From "Approaching the Great Perfection":
You have made the assertion that the view of Hashang was like this, based on refutations like the similarity of nonmentation to an egg. Yet scriptures such as the Buddhavatamsaka were known to Hashang. During the debate, Kamalasila asked what was the cause of samsara by the symbolic action of whirling his staff around his head. [Hashang] answered that it was the apprehender and apprehended by the symbolic action of shaking his robe out twice. It is undeniable that such a teacher was of the sharpest faculties. If the nonrecollection and nonmentation entail the offense of rejecting the wisdom of differentiating analysis, then the Prajnaparamita sutras of the Conqueror also entail this fault. Therefore what the view of Hashang actually is can be known by a perfect buddha, and no one else.
Jigme Lingpa's insistence on this distinction between the two methods makes the note he attaches to this passage, in which he suggests that the common understanding of Hashang's erroneous method is a misinterpretation, quite surprising. There is a precedent for this statement in the works of Longchenpa however. In his Desum Nyingpo (pp. 155-56), Longchenpa writes on the subject of the transcendence of the consequences of positive and negative actions. There is a famous statement attributed to Hashang Mahayana on this same subject, that virtue and sin are like black and white clouds, in that both cover up the sun. Rather than distancing himself from this, Longchenpa uses the same metaphor and then goes on to say:
The great master Hashang said this, and although those of lesser intellects could not comprehend it, he was in accordance with the [ultimate] truth.
Longchenpa himself was also following a precedent set by the twelfth-century Nyingmapa Nyangral Nyima Özer (1124-92), who state that there is no difference in [ultimate] truth (don) between the two paths, but that for those of the best faculties, there is the simultaneous method of Hashang, and for those of medium and below there is the graduated path (Chos 'byung me tog snying po p. 435b). I discuss Jingme Lingpa's use of this distinction between the faculties of trainees with regard to the simultaneous aspect of the Great Perfection in chapter 7. Perhaps Jigme Lingpa's really original contribution in this note is to point out that there is a scriptural basis for the simultaneist method as much as for the gradualist method in the Prajnaparamita sutras, an insight that appears to be based on comparative readings of texts rather than the standardized rubrics of Tibetan scholarship.
"While teachers of the middle way, mind only, transcendent wisdom, mantra, and other schools may have their own assertions, the fulfillment of those intentions is the same. There is not a single thing that is not contained within mind."
(Gampopa to Düsum Khyenpa, in "The First Karmapa", KTD Pub, p254)
“If you recognize the world of appearance and existence as the mind, realize the mind itself as empty, and have no grasping at the superiority of your realizations — this is the ultimate view."
(Chegom Dzongpa, in "The Book of Kadam", Wisdom Pub, p609)