asunthatneversets

This does not mean that Longchenpa is not considered to be a key figure in Dzogchen. Is he the end all be all? Of course not, but to say he isn't a major figure in the history of the teachings is reaching.

Both links you provided only cited that Dzogchen does not accept the two truths schematic.

Longchenpa and Jigme Lingpa are certainly considered to be key figures of the system. There surely was no gzhan stong for the original teachers; Garab Dorje, Manjusrimitra, Śri Simha, Vimalamitra and so on.

Not likely being that he himself has pointed this out numerous times.

Candrakīrti agrees as well.

By 'key adepts' I mean the original adepts; Longchenpa, Jigme Lingpa and so on. It has also been pointed out that while Dudjom Rinpoche was a widely respected teacher, his view on that matter is by no means definitive either. Gzhan stong in and of itself is by no means definitive, and honestly makes no sense in general.

As does Madhyamaka.

Much like his teacher Nāgārjuna, Candrakīrti did not assert that relative truths were ultimately valid.

Being that the majority of the key Dzogchen adepts held the Prasanga view ala Nāgārjuna to be a definitive view, I can't say they would agree. Apart from the fact that the praxis of Dzogchen differs, in that unlike Madhyamaka it does not implement logical analysis as its main path, the views of the two systems are identical. Madhyamaka does a good job of 'throwing itself in the trash can' as it is.

Neither Candrakirti nor Rongzompa hold relative truths to be actually true.

All that is saying, is that within the context of relative truth, a 'valid' process is judged according to its efficacy. However it is still a relative truth, as was pointed out in the link you shared, and therefore it is predicated on an invalid cognition either way. The relative is always merely relative, that isn't being disputed. Within the relative, for purposes of relative accuracy, there are so-called valid and invalid truths. That does not mean that the valid relative is ultimately valid.

Why is this being bumped? Are people supposed to object to a system having its own pointing out methods? Seems like you're waiting for an argument that isn't coming.

Which fall under the category of 'right intention' in the eightfold path. Therefore correct intention is maintained in whatever form it takes, and the underlying principles stand.

And therein is found the eightfold path, with the minor differences curtailed to the needs of the Mahāyāna view. For example the division of prajñā concerning right view and intention, the only difference would be the treatment of the intention, which would be the bodhisattva ideal. So the same theme is present in the division of prajñā, which is; right view and right intention. Buddha Śākyamuni never intended for the example of the path itself to be fixated upon in a rigid way, but intended for the central themes and views to be malleable so that they can match the capacity of the individual or vehicle concerned.

The same principles, same themes, same intent, runs through all the yānas, curtailed to fit the capacity of those involved with each. The paths themselves may differ in their approaches, but those underlying principles, themes and intent never wavers. Ergo if you can see what the eightfold path is pointing to, you can see the eightfold path in any of the teachings of the buddhadharma. The same way, if you view any teaching of the buddhadharma, you can likewise see it within the eightfold path. The details may differ and fluctuate, but the underlying theme and intent is the same.

The eightfold path "is" view and conduct, and those principles span the yānas, according with the view of each.

Yes, conduct among other things. You stated on the previous page that the eightfold path was extraneous and irrelevant to Mahāyāna and Mahāmudrā however if you examine the principles of the eightfold path and apply them within the context of Mahāyāna and/or any other path within the buddhadharma, they are the foundation for those paths as well.

Right view and conduct are a crucial foundation for all paths to (and means of accomplishing) buddhahood. You seem to be taking the eightfold path very literally.

It isn't so much about the literal eightfold path, but the fundamental pointers it suggests. Those aspects are also fundamental characteristics of the Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna paths, including Dzogpa Chenpo. The only difference with paths such as Dzogchen is that they intend to directly introduce the aspirant to their nature first thing. So the pāramitās (which are cultivated gradually and in a contrived manner in the pāramitāyāna) are immediately perfected in that direct insight, because one's nature is prajñāpāramitā. "If someone does not dwell in words and does not dwell in names, that is prajñāpāramitā, buddhahood’s state of realization." -- Rigpa Rangshar [Per Malcolm] However not everyone is able to recognize their nature in the moment of introduction, so right view, conduct, and so on are an imperative basis for one's practice. They're also important after recognition occurs... As the iconic line from Padmasambhava goes: "Though my view is as spacious as the sky, My actions and respect for cause and effect [karma] are as fine as grains of flour [tsampa]". And Yangthang Rinpoche states: "Generally speaking, the samayas of empowerments are very strict and difficult to guard. Here I will not share with you too extensively. The main thing is to guard the principle of karma, cause and effect. This is common practice of greater and lesser, higher and lower vehicles in Buddhism. Nowadays, many people brag about themselves and claim that they are Dzogchen Yogis, and thus look down or ignore karma. Many others also plant seeds of lower rebirth in living beings' mind stream. Anyway, I beg you to guard the principle of karma, cause and effect, properly and unmistakenly. Adopt what is to be taken up, and discard what is to be abandoned!"

