As early as Mahasamghika schools of Buddhism there was a view that there are countless Buddhas in the ten directions, that all Buddha's have one body (dharmakaya), and that they are just manifestations (nirmanakaya). The last part says how Buddhas, including Gautama, didnt and dont actually ever get hungry, or eat, or got dirty, or defecate, or struggle to achieve enlightenment, or grow old and die, but that all that is for show, a part of teaching people. Are all Buddhas like this, just like some 'holograms' that Dharmakaya projects in various world to teach people? If that is the case, that seems to imply that we cant actually become Buddhas, because the Buddhas are just manifestations. I know the stories in some Sutras about how some humans aeons ago made vows to become a Buddha and now they are a Bodhisattva (such as Avalokitesvara) or a Buddha (such Amitabha), but if that is also all just for show, skillful means to teach people, it seems there are no examples of actual people becoming a Bodhisattva or Buddha..? Whats going on there?

In a lot of Buddhist literature you will find passages suggesting that our Buddha nature is actually "nothingness" or "emptiness". I was wondering if this was true? I'm starting to doubt this claim because of the Dharmakaya. The Dharmakaya is one of the three bodies of Buddha which is transcendent. While some say that the Dharmakaya "is" nothingness, others claim that it is neither part of space (emptiness and form) nor time. The idea is that everything, including nothingness (emptiness), originated out of the Dharmakaya. It's an impersonal force which holds everything together, originated everything, and maintains everything through a transcendent state. **My question**: What is the proper understanding of the Dharmakaya and it's relationship with our Buddha nature? Is it the Buddha nature or not?

Can we consider 'tathagatagarbha' and 'dhammakaya' as synonyms? If not, what is the difference between those words.

It occurred to me that some human life has immeasurable value. Not just is very very valuable, but cannot, in principle, be contrasted with the value of another sentient life. I *think* that the term for this immeasurability is the ***dharmakaya***. Do any traditions claim that the dharmakaya is never manifest in a human being?

ARe there any schools which say that Shakyamuni the historical Buddha, alone, will ***ever*** be a Buddha? I understand that some might identify him *fully* with the dharmakaya, but isn't it completely canonical that there is a Buddha vehicle for others, at some point in time?

*Might* it be true that emptiness can be conceived of as the one taste of mind: that the world of mind has only one reality which is everywhere and always the same, unchanging. Who (which groups or individuals) say so? And: what **reasons** are there to believe it is a correct charaterisation of mind?

I am asking because I think that if the past has buddha nature, and the dharmakaya is impermanent, then there is nothing left of the enlightened when they die.