I don't mind to delete the post, readers. Lamaism was in fact employed intentionally to differentiate Tibetan Buddhism from its corrupted version. Historically there was a sect called Jonang in Tibetan Buddhism that abiding the Buddha Teaching, but destroyed by the previous Dalai Lama (5th). Many Tibetan Buddhists masters not all agreed with Je Tsongkhapa, but put down when his sect gained the ruling power... the Gelug sect. Please read the history yourself.
Lamaism was a term rented from the German/British scholars, list a few here:
1. Matthisa Hermanns,
"...the positive nature of the Buddhism has been entirely buried underneath of the Lamaism..."
-- Das Nationalepos der Tibeter, Gling Koenig Ge Sar, Regensburg (1965)
2. Hegel (yes, that "dialectic" German philosopher),
"...Far East (Hinduism, Buddhism, and Lamaism), the Near East (Persian, Egyptian, and Jewish religions), and the West (Greek and Roman religions)..."
-- Hegel: Lectures on the Philosophy of World History, Volume I (Manuscripts of the Introduction and the Lectures of 1822-1823)
3. L. Austine Waddell,
Prof. Waddell opines, "is only thinly and imperfectly varnished over with Buddhist symbolism, beneath which the sinister growth of poly-demonist superstition darkly appears."
-- The Buddhism of Tibet, or Lamaism with its mystic cults, symbolism and mythology, and in its relation to Indian Buddhism
[In his opinion, there are two primary sources for the demonic dimension lurking in Lamaism: it originates in part from the primitive paganism of Bon, and in part from Indian Tantrism. (p. xi & pp. 29-30)]
I in fact was acting out of minimizing the critique not quoting those books, also probably going too extensive from the OP's question, to just use Lamaism, so that Tibetan Buddhism as a whole was not mixed in. There are some Tibetan teachers I admire, such as Tsultrim Lodrö (I watched some of his youtubes), Lama Kyabje Thubten Zopa Rinpoche (just by his face, same method I used when discerning Dalai Lama), Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche... also some historical ones. IMHO, Chogyam Trungpa could be a victim of his own "crazy wisdom", very unfortunate.
This complainer seems misunderstood the whole picture but directed by emotion from devotion turned sour... Again, I am having no problem to delete my post. In fact I will delete any of my post if anyone insisted I must edit it to a condition I myself found unacceptable/dislike, incl. that post on Svabhava. Sometimes I delete a post if I sensed the audiences not right; or some snapped the useful parts which helped them understood certain concept, or the Mahayana explanations were better than their own, but keep on libeling/disparaging Mahayana tradition; such as saying Lotus Sutra are fake, Heart Sutra fake, Perfect Enlightenment Sutra fake... except Pali Canon is Buddhavacana, Mahayana was a later collective creation work, etc. The more I read in this forum or elsewhere, the more I found that perhaps the libeling/disparaging partly due to the mixed in of Lamaism claimed Mahayana Tibetan Buddhism, such as many so-called deity-worshiping, of Heruka, Palden Lhamo... etc. or mistaking Tantric sexual yoga as one of or the only real Mahayana meditation practices...
For the complainer, you may read Trimondi, and learn about it yourself to see if you can justify your complaints at the first place.
What is a real criticism @ChrisW, of your HHDL @Yeshe Tenley? Please read James Snell from Huffington. My one line on Dalai or comment on the quoted of his words was over-praised by you two a legitimate criticism, really. No?
It's easier to write here than in the comment -
Dear @Yeshe Tenley, you have a fine brain, with vivid personality also very honest you speak your mind, I like people your type. I hope the disagreements didn't inflict stupid negative feeling between you and me, that would be very silly. To avoid messing up more misunderstandings in being disagree, let me put things a bit clear:
Lamaism, I know it's bad term, I used it with good intention. I don't have bad impression towards Tibetan Buddhism as a whole. My initial introduction to Buddhism was via a Tibetan "shifu" - meant teacher-father you called "guru" I think. I learnt a lot from him, mostly in terms of meditation, Great Prostration, healing, and Dharma on ethical life... etc. That was the only teacher I ever called teacher. I'm not belonging to any lineage, nor I see myself going to subscribe to any. I only abide to the Dharma, that is the authentic Buddha Sutras. So when I used Lamaism, I was thinking in my mind to avoid mixed in Tibetan Buddhism as a whole. I only dislike the corrupted version of Tibetan Buddhism, which I thought that's the part called Lamaism. But it seems you guys' understanding just the opposite. I in fact was thinking in the Svabhava post if I used Tibetan Tantra Buddhism would be mixing in all the sects because Tantra has many meanings as I understood, so I thought using Tantra Lamaism was more specific it would refer to just the corrupted part of Tibetan Buddhism. (There are corrupted sects in Mahayana Chinese lineage too, like Nichiren was from the Lotus sect). Let me think of a better way to write it clearer... I don't think we have real conflict in this issue, the only problem is misunderstanding.
HHDL, I don't like him. Yeah, just silly dislike someone's face. That is my problem. I admitted I was innocent/naive even in my answer of that post now in discussion. But I think the way I wrote was half joking, don't you think sometimes taking things lightly is cool? Even after I read your deleted quote of Zopa Rinpoche, I like him, even I disagree with his teaching in that quote. IMO Zopa Rinpoche is a very honest man, he speaks his mind. I have good impression of @Tenzin Dorje (I like the cartoon picture of his profile), I had no idea he is of which lineage or taking what role, he is an amicable user in forum and I remembered there was a post by Theravadin user disparaging Lotus Sutra he wrote very professional comment to refute, using very technical terminologies, impressed!
I have very vague or even confused idea of who refer to which lineage of Tibetan Buddhism. I read some historical masters' works or lines sometimes, I just take up anything that's useful for me. So your thinking I against you or your teachers or your lineage is a misunderstanding.
Due to my personal experience and benefiting from the Buddha Dharma therefore I'm a bit taking it personal if I read something that to my understanding distorting the Buddha's teaching. I think I tried to explain what I understood as correct but due to the texts we based it's likely you can't get my point.
Therefore I don't think there any real issue between you and me, or those posts. The only issue perhaps is just misunderstanding. If you read the Buddha Sutras, many places praise the importance of "noble Dharma friends" (善知識) helping each other along the path. Regards.