Dharmakāya as the “True Self” in Buddhist Traditions

In certain Mahāyāna Buddhist traditions, the ultimate reality of Buddha – the Dharmakāya or “Truth Body” – is explicitly linked to a concept of an eternal True Self (ātman) or “Higher Self,” even while Buddhism generally teaches non-self (anātman). This view emerges in Mahayana sutras on Buddha-nature, is echoed in Vajrayāna (Tibetan) doctrines of buddha-nature, and appears in the rhetoric of some Zen and Pure Land teachers. Below, we explore how these traditions interpret Dharmakāya as a True Self, with scriptural and doctrinal references, and examine whether Amitābha Buddha is identified with the Dharmakāya or the practitioner’s Higher Self in Pure Land and related schools.

Mahāyāna Sutras and the “True Self” (Buddha-Nature)

Mahāyāna Tathāgatagarbha (“Buddha-nature”) sutras openly describe an ultimate essence in all beings that is true, permanent, and self-like – effectively identifying the Dharmakāya (ultimate Buddha) with a True Self. The Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra (not to be confused with the Pāli Nirvana sutra) is a key example. It links tathāgatagarbha (Buddha-nature) with the eternal Dharmakāya of the Buddha, and even calls this Buddha-nature the “Self” (ātman)en.wikipedia.org. In this scripture, the Buddha shocks monks who cling one-sidedly to “non-self” by declaring that the Dharmakāya of the Buddha is in fact the eternal, true Selfnirvanasutranet.com. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra explains that teachings of universal non-self were provisional, intended to counter attachment, but that ultimately Mahā-nirvāṇa (Great Nirvana) and Buddha-nature are not non-selfnirvanasutranet.com nirvanasutranet.com. It famously attributes to the Dharmakāya four transcendent qualities – eternity, bliss, purity, and selfen.wikipedia.org. In short, this sutra identifies the Buddha’s indwelling essence as “the Self in all dharmas”nirvanasutranet.com, an enduring, unconditioned reality accessible when ignorance is removed.

Other tathāgatagarbha sutras reinforce this idea. The Śrīmālādevī Siṁhanāda Sūtra (Lion’s Roar of Queen Srīmālā) equates tathāgatagarbha with the Dharmakāya of the Buddha, describing it as “permanent, eternal, everlasting, and peaceful”en.wikipedia.org – positive attributes usually denied to conditioned phenomena. Likewise, the Mahābherī (Great Drum) Sūtra describes the universal Buddha-nature as “luminous and pure, as eternal, everlasting, peaceful and [as] self (ātman)”en.wikipedia.org. These texts use seemingly Upanishadic language to convey that ultimate reality (Dharmakāya/Buddha-nature) is our true abiding identity, even if empty of mundane “selfish” qualities. The intention is to inspire faith that nirvana is a positive state, not a nihilistic void.

Not all Mahāyāna thinkers interpreted this literally; some (especially Madhyamaka philosophers) read “True Self” as a skilful metaphor. However, the idea was taken at face value in East Asia. Chinese Buddhism widely embraced Buddha-nature teachings – often equating “True Mind”, “True Nature,” or “One Mind” with the Dharmakāya. For example, the 6th Chan Patriarch Huineng taught that our self-nature (zìxìng) is originally pure and complete. Upon awakening he exclaimed: “How unexpected that self-nature is originally clear and pure… not born or extinguished… complete in itself… able to produce all dharmas!”taoism.net. Chan/Zen literature frequently calls this inherent nature the original self or original face. Huineng’s teacher affirmed, “If you know the mind of the true self, you will see its true nature – this is how one becomes a Buddha”taoism.net. Thus, in Zen, the quest for enlightenment is often framed as discovering one’s True Self (which is none other than Buddha-nature shining through when the illusory ego-self is dropped). In short, classical Mahayana sources like the Nirvana Sutra explicitly equate the Dharmakāya/Buddha-nature with an ultimate True Self present in all beingsen.wikipedia.org nirvanasutranet.com, and this doctrinal thread profoundly influenced Zen and East Asian Buddhism’s understanding of our innate Buddha-mind.

