I didnt get a chance to thank you for including my question (above) in your daily email as I have been away for a few weeks with work. I thought it would be a nice idea to tell you that your response and the response of others has put me a little more at ease with everything, and your answer was confirmation of what I thought might be the case. Like Gambatte above I have no Sangha other than the one I turn to online - there is a local group, but I have been warned off of them in the past by the Theravada monk who taught me in the first place. Learning for me has become a very personal experience. I find it difficult at this early stage to associate specifically with a school of Buddhism, as the books and articles I read dont directly lend themselves to one, but I know what I am doing is having a positive effect and understand this is kind of the point of the whole thing.

Thanks again

Unlike other Buddhist groups or traditions in France, the practice of Tibetan Buddhism requires a conversion process. In the late 1970s and 1980s, many more people joined the Tibetan communities. Since the 1990s, conversions have been subjected to stricter verification of the initial motivation to join and the spiritual progression into the Buddhist path. This “recoupment” is a reaction to the drifts in doctrine and practice that have occurred by this time because of the dramatic increase in potential adherents.

That’s talking specifically about France, but it applies to Tibetan traditions worldwide. There’s no need to single out the Tibetans in particular on this issue, though; I’ve found that among Southeast Asian Theravada Buddhists the question “Are you a Buddhist or not?” is thought to have a much more definite answer than it does in the minds of many Westerners.

I then look back at my Christian background and see the difference in observance between lay members and ordained clergy.

Maybe I am a buddhist, just not a monk?