now looked down upon.--Secondly, we find the wisdom of Confucius, which has special attractions for Chinese _savants_ and statesmen. Judging from translations, it is a rambling, commonplace, predominantly political, moral philosophy, without any metaphysical support, which has something peculiarly insipid and tiresome about it.--Finally, there exists for the bulk of the nation Buddha's sublime doctrine full of love. The name, or rather title, of Buddha in China is _Fo_ or _Fhu_, whilst in Tartary the "Victoriously-Perfect" is more frequently called by his family-name, _Shakia-Muni_, and also _Burkhan-Bakshi_; in Birma and Ceylon, he is generally called _Gótama_ or _Tagátata_, but his original name was Prince _Siddharta_.[327] This religion which, on account of its intrinsic excellence and truth, as well as of the great number of its followers, may be considered as ranking highest among all religions on earth, prevails throughout the greater part of Asia, and according to the latest investigator, Spence Hardy, numbers 369 millions of believers: that is, far more than any other.--These three religions, the most widely diffused of which, Buddhism, subsists without any protection whatever from the State, by its own power alone--a circumstance which speaks greatly in its favour--are far from being hostile to one another, and exist quietly side by side, nay, harmonize even to a certain extent, perhaps by reciprocal influence, so that the sentence: "The three doctrines are only one", has become proverbial. The Emperor, as such, professes all three; still many of the Emperors, even up to the most recent times, have been especially devoted to Buddhism. This is shown by their profound respect for the Dalaï-Lama, nay, even for the Teshoo-Lama, to whom they unhesitatingly yield precedence.--These three religions are neither monotheistic nor polytheistic, nor are they even pantheistic--Buddhism, at any rate, is not; since Buddha did not look upon a world sunk in sin and suffering, whose tenants, all subject to death, only subsist for a short time by devouring each other, as a manifestation of God. Moreover the word Pantheism, properly speaking, contains a contradiction; for it denotes a self-destroying conception, and has therefore never been understood otherwise than as a polite term of expression by those who know what seriousness means. It accordingly never entered into the heads of the clever, acute philosophers of the eighteenth century, not to take Spinoza for an Atheist, on account of his having called the world Deus; on the contrary, this discovery was reserved for the sham philosophers of our own times, who know nothing but words: they even pique themselves on the achievement and accordingly talk about Acomism, the wags! But I would humbly suggest leaving their meanings to words--in short, calling the world, the world; and gods gods.