Vajrayāna (Tibetan) Perspectives on Dharmakāya and True Self

Vajrayāna and Tibetan Buddhist schools inherited the Buddha-nature doctrines of Mahāyāna and often amplified them. In Tibetan Mahāmudrā and Dzogchen teachings, the innate mind of each being – luminous, empty awareness – is regarded as identical to the Dharmakāya. Although lamas usually avoid the word “self” due to anātman orthodoxy, they effectively describe Buddha-nature as an ultimate Self (unborn, deathless awareness). The Jonang school, led by 14th-century master Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen, is famous for openly embracing this idea. Dolpopa taught a “Shentong” (empty-of-other) view: all relative phenomena are empty of self-nature, but absolute reality (Buddha-nature/Dharmakāya) is not empty of itself – it truly exists with glorious qualities. He describes the Buddha-nature as natural luminosity, synonymous with the Dharmakāya, a “primordial, indestructible, eternal great bliss” inherent in every beingjonangfoundation.org. Dolpopa even used terms like “Paramātman” (Supreme Self) to underscore that the ultimate nature of mind is real and enduring (he justified that Buddha’s true Self is not the limited ego, but the boundless reality beyond ego)jonangfoundation.org. This earned him criticism from more orthodox scholars, but his ideas were influential. Modern Kagyu teachers, such as Lama Shenpen Hookham, echo this interpretation: “Buddha-nature is a True Self – real and permanent, the Buddha within”en.wikipedia.org. The Kagyu tradition (e.g. 3rd Karmapa Rangjung Dorje) likewise emphasizes the indwelling enlightened essence (sugatagarbha) in each mind, sometimes in positive language.

Even when not explicitly saying “Self,” Tibetan Vajrayāna texts equate our innate awareness with the Dharmakāya. In Dzogchen (Great Perfection) teachings of the Nyingma school, the primordial Buddha Samantabhadra – symbol of the Dharmakāya – is taught to be none other than our own rigpa (pure awareness) once recognized. This is effectively one’s ultimate Self-nature. The Geluk school (following Je Tsongkhapa) was more cautious, interpreting Buddha-nature as empty-of-self potential, but all Tibetan schools uphold that the Dharmakāya is the true nature of mind. In summary, Vajrayāna agrees that realizing Dharmakāya within is discovering one’s timeless identity beyond the ego. As one scholar notes, both the Thai Dhammakāya tradition and the Indian Tathāgatagarbha sutras similarly regard the Dharmakāya as the “ātman (true self) of the Buddha present within all beings.”en.wikipedia.org This convergence shows that in Tibetan Buddhism, Dharmakāya or Buddha-nature is explicitly the true eternal identity of all enlightened beings – essentially a Higher Self, described in theistic-sounding terms yet distinguished from the ordinary self.

Zen (Chán) Buddhism and the “True Self”

Zen inherits the paradox of Buddha-nature: it denies the small ego-self, but affirms an original nature often called the true self. Chán/Zen masters frequently refer to this authentic nature in personal terms. The famous Zen adage “See your original face before you were born” points to an identity beyond birth and death. While Zen avoids ontological speculation, its experiential language implies that awakening reveals our True Self – not an ego, but the one Mind or Buddha-nature. For example, the Japanese Rinzai master Hakuin spoke of the “great death” of the ego that unveils the “Great Self” of enlightenment (sometimes called the one bright mind). The Platform Sūtra of Huineng (an essential Zen text) teaches that “our self-nature (zixing) is originally pure” and one just needs to awaken to it. Huineng’s realization was that “None of the myriad dharmas is separate from the nature of the self”, leading him to exclaim the inherent unborn, unshakable purity of Self-naturetaoism.net. His teacher confirmed that knowing this true self-mind is enlightenmenttaoism.net. Thus Zen explicitly uses True Self terminology in pointing to Buddha-nature. Contemporary Zen teachers sometimes say “Your Buddha-nature is your true self”. They carefully distinguish it from the deluded, conditioned self, often calling it the “Big Self” (as opposed to the ego “small self”). As Zen master D.T. Suzuki wrote, “our True Self is the Buddha-mind, empty yet full of everything.”

It should be noted that Zen’s true self is not a soul or ego-entity – it is emptiness and form in unity. Zen master Dōgen in fact critiqued any substantialist reading of Buddha-nature, famously saying “To study Buddhism is to study the self; to study the self is to forget the self; to forget the self is to be verified by all things.” For Dōgen, the true self is an activity (the dynamic functioning of Buddha-nature), not a fixed essence. Some Zen writings prefer phrases like “true nature” or “original mind.” Nonetheless, especially in Chan and Zen integration with Pure Land (common in Chinese Buddhism), we see explicit references to “Self-nature Amitābha” (zìxìng Āmítuófó) and “Mind-only Pure Land”. These emphasize that the Buddha one seeks is one’s own true mind. In summary, Zen teaches that realizing Dharmakāya/Buddha-nature is discovering the True Self – the boundless awareness that was always present. This is done not through conceptual analysis but through meditation and direct insight, dropping the false self to reveal the Dharmakāya within.

