In "Mind in Tibetan Buddhism" (bLo-Rig according to Geshe Jam-bel-sam-pel ) by Lati Rinpoche (transl by Elizabeth Napper), in the chapter regarding Direct Perceivers, I came across a statement that the Sakya Pandita refuted both 'alternating production' (1st moment of sense direct perceiver apprehending form followed by 1st moment of of mental direct perceiver apprehending form, then 2nd moment sense direct perceiver produced etc) and 'production at the end of a continuum' (a mental direct perceiver apprehending a form is only produced at the end of the last moment of the sense direct perceiver apprehending a form).
Instead the Sakya Pandita apparently endorsed the idea of 'production of three types' (explained in this translation as the second moment of sense direct perceiver apprehending a form, the 1st moment of the mental direct perceiver apprehending that form, and the self-knowing direct perceiver experiencing these two as all happening simultaneously).
Again according to this book, Khedrup Je, himself a learned Sakya scholar prior to becoming Je Tsongkhapa's disciple, also endorsed this idea (though with a different name) as "there would be no fault in the simultaneous production of a direct perceiver apprehending a form and a self knower experiencing it" but there "would be fault in simultaneous production of two moments of a mental direct perceiver apprehending a form".
My questions are:
Is this an accurate description of the Sakya Pandita's and Khedrup Je's position(s)? Are they the same position, given that no mention is made in this text of Khedrup Je's discussing the 2nd moment of the sense direct perceiver (I am not sure what Khedrup Je called this type of production)?
Any clarification would be much appreciated, perhaps Namdrol-lags you could elucidate?