There’s two problems here. One is that I can’t remember where I read it. It was some Thrangu R. book. So I can’t give a citation.So if there was a difference in view, even if slight, would be nice if I could see that. Even if it’s just an intellectual indulgence.
Thanks
The second is that I didn’t memorize exactly what he said. So I’d likely misrepresent it. In fact I’ll guarantee I’m screwing it up. So if you are willing factor that into your reading of this post, I’ll give it a shot.
It had to do with Shentong dismissing appearances as false and positing an Absolute beyond appearances. Then, once that Absolute has been ‘seen’, appearances can retroactively be understood as expressions of the Absolute.
Mahamudra, on the other hand, looks for the Ansolute in appearances from the start.
I believe they both end up at the same place, but how appearances are initially handled was the difference.
Anyway it’s in that ballpark but not a reliable presentation. Cone could probably have a more authoritative take on this. Maybe he will help out.