If you read the whole (two) threads I think it is pretty obvious why I have some doubts about Sonams understanding of Dzogchen, not only I actually Mutsuk was a lot tougher with him than me. Previous he had many discussions with Jean-Luc Achard on French forums that got very heated over these matters. Jean-Luc knows a lot about Dzogchen and he is, just like Sonam, French. Did we all misunderstand him? I don't know, what do you say Sonam?
On that point, and only on that point, because I'm not going to discuss the personnal opinion you can have on me, or my knowledge about the separation of sem and rigpa, or any else.
Jean-Luc, is an appreciated translator of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon. And I recognize he has made a very "good job" in offering in french many treasures of the Dharma. He is a respectable scholar. But his (Bon) approach corresponds to the instructions his master gave to him, so it corresponds to what was certainly the best for him. As you agreed in an other part of the discussion, to be a scholar does not mean to be a genius practitioner.
The fact is, because of his own understanding, that he is "strongly" attached to an "heavy" progressive approach ... and I don't want to understand why !
As for Mustuk she is only repeating, quasi textualy, what JLA explains, and she has a level of agressivity and attacks ad hominem (i.e. when I see your avatar I understand who you are
) that it disqualifies her definitely.
But back to JLA, with that "strong" point of view, it is not surprizing that, when I was underligning (in a french discussion) that ChNN was teaching the non "necessity" of ngondrö (for exemple), his answer was "yes, but in private he says otherwise" ... this is not modesty and it 'cut' all discussions.
But what bother me more, is that when in his commentary of some songs of Khenpo Gangshar (Principes de la Pureté Primordiale) he states that the Dzogchen adept should follow the following cursus ... following a list of 9 (minimum) types of (long) retreats that "must" be realized, from the ordinary preliminaries until the different guides (khrid) of thodrgal (dkar khrid, nag khrid, ...), to finally state that Khenpo Gangshar was in that song (le chant d'instructions à Gog Zangden) only speaking about the view (lta ba). And when one knows the particularity of Khenpo Gangshar giving pointing out instruction to "any body" he encounters, claiming that it was no more time for ngondrö and long sadhanas (I've tried to found the exact words of Khenpo Gangshar, as it has been transmited to me by Khenchen Thrangu, but I could'nt found it), you may found the commentary of JLA a bit "heavy" and corresponding more to what "he" thinks should be realized than what Khenpo Gangshar thought it should.
So finally, I'm sorry that you have such "opinion" on who I could be, but I can't help ... so let's try not to have "opinion" on who each of us is, and let stick to what has been "really" said.