Adi-Buddha on Wikipedia

[Boomerang]

In another thread Malcolm says,

The so called adibuddha has an origin. He is called the adibuddha (first buddha) because he is the first sapient being to attain buddhahood in this world cycle, not because there is some primordial buddha who hangs out in eternal time without a beginning.

The Wikipedia article on Adi-Buddha says,

In Vajrayana Buddhism, the Adi-Buddha, or Adibuddha (Tibetan: Dang-po'i sangs-rgyas), is the "Primordial Buddha." The term refers to a self-emanating, self-originating Buddha, present before anything else existed. Samantabhadra, Vairocana and Vajradhara are the best known names for Adi-Buddha, though there are others like Sanghyang Adi Buddha from Indonesia. Adi-Buddha is usually depicted as dark blue.

The concept of Adi-Buddha is the closest to monotheism of any form of Buddhism. Even then, Adi-Buddha is recognized as the center of an extended array of peaceful and wrathful deities, which are considered reflections of it. All famous sages and Bodhisattvas are said to be reflections of Adi-Buddha, and many are identified as the "personality" of it.

Adi-Buddha is better compared to the abstracted forces of Brahman, Ayn Sof or Arche rather than a personal creator God in the mold of Yahweh or Allah. Also, Adi-Buddha is not said to be the creator, but the originator of all things. Adi-Buddha is a deity in an emanationist sense.

I wonder if this is a little bit misleading.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

It's Wiki. You don't like it? Change it.

[Boomerang]

It's Wiki. You don't like it? Change it.

I don't know if I have the credentials for that. I was curious to know if the article is 100% wrong, or 50%, 25%...

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

It's Wiki. You don't like it? Change it.

I don't know if I have the credentials for that. I was curious to know if the article is 100% wrong, or 50%, 25%...

The article did say it was in need of citations...

[Malcolm]

I wonder if this is a little bit misleading.

It is in fact completely wrong.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

It is in fact completely wrong.

Ok, so are you going to edit it?

[Malcolm]

It is in fact completely wrong.

Ok, so are you going to edit it?

Not my job.

[Boomerang]

I'm not sure why this fascinates me so much, but I did a bit of sleuthing.

The original 2006 iteration of this article was a single sentence stating,

In Buddhist context, the Adi-Buddha is the "Primordial Buddha." This refers to a self-emanating, self-originating Buddha, present before anything else existed.

The only source for this sentence was a sparse page on a (now defunct) website for a record label/publishing company specializing in Shamanic drumming. The website had pages on deities from all over the world, and Adi-Buddha was listed under the South Central Asia section along with The Adityas and Agastya.

The original source said,

The Adibuddha or "Primordial Buddha", rose to prominence in the 11th centruy as a result of an attempt to transfom Mahayana, or "Great Vehicle" Buddhism, into a monothesitic religion, inspired by a sentence within a Buddhist text, which claimed that there was a self emanating buddha who existed long before anything else. In Nepal, the adibuddha came to be seen as infinite, omniscient and the supreme creator. It was said that he emanated from the mystic syllable "Om" and gave rise to the five Dhyanibuddhas, or "Great Buddhas of Wisdom".

In Tantric Buddhism, Vajradhara is identified with the Adibuddha, and portrayed holding a bell and a thunderbold. In Nepal and Tibet the Adibuddha is usually shown wearing robes and ornaments of a Bodhisattva. His Shakti, or female energy, is Adidharma

After that some other folks found the article and started adding links like, "God, Names of God, Buddha as an Avatar of Vishnu."

Four years later in 2010, somebody named Avram Fawcett went to town and added a big hunk of misinformation with no citations, including gems such as,

The concept of Adi-Buddha is comparable to theistic chains of thought in other religions. However, Adi-Buddha is better compared to the abstracted forces of Brahman, Ayn Sof or Monad rather than a personal creator God in the mold of Yahweh or Ishvara.

Since then a few more people have added to the mayhem (Adi-Buddha is the demiurge), but almost none of it has been taken away.

It's interesting to see how one little sentence from an obscure website can snowball into a catastrophe that misinforms thousands.

[krodha]

It's Wiki. You don't like it? Change it.

I don't know if I have the credentials for that. I was curious to know if the article is 100% wrong, or 50%, 25%...

An ape with a computer and internet connection has the credentials to edit Wikipedia.

[Malcolm]

I

In Buddhist context, the Adi-Buddha is the "Primordial Buddha." This refers to a self-emanating, self-originating Buddha, present before anything else existed.

This is also wrong.

