And the modern Schopenhauer, repeating this philosophical idea, 10,000 years old now, says: “Nature is non-existent, _per se_.... Nature is the infinite illusion of our senses.” Kant, Schelling, and other metaphysicians have said the same, and their school maintains the idea. The objects of sense being ever delusive and fluctuating, cannot be a reality. Spirit alone is unchangeable, hence--alone is no illusion. This is pure Buddhist doctrine. The religion of the _Gnosis_ (knowledge), the most evident offshoot of Buddhism, was utterly based on this metaphysical tenet. Christos suffered _spiritually_ for us, and far more acutely than did the illusionary Jesus while his body was being tortured on the Cross. In the ideas of the Christians, Christ is but another name for Jesus. The philosophy of the Gnostics, the initiates, and hierophants understood it otherwise. The word Christos, Χριστος, like all Greek words, must be sought in its philological origin--the Sanscrit. In this latter language _Kris_ means sacred,[268] and the Hindu deity was named Chris-na (the pure or the sacred) from that. On the other hand, the Greek _Christos_ bears several meanings, as anointed (pure oil, _chrism_) and others. In all languages, though the synonym of the word means pure or sacred essence, it is the first emanation of the invisible Godhead, manifesting itself tangibly in spirit. The Greek Logos, the Hebrew Messiah, the Latin Verbum, and the Hindu Viradj (the son) are identically the same; they represent an idea of collective entities--of flames detached from the one eternal centre of light. “The man who accomplishes pious but interested acts (with the sole object of his salvation) may reach the ranks of the _devas_ (saints);[269] but he who accomplishes, disinterestedly, the same pious acts, finds himself ridden forever of the five elements” (of matter). “Perceiving the Supreme Soul in all beings and all beings in the Supreme Soul, in offering his own soul in sacrifice, he identifies himself with the Being who shines in his own splendor” (_Manu_, book xii., slokas 90, 91).