However it will certainly teach right view, right intention, right action, skillful means in relation to the view. It is no different.

Actually it is literally the fundamentals, right view, conduct, all of that. Upāya is indispensable until prajñā dawns in the mind stream, and even after that right view and conduct are indispensable. "The Buddha explained the Dharma to sentient beings in three episodes, called 'the three periods or occasions,' during which the Buddha turned the wheel of the Dharma. This is also called 'the three turnings of the Dharma wheel.' The first was what we call the 'basic teachings,' including the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, the three basic characteristics of impermanence, suffering, and not-self, the twelve links comprising the chain of interdependent origination, and so on. We might mistakenly think that Theravada or Hinayana, the so-called 'Lesser Vehicle' is inferior, but this is not the case. It is best to speak of the Theravadin tradition as the Ground, Fundamental, or Root Vehicle. This means that all the teachings have to be built upon that foundation, which includes being well-grounded in the Vinaya and the sutras taught by the historical Buddha. Therefore, all the higher teachings of Mahāmudrā, Maha Ati or Dzogchen - The Great Perfection, and Madhyamaka, must all be supported by the ground, which must be very firm and well prepared." - Dzogchen Master Nyoshul Khenpo Jamyang Dorje

It is the foundation for them though. Jigten Sumgon said these preliminaries are the highest teachings. He (and my Drkung Kagyu lama reiterated this to me just recently in the context of Mahāmudrā) states that you would never build a house without a strong foundation, because it would fall apart. In the same way, whether it be Mahāmudrā, Dzogchen, Madhyamaka and so on, without the preliminaries set forth in the eightfold path and teachings of the like, your practice in Mahāmudrā, Dzogchen, Madhyamaka and so on will fail. Nothing can flourish in infertile soil.

Vajrayāna does not make you dependent on human relationships, for various reasons. You seem to be taking the tradition at face value, unfortunately.

You should tell us CT, since you appear to be the one quite preoccupied with cutting down those you deem to be deviants. Perhaps that subconscious projection is why you are so concerned with policing the activity of others.

My so-called nonchalant remarks and quips are, in my opinion, a semi-polite way to voice an objection without engaging in disparaging ad hominem attacks. I say 'dangerous' because the post I commented on contained what I consider to be dangerous rhetoric, there is really no need to elaborate further than that. The controversial aspects of the post in question are surely self-evident. I'm not quite sure what your issue is, if you disagree with what I said you are welcome to, if you believe my response was unelaborated and lowbrow, you are welcome to. Everyone has opinions, and you are welcome to your own. At any rate, I beg to differ that my voice of discord is contrary to buddhist conduct. Mahāvidyādhara Jigme Lingpa clearly states: "In the first place, the primary condition necessary for initiation is none other than the vajra master himself; therefore it is very important to examine the teacher to whom you are connected. As Orgyenpa has said: 'Having an unexamined lama is like jumping into an abyss; Having an unexamined student is like drinking poison.' Because you must not make a mistake in this basic situation. I will examine the nature of it. The rig pa rang shar tantra teaches the following on the characteristics of a master: 'A master endowed with the truth of the vajra should: Have a good disposition and be skilled in teaching, Have obtained initiation and have applied himself to the secret mantra, Know all of the outer and inner activities, Be inseparable from his yidam deity, Be undistracted in contemplation, Be learned in the secret tantras of the secret mantra, Which hold the truth of rdzogs chen man ngag sde Have achieved all outer an inner accomplishments, Never move from the meaning of the view, Perform the outer, inner, and secret activities, With qualities like precious jewels, And an inexhaustible treasury of activity.' This tantra [rig pa rang shar] also speaks of six characteristics: having put all samsaric phenomena behind him, [ii] having few desires and being content, [iii] being skilled in practice and having had experiences, [iv] being learned in the meanings of the tantras and having striven to accomplish them, [v] being learned in the meaning of the view and being completely capable with it, and [vi] having great compassion and being happy in renunciation. One with the complete set of these qualities is said to be necessary. If, on the other hand, he is merely an effigy of whom it is said 'This one is a wonderful source of miracles,' 'This one holds an unsurpassable rank,' and 'This one is a sacred object of worship and harmony with worldly people,' then he is not [a genuine teacher]. From the same tantra [rig pa rang shar]: 'Very proud and ignorant, Followed because of his foolish words, Without any realization of the meaning of secret mantra, His arrogant words disparaging others, Engaging in a false path, Not seeing the face of the initiation mandala, Becoming lax in his vows, Not coming up with the answers to pure questions, Very proud of the little he has learned, The unexamined master is a demon of a master.' As it says, do not get involved with such a demonic master." Longchenpa, in his own response to the excerpt from the rig pa rang shar above (regarding the unqualified teacher), states: "Accordingly, I advise you to avoid them." The kun byed rgyal po states: "The inauthentic master teaches scripture like a monkey, his false path beset with concepts." And regarding the qualified teacher it goes on to say: "The master who displays the truth is a precious treasury worth an inestimable price."