Pure Land Buddhism and Amitābha as Dharmakāya / Higher Self

A statue of Amitābha Buddha. In Mahāyāna Pure Land teaching, Amitābha’s ultimate nature is equated with the Dharmakāya or Buddha-nature – the true reality of all Buddhas and beings.

Pure Land Buddhism primarily emphasizes devotion to Amitābha Buddha (Amida) as an external savior, yet within its philosophy there are interpretations linking Amitābha to the inner Dharmakāya and one’s Buddha-nature. Especially in East Asian Pure Land, which often blends with Zen, Amitābha is understood on two levels: (1) an external Buddha in his Western Paradise, and (2) the inner reality of enlightenment (Dharmakāya). Shinran (1173–1263), founder of Japanese Jōdo Shinshū, articulated this clearly. He taught two aspects of Dharmakāya: the “Dharmakāya-as-suchness” (hōsson, the formless ultimate reality) and “Dharmakāya-as-compassionate means”slbuddhist.org. Shinran saw Amida Buddha as the manifest form of the Dharmakāya – “Dharmakāya-as-compassion”. In his writings, Shinran says: “Dharmakāya-as-suchness has neither color nor form… From this oneness was manifested form, called Dharmakāya-as-compassion. Taking this form, the Buddha proclaimed his name as Bhikṣu Dharmākara [who became Amitābha] and established the 48 great vows.”slbuddhist.org In other words, Amida is the Dharmakāya come into form out of compassion, to save beings. Ultimately, Amida is one with Nirvana (Suchness). Shinran quotes a Pure Land hymn: “Uncreated Dharma-body (Dharmakāya) is true reality… Suchness is oneness. Amida Tathāgata comes forth from Suchness and manifests various bodies.”en.wikipedia.org. Thus Amida is synonymous with the Dharmakāya in an emanated form. Those who attain Shinjin (faith) and say Amida’s Name realize Nirvana, because in Shinran’s view “Amitābha as the Dharmakāya itself” assures their enlightenmenten.wikipedia.org.

Earlier Chinese Pure Land masters also equated Amitābha with the True Mind. A famous saying in Chinese Buddhism is: “Self-nature Amitābha, Mind-only Pure Land.” This means that Amitābha Buddha is, at the deepest level, one’s own Buddha-nature, and the Pure Land is ultimately a state of one’s own mindymba.org. Far from negating the literal Pure Land, this interpretation adds a mystical unity: by reciting Amitābha’s name, one is essentially invoking one’s own deepest nature. The modern Young Men’s Buddhist Association (YMBA) explains: “Along with [the] popular form of Pure Land, there is a higher aspect in which Amitābha… is equated with our Buddha Nature, infinitely bright and everlasting (Self-Nature Amitabha, Mind-Only Pure Land). Thus, to recite the Buddha’s name is to recite the Buddha of our own mind, to return to our own pure mind.”ymba.org. In Pure Land thought, the compassionate “Other-Power” of Amida and the inherent “Buddha-nature” in us are not two separate things – ultimately they are the same Dharmakāya working to liberate us. 16th-century Pure Land master Ouyi Zhixu also encouraged meditating on “self-nature Amitābha” in Chan fashion to complement devotional practicebuddhistdoor.com.

It is also asked whether Amitābha is explicitly called the practitioner’s Higher Self. While traditional texts may not use the Western term “Higher Self,” the concept is implicit in teachings that Amitābha and the innermost mind are one. Modern teachers occasionally phrase it in accessible terms. For instance, a Pure Land glossary states: “Amitabha Buddha at the highest (noumenon) level represents the True Mind, the Self-Nature common to Buddhas and sentient beings – all-encompassing and all-inclusive.”buddhistinformation.com. Here Amitābha is essentially the universal Dharmakāya or true Selfhood of all life. This “deeper understanding,” as the text says, “provides the rationale for the harmonization of Zen and Pure Land.”buddhistinformation.com In practice, many Pure Land Buddhists still relate to Amitābha as an otherworldly savior. However, doctrinally Amida is Nirvanic Truth (Dharmakāya) appearing in a relational form, and devotees who realize this may experience Amida’s Pure Land as inseparable from awakening their own Buddha-natureymba.orgbuddhistinformation.com.

Historically, Mahāyāna teachers such as Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu (in his Pure Land Treatise) hinted that the “Land of Bliss” of Amitābha is attained through realizing One Mind. And in Shin Buddhism, it’s taught that when one entrusts to Amida, one’s mind is taken into Amida’s mind – effectively uniting with the Dharmakāya. So while the term “Higher Self” is not classical, Amitābha is indeed identified with the Dharmakāya (True Self of Buddhas) in many interpretations. For example, Shinran states “Amida Tathagata is the Dharma-body as compassionate means,” and “Dharma-body as suchness is formless reality”slbuddhist.org – in essence, Amida and ultimate reality are one. Thus, Amitābha can be seen as the personification of our Higher Self, guiding us to realize that very Self (the Dharmakāya) directly.

