.” It is true that “the East” is a more problematic concept since it is a less tightly woven set of traditions and cultures, especially from the perspective of India (which, of course, did not appropriate any Chinese tradition the way China appropriated Buddhism). From Japan’s perspective, however, especially from a Japanese Buddhist perspective which intimately weaves together Indo-Sino-Japanese threads, it may still make some sense provisionally and in certain contexts to speak in terms of “the East.”