[BuddhaFollower]

So what is the correct definition of Adi-Buddha?

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

In Kagyuland it's just "Vajradhara is the Dharmakaya Buddha". Simple. Maybe they've got a whole Adi-Buddha narrative somewhere but they don't talk about it.

[krodha]

So what is the correct definition of Adi-Buddha?

Per Malcolm:

• The so called adibuddha has an origin. He is called the adibuddha (first buddha) because he is the first sapient being to attain buddhahood in this world cycle, not because there is some primordial buddha who hangs out in eternal time without a beginning.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

So what is the correct definition of Adi-Buddha?

Per Malcolm:

• The so called adibuddha has an origin. He is called the adibuddha (first buddha) because he is the first sapient being to attain buddhahood in this world cycle, not because there is some primordial buddha who hangs out in eternal time without a beginning.

But then there is the perspective that all Nirmanakayas are simply spontaneous expressions of the Dharmakaya. The Dharmakaya automatically finds expression as a Rupakaya when the karma of sentient beings is clean enough to permit it. Although someone like Sakyamuni appears to be born, leave home, get enlightened, then teaches and dies, all that really happens is the spontaneous appearance of complete enlightenment from beginning to end. This idea is found in the Uttaratantra.

Or, as I like to interpret it, enlightenment is retroactive. If you manage to become enlightened you can retroactively see you were enlightened all along. That in effect nullifies the idea that you were ever anything other than a Buddha. That kind of idea may come into play here.


I both like and dislike this kind of idea. For instance, on a recent thread Milarepa is quoted as saying that we should not interpret his life in such a way, which I find quite sympathetic. You could dismiss all his trials as mere appearance of enlightenment and nothing more, which would defeat the value of his story. That would be harsh!

[gad rgyangs]

Per Malcolm:

The so called adibuddha has an origin.

what is his origin?

[Boomerang]

Thank you, Victoria. Is it correct now?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi-Buddha

In Vajrayana Buddhism, the ādibuddha (Tibetan: dang-po'i sangs-rgyas), is the "First Buddha." The term reemerges in tantric literature, most prominently in the Kalachakra.[1] According to the first interpretation, ādi means “first” such that the ādibuddha was the first to attain Buddhahood.[2] According to the second interpretation, ādi means “primordial,” not referring to a person but to an innate wisdom that is present in all sentient beings.[3] In Tibetan Buddhism, the term ādibuddha is often used to describe Samantabhadra or Vajradhara.[4] In East Asia, the ādibuddha is typically considered to be Vairocana.[5]

[Kim O'Hara]

I'm not qualified to say it's completely correct but it's certainly a better article than it used to be.


Kim

[Malcolm]

Thank you, Victoria. Is it correct now?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi-Buddha

In Vajrayana Buddhism, the ādibuddha (Tibetan: dang-po'i sangs-rgyas), is the "First Buddha." The term reemerges in tantric literature, most prominently in the Kalachakra.[1] According to the first interpretation, ādi means “first” such that the ādibuddha was the first to attain Buddhahood.[2] According to the second interpretation, ādi means “primordial,” not referring to a person but to an innate wisdom that is present in all sentient beings.[3] In Tibetan Buddhism, the term ādibuddha is often used to describe Samantabhadra or Vajradhara.[4] In East Asia, the ādibuddha is typically considered to be Vairocana.[5]

The term adibuddha does not exist in sutra.

[yan kong]

Thank you, Victoria. Is it correct now?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi-Buddha

In Vajrayana Buddhism, the ādibuddha (Tibetan: dang-po'i sangs-rgyas), is the "First Buddha." The term reemerges in tantric literature, most prominently in the Kalachakra.[1] According to the first interpretation, ādi means “first” such that the ādibuddha was the first to attain Buddhahood.[2] According to the second interpretation, ādi means “primordial,” not referring to a person but to an innate wisdom that is present in all sentient beings.[3] In Tibetan Buddhism, the term ādibuddha is often used to describe Samantabhadra or Vajradhara.[4] In East Asia, the ādibuddha is typically considered to be Vairocana.[5]

The term adibuddha does not exist in sutra.

But in East Asia they do refer to Vairocana as the Primordial Buddha or at least "Universal".

[Malcolm]

Thank you, Victoria. Is it correct now?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi-Buddha

The term adibuddha does not exist in sutra.

But in East Asia they do refer to Vairocana as the Primordial Buddha or at least "Universal".

Yes. but this still is not sūtra. This comes from Mantrayāna. It is a name for the nature of reality, the buddhahood of the basis, i.e., the reality that all buddhas realize.