Conclusion

Across Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism, we find a striking idea: the ultimate truth, the Dharmakāya, is not a void but a transcendent Selfhood – the Buddhic essence in all beings. Mahayana tathāgatagarbha scriptures explicitly call this essence the “True Self”en.wikipedia.org, and Tibetan masters describe it as an indestructible Buddha withinjonangfoundation.org. These perspectives maintain that realizing this Dharmakāya/True Self does not contradict the no-self doctrine, since it refers to the unconditioned reality beyond the ego. In Zen, this is the luminous original nature experienced in satori, often spoken of in terms of finding one’s true identity. In Pure Land, especially through harmonization with Zen/Chan, Amitābha Buddha is understood as an outward manifestation of the Dharmakāya that is also the practitioner’s own deepest naturebuddhistinformation.comymba.org. Authoritative teachers like Shinran confirm that Amida is the Dharmakāya in form, leading us to the formless Dharmakāyaslbuddhist.org. In sum, several Buddhist traditions – from Mahayana sutras and Tibetan Vajrayana to Zen and Pure Land – explicitly interpret the Dharmakāya as the True Self or ultimate Self-nature. They provide doctrinal and scriptural support for viewing the Buddha’s eternal reality (and by extension, Amitābha’s true nature) as synonymous with a Higher Self that is to be realized within the practitioner. This lofty “Self” is not the individual personality, but the universal Buddha-nature – the one Dharmakāya in which all buddhas and beings are ultimately unifiedbuddhistinformation.com. Such teachings aim to inspire practitioners to seek communion with that True Self, whether through meditation or devotion, until one awakens as a Buddha – the very embodiment of the Dharmakāya.

Sources:

Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra (c. 2nd cent.), which equates Buddha-nature with the eternal Dharmakāya and “Self”en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra declares the Buddha (Dharmakāya) to be the “true Self (ātman)” beyond the transient non-self phenomenanirvanasutranet.com.
Śrīmālādevī Siṁhanāda Sūtra – describes the tathāgatagarbha/Dharmakāya as permanent and eternalen.wikipedia.org.
Mahābheri Sūtra – also attributes Self to the Buddha-natureen.wikipedia.org.
Chan/Zen teachings: Platform Sūtra of Huineng (7th cent.) – “self-nature… originally pure… not born or extinguished”taoism.net; Huineng calls the Buddha-nature the true Self-nature. Zen commentary highlights knowing the “mind of the true self” as seeing one’s Buddha-naturetaoism.net.
Dharmakāya in Vajrayāna: Dolpopa (14th cent.) on buddha-nature as “natural luminosity… synonymous with the dharmakāya… a primordial, indestructible, eternal great bliss”jonangfoundation.org inherent in all beings. Shenpen Hookham describes Buddha-nature as a True Self that is real and permanenten.wikipedia.org.
Dharmakaya = ātman reference: Dharmakāya entry – notes that the Thai Dhammakāya tradition and the tathāgatagarbha sutras view Dharmakāya as the Buddha’s “true self” present in all beingsen.wikipedia.org.
Jōdo Shinshū (Pure Land) doctrine: Shinran’s Notes on Essentials of Faith Alone – “Dharmakaya-as-suchness… From this oneness was manifested form, called Dharmakaya-as-compassion… [who] became Amida Buddha”slbuddhist.org; Shinran’s hymn in Kyōgyōshinshō – “Uncreated dharma-body is true reality… Suchness is oneness. Amida Tathagata comes forth from suchness and manifests various bodies.”en.wikipedia.org. This shows Amida = Dharmakaya in compassionate form.
Pure Land & Zen convergence: Ōuyi Zhixu and others – “Self-nature Amitābha, Mind-only Pure Land” conceptymba.org. Modern explanation: reciting Amitābha’s name is reciting the Buddha of our own mindymba.org. Pure Land glossary: Amitābha at the noumenon level “represents the True Mind, the Self-Nature common to Buddhas and sentient beings”buddhistinformation.com, i.e. the Dharmakāya.
Additional scholarly context: Paul Williams on the Avataṁsaka (Huayan) vision of Vairocana (the cosmic Dharmakāya Buddha) being present in all beingsen.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org; this reinforces the idea of a shared “Buddha-self”.