The dharmakÃÂya (, "truth body" or "reality body", , ) is one of the three bodies (trikÃÂya) of a Buddha in MahÃÂyÃÂna Buddhism. The dharmakÃÂya constitutes the unmanifested, "inconceivable" (acintya) aspect of a Buddha out of which Buddhas arise and to which they return after their dissolution. When a Buddha manifests out of the dharmakÃÂya in a physical body of flesh and blood, which is perceptible to ordinary sentient beings, this is called a nirmÃÂá¹ÂakÃÂya, "transformation body".
The DhammakÃÂya tradition of Thailand and the TathÃÂgatagarbha sà «tras of the ancient Indian tradition view the dharmakÃÂya as the ÃÂtman (true self) of the Buddha present within all beings.
In the PÃÂli Canon, Gautama Buddha tells Vasettha that the TathÃÂgata (the Buddha) is dhammakaya, the "truth-body" or the "embodiment of truth", as well as dharmabhuta, "truth-become", that is, "one who has become truth."
The trikaya doctrine (Sanskrit, literally "three bodies" or "three personalities") is a Buddhist teaching both on the nature of reality, and the appearances of a Buddha.
The dharmakaya doctrine was possibly first expounded in the Aá¹£á¹ÂasÃÂhasrikàPrajñÃÂpÃÂramitÃÂ, composed in the 1st century BCE.
Around 300 CE, the yogacara school systematized the prevalent ideas on the nature of the Buddha in the trikaya "three-body" doctrine. According to this doctrine, buddhahood has three aspects:
Tulku Thondup states that dharmakaya must possess three great qualities:
According to Guang Xing, two main aspects of the Buddha can be seen in MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghika teachings: the true Buddha who is omniscient and omnipotent, and the manifested forms through which he liberates sentient beings through skillful means. For the MahÃÂsaá¹Âghikas, the historical Gautama Buddha was one of these transformation bodies (Skt. ), while the essential real Buddha is equated with the dharmakÃÂya.
SarvÃÂstivÃÂdins viewed the Buddha's physical body (Skt. ) as being impure and improper for taking refuge in, and they instead regarded taking refuge in the Buddha as taking refuge in the dharmakÃÂya of the Buddha. As stated in the MahÃÂvibhÃÂá¹£ÃÂ:
In the Pali Canon of Theravada Buddhism, the DhammakÃÂya (dharmakÃÂya) is explained as a figurative term, meaning the "body" or the sum of the Buddha's teachings. The Canon does not invest the term dhammakÃÂya with a metaphysical or unrealistic connotation. Jantrasrisalai disagrees though, arguing that the term originally was more connected with the process of enlightenment than the way it later came to be interpreted. In all references to dhammakÃÂya in early Buddhist usage, it is apparent that dhammakÃÂya is linked always with the process of enlightenment in one way or another. Its relation with the Buddhist noble ones of all types is evident in the early Buddhist texts. That is to say, dhammakÃÂya is not exclusive to the Buddha. It appears also that the termâÂÂs usage in the sense of teaching is a later schema rather than being the early Buddhist common notions as generally understood.
In the atthakathÃÂs (commentaries on the Buddhist texts), the interpretation of the word depends on the author. Though both Buddhaghoá¹£a and DhammapÃÂla describe dhammakÃÂya as the nine supramundane states (navalokuttaradhamma), their interpretations differ in other aspects. Buddhaghoá¹£a always follows the canonical interpretation, referring to the teaching of the lokuttaradhammas, but DhammapÃÂla interprets dhammakÃÂya as the spiritual attainments of the Buddha. DhammapÃÂla's interpretation is still essentially TheravÃÂda though, since the Buddha is still considered a human being, albeit an enlightened one. The Buddha's body is still subject to kamma and limited in the same way as other people's bodies are.
In a post-canonical Sri Lankan text called SaddharmaratnÃÂkaraya, a distinction is drawn between four different kÃÂyas: the rà «pakÃÂya, dharmakÃÂya, nimittakÃÂya and suñyakÃÂya. The rà «pakÃÂya refers to the four jhÃÂnas here; the dharmakÃÂya refers to the attainment of the first eight of the nine lokuttaradhammas; the nimittakÃÂya refers to the final lokuttaradhamma: NibbÃÂna with a physical remainder (sopadisesanibbÃÂna); and the suñyakÃÂya refers to NibbÃÂna without physical remainder (anupÃÂdisesanibbÃÂna). However, even this teaching of four kÃÂyas does not really stray outside of orthodox TheravÃÂda tradition.
In a more unorthodox approach, Maryla Falk has made the argument that in the earliest form of Buddhism, a yogic path existed which involved the acquisition of a manomayakÃÂya or dhammakÃÂya and an amatakÃÂya, in which the manomayakÃÂya or dhammakÃÂya refers to the attainment of the jhÃÂnas, and the amatakÃÂya to the attainment of insight and the culmination of the path. In this case, the kÃÂyas refer to a general path and fruit, not only to the person of the Buddha. Although Reynolds does not express agreement with Falk's entire theory, he does consider the idea of an earlier yogic strand worthy of investigation. Furthermore, he points out that there are remarkable resemblances with interpretations that can be found in YogÃÂvacara texts, often called Tantric Theravada.
