[Jasonstawnosaa]

Yes, but even so nearly all experienced teachers are likely referring to a multilayered conceptual tool absent a literal belief in a flesh and blood human that lived sometime between 2,300 and 3,500 years ago who sat under a literal fig tree and grappled with literal armies of Mara.

Nearly all students of Tibetan Buddhism are commonly engaged with it at a very surface layer. All premodern mythology is multilayered - Tibetan Buddhist mythology is richly and complexly multilayered and multi-disciplined (the artificial borders between areas of knowledge that the West has carved aren't present in ancient perceptions of reality). Experienced Tibetan teachers know that in addition to this conceptual tool ("The Buddha") being the anthropomorphic face that serves as the focal point and road map of the journey/experience, it is also a very complex multilayered multifunctional symbol that directs those who are trained to far-reaching information and awareness regarding the processes and mechanics of the material/phenomenal worlds as well.

It's important to remember that in Tibetan Buddhist mythology (and all of Buddhist mythology) as with nearly all ancient mythologies/cosmologies, the distinction between "inner" and "outer" worlds, between the material world and the phenomenal world, is fluid and artificial, and both are represented by the same set of conceptual tools. The conceptual tool known as "The Buddha" reflects the axis of the journey (the being who is journeying/experiencing), the patterns of the journey/experience itself, and the corresponding patterns of the journey/experience as they appear and function in every aspect of the phenomenal and material worlds. As above, so below. As inner, so outer.