Karma Dondrup Tashi wrote:Jyoti wrote:... abiding in the reason is the intellect.
You don't need the intellect to integrate your real nature into every perception, thought, desire or action. In dzogchen behavior is absolute spontaneity beyond adherence to rules or principles, carried out beyond specific sessions of contemplation into daily activities and even sleep. Regarding this behavior Padmasambhava says "one should neither accept nor reject anything, thus never falling into partiality". Behavior is the spontaneous flow of activity which is beyond intellectual acceptance and rejection and therefore beyond intellectual partiality insofar as the state of knowledge itself is totally beyond judgment. Its essence is that it is uncontrived.
The careless craziness of destroying clinging to a style …
may this human lifetime be spent in this State of uninhibited, naked ease.
Dudjom Rinpoche in the poem entitled Calling the Lama from Afar
Jyoti, Tiger, viniketa:
Dzogchempas have been getting themselves into trouble with unconventional perceptions, thoughts, desires, actions since day one. The bad reputations we get are actually helpful, if you can believe it - as long as our actions are genuine spontaneous and not just an act.
In any event a cramped intellect has nothing to do with behavior in Dzogchen. In fact, If you can believe it, technically speaking this form of "abiding in the reason", as you put it in your language above, that is, what we call "careless craziness", is actually the form of refuge in the third jewel which we have in Dzogchen.
It is like Mutsuk wrote, Jyoti does not answer on these for her not to understandable answers / replies from the Dzogchenpas. Is this a wise decission or the only way which is left for her, otherwise the whole philosophy is "lost"?
So if one is defending one should reply to the answers from the other party. And if one is not able to give straight answers, that will mean there is something to ponder about.
What is left over is the one way interpretation about what would be (Chinese) Yogachara.
Well that is what we (Dzogchenpas) realy know, or don't we know what Yogachara is? That is realy not difficult to understand, but maybe are there here herds of dummies running around, who knows.
But here is never agreed upon what that has to do or is related to Dzogchen.
So it is realy senseless to go on, on this one way road where we get explained what Yogachara would be, but the main question was YOGACHARA AND DZOGCHEN and not what is Yogachara.