gmatically as
follows, but it assumes somewhat divergent forms according as it is
treated theologically or metaphysically.

A Buddha has three bodies or forms of existence. The first is the
Dharma-kaya, which is the essence of all Buddhas. It is true knowledge
or Bodhi. It may also be described as Nirvana and also as the one
permanent reality underlying all phenomena and all individuals. The
second is the Sambhoga-kaya, or body of enjoyment, that is to say the
radiant and superhuman form in which Buddhas appear in their paradises
or when otherwise manifesting themselves in celestial splendour. The
third is the Nirmana-kaya, or the body of transformation, that is to
say the human form worn by Sakyamuni or any other Buddha and regarded
as a transformation of his true nature and almost a distortion,
because it is so partial and inadequate an expression of it. Later
theology regards Amitabha, Amitayus and Sakyamuni as a series
corresponding to the three bodies. Amitabha does not really express
the whole Dharma-kaya, which is incapable of personification, but when
he is accurately distinguished from Amitayus (and frequently they are
regarded as synonyms) he is made the more remote and ethereal of the
two. Amitayus with his rich ornaments and his flask containing the
water of eternal life is the ideal of a splendidly beneficent saviour
and represents the Sambhoga-kaya.[93] Sakyamuni is the same beneficent
being shrunk into human form. But this is only one aspect, and not the
most important, of the doctrine of the three bodies. We can easily
understand the Sambhoga-kaya and Nirmana-kaya: they correspond to a
deity such as Vishnu and his incarnation Krishna, and they are
puzzling in Buddhism simply because we think naturally of the older
view (not entirely discarded by the Mahayana) which makes the human
Buddha the crown and apex of a series of lives that find in him their
fulfilment. But it is less easy to understand the Dharma-kaya.

The word should perhaps be translated as body of the law and the
thought originally underlying it may have been that the essential
nature of a Buddha, that which makes him a Buddha, is the law which he
preaches. As we might say, the teacher lives in his teaching: while it
survives, he is active and not dead.

The change from metaphor to theology is illustrated by Hsuean Chuang
when he states[94] (no doubt quoting from his edition of the Pitakas)
that Gotama when dying said to those around him