The usage of the word dhammakÃÂya is common in Tantric TheravÃÂda texts. It is also a common term in later texts concerning the consecration of Buddha images. In these later texts, which are often descriptions of kammaá¹Âá¹ÂhÃÂna (meditation methods), different parts of the body of the Buddha are associated with certain spiritual attainments, and the practitioner determines to pursue these attainments himself. The idea that certain characteristics or attainments of the Buddha can be pursued is usually considered a MahÃÂyÃÂna idea, but unlike MahÃÂyÃÂna, YogÃÂvacara texts do not describe the Buddha in ontological terms, and commonly use only TheravÃÂda terminology.
The Dhammakaya tradition and some monastic members of Thai Theravada Buddhism, who specialise on meditation, have doctrinal elements which distinguish it from some TheravÃÂda Buddhist scholars who have tried to claim themselves as the orthodox Buddhists. Basing itself on the Pali suttas and meditative experience, the tradition teaches that the dhammakaya is the eternal Buddha within all beings. The dhammakaya is nibbÃÂna, and nibbÃÂna is equated with the true self (as opposed to the non-self). In some respects its teachings resemble the buddha-nature doctrines of Mahayana Buddhism. Paul Williams has commented that this view of Buddhism is similar to ideas found in the shentong teachings of the Jonang school of Tibet made famous by Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen.
The Thai meditation masters who teach of a true self of which they claim to have gained meditative experience are not rejected by Thai Buddhists in general, but tend, on the contrary, to be particularly revered and worshipped in Thailand as arahats or even bodhisattvas, far more so than more orthodox Theravada monks and scholars.
According to Paul Williams, there are three ways of seeing the concept of the dharmakaya in the prajnaparamita sutras:
In the Lotus Sutra (Chapter 16: The Life Span of Thus Come One, sixth fascicle) the Buddha explains that he has always and will always exist to lead beings to their salvation.
In the tathagatagarbha sutric tradition, the dharmakaya is taught by the Buddha to constitute the transcendental, blissful, eternal, and pure Self of the Buddha. "These terms are found in sutras such as the Lankavatara, Gandavyuha, Angulimaliya, Srimala, and the Mahaparinirvana, where they are used to describe the Buddha, the Truth Body (dharmakaya) and the Buddha-nature." They are the "transcendent results [of spiritual attainment]".
In Tibetan, the term chos sku (à ½Âà ½¼à ½¦à ¼Âà ½¦à ¾Âà ½´à ¼Â, phonetically written as chö-ku) glosses dharmakÃÂya; it is composed of chos "religion, dharma" and sku "body, form, image, bodily form, figure". Thondup & Talbott render it as the "ultimate body". Gyurme Dorje and Thupten Jinpa define "Buddha-body of Reality", which is a rendering of the Tibetan chos-sku and the Sanskrit dharmakÃÂya, as:
The Dalai Lama defines the dharmakaya as "the realm of the DharmakayaâÂÂthe space of emptinessâÂÂwhere all phenomena, pure and impure, are dissolved. This is the explanation taught by the Sutras and Tantras." However he also states that it is distinct from the Hindu concept of Brahman because Buddhism adheres to the doctrine of emptiness (sunyata).
According to Jamgon Kongtrul, the founder of the Rimé movement, in his 19th century commentary to the Lojong slogan, "To see confusion as the four kayas, the sunyata protection is unsurpassable", "When you rest in a state where appearances simply appear but there is no clinging to them, the dharmakaya aspect is that all appearances are empty in nature, the sambhogakÃÂya is that they appear with clarity, the nirmanakaya is that this emptiness and clarity occur together, and the natural kÃÂya aspect is that these are inseparable."
In the early traditions of Buddhism, depictions of Gautama Buddha were neither iconic nor aniconic but depictions of empty space and absence: petrosomatoglyphs (images of a part of the body carved in rock), for example.
Thondup and Talbott identify dharmakaya with the naked ("sky-clad"; Sanskrit: ), unornamented, sky-blue Samantabhadra:
Fremantle states:
The colour blue is an iconographic polysemic rendering of the mahÃÂbhà «ta element of the "pure light" of space (Sanskrit: ).
The conceptually bridging and building poetic device of analogy, as an exemplar where dharmakaya is evocatively likened to sky and space, is a persistent and pervasive visual metaphor throughout the early Dzogchen and Nyingma literature and functions as a linkage and conduit between the 'conceptual' and 'conceivable' and the 'ineffable' and 'inconceivable' (Sanskrit: ). It is particularly referred to by the terma Gongpa Zangtel, a terma cycle revealed by Rigdzin Gödem (1337âÂÂ1408) and part of the Nyingma "Northern Treasures" ().
Sawyer conveys the importance of melong ('mirror') iconography to dharmakaya: