(3 of 3)
Arthur Koestler's own Western approach to things reveals itself in his complaint that Zen has little to offer to "the moral recovery of Japan." Actually, the concept of morality or immorality, good or evil, does not exist in Zen; enlightenment, rather than making the world a better place to live in, is the goal.
Koestler has no patience with the self-deprecating habit of contrasting a contemplative, spiritual East with a crass, materialistic West. The difference, he says, is not between spirituality and materialism but between Western philosophy—love of wisdom—and Eastern "philousia" (from the Greek word ousia, meaning essential Being), which "prefers intuition to reason, symbols to concepts, self-realization through the annihilation of the ego to self-realization through the unfolding of individuality . . .
"Thus the hubris of rationalism is matched by the hubris of irrationality, and the messianic arrogance of the Christian crusader is matched by the Yogi's arrogant attitude of detachment towards human suffering. Mankind is facing its most deadly predicament since it climbed down from the trees; but one is reluctantly brought to the conclusion that neither Yoga, Zen, nor any other Asian form of mysticism has any significant advice to offer."
* Orthodox Christian asceticism is designed to subdue the body rather than hasten its death.