[Buddha-l] Lamas and such

[Chris Fynn]

S. A. Feite wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Dan Lusthaus wrote:
> 
>>  I
>> don't know how others are solving this, but I have taken to using the
>> uncomfortable and similarly problematic term "non-Mahayanic" as its
>> replacement. That still privileges Mahayana and positions all other  
>> forms of
>> Buddhism vis-a-vis Mahayana, so not a good solution. Anyone have a  
>> better
>> replacement?
> 
> 
> I would think "Tantric Buddhism" (or Vajrayana/Mantrayana) would do  
> well for most areas that would be considered "Lamaistic"--former  
> Tibet, the Himalayan Kingdoms, Mongolia, Kalmykia and Buryatia.

This doesn't quite work as Tibetans etc. insist that their Buddhism 
follows all three yana: shravakayana, mahayana and mantrayana.

In English the word "Tantra" is probably far more misunderstood than the 
word Lama. Why is it OK to add "-ic" or "-ism" to the word Tantra and 
not to the word Lama?

- chris